Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/2002 P&Z Packet• AGENDA • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Wednesday, July 10, 2002 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 12, 2002 IV. OPEN MIKE V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING, Spirit Hills Commercial Development, corner of Birch St./Ware Rd., Rezone to GB/PDO, Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, Cindy Sherman (NAC) B. PUBLIC HEARING, Stoneybrook, Birch St/Sherman Lake Rd., Comprehensive Plan Amendment/MUSA allocation, Rezone to R -1X, Preliminary Plat, Mike Grochala C. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, Russian Baptist Church, Ash St./Baldwin Lk. Rd., Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit, Tanda Gretz & Jeff Smyser VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Draft Subdivision Ordinance, Jeff Smyser VII. ADJOURN • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES D ED PRESENT SENT I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. Chair Rafferty called the Lino Lakes P p.m., June 12, 2002. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was ap III. APPROVAL OF 11IINUTE ay 8, Ms. Lane m Lino Lakes Planri% carried 4 -0. OTION to a d Zonin IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Rafferty declared open mike open at 6:41 p.m. No one was present for open mike. Board meeting to order at 6:40 rove the minutes of the May 8, 2002, meeting of the card, and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:41 p.m., and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 4 -0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. Emergency Apparatus Maintenance, 7512 — 4th Avenue, Site Plan Review DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 2 Staff explained Emergency Apparatus Maintenance, located at 7512 -4th Avenue, is a company that repairs and customizes equipment used by fire departments. The current 5,600 sq. ft. building was approved in 1996 with plans which indicated an area for future expansion. The company would now like to expand into the area indicated in the 1996 plans, and has submitted an application for a Site Plan Review Staff presented its analysis by explaining the site was a 1.12 acre triangular piece of property located to the east of 4th Avenue within the Lino Industrial Park. Superior Masonry & Concrete abuts the site to the north, with Nol -Tec located to the south. Staff stated the existing building measured 5,273 sq.ft. The proposed addition would be located to the east of the current building and measure 5,450 sq.ft. The expanded area would be used exclusively as repair bays. Staff indicated the building elevations showed the proposed addition matched the existing building of color and materials, which was rock face concrete block. Staff stated the b li height was similar as well Staff reviewed the proposed setbacks for the With respect to parking, staff indicated a new 4th Avenue. Staff stated parking for the origin each employee (6), with nine stalls actually c; with proposed plans showing a total of 19: City Ordinance required light manufac employee or one space for each 2,000 f minimum of ten parking stalls wer each employee. access as proposed onto was calculated at one stall for tructed - actuall aee are now ten employees, constructed. Staff stated ,rovide "one space for each 5fxs:... ea, whichever is greater." A e site, calculating one stall for With respect to grading/draina preliminary Gradi remained incom from Mr. Studer drainage, arr to any Ci Co staff indicated the applicant had submitted a r r d Drainage plan, although some information gineer ` Studenski. The memo dated June 6, 2002 hala detailed these issues. Staff stated all grading, esolved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to Micha << issues mus ieview. Staff indicated Rice rshed had issued a TWAFAA for the proposed project pending receipt of several dm nistrative items, including: 1.) Incorporation of infiltration practices. 2.) Existing versus proposed swale capacity narrative. 3.) Revegetation specifications for incorporated infiltration BMP's (best management practices). With respect to lighting, Staff indicated submitted plans showed wall pack style fixtures, which did not comply with City Ordinance lighting standards. The applicant had been directed to use shoebox style, no -spill fixtures which will deliver meter readings within City standards ( <1 foot candle on public streets). With respect to landscaping, Staff stated City Ordinance allowed impervious surface coverage up to 90% in a General Industrial Zone. No landscaping was proposed, and staff was not recommending any, as the addition was located behind the original structure and was surrounded by similar industrial uses. DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 3 Staff indicated the trash dumpster servicing the original building was located in the area planned for expansion and, as a result, would have to be moved to a new location. Staff stated original plans approved a dumpster without an enclosure; instead four pine trees at the rear of the lot were installed. Staff indicated since the pine trees were only approximately three feet high and offered no real screening of an otherwise exposed dumpster, and since the previous trash arrangements were made under a previous Ordinance, staff would require that the dumpster be enclosed as required under Section 3, subd. 4.G.2.c of the current ordinance. Staff stated the building was required to be sprinkled. Review of the fire suppression system would be handled as a building inspection issue. In conclusion, staff indicated plans for the ori identified an area to the east of the building to application described a 5,450 -sq.ft addition to repair bays. Staff would recommend approval conditions: Iding, approved in 1996, expansion. The current ±fig, for use as the following on licatioi 1.) Proper building permits be obtain -,, • •. any cr`tuction. 2.) The City Engineer shall review � '.pp aE. ,, ecessary grading, utility, and drainage plans: incomplete gra•' :, ut ? . _ ainage issues identified in the memo dated June 6, 2002 from 'ty aneim Studenski are to be resolved to his satisfaction prior to any City Co -w. 3.) Permits be obtained by Rice Creek W: 'ershed prior to any site work or issuance of building permits. 4.) Cut sheets style, no new choice of fixture 5.) Trashldpsters must b€ plans '6 hting 't ure choice meeting City Ordinance (shoebox revised otometric lighting plan which reflects the must be submitted prior to City Council review. nclosed within a six -foot high fence or wall. Elevation nclosure must be submitted prior to City Council review. Staff recommended a outlined. e Site Plan Review application with the conditions as Chair Rafferty invited applicant to make comment. Jeff Anderson, General Manager, stated they agreed with the conditions as outlined by staff. Chair Rafferty inquired about the number of stalls. Mr. Anderson replied the requirement was 10 stalls and they were proposing installing 18 stalls. Mr. Lyden asked why condition number 6 was omitted. Ms. Gretz replied she was not sure if this condition would be taken off or not at this time, but this would be resolved by the time it went to the Council. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 4 Mr. Corson inquired about the concrete slab. Mr. Anderson replied it was a concrete slab that was proposed to extend the entire parking lot. He stated they might do concrete on the whole parking lot and not asphalt. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to recommend approval of the proposed Site Plan Review with the five conditions as outlined in staff's report. The motion was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0. B. Russian Baptist Church, Ash St./Baldwin Lk. Rd. Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit Staff presented the application by Russian B Conditional Use Permit. Site Plan Review and Staff reviewed the background of the lot by expla' southwestern corner of the City, west of Baldwin Lake The property, which is 4.6 acres in size, is o ed Rural. Conditional Use in a Rural Zone, a Con.± Staff indicated the Church currentl now renting space in Spring Lak applied for a Site Plan Review of their own. roposed site was in the far d north of Ash Street. churches are listed as a emit has also been applied for. a•.pp for t ondition 180 members. The church was ngs and parrish needs, and had Permit in order to construct a church Staff presented i nalysi xplami ° >6 e site was a 4.6 -acre lot fronting Ash Street (County Road The north `em i of the property was wooded, with a wetland in the northwest quarter The Souther f of the property was largely open grassland. The west border tithe -nronerty abuts, rear lot lines of residential homes along Indian Hills Drive in Circle Pine`_ the north qtn border abuts the back half of a property located on Baldwin Lake Road in es. The east border of the property abuts the rear lot lines of three homes also long °Baldwin Lake Road, as well as a neighboring home on Ash Street. To the south, across Ash Street in Shoreview, are residential homes. Staff indicated the Site was zoned Rural. Churches were listed as a Conditional Use in such a district with the following provisions: 1. Side yard setbacks shall not be less than fifty (50) feet. 2. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with the landscape and screening regulations of Section 3 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Adequate off - street parking and access is provided on the site...and such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 3, subd. 4.S of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. Adequate off - street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Section 3, subd. 6 of this ordinance. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 5 • Staff noted, additionally, under Section 2, subd. 2.B.7 of the City Zoning Ordinance, any • • issued Conditional Use Permits must meet the following standards: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood of the City. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this ordinance. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. 4. Will be served adequately by essential public, facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage struct s, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be servedequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies res cons ble for the establishment of the proposed use. 5. Will not create excessive additional req .dents at pubic c st for public facilities and services and will not be de riental to the economic welfare of the community. 6. Will not involve uses, activities, process , materia l ;equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to ,ri persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production ofl noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. 7. Will have vehicular approaches to the property, which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion interference, with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. 8. Will not res feature 9. Will c. use., ss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic jor imps rm to spec ice. 'standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular Staff stated the proposed site and use appeared to comply with the above - described provisions and stan Staff indicated proposed construction included 15,920 total square feet of building over three levels: • Main Level: 7,438 square feet (sanctuary and related uses) • Lower Level: 7,438 square feet (classrooms, fellowship area and kitchen facilities) • Upper Level: 1,044 square feet (storage and child/parent room) Plans also showed a 60' X 50' footprint to the north of the proposed church, to be used as a future expansion area. Any future expansion will require a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan Review. DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 6 The exterior of the building would include a brick facing/apron and vinyl siding, with a proposed 45 -foot steeple. No bells are proposed at this time. Asphalt shingles would cover the roof. Staff noted there was neither water nor sewer available for the site. Plans indicated a proposed drain field north of the church, with adequate room for a secondary drain field site. Soils tests confirm that the site could adequately support a septic system. As building code requires a sprinkler system for this building, and the site had no public water available, a holding tank for fire suppression purposes would be required. Design of the sprinkler system would be reviewed as part of the building permit application, but design specifications would be required prior to City Council review. Staff stated the site was located in a Phase 1 Growth;' immediate plans for City sewer and water services to ^+m a they would be available by 2010. City services may, Shoreview or the city of Circle Pines, howev had no plans to pursue utilities through either c 4 Although there were no Palled, it was possible that ilable via the City of 4A1 staff that they Staff noted City Ordinance required one parley There are 360 seats show in the main asset stalls. Plans for the church show 99 par. h four seats in a church. old then require 90 parking Staff noted although there were additional classroom and fellowship areas in the lower ate-. ,,,, � level of the church, these areas w re of exp the main assembly hall. As a result, the park ii estimates generated from the number of seats in the main asset b ,hall appear to be adequate for church needs. e used by adults concurrently with Staff stated plan additional par . additional std future parkin water practices ea to the northeast of the proposed church to be used for choose to expand. This area would contain 33 1 Board had recommended use of green parking in well as an increase in the use of infiltration and storm as in general. Staff noted access is of Ali street, a County road. As a result, plans had been submitted to the Anoka County Highway department for review. Plans show a two -lane, 24 -foot wide driveway entrance to the site off Ash Street. Staff indicated there had been no traffic generation study conducted. With respect to lighting, staff noted a photometric plan had been submitted, along with fixture details. Lighting would be no- spill, with meter readings within City requirements (< 1 foot candle for streets; < 0.4 foot candle for abutting residential property). With respect to landscaping, staff stated the proposed church would exist as a conditional use within a Rural zone. City Ordinance directed that such conditional uses provide "adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping...in compliance with Sec. 3.subd.4.S." City Ordinance specifically directs buffering/screening in the form of "either a fence or green belt planting strip." DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 7 Staff noted the applicant had elected to construct a fence for screening purposes, and City Ordinance required "such a fence shall provide a solid screening effect six feet in height." Staff recommended a condition requiring that such a fence be extended to the north to screen all proposed and future parking expansion areas, as current plans do not show the proposed fence extending along the entire area of parking. In addition, Staff stated the applicant had provided some additional landscaping in an attempt to soften the effect of the fence, as City Ordinance directed "exposed fences shall run a maximum length of fifty feet between landscaping areas or clusters" (Sec. 3.subd. 4.S.5.e.2.b). At this time plans showed the fence located on the lot line, with landscaping located on the church side of the fence. Staff indicated the current landscape plan showed some trees within ponding and drain field areas and the Environmental Board had recomn* desuch trees be moved to appropriate areas. The Board also recommendedfconsideration of alternate tree species choices, which were described in the memo from Environmental Specialist Marty Asleson. In addition, the Board had recommended hat a tree iriy ntar ? and tree preservation plan be submitted for the site. Staff noted plans showed a 13' X 10' trash enclosure located, at the northern end of the parking area. The enclosure was 6' -8" him anc e structed of concrete block painted to match the principle building color. With respect to signage, staff state, Lakes Sign Ordinance limits instill ways: maximum of 32- square than 10 feet to any property lin an had yet been submitted. The Lino +hal signage in die Rural zone in the following eh signage area., �amaximum of 8 feet high; no closer Staff noted there° for the north s Staff stated t unresolved, per these concerns. All " "e. Engineer prior to any Ci gin fee required. There are no trails planned a numbe nee gineering issues that remain incomplete or tudenski; the memo dated June 7, 2002, detailed ssues are to be resolved to the satisfaction of the City ncil review. Staff indicated Rice Creek Watershed District had issued a TWAFFA for this project, pending completion of five administrative items. Staff noted the Environmental Board reviewed this application at their May 29, 2002, meeting and recommended approval with some changes; the Memo from Marty Asleson dated June 6, 2002, detailed these changes. In general, recommended changes center around the following: 1.) Submit a tree inventory and tree preservation plan. 2.) Increase infiltration and storm water practices, particularly around parking areas. 3.) Alter tree choices, and move some trees out of water infiltration areas. 4.) Use of green parking in future parking expansion areas. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 8 Staff recommended approval of the application, with the following conditions: 1.) Proper building permits be obtained prior to any construction. 2.) Permits be obtained by Rice Creek Watershed prior to any site work or building permit issuance. 3.) Fencing shall extend to the north to buffer all proposed and future parking expansion areas. 4.) Any signage must comply with the City's Sign Ordinance. 5.) Any future expansion shall require Site Plan Review and a Conditional Use Permit Amendment. 6.) A tree inventory, tree preservation plan, and revised landscape plan are to be reviewed by the City's Environmental Specialist. All trees shown placed in ponding or drain field areas are to be moved jo uitable areas. 7.) - The City Engineer shall review and ap rove al necessary grading, utility, and drainage plans: issues identified in the mo tte' 1, 2002, from City Engineer Jim Studenski are to be reso b d t s satisf cti n x or to City Council review. 8.) Design specifications for the fire suppresso Council review. 9.) A performance agreement shall berear .d, including' financial securities, and executed prior to City Council r 10.) Utility connection through the C should be more fully investigated prior to City Council re rn will be required prior to City Mr. Corson asked if the City w; Gretz replied there were no plans a connection in Cir Alternatively the under a Coun: ding to lob kt putting utilities in this area. Ms. s time to make connections. She stated there was s Drive, approximately 200 feet away. fe in Shoreview, but they would need to go Mr. Corson i require a large t stated a well would n unusual to have this t .;suppression system. Mr. Smyser replied it would er, as well as a generator to pump the water. He :enough water to put out a fire. He indicated it was not e o facility. He stated they would prefer them investigating hooking up to Circle Pines, and they would find out if this will be possible before this went to the City Council. He stated it was expensive to put this type of a fire suppression facility on site. Mr. Corson asked if the Church would be required to hook up to the utilities, if they came in the area. Mr. Smyser replied the City did not force people to hook up to the utilities when they were in the area. Chair Rafferty opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. Michael Kula, 6 Indian Hills Drive, Circle Pines, stated he observed that the matter before the Planning Commission seemed premature. He indicated there were a number of issues that needed to be resolved. Chair Rafferty replied this stage would be a DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 9 recommendation for or against the project and would go before the City Council at the 110 first July meeting. • • Mr. Kula asked if the recommendations would be modified prior to the City Council meeting. Chair Rafferty replied they could be. Mr. Kula expressed concerns regarding the nature of the use of the property. He asked if there would be a school on the property. He asked if they had any intent of expanding in the future. Ms. Gretz replied services would be held on Sunday. She stated was not sure how many services they would be holding on Sunday. She noted there would probably be Wednesday evening classes or meetings of some type, and also possibly Friday meetings. Mr. Kula asked if there would be a representatof they C1zltrch at the City Council meeting. Mr. Rafferty replied he assumed thi Mr. Kula expressed concern about the drainage- " e property I stated he was concerned about water run -off unto his property . replied all run -off would flow across the parking lot to the east side of the prope rt nth run -off to the drainage pond. Mr. Kula stated the drainage issue was about a septic system being used. utilities. He expressed concern a happen if the electricity went outer the watering of that landscape. He asked if they could Mead have concern about li yards. He sta traffic was gt a traffic study: ancerns. He expressed concern urged the applicants to hook up to Circle Pines e fire prsion system. He asked what would there was , fire. He asked about landscaping and ed he was not interested in seeing a wooden fence. ?ping with additional berming. He expressed ere- lbe lighting spillage onto his and his neighbors as an ektremely busy road. He asked how much more this development. He asked if there was going to be speed at this location. ounty Road. 1 to be incurred! seduction in Steve Waldhauser, rive, Circle Pines, expressed concern about the drainage onto his prope " t MH indicated his property could not handle any more water. He expressed concern about the lighting. He stated he would also like to see more landscaping and no fencing. Dave Rieger, 10 Indian Hills Drive, Circle Pines, stated he had the same concerns about the issues already mentioned. He indicated County Road J was extremely busy and expressed concern about the increase in traffic. He expressed concern about the drainage. He expressed concern about the septic system. He expressed concem for the wetland. He asked how high the lights were going to be. Ms. Gretz replied the Ordinance did not state the height of lights, but it did indicate how bright they could be. Mr. Rieger asked how much of the 4.6 acres was wetlands. Ms. Gretz replied she did not have the information. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 10 Mr. Rieger asked how they would get utilities from Circle Pines. Ms. Gretz replied that was under investigation. It might involve a Joint Powers Agreement between the two cities. Mr. Rieger replied everyone on Indian Hills Drive had underground utilities. He asked if those services if extended would be underground also. Ms. Gretz replied she assumed they would be underground. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. The motion was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 4 -0. Mr. Lyden inquired about the drainage. Ms. the east to the retention ponds. ite would be draining to Mr. Lyden stated all of the run -off would go ea it was her understanding that was where the flowage w Mr. Lyden asked where the Rice Creek,1 s with this. Ms. Gretz replied all of the paperwork had been completed, wit TWAPAA apkr val given. the north. Ms. Gretz replied Mr. Lyden asked about the fencing put in because the Ordinance rep neighbors wanted landscaping, stated landscapin rsus la sca. . Ms. Gretz stated the fencing was d some screiiiiig. However, she stated if the ould put landscaping in instead of fencing. She uld work well for this site. Mr. Lyden as a" out the 11 downward would not be lighting, the applicant could put would be a problem, an t the s. Gretz replied the lighting would be aimed a lighting. She stated if there was a problem with ders on the lights. She stated she did not think this work it out. Mr. Lyden inquired aboute traffic. Ms. Gretz replied this was a County Road. She pointed out that this congregation was 180 people and they did not anticipate this would increase traffic dramatically. She stated the Board could recommend a condition saying that approval by Anoka County Highway Department was necessary before any development was approved. She stated they would need to rely on Anoka County's recommendation regarding traffic. Mr. Corson inquired about the utilities. Ms. Gretz replied they were currently working on the utility issue. She stated it was her understanding that if utilities were available, they would urge applicant to hook up to those utilities. Mr. Corson inquired about the parking lot entrance surface. Ms. Gretz replied the plans showed a gravel driveway at the entrance, but she was not sure why. Mr. Corson expressed concern about a gravel driveway. Ms. Gretz replied that might be one of the conditions the Board wanted to add. She stated they could require a paved driveway. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 11 Mr. Corson asked if any thought had been given to having the full lighting when people were there at the Church, and partial lighting around the building for security purposes when there was no one present. Ms. Gretz stated she was not familiar with a project that had done that. She stated lighting was also a matter of security and crime prevention. Mr. Smyser replied they would look into this because of the close proximity of residential homes. Ms. Lane stated she was not comfortable with this. She stated there were too many unresolved issues. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to table this for further information regarding drainage, traffic, lighting, utilities, landscaping, as well as other issues brought up at this meeting. The motion was supported by Mr. Corson. Mr. Hyden stated he was disappointed the appp Mr. Rafferty expressed concern about the manyssue stated traffic and drainage were enormous is that n eting. remained to be answered. He e be resolved. Gerald Clausen, 6109 Baldwin Lake R9 to the traffic concerns expressed. He std: would be on Sundays, when there was traffic was much worse. not think the Church would add affic generated by the church yway. He indicated rush hour Mr. Kula stated when traffic was over the hill you could not see down County Road J. He stated Motion carne Dick Keiser, Church had He 'red neighbors so they co' r issue. ircle Pines, stated he was at the original meeting the Church schedule one more meeting with the ans and possibly address concerns. Mr. Kula recommended that °'the public hearing be reopened so the residents could continue to comment. Mr. Smyser replied they would renotice the public hearing and reopen it. C. William Walton, 8140 — 20th Avenue, Conditional Use Permit Staff stated Bill and Jean Walton had been operating a Petting Zoo, "Walton's Hollow," for over ten years. The Waltons had traditionally trailered their animals to various locations around the Twin Cities (nursing homes, senior centers, etc.). The Waltons, who had moved with their animals from White Bear Lake to Lino Lakes in the past year, would now also like to provide on -site visits to their farm on 20th Avenue and so are asking for a Conditional Use Permit to allow such a use. DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 12 Staff presented its analysis by explaining the site was zoned Rural and guided as Rural Land Use under the proposed 2001 Comprehensive Plan. All surrounding uses are similarly zoned and guided. Staff indicated Lino Lakes City Ordinance did not specifically address any use such as a "petting zoo" or "farm visit." As a result, staff was recommending using Section 5, subd. 1.H.3, which applied to conditional uses in a Rural zone described as follows: "Commercial riding stables, horse boarding stables, horse arenas, dog kennels, animal hospitals with overnight care and similar uses." Staff would argue that the above - described uses were basically similar in nature to that of a petting zoo in the following ways: 1.) Animals are kept on site. 2.) People come to interact with animals. 3.) There is a recreational as well as a commer Staff stated as a result, it was appropriate that a. Condi ,!v use Permit be applied for prior to allowing a use such as a petting zoo to Joccur on t Staff noted the subject site was a 20 acre iarc north of 80th Street. The northern area oft e' the site contains fenced pasture e s; the cen off 20th Avenue to the house, p area, an ocated pti the east side of 20th Avenue, e was open hayfield; the southern area of the site contains a driveway leading Pebarn. The 90' X 96' pol by approximate a hay storage /: surround th 5 tit)! ea over t One a 0' 72' central arena area, which was surrounded is srze , in addition to some storage areas. There was s. Five separate fenced pasture areas of various sizes Staff noted in a from the rest of the 20' X 96' area on the north side of the barn, separated which will contain restroom facilities. Staff stated parking areas were to the west and northwest of the barn. Further west of the parking area was an outdoor area to be used for outside exhibition of, and interaction with, animals. Staff stated the site was serviced by a septic system. Building officials confirm that the system was oversized and capable of handling the extra restroom facilities proposed by the applicant. Staff noted Fire Chief Bennett had advised that any use of the barn area would require that the entire barn be equipped with a sprinkler system, the price of which appeared at this time to be prohibitive for the applicant. Chief Bennett had also advised that even use of the room on the north side of the barn for gathering/assembly purposes would require that the entire barn area be sprinkled because the area could not structurally be adequately DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 13 • separated from the rest of the barn area. Use of the area for restroom purposes, however, could be allowed under fire code according to Chief Bennett. • Staff stated as a result of the above, the applicant would plan to exhibit animals out of doors as they do when trailering animals to various sites, and possibly constructing a smaller building in the future for assembly /shelter purposes. Staff noted the applicant did not foresee general, open hours of operation for the public at large. Rather, scheduled groups of set numbers would visit. Group sizes might vary, but would be known ahead of time. In this way, parking issues could be planned for. Staff indicated the main parking area was to the west of the barn and measured roughly 100' X 100'. A second parking area, measuring roughly 100' X 50', was situated across the driveway to the north from the main parkin rea ' �e riveway itself was currently 17 feet wide, and the applicant planned to wider rt tp 2 better accommodate vehicles. Staff stated access to the site was off 20 th Avenn plans had been forwarded to the Anoka County Highw as a County road. As a result, artment for review and comments. Staff noted the applicant had carried a license Aerate 'petting zoo for a number of years under the U.S. Department o �.gr cult r 's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). As a requirement or such lc�e, their site - or any site they exhibit at — was subject to annual, unscheduled inspections by USDA/APHIS officials. Such an inspection was successfully conducted this spring at the site on 20th Avenue. Staff indicated i y rdinari%ce.Section sbbd. 2.B.7 stated that the "Planning and Zoning Boards 11 recommend oaditional use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of.spermit only if finds that such use at the proposed location: a.) Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare borhood or the City. Visitors to the site would be confined to the site, with no parking taking place on 20th Avenue. b.) Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this Ordinance. The site was zoned and guided Rural. The proposed use was in keeping with this designation. c.) Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. The use maintains the site as a farm, a traditional rural use. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 14 d.) Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. The site was serviced by a septic system capable of handling the additional numbers of site visitors. Access to the site was off a County road, and onto a prepared, confined parking area. e.) Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Public cost should not be impacted, as the pe. Additional use of roadway for access to the st fined to the site. tipreciable. f.) Will not involve uses, activities, processes, operation that will be detrimental to an because of excessive production of tra uipment and conditions of ersons, property, or the general welfare ire, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Visitors to the site are not foreseen to b noise or access issues. All parkingou` g.) Will have vehicular approache traffic congestion or an inter; Visitors to the si traffic issues All arking w at enough to cause excessive TO the site. o the prop s which are so designed as not to create with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. to of numbers great enough to cause excessive confined to the site. h.) Will not re u'ltin the destruc feature of majoportance loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic The site will continue as a rural farm site. i.) Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. City Ordinance states that "the applicable provisions of Section 500 of the City Code relating to the keeping of animals are determined to be satisfied." Animals and the conditions in which they are kept will conform to City Ordinance. In addition, the Walton animals are routinely (annually) inspected byUSDA /APHIS, as licensing requirements for a petting zoo are the same as those for any other zoo. DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 15 Staff noted use of the site for a petting zoo /farm visit site appeared to conform to the general guidelines outlined for a Conditional Use for a Rural zone under the Lino Lakes City Ordinance, and staff would recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit, with conditions. As various fire and building code issues come into play depending on how the site was used, staff would recommend the following conditions: 1.) All parking must be contained on site. The driveway should be widened to 24 feet to better accommodate visitor traffic. Parking surfaces should be rocked; any paved/impervious parking surfaces will require submission and approval of a grading plan to the City Engineer. 2.) Any indoor assembly areas must conform to applicable fire and building code; if visitors to the site enter the barn area, with theex tion of restroom facility use, it will have to be sprinkled, per reviev a fhe ino La Est Fire Chief. Staff recommended approval of the Conditions emit, with on itions as noted. Mr. Corson asked what type of animals the a have exotic animals, but rather typical anir miniature donkeys). s Gretz replied they did not P Y g zoos (goats, bunnies, Chair Rafferty opened the public hgArir Ms. Gretz read a letter from Je Alex ick, 8196 20th Avenue North, neighbors to the applicants, indicating they had no objection to the petting zoo. Neighbor of the petting zoo on theproperty. Chair Raffe Mr. Hyden inquired `aboa applicant, replied groups, open to the general public. stated he did not have a problem with a acing at 7:51 p.m. ointments only clause. Bill Walton, 8140 20th Avenue, call in for a visit to the farm. He stated it would not be Chair Rafferty asked if there was a group size limit. Mr. Walton replied they were looking at a maximum of 100, but because this was a new concept for them, they were not sure how many people they could accommodate. Mr. Hyden asked if they advertised. Mr. Walton replied they had a web site and advertised in the yellow pages. He stated most of their work was word of mouth and repeat business. Ms. Lane asked what buildings were currently on the property. Mr. Walton replied they had a home and pole barn. He stated they might want an additional building at some point in the future. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board June 12, 2002 Page 16 Chair Rafferty asked how many animals they had. Mr. animals, nothing exotic. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to recommend approval Conditional Use Permit, with conditions as outlined in The motion was supported by Mr. Lyden. Motion carried 4 -0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS None. VII. ADJOURNMENT Walton replied they had all farm of the Site Plan Review and staff's report. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to adjourn the mee Mr. Lyden. Motion carried 4 -0. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Altman, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. :00 p.m DRAFT MINUTES as supported by • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P AND Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM 5A Cindy Sherman/Aaron Jones (NAC) July 10, 2002 Spirit Hills — Rezoning, CUP, and Site & Building Plan Review Rockne Goertz has submitted an application for Site and Building Plan Review, CUP and Rezoning to allow the development of a neighborhood business center at the northwest corner of Ware Rd. and Birch St. Prior to development of the site a final plat will be required and an existing drainage and utility easement platted with the Spirit Hills development will need to be vacated. The final plat and the easement vacation are both subject to City Council review and approval. The application was previously submitted by Glenn Rehbein Companies as Village Hills. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Site grading, drainage, and erosion control plat dated 2/1302 and revised 6/12/02 Site Plan dated 3/4/02 and revised 6/12/02 Utility Plan dated 3/5/02 and revised 6/12/02 Landscaping and tree preservation plan dated 3/11/02 and revised 6/12/02 Building Elevations dated 6/14/02 Lighting Plan dated received 3/11/02 Environmental Board Comments dated 4/24/02 ANALYSIS Land Use and Zoning: The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the subject property for commercial use. The site's present R -1 zoning classification is not consistent with this land use designation. The request is to rezone the site to General Business with a PDO overlay to allow multiple buildings on the site with shared access and parking. • The table below illustrates the existing and proposed land use designation and zoning. • • • Spirit Hills. Page 2 of 8 Location Existing Land Use Guided Land Use Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning GB, General Business Site Vacant Commercial R -1, Single Family North Residential Residential R -1, Single Family 45 feet South Ag/undeveloped Commercial R -3/R -1 East Residential Residential R -1 West Residential Commercial GB/R -1 Lot Size and Setbacks: The lot and building performance standards for properties in the GB, General Business District are outlined in the table below. GB District Requirement Proposed Lot size minimum 20,000 sq. ft. 163,314 sq. ft. Lot width minimum 100 feet 1000 + feet Setbacks — building from local street from collector rear lot line side lot line from residential district Setbacks — parking from street rear lot line side lot line 30 feet 40 feet 30 feet 10 Feet 35 feet 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet 50 + feet 80 + feet 40 + feet 40+ feet 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet Building height 45 feet 28 feet Green space 35 percent w/ PDO 36 percent As shown above, the proposed development has been found to meet all of the standards outlined. Building: The applicant is proposing to construct three buildings and a canopy for gas islands totaling 30,266 square feet. This breaks down to building A at 13,720 square feet, building B at 6,440 square feet, building C at 7,606 square feet plus the canopy is 2,500 square feet in size. The buildings are generally designed with peaked roofs with focus features at selected ends of the buildings. The highest points of the buildings measure approximately 28' feet in height and conform with the maximum 45 -foot height requirement imposed in the GB District. • Spirit Hills. Page 3 of 8 The buildings are proposed to be finished with rock face block and stucco (EIFS) sign banding and accents. Standing seam metal roof at varying heights will be the roofing materials. The proposed mix of materials conform to the standards in Section 3, Subdivision 4.B of the City Code. Trash Enclosure: The site plan does illustrate exterior trash handling areas. According to Section 3, Subd. 4.G of the Ordinance, all refuse and recyclable materials must be stored within the principal building or within an accessory structure (within a side or rear yard) that is totally screened from eye level view from neighboring uses and public rights of way. The applicant is aware of the provision and has placed the enclosures upon the site plan. There are now two 10' x 10' foot enclosures with brick walls and gates. The first enclosure is located behind Building A along the western lot line. The second enclosure belonging to Building B (the bank) is located in the southwest corner of the lot along Birch St., this is not permitted. The enclosure for Building B may be better suited if placed behind the building along the western lot line away from Birch St. Both enclosures will be surrounded by landscaping to soften the look of the enclosure. The plan states that waste for Building C will be stored within the building. Signage: Signage on the site is proposed to be individual letters mounted over the storefronts. Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and requires a separate permit. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications and must satisfy applicable requirements of the Ordinance in regard to sign type size and location. Landscaping: As shown on the landscape plan, a variety of trees shrubs and ornamental plantings are proposed on site. A heavier landscaping treatment is included along Ware Road which separates the proposed development from existing single - family residential uses. A fence six feet in height was provided by the developer on the east side of Ware Rd. at the time of development of the single - family residential area. The proposed Amur Maples have been replaced with less invasive species. Landscaping, in the form of deciduous or coniferous trees, should be extended along the west property line. Parking: The standards for calculating the off -street parking requirements for Retail Store and Service Establishment are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code. For the purposes of calculating parking spaces, the ordinance requirement is to use 90% of the gross building area. Use Gross Area 90% of Gross Area Ratio Required Spaces Retail/Service 30,266 s.f. 27,240 s.f. One space per 200 s.f. 136 • Spirit Hills. Page 4 of 8 As shown in the table above, a total of 136 off - street parking stalls are required for the proposed use. Because this will be a multi -tenant building, a general parking ratio has been applied. The applicant's plan calls for 138 stalls including the gas island areas. Thirty -six (36) spaces are proposed to be constructed with a pervious Netlawn turf. The use of the Netlawn allows the applicant to satisfy parking requirements while reducing the site's impervious surface area and maximizing on -site infiltration of storm water run -off. Five handicap parking stalls are required one of which must be van accessible. These have been provided. Roads, Access, Circulation: The standards for access and traffic circulation are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code and illustrated in the table below: The subject property meets all of the requirements of this section. Two access points into the site are proposed. The northern access utilizes the existing Ware Road/Ware Circle intersection. The southern access is located approximately 220 feet north of the Ware Road/Birch Street intersection. The proposed southern access location maximizes the separation from both the Ware Road/Ware Circle and Ware Road/Birch Street intersections. The City Engineer has indicated that the proposed development will necessitate the need for a right turn lane from Ware Road onto Birch Street. Staff is evaluating this requirement in conjunction with the proposed extension of Ware Road to Hodgson Road (CR 49). A five (5) foot concrete sidewalk is proposed along Ware Road, extending from Birch Street to Sioux Lane, to facilitate pedestrian access to the site. Maintenance of the sidewalk shall be the responsibility of the commercial development. A connection to a future trail along Birch Street is also proposed on the plan. Lighting: A plan has been submitted for review. The ordinance provides for maximum lighting levels of one -foot candle at the street and 0.4 when casting light onto a residential property. Glare can be an issue from fixtures even if foot -candle measurements are met. Because of proximity to residential uses the type of fixture will be critical. The ordinance requires that light sources be hooded or controlled. The fixture proposed is a decorative, round cutoff luminaries that has the option of a solid dome or a glow dome. Staff believes all of the lights should include • a solid dome. The submitted plan does show a combination of domes. No specific lighting type Required/Allowed Proposed Curbing Perimeter curbing Perimeter curbing Curb Opening 36 feet 30 feet Access Drive 24 feet 24 feet Stall Width 9 feet 9 feet Stall Depth 18 feet 18 feet The subject property meets all of the requirements of this section. Two access points into the site are proposed. The northern access utilizes the existing Ware Road/Ware Circle intersection. The southern access is located approximately 220 feet north of the Ware Road/Birch Street intersection. The proposed southern access location maximizes the separation from both the Ware Road/Ware Circle and Ware Road/Birch Street intersections. The City Engineer has indicated that the proposed development will necessitate the need for a right turn lane from Ware Road onto Birch Street. Staff is evaluating this requirement in conjunction with the proposed extension of Ware Road to Hodgson Road (CR 49). A five (5) foot concrete sidewalk is proposed along Ware Road, extending from Birch Street to Sioux Lane, to facilitate pedestrian access to the site. Maintenance of the sidewalk shall be the responsibility of the commercial development. A connection to a future trail along Birch Street is also proposed on the plan. Lighting: A plan has been submitted for review. The ordinance provides for maximum lighting levels of one -foot candle at the street and 0.4 when casting light onto a residential property. Glare can be an issue from fixtures even if foot -candle measurements are met. Because of proximity to residential uses the type of fixture will be critical. The ordinance requires that light sources be hooded or controlled. The fixture proposed is a decorative, round cutoff luminaries that has the option of a solid dome or a glow dome. Staff believes all of the lights should include • a solid dome. The submitted plan does show a combination of domes. No specific lighting type • • • Spirit Hills. Page 5 of 8 has been provided for under the canopy. Lighting under the canopy shall be designed with completely recessed lighting and no lighting on the canopy sides. Grading and Drainage: The submitted erosion and grading plan is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. The City Engineer's comments, dated July 3, 2002, are attached. Utilities: The submitted utility plan is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. The City Engineer's comments, dated July 3, 2002, are attached. Easements: All standard easements are to be dedicated with the final plat. There is an existing drainage and utility easement to be vacated that was previously platted with the Spirit Hills subdivision; this shall be completed prior to issuance of a building permit. Park Dedication: Park dedication has not previously been satisfied on this parcel. As a result, the proposed final plat will be subject to park dedication requirements. For commercial development, a park dedication requirement of $2,175.00 per acre is required. The plat includes 3.75 acres which requires a park dedication of $8,156.25 to be paid prior to recording the final plat. Proposed Use: The development is intended to be used for Retail and Service uses consistent with the GB, General Business District. Three uses proposed on the plan include a Day Care Facility, Motor Fuel Station (Convenience Store) and Bank with Drive -Thru, which require a Conditional Use Permit. Approval of these uses are included as part of the PDO approval but are identified here for clarity in what will be permitted. The Planning and Zoning Board shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. Comment: Bank drive -thru, child day care and service station uses currently exist within the City of Lino Lakes. None of the uses should be detrimental or endanger the public. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this ordinance. Comment: The comprehensive plan guides for commercial use of this site. Once rezoned from R -1 to General Business the site would match the comprehensive plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. • Spirit Hills. Page 6 of 8 Comment: The building designs include many windows and rock face block. The design will be carried through on all four sides of the buildings. This should help make the buildings more attractive. Landscaping and fencing should soften the development and help screen the use from residents. The added sidewalk should be beneficial for pedestrians. 4. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including street, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Comment: The proposal should be served adequately by such facilities and services. 5. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Comment: This development should not increase public costs, nor be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 6. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of • operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Comment: The proposed commercial uses upon this site should not create any excessive externalities that would be abnormal to the character of commercial sites. 7. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. Comment: The site layout meets standards held within the City's zoning ordinance including turn lanes, access width, and access spacing/location. 8. Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Comment: The applicant is currently working with the RCWD to satisfy the remaining mitigation requirements through a comprehensive drainage plan for the site, future Ware Road extension and surrounding properties. 9. Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. • • • Spirit Hills. Page 7 of 8 Comment: Each use should conform to the specific standards listed within the General Business section of the zoning ordinance. Specifically, the day care should meet the requirements listed under Section 7 H(11)(a). Environmental Board: The Environmental Board reviewed the proposed development on April 24, 2002 and recommended approval. Their comments are attached and, where applicable, have been incorporated into this report. Rice Creek Watershed District Review: The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) granted a TWAFAA (Table With Authorization For Administration Action) on February 27, 2002, pending resolution of Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) issues. The applicant is proposing to fill 8,000 square feet of existing wetland on the site. 3,041 square feet is proposed to be mitigated on -site. The applicant is currently working with the RCWD to satisfy the remaining mitigation requirements through a comprehensive drainage plan for the site, future Ware Road extension and surrounding properties. The wetland delineations have been approved and RCWD has agreed to work with the applicant to create the best solution for wetland impacts and protection. No permit for the work at Spirit Hills will be issued until the overall impacts are addressed during the Ware Road permitting process. Anoka County Highway Department: A copy of the application has been submitted to Anoka County for review. Their comments, will need to be incorporated into the site design. Dedication of access control, along Birch Street, to Anoka County should be shown on the final plat. It is anticipated that improvements to the Ware Road/Birch Street intersection, including turn lanes will be required. Site Improvement Performance Agreement: Prior to the commencement of any site work, the applicant will be required to enter into a performance agreement with the City and post all the necessary securities required by it. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in this report and subject to the conditions listed below, our office recommends the following: A. Approval of rezoning the site to GB, General Business and approval of the PDO overlay subject to the following conditions: 1. The site and buildings shall be developed as outlined on the plans dated 3/4/02 and last revised 6/12/02. • 2. A sidewalk shall be installed along the frontage of Ware Road and shall be maintained by the commercial development. Spirit Hills. Page 8 of 8 3. The PDO shall include the CUP's for the Motor Fuel Station (Convenience Store), Bank Drive -Thru and Day Care subject to the requirements of Section 7, Subdivision 3, H(2), H(5) and H(11), respectively of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance. B. Site and Building Plan approval to allow the construction of 30,266 square feet in three buildings and canopy as configured on the site plan dated received June 14, 2002 1. All refuse and recyclable materials shall be stored within the principal building or within an accessory structure (within a side or rear yard) that is totally screened from eye level view from neighboring uses and public rights of way. 2. All signs shall be reviewed with the sign permit applications and shall be required the applicable requirements of the Ordinance. 3. Light fixture design is a solid dome variety only and under- canopy lighting shall be submitted and subject to staff approval. 4. The submitted erosion and grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the City Engineer's comments, dated July 3, 2002. • 5. The submitted utility plan shall be revised to incorporate the City Engineer's comments, dated July 3, 2002. 6. Stop signs shall be installed and maintained at the access points with the public road. 7. The Rice Creek Watershed District issues a permit to allow the development proposal and the conditions required by it are fulfilled. 8. A Watershed District Permit is received prior to City building permit issuance. 9. A final plat and vacation of easements shall be submitted and approved by the City. The plat shall also include dedication of access control, along Birch Street, to Anoka County. 10. Prior to the commencement of any site work, the applicant enters into a performance agreement with the City and post all the necessary securities required by it. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Plan 2. Utility Plan 3. Landscaping Plan • 4. Notes and Details 5. Building Elevations 6. City Engineers Report (-HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA W.0.1. McCULLY DALE: REG NO 2. 133_,„ SPIRIT HILTS CENTER SECT. %. l,n. 21. P.G. tZ VICINITY MAP ,0 11C• SITE PLAN NOTES 1997 Uniform Building Code 1998 MSBC CABO /ANSI A117.1 -1992 1999 Minnesota Energy Code Building Clossificotion A. Occupancy B A building or structure, or o portion thereof , for office, professional or service -type tronsoctions, including storoge of records and occounts; eoting and drinking establishments with on occupant load of less than 50. 1 -1. Nurseries for the full -time core of children under the age of six (each accommodating more than five children). M A building or structure, or o portion thereof, for the disploy and sole of merchandise, and involving stocks of goods, wares or merchandise, incidental to such purposes and occessible to the public. B. Type of Construction V- One -hour Sprinkled C. Location on Property Separation on all sides D. Allowable Floor Area 14,000 sf 14,000 separation on all sides 14,000 outo sprinklers 42,000 Allowable sf Buildings A 13,720 B 6,440 C 7,606 27,766 2,500 conopy 30,266 Total sf E. Height and Number of Stories 1,2 story Site Dota City of Lino Lokes Zoning Ordinance 163,314 sf site 58,793 sf 36% green space (more than 25% required) Setbocks from streets Local street 30 ft Collector or Arterial Street 40 ft Porking lot/ Driveway 15 ft Rear yard 30 ft Parking lot 10 ft Side Yard 10 ft Porking lot 10 ft Parking Spaces 30,266 sf including 107 mezzanines /200 sf 151 required 138 designed 9 ft wide x 18 ft 24 ft wide two way oisle Maximum slope driveway/ access: 8 ft. rise in 100 horizontal All elevations are flowline elevations unless noted otherwise NOR SFNAGC. -A �. MAN 7:- - '.1 GRAPHIC SCALE • N fn ( IN 20E1 ) I Inch - 30 15. JUN 1 4 200 CITY OF LINO LA 19 B0 "8 9 SHED Ap 20 95. L 22 L Imo`. i +39 7.07 TT_ ft" ------ ------- --- --T58^ ----- 897.55 'L R�.. R X7.9 9 8.10 98.0. y 20 896 FCL 101 0 Q) 0 FCL \e20 1FCL 2 00 1 - - -L - ---� off) '1 --- - - = - -- N8�2 2 5� V�7- / L -- -- oCen�er line - Bird - , 5,3.1,6 8 - 6 (0 (REVISIONS NSEO PER QTY 0./0/02 REN5E0 PER CRY 05/12/2002 E DRAWN ORL CHECKED WATM DATE 03/04/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HOW; 30' JOB 50. 01516 BOOK PACE SHEET 2 OF 6 SHEETS �u a ou o u v GRAPHIC SCALE n b p ( IN FELT ) 1 inch 70 (t. UTILITY NOTES ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE 6" PVC SDR 35 ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 6" PVC SCH 40 ALL WATERMAIN SHALL BE 8" DIP CL52 SEPARATE DOMESTIC WATER FROM FIRE FLOW SERVICE AT THE WATERMAIN WATERMAIN TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8' OF COVER SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN CROSSINGS TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION EXISTING UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE OR SHE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TWIN CITY AREA (651) 454 -0002 - MN TOLL FREE 1- 800 - 252 -1166 P 11 A RECEIVED JUN 1 4 2002 CITY OF LINO LAK S 9 N N DR 1. 19 0 %y. O SHED Ap ' 1� PYC 193.8 J \:* RIM: 8• LZ0 rr z' �� INV: 887. I -A - Q _ BEND �\ \% I I iii ; I r i -1__ ____ 6.OIP_WM_______________ INV: 889: KM. ♦i.1 I 00� 3,s ! �� a 11.1 n Ir, V'j1 I ■ EV t � _ ,r./ , •_ $98.3• .o 8 F21#-4/1 PMA %1k. 10x- ---1 — 0 0) Orr' N • /v JU { 468 .01E A 5,33.,6$ -- -•`� -� --- := t - - -z,- Center - - -- - - 11ne �Ir� -- I _ n I HEREBY CERTFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA A.T. McCULLY DATE: REC NO2 }t3 { DRAWN DRL CHECKED WATM DATE 03/05/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HORIZ. :30' JOB NO. 01516 000K PACE SHEET 3 Or 6 SHEETS SITE, GRADING, DRAINAGE A N D EROSION CONTROL PLAN V / Y DRAI S EASEAR' AN : I / / • •••• •ti 1 P••e 0. •64••••g••• 11•0•0,•011 ••••I •••• •• �•••• Ow �l •4 a. D 0. X \ 892.1 5 "B 12 "Bx- wA \ \1i 11 iv1 11 11/, 1 -1\\ AP 8 "RO - II 1 3 -19 "RO 24 "S�x d ' 895.6 �91, ern "Sp 'Ap . HOUSE ;/:,?7,5 X896. ECL GRADING NOTES INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SILT FENCE AS NECESSARY INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SEED AND MULCH AREA WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF FINAL DISTURBANCE SEED S.E. WETLAND (near monument) WITH MNDOT 25B OR SAME PRAIRIE RESTORATION MIX AS SPIRIT HILLS SEEDED AT A RATE OF 35 LBS PLS PER ACRE MULCH RATE SHALL BE 2 TONS PER ACRE VEGETATED HATCH AREAS TO BE BROUGHT UP TO GRADE WITH GRANULAR SAND FILL LARRY GRUBBS WILL PERMIT GRADING ON HIS PROPERTY DRAINS TO DITCH TO RICE LAKE, S 30, T 31, R 22 IF WETLAND EXEMPTION IS NOT GRANTED, FILL AREAS OF THE EXISTING WETLAND REPLACEMENT AND BANKING PLAN SHALL BE REVISED TO REFLECT THE 2002 RE- DELINEATED WETLAND FILL AREA AMOUNTS. NEW DELINEATION SHALL BE DONE IN THE SPRING 2002, IF THE BOARD DOES NOT EXCEMPT WETLAND OR MAKE A NO LOSS DETERMINATION TEP FINDINGS PRESENTED AT THE 2/13/2002 RCWS BOARD MEETING INSTALL NETLON ADVANCED TURF ONCE CURBS AND PARKING LOT SURFACES HAVE BEEN INSTALLED ROUGH GRADE SHALL LEAVE NETLON ADVANCED TURF AREAS 6" ABOVE GRADE EXCAVATE OUT AND DISPOSE OF THE EXTRA MATERIAL FROM THE NETLON ADVANCED TURF AREAS TILL IN THE NETLON MESH WITH A NETAVATOR ADD PEAT OR TOPSOIL IN APPROVED AMOUNTS TO THE ROOTZONE MIXING AND BLENDING MAY ALSO TAKE PLACE OFFSITE CITY ENGINEER TO APPROVE TIME FOR THE REMOVAL OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES STORM NOTES ALL STORM SEWERS TO BE 12" N -12 HDPE PIPE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ALL STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN /MANHOLES SHALL BE TYPE 406 ALL STORM SEWER CATCH BASINS SHALL BE TYPE 409 ALL STORM SEWER MANHOLES SHALL BE TYPE 402 OR 409 DRAINTILE SHALL BE 6" CONTECH A -2000 PERFORATED WITHOUT SOCK 1 1 1 1 ,153' FLo.o ,i .9% -f> ww /A W� ■h FL �fA.!397.1 FbA "'___i_4497 4 L Cell 897.5 RIM: 897.31 • INV:893.31 t` o 3 X98.3 20 GS 6) "f CL 305.09 `13'41 "W x 893.5 p "E 89� EXCEPTION 897.9 FL 8197 FL Hb 97.\ FL. /w line C.S.A.H. 10 fF — -898- TS- - i> - - -- v -8-r - 73 °.q-Fi er line -B-irZ -S`}. 1 - - -- - - - —+-- - --1 _ _ ° 6 I = -- \ 0 I RECEIVED JUN 14 2002 CITY OF LINO LAKES GRAPHIC SCALE. LEGEND SF 110 FEET1 1 Inch - 30 IL SILT FENCE EXISTING CONTOUR -- — — — -(896) PROPOSED CONTOUR x 895.69 SPOT ELEVATION WETLAND PLAYGROUND 1 (REVISIONS BY 1 =SS:SS RAISED PERVIOUS PLANTER INFILTRATION /FILTRATION NETLON AREA DEPRESSED PERVIOUS PRETREATMENT NETLON INFILTRATION RAIN GARDENS 111•N5ED PER RCWS 02/75/2007 WATT [REVISED PER RCWS 03/28/2002 W614 11EH510 PER OTT 04/14/2002 WATM R(NSCD PER OTY DR. 'I HEREBY CERDFY THAT THI\ PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AAI A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS Or THE STATE a MINNESOTA DATE: REC. W.A.T. McCULLY 00.23130/1 cp DRAWN DRL CHECKED WATM DATE 2/13/2002 VERTICAL SCALE NORIZ. r JOB NO. • 01516 BOOK PACE SHEET 6 SHEETS LANDSCAPING & TREE PRESERVATION PLAN TREES KEY Scientific Name Common name Habitat. Comments AG Amelanchiers grand0.v 'Autumn Brilliance' Autumn Brilliance Serviceberty MD Clump form AR Ater rubrum'Norlhwoods' Northwoods Rod Maple M Moisture tolerant TIN Banda Nigro River Birch MD Clump form CC Cmraegus erua -golf var. inermis Thornless Haw•hom MD Drought tolerant CO Celru ocoidentniis Hackberry MD Tolerato wet sites MP Aloha 'Prairiefue' Prairefire Flowering Crabapple M Red 2.5 -3' cverblooming MS Aloha 'Sutyzani Sugar Tyme Flowering Crabapple M Pink 2- 3'everbloming PGS Picea glance dentota Black Hills Spruce 1v113 Red 3' PN Pions nigra Austrian Pine MD Salt tolerant PR Pinus resinoso Norway or Red Pine MD Red 2.5.3' ...blooming pT Populous tremuloides Quaking Aspen MIS Plant in grouping QB Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak MD Compact SRI Syringe reticulate 'Ivory Silk' Japanese Tree Lilac M 10 -12' MSD Mobs Snowdrift Snowdrift Crabapple SHRUBS M Key Scientific Name Common e Habitat Comments AGC Acerginnala'compactum' Compact Amur Maple MD MW CS Cornets scrim 'benti' Isanti Dogwood MW Moisture tolerant DL Diend/ia lonicera Dwarf Bush Honeysuckle DM Drought tolerant IBC Juniperus'Blue Chip' Blue Chip Juniper MD Creeping PPG Picea pungens'Globoss' Dwarf Blue Spruce MD Tolerato wet sites RC Rosa 'Champlain' Champlain Shrub Rose M Red 2.5 -3' cverblooming RC Rosa 'Carefree Wonder' Carefree Wonder Shrub Rose M Pink 2- 3'everbloming RGV Rosa 'George Vancouver' George Vancouver Shrub Rose M Red 3' RH Rosa 'Henry Hudson' Henry Hudson Shrub Rose M White 3' RUH Rosa 'Hope for Humanity' Hope for Humanity Shrub Rose M Red 2.5.3' ...blooming RW Rom 'Winnipeg Parks' Winnipeg Parks Shrub Rose M Red 2-2.5 everblooming SG Soiroea 'Goldmound' Goldmound Spirea DM Compact SH Sivingax hyacinrhglore 'Pocahontas' 'Pocahontas Lilac M 10 -12' SP Seringo patula 'Miss Kim' Miss 61171 I.ilac M 6 -1' PERENNIALS AND PRAIRIE PLANTS (PORES) KEY Scientific Name Common name Habitat Size Comments Al Aselepiarinatrrurta Swamp Milkweed MW 2.5" Widely adaptable CV Coreonsisverticillata 'Zagreb' Zagreb Coreoosis MD AI Tolerates drought EM Euparo:runt nmcalatum Joe Pve Weed MW 2.5- EP Echinaceapurpurea Purple Cone Flower MD 4" Tolerato wet sites HPM Hemeroeallls 'Pardon Me' or 'Baia' Daylily 'Pardon Me M 41 Deep Red HSD Hemcrocvltis 'Stella do Oro' or 'Happy Return Stella de Oro Daylily M 61 Golden yellow or light yellow IS iris sibenca • Rufled Velvet' Ruffled Velvet Siberian Iris M - NI IV Iris venicotor Blue Flag iris MW 4" MF Murmrda fixtulaso Wild Bergamot MWD 2.5' NW genera .Y ranter:a'Walkers Low' Walker's Low Catmint MD XI Tolerates drought RG Rudbeckia'Goldsturm Galdsturm Rudbeckia or Brown Eyed Susan MD 4' GRASSES KEY Scientific Name Common name Habitat Size Comments CA Calanrugrostis x ocutyoro 'Foil Foersier• Feather Reed Grass M 4" Widely adaptable SH Sporobolus heterolepis Prairie Dropseed NI 4" SN Sorgh.tntnnn matins Indian Grass M 4" SP Sporting pectinohs Prairie Cordgrass MW 2.5" Tolerato wet sites SS Schi000hvrium scoparius Little Bluestein MD 4" • D= P ant prefers a dry site, M. Meaic -plant prefers • site that is moderately, but not excessively moist, W = plant prefers a moist location and will tolerate short periods of standing water or moderately long periods of constantly- moist soil conditions. REQUIREMENTS FOR TREES, SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, AND PRAIRIE PLANTS: • All deciduous trees arc to be 2" in diameter or greater (measured at 6" from ground) and root systems ball and burlopped (B&B) and supported in a sturdy wire basket that holds the root ball in a firm, rigid condition (See pp. 5.6, item 1.3.1 through 1.4 of AAN Standards for Nursery Stock). • All evergreen (coniferous) tans arc to be 5'.6' in height and trees dug and processed using B&B method with sturdy wire basket around root ball. K1inimum root ball diameters shall be the same as those specified fur duiduous trees (item 1.3.1 through 1.4 and pp 14.15, item 3.2.1). Minimum diameter ball is 20" for a 5' conifer, 22" minimum for a 6' bee. • All shrubs, evergreen and deciduous, are to be of 4 -5 gallon container situ (in 63 or 45 pot sizes). • AS perennials and prairie plants are to be in containers no smaller than what is specified in plant list. Container sizes specified in inches refer to the diameter or width of container or pot. A NI size refers to • 1 gallon size container. OTIIER REQUIREMENTS: • Mulch all trees and shrubs with 4' of hardwood shredded bark mulch. Mulched areas around tree trunk should be 4' in diameter. • Mulch all perennial beds with 2" of hardwood shredded bark mulch • After planting and before mulching. apply • granular proanergent herbicide (such as Preen) around all plants. • Edge all beds with Black Diamond Vinyl edging or equivalent. • Wato plants thoroughly after planting. Also wet down mulch thorughly so moisture penetrates into soil below in order to activate herbicide. LANDSCAPING LEGEND OVERSTORY DECIDIOUS SHADE TREE HALF HIGH DECIDIOUS TREE EVERGREEN CONIFEROUS TREE • EVERGREEN SHRUB 6 SHRUBS 0 LARGE EVERGREEN SHRUBS A- ORNAMENTAL OR CLUMP GRASSES -0 LAMP POST GENERAL LANDSCAPING NOTE$ 2• CU IRRIGATION SERVICE CONVENTIONAL IRRIGATION SYSTEM SPECIFIED ECS IRRIGATION SYSTEM APPROVED EQUAL SOD ALL DISTURBED AREAS OR SEED VA TH DEVELOPMENTAL SEED SEED PONDS AND WETLANDS PER GRADING PLAN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN EXISTS FOR PROJECT ALL TREES TO BE BALL AND BURLAPPED ALL TREES SHALL BE STAKED AND GUYED PER NURSERYMAN'S STANDARDS LANDSCAPER TO INSTALL EDGING MATERIAL AROUND SHRUBS, FILLED WITH MULCH OR ROCK PER DEVELOPER'S CHOICE PRESERVE AS MANY PINE TREES ALONG WEST PROPERTY LINE AS POSSIBLE PRESERVE OR MOVE BIRCH TREES WEST OF MONUMENT G VT A GRAPHIC SCALE O IS SO ISO ( IN FEET) 1 inch - 30 11 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPING DESIGN BY: MR. DAVID GIFFORD LANDSCAPE DESIGNER LONG MEADOW DESIGNS, INC. TEL: (952) 854 -8140 JUN 1 4 ZO02. CITY OF LINO LAKES 19 5 22 1 C 4 YP) j; - -- "---- ----- 1 S T - . ,. ------3-GS------ 3 JB P. r SRI I Q) 0 2 M / kt t'- ---- oCen -er line - BirTi -5. 0 Fl u I (0 REVISIONS REWYO PER CITY 06/12/2002 Y '1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THI\ PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS 04 THE STATE OF MINNESOTA W.A.T. McCULLY DATE: REG. N0.2315•y W DRAWN DRL CHECKED WATM DATE 03/11/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HORIZ. 1 _ :30' JOB NO. 01516 BOOK PAGE SHEET 4 / \ Of 6 SHEETS/ ii BANK- EAST ELEVATION Y EL • 120'-10' Y EL • 112V-0- EL. • 0' EL • b1' -0• EL • 102' -4- EL • 100 BANK -SOUTH ELEVATION STANDING SEAN METAL ROCP EFS E0I0. ND ROOrgACE 4' HIGH ALUTN -I STOREFFCNT PRECAST SILL CLOCK RCOffACE O' N1044 MAIN CENTER- EAST ELEVATION 0 EL. • 06 -10 Y EL • EL • b5' -0- EL • 101'-0 - EL. • 102• -4• EL. • 100'-0 -•-a SIGN MEE E- Nummin 11 e � 0, ' l•■=Slie 1w1wu1111111111w11n1 E. STANDING BEAM METAL ROOF EFFS SICSbAND ROCOACE 4• HKaW ALU-INft BTOREFRCNT PRECAST SILL CLOCK ROOffACE S- HIGH OCONVENIENCE STORE- EAST ELEVATION EL. • 113'•0• EL. • 109 -0 EL • 101' -0- EL. • 102'-4 - EL • 100'•0' CONVENIENCE STORE/GAS CANOPY - SOUTH ELEVATION VS" • I' -0- 7 i. • r24 ' -10 EL �-0' VEEL.. a -0' L. • 101• -0• VY102 .4. EL•100• -0' u..Iuil.tonnium u. € o: im ; HUM CIER MN TUUJUUuu�1 .,. STANDNG SEAM METAL RDCF CONVENIENCE STORE- (LEST ELEVATION EIRE SIONSAND ROCIO<ACE 4. 111014 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT PRECAST SILL CLOCK ROOO:ACE S' WON uIC n:- SIGN I.I.Ur���,uwn UiuIi.iifiu,m,m0iiNINI 0 CONVENIENCE STORE - NORTH ELEVATION VS- • I' -0' RSP Architects, Ltd. Minneapolis / Phoenix www.rsparch.com RECEIVED ,SUN 14 2002 Girl Of Liist0 LAKES SPIRIT HILLS Lino Lakes, MN 14 June 2002 AECEIVED \OT S ANR DET 1.5" BIT. WEAR 0.1 STEP O.( LOWER 2" BIT. BASE FLAT 24" CURB / / / SLOPED / 6" NEMON ADVAN/CED TURF / 8" CLV GRAVEL / / / / / / / 6" TESTED SAND / / / / 2.t2.4=''''''' t******+.4 V". 4 •••,"••• OA:9A. p$A4K•Asike,k.. '/.. ,.. • • / /\ • Zre...41-,trr!,-04.17,, ■AAWM04404001AAAAgggNMMOMM \ \ / /,/ ••/:i\•/:170:i-it.1-te-IS-fil.7.7.7;:::::72:- \ \ \ \ _. **** *** * •... ********************************************* if,\ /4/\\/// ' / \ WASHED SAND • /,/ < "../..,( \ : \ \ \ \ \ \ s \ \ \ IMPORTED GRANULAR MATERIAL CONTECH A-2000 PERFORATED • CURB TO BUIvPER DETAIL MAY BE LANDSCAPED TRENCH FRAME AND COVER NEENAH R-4991-KX TYPE D COVER OR EQUAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK ANCHOR BOLT GRANULAR FILL As/ CONCRETE DRAINWAY WITH COVER "INFI-SHIELD" SEAL OR GROUT 4' -0" LON. COVER • C.B. LEAD (15" MIN.) REMOVE CURB 80X BOLTS RINGS (3 MIN., 1.0' MAX. OF RINGS AND MORTAR). 1/2" MORTAR ON OUTSIDE. BETWEEN RINGS. CASTING & MANHOLE. FINISH SMOOTH ON INSIDE. NO MORTAR ON INSIDE. CEMENT MORTAR 6" PRECAST CONC. BASE NO 8.000 SHALL BE 145E0 FOR ADJuSTINC CASTING, CEMENT 6ORTAA 014.1, CAST No. CATCH BASIN fRANE • COVER CASTINGS PER SPECNICATIONS. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE CONE SECTION & PRECAST BASE PER ASTN C478. MI. OPENING BETwEEN PIPE N40 MANHOLE NALL WITH CEACNT MORTAR INSIDE SURFACE SHALL BE fINSHED SmOOTH. • M144LA144 FIPC COVER AN EC REDuCED 611044 4' TO 2•-6" WITH 54STALL4.TI011 OF PERFORATED PIPE PRAM PER STO. OETNL NO. 413. CATCH BASIN, TYPE 402 1/2" MORTAR ON OUTSIDE. BETWEEN RINGS. CASTING & CATCH BASIN. FINISH SMOOTH ON INSIDE. NO MORTAR ON INSIDE. REMOVE CURB BOX BOLTS 0 LS B612 CURB TYPICAL CY/LF 0.0474 LF /CY = 21.1 11612 CURB 2% CROWN C„RB MODIFIED D412 CURB "RIBBON CURB" CY/LF = 0.043 LF/CY = 23.14 I01IF1E0 0412 CURB 1211113544 CAB' PTAILS RINGS (3 MIN.. 1.0' MAX. OF RINGS & MORTAR). —'INFI-SI1lELO' SEAL OR GROUT. VARIABLE PRECAST COVER SLAB (TYPE 2) PLACE 2 STRIPS BiTuMASTIC SEAL ON SLAB JOINTS. CEMENT MORTAR PRECAST BASE DIA. SLAB THICKNESS 48" 54-102" 108" 10" 120' 12' NO 11000 SHAU_ BE USED FOR ADJUSTING CASTING: CEIJENT MORTAR ONLT. CAST IRON FRAME GRATE CASTINGS PER SPECIFICATIONS. mANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON. ALumiNum OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTIC PER A5TI4 C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. PREC.AST REINFORCED CONCRETE BASE SLAB & COVER SLAB PER ASTLI 0478. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS PER ASTAI 0478. OR 8' CONCRETE MANHOLE BLOCK MTH 1/2' MORTARED EXTEROR. FURNISH PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS NITH 0-RING GASKETS & LUBRICANT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. FILL OPENING BETWEEN PIPE AND INNHOLE NALL WITH CEMENT MORTAR. iNSDE SURFACE SHALL BE FiNISHED SmOOTH. • IIIAAAAAA Pin COvER CAN BE REDUCED FROM 4' TO 2'-6- WM. INSTALLATiON Of PERFORATED PiPE DRNN PER 'GRANuLut SueCUT ANO PERFORATED WE cam.- DUNI.. CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE, TYPE 406 'INFI-SHIELD. SEAL OR GROUT A 1/2' MORTAR ON OUTSIDE, BETWEEN RINGS. CASTING & MANHOLE. FINISH SMOOTH ON INSIDE. NO 140RTA11 ON INSIDE. RINGS (3 MIN 1.0' MAX. OF RINGS & MORTAR) 2% CROWN 0 48" CEMENT MORTAR SECTION A—A 6' PRECAST BASE SLAB ELEVATION 8.000 SHALL BE USED FOR ADA:STANG c&s*Nc: cc&Da MORTAR ONLY. CAST 6044 4400111010 Mud & COVER S PER SPEOFICATCNS MANHOLE STEPS SuLL BE CAST IRON. ALUIANUAI OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTIC PER ASIN 0478. LOCA1C44 SHALL 00 05 NOTEO 144 THE SPECtFICATIONS. LLANHOLES 20 DEEP AND OvER 10 BE CON5TR44CTE0 NITHOUT STEPS. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE wNHCLE SECTX/NS 6 BASE SLAB PER ASTIA 0478. FURNISH PRECAST mANHOLE SECTIONS WITH 0-RING CASKETS • 183840ANT EXCEPT AS OTHLRwIsE SPECIFIED. A TB' OR 16' BARREL SECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED UNDER THE CONE TANENEvER POSSIBLE. FILL OPENING REPKO. PIPE • Am WALL WITH CEACNT LIORTAR. INSOE SURFACE SHALL DE fueSNED 58403111. STORM SEWER MANHOLE, TYPE 407 (PIPES 27" OR LESS) JUN 1 4 2002 CITY OF LINO LAKES RINGS (3 MIN., 1.0 MAX. OF RINGS & MORTAR). 1/2" MORTAR ON OUTSIDE. BETWEEN RINGS, CASTING & 1.4ANHOLE. FINISH SMOOTH ON THE INSIDE. NO MORTAR ON INSIDE. PRECAST COVER SLAB (TYPE 2) 2 STRIPS BITUMASTIC SEAL ON SLAB JOINTS. NO CEMENT. PRECAST BASE 1411 DIA. 48" 5C-102" 18' Lommum OJT OFF BERL. TO 145488420 RUNOFF FROM STE maNTAIN R004 ENTRANCE if- TRACKING BEONS ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE \"INFI-SHIELD" SEAL OR GROUT SLAB THICKNESS 8" 108' 10' 120" 12' 0 54 NO W000 SHALL BE U5E0 FOR ADAFSTING CASTING; CEmENT YORTrit ONO% CAST PON •6445-10LE TRAAC • 006ER AS PER SPECFCATCNS. mANNOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON, ALU.NUm CR STEEL REINFORCE0 PLASTC PER AST. C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED IN THE SPCOFIC.ATIONS. PRECAST Ronroacto 006011cT0 sccno&s & BASE SLAB PER AST. 0418. FURNISH PRECAST MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH 0-RING CASKETS & LUBRCANT EXCEPT *5 0111011480 A 12' OR 15' BARREL SECTION SHALL SE 60T90LE0 UNOCR 180 CONE wHEREvER POSSIBLE. TILL OPENINC BETNEEN INPE 4. IAN WALL IATH amENT MORTAR. INSCE SuRfACE SHALL BE FRASHED SmOOTH. STORM SEWER MANHOLE, TYPE 409 (HEREBY cut' nrr THAT PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFE590061 ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE or MINNESOTA W.A.T. McCULLY REG. DRAWN CHECKED WATM DATE 3/05/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HORIZ. JOB NO. 01 51 6 B001< pacE SHEET 5 OF 6 SHEETS} \OT S A\D COMPACTED BACKFILL COMPACTED SAND OR PIT RUN GRANULAR MATERIAL COMPACTED BACKFILL GRANULAR MATERIAL BEDDING 0.0/2 0.D /4 (4' MIN) 1/2 0.0_1 EARTH FOUNDATION PIPE FOUNDATION DETAILS e/ O.D. COMPACTED BACKFILL • ASTM 02321 EMBEDMENT MATERIAL (SEE SPEC.) PIPE INSTALLATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM 0 2321. TABLE 2. 3/4- GALVANIZED STEEL TIE RODS OR 'MEGA LUG' BRAND THRUST RETAINER GLANDS AT JO■NTS SEE STD. DWG. 203 ill -TAILS CURB 4' 24 PROP. LINE O z 0. WELD CONOUCTMTY STUD 2' BELOW FLANGE (FOR LOCATION PURPOSES) COVER AS SPECIFIED GEOTE1T1LE FABRIC MNDOT 3733 TYPE 3 CONCRETE BLOCK REACTION BACKING •D /4 (4' MIN) • EMBEDMENT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM 02321. TABLE 1. GRANULAR MATERIAL BEDDING METHOD (FOR PVC PIPE) COMPACTED BACKFILL (IN CORROSIVE SOILS USE GRANULAR ENCASEMENT) 0.0. +2' 0.0. 1 1 /2- CRUSHEO ROCK OR WASHED ROCK 8'%8'X16' CONCRETE BLOCK TYPICAL HYDRANT LAYOUT (VALVE IN BOULEVARD) WATERMAIN SIZE VARIES 0.0A DEPTH AS NEEDED TO STABILIZE TRENCH MIN. 0.0./4 BUT NOT LESS THAN 10'. SPECIAL FOUNDATION FOR STABILIZING OR DEWATERING OF TRENCH TEE COVER AS SPECIFIED CURB 11/2' WASHED ROCK ALL AROUND MIN. 1/3 C.Y. (MIN. 1 C.Y. IN IMPERVIOUS SOILS.) GATE VALVE BOX 0 6' GATE VALVE 1 1/2' WASHED ROCK ALL AROUND. 1.41N.1 /3 C.Y. (MIN. 1 C.Y. IN IMPERVIOUS SOILS) 8'X8'X I6' CONC. BLOCK TIE ROOS 14NOOT 3733 TYPE 3 OEOTEXTILE FABRIC MIN. 1 LAYER ATTACH TO TOP OF BONNET GATE VALVE INSTALLATION PROPOSED OR EXIS18G POADWA7 C09ER 65 5PECN2(3 6' STEEL FENCE POST PAN41E0 BLUE 1' MA4. 101 SITE. LENGTH. MO TYPE OE MATERUL 401 SERVICE LNNE AS SPCC9'K0 6901120921.4. 1000 CORPORATION 59040 6' MIN COYER WATER SERVICE DETAIL (NO(e: All 4. 4 .aA *r.a 6J- 414 -600 PLAN 52 0 1 L UNDISTURBED SOIL ELEVATION 6" 40 MIN. UNOISTUR8E0 .III�IFIIEII�II -II�Ir i. SOIL III. CORE 80* 4' LONG AT FULL EXTENSION 6" TM. WITH F CR1MPEO ENO OR •RAPED M PLASTIC AND MXUFI SUPPORT CURB BOX WITH CONC. BRICK PLAN NOTE: COVER FITTINGS WITH POLYETHYLENE (4MIL.) PRIOR TO POURING CONCRETE. 2500 P.S3. CONCRETE 28 DAY STRENGTH PLAN CONCRETE REACTION BACKING Z' a 2' HARDWOOD MARKER W /SPIKE. SECTION E -6' METAL FENCE POST MARKER PAINTED GREEN • 3 I SERVICE SLOPE 1X MIN. `0 l��� f'IICl _- 11=1 I . 0. GRANU1LAR . BEOOIN6 MATERIAL (COMPACTED) WITHOUT RISER SERVICE WYE TO BE EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE DEPTHS GREATER THAN 74' WHERE RISER APPROVED BY ENGINEER. SERVICE WYE 111 2' 8 2' HARDWOOD MARKER W /SPIKE 1=1 1 1= 111 IF F AIRTIGHT PLUG OR = CAP 45' BEND 6' METAL FENCE I- POST MARKER PAINTED GREER 3 SLOPE 1% MIN p 4 MAX. 45' �_- NOTE: SERVICE PIPE TO BE PVC. SOR 26 (ASTM 0 -2241) OR 111 1 -r-� 7=-7 WITH RISER SCH. 40 (ASTM 0- 2665). SOLVENT WELO ALL JOINTS. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE DETAIL (WITH END RISER) =111 =111- 1 AIRTIGHT PLUG OR CAP I_ 45* BEND GRANULAR BEDDING MATERIAL (COMPACTED) SERVICE WYE TO BE EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE 0 UNDISTURBED SOIL 6 MIN. -0- moo. 9 -9 IAN Ww 1.9.0 G.94. C•. Ore. 0A., rmt« a..puol 74 30'. *9. 75'. © tl.. ew erc4 «, el 1.. option. 471*7 .43004114 646.47.4 .43.5...60* spec. 3601 le. We V* 4* Cow Hew41 pee.. *wile .pweed In Inc Wane. 371. lep5 .71060 m+.. . pe43 J Ow New we ..*.M N. Need *peon 3 N.. O3 oPNIAP40 t" owes in..a• ..am W w.nn. E. JUN 1 4 2002 CITY OF LINO LIKES TALE OF OVA/PIES WRVS TABLE OF OVANITIE5 SWISH, *1 RCP.6 057105 w 9025 Or LOUVKC0T Snen WON 01655 9 p.6 M 5 14 .,0- CU55 N �-lr [90. R0«a P:p. ( *.) L (4L) 12" 0.44174 54 (c•. ra.Ka. New GeanM« F4*« ra.HC.. DN. w ra.H<... O.pl x G e.7 7a.HCa. 7C wpm a:p.00 70.690. 12- Owen c e2*« VP.) 12 15 ID 2. 74 27 30 34 4e • 9 5 12 12 14 16 a 10 2.5 29 3.9 4.2 5.5 5.6 7.3 9.7 10.9 11.9 1.4 5 2.0 2.1 35 2.9 31 4.6 5.5 6.5 4 5.9 6.3 63 e.1 10.9 13.6 16.: 19. 2.1 2.2 3.0 3.2 4.2 4.4 5.5 6.9 9.2 9.> 5.3 55 7.6 11.4 11.0 11.6 14.5 16.3 21.1 25.6 1.5 2.9 3.9 4.2 5.3 5.6 73 9.2 10.9 13.9 TABLE OF OVANITIE5 SWISH, *1 RCP.6 057105 w 9025 Or LOUVKC0T Snen WON .: R.wi..r.M le. 4'v49 in «W 9:c.n.,.end 0.1« 64446et .4 M 0.49.4122 9 M Plana RIPRAP AT OUTLETS '1 HERE8Y CERTIFY THAT THIS\ PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED 80 ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERNSION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA W.A.T. MCCULLY DATE: REG. 010.2313@ / r DRAWN DRL CHECKED WATM DATE 6/13/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HORIZ. 308 NO. 01516 BOOK PAGE SHEET 6 \ OF 6 SHEETS o. 9 -6' cH 0. *5.9' N 0 543 12' 5" 9' soon 99V.cn 1 9" 14 0.em rr4144 45' 177.:1_14 OFin, le' 0w47 20003)2 (in.) (IL) a:p3w (Cu. N. Cu. 70. 4.99(7. Cu. ( 04)43.. 74. 00.45. Cm. Y. Cu. 74. 22 10 3.9 2.0 5.9 3.0 7.9 35 25 36 12 14 55 7.2 29 9.7 10.5 4.1 5.4 70.9 14.3 5.5 7.2 51 16 15 9.2 10.9 3.5 4.9 5.5 13.7 16.3 6.9 5.2 19.3 21.7 9.2 10.9 58 70 17.7 6.4 150 9.5 25.4 12.7 .: R.wi..r.M le. 4'v49 in «W 9:c.n.,.end 0.1« 64446et .4 M 0.49.4122 9 M Plana RIPRAP AT OUTLETS '1 HERE8Y CERTIFY THAT THIS\ PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED 80 ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERNSION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA W.A.T. MCCULLY DATE: REG. 010.2313@ / r DRAWN DRL CHECKED WATM DATE 6/13/2002 VERTICAL SCALE HORIZ. 308 NO. 01516 BOOK PAGE SHEET 6 \ OF 6 SHEETS C I T 0 F • LN�j \' KES Memorandum DATE: July 3, 2002 TO: Mike Grochala FROM: James E. Studenski, City Engineer RE: Spirit Hills (Previously Village Hills) Site Plan Review A site plan review of the submitted documents including a six -page drawing set dated June 12, 2002, and drainage calculations dated June 20, 2002, for the proposed Spirit Hills site has been performed. The plans generally meet City requirements. The following comments must be addressed prior to final approval given for this site plan: Watermain: - Part of the watermain is mislabeled as 6" DIP between two 8" DIP pipe sizes. Sanitary Sewer: - Meets City standards. Street Standards: - Turning movements of trucks within the site must be confirmed. - Sidewalk along Ware Road north of Birch Street has unacceptable cross slope. - Right turn lane onto Birch Street is under review. Storm Sewer /Drainage: Attached is a memorandum dated June 26, 2002, which addresses the storm sewer and drainage design. Plat: Plat must show drainage and utility easements. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 -1182 Phone: 651 - 982 -2400 • Fax: 651- 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 -982 -2410 oTKDA • TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2140 PHONE: 651/292 -4400 FAX: 651/292 -0083 Jim Studenski Reference: Drainage Review for Copies To: John Powell Spirit Hills Center (Village Hills) From: Scott A. Brink City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Date: June 26, 2002 Commission No. 12475 -002 The following documents, submitted on June 24, 2002, to the City of Lino Lakes, were used to review the proposed Spirit Hills Center, Site, Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (Sheet 1 of 6): 1. Plan set dated February 13, 2002, revised June 21, 2002, and signed on June 21, 2002 (full size and half size copies provided) 2. HydroCAD calculations dated June 20, 2002 3. TKDA memorandum from Stephen Hartley dated May 1, 2002 After reviewing the above documents, I have the following comments: General Comments: In order to provide for better understanding and clarification of the Plan, the following information should be provided: 1. Grading notes should be numbered and referenced to and from the Plan accordingly. 2. It is not noted on the Plan whether the spot elevations provided are existing or proposed. They are presumed to be proposed, but must be distinguished and stated clearly on the Plan. There are some spots (particularly between buildings at the south end of the site) that do not show clearly that they will drain. In addition, drainage flow direction should be more clearly defined at the site entrances (i.e., drainage to Ware Road vs. on site, etc.) • 3. Denotations on the Plan such as FL, FCL, LP, D etc., should be noted in a glossary or index as to what they identify or stand for. An Equal Opportunity Employer • Memo - Drainage Review for Page 2 June 26, 2002 Spirit Hills Center (Village Hills) City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 4. There are some differences between the full size and half size copies provided. For example, hatched areas do not show up on the full size Plan, and the location of curb and gutter differs between copies. Other Comments 1. The Plan must note or reference that all curbing shall be B612. concrete curb and gutter as required by the City. Curb cuts must be noted on the Plan where it is intended to drain to infiltration areas. The location of curb and gutter must be clearly shown and referenced to the City standard accordingly. 2. The Plan must show specifically where silt fence is to be installed (essentially all locations where any runoff can leave the site). 3. All disturbed areas shall be seeded and mulched immediately, or within a maximum of two weeks from final disturbance. 4. The "future" mitigation at the SE corner of the site is labeled "if necessary ". It would appear that the detention area is necessary, regardless, since permanent drainage from the site is being routed to this location. The expected HW should be noted on the Plan, and the overflow route (to Birch Street) must be better defined to indicate what the effects on Birch Street may be. 5. A shaded area is shown on the NW side of the property, between the driveway and pond, along with a note stating "Tuff Turf' swale. The shading must be referenced in a glossary or index with the other cross hatching, and a specific reference or detail to "Tuff Turf" must be provided. It is presumed that "Tuff Turf" is an industry trademarked product, and it must be referenced and/or specified and described accordingly. 6. The entire wetland mitigation work for this site is very confusing. Notes on the Plan referring to mitigation should reference to the note describing the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed. Re- delineations in the spring of 2002, future mitigations if necessary, etc. are stated on the Plan. If such re- delineations have been performed, they should be incorporated into the Plan accordingly. Mitigation areas should also be clearly defined and outlined. This Plan shall not be considered approved until the Watershed has reviewed and approved the Plan accordingly. Again, the mitigation work shown for this site is not clear and must be clarified and detailed on the Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed District. 410 7. A reference or detail for "Netion Advanced Turf" and "Netavator" must be provided. It is presumed that this is an industry trademarked product, and it must be referenced and/or specified accordingly. Memo - Drainage Review for Page 3 June 26, 2002 • Spirit Hills Center (Village Hills) City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 8. Rock entrances shall be provided at all construction site access points. 9. A note is provided stating that grading on Larry Grubbs' property is permitted. It is not shown on the Plan where this property is located, or exactly what may or may not be permitted. The note should be revised to state that no grading shall be allowed beyond the site property, unless the Contractor attains authorization from adjoining property owners accordingly. The Contractor shall be responsible for any disturbances or encroachment upon adjoining private properties. 10. A note is provided stating adding peat and topsoil to root zone mixing. This must be more clearly explained as to where, what, etc. Reference to an appropriate specification or detail is needed. 11. Previous correspondence indicated that a right turn lane from southbound Ware Road to Birch Street will be needed. This should be reflected on the Plan to adjust the site grading accordingly. • Storm Notes 1. A note should be included that all storm sewer pipe, manholes, and appurtenances shall adhere to the requirements and standards of the City of Lino Lakes. 2. For the PS -NW Outlet Structure, the normal elevation of the pond must be provided on the Plan. The outlet and ditch to Rice Lake must be reviewed and approved by the Watershed District to assure that the outlet is adequate. Drainage Calculations 1. HydroCAD Drainage Calculations have been provided. However, a site plan (existing and proposed) with specific drainage areas highlighted must be provided to allow for adequate review of the calculations. 2. The retention pond at the north side of the property must provide a permanent pool size that meets NURP standards in accordance with the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City of Lino Lakes. A preliminary observation suggests that the pond is undersized. The Developer's Engineer shall submit calculations demonstrating that the project's storm water detention system does meet the treatment requirements of the Watershed and the City. • • AGENDA ITEM 5B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala P & Z MEETING DATE: July 10, 2002 TOPIC: Public Hearing • Comprehensive Plan Amendment: MUSA Allocation • Rezoning from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive • Preliminary Plat (Stoneybrook) BACKGROUND Tollefson Development, Inc., has submitted an application for preliminary plat approval of Stoneybrook, a 102 lot single family residential subdivision. The request also requires approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allocate MUSA to the site and a Rezoning from R, Rural District to R -1X, Single Family Executive Residential District. The site is located adjacent to and south of Birch Street and a quarter mile west of Centerville Road. This review is based on the following revised submittals prepared by Pioneer Engineering and received by the City on June 5, 2002: Preliminary Plat, revised May 29, 2002 Existing Conditions Plan, dated January 14, 2002 Preliminary Site/Utility Plan, revised May 30, 2002 Preliminary Grading and Erosion Control Plan, revised May 30, 2002 Detail Sheet, revised May 30, 2002 And Preliminary Landscaping Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated March 7, 2002 and received by the City March 11, 2002. Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Barr Engineering, dated August 16, 2001, and received by the City March 27, 2002. Geotechnical Report prepared by American Engineering Testing, Inc., dated February 28, 2002 and received by the City March 27, 2002 Wetland Replacement Plan prepared by Barr Engineering, dated March 2002, and • received by the City March 27, 2002 • • ANALYSIS Project Overview Project Data: Existing Land Use: Total Site Area: Upland Area: Number of Lots: Gross Density: Net Density (Upland Only) 78.07 acres 54.73 acres 102 Single Family Residential Lots 6 Outlots 1.30 units /acre 1.86 units /acre The project consists of a 78 acre parcel that is currently in agricultural use containing approximately 19 acres of wetland. Surrounding land uses include sewered residential to the north (Pheasant Hills Preserve), unsewered large lot residential to the west and south, and a single family dwelling, pasture and wetland to the east. Land Use Plan: Zoning: The project site is currently zoned R, Rural District. Surrounding zoning includes R -1X, Single Family Executive to the north, and R, Rural to the east, west and south. Comprehensive Plan Amendment (MUSA Allocation): The applicant is requesting the allocation of approximately 54.73 acres of MUSA to service the proposed development. In 1996, the Metropolitan Council provided the City of Lino Lakes with a 150 acre "MUSA Reserve ". The reserve was intended to accommodate some limited development within specified areas of the City until the updated Comprehensive Plan, including the transportation element, was completed. There are approximately 15.7 acres remaining in the City's MUSA Reserve. An existing development proposal, currently being reviewed by the City (Pheasant Hills Preserve 12tn Addition) has requested 4.5 acres. This potentially leaves the City with 11.2 acres until Stoneybrook Page 2 Comprehensive Plan (1990) Comprehensive Plan (2001) Site Rural Low Density Sewered Residential (Growth Area 1) North Single Family Residential Low Density Sewered Residential East Rural Low to Medium Density Residential (Growth Area 2) South Rural Low Density, Unsewered Residential West Rural Low Density, Unsewered Residential Zoning: The project site is currently zoned R, Rural District. Surrounding zoning includes R -1X, Single Family Executive to the north, and R, Rural to the east, west and south. Comprehensive Plan Amendment (MUSA Allocation): The applicant is requesting the allocation of approximately 54.73 acres of MUSA to service the proposed development. In 1996, the Metropolitan Council provided the City of Lino Lakes with a 150 acre "MUSA Reserve ". The reserve was intended to accommodate some limited development within specified areas of the City until the updated Comprehensive Plan, including the transportation element, was completed. There are approximately 15.7 acres remaining in the City's MUSA Reserve. An existing development proposal, currently being reviewed by the City (Pheasant Hills Preserve 12tn Addition) has requested 4.5 acres. This potentially leaves the City with 11.2 acres until Stoneybrook Page 2 • the Comprehensive Plan is approved by the Metropolitan Council. This amount is insufficient to cover the requested allocation of 54.73 acres. • The City's 2001 Comprehensive Plan is currently being reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. As part of the plan, the City is requesting an additional 359 acres of MUSA to service future development through 2010. Upon approval of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Update, by Metropolitan Council, the proposed residential development would be eligible for the MUSA Allocation of 54.73 acres based on the following findings: 1. The application for 54.73 acres of MUSA is being made in conjunction with the request for preliminary plat approval. 2. The applicant has requested an R -1X zoning designation be applied to the proposed development consistent with the proposed land use contained in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan. Such request has been made in conjunction with the preliminary plat request. 3. The property lies immediately south of Pheasant Hills Preserve, which is within the existing MUSA. The property lies within a Stage 1 growth area as defined in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan. 4. Development of the property is considered a natural utility extension. Existing utilities are located immediately to the north of the site. 5. Development of the property is considered a natural extension of existing roadways. Proposed roadways into the site will connect with the existing Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road. 6. Development of the property is environmentally compatible with the surrounding area. The proposed development has minimized impacts to existing wetlands and tree cover on the site. Approximately 21.44 acres of the 78.07 acre site (27 %) will remain undeveloped. 7. The proposed development lies outside the scope of the City's 1992 Park and Trail Plan. The City's Park Board has evaluated the proposed development and recommended a 100% cash park dedication. 8. The Development is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan. 9. Development of the property shall not adversely affect the health, welfare, and general safety of the community. 10. Birch Street (CSAH 10) is adequate to handle the additional traffic generated by the proposed development subject to the improvements specified by Anoka County. The developer will be responsible for the necessary upgrades to CSAH 10. Stoneybrook Page 3 • 11. The project is proposed to be phased over two years. The phasing plan calls for 52 lots in 2002 and 50 lots in 2003. • Rezoning: As previously indicated, the applicant has requested the rezoning of the subject property from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive. In consideration of rezonings, the Planning and Zoning Board must consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment based on the following criteria: 1. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. Comment: The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's 2001 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed R -1X zoning is consistent with the Low Density Sewered Residential Land Use designation for the property. The rezoning shall be contingent upon Metropolitan Council Approval of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. Comment: The proposed R -1X single family residential zoning is consistent with existing and proposed land uses of the area. The proposed gross development density of 1.30 units per acre provides for a suitable transition from surrounding large lot residential developments. 3. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein. Comment: The proposed residential subdivision is in conformance with all applicable performance standards. 4. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. Comment: The proposed use can be accommodated by existing public services. 5. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. Comment: The proposed use will require the installation of left and right turn lanes on Birch Street (CSAH 10) at Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road. The developer will be responsible for making these improvements. Stoneybrook Page 4 • • Preliminary Plat: Lot Size. The minimum lot size of the R -1X District is 12,825 square feet of buildable land. All lots meet or exceed this provision. Lot Depth. The minimum lot depth is 135 feet. Double frontage lots are required to have a minimum lot depth of 145 feet. All lots meet or exceed these provisions. Lot Width. The minimum lot width is 90 feet for standard lots and 115 feet for corner lots. All lots meet or exceed these standards. Outlots. There are six outlots included in the proposed subdivision. The outlots cover the majority of ponds and wetland areas. The applicant is proposing to dedicate all outlots to the City. The applicant should be aware that the dedication of outlots to the City will not be accepted in fulfillment of park dedication (payment in lieu) requirements. Setbacks. The required setbacks established in the R -1X District are the greater of the following: 40 feet (Collector or Arterial Street), 30 feet (Local Street), 30 feet (front yard), 30 feet (rear yard), and ten feet (side yard - principal building). The lots have adequate dimensions to meet required setbacks. In addition, pond and wetland areas will mandate a significant setback between proposed building sites and existing homes on adjacent properties. However, the building pad for Lot 2, Block 4 extends to within 18 feet of the existing wetland and proposed 100 year High Water Elevation. While the City has no requirements with regard to wetland setbacks, staff recommends that the building pad, on this lot, be modified to maximize the usable yard space on this lot. Street and Block Design. Two accesses to the site, from Birch Street, are proposed at the existing Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road intersections. Street A extends southerly into the development from Birch Street, loops back and ties into Street B. Street B is proposed to extend from Birch Street to the easterly property line of the development to provide a connection for future development to the east. There are five cul -de -sacs proposed that intersect with either Street A or B. The proposed extension of Street B easterly has been evaluated to determine its feasibility. The proposed alignment appears to allow the street to service the adjacent property with minimal potential wetland impacts. Staff is recommending that the curve radius of the street be modified to further minimize potential wetland impacts. Further verification of the potential for Street B to cross the St. Paul Water Utility lines will be required. The developer is currently working with the water utility to provide such information. The proposed temporary cul -de -sac should be extended easterly to abut the property line. The cul -de -sac design should be modified to extend into Lot 3, Block 2, rather than Lot 46 Block 8 due the larger upland area on Lot 3. A permanent easement Stoneybrook Page 5 • • ie will be required to allow a cul -de -sac to be constructed until such time as the street is extended. Signage will be located at the street terminus indicating the future extension of the street. Street A is proposed as a large loop in the southern half of the development. While this section has two access points they form the same intersection and create a situation similar to a long cul -de -sac. Staff has evaluated other alignment options, however it appears that these would cause additional wetland impacts. Staff has reviewed this issue with the Public Safety Department and the Centennial Lakes Fire Department and determined that there are no access concerns with the proposed layout. Staff is also recommending that the applicant provide a street stub alignment to the south of the development in the approximate location of Street G. This would allow for a future connection with East Holly Drive. The 2001 Transportation Plan identifies East Holly Drive as a future Minor Collector and proposes its future connection with Holly Drive to the west and southerly to Ash Street (County J). While these projects are not planned in the near term, it would be practical to reserve the option to connect this subdivision to Holly Street in the future. It appears that an alignment option is available that would minimize impacts to existing properties to the south. It is likely that the connection would not be made until development takes place to the south. Street Width. In response to comments received by Rice Creek Watershed District the Developer is requesting a reduction in the City's standard street width to reduce impervious surface. The City currently requires a thirty -two (32) foot street width. The developer is requesting a twenty -nine (29) foot width. Section 302 of the City Code states that the City Council may permit variations from the street construction standards. Staff has evaluated the request and determined that the proposed twenty -nine foot width would be sufficient to handle local traffic needs within the development. However, it does appear that parking would need to be limited to a single side to insure emergency vehicle access. Additionally, the reduction in street width coupled with a curvilinear design of the subdivision's streets may reduce visibility of on -street pedestrian movements. Sidewalks along Street A and Street B may be necessary to alleviate this concern. The Environmental Board recommended reducing the street width. The City Council has discussed the issue and requested a recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Board. Grading and Drainage. The City Engineer has completed review of the Grading and Drainage Plan. His comments dated, July 3, 2002, are attached. A Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Land Development Permit is also required. The City's Local Water Management Plan calls for the minimum floor elevation, including basement to be 4 feet above the groundwater, 4 feet above the normal water level, or 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation, whichever is greatest. The plan appears to satisfy these requirements based on the proposed normal and highwater levels. Stoneybrook Page 6 • The developer is currently monitoring existing groundwater elevations for verification. Final adjustments will be made with the final grading plans. Mitigation sites are proposed to be fenced off after grading is completed to restrict construction traffic. If soils are to be brought to the site they must be consistent with existing soil types. Utilities. The City Engineer has completed review of the Utility Plans. His comments dated, July 3, 2002, are attached. Sanitary Sewer is proposed to be extended to the site from its existing location in Sherman Lake Road, north of Birch Street. Water will be provided by connection to the existing 16" trunk water main lying adjacent to the property on the south side of Birch Street. The water main is proposed to be looped back to the system by crossing Birch Street at Pheasant Hills Drive. Adequate capacity exists in the sanitary sewer system to service the proposed development. In addition, the Black Duck Lift Station, which services the area, is scheduled for replacement in 2003. Drainage and. Utility Easements. Drainage and Utility easements are proposed being five feet in width and adjoining lot lines, and 10 feet in width and adjoining street lines and rear lot lines as required. Drainage and Utility easements covering the 100 year High Water Level and those covering underground storm sewers are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Easements should be provided to access all pond and wetland areas. Specifically, an easement should be provided for access to Outlot F and covering the emergency pond overflow on Lot 6, Block 8. Parkland Dedication. The Park Board discussed the proposed subdivision at its February 4, 2002 meeting. The board is recommending 100% cash payment in lieu of parkland dedication. As explained in the Public Services Director's February 5, 2002 memo (attached) the proposed development lies outside the planning limits of the Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan. The Park Board looked at several alternatives and recommended the payment in lieu as the preferred option. Floodplain. Portions of the site lie with a Flood Plain Zone A. Zone A represents areas of 100 year flood where base flood elevations have not been determined. The City's Floodplain Management Ordinance requires that all principal structures be located no lower than one foot above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The submitted grading plan identifies proposed 100 year High Water Level elevations. The Rice Creek Watershed District's 1998 Calibration Study identifies the regulatory flood elevation for this area as 887.6. As currently proposed, all lot pads are located entirely above this elevation and all first floor elevations satisfy the flood plain requirements. • The proposal is subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and Rice Creek Watershed District. If the proposed subdivision is approved the Developer will be Stoneybrook Page 7 • • • required to make application to FEMA for a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) or Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) to revise the existing Flood Plain maps consistent with the proposed grading. Wetlands. The project site contains 19.39 acres of wetland. 2.06 acres of wetland are proposed to be impacted by the site development. The wetland mitigation will take place on -site, by creating two new wetlands and three water quality ponds, which will have a total area of 2.51 acres and 3.27 acres, respectively. A portion (.20 acres) of one of the existing wetland areas will be converted from Type 2 wet meadow to a Type 3 shallow marsh wetland to help facilitate site drainage. The developer is proposing to install signs, delineating the wetland edge, at property corners or where the wetland edge changes drastically within a lot. Approximately 35 to 40 signs will be installed (one sign per two homes) along the wetland edge. The signs will designate the area as a protected wetland zone. The sign will also inform homeowners that moving or cutting beyond the sign is not allowed. The plans also delineate a wetland buffer easement adjacent to wetland to provide additional transition from cultured lawns to native vegetation. The developer is proposing the establishment of a HomeOwner's Association to maintain all buffer areas and applicable signage. The developer should also make available to all lot purchasers a Best Management Practices/Environmental information brochure identifying purpose of buffer areas, soil and water conditions in infiltration areas, as well as limitations on use of buffer and wetland areas. The application also includes a Monitoring Plan that provides for monitoring of the newly created wetlands for a 5- year period. The report will be submitted to Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) on a yearly basis. The RCWD is the Regulatory Government Unit (RGU) for administration of the Wetland Conservation Act. Security should be required within the development agreement to insure installation of signs as well as the required monitoring. This requirement will need to be coordinated with the RCWD. All exposed soils above the Normal Water Level should be seeded with mixes consistent with City of Lino Lakes seed mixtures. The applicant should coordinate seed types with the City' s Environmental Specialist. Tree Preservation. The site contains a number of Oaks in the extreme southeast corner, along the westerly property line and one on the north side adjacent to Birch Street. There is no anticipated tree loss as part of this project. The grading plan identifies the installation of fencing along the drip line of the trees. Installation of tree preservation measures will be required before grading activity on the site. The developer should coordinate all tree preservation activities with the City's Environmental Specialist. Stoneybrook Page 8 • • CEPTED. Officer Mike Rumpsa prepared a review on January 21, 2002 (attached). He expressed concern with the additional traffic load on Birch Street, particularly with morning rush hour traffic. Landscaping. A landscaping plan for screening along Birch Street has been submitted as required. The plan consists of a combination of deciduous and coniferous trees. The City's Environmental Specialist is recommending replacement of the proposed Colorado Spruce with the White Spruce. The developer is also proposing to add an additional coniferous tree buffer along the northeasterly and westerly property lines in response to adjacent property owner concerns. Phasing. The applicant is proposing to phase the development over two years. 52 lots are proposed for development in 2002. The remaining 50 lots would be developed in 2003. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). The proposed subdivision does not surpass the mandatory thresholds for an EAW and therefore is not required. Environmental Board. The City's Environmental Board reviewed the request on March 27, 2002 and June 26, 2002 and recommended denial of the request due to excessive wet characteristics of the site, and incomplete information needed to process the plat. Note: All information required has been submitted by the developer. They also submitted recommendations to consider if the proposal is approved. These comments are attached and, were applicable, have been incorporated in this report. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). The developer has made application to the RCWD for approval of a Land Development Plan and a Wetland Alteration Plan. The RCWD has approved a TWAFAA (Table with Authorization for Administrative Action) for the proposed development. Anoka County. The County has completed its review of the proposed development. The County will require improvements to Birch Street (CSAH 10) so that there will be left, through and right turn lanes for eastbound and westbound CSAH 10 traffic at both the Sherman Lake Road and Pheasant Hills Drive intersections. The developer will be required to make these improvements as part of this development. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in this report and subject to the conditions listed below, staff recommends the following: A. Approval of the MUSA Allocation subject to the following conditions: Stoneybrook Page 9 • 1. Allocation of MUSA shall be subject to the approval of the City's 2001 Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. • • B. Approval of the Rezoning from R, Rural District to R -1X, Single Family Executive District subject to the following conditions: 1. The Rezoning shall not be effective until 30 days following publication of the ordinance. The ordinance shall not be published until the Metropolitan Council has approved the City's 2001 Comprehensive Plan. C. Approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The MUSA Allocation and Rezoning are approved. 2. Approval of the City's 2001 Comprehensive Plan by Metropolitan Council. 3. A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted containing the following modifications: a. The alignment of Street B shall be modified to reduce potential wetland impacts from its easterly extension, subject to staff review. b. The proposed Street B cul -de -sac shall be extended to the easterly property line and modified to reduce the impact on Lot 46, Block 8. c. Street G shall be modified to extend to the southerly property line of the proposed subdivision for future extension. d. Easements shall be provided for access to Outlot F and to cover the emergency pond overflow on Lot 6, Block 8. 4. Soils imported to the site, if any, shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. 5. The developer shall provide a cash payment in lieu of park dedication. 6. The developer shall provide the City with a Homeowner's Association agreement including an operation and maintenance agreement for the wetland signage and buffer areas. 7. Developer shall prepare a Best Management Practices/Environmental Information brochure with regard to buffer and wetland area requirements. 8. The developer shall submit a revised landscaping plan showing proposed landscaping on northeasterly and westerly property lines. 9. A phasing plan shall be implemented. Pending Comprehensive Plan approval, Phase 1 development shall be limited to fifty -two lots in 2002. Phase H development will consist of 50 lots in 2003. Nothing herein shall prevent the grading of the entire site in one phase. 10. All modifications as required by the City Engineer shall be satisfied. 11. All required improvements of Birch Street (CSAH 10), as set forth by Anoka County, shall be the responsibility of the developer. 12. All federal, state, county, and watershed district permits shall be obtained prior to commencement of site improvements. Stoneybrook Page 10 • • 13. The developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City prior to commencement of site improvements. ATTACHMENTS 1. Preliminary Plat 2. Utility Plan 3. Grading Plan 4. Landscape Plan 5. Park Board Memorandum 6. CEPTED Review Letter 7. Environmental Board Memorandum 8. City Engineer's review 9. Anoka County Review Stoneybrook Page 11 J r--EM he of !M SE 1/4 of >r 27 • • PRELIMINARY PLAT STONEYBROOK �- -- -------- -- -- -� -- -- - - -- -------------------------------- '4°ox 4°7'--- - - - - -- E X C f P X 1 0 N x.19 ••- v� i -Tr] SHERMAN LAKE ROAD 1 1 Ti 1► 14.01?NR. 1- r 28 11.310 NIL 1 PHEASANT HILLS D 1 RIVE 1 1_I_I NANO q0. 7 17.013 NN. . -.Sts. .Ea_ 16 17 18 142!1 NR. 13.500 NR. 131173 DENOTES PROPOSED %EXAM AREA DENOTES PROPOED PENDING AREA - -- -- DENOTES PROPOSED SINTER EASEMENT GRAPHIC SCALE 130 0P « (a PEST ) 1 hove - 100 It * ** * Anon angroairing LOT DATA (NOT TO SCALE) 11041111.111 LOT DEPTH 135 FT. Ma11UY LOT 1110T1 At SETSA0( UM 90 FT. AT COMER 115 FT. AT 11/4 UPC N/A FT. I1 .Shy ee1Ry 4.41 t1.w Pia w P,+..W Op ow w wow sty *.et wowwW1.. 1.14 0..t 1 .w • AAy aow...d 1.4 Swnwpo .N. W 1w M a.. 11N.. YYw..eha ARD 18A0< - 30 P1. LOT MCA CORNER I! 825 50. FT. AREA (12.825 50. FT.) YARD SETSACI( NQ{5E 10 FT. GARAGE 5 FT. 30 FT. hat M M M Ent Mt N W SE 1/4 of Set 27 —0. STREET FRONT TARO SET0AEX 30 n. tw N0omo'so T DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: 3—i 1 4- 1-5 e L— I 1 boIng 5 h width. and odphhq 101 Emu, and 10 teat In width and odl.:Ming street Ens and rear lot lines adieu otherwise Indicated on the Plot LEGAL DESCRIPTION We Emit Nave (1/2) of the Southeast Oumtr (1/4), Section 27. Township 31. Range 22. aaoept tM foot 1 1/2 rode Unroof, according to tn. United Mateo Government Savey threat and situate ti Anoka County, MMne.ato. 1 Rohe W... 3-7 wn.w..4 1 A�wll. hash 1-e Cwmw,w�b 11,9. 17/011/10 Ace 1r 7a6M L-5-w2 I3 10/••/02 TOTAL AREA SITE DATA OUTLET AREA LOT AREA R.O.W. AREA UPLAND AREA 74.07 AC. 21.44 AC. 32.92 AC. 23.71 AC. 54.73 AC. NUMBER OF LOTS 102 LARGEST LOT 46.360 S.F. SMALLEST LOT 12,826 S.F. AVERAGE LOT 14.042 S.F. EXISTING ZONING AGRICULTURE PROPOSED ZONING R IX UTILITIES AVAILABLE LOCATION MAP / 1 I1 RECEIVE i JUN 0 5 20C GITY OF LINO LA SHEET INDEX 1. PREUMINARY PLAT 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3. PREUMINARY SITE & UTILITY PLAN 4. PREUMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 5. PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 6. PREUMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 7. PREUMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 8. GRADING DETAILS Dot. J o... SHEET nTLE [DwNERTOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT, INC.`PROLCT l 17271 NENT'ON AVEt1E SUITE 1 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT lJU(ENde: MINNESOTA 55044 CTflNFVRR(Xnt< 201132PRP.DWG I ES t 1 R 4P.C.) r'1 1U00A11 A S6.1[0 L <ir1a lY 1 11 L J aERI AN LAKE ROADRNCE O �W 1100.311 Imo\ \\ /ri - d =aura Kamm., WITit A NOULE 11 �lrrewatrn.s>7/4 .1>��\ Sl PAW SSW MAW - NDIIn A M14D E CAMIIIM rw r 1 p;4A5T1fa 1 a 1 I 1 1III - i - -�- -- r 4 / .} I `, , \ '':. �\ R. M \ \ \ \ \\ - — \ ER 4 O Es f F " \ Fro ISTFI t I 1 Q`'�'r'� t \1 a ON @R ptsAtt ol;Ls citric * ir �yo�s Ry •� * * « *R ���� may♦ [I Mr. Willy VW 04—RM Y4ei by M sr M1N q Erd 7171, wM.w1 ••• 01111 4 • 44.lIoo and land SrtNp __ M r. •I M 5114.. ON Mwwrla CC- T--- -r —c— I C 4 111 Q!1 I d ICI J- --i - -1 I \ \ ) \1 III ) \ j - r— 1t (f/�� -- l \ I11 j/-\; \ ) r Plo i / 1 —max i 1 F \ �t .....:.;{� ( 1( / 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 / I I 1 (''--ii / f • r / / fir - - N, SITE DATA t.% JACK C. CAMKELO TOTAL AREA 78.07 AC. EXISTING UPLAND AREA 50.07 AC. EXISTING WETLANDS 19.20 AC. x 7' 111 \I- \\ \:... -' . I N DE11OIES EIOSTINC •ETUIND EDGE DENOTES EnSTIMG KuUND ►TEA 64.81 / &wETTZ anima \ J I wo u +oaf...' • •17.x5 •0•.x7 7 •I I6 tea Ka GRAPHIC SCALE ��-- ••__ice M<UAM F. T040 ION ( FT= ) teak - won SW E;:ri0�' is RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2002 CITY �= L1NO L�IG�S 01S Ma E076 0p. 6'Te -•2 Rooblene _..11.---1.^ZIM1 SHEET nTLE IoTNER TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT. INC.1 PRO.CCT EXISTING CONDITIONS 17271 KENYON AMENUE, SLOE 103 1ANE _ MIN I UNtTt3KUUIC 1 cr 8 SHEETS 201132PPP.O4 • IL MA AIM TatOIM- nt1 AROUND NO Oa MEM 0 0 O R Ate R \ I ■ •• 1 a ia. TICTE1'3 CRAPHE SCALE IN FLDR WETLAND OUILOT F OUTLOT A WETLAND t/ L MET DATE SANITARY Stl) STREET !i WETLAND i 1 JACK WA UN BRCH .... � RTTM• _ GATE Wl/14 1 PHEASANT H DF i_I_Ii :I T L A N D - -- L.-__. STREET G tetra +ro., * ** 6,701101 wine1 clntf NOM 11)UCIYIIL 3 trams vrco Ws= 101/107/11101.1100A 0.2140101 OPIw 1411 �Lv 1 SIO01111•121t[,t 1IR V.1'l OOOtRON[. [L lJ l 1 ter•. r �e r�r�esaeN!.11 rw�r rye ff>• t.' 11{:. 1��ti1 RI 1110.1 L. AL:lt f1 JI_. is 1l Il..l "7[_L- .17•.1 MI. 11. =• 011 7lLJ11110•l• ALM. t1 IMF 11 1l • Al •III it 111 1 I s_---- - --- -f• •.. 11_ ■11 t1t1�1 JIL. It1t•1.•.•. ■ ■0' 11!.11 11.._.71 11 .1C':_■ MS S. • . 1111111■1•110,11 ' 101•1• 1•i 11 IL ■1' 1 /'. 11:.11. -• 111 5 11: •..1[F! l 111•1 f1S. Sti00111 •1A 117.1 S. 1a 115tH It 1I'It'tl' 0L 11'. aC 11..1{! 11../.11 d tl J1' 1 11 11'11!711LJI6jL•lt•Ll' 151111 tt 7['.I 1IJJ1 6(111 :113 1 111110 is 1WJt_I/1.11X IlJV • 1L!1LLllF 11111.10 JL1J1 •1:.6111 01 ..11'17 111100 i• 1■ 11 If. llt L{ JI1J1•!1L!1l'J111t 11 JJ111 1I 1.11 111.1 JN!.l 111110 if.lf 1l',I3' ILJ. !MHOS x.11.11 1131[' 11 11 -3-11 51/1..7:Il! l i•_1t .1 It JV_ 11L_117JL• 311! 11... 5 .0 .11!•1[!. 1111 -Jill 11 :11' 1 11:10.12/10 1il71l l.Ifiilll •IL ?11!.lf!IL 17•.11! 7f 1l ".[[ 11.:1 f1M C' l . I15' l ._ I1♦i�1♦7' IS FJILM1UI tt� ,.AL .I s:' 1l711JJi L1lL11L'Ll'JLIS 11 7l' 151:.11. • •1l )t - ..:10'.1 ttt�i. • •IL./[ /IL ll'JlLi11f 711'/L� 15.15: 11 102.51 .11: !•Il ll •:1011/ tt�1!i1f._.L 1[0 11! 1111.51•• 11!11_. 11: 1t 11.. 11'.11. 11.:2 11 _ll 1•.10.11 tttttl 0•1. 1 fJI' II7 II71I1JI:JL•'1tN11•JWif al. a I..lilii1.5.51 JL::A_I.•:l ttA i! U. AI! 117.501 ll )L•'ILLtIII 0=1110 1•011M1L01 11 J1 7l / INIM t� • ••CI •t1•�I SI • IC1 I. 1f •I! 1/• IL[ 33' :11 11•. /LC11. 141■ •■C'. ■1• I 11 11.:111 I[• ! M. ABEL 1l! 513 II! I IL. 111111!••'. •1 IL l[' 11? I . 11 -:1:11 11 14: 1•.SI1 -1 •If 1.111 fl- ll L_741ILI••f 0:111 1[ l!? Iif 1/ 11 1 11 I :e I1' -1 St• 0tt•1I•'V 11' .1f•IA1If• OKI ft .l' l3.L1LE 111. 1LL 11!11' /••.1111 11 71'.11••1. .1.11 Al 1 711!1 111[�f1.S1. 11 _11_11711. • 11f.111'IL•Il! lII if ■I7 11'•11:11. ' 11 11.7:113.■ 1• .51. -tl' I{l1L711:1f/.lif.IL�1 ■Mll.l■ L[ /1[SII11[11 It •dl 3 ►:1[3:1 �• 11111 II!. -MI ...11�� f: 11 111111SNI11.1(1. 01' 1{r,ILI[I.'. 111 It 11 � 171.1! 11..'.:11 7.11. .15'.1 11f_1lrJfLJILJL .5[11.511 L1a:110•{!11 1[ .11!.1 :.:11 lA..l1 .1[f 1 f:�.11•. __ ..��• malt__... • � 1SI -R IC 4 1r1R t1001111SOtL`/ 1480101 r•®SCIA• i*+ �ii��r�es nr�nr� aar INC MI r ti Wi_,itlrtli JL• 1/11 11 I I• 13.11 /1.11 • 11 1.11 -SJILJ L •t`.' ��rLL.IL'.I [ •Wf?'7L 1Jif�l :11. .l JCS 1•MM� •ti�t••it•111t•1�1 • •11 •11'I li 11.11•:00. 1 l IZ /1•L 1Llt!. t1! 1[• 71 11. I ll 1.44/ .1 OM ARM titi•Itittll•Mt•t1=!♦L_ ■II,.1L1 iii lilli3! 1 LJIeIllatt!At!AI L11L1t'_11!Jt JIL1l__JL.5.1I:.LJL1 t,1iL1CLJCLIL1L1lPJL'3 ! LJC1tLl[SJ112_ll =1LJ II:_111.3.1Cf.:J 111: 1tti. 1 [C.:1lLJLJLLJ[lilf!1LL1•LJE.1•t Sf IC._1 1..'.JI III/1_JCLLI IfL.iii11 L7!!_ ULLIIILA ILL1l6_I/JLJL_SiIC JLILJJI MAKIL1 LJLJLLII:' ILL1LUL1f'= 115!0[.511.161L_J( .11.5?JILJ 11 I1LEL:1[e51!!NILIELJl!..111 ILL• OILM IL.= JL__)412. • ELJ 111.53' CL IUIL;LLlfl.�l!*J1LJi[J1 '.11' ' 41 7..ItfJ LIL .E IC=JaJLJL:7la7t_ 11[0:1311 1[ . lI J1 .1,411E-7 C -111*' II:LIILLUL 11353.1CLllt.li111_ .lIJA71. 111.1 IS. It_JI5LICJL 11 I5 .1:'.Jl'.l1_11:.J1A7 11 • 33Sil _ C111I: 1FL-] C?1 a71171JL•"1LC!71L11.iI16ill_AII LJC!J 1 01: _11..1_'JLI1J: L•JtU�tt tt l�_JtL•l.1�1!Jt1�11.,.1_ 1l-JJJL:t_1L_1 1 •1•11t1= WM= MAUL .5•1/:131 IlCI51 11': 11• '11L71.SJI lS^•C.•J1:11'0000 A11�.JCS.1 /i .517111.11 11' J3LL['! 1L1 •'JL:L •J11111J[dJl':AL/ tIMl�11 �7ti• •i5t•� ∎MINII.1� 115 11..11: 1(711' 3 JLS:1lSJI1t1LLULI1ILLJC• Jl• 1111_710 L-F.L151.1 EL:MO. ELL• • 1 1/31[ .' •ijLJLAJl'' : 1 .5:., . 11 16'.1 iJt. 11!_0[1 =11 -11 :7Ll�JL']tdLli 11[.51! lL' 01':0::70_, /_t[ J 01_.5371 0�•i7•!♦11•� �111i t�ti I11:`ii 111 • i [01.5 116.1 .11L L/1JLLI11 C1•:'JJCLIIJt•J1' 1 _.711-:∎.? 111 ..7.J!_ 1::i11.11' 1 VILA :L.[Fi'.rIC1L_ .51'11' I1.1I • 1 ) IL. 11u1''I 1 :l 1.0.1F.5 3 IMIN1i�•11•Al•1111 =11= LAIALLAI tI!1L Il�il:i•[L11•.1LL t�ifalC•L(ilLt:. 7�1Cirif[Lf115111' 17�iLL1iL:11L1t3 �i[:1i..1(.3151 111110:: 'JAIL [1,IL' IMMIN 1 PD Crtt term a it' t/w.A 1 TYPICAL Slt<etl SECTION 1 1 1.11.07 .frlill,1•t'•"itf-7 -7'11PAIEv . -V- 711 M 1... •I 16. AM. .1 11...x10 lr1.1.1y1 1 < ER 2. 4/11/0! & UTILITY PLAN TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT_ INC. 1727t I@fYCN A%VIX SLITE 103 A 55044 P0rtrr? TYPICAL TEARDROP CUL -DE -SIB STONEYBROOK 1 WET 3 ow. • r -- lop Of 13I11.1.9O4.06 r -'� , 111„'K1- 899.7E / 1 I Orould.907.76 QounA.Y07.27 1 -- Top of pb••905.15 pbn•tKYS o2 •- PP Im•rt•a99.68 699.52 I `\ 1 I ' tir-PP % EX. HOUSE \ s. t V \ 1 1I I \ ! I-- -� EX. B NG \ � t i �Dg 1 \ )• Hi \ / '// ___) ) / RIM EL. 909.76„( 1 r_ - = - - -- 904 - �4- -- - - -- t�R -ma '-S -906- - - _ - e9_7= -_ 4. Craund•906.61 PoND 9 Top of pb. -90&06 ---. NW1 897.7 Inwrt•899.56 �\ 100YR HWL 900.7 O+ound••9O&17 1 Top of pb.••905. - -- In..rt•899.50 Oroud•906.94 Top of pip.•410 5.11---. In ort•899.61 \ \,, \ 1 TEMPORARY • �`__,...\ \ _Az_..L._______1_,_._.„. - � G,Wii•�.r�Y• � �ww1��.• s a GRAPHIC SCALE IN MST R151111. ILT MCI Ch..) 24. Oro IE 696.4 - tvxa (TMJ •1 •1 •I a FOND 1 NWL 897.8 100YR HW . 900.3 NSTALL SILT VOICE ma WARM _ I • 902.49 • 882.54 0 D. MT ?D$ m*J 1 r cm) I / WETLAND NO. 8 j ``� /�? NWL 895.5 � OhA T7tw ---,. 1 f100YR HWL 898.9 1 1a• RCP 1 it .. IN NMI 100 897.0 HWL 898.1 1 n.w7 e.IMr IMI Mb 0.• w 1.•A•M •• en• . •.4....r •.sA 0•�e Ie. e1 IM LAM. of 1■••••••• r G0•••� •••I //' o 6- \\ t�T L _ 0. \•aa c+ �.:i: 4. PER MT met 1 DOLS f O TA1 AAA AT MERLMe 8 OIAROC IOmw AIR TO ►002 1 8 4. 1 In V LA10U1 • CRAMS. 1. 400 MIA UK. 1 t/2i p0/M hs•• i. T/2] 4. 5 Aq. - 0i11 •M'"1,14M 11. 1De1• DI•lo.•4 t �S 1 • •IF v RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2002 CITY OF LINO LAKES { 1 •/r2 91EET not IJMINARY GRADING EROSION PRE CONTROL PLAN & J08Nt8 TOLLEFSON DEVELOPUFMT 17271 KENTON AVDPJE. SATE 103NC• LAKEVILLE. MINNESOTA 55044 KEY / WETLAND Flu. (1.84 AC.) WETLAND EXCAVATION (0.22 AC.) TOTAL IMPACT (2.08 AC.) WETLAND MITIGATION (2.51 AC.) WETLAND TYPE CHANGE (0.20 AC.) PROJECT STONEYBROOK [SEE SHEET 41 1 WAL VAT 1 WEILAND NO. 8 i �.„ �."‘"T PONO 2 I DA R.a NC"A� t I NNL 895.5 OVERFLOW `�I w 00YR H. 899.1 I � .,�._ 6— \\ Na oRAL / 18' RCP 1 1 1 1 `I I1 ft POND 200 NYY . 897.0 100YR MIL 900.7 T 07 [O C NAVATION 007 At r 00 GRAPHIC SCALE 01 FEES ALA 1E 0 U 10018 Hw 898.3 °‘ MAUL DORMICE WEILAND NO. 13 I 300 N#. 899.0 YR NM. 901.' MILANO OOCAVA MI At / PHEASANT HILLS DR. TOP OF H2O ELEV.- 892.51 * *r{1� . * PIONl1�1 . � rr.N • ••••1 EM. MIMS • aMw OVE 1 Melly Wily 0u1 1.11 /la, w M.p.. 1/ r. Y a+N rT d.el ••••■•■ and 9M 1 r... Mi l•4•0PralwMai•1 E•••••• 1rw An 1•... M TM. N I•w••. •• 1 8- 4 POI Cm' 11001. 3 KTMM W110ATl l TOTAL S. NEW SIC LAWA7T • OtAOMP 1. ACO 1T14 UL garM T. .. ��]0�: 4. \ \ /4't�AK(2) EMIERCCY 14,0 1 OAK 1 ASH/ / y \ \ \\\ \ OVERFLENOW \ / ` ♦ '9as_J i / SHEET TITLE PRELIMINARY GRADING & I ovmER EROSION CONTROL PLAN IRWIN° IOU. NY 0011.0101 r RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2002 CITY OF LINO LAKES OURCT 1IRUCfl 3 MI ORAL KEY WEILAND FILL (1.84 AC.) MIEMND EXCAVATION (0.22 AC.) TOTAL IMPACT (2.08 AC.) WETLAND I81IGATION (2.51 AC.) WETLAND TYPE CHANGE (0.20 AC.) TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT, INC. Plu An ZAPS Dm. 17102 YRS. 17271 KENYON AVENUE. SUITE 103 LAKDILIL. MINNESOTA 55044 PROJECT STfNFYPRCOK � T 5 a 8 .asrTe Okla -a0494 Top of p4.- 905.11• —, / / 1 _ i \ \ _ ak ■ .t. _�� -- ���- 1-�' == o ___ - o . .. ( o lEx. ANC _.° _� -T_ =—__ —_• =�- -- RHI 0.= 905.90 r _— `— Jam-- -_ _'_ —_ °— —. _— I l./ +_� _. ��e.r.�.� -- _� —` _+� \�X �}__ —___. �_- _"__'—'1 x905.0 / 7� •,!'/ ` \\ \\ .408' / •37 — \311 MAIL j \` \\ \ // —� 11F1A1p 0.A / , \ \ ..%.., --Of /sr.' / °-;;;,- ,, / SS So GRAPHIC WALE IN FEET ti 7 x904.0 MOOR HYML 905.0 / IRSAIRI 0 AG i WETLAND NO. 11 1 )/ •/ 24' 04 16 0 16' 0 10' OAK er.o 11° ®12" 14' OOAAKK 14' OAK 111 0A1114 0AK 12' _0020' OM '1 14' OAK It r 1' 4" OAK 20' OAK (2) 27 112 LARD 0.14 AS J,‘ EX. BUILDING 909.5 8 OAK ELERGt44C OYERFLOS jE$23UILDIlIG )EAUII DG ' °AK //906 18' °AK'( 906.5t WE 0 ° \� 1 • � n • \ _B \ I ; 1 i i �i� �\ • / •• g c 4111•—• Yn— . Evr_ -- % /, - / OVERFLOW • 20 • 4.114umws • 64.4.4 mamma aoritin ... 1114.... MYRT .•.h N.1 114. IMF w V...N by no ...M •7 .n,tl .•••.m .r 01•1 1 .. • •47 Ue....A+.4..n,. We....... w Am r Ito 000. of 1000•.1. .M3 TIPS c. • MOM >Q 1010[ AT101 MAWS G 011101.2100 70 111311007 00111T MC'I ON "WIC \� �----\ 4. POI 07Y WWII 1 MUM M90A1101 10?M 01MIQ 10071 IIR ants .Of PONDS 7 . 4. 1 In L70 1A107T 0. CRAMS 1. ADD /MIA INC. 1111703.1011 POW AT90 OWNS s TO 102211101 Opa7MUCI1011 1fATTO JUN 0 5 2002 CITY OF 1_1 110 LAKES I ""D'b' „ T "111 PRELIMINARY GRADING & j ow1+E4 TOLIFFSON DEVELOPMENT, INC. SAO - EROSION CONTROL PLAN 'nT 'E°N P* 0TA 36044 � PROJECT IUNtTt1NOOK elre WETLAND FILL (1.84 AC.) WETLAND EXCAVATION (0.22 AC.) TOTAL IMPACT (2.06 AC.) WETLAND MITIGATION (2.51 AC.) WETLAND TYPE CHANGE (0.20 AC.I 1 1 6C11Mp /IL 016 AC. eARRGINCY INV� • se OVERFLOW -1c -� ......• **•■ s ILIUM JILL 0.06K 5_J vf� 6 1 ` • % r • • • / \� i GRAPHIC SCALE IN FELT ,1l' 0 t i GENCY ,OVERFLOW / / A,1 5;s/ t OULU % 30'OAK hi 6'TREE \ J \\\ '9 �'_ - - -� / 11 J 908.2fj/30/912.3/ nno •To a 909.18 9.20 s r ,iii /' �:� ��:� ,•+►aa� rig 1 handy ..My OM 61+ pl . we 1.1.1.1111, .1. V .• ••f 16..1 liup All+. an. bet 1 w a 6/1y Ua...P..l..+nal F•o►.■ ..a. 6.. 1...e1 O. SW* M IllowomMe 4 101 OTT WAD! 1 RnMO 44110ATId TOTAL• OWIE 100111 1111 RCV. FOR POO 1 L NOV •IC WWI. OIA0+6 1. ADO RYA UK. R..YSn 6/10/02 1y •• Jn 1/ .. m\ - NN r\ RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2002 CITY OF LIFO) LAKES KEY Dal 1 o-+.. 610 s+EEr nnc PRELIMINARY GRADING & lowER TOLL EFSO►d DEVELOPMENT, INC. I PROJECT EROSION CONTROL PLAN �n" a�,vri "yVp�M�JJ[[ syI7 +w u. YRMIESOiA SBG., STONEYBROOK WETLAND FLL (1.84 AC.) WETLAND EXCAVATION (0.22 AC.) TOTAL IMPACT (2.06 AC.) %WEILAND 14I11GA110N (2.51 AC.) WETLAND TYPE CHANGE (0.20 AC.) 'SHEET 7 a 8 'I it If II TYPICAL STREET SECTION )RI 10' CATION POND St' TIoN 1/ TYPICAL lotaLsomi SUBGRADE CORRECTION DETAIL NO SCALE 0. QA$ 3 I! RAP AT 16' OEnN 700 Aa man st Is THDA !Kits \✓� am= 40316116440. WM 411 411* P13 olori __ *� #171F�* 1.._�1��"'..•� • .WALKOUT 110 KALE 911II •T MISER STRUCTURE IA 00440 Pao STRUCTURE • • • d • E II 100 1 0000 47.0 16.0 517.0 1074 10' OA 7 3 200 2 0000 107.0 3150 107.0 1074 34' 013, 101.7 300 3 1010 904 5103 100.0 09.0 10' 01. 130.0 4TOdt Coln! *Et ands • �. "ii 4, "i i.i.• 1 4.07 M ll°.11M121wrae71 W We I= 110 3144 414. En r1Y S LT FENCE 453//5410 1V=Y AN 0 N 17110 a 13.7• lt4 I YOLLi��PrsK B L NOT 10 004E2 7111232 PONE 3707110. 110202E' 604 7415349E 1. 191 NONE =R0? RD7 ERoS10N CONTROL NOTES 1640400 M104 71Au E N.0r 1110 1. 31001 9401/D'7 E7O NS�PREAD U409161Y AT A 5440 Of 1 -1N� PER ACE APO A4oa12D 9134 0140 R.11wa 7R A 3113041 MC. ALI. WHO NO !) 1EA3 O RATE PLACE 711014 wawa 6LEKS nook O 061. 611 AEAO 01118 113E A INV= 07 3008 (6)506 Cr 10•506. PI0LlD. 'lEID00 SEED= 90/1 E 148007 00. DORMANT =NO 89101 1220001 L UMW 772 70105163 11.001 0641111111/6301 700. L71061 717 00 2000 TO 1 Ft 60.05600) 1 5 1:0101711---;11011 Of SOW LIDT BENCHING DETAIL E70511IC 10' CONTOUR D3STrxi 2' CONTOUR PROPOSED 10' CCN10l1R PROPOSED 20 CONTOUR SILT FENCE TREE FENCE E5S1H0 23Qi1CANT TREE PROPOSED Sr11RM SERER FROSTING STORM spa PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATiq* TREE UNE DELINEATED WERaN0 UNE REMA BOUNDARY LIE RE LAND DUFFER EASEMENT UNE RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2002 CITY OF LINO LAKES 510005 LOT 10TAL 0133 AREA 11P1/OND LOT AREA LOIEST FLOOR ELEV. 100YR NIL N"- WATER TABLE 1 1 3 3 • • 5 _ 7 1 11 20490 12616 37.300 21.2479 54105 41.040 11.443 14.40 2400 14310 74413 14043 11544 14477 11471 13.333 0049 1055 09.0 0055 0015 0015 0010 0035 915 44/4 N%A 000.4 000.4 0044 0044 904 09.4 0/4 0/0 97.6 97.11 97.0 97.6 97.0 193 0070 0000 000 0000 0330 0000 0000 0000 2 7 3 x504 6 1629 1{7',00079 143611 16734 9033 5015 0044 1064 soa4 97.6 09.1 19.e 0330 0000 0670 3 1! 5 107.720 12.172 1� 17.09 1102.5 1011 1016 961 90.1 960 910 017.0 VOA 0000 ONO 040 4 _ 1 3 • 17340 14.1101 15,111 1730 13.030 43516 4036 0016 003.2 6032 Soat 0015 917 0007 6667 1055 97.0 97.0 747.6 0000 0000 0000 5060 5 3 14.51142 12.11111 0032 043 0007 000.7 47.0 473 ONO 0000 4 ■ 1 3 4 6 1 7 24.673 14458211 44.917 1449 13.224 10 40 22.410 14671120 13.771 17,.777 11140 13.571 1015 1020 502.5 1025 107.6 015 101-5 911 411 1111 1011 0 611 461 69.1 19.0 974 97.0 567.0 9 10 003.5 45 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 00 MOO 7 0 _ 2 1 3 4 0 14263 14763 SAX 13467 71012 1 ;1141 14607 1349 43.002 10'5 00.5 1011 �.5 6617 2020 0010 0015 4103 004.0 6010 1014 1060 19.0 4064 0 74 „a 0103 0140 913 463 003 1517 94.3 94.3 1543 604.3 1043 0030 0003 0330 0030 aoSD 10 11 12 4 14 16 17 9 70 Man 11.634 9.513 27.05 37.044 11012 13.010757 1,070 11624 17,47 4404 13372 13.002 1]300 4. 50.146 5,3 7 3444 7417 4,201 4100707 22410 4� 3.10 3.424 1173 3107 4.616 3600 150 21144 1063 963 0 43 963 1013 070101.1 001.1 2013 0013 6013 105 0013 00.6 N/A N/A 44.3 09.3 94.3 104.3 40.0 6 WIC 1110 973 94.0 210.0 910 474 90.0 N/A N/A 0030 0030 0330 0030 0000 0 37 0006640 0030 040 000 0000 0030 0030 000 020 NO 400*1 EILDOC LOT TOTAL LOT AREA OPU1110 LOT AREA LOST FLOOR E]EV, 100TO NIL ' MATER TABLE 0 21 72 23 24 35 50 27 50 30 31 22 33 34 35 31 37 30 36 40 41 42 43 4 46 45 30.673 72.515 46,300 25.357 13.101 311.403 25.1113 4.90 9761 4130 4 4 4.09 4.59 4270 7149 23.09 20.502 x120 17.331 17.20 16656 17.314 50.50 34373 7105 50,414 7.004 0.234 77.713 4777 1.511 2337 1552 3.1106 440 7.90 1131 3.307 217 7.114 3.574 390 2.59 110 169 035 9115 9133 035 9135 0405 9100 965 1003 90.0 0.0 SOLD 10 1000 1060 0010 507.0 007 1073 3 9064 965 1063 0015 1016 101.6 l0 107.5 074 11/3 N/A N/A N/A 44/3 11/3 N A 40.0 1000 0060 1060 505.0 0050 11030 900 5013 0013 002.3 5013 5023 502.3 1013 413 102.3 1102.3 013 0/3 0/4 11/3 5/4 1/0 2/4 N/A 904.0 004.0 1104.0 504.0 1104.0 904.0 504.0 104.17 0060 900.0 '5060 500.0 90.0 960 100.0 1100.0 1100.0 960 5060 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 ONO 0210 0000 0000 0000 MOO 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0030 0000 ONO 0000 0000 0000 1 1 2 2 4 4 11 7 0 0 16 12 13 14 16 1 17 10 2501 11 22 121.471 15.49 14364 14714 14957 14 57 21.957 27,791 3'663+. 670 3.41 163 2x75 4317 607 4.77566 1312 4.315 4777 4.362 3.12 4047 4.677 3033 4171 2404 4,13 300 1.364 13655 1153631 2.631 3.50 1607 22/73444 3477 3 4.063 3 4 170 542.3 0125 9115 612.3 117.5 912.5 5425 012.3 9157 011.0 011.0 0113 01 0 1106 1108 103 065 15410.655 M0.5 010'3 00.5 7064 0164 2054 5014 0064 0 .4 504.4 006.4 606.4 606.4 1064 1014 2044 1064 5064 1064 7064 1064 77014 1064 1064 1064 106 206. 101 006 106 500. 501. 506 106 006 101 106 101. 106 106 106 006 106 I 05. M. 102 0000 0000 0300 0000 0030 0030 0000 0000 0000 0030 0030 0030 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 03030 0000 0000 0000 MiE71 TAt7 0173103 1Q 253114115 ►R3. M /320710/5 Or 114E 0115/0005 AT SEVERN. tO0A50R ADIOS )E 9 710T0 1g7 MC NTLY 8066 3001073 mown 010940 731110 ELEVATORS. PROJECT STONEYBROOK sWET 8 N> - 8 SHEETS • H r v 99.3 BIRCH STREET • 392 - -� • CSAH 10 `goon 03.1 • — __ I -' y BIRCH STREET • —910 - ke_ - 10 vk POND 3 iii D NO. 'III It I ' JI ' I I ff AII: __ /Ij P� i i I 41 76 110 160 GRAPHIC SCAL= IN FEST * * 1F�c ...* PIONEER sn �e11...ey�i1•Y'pelea7a.M I1 hereby Nally twat tii• Men Nel Peow•d by me or and. my 04.1 Nam. .0aMMan and Nat 1 an a duly Rplte0 Lerwuoc. Nchltoet undo Ih. I.a. el the Stole of M. ...Ia 3 PLANT SCHEDULE KEY COMMON/BOTANICAL NAMES OVERSTOAY TREES SO PA OAIHdS / � MOCO VWLEJACER RUNRUI1 NORTF90005 PATNORE ASH/HiN014111 PENNSTLVANOCA PAT40RE. �}( ER�EpELN TRW's 2."M# CS 9LAU POLLS laCtS E S�EEAA A L&U S /PICEA GLAUCA DENSATA SIZE/ROOT QTY. 2.3' 8!9 e 2.33'989 fen I4 /4344 Due lIzA. CONIFER TREE VIETEANO NO. 2 LANDSCAPE NOTES • Th. SC� pro e New. Nth Ni alIMYo M Ma 1. •Ih Lerw..a.• eser011 Mv.Vp al •W1 en piss 1. taNeensi.y ..r.. • w noel end a4. geese te w er.la Ned by ethane •NN•.1een4ell. .t ..1M•hi M s.u.ed eat. preepreens a and eras e.•y1Ned 1' 1N 1 .ed84. O 01 he Ante*. W alai w Wad 8. Mended fa Nosey Sled. a Alf pates. a . INl it to be veto q IM oatelnee • Malaga a 4(Jaose p4r to pewee, on M e. • 41.* be tilt laa•pd. CeNnee 8Ne W.eee ele lend Neee er w *The 1.4001 Ccetreater Not *Nat. w• 4111 rnaleiel Rwaga tee (1) teen, • yea boa the Unee aritNa •agteaen el ..a trove the •w.. .11 thee . s ey t.N..ee the number of the Mal lbl. tae Note. 410 14 a • to m •C.MnMWI,tole 1041004 .NS. Me N emceed hewn. dl palap bee. 4 pNei .e.. •4 .f�p. mew. ad Iw ,1.101 0.101 M teen red a. me lay a. 110101.4 bra anthem. 1. 10.40. s Wye 841 904 M MIa.Nen ea taw taaU. 0.... 004 0.110 C Inn NI I0. 1.3 ea en the I 0.wr o.M.,w. b•0. .x 0.tad 1.f 441 8414 the b..: Nee. .12. r1eieiaeu°mpeed oe th.nea 1 e1eej etieeea d0i1Arereeit 2.N ewer. .UI sAD /ter SHEET 11TLE PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN OWNER TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT. INC. 17271 KENYON AVENUE. SUITE 103 LAKEVILLE. UINNESOTA 55044 PROJECT STONEYBROOK SHEET L1 of 1 SHEETS Lino Lakes Public Services Department 600 Town Center Parkway CRNS1 T Y' \; • ; : 0 F Lino Lakes, MN 55014 KE (651) 982 -2440 Fax (651) 982 -2439 February 5, 2002 TO: Jeff Smyser, City Planner FROM: Rick DeGardner,`Public Services Director SUBJECT: Park Board Comments on Stoneybrook Preliminary Plat After discussing several alternatives, the Park Board is recommending 100 percent cash dedication for the proposed Stoneybrook Development. The Park Board looked at several alternatives including: 1. Acquire land for a park along the eastern edge of the development. This may be able to be connected to additional parkland that is acquired as the property to the east is developed. However it appears the St. Paul Water Utility Easement would make this difficult. Also, it is our understanding that substantial wetlands are located to the east of the Stoneybrook Plat. 2. Acquire two lots to provide a small park area for playground equipment. However, the Park Board didn't want to simply acquire, "less than one -acre park areas," as each development is created. 3. Designate the recreation complex as the park to service the residents in the Stoneybrook Development. The recreation complex will provide some leisure opportunities for informal play such as playground equipment, basketball, and tennis. However, the recreation complex will be used very intensely by all residents. If the upcoming referendum is unsuccessful, the recreation complex will most likely not be developed. When the Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan was developed, the Stoneybrook property was located outside the anticipated urban development limits. Therefore, the Park Board has not had an opportunity to analyze the parks and trails needs for this area of the city. Without the ability to look at "big picture" it is difficult to determine how this 78 -acre development will fit within the city's overall, long -range parks and trails plan. Therefore the Park Board is recommending 100 percent cash dedication. If the Community Development Department anticipates additional development outside of the anticipated urban development limits (as indicated in the Comprehensive Parks and Trails Plan) perhaps we should consider updating the Comprehensive Parks and Trails Plan to address the need for additional parks and trails. sw /rick/Park Board Comments on Stoneybrook Preliminary Plat Memo to Smyser.doc Department of Public Safety POLICE David J. Pecchia Public Safety Director / Chief of Police Officer Mike Rumpsa Lino Lakes Police Department 01/21/02 CPTED Reviews I have reviewed the plans for the Behm Century farm edition, Stoneybrook edition, TCF bank, and the Marketplace 2nd Addition. I have several comments. Behm Century Farms Edition: -- • The street names are going to be confusing. For instance: At the present time, we already have a Pony Ct that intersects Mustang Lane. • I see from the plans, A Pony Lane and Pony Ct are planned to gain access to Sunset Ave. • This is going to cause confusion for Police, Fire and Ambulance. ▪ I have noticed that Pinto Lane has several small cul -de -sacs. Each of these cul- de -sacs has a different name. I suggest, if possible, to eliminated Pinto Court and have those houses keep the Pinto Lane Street name. It appears to me that the lot's south of Pinto Cove will not be buildable lots, and this will lessen the clutter of street names we have for this development. • The new "Mustang" Street names are going to cause confusion because Mustang Ct and Mustang Lane have already been used for street names south of Palomino Lane. • The Mustang Lane, Avenue, Cove, Circle and Mustang Way should be renamed to eliminate any chance of confusion for emergency personnel. • I understand that the land developer wants to maximize his/her land usage, but by looking at the layout of the streets and the names that were assigned to roads, I see utter confusion for emergency personnel. Stoneybrook Edition: � • At the present time, the only concern that I have for the development, is the traffic load that it will pose to Birch St for morning rush hour. • Much of the traffic heads east on Birch Street to Centerville Rd then south to I35E. • I would recommend a semaphore at the intersection of Birch St and Centerville Rd to help manage the congestion problem. 640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014 -1182 Public Administration /Records: 651 - 982 -2300 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2399 Department of Public Safety POLICE David J. Pecchia Public Safety Director / Chief of Police • The semaphore would provide a break in the Westbound traffic to allow motorists attempting to gain access from Sherman Lake Rd to Birch St a chance to merge into the traffic lane. TCF Bank: • I have no comments on TCF at this time. The lighting and landscaping look fine. Market Place 2nd Addition: • I am not able to comment on this due to the lack of information on the preliminary plat that I received. 640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014 -1182 Public Administration /Records: 651- 982 -2300 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2399 • • • Memo To: Michael Grochalia From: Marty Asleson Date: June 27, 2002 Re: Recommendations of the June 26 Environmental Board /Stoneybrook Environmental Board Meeting Date: June 26, 2002 Topic: Stoneybrook Development/Preliminary Plat Recommendations: The Environmental Board made a recommendation that the Preliminary Plat be denied because of excessive wet characteristics of the site, and incomplete information needed to process the Plat. The following comments were made: • The site is excessively wet. • Ordinary high water elevations not determined for lots 23 -27 adjacent to wetlands 12 and 13. • The Environmental Board showed concern that there is not sufficient MUSA available, and that the Comprehensive Plan is not finished yet. • There has not been a response to the request of the March 27th Environmental Board for 17 acres of open space. • There has not been a response to the request of the March 27th Environmental Board asking that street lighting be downward focussed low intensity and of no spill nature. • If plat is to go forward, than: • Reduce Road widths to 29 feet from 32 feet. Recommendation is based on the Center for Watershed Protection's Better Site Design Handbook. Attachment 2. • Page 1 • • • Additional oak trees should be placed in the SE corner of the Plat. See attachment 1. • The buffer areas around the wetland/pond areas should be increased to 10 to 20 feet minimum. • A more detailed description of the Tree Preservation Plan should be submitted indicating that protection fence will be installed before any soil disturbance occurs. • An agreement has been reached concerning site soils budget, and that no soils will be exported or imported to the site without discussion and approvals from City Staff. • That an environmental information and disclosure brochure be given to new prospective lot buyers describing the soil and water in the area, that there may be soft and wet conditions in back yards, and that buffers have been established around all wetlands and ponds, and that this means no- mowing, dumping, or changing vegetation (without approvals from the City), and that all buffer areas will be signed as such. • That the City does not loose sight of the Waterworks easement as a part of a Citywide Greenway System. Motion to Deny made by Donlin second by O'Connell. All were in favor. Motion passed. • Page 2 • IN LKES Memorandum DATE: July 3, 2002 TO: Mike Grochala FROM: James E. Studenski, City Engineer -3 RE: Stoneybrook Subdivision A preliminary review of the resubmitted documents has been performed. The submittal included an eight -page revised drawing set dated June 3, 2002, item by item response letter to city comments plus exhibits dated May 29, 2002, supplemental letter dated May 31, 2002, and revised fire flow documentation dated June 10, 2002, for the proposed Stoneybrook Subdivision has been performed. The design generally meets City requirements. The following comments must be addressed prior to final approval given for this subdivision: Watermain: Watermain lines are to be Class 52 ductile iron pipes in final specifications. The City of St. Paul requirements for crossing the aqueduct must be submitted. Confirmation of adequate water system supply is under review. City will confirm size of watermain extension to the west boundary at Birch Street. Utilities shall be extended to the project's south boundary in Street G. The submittal meets all remaining design standards required by the City of Lino Lakes. Upon receiving the plans and specifications for the project, the specific details of materials, construction standards, and testing requirements will be reviewed. Sanitary Sewer: The sanitary sewer crossings of the watermain are to show at least 18 inches of vertical separation in final plans. As defined in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Sewer Element), this project is in Sewer District 1 and 5. Sewer District 1 will service this subdivision and will provide adequate capacity for the project. The existing sanitary sewer system has adequate capacity to handle the new subdivision. The lift station at Black Duck Drive is scheduled for upgrading which will further increase and improve the ability to service the area. Utilities shall be extended to the project's south boundary in Street G. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014-1182 Phone: 651- 982 -2400 • Fax: 651- 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 - 982 -2410 Stoneybrook Memorandum • Dated July 3, 2002 Page 2 • • • The submittal meets all remaining design standards required by the City of Lino Lakes. Upon receiving the plans and specifications for the project, the specific details of materials, construction standards, and testing requirements will be reviewed. Street Standards: We recommend providing right -of -way for future connections of the street and utilities to the south of the subdivision at the location of Street G. Dimensions and easements must be provided for the cul -de -sac on Street B. Areas below the 30 -mph design criteria will require appropriate signage on final plans. The two street access points onto CSAH 10 (Birch Street) is currently under review by Anoka County. The 2001 City of Lino Lakes Transportation Plan Shows Birch Street as a Major Collector roadway. The submittal meets all remaining design standards required by the City of Lino Lakes. Upon receiving the plans and specifications for the project, the specific details of materials, construction standards, and testing requirements will be reviewed. Storm Sewer: Attached is a memorandum dated July 3, 2002, which addresses the storm sewer design. The submittal meets all remaining design standards required by the City of Lino Lakes. As stated in the memorandum, approval is required from RCWD. Upon receiving the plans and specifications for the project, the specific details of materials, construction standards, and testing requirements will be reviewed. Grading Standards: General design meets requirements by the City of Lino Lakes. Further review will be required upon addressing issues as outlined in the storm sewer review. Documentation of material entering and leaving the site will be necessary prior to approval of the plans. Minimum ditch grades of 2% will be required. Recommendation: The design generally meets City requirements. Upon completion of the above issues, final approval can be given for the proposed Stoneybrook subdivision. •TKDA TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED • • ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 -2140 PHONE: 651 /292 -4400 FAX: 651/292-0083 Jim Studenski Reference: Drainage Review Copies To: for Stoneybrook From: Stephen W. Hartley City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Date: July 3, 2002 Commission No. 12475 -002 The following documents, submitted to the City of Lino Lakes, were used to review the Stoneybrook site plan: TKDA Drainage Review memo dated April 9, 2002 Pioneer Engineering response letter dated May 29, 2002 Plan Set dated January 14, 2002, and revised May 30, 2002 HydroCAD Model dated March 6, 2002 After reviewing the above documents, I have the following comments. New comments are shown in bold: 1. Final construction plans will need to be designed to City Standards. City Standard Details for storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and watermain will need to be shown in the plans. Response letter stated final construction plans will meet City Standards. 2. The detail for the outlet control structure calls for a treated lumber weir. The weir will need to be concrete. The detail for the weir now shows the weir as concrete. An Equal Opportunity Employer • • Drainage Review Page 2 July 3, 2002 for Stoneybrook 3. The City's design standards for storm sewer are the following: Minimum Full Velocity — 3 fps Minimum Mainline Storm Sewer Size —15" RC pipe Minimum Culvert Size — 15" RC pipe The submitted design seemed to use a minimum full velocity of 2.5 fps and minimum pipe size of 12" RC pipe. The storm sewer chart included in the new plan set reflects the above requirements. 4. The City's Local Water Management Plan calls for ponds to be built with a 15 foot, 10:1 side slope bench. The pond detail submitted show a 10 foot, 10:1 side slope bench. This detail need to be corrected and the proposed pond adjusted to a 15 foot wide bench. The pond detail has been revised to show a 15 -foot, 10:1 side slope bench. 5. The supporting information, soil types, and land use, used to determine the curve numbers needs to be submitted. Supporting information was included in the response letter. 6. An SCS TR -55 method should be used to determine the Time of Concentrations, not the Lag method. Response letter reiterates the Time of Concentration from the HydroCAD Model, which was a Lag method computation. An SCS TR -55 method is the preferred method to calculate Time of Concentrations. 7. Pond 6 is landlocked, according to the model. The 100 -year flood elevation for the pond will need to be determined allowing for a 100 -year snowmelt, 10 -day runoff of 7.2 inches and a Curve Number of 100. The flood elevation has been revised to reflect a 100 -year, l0 -day snowmelt situation. The supporting computations need to be submitted. Drainage Review Page 3 July 3, 2002 •for Stoneybrook • • 8. Groundwater information was not provided. The City's Local Water Management plan calls for the minimum floor elevation, including basement to be 4 feet above the groundwater, 4 feet above the normal water level, or 2 feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, whichever is greatest. The lowest opening is also required to be at least 1 foot above the emergency overflow. Response letter stated groundwater levels were being monitored. Has final determinations been made yet? 9. Approval from Rice Creek Watershed is needed. The City will need to receive confirmation that Rice Creek Watershed District has given approval before final approval can be given from the City. 10. Proposed discharge rates to Wetland 11 seem to exceed existing condition discharge rates to Wetland 11. The use of Wetlands for rate control is discouraged. Please review Wetland 11 and its drainage. • • April 10, 2002 COUNTY OF ANOKA Public Services Division HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD. N.W., ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 -4005 (763) 862 -4200 FAX (763) 862 -4201 Mike Grochala City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Liao Lakes, MN 55014 -1182 Re: Preliminary Plat Review Stoneybrook Dear Mike: We have reviewed the preliminary plat of Stoneybrook, to be located south of CSAH 10 (Birch Street) between Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road, within the City of Lino Lakes, and I offer the following comments: Existing right -of -way adjacent to CSAH 10 should be adequate for future reconstruction purposes (60 ft right -of -way south of CSAH 10 right -of -way centerline). As proposed, the plat will introduce two (2) new city streets south of CSAH 10. These streets will line up directly opposite the existing city streets of Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road, which is acceptable to this department. However, we are concerned with the increase in the number of turning maneuvers which will occur at both intersections. As CSAH 10 is a high -speed route (55 mph), and if vehicular conflicts occur at either intersection as a result of this development, they are likely to be severe in nature. Currently on CSAH 10, there is a westbound right turn lane and an eastbound bypass lane at Pheasant Hills Drive, and a westbound right turn lane at Sherman Lake Road. With the introduction of the south leg of Pheasant Hills Drive with this development, the eastbound CSAH 10 bypass lane will no longer be an acceptable measure to handle traffic at the intersection. In addition, the Anoka County Highway Department has recently had a change in philosophy regarding the accommodation of county highway needs in conjunction with new development. This section of CSAH 10 was recently overlayed by this department, and no capital improvement projects are scheduled or planned to occur within the next five (5) years. Since this development will introduce a significant number of turning maneuvers at the intersections of Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road, the city and /or the developer will be required to make improvements to the county highway so that there will be left, thru and right turn lanes for eastbound and westbound CSAH 10 at both intersections. The design details for this turn lane construction will need to be reviewed and approved by this department, prior to the issuance of any permits for the new access points or permits for work within the county right -of -way. The city and the Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer • Mike Roshell Preliminary Plat Review Stoneybrook April 10, 2002 Page 2 • • developer should plan on arranging a meeting with us to discuss and determine these design details. No driveways will be permitted onto CSAH 10, and all access for this development shall be made via Pheasant Hills Drive and Sherman Lake Road. The right -of- access along CSAH 10 shall be dedicated to Anoka County, with exceptions at the two (2) new local roadways. It appears that there are sight distance obstructions at both new intersections on CSAH 10. The city and /or the developer shall ensure that the applicable sight distance requirements are met to the greatest extent possible for this development. Drainage calculations and detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plans are required and must be submitted to this department for review and approval. The post - developed rate /volume of discharge shall not exceed the pre - developed rate /volume of discharge for the 10 -year frequency storm, utilizing the "SCS Method" of design. If culverts are required within the county right -of -way, they shall include 6:1 safety grates and aprons. If any trails are to be constructed along CSAH 10 in conjunction with this development, the design and location of the trail within the county right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved by this department. It should be noted that residential and use adjacent to highways will usually result in complaints regarding traffic noise. Traffic noise at this location could exceed Noise Standards established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Anoka County policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing county highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The city and /or the developer should assess the noise situation and take any action deemed necessary to minimize associated impacts at this site from any traffic noise. A permit is required and must be obtained prior to the commencement of any construction. License Permit Bonding, Method of Construction, Design Details, Work Zone Traffic Control, Restoration Requirements and Follow -up Inspections are typical elements of the permitting process. Please contact Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator, or Josie Scott, Permit Technician for further information regarding the permit process. Please not that we are concerned with the safety issues that may occur on CSAH 10 as a result of this development. In the past, the neighborhoods along CSAH 10 have been rather vocal in voicing their concerns about this corridor. It is our hope that the City of Lino Lakes will take this into account, and have a supportive, proactive approach toward dealing with the recommendations for this development that have been outlined above. We look forward to S Mike Roshell Preliminary Plat Review Stoneybrook April 10, 2002 Page 3 • • addressing these issues with the city and the developer until a favorable outcome for both the transportation system and the development can be achieved. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Jane Pemble Traffic Engineer xc: Doug Fischer, P.E., Director of Highways Tom Hornsby, Traffic Services Superivisor — Signs Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator Mike Kelly, Chief Right -of -Way Agent Josie Scott, Permit Technician Larry Hoium, County Surveyor 2002 City of Lino Lakes File • AGENDA ITEM 5C STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tanda Gretz/Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: July 10, 2002 TOPIC: Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit Russian Baptist Church, west of Baldwin Lake Road and north of Ash Street (Co. Rd. J) ACTION REQUIRED: 3/5 vote BACKGROUND The City has received an application for Site Plan Review and a Conditional Use Permit for Russian Baptist Church. This application was initially presented at the June 12th meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board, but was tabled pending further information on a number of issues, including: • Investigating providing city services through either the City of Circle Pines or the City of Shoreview, as an alternative to the proposed use of a well and septic system. • Drainage: neighboring residents had concerns about runoff onto their property. • Buffer greenbelt: neighboring residents were not supportive of the use of a fence; a revised landscape plan using vegetation and/or berms was proposed. • Lighting: neighboring residents had concerns over glare. • Traffic issues: Anoka County has not yet responded with comments on the proposed project. At the request of neighboring residents, the Russian Baptist Church held a second neighborhood meeting on June 26th in order to meet with residents and address their concerns. The proposed site is in the far southwestern corner of the City, west of Baldwin Lake Road and north of Ash Street. The property, which is 4.6 acres in size, is zoned Rural. • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP Since churches are listed as a Conditional Use in a Rural Zone, a Conditional Use Permit has also been applied for. The Russian Baptist Church currently has approximately 180 members. The church is now renting space in Spring Lake Park for their meetings and parish needs, and has applied for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a church of their own. ANALYSIS Land Use Compatibility The following chart identifies the existing land use and zoning surrounding the proposed site: Direction Land Use Zoning Site Low Density, Sewered Residential Rural North Low Density, Sewered Residential Rural East Low Density, Sewered Residential Rural South Residential (Shoreview) Residential (Shoreview) West Residential (Circle Pines) Residential (Circle Pines) The City's proposed 2001 Land Use Plan guides the subject site as Low Density, Sewered Residential (one to 2.5 units per acre). While the 2001 Plan is not yet officially adopted, it does reflect the long -range goals of the community related to existing and future land use. Site Description The site is a 4.6 -acre lot fronting Ash Street (County Road J). The northern half of the property is wooded, with a wetland in the northwest quarter. The Southern half of the property is largely open grassland. The west border of the property abuts the rear lot lines of residential homes along Indian Hills Drive in Circle Pines. The northern border abuts the back half of a property located on Baldwin Lake Road in Lino Lakes. The east border of the property abuts the rear lot lines of three homes also along Baldwin Lake Road, as well as a neighboring home on Ash Street. To the south, across Ash Street in Shoreview, are residential homes. • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP Zoning /Conditional Use Permit The Site is zoned Rural. Churches are listed as a Conditional Use in such a district with the following provisions: 1. Side yard setbacks shall not be less than fifty (50) feet. 2. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with the landscape and screening regulations of Section 3 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Adequate off -street parking and access is provided on the site...and such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 3, subd. 4.S of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. Adequate off -street loading and service entrances are provided and regulated where applicable by Section 3, subd. 6 of this ordinance. Additionally, under Section 2, subd. 2.B.7 of the City Zoning Ordinance, any issued Conditional Use Permits must meet the following standards: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this ordinance. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. 4. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. 5. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 6. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. 7. Will have vehicular approaches to the property, which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. 8. Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. 9. Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. The proposed site and use appear to comply with the above - described provisions and standards. • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP Building Issues Proposed construction includes 15,920 total square feet of building over three levels: • Main Level: 7,438 square feet (sanctuary and related uses) • Lower Level: 7,438 square feet (classrooms, fellowship area and kitchen facilities) • Upper Level: 1,044 square feet (storage and child/parent room) Plans also show a 60' X 50' footprint to the north of the proposed church, to be used as a future expansion area. Any future expansion will require a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan Review. The exterior of the building will include brick facing/apron and vinyl siding, with a proposed 45 -foot steeple. No bells are proposed. Asphalt shingles will cover the roof. There is neither water nor sewer available for the site. Plans indicate a proposed drain field north of the church, with adequate room for a secondary drain field site. Soils tests confirm that the site can adequately support a septic system. As building code requires a sprinkler system for this building, and the site has no public water available, a holding tank for fire suppression purposes will be required. Although design of the tank/sprinkler system will be reviewed as part of the building permit application, staff have requested that design specifications be required prior to City Council review due to the fact that the functionality of the site is completely dependent on the viability of such a system. Public Services The site is located in a Phase 1 Growth Area. Connections to Lino Lakes water and sewer connections are approximately 2500 feet away. Although there are no immediate plans for City services to be installed, it is possible that such services might be available by 2010. The provision of public utilities for properties, when at all possible, is a goal of the City. As a result, although Lino Lakes utilities are not feasible for the site, staff have investigated the possibility of servicing the site with utilities from the City of Circle Pines. City Engineer Jim Studenski reports the Circle Pines connections are located 350' west and 125' north of the site, along Indian Hills Drive. Connecting the site to such utilities is estimated to cost approximately $55,000 and would require a joint powers agreement between the City of Circle Pines and the City of Lino Lakes. Parking /Access/Traffic City Ordinance requires one parking space for each four seats in a church. There are 375 seats show in the main assembly hall, which would then require 94 parking stalls. Plans for the church show 99 parking stalls to be constructed. Although there are additional classrooms and fellowship areas in the lower level of the church, these areas are not expected to be used by adults concurrently with the main Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP assembly hall. As a result, the parking stall estimates generated from the number of seats in the main assembly hall appear to be adequate for church needs. Plans indicate an area to the northeast of the proposed church to be used for additional parking should the church choose to expand. This area would contain 27 additional stalls. The Environmental Board has recommended use of green parking in future parking expansion areas, as well as an increase in the use of infiltration and storm water practices around parking areas in general. Access is off Ash Street, a County road. As a result, plans have been submitted to the Anoka County Highway department for review, and we are awaiting comments back. Plans show a two -lane, 24 -foot wide driveway entrance to the site off Ash Street. The preexisting gravel driveway, shown on survey and engineering plans, will no longer share access. There has been no traffic generation study conducted. Setbacks The following chart indicates the required and proposed setbacks for the site: Setback Required Proposed Principle Building — front/from street 40 feet (for arterial roads) 40 feet Principle Building — side yard 50 feet (for CUP requirements) 50 feet Principle Building — rear yard 30 feet + 30 feet Parking — front/from street 15 feet 30 feet Parking — side yard 15 feet 15 feet Parking — rear yard 10 feet + 10 feet Lighting A photometric plan has been submitted, along with fixture details. Lighting will be no- spill, with meter readings within City requirements (< 1 foot candle for streets; < 0.4 foot candle for abutting residential property). Neighbors to the west of the site had expressed some concerns at the June Planning & Zoning Board meeting regarding the possibility of glare from the lights, and had inquired about alternative management measures for the lighting, such as dimming or shutting off lights at night when the church was not being used. In general, shoebox style /no -spill fixtures should solve for any glare problems, as lighting • is completely shielded and directed only downward. Additionally, building officials • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP report there is nothing in the building code which specifies a minimum height for fixtures. In responding to inquires about shutting off lights, police officials recommend that lights should be on "from dusk to dawn," according to CPTED guidelines. Such guidelines are advisory and not compulsory, however; police officials recommend that, at a minimum, several poles stay lit and that the front of the building and all entrances /exits be lit. Landscaping The proposed church would exist as a conditional use within a Rural zone. City Ordinance directs that such conditional uses provide "adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping...in compliance with Sec. 3.subd.4.S." City Ordinance specifically directs buffering/screening in the form of "either a fence or green belt planting strip." Neighboring residents had expressed concern with the idea of using a fence as a buffer. Rather, residents requested a landscaped buffer be used, with possible use of berming. Such suggestions appear to be attractive to both church and City, and the landscape plan is being revised to incorporate such changes. Additionally, the current landscape plan shows some trees within ponding and drain field areas and the Environmental Board has recommended such trees be moved to appropriate areas. The Board also recommends consideration of alternate tree species choices, which are described in the attached memo from Environmental Specialist Marty Asleson. In addition, the Board has recommended that a tree inventory and tree preservation plan be submitted for the site. Trash Enclosure /Screening Plans show a 13' X 10' trash enclosure located at the northern end of the parking area. The enclosure is 6' -8" high and constructed of concrete block painted to match the principle building color. Signage No signage plans have yet been submitted. The Lino Lakes Sign Ordinance limits institutional signage in the Rural zone in the following ways: maximum of 32- square feet of signage area; a maximum of 8 feet high; no closer than 10 feet to any property line. Parks & Trail There will be no park dedication fee required. There are no trails planned for the north side of Ash Street. • • Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP Grading/Drainage /Wetland Aside from those issues relating to the possibility of connecting to public utilities through the City of Circle Pines, engineering issues have been principally resolved. Minor issues of pond outlet orifice size for a 2 -year storm event and an adjacent driveway are being resolved. The memo from City Engineer Jim Studenski, dated June 24, 2002, details the remaining issues and is attached to this report. Rice Creek Watershed District has issued a TWAFAA for this project. Environmental Board Recommendations The Environmental Board reviewed this application at their May 29, 2002, meeting and recommended approval with some changes. The memo from Marty Asleson dated June 6, 2002, details these changes and is attached to this report. In general, recommended changes center around the following: 1.) Submission of a tree inventory and tree preservation plan. 2.) Increase infiltration and storm water practices, particularly around parking areas. 3.) Alter tree choices, and move some trees out of water infiltration areas. 4.) Use of green parking in future parking expansion areas. CONCLUSION Staff recommends approval of the application, with the following conditions: 1.) Proper building permits be obtained prior to any construction. 2.) Permits be obtained by Rice Creek Watershed prior to any site work or building permit issuance. 3.) A revised landscape plan which replaces fencing with landscaping for buffer purposes shall be submitted prior to City Council review. 4.) Any signage must comply with the City's Sign Ordinance. 5.) Any future expansion shall require Site Plan Review and a Conditional Use Permit Amendment. 6.) A tree inventory, tree preservation plan, and revised landscape plan are to be reviewed by the City's Environmental Specialist. All trees shown placed in ponding or drain field areas are to be moved to more suitable areas. 7.) All grading, drainage, and utility issues are to be resolved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to City Council review. 8.) Design specifications for the fire suppression system will be required prior to City Council review. 9.) Driveway access shall be exclusive to the site, and shall not be shared with the property to the east. 10.) A performance agreement shall be prepared, including financial securities, and executed prior to City Council review. Planning & Zoning Board July 10, 2002 Russian Baptist Church Site Plan Review & CUP OPTIONS 1.) Recommend approval of the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit, with conditions. 2.) Recommend denial of the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit. 3.) Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option #1 ATTACHMENTS 1.) General Location Map 2.) Certificate of Survey 3.) Site Plan 4.) Floor Plan 5.) Elevation Plan 6.) Landscape Plan • 7.) Lighting Plan 8.) Utility Plan 9.) Grading, Drainage, & Erosion Control Plan 10.) City Engineer Memo, Dated June 24, 2002 11.) City Environmental Specialist Memo, Dated June 6, 2002 • EXHIBIT # / 8 Hf .I8I10 94.00 I!3IFII1ff �� m�0`y Q�'.a�QOQs i'ti,l11il MAIIIIiiiiftoniiiiitizi I, �o v�o ' e Ie —. !l�yO -R�?R -11.11111.121111 im■I�;_•a rim� i 1•r • per CCUNTY Oath N0. IS CORP TE m A NO. 4 NOKA OUNTY VEY • R DRAWN SEP. 1974 REVISED NOV.1978 REV. MAR.1980 REV. SEP.1981 REV. DEC.1982 REV. JULY 1985 REV. DEC. 1985 REVISED JAN. 1987 REV. MAY 1988 REV. AUG. 1989 REV. FEB. 1991 REV. FEB. 1992 REV. FEB. 1993 REV. MAY 1994 SCALE 1 "= 1500' REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. M S OF CITY COUNTY ^ITATS —AIO- NOV. 1994 JAN. 1996 JULY 1997 JULY 1998 AUG. 1999 SEPT. 2000 0 1/4 1/ 3/4 • Certificate of Survey for: Russian Baptist Church .WJ6b6._ w -YOL ..a.1 41.m1 CAINE de ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS. INC. A OMI•OAOT Q V610•04 t14 ••••.a0••••.1AM•mmYW }HibMM �.u.. yi.**r OMb ~W ^ ^... .w.l wN M ..r.w11.r s•.' > -awalr EXHIBIT # ,Z t04 Dtlq.IfOY 7• O•11 MO/ MA 1011.000 M 0....1 30600 MM N 10. W 14.400 MM Y OM O..MW 0.1arer *4 Om Pm*** Ow rul t. 4.11 dot X71 * �I 03.00T�YM4d W* — 44100 4.4 00.0. 4 Wm M M • Sa0Mw l Oars • M L.O...• 14..r. Ypa M Oa.ly 1.1.. J (AA 00.0). 4N ..M 44. •,.4 N.A. wary — M lCAll • 017 Orw OM M ... Om** r... ms. 30 44 SO 0•104* 4.0041 wady WAJO 1 .101 - 30 ROT —O Om * addl-. W Wwwlbl • 0O.01p .IOM 144.4T 10100 �'-- �' ^"�•— O...1M d0..4 ..bond w 46b..41.4 b folk 40.• Ar..4Ms h 0 ODOR• in ..01 RO1 m0 Ott VICINITY MAP SCALE: NOT TO SCALE BACKFlLL W/ NEW GOOD QUALITY TOPSOIL & SEED NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT EXISTING SUBGRAOE SOIL CLASS 5 BASE AGGREGATE 86 -12 CONCRETE CURB DETAIL NOT TO SCALE VEHICLE ID REQUIRED UP TO J200 FINE FOR NOLATION ON STALLS ADJACENT TO 8' -0" AISLES ONLY ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SCALE: 1" • 1' -0" R U S S I A N B A P T I S T C H U R C H 13. -4" 1\-- 5" CONC. SLAB ON GRADE I I 5" COMPACTED CLASS 5 BAS-E-\1 VERT. R O W/ / BENTDOWELS INTO FTC. INVERTED LINTEL BLOCK TOP COURSE 8" CONC. BLK. PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING HINGE BY GATE SUPPUER VERT. CEDAR GATE W/ CEDAR LATCH 12 -0" WIDE x 5' -6" HIGH W UNE OF THE SW1 /4 OF THE SW1 /4 --1, OF SEC. 31,T,31,R,22 CONCRETE SLAB AND APRON t2 ,46" CONC FIG. W /(2) /5's CONT. 5 "e STEEL BOLLARD GROUTED SOLID IN BLOCK CORE FOR GATE MOUNTING TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" • 1' -0" ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SEE DTL. 3/A1 9.-0. • air ° 4 x 4 d 4 5' -0" 8•-0' ACCESSIBLE CURB CUT SCALE: 1/8" • 1' -0' 8' -0• 5 B8'29'53" E 340.00 T `pt'Q ,0 $ DRAINFlELJ 1 ^� I EXPANSIOI1 z� 111 1 I SECONOARIYI PARKING 1 NG DRAINFlEL I PARK SETBACK 11 I I. Fl f 6' -0" HIGH OPAQUE FENCE i1 50'1-0" BLp4. ETBACK I ° 00I 1 I 1 I gl I fI CI "ICON SIDEWALK L r2PONO VERIFY W/ CIVIL PLANS- I 7-r-r - 1- rr-r -I -1 -r I I J r- F" F - L - TRASH ENCL0SUR1: SEE 4/A1 r- U.G. WATER RESEVOIR FOR SPRINKLER SYSTEM VERIFY SIZE AND LOC•N W/ SPRINKLER CONTRACTOR I FUTURE I EXPANSION I CONC. STOOP 1 SEE STRUCT. 120 -0 PROPOSED BUILDING 15,487 S.F. 3.LE\LELS - -4 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 28 PARKING FOR FUTURE EXPANSION I -_ n 1 1 1 1 1 n rij LIIII- i 9 rYB' 8' � 00F SADDLE 1 5J X --�Y- 113.00 N 88'29 53" W 6' -0" HIGH OPAQUE FENCE PROPOSED WELL LOCATION VERIFY W/ CONTRACTOR 15' -0" PARKING SETBACK 9z C O M M E R C I A L P L A N R E V I E W F O R C O D E C O M P L I A N C E A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Nome Russian Boptisl Csurth Project Location: Lino Lakes, Minnesota Lot Sae: 4.61 Acres 200,786 s,1. Zoning And Land Use: Rural District (C.P.U.) Herd Surface Coverage 48.926 .1./200,786 .1. • 24.4% Green Space Cowrage 151,860 .1./200,786 .1. - 75.6% Belding Courage: 7,436 .1./200,786 .1. • 3.7% B. APPLICABLE CODES: ii o rn I. Uniform Building Code 2. Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance 3. Minnesota Stale Beading Code 4. Minnesota Disabilities Code 5. Mimesola Plumbing Code 6. Minnesota Electrical code NEC 7. Minnesota Energy Conservation Code 8. Uniform Fro Code 9. Minnesota fie Coda 10. Minnesota H.V.A.0 & R. Code 11. Uniform Mechcnkal Code 12. Elevator Safely Code OCCUPANCY GROUP Church- 15,487 .1. (UBC 304) Group A2.1 1997 Edition (UBC 1997) Current Edition 1998 Edition 1999 Edition 1998 5411 n 1999 Edition 1999 -2000 Edition 1997 Edition 1998 Edition 1998 Edition 1991 Edition 1999 ErSlion TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION A2.1 Type V 1 Hour Fully sprnklred in compliance with UBC standard 9 -1 ond 9 -2 (SprnIdr Concealed Spaces) BUILDING AREA, HEIGHT Told Square Feel: 7,436 .f. + 1,062 .1. Upper Lewd • 8,498 .1. With 6,989 .1. Basement 1 oAlt EXHIBIT # `3 L A M P E R T ARCHITECTS 13837 NE Uncoln Street Ham Lake, MN 55304 ILL Phone:753.755.1211 Fax:7$3.757.2549 lampertalempert- arsh.cam ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY 0838? NAT TH15 PLAN, SPEOPICATK/I CR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER BY 08<01 5UVERM90N AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED AROMTECT UNDER THE LAWS a THE STATE OF 0Il*83OTA SIG•awE LEO/AR0 LAMPERT vANT MA. LICENSE Na ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AND BUILDING AREA 1. Mlo.o5e Height (UBC 505, 506, Table 5 -8) 50' -0" 2 Stories 2. Proposed Height - 45' -0" - 0 Steeple 3. Allowable Area - A21 Type V 1 How 10,500 S.F. x Separation (UBC 505) 4 sides 1008 - 21,000 S.F. 21,000 SF. + Multi Story Approved Sprinkler System (085 505.3) 200% • 42,000 S.F. 4. Area Check - 8498/42,000 • 20.2%<1008 G. OCCUPANCY SEPARATION (UBC 302.4) Not Required H. AREA SEPARATION (UBC 504.6.4) Not Required I. FIRE RESISTIVE RATINGS (UBC TABLE 6 -A) L Exterior Bering Walls Hex 2. Interior Bearing Woes Hour 3. Exterior Non- bearing Wads Hex 4. Structured Frame How 5. Permanent Partitions Hour 6. Shaft Enclosure Hour 7. Flocs And Floor CaTmgs How 8. Roofs and Roof Ceilings How 9. Exterior Doors And Windows Not Permitted Less Than 5 Feet, Protected Less Thon 10 Feel. , OCCUPANCY LOAD (UBC TABLE 10 -A) Seating Capacity • 375 Occupant Load • 713 As Slated On Floor Pion K. EXITING 1. Number Of Exits (UBC 1004.2.3) 713<1,000 Occupants • 3 Required, 4 Provided 15' -0" PKG. 2. Distance To Exits (UBC 1004.2.5) SETBACK Less Than 250' -0" 3. Corridor Width (UBC 1004.14) 44" At Occupancy Load Greater Than 49 Mrongemenl 01 Exits (UBC 1004.2.4) Nal Less Than 1/2 Diagonal overall Belding Dimensions 5. Exit Width (UBC 1003.2.3) Min. Dear Width 32' Per Door 6. Door 98415 (UBC 1003.31.3) M9 Exit Doors Are Min. 3' -0" In 18410 7. Doan Swing (UBC 1003.3.1.5) Doors Swing Out Where Required 8. Type 01 Lock Or Latch (UBC 1003.3.1.8) Openobie From Inside Without Use 01 A Key. 9. Exit Or Exit Access Doers Shall Not Be Provided With A Latch Or Lock Unless It Is Panic Hardware (1007.2.5) 10. Manually Operated Edge - Or - Surface - Mounted Flush Bolts And Surloce Bolts Or Any Device Used L. OTHER 1. Balding Is Accessible 2. Roof Access (MSBC 1300.4500) Not Required 3. Roof Hatch (MSBC 1300.4500) Not Required Droll Slops (UBC 708.3) Required See Plan For Notes And Locol'an 5 Redding Space - Exterior Trash Enclosure 6. M Approved Fire Morn, System 5hol1 Be Insldted (U.B.0 303.9) 7. Audible And Mead Moans Shod Be Provided (9.58.6. 1341.0472) PLUMBING FIXTURES - INCLUDING ACCESSIBLE (UBC APP. CHPT 29) Required Provided POND VE W/ CIVIL rPP ANOKA A CO. HWY. 5 -0- 0 1 14 __J PLAT N0. 48 sod On Occupants 1. Wale, Closets 2. rinds Votaries mans vice Sink PARKING 1. Church: 375 Seals 0 1/4 Seals - 94 Spaces 2. Told Pocking Requ*ed • 94 Spaces X EXI STIN CURB CU' ASH STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 32) 1 ANOKA CO. MONUMENT AT THE SW CORNER OF SEC. 31 SITE PLAN • 227.00 N 88'29'53" W S. LINE OF THE SW1 /4 OF THE SWI/4 OF SEC. 31,T31R,22 SCALE: 1 • 40' -0" NORTH 2 4 216 2 - 44- 11 3. Told Pocking Provided 4. Stag Size 5. Striping - 4" White Stripes 0. PAVEMENT DESIGN: 1. All Parking Areas 1 I/2" Bituminous Wear Course MN. D.O.T. 2331 Tye 41 2' Bituminous Binder Course MN. D.O.T. 2331 T1pe 31 6" Compacted Coss 5 Bose MN. D.O.T. 3138 2. Verify With Existing Sal Candilions Md AdNst Accordingly • 99 Spaces . 9' X 18' Stolls Lino Lakes, Minnesota Drown By. ECO Chocked By LL, LML Revisions 04.08.02 04.22.02 05.10.02 06.04.02 CITY SUBMITTAL PRELIMINARY DWGS 0TY SUBMITTAL ISSUE SITE PLAN CODE REVIEW DETAILS Sheet Number Al Project No. 010606 -4 17•-7 1/2" 66" MIN. 1' -O• / 7 8, -1. 27 " -31" / 27 " -31" 66" MIN. z 7 32' CLEAR 1 30•448" 1 I .gi FLOOR 1 L_�A J 30•x48" I I R DOOR 1 LSPACE _.,_ _ J 30 "x48" 1 CLEAR FLOOR I SPACE T 30•x48" CLEAR FLOOR SPACE 2' -9" N-SEE 7/A2 FOR DRINKING FOUNTAIN DETAILS 30•x48" 1 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE 30"74-8"-1 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE I} J NOTE: 27' - WALL MOUNTED TOILET 31" - FLOOR MOUNTED TOILET ENLARGED RESTROOM PLAN SCALE: 3/8' - 1' -0" LAVATORIES SHALL HAVE A CLEAR ACCESS WIDTH OF NOT LESS THAN 30 ", CLEAR HEIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 29" TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FIXTURE APRON. CLEAR HEIGHT OF NOT MORE 34" TO THE RIM OF THE FIXTURE, AND A CLEAR DEPTH OF NOT LESS THAN 12' UNDER THE FIXTURE EXCLUSIVE OF BOWL AND WASTE PIPE. All EXPOSED PIPES ARE TO BE COVERED WITH AN INSULATED PROTECTIVE MATERIAL THE WATER CONTROL VALVES SHALL HAVE LEVER HANDLES RESTROOM ACCESSORIES NOTE: MIRRORS SHALL BE MOUNTED 50 THAT THE BOTTOM IS NO HIGHER THAN 38" ABOVE THE FLOOR. ALL WALL - MOUNTED DISPENSERS. WASTE DISPOSAL CONTAINERS, OR SIMILAR ACCESSORIES SHALL BE MOUNTED SO THAT WORKING HEIGHT IS NO HIGHER THAN 38' ABOVE THE FLOOR. AND SHALL BE FREE OF INTERFERENCE BY CRAB BARS OR OTHER ACCESSORIES OR FIXTURES. GRAB BARS SHALL SUPPORT A WEIGHT OF 250 LB5. OR GREATER. UPPER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/8" - 1' -0" UPPER LEVEL S.F. - 1,044 S.F. UPPER LEVEL OCC. - 2 OCCUPANTS 30 "x48 "\ CLEAR \ \ FLOOR \SPACE / 1 CLEAR 48' I FLOOR • SPACE F.D. <2 - BACK WALL SIDE WALL CRAB BARS AT ACCESSIBLE WATER CLOSETS 8' MIN (KNE CLEARANCE RESTROOM DETAILS & NOTES SCALE: 3/8" - 1' -0" 17 " -19 HIGH FOUNTAIN EQUIPMENT P- PERMITTED IN SHADED AREA 8' MIN./ 6" MIN. 6" MAX.(TOE CLEARANCE) 17' MIN. 19" MAX. LAVATORY CLEARANCES HIGH FOUNTAIN LOW FOUNTAIN 30 448" CLEAR FLOOR SPACE SPOUT HEIGHT AND KNEE CLEARANCE FOUNTAIN OR COOLER DRINKING FOUNTAIN DETAILS & NOTES SCALE: 3/8" - I' -0' ENLARGED RESTROOM PLAN SCALE: 3/8" - 1' -0" NOTE: VERI. SPRINKLER FIRE DEPT. W/ SPRINKI AND LOCAL CB) C 0 E 0 H 8' -8" 10' -5" 5' -7 1/2 8' -9 I/2' LYE BERIIMIM 120' -8" �� li Y 16' -6" FUTURE STORAGE 13' -0" o I 11' -0" Q 11' -8" 16' -4• r ATTIC - ANEL M.1. -S ®' 126 S.F. 1 OCC. 1i ? r-1 1' , Z1 - 24'x36 ACCESS a� .,:: o / 41.0F1NISI-LOOR L. m 10 -6 43' HIGH WALL0 W/ W000 CAP Vi m; =., —_, .' - - - 1 I 0 "- \ mmit MIS_ I 1 t/d/ 03 A IMM RA P MIE ma tam 1_I F .' CLA 104 M 230 S.F. 12 OCC. ' 0 14' -0' •' •_7i• ST ®v 181 S.F. 1 OCC. :I •- I OP - -__ ORGAN I ��- / - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 9' -2" - - - - - - - 19' -8" - ` - - - - \ J IMA n11.1 UPPER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/8" - 1' -0" UPPER LEVEL S.F. - 1,044 S.F. UPPER LEVEL OCC. - 2 OCCUPANTS 30 "x48 "\ CLEAR \ \ FLOOR \SPACE / 1 CLEAR 48' I FLOOR • SPACE F.D. <2 - BACK WALL SIDE WALL CRAB BARS AT ACCESSIBLE WATER CLOSETS 8' MIN (KNE CLEARANCE RESTROOM DETAILS & NOTES SCALE: 3/8" - 1' -0" 17 " -19 HIGH FOUNTAIN EQUIPMENT P- PERMITTED IN SHADED AREA 8' MIN./ 6" MIN. 6" MAX.(TOE CLEARANCE) 17' MIN. 19" MAX. LAVATORY CLEARANCES HIGH FOUNTAIN LOW FOUNTAIN 30 448" CLEAR FLOOR SPACE SPOUT HEIGHT AND KNEE CLEARANCE FOUNTAIN OR COOLER DRINKING FOUNTAIN DETAILS & NOTES SCALE: 3/8" - I' -0' ENLARGED RESTROOM PLAN SCALE: 3/8" - 1' -0" NOTE: VERI. SPRINKLER FIRE DEPT. W/ SPRINKI AND LOCAL CB) C 0 E 0 H LOWER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/8" - 1' -0" LONER LEVEL S.F. - 7,438 S.F. LOWER LEVEL OCC. - 282 OCCUPANTS 4'- 8•x4' -8" CONC. STOOP " NOTE: VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION & CONTSTRUCTION OF ELEVATOR PIT AND SHAFT W/ APPROPRIATE SHOP DRAWINGS XHIBIT ## 4' 8' -8" 10' -5" 5' -7 1/2 8' -9 I/2' LYE BERIIMIM 120' -8" �� 9' 7" © Y 16' -6" 12_10 13 " -0" r- - -- 13' -0" 13' -0" / 11' -8" 16' -4• 24' -4" / P R I 1 OCC. 1 o / 1 B - - - - - - - - 1O 18' T 2• TYP. Io I t/d/ -_- �� •�' RA P P 1_I F .' CLA 104 M 230 S.F. 12 OCC. ' 0 14' -0' •' •_7i• ,,.. rime ass :I •- I - -__ ORGAN I ��- / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _.. - - - ` - - - - - - - - - - I q� 0 ■ III - . • � �• ta- In 1 I I o 1 2 CLr051OU 7,_4,. '_° FINISHED FLOOR 230 S.F. 12 OCC. 14' -0" © !ry -UP �R 9EQ .� �• - I. 8, -2" UP O 0 O 102 9 vl.n - - _✓ L - 89 -6 tI .40 IV 0 �' I PROVIDE 1 -HOUR COLUMN WRAP. TYP SEE 8/A7 © ,a Tn j I �� CL01 i V I 1 - ®', 1 ' 0 0 © 9 K1T1'.HFN 1 2910 S.F. $ FZ ao a _ — -F <. _ -n■ - I 51'-10" 01 'o 61 j 12 A - •M 18 ®F. 9 OCC. 11 " -8" CLA - OM 18 ®.F. 9 OCC. t1r -8" - 4' -8• 4,z 1 "Mr - ' II 2 OCC. 15'- 6 "'.'. 1 23' -4. 1•_0• 5. -0. X MOM ,�. 1� Q _ -" 0081 - FINISHED �EL.. 100'_0 -0. 8...5 1/2' FLOOR "_ • • M `` AID -, - - - - _ - _ _ - - - - - - - _ - - - _ _ - - - - ._ - - _ - il 1 i/ �- _ENE., - _ PROVIDE 1 -HOUR OCC. SEPARATION 0 STOR,/MECH. ROOM 107 SEE DTL. 10 /A7 STCR® CH, t0 364 S.F. 2 OCC. SPRINKLER C RISER nI ry • • • • • • FEL.QHIP W$ 11081 211 OCC. ID 12011 73 OCC. 1/211 4� a 2�' II U �-4 _ 8-1* IN •� • -y [ 4� 109 ® I I CON ®ICE I 230 S.F. I 12 OCC. ( 14' -0' j I tIi1; = I 1 LL I � -'s 0 10 m mil . j1 8' -0" m III I207 M °' 352 5.F. II 23 OCC. SPRINKLER LL,I RISER ST A 1 I,00 190 S.F. I 1OCC._..,. 0 • CL 109 230 S.F. 12 OCC. 14' -0' =M C. —v. 5 NO L 1 1/2" FURRING STRIPS - STAIR -1 / ry My W/ 5/8" GYP. BOARD & 1 1/2" RIGID INSULATION TYP. 0 EXTERIOR CONC, 1 Q 9' -5" Ai 10' -11' 1 9'F-0' BLOCK WALLS I I u •� �� Ali �© o r.. t° '4 �Q a io LOCK BO• 0 ® __ 0 :0000101000==dd61040W,M101010/4110// - di/ /IR10Iddd 11 //I/Id/ 11 = / / //®ill011/1=1011=0101•2V /�6- ,0 • I J �illu� InIP� IE o . ©. 4h' ' 0 8 " -0" 5' -8" 9' -4" 5' -8' �a. L =_ —"J PROVIDE 1 -HOUR 105' -0" STORAGE ROOM 100 G1T nn 10 /U ROOF ABOVE 9' -2" 20' -8" 4' -10" LOWER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/8" - 1' -0" LONER LEVEL S.F. - 7,438 S.F. LOWER LEVEL OCC. - 282 OCCUPANTS 4'- 8•x4' -8" CONC. STOOP " NOTE: VERIFY SIZE, LOCATION & CONTSTRUCTION OF ELEVATOR PIT AND SHAFT W/ APPROPRIATE SHOP DRAWINGS XHIBIT ## 4' MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8 - l' -0 MAIN LEVEL S.F. - 7.438 S.F. MAIN LEVEL OCC. - 429 OCCUPANTS NORTH 0 - ILLUMINATED EMERGENCY EXIT SIGN VERIFY LOCATION W/ FIREMARSHALL TOTAL S.F. - 15,487 S.F. TOTAL OCCUPANTS - 713 OCCUPANTS (TOTAL OCCUPANTS I5 CALCULATION ONLY, FOR EXITING REQUIREMENTS) LA M PER T ARCHITECTS 13837 NE Uncoln Street Hom Loka, 1,19 55304 111 Pnon.:7e3.755.1211 Fo.:765.757.2&41 Iemp.naomp.rl- aroh.00m ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAR. SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME DR UNDER NY DIRECT 91PERMSRl ANO THAT 1 AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER ME LAWS aF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NWATuRE 1E04400 10 LAMPERT ,* LICENSE N0. DATE Lino Lakes, Minnesota Grown By. EGO, KMB Checked By. LL, LML Revisions 04.08.02 04.22.02 06.04.02 CITY SUBMITTAL PRELIMINARY MHOS ISSUE LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN DETAILS Sheet Number A2 Project No. 010606 -4 8' -8" 10' -5" 5' -7 1/2 8' -9 I/2' LYE BERIIMIM 22' -9" �� 9' 7" © 8' -0' - - - OA 8' -0" 8' -0" ---- ©- ---© 8' -0" 0 12' -5" MEM y -5- P R I 1 OCC. 1 o 1 B - - - - - - - - 1O 18' T 2• TYP. Io I RA P P 1_I F .' ,,.. rime ass :I •- I - -__ ORGAN I ��- / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _.. - - - ` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - -_ - _ ■ III - . • � . - i • • � ■ - i • • • � MFN 12031 1� €E 1 5-0" I• II I © !ry -UP �R 9EQ .� r�I i • O O vl.n - - _✓ , r-e 7-00 7-4' 6 7.- 0" 6 - 0. 6 6*-- 10" t FINISHED FLOOR I ,� 03 © I� 11' -5. _7 - EL. - 101' -9" 1 ' 0 0 - — _' s -a- -Q _ _ — -F <. _ -n■ - C _ CHANCEL -' • 01 9' -1 1/2" NV 1 CONf2091NCE n II I I ?5 OCC. v'�j.•+ °' \ 111 Cr.) © 01 N _ < -2 TREADS- - - - - - -. -- SAt {CTUI RY 0 12' - 2.-Er 1206 m 336 SEATS 4,742 S.F. E4 X .�, ,�. 1� Q _ -" 0081 FINISHED �EL.. 100'_0 -0. 8...5 1/2' FLOOR "_ • • M - - -, - - - - _ - _ _ - - - - - - - _ - - - _ _ - - - - ._ - - _ - 316 - - - - - _ OCC. - - - .- - - _ _ - - - - - _ -. �- _ENE., - _ In • • • �•.� • • • • • • • • rr o 101 J 4 -8 12011 73 OCC. 1/211 4� BRICK VENEER II U I I _ 8-1* IN PI i6 _3 1 LL I � -'s 1T -9" ' 900111 8' -0" m III I207 M °' 352 5.F. II 23 OCC. SPRINKLER LL,I RISER 0 • - - _- - - - =M C. —v. 5 NO L DEACONS STAIR 1:9i4i '• II OUND ROOM I- [2051 205 ?OW: IJ I I u �� Ali �© o r.. t° '4 �Q a io LOCK BO• 0 ® __ 0 - = 'Y LOC'N OF RISER AND CONNECTION .ER CONTRACTOR FIRE MARSHALL ��'�� IRE DEPARTMENT BRICK I' CONNECTION VENEER ry _ © - - - - IrQ CONC. PI o o . ©. o 8' -0" 0 8 " -0" 0 �a. n ROOF ABOVE 9' -2" 4' -10" 4' -10• 5 " -0" CONC. CONC. 57001 - - SEE STRU T. NV 12' -5" SEE STRUCT. 38•_6" 12 -11" 8' -0" 8' -0" 105' -0" 19' -8' 124' -8" MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8 - l' -0 MAIN LEVEL S.F. - 7.438 S.F. MAIN LEVEL OCC. - 429 OCCUPANTS NORTH 0 - ILLUMINATED EMERGENCY EXIT SIGN VERIFY LOCATION W/ FIREMARSHALL TOTAL S.F. - 15,487 S.F. TOTAL OCCUPANTS - 713 OCCUPANTS (TOTAL OCCUPANTS I5 CALCULATION ONLY, FOR EXITING REQUIREMENTS) LA M PER T ARCHITECTS 13837 NE Uncoln Street Hom Loka, 1,19 55304 111 Pnon.:7e3.755.1211 Fo.:765.757.2&41 Iemp.naomp.rl- aroh.00m ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAR. SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME DR UNDER NY DIRECT 91PERMSRl ANO THAT 1 AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER ME LAWS aF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NWATuRE 1E04400 10 LAMPERT ,* LICENSE N0. DATE Lino Lakes, Minnesota Grown By. EGO, KMB Checked By. LL, LML Revisions 04.08.02 04.22.02 06.04.02 CITY SUBMITTAL PRELIMINARY MHOS ISSUE LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN DETAILS Sheet Number A2 Project No. 010606 -4 ONT. RIDGE VENT 6" WIDE POLYURETHANE MOLDING W/ 5 -2" RADIUS (TYP.) 12 10 1 1 10' -4" Ea A J� TOP OF ROOF N. El. 136' -6" e© /-CONT. RIDGE VENT ASPHALT SHINGLES (TYP.) fi • -0" 1' -0 OVERHANG OVERHA G (TYP.) (TYP.) EAST ELEVATION SCALE: I /8" - 1' -0" 1. 0' OVERHANG (TYP.) LL VINYL LAP SIDING FACE BRIO( SOLDIE COURSE FACE BRICK FINISHED FLOOR EL. 100' -0" 4) TOP OF FOOTING EL. 89' -1 3/4" WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" - 10 12 10 12 10 12 EXHIBIT # TOP OF STEEPLE EL •• 145' -0P TRUSS BEARING EL - 135.—CCV OVERHANG 6" WADE POLYURETHANE MOLDING PRE— FINISHED METAL GUTTERS ANOOIZED ALUM. FRAME W/ 1" INS. GLASS (TYP.) POLYURETHANE MOLDING AROUND SANCTUARY WINDOWS PRE — FINISHED LI TA DOWNSPOUTS W SPLASH BLOCK SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" - 1' -0" 1' -6"J OVERHANG Y OVERHANG HIM NOEL PROVIDE ROOF VENTING 0 1 S.F. PER 300 S.F. OF ROOF AREA W/ 50% OF VENTING LOCATED A MIN. OF 3' -4" ABOVE SOFFIT VENTNG W/ THE BALANCE PROVIDED BY SOFFIT VENTNG. PROVIDE BOX VENTS AS REOD ON NORTH SIDE OF BUILDING TRUSS BEARING EL 110' -0 e. —0" OVERHANG ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ masa _i OV(TRHANG YP) 1 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1 /8" - 1' -0" 5 L A M P E R T ARCHITECTS 13837 NE Lincoln Street Ham Lake, MN 55304 111 PNw,.:703.753.1211 ra• :733.717.2049 Iomp..tOlamp.A- awh.aam ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY MAT THIS PLAN. SPEORICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER IN DRECT 9WERW90N Alp MAT 1 AM A DULY UNXNSED ARCHITECT U NSER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OP MINNESOTA. SIGNATURE LEONARD LAMPERT NMI MANE RNSE DATE Drown By. ECO, KMB Checked BK LL, LML Revisions 04.08.02 04.22.02 06.04.02 CITY SUBMITTAL PRELIMINARY DIGS ISSUE ELEVATIONS Sheet Number A3 Project No. 010606 -4 1 ANDSCAPF NOTES: -ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS TO BE PROVIDED WITH AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM. - PROVIDE MULCH AND EDGER SNIP 0 ALL SHRUBBERY PLANTING LOCATIONS. - FOUR (4) INCHES OF BLACK 01RT SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL LANDSCAPE SITUATIONS AND BE THOROUGHLY TILLED INTO THE SUB GRADE TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF SEVEN (7) INCHES. - ALL NEW PLANTS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR TWELVE (12) MONTHS FROM THE TIME CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE ALIVE, OF GOOD QUALITY. AND DISEASE FREE AT THE END OF THE WARRANTY PER100 OR BE REPLACED. ANY REPLACEMENTS SHALL BE WARRANTED FOR TWELVE (12) MONTHS FROM THE TIME OF PLANTING OR A LETTER OF CREDIT AND /OR CASH ESCROW IN UEU OF A WARRANTY. PLANTING SCHEDULE QTY. KEY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE MTHD REMARKS 3 A GREEN ASH FRAXINUS PATMORE 2.5' BB ELYMUS TRACHYCAULUS 6 B SUGAR MAPLE ACER SACCHARUM 2.5" BB 34.0 2 C FLOWERING CRAB MALUS SPECIES 2" BB BLUESTEM, UTTLE 4 D SPRING SNOW CRAB MALIUS SPECIES 2" BB TOTAL: 23 E GREEN SPRUCE PICEA CLAUCA 6' BB 18 F COMMON LILACS SYRINGA WIGARIS g2 CONT. 12 G GOLD FLAME SPIREA SPIRACA JAPONICA 12 CO1JT. MIXED W/ H 12 H VARIEGATED DOGW00D CORUS ELEGANTISSIMA g2 CONT. MIXED W/ G MIXTURE 15A MODIFIED (15B) —MESIC TALL GRASS PRAIRIE COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME % OF MIX BLUESTEM BIG ANDROPOGEN GERARDI 5.0 GRAMA, SIDEOATS BOUTELOUA CUR TIPENDULA 10.0 WILD RYE. CANADIAN ELYMUS CANADENSIS 5.0 WHEAT GRASS, SLENDER ELYMUS TRACHYCAULUS 5.0 RYE GRASS, ANNUAL LOLIUM ITAUCUM 10.0 REGREEN NA 34.0 FORBS(TABLE F -1,F -2 OR F -3) NA 5.0 SWATCH GRASS PAJCUM VIRGATUM 2.0 BLUESTEM, UTTLE SCHIZACHYRIUM SCOPARIUM 12.0 INDIAN GRASS - SORGHASTRUM NUTANS 12.0 TOTAL: 100.0 RATE: 30185 /ACRE (331(G/HA) DESCRIPTION: NATIVE MIX REACHES A HEIGHT OF. 36 TO 48 INCHES. EXCELLENT FOR USE ON ALL SOIL TYPES. FOR USE 01 OAK SAVANNA AND PRAIRIE REGIONS OF THE STATE. a I, 18" MIN. 1, 3" LAYER W000 CHIP MULCH TURN BACK BURLAP SAUCER PLANTING SOIL WITH FERTILIZER REMOVE 'WIRE AND PLASTIC SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1" - 40' -0" TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1' a 40' -0" MAINTAIN TREES NATURAL FORM BY PRUNING BRANCHES FLUSH WITH BARK PRUNE FOLIAGE ONE THIRD DO NOT CUT LEADERS STAKING AT CONTRACTORS OPTION PAPER TREE WRAP SHALLOW MULCH NEAR TRUNK (11 NCH) MULCH DEPTH 4 " -6 ", 12" FROM TRUNK MULCH TAPERS TO 2 " -3" DEPTH 0 PERIMETER EGSTING GRADE GRADE PERIMETER CUT 1 " -2" DEEP TO HOLD MULCH PLANTING SOIL MIXED 1.4111 MIN. 50% EXISTING SITE SOIL. ACHIEVE PROPER SOIL TEXTURE FOR TREE. IF UNKNOWN, MIX A SANDY LOAM SOIL TO BE PLANTED FROM AWAY PROPERTY LINE 6' -0" HIGH BD. ON B0. OPAQUE FENCE i cx S 8879'53" E EXISTING TREES 340.00 J� II LNATIVE GRASS LPON07 EVST1NC TREES • 1—I—rrT'T- { 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 EXISTING TREES // 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE PLANTED 3' -0" AWAY PROPERTY LINE FUTURE EXPANSION 6' -0" HIGH B0. ON BD. OPAQUE FENCE ©2 r4 0 �, • 01 • PONOMIM- W,t' o ° SOD IIllll1416-1& II1111 III —� — m A:3 6500 ASH STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 32) 227.00 N 88'29'53" W S0. o LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" - 40' -0' NORTH EXHIBIT # (o L LL CU 0 0 0 Z c 6.6 Lino Lakes, Minnesota Drawn 8y. ECO Checked By. 1.1. LML Revisions 04.08.02 04.22.02 05.10.02 06.04.02 CITY SUBMITTAL PRELIMINARY DWGS CITY SUBMITTAL ISSUE LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet Number L1 Project No. 010606 -4 SITE LIGHTING FIXTURE LEGEND TYPE 1/1 TYPE SYMBOL QUANTITY ARRANGEMENT LUMENS L1F DESCRIPTION 2A MEI 3 BACK -BACK 25,000 0.700 SPAULDING Pfl- 41250PS- SVS -FG 1B Q I SNGLE 25,000 0.700 SPAULDING Pfl- 14250P5 -6 -FG IA f] 2 0NGLE 25,000 0.700 SPAULDNG Pfl- 11250PS- SVS -FG 0 19 19 873 439 20 0 0 21 lb 822 359 20 0 LUMINAIRE LOCATION SUMMARY PROJECT: ALL PROJECTS SEG NO. LABEL X Y Z ORIENT TILT 16 20 806 210 25 90 0 12 to 936 436 20 0 0 18 29 715 212 25 90 0 19 19 873 439 20 0 0 21 lb 822 359 20 0 0 STATISTICAL AREA SUMMARY PROJECT: ALL PROJECTS LABEL AVG. MAX N1N AVG/LIN YAX/MIN SOUTH LOT 1.96 3.9 0.6 3.27 7.71 NORTH 101/DRIVE 1.41 3.8 0.2 7.05 7.57 1 71" ITTaI T,.1- T d 1 L L L. 1..1,.1 ..1 J d l .1. PARXThG rd I- PPJTORE.EXPAP161CN 1171031178area LIGHTING PLAN SCALE: 1' NORTH NOTE: LIGHTING SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. LIGHTING 15 DESIGN -BUILD BY ELECTRICAL CONTRATOR, VERIFY SIZE, STYLE. QUANTITY AND LOCATION W/ OWNER AND CONTRACTOR. PROVIDE LIGHTING PHOTO METRICS IF NECESSARY AT CITY'S REQUEST. EXHIBIT # 7 Lino Lakes, Minnesota Drown By. EGO Checker! By LL. LML Revisions 05.09.02 05.10.02 06.04.02 PRELIMINARY DY755 CITY SUBMITTAL ISSUE LIGHTING PLAN Sheet Number L2 Project No. 010606 -4 • 1G2000 RLK-Kuusoto LTD. SITE NOTES • DIMENSIONS ALL DIMENSIONS SHINN ARE TO BACK OF CURB BUILDING DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO OUTSIDE CF BUILDING FACE CURB RADII IS 5 FEET TO THE BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. CONSTRUCTION NOTES • CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2531. CONCRETE CURB ANO GUTTER SNAIL 8E 13-612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CLASS 5 SHALL 8E MENDED e BEYOND THE BACK OF CURB. • CLEARING AND GRUBBING ALL CLEARING ANO GRUBBING SHALL BE ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2105. • TOPOGRAPHY COSTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY RUC-CAINE & ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS% INC.. UTIUTY NOTES • SPECIFICATIONS ALL U DUDES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT EDITION OF THE aTY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM) SPECIFICATIONS. • CATCHBASINS AND MANHOLES CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.05 FEET. CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL 8E SUMPED 0.15 FEET. Rim ELEVATIONS SHOWN REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS. • i `v• 1 I I , r — 15.0' L . 50.0' —u -4- 24. I 'Or co 80.0' :rr,r4j1 1 1.- i .> '--•.?~) I ) ,. ,,„...„,,, ,..1, . 7./ s 1 •-• — - —.-- 9-6 8-5 ETE EXPA:•:S;!..)1,1 0, • • 0 —18L1 ▪ L__ q 120.0' I I I I BFE 892.0 B-2 I L_I d FFE 903.0 28.0' A -'4-18.0' 15' f 15' 6 I L_ FT, 0 24.0' '2o• •-slyr-rs-rrs • ASH STREET (C.S.A.H. NO. 32) 15 U.G. WATER RESEVOIR FOR SPRINKLER SYSTEM VERIFY SIZE AND LOCATION WITH SPRINKLER CONTRACTOR PROPOSED WELL WELL DRILLER TO VERIFY LOCATIONS AND MEET ALL APPUCABLE COOES. ■.9 rQn4 Jfhor...37 - • - - - • ••• . •.— •..- - •_. - • -. Call 48 H GOPH1 Twin Citie MN. Toll 1 BENCHMARK EXHIBIT # 8 BRASS DISK IN SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BRIDGE LOCATED ON COUNTY ROAD EAST OF LEXINGTON AVENUE CROSSING RICE CREEK. (ANOKA CO1JNT6 ELEV.o 886.559 SPIKE IN POWER POLE LOCATED 525' NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD .1 ON BALDWIN LAKE ROAD. (ORGIN UNKNOWN) 893.81 LEGEND PROPOSED EXISTING ecelv et) 30 1% 2002, 01 OF 1-‘140 LAKES 0 RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE PROPERTY UNE CURB UNE SANITARY SEWER/ MANHOLE WATTFRMAIN FIRE HYDRANT FIRE HYDRANT W/ AUX. VALVE GATE VALVE CATCH BASIN/STORM SENER/MANHCCE FLARED END SECTION W/ RIP RAP 30 NORTH 60 • 90 SCALE IN FEET 0 2000 RLK- Kuuaiato, LTD. FINISHED GRADE 1 1/2" BIT. WEARING COURSE. MnDOT SPEC. 2331. TYPE 41 TACK COAT, MnDOT SPEC. 2357 2" BIT. BASE COURSE, MnDOT SPEC. 2331, TYPE 31 6" AG G. BASE, CLASS 5 MnDOT SPEC 2211 COMPACTED SUBGRADE AS APPROVED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT NORMAL SECTION (DESIGN 8Y AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING. INC"I BENCHMARK BRASS DISK IN SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BRIDGE LOCATED ON COUNTY ROAO J EAST OF LEXINGTON AVENUE CROSSING RICE CREEK. (ANOKA COUNTY) ELEV.= 886.559 SPIKE IN POWER POLE LOCATED 525• NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD J ON BALDWIN LAKE ROAO. (ORION UNKNOWN) ELEV.= 893.81 GRADING, TURF ESTABUSHMENT & EROSION CONTROL NOTES • TURF ESTABUSHMENT ALL TURF ESTABLISHMENT SHALL BE ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2575 ANO SHALL TAKE PLACE WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE COMPLETED GRADING OPERATION. • TOPSOIL CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP. STOCKPILE AND RE- SPREAD SUFFICIENT TOPSOIL TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM 4 INCH DEPTH (COMPACTED) TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS. TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED. • SEEDING (INFILTRATION PONDS) SEED MIX SHALL BE MnDOT 288 AT 100# PER ACRE. • SEEDING (ALL ELSE) SEED MIX SHALL BE MnDOT 508 AT 100# PER ACRE DORMANT SEEDING AFTER NOVEMBER 1, AT TWICE THE NORMAL RATE • 500 SOD SHALL BE ACCORDING TO MnDOT 3878. • MULCHING MULCH SHALL BE MnDOT TYPE 1. STRAW SHOULD BE SPREAD UNIFORMLY AT A RATE OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND ANCHORED WITH EITHER NETTING OR A STRAIGHT DISC. • FERTIUZER TYPE 20 -0-10 AT 4001 PER ACRE. • EROSION CONTROL ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF GRADING OPERATIONS AND BE MAINTAINED UNTIL ALL AREAS ALTERED ON THE SITE HAVE BEEN RESTORED. AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY. • GRADING ALL GRADING SHALL BE ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2105. AFTER SUBSTANTIAL TURF ESTABUSHMENT, ALL SEDIMENT SHALL BE RI7JOVED FROM ALL PONDS. • EROSION CONTROL CONTACT PERSON DAN TORGERSON 19222 STAPLES SE NE EAST BETHEL, MN 55011 763 -413 -0042 CONSTRUCTION NOTES • CONLKtIC CURB AND GUTTER CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2531. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE 8 -612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CLASS 5 SHALL BE WENDED 6" BEYOND THE BACK OF CURB. • CLEARING AND GRUBBING ALL CLEARING AND GRUBBING SHALL BE ACCORDING TO MnDOT 2105. • TOPOGRAPHY EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY RIX -CAINE & ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS. INC.. • WETLAND DELINEATION WETLAND DELINEATION BY EARTH SCENCE ASSOC., INC. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING DURATION INSTALL SILT FENCE 2 DAYS STRIP 51TE 3 DAYS GRADE SITE TO SUBGRADE 2 WEEKS INSTALL UTILITIES 2 WEEKS CONSTRUCT BUILDING 2 MONTHS PAVE PARKING AREAS 1 WEEK STRIPE PARKING AREAS 1 DAY VEGETATE GREEN AREAS 1 WEEK PROJECT DURATION 3 MONTHS SECONDAR. DRAIN FIELD PRIMARY DRAIN FIELD 8' EDGE OF WETLAND AS DEIJNEATED BY EARTH SCIENCE ASSOCIATES. INC. ;. ' OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE / 92 �- -889- • - 8BB 988 C\ • B -6 NM. 889:0- HWL. 691.5 cCt • O9P�Ppf HY& 886.1 (COUNTY DITCH 18) s. \ / r SILT FENCE - (SEE DETAIL �, T 1y VIVA- - • - l 92IE =889" B -5 Nt- ; <i;lia >�tR 894 90. -21" RCP 0.3 O 0.8% 8617 CURB & GUTTER metal or wood stake CBMHI '`,48•o W/MnOOT 40201 COVER. 113250A E(15•)=89Q.46 15(21 ") =889.72 Col Twin TIE LAST FOUR SECTIONS USE 2 TIE BOLT FASTENERS PER JOINT ladles Glass 11 Tap Rap Cu. Wis. 12 1S 18 21 24 27 30 36 42 48 54 60 ea 72 78 84 90 43 5.2 92 73 93 9.7 11.0 15.5 18.9 22.5 26.5 30.9 35.5 403 472 529 58.9 / engineering fabric as specified --fabric anchorage trench backflll trench with \ tamped natural soil EXHIBIT # GEOTE5TILE FABRIC RP -RAP CANDOT 3733, TYPE N) 2331128_111=8 SPECIFIED MATERIALS ARE FOR HAND PLArEO AND GB9SIIED RP -RAP L� FLARED END SECTION WITH RIPRAP W a SILT FENCE DETAIL 140' -15" RCP 01.5 0 1.45 F9 o ,9 APo Jn 90 9< 2 Tat r B -3 0 • FUTURE BUILDING f1 56"7 FENCE (SEE DETAIL) 4 "25 n BFE 892.0 8 -2 9B FEE, 903.0 rho }cl6t,� 8 -1 C84 2ro 84342 CASTING RE =899.29 I5 =895.79 898 Drainage & Utility Easement 8981NFILTRATON POND 90 902 °2 C8MH2 48•o W/MnDOT 40201 COVER, R3250A CASTING RE =901.0 IE•892.22 • 140' -IS" RCP CL5 0 1.45 SEC7109 A-A HWI. =899.9 ., ®. a."vna...,....�...a.," �."......._ . ,y,.n:•:.:.,...,..•.....•.,.,.' err C ii ::..,T7 " ........,,�...t•..>,.3. 4r•CCi4cRETE . . - OR11F APRON CBMH3 4RE CCO8E0 0NW. 1 G / 14 .R32 70 DOSOT A 40201 f= s o" / IE-.894.18 125' -15" RCP CL5 0 1.35 GRAVEL ENTRANCE '. (SEE DETAIL) 3z0 ASH STREET (C.S.A.H. N0. 32) COARSE AGGREGATE MINIMUM 1Ye• ROCK GRAVEL ENTRANCE LEGEND PROPOSED EXISTING • • tYj.c SEC1194 9-e 4. BMRCE 6-W47 UNARM ORATE COMO rx a•••• ♦• rololET[ w o. 4• MACE OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE NOT TO SCALE RIGHT - -OF -WAY UNE PROPERTY UNE am LINE DELINEATED WETLAND CATCH BASIN/STORM SEWER/MANHOLE BARED END SECTION W/ RIP RAP TOPOGRAPHICAL CONTOUR UNE DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE SLOPE SILT FENCE GRADING LIMITS SIGNIFICANT TREE 0 NORTH 30 Y 60 90 SCALE IN FEET Zoz QJ LULL,F 0° 9 (9Z 1 00) Lt OW I z N • • • Memorandum EXHIBIT # 1 0 DATE: June 24, 2002 TO: Mike Grochala FROM: James E. Studenski, City Engineer RE: Russian Baptist Church This review is a follow -up to my June 7, 2002, memorandum. The review of the watermain, sanitary sewer, and street standards remain the same. In addition, this review includes the latest drainage review dated June 21, 2002. The submitted documents included a response letter dated June 5, 2002, a plan set dated June 4, 2002, and received June 10, 2002, a grading, drainage and erosion control plan dated May 31, 2002, a geotechnical review dated November 9, 2001, and drainage calculations dated May 30, 2002. The following comments must be addressed prior to a recommendation given for this site: Watermain: No city water connection is planned for this parcel. Currently, Lino Lakes city water is over 2500' from this parcel. Any Shoreview or Circle Pines utility extension would require a joint powers agreement. Sanitary Sewer: No city sanitary connection is planned for the parcel. Currently, Lino Lakes city sewer is over 2500' from this parcel. Any Shoreview or Circle Pines utility extension would require a joint powers agreement. Street Standards: The construction entrance must note that the width is a minimum of 20 feet. Anoka County approval will be required for the street connection. Adjacent driveway must be addressed. Storm Sewer /Grading: - Attached is a memorandum dated June 21, 2002, which addresses the storm sewer and grading design. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 -1182 Phone: 651 -982 -2400 • Fax: 651- 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 - 982 -2410 •TKDA TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 -2140 PHONE: 651 /292 -4400 FAX: 651/292 -0083 To: Jim Studenski Reference: Drainage Review for Copies To: John Powell Russian Baptist Church From: Stephen W. Hartley Lino Lakes, Minnesota Date: June 21, 2002 Commission No. 12475 -002 The following documents were used to review the Russian Baptist Church site plan: 4111 • TKDA's Review Memo dated May 1, 2002. • HydroCAD Model dated May 30, 2002. • Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Review dated November 9, 2001. • Plan Set dated and signed April 8, 2002, and revised May 31, 2002. • Response Letter to City dated June 5, 2002. After reviewing the above documents, I have the following comments. New comments are shown in bold: 1. The 2 -year and 100 -year existing and proposed condition drainage computations have been submitted. The 10 -year drainage computations also need to be submitted. The 10 -year drainage computations have been submitted. The project will meet the flow rate requirement for the 10- and 100 -year storm, but not the 2 -year storm. The proposed condition flow rates are .2 cfs over existing conditions. The proposed outlet is already a 4 -inch orifice. This really is the smallest practical size for an orifice, otherwise clogging becomes an issue. Therefore, the slight increase in discharge rate is acceptable. 2. Supporting information for the Curve Numbers and "Direct Entry" Time of Concentrations computations need to be submitted. Supporting information has been provided. All concerns have been addressed. An Equal Opportunity Employer • Drainage Review for Page 2 June 21, 2002 Russian Baptist Church 3. An existing conditions drainage area map needs to be submitted. Proposed condition drainage areas are shown on the grading plan. Supporting drainage area map has been provided. 4. The proposed outlet control structure detail shows a treated wood weir in the proposed structure. This weir will need to be concrete. The outlet control structure detail has been revised to show a concrete weir. 5. In order for the top of Pond #1's outlet control structure to be considered as an emergency overflow, the outlet pipe from the control structure will need to be a minimum size of 15" RC pipe. The outlet pipe has been increased to 15" RC pipe. This allows the top of the structure to be considered as an emergency overflow. • 6. What elevation and where is the emergency overflow for Pond #2? • Overflow locations have been added to the grading plan. 7. Drainage easements are required around all ponds and wetlands. They need to be shown on the grading plan. Drainage easements have been added to the plan. 8. Does the City want to control when the Erosion Control measures can be removed? If so, some of the language on the grading plan will need to be changed. The Erosion Control notes have been revised stating the City will give approval for the removal of the Erosion Control measures. 9. To help control erosion at the outlet pipes, the pipes should be designed so that the maximum velocities do not exceed 6-feet per second. Also, rip -rap will need to be placed at the end of the outlet structure. A detail should be shown on the grading plan. The outlet pipes have been revised to restrict the maximum velocities to 6 feet per second. The required rip -rap location and detail has also been added to the grading plan. 10. Have soil borings been taken? If so, what is the water table elevation? • Drainage Review for Page 3 June 21, 2002 Russian Baptist Church • • The Geotechnical report has been received. The water table elevation is approximately 885.5 feet according to the report. This is well below the lowest floor elevation. 11. The primary and secondary location for the septic drain fields should be shown on the grading plan. At this time only one septic area is labeled. Primary and secondary locations are now shown on the grading plan. 12. There is an existing gravel driveway that crosses the proposed property. Is this access to remain? If so, an access easement is needed. It still is unclear whether the existing 8' driveway will remain. 13. Approval from Rice Creek Watershed District is needed. Rice Creek Watershed District has granted approval pending field verification of the delineated Wetlands. 14. The gravel entrance material is not defined; it should be a minimum of 11/2-inch rock. This comment has been addressed. 15. Ash Street is a County Road. The proposed access drive and activity within the County Right -of -Way must be approved by the Anoka County Highway Department. 16. The grading details of the future parking area will have to be reviewed when the expansion is requested. • Memo EXHIBIT # 11 To: Tanda Gretz From: Marty Asleson CC: Michael Grochala Date: June 6, 2002 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations /May 29, 2002 /Russian Baptist Church /Site Plan Review • Russian Baptist Church • Motion to recommend to forward on without approval or denial to be brought back with pending issues addressed at preliminary plat time. Environmental Board Issues: • Parking stalls be reduced to a minimum. Add pervious parking to future parking expansion. Avoid tree buffer around pond. • Submit a Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan. Protect tree buffer around pond. • Increase infiltration and stormwater practices on site. Encourage church to reconsider use of grant money offered to them by RCWD, to perform innovative surface -water management design. • Landscape Plan • Change Colorado spruce to White spruce or Oaks. • Change Sugar maples to Hackberry, Oak, Red maple or River birch. • Design plantings out of the water areas of infiltration ponds. • Page 1 • • • • Remove Tree plantings from drainfield area. • If a septic system must be used, design should include a sand or organic filtration system. • Protect subsoil from compaction. Submit a management plan on how this will be implemented. • Use the City seed schedule in native plant areas. Strongly suggest that a landscape company knowledgeable in native plant planting and maintenance be utilized. • All sod areas must be irrigated. • Page 2