Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12/10/2003 P&Z Packet
r • • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING Wednesday, December 10, 2003 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers (scheduled to be televised on Ch. 16) AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 12, 2003 IV. OPEN MIKE V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING for Preliminary Plat and CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING for Conditional Use Permit, Eagle Brook Church, 7709 20th Ave. N. - Jeff Smyser B. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING for Conditional Use Permit, Circle -Lex VFW, 7868 Lake Drive - Jeff Smyser C. PUBLIC HEARING for Rezone and Preliminary Plat, Legacy Holdings Lino Lakes LLC, Legacy at Woods Edge, SE corner of 35W and Lake Drive - Michael Grochala D. PUBLIC HEARING for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Preliminary Plat/Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit, Hokanson Family Partnership, Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition, NE corner of Lake Drive & Aqua Lane — Jeff Smyser E. PUBLIC HEARING for Preliminary Plat, Sue Carpenter, "Justin's Preserve," 171 White Pine Road — Jeff Smyser • • F. Variances for detached garage, Joseph Kivel, 6262 Otter Lake Road — Tanda Gretz (tabled at Nov. mtg.) — no staff report, item to be tabled VI. DICUSSION ITEMS A. Continued discussion - Temporary Signs /Banners - Jeff Smyser VII. ADJOURN • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES STAR''' MBERS PRES] uensl I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:40 • p.m., November 12, 2003. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Schaps requested items V. C. and V. E. be placed before item V. A. The agenda was approved as revised. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 8, 2003 • Mr. Corson made a MOTION to approve the October 8, 2003 Minutes and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 3 -0. Mr. Rafferty arrived at 6:42 p.m. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared open mike open at 6:42 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike Mr. Corson made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:42 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 4 -0. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 2 V. ACTION ITEMS C. Joseph Kivel, 6262 Otter Lake Road, Variances Staff stated this item was heard at the October Planning and Zoning Board Meeting. After discussion, it was agreed by board members and applicant that this application would be tabled pending two actions by the applicant: 1. A full Certificate of Survey would be submitted, with complete setback information and proposed garage dimensions and setbacks. 2. The applicant would explore the possibility to swapping land with the neighboring property owner to the north, whereby land could be acquired so that a driveway could be constructed along the northern property boundary with a garage to be placed to the east of the home. Staff indicated applicant had not yet submitted a full Certificate of Survey. As a result, applicant had requested this application be tabled until the December meeting. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to table Joseph Kivel, 6262 Otter Lake Road, Variances to the December Planning and Zoning Board Meeting and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0. E. Capital Homes, 6750 Black Duck Drive, Variances Staff stated applicant had constructed a home at 6750 Black Duck Drive. The survey submitted for the proposed construction showed a side yard setback on the accessory /garage side at 5 feet and on the home side at 15 feet. After the homes were constructed, the City required that an "As- Built" survey be done to verify that the home s had been built to specifications. The As -Built survey for this property showed that the required five -foot side yard setback for the garage had not been met, being only 4.5 feet rather than the required 5 feet. For this reason, the applicant is requested a 6 -inch variance from ordinance requirements. Staff noted since the home and garage had already been constructed and there was no practical way to correct the setback, staff recommended approval of this variance request. Staff indicated the neighboring property owner to the south had been notified of this variance application. Chair Schaps asked if the home was sold yet. Ms. Gretz replied she did not know. She stated she had sent a notice to the neighbor to the south and had not heard from them. Mr. Hyden asked how this error had occurred. Ms. Gretz replied she believed inaccurate measurements were made at the time of construction, when materials and mounds of earth can make measurements more difficult to make. Kerry Burnham, Capital Homes, stated human error was the cause of this. He indicated he was caught between a "rock and a hard place" because the surveyor he originally used was no longer taking any business and did not do the as -built survey. He replied it was DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 3 • probably the foundation workers that made the mistake. He noted he had spoken with the neighbor to the south and he was not in objection to this variance. • • Mr. Corson made a MOTION to recommend approving Kerry Burnham/Don Sina — Capital Homes, 6750 Black Duck Drive request for variance from the required 5 -foot side yard for accessory building and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 4 -0. A. PUBLIC HEARING, Circle -Lex VFW, 7868 Lake Drive, Conditional Use Permit Chair Schaps opened the Public Hearing at 6:45 p.m. Staff stated applicant was interested in constructing a new building at their site on the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Lois Lane. He noted the site was guided and zoned for this type of use. He indicated this was not within the MUSA and in order to connect to city utilities, it needed to receive MUSA. He noted the site had a conditional use permit (CUP) which would need to be amended to allow the construction of the new building. He indicated the City approved a CUP amendment in April 1999 for the construction of an addition onto the existing VFW building. The work proposed by this new application would replace that approved plan. Staff summarized their November 12, 2003 report in detail. Staff noted there were a number of issues that should be addressed prior to approval. He indicated several of these issues were so important, that the rest of the plan depended on them. Because of this, staff recommended tabling the project. This would allow applicant time to redesign the ponds and parking, as well as examine the other issues as noted in staff's November 12, 2003 report Chair Schaps invited the applicant to make comment. Mike Thomas, Architect, stated they realized there were issues with parking. He noted if they looked at the area as a theatre or auditorium use, there would not be enough parking, but if it was looked at as a dance hall, there would be adequate parking. He stated this was a matter of interpretation. Brian Bourassa, Civil Engineer, stated they had relocated the pond, which eliminated some of the parking spaces. He indicated they would address all concerns regarding ponding issues and they hoped to find a middle ground for parking. Chair Schaps suggested they talk to other VFW's to find out their parking needs and show staff what VFW's of this size actually needed for parking. Mr. Thompson stated the biggest issue they had from a design standpoint was the parking issue. He stated they would do their best to address the other issues by the next meeting. He noted they hoped to start construction this winter, if possible. He showed a sample of the proposed exterior materials and colors. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 4 Chair Schaps asked if this building would look different than the existing one. Mr. Thompson it would. He noted this was an extremely difficult site with respect to parking and trying to get all of the pieces together was not easy. He stated he could get the appropriate parking on site, if they did the ponding underground. However, this would significantly increase the cost of the project and they were trying to avoid that. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment and to limit their comments to two minutes so everyone could be heard. Bert Noren, 785 Lois Lane, stated his concern was a privacy fence, or barrier, such as trees between the parking lot and his residence. He expressed concern about seeing headlights all night. He noted it was a vacant lot right now, with a 3 -foot fence. He stated he had lived on his property for 18 years. He stated he liked the looks of the proposed building and believed this would provide a good sound barrier between his residence and Lake Drive. Ann O'Brien, 793 Lois Lane, stated she had the same concerns as Mr. Noren. She stated they had issues with overflow parking in the past and requested no parking signs be posted on her residential street. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to continue the Public Hearing, Circle -Lex VFW, 7868 Lake Drive, Conditional Use Permit request, to the next Planning and Zoning meeting and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 4 -0. B. PUBLIC HEARING, Eagle Brook Church, 7709 20th Avenue North, Conditional Use Permit Chair Schaps opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 p.m. Staff stated applicant was proposing to construct a new facility on 90+ acres on 20th Avenue, north of 77th Street. He indicated a church was a conditional use in the Rural zoning district. He noted the City processed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on this project last year. That review examined the potential environmental impacts of the project. The design reflected in the current application used information gathered during the EAW process. Staff summarized their November 12, 2003 report in detail. Staff recommended tabling this application to the next Planning and Zoning Board meeting. He noted there were numerous unresolved issues that include fundamental site design elements. These included the existing house on the site, clarifications of drainage design issues, clarification of roadway design issues, and traffic management policies. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Kettlerine Leonidas, TKDA Architects, stated they had been at this project for quite awhile. She indicated they had been through the Environmental Session worksheet and they were now in the design process. She stated they were in contact with Anoka County and the Rice Creek Watershed District. She indicated they had made great endeavors to DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 5 meet with the neighbors over the past few months. She stated they hoped to start construction this spring and the construction would last 16 -18 months. She stated the easements, stormwater management, roadways, etc. were doable and agreeable to applicant. They were agreeable to adding additional screening also. They were agreeable to traffic control during peak times. She assured them the Conservation Easement was being pursued and the church was working with Anoka County Parks and Rice Creek Watershed District on it. She indicated the church was willing to split the property where the house was located off from the rest of the property. She stated they were working with Anoka County on the roadway. She noted traffic was the most challenging issue, but it was a regional issue that this project alone would not cause. She indicated the church was willing to work with traffic control officers to alleviate the congestion. She stated the proposed turn lanes would also assist with traffic congestion. Mr. Rafferty asked if the existing home was where the previous owner of the land lived. Ms. Leonidas replied that was correct. She indicated the Church was agreeable to increasing landscaping along certain areas of the site, which had been a concern to some of the residents. She noted they would put in a berm along the south side for further screening for the residents to the south. Mr. Rafferty asked the footprint of the proposed church. Ms. Leonidas replied it was 250 x 350. Mr. Corson asked what was the situation with the existing home. Ms. Leonidas replied that under an agreement, the former owner could stay there for a specific period of time from the date of purchase, which was last July, but at this point, they had no plans for the building. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. Barbara Bor, 7707 20th Avenue North, stated she lived to the south of the property and her driveway was adjacent to the proposed Churches driveway. She presented a petition signed by 160 neighbors within one mile of the property who were opposing this development. She stated they did not go into Centerville or Columbus Township, even though many residents wanted to sign the petition. She stated this petition represented 95% of the neighborhood and this was a significant unified indication in opposition of this. She presented a letter from RLK regarding traffic and a letter from attorney Paul R. Haik. Both letters and petition were given to staff to be made a part of the City's file. She stated they wanted to see the numbers of services and hours of operation the Church was proposing. She noted the current traffic study was done over a year ago and conditions had changed. She also indicated the traffic study was done for Sunday services only and did not include Saturday or Wednesday night services. She requested the City require updated traffic information based on current data. She expressed concern about the stormwater management plan. She noted this was a critical project for this area and it would forever change what was currently there. She asked as a neighborhood, from an environmental perspective, and for their heritage that this project not be approved. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 6 Doug Jost, 7304 Brian Drive, Centerville, read from a written statement, which was given to staff to be made a part of the City's files. He noted the City should adopt the US Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (L.E.E.D.) standards. He noted by following the standard, project could reduce their operating costs for energy and water. He indicated the municipal economic advantages included lower landfill, water supply and treatment infrastructure, and operational and development costs, among others. He expressed concern about the increase in traffic if this development was approved. He expressed concern about the project being too large for this site. He stated the residents of Centerville request that this Conditional Use Permit be denied. Chuck Kerkhoff, 7841 20th Avenue, stated he owned the property to the north. He expressed concern regarding keeping people off of his land and asked if he would be responsible if someone got hurt on his land when they were trespassing. He stated his land was inviting to others because of the paths and trails. He also expressed concern regarding where the snow would be placed in the wintertime from the parking lots. He requested the snow not be put in his direction. Sylvia Marier, 1833 East 77th Street, presented a diagram overview of Peltier Lake. She read from a prepared written statement, which was given to staff to be made a part of the City's file. She stated there had been many red flags proposed to this development regarding impact on the wildlife. She stated this project did not meet the City Conditional Use standards. She indicated they had been open and honest about their opposition to this project to no avail. She asked about the other one -acre parcel where the other residence was located. Mr. Smyser replied there was an existing home along 20th Avenue that was a separate piece of property and was not owned by the Church. He stated the church had no rights over that. The property was surrounded by Church land, but the church had no rights to that property. Ms. Bor replied the property was owned by Pamela Thiltgen. Pamela had sold the property to John Magill and she would be moving in the spring. Ron Marier, 1801 77th Street East, stated he was the Director of the Peltier Lake Association and he had been involved for many years preserving the heron nesting site. He stated there were quite a few discrepancies with this proposal, including ditch 72 and ditch 55. He indicated the church had the drainage area for ditch 72 at less than 600 acres. He replied this was inaccurate and the actual drainage was over 1,400 acres. He presented color photographs of the area which were given to staff to be placed in the City's file. He stated the Church representatives had taken their figures off of the existing maps, which were no longer accurate. He stated he had walked the property with a consultant and came up with the other figures. He indicated he had informed the church about this, but they had not addressed it. He stated the impervious surfaces proposed for this property would have a detrimental impact to this area. He noted someone had to look at this concern. With respect to the conservatorship area, he believed they were falling short in acreage. He noted the previous owners had been fantastic in preserving this area for the wildlife. He indicated just the water issue alone DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 7 was huge because this was the final spot that drained hundreds of acres and noted this would destroy this area. He stated if construction was started next spring, this was the worst time for the nesting herons and once the herons were gone, they were gone. He stated for the first time in three years they were successful in heron nesting. Walt Eashenaur, Water Resources Engineer, stated one of the things they wanted to do when they analyzed the hydraulics of realigning ditch 72, was to make sure what the drainage area was for this particular ditch. He stated they went to Anoka County records and noticed there was 9.6 miles of tile for this ditch and yet when they looked at what was originally commissioned as the drainage area, it was 590 -600 plus acres. He noted ditch 55 drained to the east of 35E and connected to ditch 3. He stated ditch 55 did cross 35E to the south and there were no records showing connection between the two ditches. He noted together with the staff, Watershed District and the Board, there might be areas added for connections. He stated the extent of the area larger than 600 to 650 acres was not warranted with their investigations. Mr. Tralle requested for future meetings, the ditch assessment be presented as a handout. Ron Marier stated a lot had happened since 1972. He indicated there was a connection under 35E and he personally watched the connection being made. He stated tiles had been added and the City and County knew about this. He indicated this had all happened since 1972. Mr. Eashenaur replied the Watershed District was not aware of that connection. Chair Schaps recessed the meeting at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Mr. Eashenaur stated when they looked at County ditches and when realignment was asked for, State Law required they examined the existing function of that ditch and then the benefiting parties could not be impacted. He stated they would maintain the existing functionality of the drain line, which would maintain the exact same characteristics as the land had today. Mr. Rafferty stated if that was the Watershed's recommendation, what about the impervious surfaces that was being added. He stated he was surprised that due to the impervious surface the line would not be enlarged. Mr. Eashenaur replied surface water from the proposed impervious surface went into different directions and did not go into the tile line. He stated the water would drain at the same rate. He noted the water would drain to the ponds and not the tile line. Barbara Bauman, volunteer with the church, stated they were concerned about addressing the entire 92 acres to make sure things were done appropriately. She indicated they planned a prairie restoration. She stated a conservation easement was a legal binding agreement giving up the churches rights to develop that area. She stated this was a perpetual agreement. She indicated they were not entering into this lightly because it was 14 acres out of the 92 acres and this was a large amount of land. She stated while they planned to put 14 acres into a conservation easement, they also planned to restore the entire area. She stated in addition to the contract, there would be a management plan, which included the restoration effort and management efforts. She stated they had a draft DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 8 of the management plan, which was being reviewed by various governmental agencies. She noted they would have professionals manage this area. She handed out a copy of the draft of the management plan to staff to make a part of the City's file. Dave Scheer, Eagle Brook Church, stated they had met with Anoka County Parks and they were developing a plan to cultivate the rye grass down and recultivating it with more natural grass. He indicated they had every intention of including the area Mr. Marier was concerned about. Ms. Bauman noted they were also working with an agency regarding the heron nesting. Connie Grundhofer, 235 Linda Avenue, stated she was an environmental board member, but she was speaking as a citizen. She indicated she was hoping the Church's environmental committee would include the extra three acres into the conservation plan. She stated it was the Church's plan to use the three acres as a teaching area for children. However, she noted this activity would disturb the herons because this is where they gathered their nesting materials and it was imperative that it was not disturbed, even unintentionally. She expressed concern about the 50 -foot building with lights. She stated the lights would disrupt the life cycles of the wildlife in the area. She expressed concern about being unable to see the night sky. Mr. Rafferty stated he appreciated her comments, but noted it appeared the church was trying to find ways to deal with these issues, but are said to be coming up short by three acres. He asked if she were the owner of the property, what would she think after spending a lot of money on this property, and then not being able to develop it. He acknowledged that this area was important for the heron population. He stated he believed the church was trying to work everything out. He noted it appeared to him that the City's guidelines were that development was going to happen at some point and there was nothing that could be done about it. He asked if there was not some common ground. He noted the church appeared to be at least trying. Ms. Grundhofer stated all the Environmental Board could do was give recommendations to the Council and it was up to Council to either accept or reject their recommendations. Mr. Rafferty stated it was not staff's job to not have a project move forward. It was staff's job to present the facts, and it was up to Council to eventually approve or disapprove the project. He stated he was not saying he was or was not voting for the project, but he believed staff had a responsibility to bring forward the facts. He noted there had to be a give and take in this and while the best environmental thing would be for nothing to happen, this was not realistic. Ms. Grundhofer asked the Board to listen to the citizens, who had lived in the area for many years. She stated the residents wanted to help the area and the residents were looking to the Board for help. She stated sometimes professional specialists did not take enough time on projects to see the total impact. She asked them to listen to the citizens and their concerns. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 9 Chair Schaps asked would the 3.2 acres of made a difference to the Environmental Board. Ms. Grundhofer stated that would not have made a difference because the Environmental Board had many other concerns as well. Chair Schaps asked if the Environmental Board had discussed what in their view would be a better project. Ms. Grundhofer replied they had not discussed this. Chair Schaps noted that to think nothing would happen with this property was unrealistic and he was not sure the residents would agree with any development that was good for the use of this land. Ms. Grundhofer replied they were not asking for this property not to be developed, but this proposed development might not be the best use for this site. Chair Schaps stated professionals had their reputation on the line and he did not believe they would give inaccurate information. Greg Stull, 1537 Sherman Lake Road, liaison between the residents and the church, stated this would never have gotten designed as sensitive as it was unless the residents got involved. He indicated this was very difficult for the neighborhood. He indicated this had gotten to the point where it could only come with type of dialogue with the neighbors and he did not believe any other developer would have been as concerned as the church was. He stated nobody wanted change, but this developer was being sensitive to the environment and neighbors and they were only doing this because they wanted to be a good neighbor to the residents. He stated a large neighborhood meeting had been held on November 3, and on an individual basis, they went door to door and spoke to the people who were home and left information. He indicated the residents' comments were given to the Church. Mr. Tralle asked about the added growth the Church was looking at in the future. Ms. Leonidas replied this was something that was dealt with at the EAW and this had been taken into account. She noted within the footprint of the church, it could accommodate an additional 700 seats. She stated when this expansion took place, they would need additional classrooms, in addition to additional parking needs. Mr. Tralle asked with all that they needed to do with the 90 plus acres that were added costs, plus the traffic consideration, why this site? Mr. Stull replied the church did not seek the site out, the seller sought the church out, which started the ball rolling. He noted this was a beautiful site for a church. He stated no other site was considered and where the church was located at the present time in Hugo, was no longer adequate for their needs. Ms. Leonidas corrected Mr. Stull's statement to indicated the church had done an exhaustive search, but a member of the church, who was the former owner of the land, had offered the land to the church. She stated this piece of property fit their needs and it was a wonderful site. Mr. Rafferty asked what was the Master Plan for this site. Ms. Leonidas replied there was no Master Plan for this site, but she could say that the existing facility in Hugo would continue to be a major focus for them and the administrative offices would stay in Hugo. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 10 She indicated they intended to be a multi - campus church and to date, this was their only plan for growth. Mr. Tralle asked where would the additional 700 seat be located. Ms. Leonidas replied it would be in the existing footprint plans, with the exception of additional classroom facilities, which would be roughly 9 percent of the overall space now. Mr. Tralle asked if there would be a gymnasium added in the future. Ms. Leonidas replied a gymnasium was already on the existing plan. Chair Schaps asked if there was going to be any more neighborhood meetings. Mr. Stull replied they would hold as many neighborhood meetings as the residents wanted. Chair Schaps suggested they have another public hearing prior to the next Board meeting and stated it would be helpful if some of those questions would be asked before this meeting. Jeff Williams, 1920 Rehbein, asked when Mr. Stull had come out with the surveys. Mr. Stull replied it wasn't a survey; they went to the homeowners with questions and the individuals that they did not meet with, they left cards so they had a chance for that dialogue. Mr. Williams asked when this was done. Mr. Stull replied it was done over three days, Friday, Saturday and Tuesday. Mr. Williams stated to -date he had only received their newsletter and no other information. Chair Schaps requested Mr. Williams be informed of all meetings. Mr. Stull gave Mr. Williams his card and asked him to call with any questions. Mr. Williams expressed concern that the experts were only doing what the Church was giving them and once resident's concerns were brought forward, then the residents were being given more information. He expressed concern that on Sunday mornings, he would have extensive delays getting out onto 20th Street and his inability to get to the freeway. He noted he lived l'/2 miles from the freeway. Ms. Bor stated for two years she had sat through these meetings and she stated they wanted equal representation and that a two- minute restriction for their comments was unreasonable. She stated they were just as deserving of time and effort. She stated the neighbors had spent many, many hours of their time on this project and she wanted the Board to hear their concerns. She indicated this was a highly emotional issue, but they were trying to keep it factual. She noted everything about this development had changed. She indicated she had no issue with the churches mission, but things needed to be separated out. She indicated they needed to look at the zoning issues and if this was too large of a development for this site. She asked them to look at how this would affect their quality of life. She stated this development needed to be done right. She indicated this was not a land use that was dedicated for this type of a development, without MUSA and the road infrastructure. She indicated she had met with City staff for over three hours and this area was zone light residential. She indicated the previous owner had not DRAFT MINUTES • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 11 informed the neighborhood that they were going to sell their land, which did not give the residents the opportunity to possibly collectively purchase the land. She stated this side of 20th, was for conservation purposes. She noted this was not an appropriate land use and she based this on what the City said the land use was. She stated there would be a great impact on traffic also. She indicated she wanted a "fair shake ". Chair Schaps asked if Ms. Bor had received a fair shake tonight considering this was her third time at the microphone. Ms. Bor replied she did not feel the Board was concerned about the residents and she had worked her whole life to preserve this area and it was a very part of the area. She stated two minutes was very harsh and she did not feel she could present her point of view in that amount of time. Chair Schaps pointed out that Ms. Bor had presented information to the Board for over a year and all of the information had been read. He stated from previous experience, two minutes was sufficient for most people. Mr. Corson stated he had read everything that Ms. Bor had provided to the Board. Ms. Bor stated this was not just her opinion, it was the opinion of the entire neighborhood. She stated in essence she was representing the neighborhood. She asked if this should be taken "off- line ". She asked how did they know this was a balance to the process. Chair Schaps pointed out that all residents had the option to be heard and listened to. He • stated he did not feel the residents were being treated unfairly. • Mr. Tralle stated he also had read all of the information given to him and he did his homework. He indicated the previous owner wanted their church to have their land and he did not believe they had an obligation to inform the neighbors as to what they were going to do with their land. He stated this was an emotional decision for those owners. He stated the previous owners owned their land and it was their right to pass the land onto the church. Ms. Bor replied she understood that, and that was not the issue. The issue was what would the land be used for. Mr. Tralle asked what would happen to the land if 200 homes were put on the land. Ms. Bor replied she did not believe there would be 200 homes on the land because of the wetlands. She stated there were traffic issues and the impact to the wildlife. Mr. Corson stated he wanted Ms. Bor to understand that they did read everything that was submitted. Pat Smith, 6922 West Shadow Lake Drive, liaison member of Eagle Brook Church, stated they had gone door to door and had prepared a direct mailing inviting them to a neighborhood meeting at one of the church resident's homes, as well as publishing an open house meeting for the entire city to attend. He stated they made their best effort to have neighborhood meetings and he did not see the benefit of having another meeting. However, if the residents had concerns, they could be addressed individually. Lisa Kettler, 7678 20th Avenue North, stated she was uncomfortable with the liaisons taking the door to door approach. She stated they had received the card, and when they DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 12 called one of the liaisons, they were told that they had already been spoken to when they had not. She stated she did not want people on her property and that the U.S. Mail would be the more appropriate way to communicate. She asked how they could put notices in the mailboxes legally. She asked the Board to protect the resident's interests and concerns. She noted her property flooded from time to time from ditch 72 and expressed concern that the ditch would not function properly if this development were approved. Chair Schaps asked if she had attended the neighborhood meetings. Ms. Kettler replied she had attended all but the last meeting. Steve Hallblade, 552 Myrtle Lane, stated he was a citizen of Lino Lakes and one of the main reasons they moved to this City was because the Church was going to be building a new facility here. He requested the Board consider all of the residents who were members of the Church. Mr. Smyser noted staff was seeking direction on specifically the traffic issue, as well as other issues brought up this evening. Chair Schaps stated the drainage issue needed to be defined once and for all and if there was a discrepancy to find out why. Mr. Smyser replied the data they used for the EAW was from the Rice Creek Watershed District and he trusted the Watershed's District data. He stated they had seen a variety of diagrams showing a number of things, but the Watershed District ran and ditches and had jurisdiction over the ditches and he trusted their data. He indicated it was true that the thing that matters was the ditch flow remained as it was today and as long as that occurs the area drained by the ditch was a moot point because it was functioning as it did before. He stated the amount it covered was not an issue. He indicated if the Watershed District said the ditch was appropriate and would meet the drainage needs, that was what staff went by. He stated the City and the Watershed District worked together and that was how they assured the public was protected. He noted in all likelihood unless something different was proposed to the Watershed District, the Watershed District's opinion would not change. Chair Schaps inquired about the traffic. He asked if the developments were always going to precede the road developments. He asked if there was any reason to have them believe this would change at any time in the future. Mr. Smyser replied right now there were funding issues, and there are never adequate funds for needed projects. The worst traffic situations get the priority for federal and state funding. Unfortunately, that means the situation gets bad before funds are available. Mr. Grochala stated the County's five year improvement plan was underway for the reconstruction of the east side of 35E in 2005 and they had received Federal funding for reconstruction of 242 from 35W to 35E, not including the interchange. He stated the interchange had been submitted for Federal funding, but the decision had not been made at this point in time and this was potentially a 2007 -2008 project. He stated that the County's review process looked at a five -year plan. He noted the improvements that were needed immediately adjacent to the project was required as a part of the development plan. He stated the roads would follow development. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 13 Mr. Hyden stated he wanted more specifics regarding the drainfield. He asked if there had ever been one of this size and nature put in before. Mr. Smyser replied the septic system was being reviewed by Anoka County and he did not know where another drainfield this size had been built, but the County staff person noted this was an expensive proposition and the Church was not required to go to this extent. He stated he would ask for additional information from Anoka County. He indicated if a drainfield was built and maintained properly, they did a very good job and were very environmentally friendly. Mr. Hyden asked who would ensure this drainfield was properly maintained. Mr. Smyser replied they did not have a set procedure, but he agreed there needed to be a maintenance program for the drainfield. Mr. Tralle asked if this septic system would need to be pumped. Mr. Studenski replied TKDA had already done a review and there had been additional information requested, but to date it appeared the drainfield met the requirements and there would be a maintenance plan. He stated he would obtain information about other septic systems of this size and would present it at the next meeting. Mr. Hyden asked the hours and number of services the Church would have. He wanted more specific information on how they were going to handle the traffic. He stated he wanted more facts and details. Mr. Smyser stated the P &Z was not involved in the EAW worksheet which addressed many of these issues. He indicated the Church would hire personnel to manage the traffic at driveways and at the 20th Avenue and Main Street intersections and at freeway ramps. He noted while this would not solve the problem, it would reduce the problem somewhat. He noted Anoka County and MNDot believed having people control the traffic was a good idea. He indicated a traffic study would focus in on the worse traffic time, so Sunday mornings were the focus. He stated if they were going to have services on Saturday, it would be the same information, but if they had services on Wednesday during rush hour, it would still be the same information, but the traffic would obviously be worse. He stated from the City's perspective, the peak traffic was whenever there was a service and that was what they had to plan for. He stated if there were services during the rush hour, this was something they needed to look at also. Chair Schaps asked for full disclose of all Church services prior to the next meeting. Mr. Hyden reiterated it was important he be provided with more specific information regarding traffic and the drainfield, as well as the other issues brought up at tonight's meeting. Mr. Smyser indicated he would provide the Board members with information provided for the preparation of the EAW. Chair Schaps requested information regarding trespassing on the north end and where the snow would be put. He requested further information on the possibility of higher berm on the south side. Mr. Corson stated he wanted further information on getting a right turn lane on southbound 20th Avenue to Main Street. He asked for information on drainage to the one DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 14 pond and how the water would be flowing. He asked if the outflow would be draining back to the east to give it more area for it to filter out. Chair Schaps asked for more information regarding the lighting to the south and southeast. He asked if there would be significant lighting on the southwest side of the building. Mr. Smyser replied there would not be lights into the sky, and the additional 14 feet of height on the building had no windows so there would not be any lighting on that portion of the building. He noted there might be some lighting of a cross and this was something the Church and staff needed to discuss prior to the next meeting. Chair Schaps asked for distinct information on the lighting by the next meeting. He asked for further information regarding the driveway location. He noted the Board should not be discussing many of these issues tonight as this should have all been disclosed at the neighborhood meetings. Mr. Tralle suggested they would light up areas portions of the parking lot as they were being used and not light up the entire parking lot. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to continue the Public Hearing to the December Board meeting, Eagle Brook Church, 7709 20th Avenue North, Conditional Use Permit to the December Planning and Zoning Board Meeting and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 4 -0. D. Ed Vaughan, Pheasant Hills 13th Addition, 1423 Sherman Lake Road, Final Plat Staff stated the original preliminary plat for Pheasant Hills Preserve was approved in 1990. The area included in the preliminary plat had been final platted as the first through the 11th additions. One of the lots on the preliminary plat was segmented by the final platting. Part of it is Outlot B in the 10th Addition, the other part is Outlot B in the 5th Addition. It was not clear why it was done this way, but the two pieces were one lot on the preliminary plat. He indicated the current final plat application proposed to recombine the two outlots into a single buildable house lot. This was consistent with the preliminary plat. Park dedication was addressed with earlier platting. No additional lots were being created that were not part of the original approvals. He indicated no new roads or other infrastructures were proposed or needed. The stubs for water and sanitary were already in place. A public trail existed on the south side of the property and would not be affected by the proposed final platting. The proposed grades of the new house lot had been examined to ensure they were consistent with surrounding properties. The utility stub locations needed to be clarified and this could occur as part of the building permit review process. Mr. Rafferty stated he agreed with the direction it was going, but requested the developer identify to the perspective buyers that there were covenants and the covenants would be enforced. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to recommend approval of the final plat for Pheasant Hills Preserve 13th Addition and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0. DRAFT MINUTES • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 15 • E. City of Lino Lakes/Hartford Group, Legacy at Woods Edge "The Village ", TIF Plan Staff stated the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan specified the southeast quadrant of 35W and Lake Drive as "the Village ", a 65 -acre mixed -use area to be set aside as a commercial and civic focal point. The intent was to combine a privately owned commercial site with city -owned land to create a walkable "downtown" neighborhood and to create a sense of civic identify and pride. The Comprehensive Plan established control of the uses of this site in order to create substantially more tax base than conventional suburban retail development, and to provide more diverse "lifecycle" housing choices not currently available in the city. The Comprehensive Plan establishes the housing density at 10 to 24 units per acre. Staff stated in 1998 the City received grant money from the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities fund to plan this area. The " Calthorpe Plan" was developed to leverage commitments the city had made, including the completed Civic Complex and future YMCA, with private development. The Calthorpe Plan also established design standards in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan objectives to provide "distinctive, consistent architectural style that promotes high quality, aesthetically pleasing commercial buildings." Staff noted Hartford Group, Inc. had submitted a proposal for the development of Woods Edge (the Village) on the southeast quadrant of 35W and Lake Drive. Housing components include 450 units of lifecycle housing, including for -sale townhomes, apartments and condos over commercial, workforce and senior housing. More than 300,000 sq. ft. of commercial, including retail and office space was planned. Pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle paths, tree -lined streets, a community green and building sited at the sidewalk would create an interesting pedestrian environment. Staff stated in September the Lino Lakes Economic Development Authority (EDA) authorized preparation of a modified Plan for Development District No. 1 and creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -11. This was a 25 -year Redevelopment District that consisted of the Tagg property and the Lake Drive interchange area. The city -owned land did not qualify for redevelopment and would not be included in the district. This TIF district was being reestablished because this project had not developed solely through private efforts and would require public participation to develop in a manner consistent with the city's goals. The TIF plan established a budget based on the amount of tax increment that could be generated for the duration of the district, once full build -out occurred. A TIF District provided a source of revenue that would be used for improvements to Lake Drive and the 35W bridge. Approval of the plan by the City was not an approval of any amount of subsidy to the developer. The amount of subsidy would be determined as the City and developer moved through the approvals process. Staff indicated the City Council had scheduled a public hearing for November 23, 2003. The plan had been sent to Anoka County and Forest Lake School District for review. According to statute, the City's planning review board must make a finding that the establishment of a new TIF District was consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 16 Staff recommended adoption of Resolution No. 03 -02 finding the modification of Development District No. 1 and establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -11 to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Chair Schaps asked what the timeframe was for this. Ms. Divine replied optimistically, late summer was when they hoped to start the building process. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to recommend adoption of Resolution No. 03 -02 finding the modification of Development District No. 1 and establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -11 to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0. F. Frank Feela Inc., Hailey Manor, NE portion of MarDon Acres, Final Plat Staff stated the City Council had approved the preliminary plat for Hailey Manor on September 8, 2003. Under the new revised subdivision ordinance, the final plat needed P &Z review prior to City Council Approval. He indicated the final plat conformed to the approved preliminary plat. The Metropolitan Council approved the additional MUSA. The rezoning was in effect as of October 30. Prior to City Council approval of the final plat, the City Attorney would review the title commitment and the City Engineer would prepare a development agreement. Construction plans for utilities and road work must obtain City Engineer approval in order to prepare the development agreement. Other conditions of approval must be satisfied prior to City Council approval or included in the development agreement. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to recommend approval of the final plat for Hailey Manor and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 4 -0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Temporary Signs/Banners Chair Schaps temporarily left the meeting and turned the meeting over to Vice Chair Rafferty. Staff stated they were seeking direction from the P &Z Board on how to address the issue of banners and other types of temporary signs. He indicated they had invited business owners to this meeting. He noted staff would then take those recommendations and prepare an ordinance for a future public meeting. Mr. Wagner, business owner, stated he had appeared at a Council workshop regarding this. He noted he had received a letter from the City enforcing the Ordinance. He stated he believed the City had focused only on bar /restaurants and not other types of businesses in the City. He indicated it was vital to small businesses to be able to advertise through banners. He stated in his business in Spring Lake Park, he had banners and other Cities allowed them also. He indicated he could live with banners on a 30 -day limitation. He indicated he had one sign attached to the building, one on the patio, and one in the parking lot. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 17 Mr. Hyden asked if he would be agreeable to only one sign on the building and nowhere else. Mr. Wagner replied he would like to work this out with staff. He stated he did not believe portable, rented signs would be economical for the businesses. Mr. Tralle asked Mr. Wagner's opinion as to how effective the banners actually were. Mr. Wagner replied he believed the specials advertised were effective in bringing in customers. Mr. Hyden stated it was not the City's intent to limit advertising and he realized all businesses needed to advertise. Mr. Tralle noted his concern was the banners got curled, dirty, and eventually fell down. He asked if the stakes for the banners should be permanently mounted. Mr. Corson stated his concern was banners on the right -of -way. Chair Schaps thanked Mr. Wagner for coming to this meeting, but noted they still did not have more than one businesses opinion. Mr. Wagner agreed signs should not be placed in the right away, and he did not believe the business owners would object to a more permanent structure on which to hang their banners. He asked if he could put banners on his roof. Chair Schaps replied the banners could be attached to the building, but not on the roof Mr. Smyser stated it was the staff s intent that the business owners could obtain a sign permit for one month, only for a specific number of times during the year, and not a different sign every month. Chair Schaps stated he did not object to having different signs put up every month and he suggested a yearly permit and not make the business owners obtain a new permit every month. Mr. Corson stated free standing banners in the right of way would not be allowed. Mr. Hyden pointed out this was heading towards businesses having signs and not temporary banners. Chair Schaps stated the purpose of this was for aesthetics and to have a "clean" looking property. Mr. Smyser stated it was more difficult to enforce a yearly permit than it was to enforce a monthly permit. He noted with a monthly permit it was easier to follow -up on it. Mr. Hyden asked at what point would the banner become a permanent sign. He noted if permanent posts were put in, then wouldn't that make it a sign and not a temporary banner. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 18 Chair Schaps stated he did not believe in "crimping" businesses as long as the banners were in good shape and looked nice. He noted he did not see this is a big problem and he was willing to look at some regulation, but this type of a regulation bothered him. Mr. Hyden stated he did not have an issue with banners as long as they were temporary. Unfortunately, the banners were not being used temporarily and that was the issue. Chair Schaps asked if the issue was the number of signs a business had. Mr. Rafferty stated it was difficult to come up with decisions, but he had to agree with Mr. Tralle that the idea of a new, clean sign was better than an old sign, but he did not like the idea of a permanent mounting structure. He liked the idea of trying to confine it to the structure itself. He noted it might hamper some businesses, but the common factor was that they were trying to make the City look nice and clean it up. He liked the idea of a clean sign, but believed the administration part of it needed to be reduced. He stated he did not want City staff to be on sign patrol to enforce signage issues when the resources could be better used. However, he also did not want to make this difficult for the businesses owners either. Mr. Smyser stated there was a concern that things were starting to look "trashy ". Mr. Hyden stated it surprised him that only one business owner showed up when many businesses had been notified of this discussion. Mr. Wagner stated he had an issue with the two -week time limit for the banners. He did not have an issue with the banner size. He noted a business owner wanted to change their signs every month to encourage new customers to come in. Mr. Smyser stated it was Council's intent to get P &Z input, but there was no direction from the Council that they wanted a recommendation from the Board. Chair Schaps requested this discussion get continued to the January meeting. B. Fabric Accessory Structures Staff stated a number of residents were constructing temporary fabric structures, primarily for the storage of vehicles. He indicated staff was seeking direction from the P & Z as to adding language to the zoning ordinance to address this type of structure. He noted staff would then take those recommendations and prepare an Ordinance for a future public meeting. But, with the number of projects on the upcoming agendas it may be best to drop this one until sometime in the future. Chair Schaps requested this discussion be postponed indefinitely. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Corson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 11:14 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • Planning & Zoning Board November 12, 2003 Page 19 Respectfully submitted, Kathy Altman, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. DRAFT MINUTES • AGENDA ITEM V. A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: December 10, 2003 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit For A Church In the Rural Zoning District Eagle Brook Church BACKGROUND The P & Z opened the public hearing on the conditional use permit application at the November meeting. That public hearing was continued. A number of issues remain unanswered, one of which was the existing house on the site. In the interim, the church has submitted an application for a preliminary plat to create a separate lot to allow the house to remain. A preliminary plat requires a public hearing. New notices were published and mailed. We can now combine the public hearings for the conditional use permit and the preliminary plat. The November staff report also called for additional information on the stormwater design and roadway improvements. Public comments at the hearing resulted in requests for further information on several specific issues. Specific issues discussed here update the information in the November 12 staff report, which is attached. Representatives of the church met with residents on Tuesday, December 2nd. Staff learned of this meeting the following day. The discussion covered several issues. New plan submittals should address design changes agreed to at the meeting. ANALYSIS Preliminary Plat Lots: The church proposes to create separate lots for the new church building and the existing house. Since the house exists, the subdivision is actually creating a separate lot for the church. Under the subdivision ordinance, the creation of a new non - residential lot requires a plat rather than a minor subdivision. Normally, the Rural zoning district requires a minimum lot size of ten acres. However, the zoning ordinance allows a smaller lot when an existing house is on a large parcel. The lot width can then be less than the normal 330'. Section 3, Subd. 3.B.2. of the zoning ordinance states: • Where there exists a habitable single family home constructed prior to July 13, 1992, a lot of a minimum of one (1) acre may be created provided that: Eagle Brook Church • page 2 • a. The new lot that has a minimum area of one acre contains the existing habitable home, and b. The balance of the property is ten (10) acres or more, and c. The new lot that has a minimum area of one acre contains one acre of contiguous buildable land, not including road right of way, electrical transmission line easements or pipeline easements, and d. Both the one - acre - minimum lot and lots made from the remaining land must meet all minimum lot requirements and provide for meeting setback and other structure requirements, and e. It can be demonstrated that all unsewered lots can accommodate the proposed principal structure, onsite well if the public water system is not available, and an onsite wastewater treatment system including both a primary and secondary drain field area in accordance with MN Stat. 7080 and other applicable requirements. Section 5, Subd. 1.B.2. states that the minimum lot width in the Rural zoning district is 330 feet "except as provided for in Section 3, Subd. 3.B.2., which shall require a minimum lot width of two hundred (200) feet. The proposed house lot is 200 wide along the road. The house has existed for much longer than 1992. The proposed lot for the existing house is 6.16 gross acres. The remainder of the property is over 80 acres. An easement for the relocated county ditch along the entire southern property line (1060') is 100' wide, totaling 2.4 acres. This leaves approximately 3.7 acres of contiguous upland. There may be a powerline easement along the road frontage that may include less than one half acre. The lot lines provide for all required setbacks. The proposed house lot meets requirements a through d, listed above. A revised preliminary plat received December 3rd shows the locations of the existing septic system drainfield and an area for a secondary drainfield. They are barely within the proposed property lines. MPCA rules (MN Rule 7080) state there must be a 10' setback from property lines. Even though a new system was installed in 1993, we still require a site for a secondary system in the event the first one fails. We also will need information to ensure that the second drainfield can be accommodated on the lot. This requires a soils test by a qualified septic system designer. The existing well also must be located to ensure it is within the property lines and properly separated from the secondary drainfield location. Access: The site plan discussed previously showed the southern driveway for the church 50' from the southern property line of the larger 90 -acre parcel. The preliminary plat shows the house driveway in its current location, running along the southern edge. The proposed church driveway has been moved north, about 200' from the house driveway. It will be 20' from the proposed lot line. The church driveway would be nearly opposite an existing residential driveway on the east side of 20th Ave. This may seem undesirable for that resident. However, it offers several advantages. It eliminates the creation of an additional conflict point along the road: the conflict point already Eagle Brook Church • page 3 • exists with the existing residential driveway. In addition, it would allow the traffic control personnel to help the resident onto the road during church events. (Traffic control personnel should be required during services and large events.) Another alternative exists to creating a new driveway location. If the church driveway is constructed at the originally proposed location, the house could use that driveway with a shared access easement between the two properties. This would avoid creating a new conflict point (the house driveway already exists.) City staff typically avoid shared driveways on other residential parcels since they tend to create situations that function as flag lots. The church will dedicate additional right of way to Anoka County for 20th Ave. (CSAH 21) to total 60 feet from the centerline along the entire property being platted. Conservation Easement: The church is proposing a conservation easement in the southwest corner of the property. The final size and boundaries of the easement is under consideration by the church. It would involve restoring part of the area to a native prairie as well as attempts to eliminate invasive species in the wooded wetland areas. The easement likely will be granted to the Rice Creek Watershed District. As noted, the church has not determined the final dimensions of the conservation easement. At any rate, it should include the round wetland and a 25' buffer around it. (Information submitted December 3rd has not been reviewed for this report.) Wastewater System: The proposed wastewater treatment system includes a tank, a pretreatment step, and a mound soil treatment system (drainfield). With the pretreatment, the proposed system exceeds the requirements of the state and the county. (Lino Lakes does not have its own septic system requirements: the City is therefore required to adhere to the Anoka County regulations.) With the pretreatment, effluent from the proposed system will be better than the standard septic system utilized by others in the area. Because of the distance between the building and the tank, the pipe must be insulated to prevent freezing. The pretreatment element area and the mound should be protected from snowmobiles and ATVs with a fence. We can add these as conditions of approval. RLK Memo On the Traffic Study: Residents submitted a memo from RLK Kuusisto, Ltd., which discusses the 2002 traffic study included in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The memo raises three issues: One, the 2002 study analyzed the Sunday peak period. The addition of services on Saturday may result in additional negative traffic impacts and should be studied. Two, though the study recommends the use of traffic control personnel, this mitigation strategy will not bring the level of service at the studied intersection into compliance with the CUP standards. Eagle Brook Church • page 4 • Three, retail or office warehouse uses on 40 acres will have greater sustained traffic impacts than the church. However, the intensity of impact during peak times will be less than the church's peak times. First, the traffic analysis in the EAW did not address services on days other than Sunday. Information received from the church on December 3rd indicates two Saturday services. It may well be that in the future, additional service times will be added during weekdays. Once the church is approved and built, the City has no way to limit service times. The traffic analysis should be expanded to address service times on Saturday and weekdays. Second, it is true that study's recommendation to use traffic control personnel to mitigate impacts did not raise the level of service to a required level. As noted at the November P & Z meeting, the critical locations are 1 V2 and 1 3/4 miles away from the church site. In addition, the City of Lino Lakes does not have control of the intersections in questions. The 20th Ave. and Main St. intersection is completely within the City of Centerville. The I -35E ramps are subject to the jurisdictions of Anoka County and MnDOT. Anoka County will reconstruct the 20th Ave. intersection pending the results of the current study of Main St. (CSAH 14) from I -35W to I35 -E. This is likely to occur within 10 years. The I -35E ramps function at unacceptable levels now. Reconstructing them involves reconstructing the entire interchange. Neither the state nor the federal government have funding available for this. If no development is to occur that will increase traffic at the interchange, the economic development goals for the interchange area must be re- examined. Third, the comparing the church proposal to 40 acres of retail or office warehouse development is not necessarily instructive. For one thing, there are well over 40 acres of developable land on the church site. For another, development in the surrounding area will increase over time as well, and this must be considered. A third point is that a short, intense peak once or twice a week should be compared to a significant increase in ongoing, daily traffic generation five or six days a week. One must also consider the activity level on the site itself for different land uses. Clarification of the County Ditch Drainage Area and Affect On Design: Residents raised a question about the area being drained by the county ditch as it exists now. The Watershed District has stated about 600 acres, residents say more. Private drain tiles typically are not all documented. It is impossible to know how many private landowners have installed tiles that cross a natural subwatershed boundary, which would increase a drainage area for a downstream tile. However, this question is a red herring. Regardless of the drainage area, the drainage rate of the tile/ditch must not be altered. This is the salient point. The drainage design must maintain the existing flow capacity. • • Eagle Brook Church page 5 As noted in the City Engineer's memo, full hydraulic calculations have not been submitted to the city yet. Once they are submitted, the City Engineer will review the calculations to ensure that the project will not alter the existing flow capacity. Effect of the Impervious Surface On the County Ditch: The county ditch will be re- aligned. The drainage design does not route runoff from the new impervious surface into the county ditch. Runoff from the parking, building, etc., will flow through a series of facilities into a stormwater pond, then into the wetland downstream from where the ditch discharges into the wetland. The church project will not increase flow in the county ditch. Neither will the church project decrease flow through the ditch. The ditch flow rate must remain the same after the project as before. Both the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City review the drainage design to ensure it meets this requirement. Additional Landscaping, Berms, Screening: One of the conditions for a CUP for a church is that "adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.Q." of the zoning ordinance. That city requirement for screening reads as follows: Screening. Where any business or industrial use (i.e., structure, parking or storage) abuts property zoned for residential use, that business or industry shall provide screening along the boundary of the residential property. Screening shall also be provided where a business or industry is across the street from a residential zone, but not on that side of a business or industry considered to be the front (as determined by the Zoning Administrator). All the fencing and screening specifically required by this Ordinance shall be subject to Section 3, Subd. 4.Q. and shall consist of either a fence or a green belt planting strip as provided for below: A green belt planting strip shall consist of vegetation and plants and shall be of sufficient width and density to provide an effective visual screen. This planting strip shall be designed to provide eighty (80) percent opacity to a minimum height of six (6) feet at time of planting. Earth mounding or berms may be used but shall not be used to achieve more than three (3) feet of the required screen. In such cases when planting strips are used in conjunction with berms designed to support plant growth, plant height may be reduced accordingly such that an eighty (80) percent visual screen of not less than six (6) feet in height is maintained. The planting plan and type of plantings shall require the approval of the City Council. Screening along the road should be considered, and should be more extensive than previously proposed. However, the front of the site is along the road. The southwest portion of the site is heavily wooded and this provides screening for property to the southwest. The new lot being created provides a buffer ranging from 200 to 350 feet in width. There are screening trees on the north of the existing house. Landscaping should focus on areas where no screening trees exist now. • Eagle Brook Church page 6 Staff has learned that the neighborhood meeting on December 2nd included discussions on landscaping. This issue should be discussed by the P & Z. Building Lighting: The P & Z requested information on how the building lighting will appear as viewed from surrounding properties. We have not received additional information on this. Days and Times of Services or Large Events Other Than Sundays: The church submitted a schedule of events, which is attached to this report. SUMMARY The preliminary plat addresses the issue of the existing house, with the exception of the following: • A revised preliminary plat must be submitted indicating the locations in Lot 2 of the existing well, the existing septic system, and a site for a secondary drainfield. All must meet the required setback and separation distances. A soils analysis must be submitted for the secondary drainfield site. • Typical lot line easements must be included on the plat. This normally is shown on the preliminary plat. Since a new plans will be needed due to the drainfield locations, the lot line easements should be added to a grading plan. Due to new information: • The traffic analysis must be revised to address service times on Saturdays and weekdays. Other issues listed in the November report remain. These included: 2. Information needed for review of the stormwater management design must be provided, as discussed in the City Engineer's memo. 3. Information needed for review of the roadway improvements must be provided, as discussed in the City Engineer's memo. 4. Traffic criteria and policy must be considered as it applies to the application and other development in the eastern part of the city. (This is a City policy question.) In addition to those items, the following issues should be considered as conditions of approval: 5. The separate parcels shall be combined into one tax parcel. The applicant must submit documentation that a lot combination has been filed with Anoka County prior to issuance of a building permit. Eagle Brook Church page 7 6. Additional right of way shall be dedicated to Anoka County for 20th Ave. (CSAH 21), as indicated on the plans. A deed for this right of way shall be filed prior to building penult issuance. 7. All necessary permits shall be obtained by the applicant from Anoka County for work in the 20th Ave. (CSAH 21) right of way. 8. Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. 9. Additional screening shall be added on a revised landscaping plan. 10. Drainage and utility easements must be created over all ponds and wetlands. These must include land 25' from the delineated wetland edge, as proposed on the plans.. 11. Easements must be placed over the relocated drain tile for Co. Ditch 72 and deeded to the Rice Creek Watershed District. 12. Issues listed in the November 5th and December 4th memos by the City Engineer must be resolved to his satisfaction. 13. Any existing wells or onsite septic system for the house that exists on the site must be located and properly abandoned. 14. Stop signs shall be installed for vehicles exiting both driveways. The signs shall not be in the right of way. 15. The church shall enter into a site performance agreement prior to issuance of a building pen nit. 16. The church shall enter into a maintenance agreement for the stormwater facilities. 17. A management plan for the prairie areas should be prepared. 18. Traffic control personnel shall be employed during peak periods at the I -35E interchange, at the 20th Ave. and Main St. intersection, and at the access driveways to the site. 19. During church services and large events, the northern driveway shall be entry only and the south driveway shall be exit only. Traffic control personnel shall be present at the driveways to assure this. 20. Parking lot lighting shall be turned off no later than two hours after services or other events at night. 21. The terms and dimensions of the conservation easement must be established. 22. The sewer line from the building line to the septic tanks must be insulated to prevent freezing. 23. A fence or other barrier shall be built to protect the septic system treatment areas. RECOMMENDATION Continue the public hearing on the CUP and preliminary plat to the January 14, 2004 meeting. Discussion of the preliminary plat in this report is based on the preliminary plat dated October 10, 2003, and a revised plat received December 3, 2003. • TKDA ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: James Studenski, City Engineer Copies To: 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292-4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com Reference: Eagle Brook Church City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Comm. No. 12701 -002 From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Routing: Date: December 4, 2003 The City of Lino Lakes has received plans providing for the construction of a church facility on a 91 acre site located east of 20th Avenue North and north of 77th Street East. A review memorandum dated November 5, 2003 was previously provided for the proposed Eagle Brook Church. Since that time, we have received the following: 1. Plan sheets C210.1, C210.3, C220.1, and C230.1, dated October 13, 2003 and revised November 19, 2003. These are reduced sized prints and 1/2 of each sheet was photo copied (i.e., each plan sheet is provided in 2 halves). Therefore some information in the center of the plan sheets is either missing or difficult to read. 2. Preliminary Plat dated October 10, 2003. 3. Land Use Application dated November 19, 2003. Essentially, all comments provided in the November 5, 2003 memorandum remain applicable, except as modified or supplemented herein. Therefore, this revised memorandum includes many of the same comments previously provided. New and Supplemental Comments As a result of the supplemental information provided, new and revised comments are as follows: 1. A Preliminary Plat sheet for Eagle Brook Addition has been received. The plat provides for division of the property into two lots: An 83.785 acre parcel containing the Church, and a 6.159 acre parcel to provide for maintaining of the existing residential property on the southeast side of the property. A table figure of 1.373 acres for right of way dedication for 20th Avenue North (County Road 21) is provided, but is not shown on the Plat itself. Typically, Anoka County requires a total dedication of 60 feet from centerline. Additional dedication is shown on the Site Plan, but not on the Preliminary Plat. The Plat will require the review and approval of Anoka County, and must include the additional dedication as required by the County. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 2 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Drainage and utility easements per City requirements are not shown on the plat. Required at a minimum are standard easement dedications of 10 -foot in width around the perimeter of the property and 5 -feet on each side of property lines. Drainage and utility easements must also be provided around all wetland areas and proposed drainage detention facilities. It is also recommended that a utility easement be provided to encompass the proposed sanitary sewer conveyance and treatment system. The November 3 memorandum provided comments regarding the proposed wastewater treatment system. The previous memo stated that the proposed system is a "performance" system and that further specific documentation would be required as a result. However, upon further review, the proposed system is not a performance system as defined by Minnesota Rules and the Anoka County Community Health and Environmental Services Department, and we concur. Anoka County has also provided a review of the proposed system on behalf of the City. TKDA and the Anoka County Public Health Specialist have reviewed the proposed system, including the Design Report and Specifications, and have provided review comments to the City. The system proposed is acceptable and has been proven successfully in similar applications in Minnesota. In addition, the system as proposed exceeds design requirements. However, the following additional comments are noted as follows: 1. The sewer line from the building line to the septic tanks should be insulated to assure that freezing of the line will not occur. 2. An appropriate barrier must be constructed around the treatment area and drainfields for protection from off -road vehicles and snowmobiles. In addition, Final Plans and Specifications for the treatment system must be signed by a Registered Professional Engineer. Previous Comments and Adjustments to Previous Comments An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared and received extensive review by the general public, the City of Lino Lakes, and other governing agencies. It should be noted that under the thresholds established under State of Minnesota rules, an EAW was not required for this project. However, the EAW provided the opportunity to more thoroughly provide comment and address specific issues in more detail. As a result of the EAW, many issues and resulting comments have already been addressed by the City and other agencies through the review process. It should be noted that site, grading, and utility plans submitted to date are considered adequate for preliminary review at this time, but are incomplete for actual construction purposes. Comments regarding construction related items required on the plans are mentioned further in this memorandum. It is expected that construction plans will ultimately be submitted as part of the approval process. Eagle Brook Church Review Page 3 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota General Comments - Issues Addressed in EAW Traffic and Roadways A traffic study was conducted by SRF Consulting Group dated September 13, 2002, and reviewed by TKDA in a memo dated September 16, 2002. A response to traffic concerns is presented in more detail in the City's formal response to the EAW comments, dated May 13, 2003. In general, the greatest traffic generation would be on Sundays, with much smaller amounts during the week. Projected traffic to be generated by future residential and/or other development in this area will also contribute much higher amounts of traffic, particularly during week days. Roadway and infrastructure improvements will be needed in this area with or without the proposed church. This not only includes lands immediately adjacent to the church site, but nearby areas of Centerville, Hugo, and Columbus Township. The three cities of Lino Lakes, Hugo, and Centerville have collectively discussed such issues. Nevertheless, the Church will be required to address more immediate traffic issues. Based on the data provided, the Church will need to provide mitigative traffic control measures on Sunday mornings at the intersections of Main Street with 20th Avenue North (County Road 21) and the freeway ramps, and at the VIP church entrance on 20th Avenue North. • The intersection of Main Street with the I -35E ramps is of particular concem. According to the traffic study, peak traffic to and from the Church site (on Sunday mornings) will require additional traffic measures by the church, even with proposed improvements to Main Street. It is recommended that the City work with Anoka County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation as expeditiously as possible to secure funding and schedule improvements, regardless of church construction or not The church has engaged in discussions with Anoka County to establish appropriate access points on County Road 21 and necessary improvements (widening and turn lanes). As a result, a central driveway location and modifications to 20th Avenue North are shown on the site plan. Dedication of additional right of way will also be required by the County. A total dedication of 60 -feet from the centerline of the right of way is typically required by Anoka County, and additional dedication must be shown on the Preliminary Plat as required by the County. Stormwater Management A CAPROC (Conditional Approval Pending Receipt of Changes) has been received from the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). The CAPROC lists several outstanding items (primarily administrative) that must be addressed or received prior to the approval of a formal permit. Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Application Number 03 -073 may be referred to for further details regarding the CAPROC conditions. An item of particular note is Anoka County Ditch No. 72 (Main and Branch 1), that runs through the church site and exists as drain tile. This ditch is regulated by RCWD. No current easement of record for the ditch • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 4 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota has been verified to exist. This ditch drains property well beyond the church site itself, or an area of 590 -650 acres to the south and east of the site according to available records. It is proposed to maintain the ditch in a pipe condition and re -route it around the church site. As shown on the plan, an 18 -inch diameter RCP pipe is proposed to connect from the existing drain tile, run westerly along the south property line a distance of about 1100 feet, turn northward and flow to an existing ditch and wetland area. The existing flow capacity of the ditch must be maintained. Therefore, hydraulic calculations must be submitted to the City for review to assure that the existing flow capacity is maintained or exceeded. Additional drainage and utility easements will also be required (provided on the Preliminary and Final Plats) to provide perpetual maintenance. The drain tile running into the property further west (1200 feet west of County Road 21) is also shown connecting to the proposed 18 -inch pipe. At this location, it also appears that much of the surface water runoff from properties to the south flows into the Eagle Brook property through a natural low area or swale. The proposed grading plan appears to raise the ground level at the property line and cut off the overland drainage. It is suggested that the storm sewer and grading be designed and/or adjusted accordingly to assure that grading changes on the Eagle Brook property do not result in adverse impacts to the existing drainage patterns of neighboring properties. Again, hydraulic calculations must be submitted to assure that the existing flow capacities are maintained or exceeded. Based upon the information provided, there will be no increase in the developed rate of runoff from the site. A summary table has been provided showing that runoff rates for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year storm events show significant decreased in the runoff rate from the site under the proposed site conditions. However, full drainage calculations must be submitted to the City to verify the summary figures provided. Best management practices (BMP's) have been incorporated into the site design to limit and control the rate of runoff, and provide storm water treatment per RCWD requirements. The information provided states that County Road 21 drainage and runoff shall be maintained in its current operative state which includes discharge through vegetated swales to existing wetland areas. However, the grading plan provided is not entirely clear as to where the roadway ditch drainage will flow, especially with pending turn lane improvements and widening of the roadway. It would appear from the plan that the north part of the roadway will drain to an existing wetland at the north end of the site as it currently does. The ditch at the south end of the property appears to connect with the County Ditch 72 system, but the grading plan is not entirely clear. There is no filling and/or impact to existing wetlands or flood plain proposed. Existing woodlands and buffer areas adjacent to Peltier Lake are proposed to be left naturally as is. In addition, dedicated wetland buffers are shown on the Preliminary Plat. The site grading plan also proposes to incorporate effective use of stormwater retention and infiltration methods to control runoff, provide stormwater treatment, and enhance groundwater infiltration in accordance with RCWD requirements. Bioretention areas in the proposed parking lots and rain gardens are proposed in the design to assist in meeting RCWD requirements for rate control and stormwater treatment. Further construction details must be provided on the plans. In addition, it is recommended that groundwater levels at proposed infiltration basin locations be verified to assure the effectiveness of infiltration at those locations. • • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 5 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Phosphorus discharge from the site will be reduced from the existing site condition, based on the phosphorus load modeling provided by the engineer. The change of the property from agricultural use alone will assist in reducing phosphorus discharge levels from the site A permit in accordance with the requirements of the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) in accordance with the most recently adopted requirements of the MPCA and the City of Lino Lakes shall be attained by the church, and shall be administered as required. Wastewater Treatment In accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the church is located in an area designated as rural, and the extension of sanitary sewer into this area is not anticipated in the immediate future. An on -site treatment system is therefore necessary, and shall be subject to the review and approval of Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes. Existing septic systems must be removed and/or abandoned in accordance with local and state requirements. An on -site wastewater treatment system is proposed, based on the Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Final Design Report and Specifications for Eagle Brook Church, dated October 8, 2003, by Eco Systems Engineering, Inc. The system and Design Report have been reviewed by TKDA and the Anoka County Public Health Specialist. The system is acceptable and has been proven successfully in similar applications in Minnesota. In addition, the system as proposed exceeds design requirements. However, the following additional comments are noted as follows: 1. The sewer line from the building line to the septic tanks should be insulated to assure that freezing of the line will not occur. 2. An appropriate barrier must be constructed around the treatment area and drainfields for protection from off -road vehicles and snowmobiles. Final Plans and Specifications for the treatment system must be signed by a Registered Professional Engineer. Water Supply In accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the church is located in an area designated as rural, and the extension of water into this area is not anticipated in the immediate future. An on -site new well is therefore necessary, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The DNR has stated that if appropriated water exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons a year, a DNR permit will be required. Under the development as proposed, estimated water usage is proposed to be 2800 gallons per day with a peak usage (large events), of 4200 gallons per day. The DNR has also recommended the use of lake water to meet irrigation needs. It is likely that a deep aquifer such as the Prairie du Chien/Jordan would be utilized, and any impacts to wells on neighboring properties would be unlikely. • • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 6 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Further details regarding the water supply distribution system will be required upon submittal of fmal construction plans, including design considerations for fire protection and adherence to local and State regulations as required. Plan Comments As previously stated, the plans submitted to date are considered adequate for preliminary review and comment, but incomplete for construction purposes. Following are review comments that can be provided at this time: Site Plan As previously stated, at least some improvements to County Road 21 will be needed at the church site per the requirements of Anoka County. Proposed improvements (turn lanes, widening, etc.) to County Road 21 are shown in concept on the site plan, but further design details will be required. A construction plan must eventually be provided that includes specific design details, including tapers, pavement thicknesses, provisions for traffic control and safety, etc. as required by the County. The site plan must provide the following information as well 1. Proposed improvement areas should be labeled accordingly, including delineation of driveway and parking areas with concrete curb and gutter (B -618), rain gardens, turfed areas, and additional dimensions for the property lines and site boundaries. 2. Construction related items such as standard construction details must be provided. This would include pavement thicknesses, and references to MnDot, County, and City standard details as required. 3. References to private utilities, including Gopher State One Call must also be provided. 4. The church building's main floor and lowest floor elevations must be provided on the plan. The lake, wetland, and proposed detention basin flood elevations are critical to the elevation to be established for the building. The lowest building opening must be a minimum of 1 -foot higher than the emergency overflow elevation. Basement floor elevations must be at least 4 -feet above the normal water elevation and 2 -feet above the design flood level. Grading Plan The grading plan provides a general overall plan of how the site is proposed to be graded. Detailed plans for construction will ultimately need to be provided and include the following: Eagle Brook Church Review Page 7 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 1. Standard details for specific design items such as the rain gardens, erosion and sedimentation control measures, outlet and manhole details, seeding and turf restoration, importing of material as may be needed, and pipe sizes and invert elevations. 2. Any imported topsoil, fill material, or granular materials to be used as roadway or building pad fill must be approved by the City Engineer (material and source). 3. Any notes regarding clearing of trees should be revised to include language stating that clearing and grubbing shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes and Mn/DOT 2101, and the Tree Preservation Plan as approved by the City. - 4. Notes regarding seeding, mulching and turf establishment should refer to the appropriate Mn/DOT Specification for turf establishment (2575) and for the seed mixture. The City of Lino Lakes has a specific seed specification for ponding areas that the Church shall incorporate into the plans. 5. All grading shall be confined to the property. No additional runoff from the site shall enter upon neighboring properties. If grading requires any work into the adjoining property, the Contractor shall be responsible for attaining authorization as needed. The grading and stormwater routing for the County Road 21 ditch system m relation to the property must also be shown. 6. Proposed storm sewer outlet and inlet invert elevations, and drainage structure rim elevations must be shown on the Grading Plan at all locations. Pond outlet details for each outlet area are needed, and can be provided on a Detail Sheet. 7. Easements shall be provided around all wetland and stormwater detention areas. Utility Plan The Utility Plan submitted at this time provides a general overall design for the utility system (water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer). Much of the detailed information required for construction Plans has not yet been provided. However, the following general comments can be made regarding the Utility. Plan at this time 1. Profile sheets, construction notes, service locations, and other pertinent information typical of utility construction Plans shall be provided accordingly. All utility system materials and installation methods shall follow City of Lino Lakes engineering standards, and the requirements of the Standard Utilities Specifications of the City Engineers Association of Minnesota. These requirements must be specified on all Utility Plan, along with additional construction notes that include the following: a legend, provisions for private utilities, references to City of Lino Lakes requirements for utility notifications and shut - downs, traffic control and safety requirements. 2. All utility installations shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a geotechnical engineer. It is our understanding that a geotechnical investigation of the site has been conducted. A copy of the geotechnical investigation and report must be provided to the City. Eagle Brook Church Review Page 8 December 4, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 3. All trenches (including services) shall be backfilled and compacted and meet 100% maximum Standard Proctor Density in the upper 3 -feet from finished road elevation, and 95% maximum Standard Proctor Density below the upper 3 -feet. 4. Water pipe and appurtenances shall meet the requirements of the City of Lino lakes, and as follows: Hydrants - Waterous Pacer WB -67; Valves - Mueller A2370 -20 or equal. DIP pipe shall be Class 52. City standards must be identified on the plan or provided on a detail sheet. Well installation shall and the water distribution system shall conform to the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health and Department of Natural Resources as applicable. 5. The Grading and Utility Plans shall include notes providing for erosion and sedimentation control. 6. All storm sewer pipes must be RC pipe. Pipe sizes, grades, and structure invert and rim elevations must be provided. Additional Comments 1. Typical street and pavement sections (pavement section and design) must be provided. All street, driveway, and parking area components shall as a minimum, meet Mn/DOT and City of Lino Lakes Engineering Standards. 2. The building will be protected by a wet pipe fire sprinkler system in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code, Minnesota State Fire Code, and National Fire Protection Association Standards. Further requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, such as the number and location of hydrants shall be subject to review and approval of the City Fire Chief. 3. A 30kW generator is proposed to be installed for back -up and safety items only, such as emergency lighting, exit signs, fire alarms, security and communications systems. 4. An existing 100 foot wide utility easement (Document No. 1187297), located approximately 1300 feet west of and parallel to County Road 21 runs north -south across the entire site. Overhead power lines currently exist within the easement. The church site as proposed does not show any surface improvements within the easement area with the exception of some grading and underground sanitary and storm sewer work. A significant portion of the proposed County Ditch 72 realignment also falls within the boundaries of this easement. It is therefore recommended that the existing utility easement be reviewed to verify its extent of coverage (utilities, drainage, power lines, etc.). Expansion of the existing easement or the establishment of new easements as needed shall be required to cover the proposed storm sewer. 5. Full Drainage Calculations must be provided. Summary sheets showing storm water runoff rates for 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year events have been provided, as well as pond volume calculations. However, full calculations showing all supporting data, computations, and design assumptions must be provided. C 1 T Y; ' O F RNOJ[ KE S Department of Public Safety POLICE David J. Pecchia Public Safety Director / Chief of Police Officer Mike Rumpsa Lino Lakes Police Department 10 -20 -03 CPTED Reviews Eagle Brook Church: The landscaping plan looks good. I have not identified any areas that are going to be a problem at this time. As with all planting materials, maintance is a key. If the trees and shrubs are allowed to become overgrown, natural surveillance will be compromised. The lighting plan is complete and looks good. Traffic impact: I don't foresee an immediate problem with traffic during the week. The turn lane into the complex should control traffic in and out of the parking lot. Sunday traffic has a good likelihood of backing up onto 20th Ave and on the ramps to 35E. Before and after services are times that I see traffic backing up. This is due to the large number of vehicles that are predicted to respond to church. • I have reviewed the traffic impact study, and I concur with its findings. • Traffic officers would have to be used to reduce the wait times and increase safety at all involved intersections. • Safety of the officer's is paramount. • During low light and inclement weather, intersections with poor or no lighting would have to be up graded with lights, to allow motorists to see traffic officers in the intersection. Traffic officers will not completely solve the traffic problem, but it should aid in the reduction of wait times. Circle -Lex VFW Post #6583 I would like to see some info on the lighting that is proposed for this project. Wall mounts should be discouraged as they have a tendency to blind people that are approaching, and reduces natural surveillance from passing motorists, neighbors and law enforcement. What, if any, improvements are planed for Lake Dr? A turn lane into the property would reduce possible rear end situations. Building placement could cause a sight view problem from Lois Lane to Lake Dr. 640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014 -1182 Public Administration /Records: 651 - 982 -2300 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2399 • • Brook eas obrooJ.iu»c Empowered by God to Reach Others for Christ. Phone: [651) 429 -9227 1 Fax: (651) 429 -7663 1 Office: 5212 130th Street N. ( White Bear Lake, MN 55110 December 2, 2003 Mr. Jeff Smyser Lino Lakes City Planner 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Mr. Smyser: This letter is in response to your request for more information concerning our plans for weekend services at the North Campus location. Our current assumption, based on congregation size and a dual campus approach, is that we will be planning to open the campus with one service on Saturday nights and two services on Sunday mornings. At the recent neighborhood meeting I shared some information about our current attendance patterns, which I have included for your review: • Current cars in the parking lot throughout the week • A typical schedule for a rather busy week • A listing of non - church events that have been held in our current location during 2003 It is important to note that with a dual campus approach to ministry, we will be splitting attendance between two campuses for many of our events, making the traffic impact less than it would be if our entire operation were at the new campus. You will also note that though we have many events throughout the week, the traffic impact and facility use is significantly less than weekend services. Again, if I can help clarify anything, please be sure to let me know. Sincerely, Scott Anderson Executive Director of Operations Church: Hwy 61 & Buffalo Street 1 6 EBC Services Saturday: 5 & 6:30 pm Sunday: 9 :30, 10:15, 11 & 11:45 am • • • 4.6 -J C � i L 1 z 13 O 2 c cs E cn W CD °o °o °o °° °o t� (0 LO mot- CO N l01 uo Sie0 °o ° Day /Time of week • Non - Church events in 2003 Date Event People* Cars* 1/20/03 WBL schools event 160 100 3/6/2003 Firearms safety course 30 30 3/13/2003 Firearms safety course 30 30 3/20/2003 Firearms safety course 30 30 8/12/2003 WBL schools event- reading institute 200 150 8/25/2003 District 916 event 850 550 8/26/2003 WBL schools event 160 100 8/27/2003 WBL schools event 850 550 11/4/2003 Voting Location -all day 500 500 11/7/2003 55+ Drivers Education 15 10 numbers are estimates (spread out all day) ) earch Results: 43 Total Records Options: liliiange View: umber Viewed: List All Records r5l Showing records 1 to 43 of 43 Search Criteria: Date Range: 10/12/2003 to 10/18/2003 Status: Approved Page 1 of 2 Print Options: Include search criteria at top: Set colors to black and white: rg �J Q Yes ®No ()Yes 0 No Print Event Name: Event Time: Resource Time: Status: Resources: Sunday, October 12, 2003 HIS WAY Early Childhood 09:OOa - 12:OOp [08:OOa - 12:20p] Approved Room 235 1 Room 232 WORSHIP 09:15a - 10:25a [09:15a - 10:25a] Approved Lower Worship Center 1 Gymnasium l Lower Lobby { Prime Time 10:45a - 11:45a [09:45a - 11:45a] Approved Fireside Room WORSHIP 11:OOa - 12:05p [11:OOa - 12:05p] Approved Lower Worship Center l Gymnasium 1 Lower Lobby Ukraine Missions Team 01:00 p - 03:00 P [ 01:00 P - 03:00 P] Approved Fireside Room 1 Kitchen Report Touchpoint SETUP 02:OOp - 09:OOp [02:OOp - 09:OOp] Approved Lower Worship Center 1 Lower Lobby 1 Lower Kitchen Greenberg wedding 03:OOp - 06:OOp [03:OOp - 06:30p] Approved Fireside Room shower Monday, October 13, 2003 Touchpoint SETUP 08:OOa - 09:OOp [08:OOa - 09:OOp] Approved Lower Worship Center 1 Lower Lobby 1 Lower Kitchen men_in_the Word- Room 202 1 Room 203 l Room 210 1 Room 220 l Room 09:30a - 11:30a [09:0Oa - 12:OOp] Approved 232 l Fireside Room l Upper Worship Center l Room 200 nday AM- Cancelled l Gallery AA 10:OOa - 11:OOa [10:OOa - 11:OOa] Approved Room 235 Moms in Touch 06:OOp - 07:OOp [06:OOp - 07:OOp] Approved Gallery Confident Kids 06:30p - 08:OOp [06:30p - 08:OOp] Approved Room 228 Nominating Committee 07:OOp - 08:30p [07:OOp - 08:30p] Approved Room 235 Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Fall Touchpoint 08:OOa - 09:OOp [08:OOa - 10:OOp] Approved Lower Worship Center 1 Lower Lobby 1 Lower Kitchen Room 202 1 Room 203 1 Room 220 1 Room 235 1 Fireside 09:30a - 11:30a [08:30a - 12:00p] Approved Room 1 Upper Worship Center 1 Room 200 1 Gallery 1 Upper Lobby DivorceCare Approved Room 202 A.A Approved Room 220 1 Room 222 Women in the Word - Cancelled 06:30p - 08:30p [06:30p - 08:30p] 07:00p - 08:00p [06:45p - 08:15p] Men's_Discipleshi.p 07:OOp - 09:OOp [07:OOp - 09:OOp] Approved Room 232 Training Wednesday, October 15, 2003 M EA WM Leaders' Wed. . 09:30a - 11:30a (09:OOa - 12:OOp] Meeting Ground_Zero - Cancelled 03:OOp - 09:OOp [03:OOp - 09:OOp] LWC Rehearsal 09:05p - 10:OOp [09:05p - 10:OOp] Thursday, October 16, 2003 A 5+ Bible Study 09:OOa - 10:30a [09:OOa - 10:30a] Approved Approved Room 202 Approved Approved Lower Worship Center Approved Approved Gallery http: / /my. serviceu .com /search/SearchResults. asp? SGUID= YJwrv7uRIjPoFeUTGNZaxNYHnhTzXM6gj ... 12/2/2003 ,earch Results: 43 Total Records Page 2 of 2 Wome_n,,,in. the _ Word... Cancelled •ms in -touch id Impact Leaders Meeting Q1 BLDS._Midweek.._, Cancelled Homeschoolers Unite Young Adult Small Group A.A Alanon 09:30a - 11:30a [08:30a - 12:OOp] 01:OOp - 02:00p [01:00p - 02:OOp] 06:30p - 08:30p [06:30p - 08:30p] Approved Room 202 1 Room 206 1 Room 220 1 Room 235 I Fireside Room I Upper Worship Center 1 Room 200 Approved Room 235 Approved Room 235 06:30p - 08:30p [06:OOp - 08:45pj Approved 07:OOp - 08:30p [10/16 6:OOp - 10/18 8:30p] Approved Gallery 07:OOp - 09:OOp [07:OOp - 09:00p] Approved Room 232 08:OOp - 09:OOp [07:45p - 09:15p] Approved Room 220 08:OOp - 09:OOp [07:45p - 09:15p] Approved Room 222 Room 222 Friday, October 17, 2003 M,EA Approved - Young Adult_Vo !ley ball 07:OOp - 09:OOp [06:30p - 09:OOp] Approved Gymnasium Saturday, October 18, 2003 Greg__Page_Men's,_Bible 08:OOa - 10:OOa [07:50a - 10:OOa] Approved Room 235 Study_ AA_fo_r_Wome_p 10:OOa - 11:OOa [10:OOa - 11:OOa] Approved Room 203 WORSHIP 05:OOp - 06:15p [05:OOp - 06:15p] Approved Lower Worship Center I Gymnasium 1 Lower Kitchen Q1 _LDS 05:OOp - 07:30p [04:OOp - 07:45p] Approved Fireside Room 1 Upper Worship Center HIS W ..y Iementary.. 05:OOp - 08:OOp [04:OOp - 09:OOp] Approved Room 202 Parent Child Room 05:OOp - 08:OOp [05:OOp - 08:OOp] Approved Room 235 Pre = dedication Service 06:15p - 07:30p [05:45p - 08:00p] Approved Room 230 ORSHIP 06:30p - 07:30p [06:30p - 07:30p] Approved Lower Worship Center ,Set . Up 08:O0p - 10:30p [08:OOp - 10:30p] Approved Upper Worship Center I Upper Lobby • http: / /my. serviceu. com/search/SearchResults .asp ?SGUID= YJwrv7uRlj PoFeUTGNZaxNYHnhTzXM6gj ... 12/2/2003 • 100 0 100 erode feet 30' uJ 1 0 0 0 z S 89°5739" E ) 249.15 LAKE PELTIER ORDINARY HIGH ATER LEVEL (884.7)------- PROVIDED BY D. .R. S 89°5539" E 250.00 LC ▪ 3.1 NU; ra.0 e S 89°5299" E 0 z 100.00 La 0 S 89°5339" E 150.00 z r r PROPOSED J100 COUNTY DITCH 72 EASEMENT. 50' S 89°50'59" E 1487.00 /1 / S 89°4945" E 489.21 501 N 89°5939" W 495.00 SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. 4/ a • PROPOSED SOUTH POND t NWL=889 BOTTOM=885 / WETLAND DELINEATIO .7` :_■// M\,\ \;\\ A WETLAND DELINEATION / PR- OP- OSED WETLAND BUFFER 50' 1 PROPOSED 100 CO NTY DITCH 2 EASE NT PROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER )19 )19 // ( 7/77 / (-) / PROPOSED 1 1 PARKING ALTERNATE SANITARY DRAIN FIELD (MOUND) WETLAND DELINEATION PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT 1495.46 NOTES: *EXISTING COUNTY DITCH 72 EASEMENTS ACROSS PROPERTY UNIDENTIFIABLE WITH PROVIDED INFORMATION. *BEARINGS ARE BASED ON ANOKA COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM *TOPOGRAPHY AND WETLAND DELINEATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS LEGEND 0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SETBACK PROPOSED EASEMENT EXISTING EASEMENT PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT COUNTY DITCH 72 OVERHEAD POWER PROPOSED SHORELANO OVERLAY ZONE N 89°4157" W LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 3 AND 4, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 55, LOTS 5, 8, 10, 12, 13 AND 14, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 56. I hereby certify that this plan, survey, or report was prepared by me or under my dlrect supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Lond Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Print Name: DEAN DUSHECK te 10/10/2003 L !cense e 16679 PROPOSED PR-OWE LINE uI PROPOSED PARKING 30' L 3 0; m N 89°5339" W 201.00 .0 61; EITT_TO rItO 0 S 89°53390 201.00 • • 30' ROADWAY EASEMENT 40' • • • 50' \ EXISTING SANITARY 247.24 DRAIN FIELD (MOUND) r F50' - -I 2588.34 50' • 1 • 1 COUNTY DITCH 72 REALIGNMENT —50' 710.61 66' (1: :A. 3 1070.88 LOT 1 LOT 2 AREA TABLE 82.888 AC 6.205 AC DEDICATED R/W 2.385 AC (CSAH 21) ZONING TABLE SITE: RURAL LOW DENSITY SEWERED RESIDENTIAL NORTH: RURAL SOUTH: RURAL LOW DENSITY SEWERED RESIDENTIAL EAST: RURAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIOL WEST: RURAL LOW DENSITY SEWERED RESIDENTIAL, PUBLIC/SEMI-PRIVATE PROPOSED 100' COUNTY DITCH 72 EASEMENT PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: EA2LE CIRCO ADIDETUON • AGENDA ITEM V. B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: November 12, 2003 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit For A Church In the Rural Zoning District Eagle Brook Church BACKGROUND Eagle Brook Church proposes to construct a new facility on 90+ acres on 20th Ave., north of 77th St. A church is a conditional use in the Rural zoning district. The required site and building plan review is an administrative review, but the review elements are relevant to the conditional use permit. The application includes the request for an increase in building height that can be included in a conditional use permit. The City processed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on this project in the last year. That review examined the potential environmental impacts of the project. The design reflected in the current application used information gathered during the EAW process. ANALYSIS Land Use and Zoning Comprehensive Plan: According to the comprehensive plan, the project site is guided for Low Density Sewered Residential land use. In addition to land use categories, the comprehensive plan designates growth areas for pre -2010 and 2010 -2020 time periods. The site is split between stage one and stage two areas. These growth areas pertain to when city utilities (sewer and water) may be made available for the area in question in order to support residential development. Since the project does not comprise residential development and it does not rely on city utilities, the growth areas are /ice r immediately relevant to the church proposal. Location Existing Land Use Guided Land Use (Comp. Plan) Zoning Rural Site agriculture Low Density Sewered Resid. North rural residential Rural Rural South rural resid., agric. Low Density Sewered Resid. Rural East rural resid., agric. Medium Density Resid. Rural West Peltier Lake Low Dens. Sewered Resid., Public /Semi- Public Rural 4 • Eagle Brook Church page 2 The comprehensive plan does not establish a separate land use category specifically for churches. Several existing church properties on large parcels are designated as Public /Semi Public land use, as are parks and the City Hall location. There is no way to predict where a church may want to locate in the city, and there are no guidelines in the comprehensive plan for locating churches. The comprehensive plan creates seven planning districts across the city that include recommendations for the specified areas. The project site is within planning district six. No recommendations refer to the specific site or to churches. The only recommendation that refers to anything specific to the immediate area states that the city will work with the City of Centerville to facilitate the future improvement of 20th Ave. The comprehensive plan also establishes conceptual greenways on the land use map. Greenways are corridors of protected open space managed for conservation and recreational purposes. The city has no ownership or other rights to greenways simply because they appear on the conceptual map. They are to be further defined as individual development projects arise, in cooperation with the site developer. A conceptual greenway overlaps the northwestern portion of the project site. This area of the site consists of wetlands and woodlands and is not intended for development. The site plan indicates only a stormwater pond in the envisioned greenway. The rest of the development would be on the eastern portion of the site. The church plan is compatible with the city's greenway corridor plan by preserving the envisioned greenway area as open space. In fact, the church is proposing a conservation and wetland easement over the southwestern portion of the site. Zoning: The site is in a Rural zoning district. A church is a conditional use in this zone. Much of the site is within the shoreland overlay zone that covers land within 1000 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Peltier Lake. The submittal compares with the Rural zoning and shoreland standards as follows: • • Eagle Brook Church page 3 Shoreland: The site is within a shoreland overlay district. This overlay includes land within 1000 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Lake Peltier. The Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) establishes the OHWL for water bodies designated as protected waters. The DNR had not previously determined the OHWL for Peltier Lake. As a result of the proposal of this project, the DNR determined the OHWL last year at 884.7. The overlay zone and the shoreland setbacks within it are measured from this elevation. The City shoreland ordinance regulates uses in the overlay district. A shoreland overlay allows the uses allowed by the underlying zoning. A church is allowed in the underlying Rural zoning district as a conditional useNeatiix jJ. Likewise, lot dimensions are those of the underlying zoning: 10 acre minimum for any new lots, with a 330 ft. minimum width of road frontage as well as at the OHWL. The existing property exceeds these minimum size requirements. The shoreland ordinance classifies Peltier Lake as a natural environment lake. Structures, septic systems, and parking must meet the minimum 150 ft. setback. The project meets these requirements. Structures must be screened from the water. The existing tree and vegetative growth provides an adequate screen. Churches are exempted from the 36 ft. maximum height in a shoreland zone. The lowest floor elevation must be 3 ft. above OHWL, so the floor must be at least 887.7 to meet the shoreland requirement. The low floor elevation is 896. SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • Site: The site includes 91 acres, 90 acres without right of way. It is located in the southeast quarter of Section 11, starting about 1/8 mile north of 77th St.. At its widest Required Proposed Lot size minimum 10 acres 95 acres Lot width minimum 330' 1500' + Setbacks: buildings from street rear lot line side lot line parking from street rear lot line side lot line Shoreland: from OHWL 40' 30' 10', 50' CUP no stated reqs. no stated reqs. no stated reqs. 150' 600' 600' 250' 200' 500' 50' 700' 500' septic Bldg. height 35' 60' church spires 50' 60' "spire" Impervious max. 60% max. (shoreland) 23% Shoreland: The site is within a shoreland overlay district. This overlay includes land within 1000 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Lake Peltier. The Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) establishes the OHWL for water bodies designated as protected waters. The DNR had not previously determined the OHWL for Peltier Lake. As a result of the proposal of this project, the DNR determined the OHWL last year at 884.7. The overlay zone and the shoreland setbacks within it are measured from this elevation. The City shoreland ordinance regulates uses in the overlay district. A shoreland overlay allows the uses allowed by the underlying zoning. A church is allowed in the underlying Rural zoning district as a conditional useNeatiix jJ. Likewise, lot dimensions are those of the underlying zoning: 10 acre minimum for any new lots, with a 330 ft. minimum width of road frontage as well as at the OHWL. The existing property exceeds these minimum size requirements. The shoreland ordinance classifies Peltier Lake as a natural environment lake. Structures, septic systems, and parking must meet the minimum 150 ft. setback. The project meets these requirements. Structures must be screened from the water. The existing tree and vegetative growth provides an adequate screen. Churches are exempted from the 36 ft. maximum height in a shoreland zone. The lowest floor elevation must be 3 ft. above OHWL, so the floor must be at least 887.7 to meet the shoreland requirement. The low floor elevation is 896. SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • Site: The site includes 91 acres, 90 acres without right of way. It is located in the southeast quarter of Section 11, starting about 1/8 mile north of 77th St.. At its widest • • • Eagle Brook Church page 4 point, the property stretches from 20th Ave. to Peltier Lake. The site consists of several individual parcels. (These should be combined into one tax parcel as a condition of approval should the application be approved.) The site has been used for crop production. The western part of the site includes some wetland along and near the lake. Another wetland is n the northeast corner of the site. These are discussed further below. County Ditch 72 runs through the site into one of the wetlands. The stormwater management design is one of the most important aspects of the project from an environmental perspective. This is discussed below. The lake is in the Regional Park Reserve. Land between the proposed church site and the lake is owned by the City of St. Paul Water Services, but is likely to be purchased by the County to add to the park reserve. The EAW raised the possibility of trail connections to the park reserve. However, the land there is primarily wetland and the County has no plan for trails through it. Existing House: A house, garage, barn, and silo exist in the south central part of the site. The proposal is for these to remain. This is not an environmental issue , and did not come to light during the EAW review. However, it is a site design issue and must be addressed now. The existence of two principal structures on one lot is not allowed under our zoning ordinance except with a planned unit development (PUD). There must be some justification for the flexibility allowed with a PUD. Alternatively, a separate 10 -acre lot would need to be created for the house. The two uses would be sharing a driveway, which would require shared access easements and possibly other legal arrangements. Such a design is not acceptable under normal development requirements. If a unique arrangement is to be made, it should be proposed so the City can review it. Conservation Easement: The second largest heron rookery in the Metro area is on the island in Peltier Lake. The birds forage for nesting material on the shores of the project property. The church has agreed to cooperate with environmental groups, including the Mn DNR and Anoka County Parks, to manage the shore area in a way that supports the foraging activity. The church is proposing a conservation easement in the southwest part of the property. This would include the wetland area there as well as land betwee the wetland and the lake. The proposed holder and terms of this easement have not been explained. Building: The proposed church is a two -story structure. The first floor footprint would include 57,463 sf. The second floor has 26, 894 sf, for a total of 84, 357 sf. (These data replace inaccurate totals in the table on the floor plan sheet.) The worship area includes seats on both the first and second levels, for a total of 2100. The building also includes six classrooms and seven childcare rooms. • • Eagle Brook Church page 5 The exterior of the building includes a variety of colors, materials, and finishes. The tallest walls are buff colored, precast concrete panels with a sandblasted finish. Areas of the lower walls also are precast concrete panels with a sandblasted, of a reddish color. Lighter color stone makes up most of the rest of the larger wall area material. The southeast corner of the larger portion of the building includes a glass curtain wall. Fire suppression sprinklers will be required. This need will be filled with an underground storage tank of 30,000 gallons of water. Such onsite storage and pump systems must meet state fire and building code requirements. Building Height: The maximum building height in the Rural zone is 35', though church spires may go up to 60'. Building heights in excess of these may be allowed through a conditional use permit if they meet specific conditions. These are described below under the conditional use permit heading. The height of the top of the exterior walls is 50'. A tower, or spire, is 60'. The CUP application includes the request for the 50' building height. Lighting: City requirements allow no more than 0.4 foot candles at the residential property line and no more than 1.0 at street right of way lines. All exterior fixtures must be 90 degree cutoff fixtures. The photometric plan dated 10/14/03 and the fixture cut sheets meet these requirements. The primary purpose of the lighting restrictions is to minimize affecting the ability to enjoy the night sky. The EAW review raised the issue of the large parking lot being lit at night. If the project proceeds, the City should attach requirements that the parking lighting is turned off after events. Signage: Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. All signs will be reviewed upon submittal of sign permit applications. Landscaping, Tree Preservation, Screening: The landscaping plan includes a variety of trees along property lines and within the site. The majority of the site will be planted with native grasses. Areas adjacent to the building will be sod. Rain gardens (infiltration areas) are distributed around the and within the parking lot, and will be planted with appropriate seeding. Almost all trees on the site will remain undisturbed. The lake shore and wetlands are heavily wooded and trees there will not be disturbed. Existing coniferous tree stands on the southern portion of the site will remain. Some trees along the road will be transplanted to accommodate driveways. The plan proposes prairie grass for large areas of the site. A management plan for this is advisable. It is impossible to completely screen such a large property. However, it may be desirable to increase screening in specific areas. • • Eagle Brook Church page 6 Utilities: A well will be drilled to provide water. The church will construct an onsite wastewater treatment system. The City has requested the assistance of the Anoka County Community Health & Environmental Services Dept. to review the final design of the wastewater treatment system. That department reviewed the preliminary design report and found the concept sound. The system must meet state and county standards. In the event that public sewer is available in the project area, it would be best for the church to connect. At this time, there are no proposals to extend public sewer or water to the area. It is always a good idea for any property owner to consider such a future connection when designing a site. The utility plan includes locations for future water and sanitary sewer connections. The City supports designing for a future connection. The City may require a condition of approval, as part of the conditional use permit, that the church connect to a public sewer within 24 months of the public system becoming available. As a condition of plan approval, utility related modifications and comments as set forth in the City Engineer's memo should to be incorporated into the final plans. Wetlands and Stormwater Management: Four wetlands are located on or partially on the project site. One is part of the shoreline of the lake in the southwest part of the site. Another is near, a depression surrounded by wooded upland. These two will not be disturbed by the proposed church project. A third.wetland is a swale in the northwest area of the site which is surrounded with tilled farmland. The fourth is on the northeast corner of the site is part of a larger wetland located mostly north of the site. These two wetlands are drainageways and have been degraded by agricultural runoff and are vegetated primarily with reed canary grass. The plans show a voluntary 25' setback from the wetlands. No building or pavement would be placed in these areas. Under City requirements, all wetlands must be protected with a drainage and utility easement. This could be enlarged to include the 25' setback. County Ditch 72 is an underground draintile, including the stretch crossing the property. The main branch of County Ditch 72 begins about 4300 feet southeast of the site. Branch 1 of the ditch begins about 2500 feet south of the site. These merge on the site, then drain into the swale wetland, which then runs into the lake. Currently, there is no pretreatment of runoff in the tile ditch system or runoff from the agricultural land before it flows into the wetlands and lake. The proposed stormwater design shows that runoff will be collected by a series of swales, infiltration areas /rain gardens, and stormwater ponds, providing pretreatment of all runoff from the development. • The Rice Creek Watershed District has review authority over the stormwater design. The county ditch will be rerouted, in a new underground draintile, around the development • • • Eagle Brook Church page 7 area. This was required by the Watershed in lieu of the suggestion to daylight the underground "ditch" and make it an actual surface ditch. The new underground tile will daylight in a location similar to the existing tile, and discharge into the wetland. The capacity of the tile will not be changed. The ditch must not be impeded so as to cause flooding. On the other hand, increasing the ditch's capacity could drain wetlands in the area. Therefore, design of any work that affects the ditch must maintain ditch capacity. As noted in the TKDA memo, we did not receive sufficient hydraulic calculations to provide for a complete review. In addition, additional information is needed to ensure proper road drainage as well as flow from properties to the south. The applicant will be required to enter into a ponding maintenance agreement with the city. Drainage and utility easements must be created over all ponds and wetlands. Easements must be placed over the relocated draintile for Co. Ditch 72 and deeded to the Rice Creek Watershed District. As a condition of plan approval, the grading and drainage related modifications and comments as set forth in the City Engineer's memo should to be incorporated into the plans. Floodplain: The city has a floodplain management ordinance. The 100 -year flood elevation, which defines the floodplain, is 887. The western portion of the site is within the floodplain. Lowest floor elevations of structures must be at least one foot above this elevation. The church building pad is not within the floodplain and is at an elevation of 896. Access, Circulation, Parking Right Of Way: The site fronts on 20th Ave., CSAH 21, a minor arterial roadway. Ultimately, Anoka County will need a total width of 120' of right of way, or 60' on each side of the centerline. Currently, it is 33'. The Church is proposing to dedicate an additional 30' to accommodate turn lanes for the new access driveways. Access, Circulation: The proposal includes two new driveways onto 20th Ave. Southbound right and northbound left turn lanes would be constructed for vehicles entering the north driveway. This would be the entry point during church events. The southern driveway would be the exit during events. This would be managed by traffic control personnel at the driveways. During non -event times, both driveways could be used for entry and exit. As noted in the TKDA memo, the submitted plans do not provide clear information regarding the road improvements. This is necessary for a complete review. The design of access on any development project should consider not only the specific site, but potential future development on adjacent properties. The EAW review raised the question of creating road easements to provide public roads to accommodate future Eagle Brook Church page 8 • redevelopment of properties on the north and south of the site. The application does not include that option, but it is worth consideration. • • There are numerous private driveways along 20th Ave. Just 700 feet south of the site is the 77th St. intersection, and Rehbein St. is 400 feet south of that. The City's comprehensive plan guides the 10 -acre properties on the south for sewered development. Though the present owners may have no intention to subdivide in the immediate future, it is probable that the ten -acre properties to the south will subdivide sometime in the future once public sewer and water are available to the area. This is nothing unusual. If fact, it is the norm, and the City should plan for it. Planning for potential future development includes determining good locations for roads to serve future development. The project proposal includes adding two new accesses to CSAH 21 that serve only one property. One way to mitigate the potential impacts of creating these additional conflict points is to design them to accommodate future public roads. Dedication of' road easements on the - north and south boundaries of the project site would support this However, 77th St. also could provide the access for the future development to the south of the church site. Future development of that land would then be required to install public utilities and reconstruct 77th St. to accommodate the additional traffic. Therefore, we do not believe it necessary to require additional public road easements. Parking: The plan provides for adequate parking, as indicated in the table below. It is possible that the church will expand in the future. The EAW analysis included the potential expansion. If the hypothetical expansion of 700 seats occurs, it would require an additional 233 parking spaces. The plan accommodates this potential with a grassy area south of the western parking lot area. It is common practice in Lino Lakes to attempt to minimize the impervious surface. Only 23% of the site will be impervious surface. The plan proposes 47 more parking spaces than required. The elimination of 47 spaces would amount to one double row. This would not accomplish much and would negatively affect the circulation design within the parking lot. Traffic: For several reasons, traffic is the most difficult issue to address. The traffic analysis prepared for the EAW concluded that the peak periods will create unacceptable levels of service at 35E ramps and at 20th Ave./Main St. Under the City's site plan and CUP requirements, this would be justification for denial of a project unless Zoning Ord. Parking Space Requirement Spaces Required Spaces Provided worship area: 2100 seats 1 space per 3 seats 700 other 1 per classroom, other 13 total 713 760 plus potential for addl. 300+ It is common practice in Lino Lakes to attempt to minimize the impervious surface. Only 23% of the site will be impervious surface. The plan proposes 47 more parking spaces than required. The elimination of 47 spaces would amount to one double row. This would not accomplish much and would negatively affect the circulation design within the parking lot. Traffic: For several reasons, traffic is the most difficult issue to address. The traffic analysis prepared for the EAW concluded that the peak periods will create unacceptable levels of service at 35E ramps and at 20th Ave./Main St. Under the City's site plan and CUP requirements, this would be justification for denial of a project unless 4 • • • Eagle Brook Church page 9 the project applicant proposes a way to resolve the level of service problem. (See criteria "d" under Conditional Use Permit general criteria.) The difficulty arises when looking at the larger picture. The 20`h Ave. /Main St. intersection is 1 1/2 miles from the proposed church site. This is quite a distance for establishing levels of service for roadways. In addition, that intersection is in another municipality (Centerville). Lino Lakes cannot require road improvements at a location over which Lino Lakes has no jurisdiction. These questions loom even larger in relation to the I -35E interchange. Clearly, no project applicant can reconstruct a.freeway interchange . unless the proposed development project is huge enough to cover the costs. (For example, a large shopping mall, sports arena, or commercial development such as the Best Buy site in Richfield.) Both MnDOT and Anoka County would have to be involved in such a project, An even more difficult question arises in considering the implications of denying the project because of the traffic impacts. Land in the vicinity of the interchange is guided and zoned for commercial and industrial development. If a retail, office, or -industrial project is proposed in that area, we would have to deny it as well unless the interchange were reconstructed to handle the traffic. Forty acres of retail development will generate far more traffic than the proposed church. The level of service (LOS) criteria are listed below. Staff suggests that P & Z discuss these criteria and their implications for the City prior to making a recommendation on the church application. Staff cannot make a recommendation without such discussion. Conditional Use Permit There are general criteria for all CUPs and specific conditions that apply to private clubs. General Criteria: 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 the following criteria have been met: a. The proposed development application has been found to be consistent with the policies and recommendations of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan including: Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, Utility (Sewer and Water) Plans, Local Water Management Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Policy Plan, Natural Environment Plan. • The proposed project poses no conflicts with these pieces of the comprehensive plan. . b. The proposed development application is compatible with present and future land uses of the area. • The site is guided for single family sewered development. This does not exclude churches, which typically are in single family zones. The majority of • Eagle Brook Church page 10 the site will remain as undeveloped open space (only23% impervious surface). The lakeshore area will be protected and managed to provide a foraging area for birds in the heron rookery. c. The proposed development application conforms to performance standards herein and other applicable City Codes. • As noted in the report, several issues require clarification with additional information. d. Traffic generated by a proposed development application is within the capabilities of the City when: 1) If the existing level of service (LOS) outside of the proposed subdivision is A or B, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service more than one grade. 2) If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below C. 3) If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is D, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below D. 4) The existing LOS must be D or better for all streets and intersections providing access to the subdivision. If the existing level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as part of the proposed project, improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better. 5) - Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision must have the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic_from the proposed _ subdivision or the developer will pay to correct any structural deficiencies. 6) The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require City street improvements that are inconsistent with the Lino Lakes Capital Improvement Plan. However, the City may, at its discretion, consider developer - financed improvements to correct any street deficiencies. 7) The LOS requirements in paragraphs a. to d. above do not apply to the I- 35W /Lake Drive or I -35E /Main St. interchanges. At City discretion, interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Anoka County and the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, and a plan must be prepared to determine improvements needed to resolve deficiencies. This plan must determine traffic generated by the subdivision project, how this traffic contributes to the total traffic, and the time frame of the improvements. The plan also must examine financing options, including project contribution and cost sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties, that contribute to traffic at the interchange. 8) The City does not relinquish any rights of local determination. • See discussion above under "Traffic ". e. The proposed development shall be served with adequate and safe water supply. f. The proposed development shall be served with an adequate and safe sanitary sewer system. • The proposed new building would have its own well and onsite wastewater treatment system. • Eagle Brook Church page 11 g. The proposed development shall not result in the premature expenditures of City funds on capital improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. • There will be no city capital expenditures for this project. h. 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. • The project will generate traffic. The parking lot will be lit. _The traffic requires consideration, as discussed above. The lighting will be comply with city requirements. i. Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. • The EAW review process concluded that the project would have no significant environmental impacts. Specific Condition s: Churches are allowed as conditional uses in the Rural zone provided that: a. Side yard setbacks shall not be less than fifty (50) feet. b. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.Q of this Ordinance. c. Adequate off - street parking and access is provided on the site or on lots directly abutting directly across a public street or alley to the principal use in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 5 of this Ordinance and that such parking is adequately screened and landscaped from surrounding and abutting residential uses in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.Q of this Ordinance.. • The project complies with the required setbacks. -Screening bears further consideration. The plans include adequate parking. Building Height: The maximum building height in the Rural zone is 35', though church spires may go up to 60'. Building heights in excess of these may be allowed through a conditional use permit provided that: a. Demonstrated need is established for the increase in height and said increase will not violate the intent and character of the zoning district in which the structure is located. • Contemporary churches are commonly large, tall buildings. The large worship space requires a tall structure. 40 b. The site is capable of accommodating the increased structure size. • At 90 acres, the site can accommodate the additional building height. • Eagle Brook Church page 12 c. The potential increased intensity and size of use does not cause an increase in traffic volumes beyond the capacity of the surrounding streets. • The additional 14' of building height does not increase traffic volume. d. Public utilities and services are adequate. • The church will construct its own water and sanitary sewer facilities. e. For each additional story over the district limitation or for each additional ten (10) feet above the maximum allowed per district, front and side yard setback requirements shall be increased by ten (10) percent. • As noted in the zoning standards table above, the setbacks are well beyond minimum requirements. f. The construction does not limit solar access to abutting and /or neighboring properties. A shadow study shall be required illustrating shadow encroachment on adjoining properties. • We have not yet received the shadow study. This is pending. g. The provisions of Section 2, Subd. 2. of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. • This refers to the general CUP criteria discussed above. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION The Environmental Board reviewed the project on October 29, 2003. Their comments are attached . This report addresses the parking issue, stormwater, conservation easement, utility connections, screening, and prairie management, and lighting. Phosphorous is being reviewed by the City Engineer. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending tabling this application to the December meeting. There are numerous unresolved issues that include fundamental site design elements. These include the existing house on the site, clarifications of drainage design issues, clarification of roadway design issues, and traffic management policies. The list below includes the issues that definitely need to be addressed before P & Z approval (the first four), as well as conditions that should be attached to the eventual approval. 1. The future of the existing house and other buildings must be resolved. 2. Information needed for review of the stormwater management design must be provided, as discussed in the City Engineer's memo. • Eagle Brook Church page 13 3. Information needed for review of the roadway improvements must be provided, as discussed in the City Engineer's memo. 4. Traffic criteria and policy must be considered as it applies to the application and other development in the eastern part of the city. 5. The separate parcels shall be combined into one tax parcel. The applicant must submit documentation that a lot combination has been filed with Anoka County prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Additional right of way shall be dedicated to Anoka County for 20th Ave. (CSAH 21), as indicated on the plans. A deed for this right of way shall be filed prior to building permit issuance. 7. All necessary permits shall be obtained by the applicant from Anoka County for work in the 20th Ave. (CSAH 21) right of way. 8. Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. 9. Additional screening shall be added on a revised landscaping plan. 10. Drainage and utility easements must be created over all ponds and wetlands. These must include land 25' from the delineated wetland edge, as proposed on the plans.. 11. Easements must be placed over the relocated draintile for Co. Ditch 72 and deeded to the Rice Creek Watershed District. 12. Issues listed in the November 5th me mo by the City Engineer must be resolved to his satisfaction. 13. Any existing wells or onsite septic system for the house that exists on the site must be located and properly abandoned. 14. Stop signs shall be installed for vehicles exiting both driveways. The signs shall not be in the right of way. 15. The church shall enter into a site performance agreement prior to issuance of a building permit. 16. The church shall enter into a maintenance agreement for the stormwater facilities. 17. A management plan for the prairie areas should be prepared. 18. Traffic control personnel shall be employed during peak periods at the I -35E interchange, at the 20th Ave. and Main St. intersection, and at the access driveways to the site. 19. During church services and large events, the northern driveway shall be entry only and the south driveway shall be exit only. Traffic control personnel shall be present at the driveways to assure this. 20. Parking lot lighting shall be turned off no later than two hours after services or other events at night. 21. The terms of the conservation easement must be established. This review is based on the following submittals, received October 13, 2003: 1. Certificate of Survey, SRF, 10/10/03 2. Site Plan, BWBR and SRF, 10/13/03 Eagle Brook Church page 14 • 3. Grading Plan, BWBR and SRF, 10/13/03 4. Utility Plan, BWBR and SRF, 10/13/03 5. Landscaping Plan, BWBR, 10/13/03 6. Tree Preservation Plan, BWBR, 10/13/03 7. First and Second Floor Plans, BWBR, 10/13/03, corrected square footages e -mail from Ron Laughlin, BWBR 8. Building Elevations, BWBR, 10/13/03 9. Photometric Plan, BWBR and Ericksen Ellison and Assoc., 10/14/03, received 10/15/03 10. Lighting Fixture cutsheets, Lithonia Lighting 11. Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Final Design Report and Specifications, Eco Systems Engineering, Oct. 8, 2003 12. Narrative, SRF 13. Description of Fire Protection System and Electrical Generator System, Memorandum, Ericksen Ellison and Assoc., 10/13/03 TKDA 1500 Piper y Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS • (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax MEMORANDUM www.tkda.com To: James Studenski, City Engineer Reference: Eagle Brook Church Copies To: From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Date: November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Comm. No. 12701 -002 Routing: The City of Lino Lakes has received plans providing for the construction of a church facility on a 91 acre site located east of 20th Avenue North and north of 77th Street East. The following document copies have been provided for review: 1. Land Use Application dated October 13, 2003. 2. Full size and 11X17 -size Application for Conditional Use permit plan set (14 sheets) dated October 13, 2003. 3. Lighting Details dated October 13, 2003. 4. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) dated October 21, 2002. 5. Review memorandum from Jeff Smyser of the City of Lino Lakes to James Studenski of the City of Lino Lakes dated October 29, 2003. 6. City of Lino Lakes Resolution No. 03-44 making a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), including finding of facts supporting the decision, and City responses to EAW comments. 7. City of Lino Lakes Conditional Use Permit Narrative, prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc., received by the City of Lino Lakes October 13, 2003. 8. Eagle Brook Church Traffic Study conducted by SRF Consulting Group dated September 13, 2002, and review comments to the traffic study by TKDA, dated September 16, 2002. 9. Description of Fire Protection System and Electrical Generator System by Ericksen Ellison, and Associates, Inc., dated October 13, 2003. 10. Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Final Design Report and Specifications for Eagle Brook Church, dated October 8, 2003. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity • • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 3 November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota The church has engaged in discussions with Anoka County to establish appropriate access points on County Road 21, and necessary improvements (widening and turn lanes). Access points must consider centralizing access points with future development to limit the total number of access points for safety purposes. Dedication of additional right of way will also be required by the County. A total dedication of 60 -feet from the centerline of the right of way is typically required by Anoka County, and is shown per the site plan. Stormwater Management. A CAPROC (Conditional Approval Pending Receipt of Changes) has been received from the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). The CAPROC lists several outstanding items (primarily administrative) that must be addressed or received prior to the approval of a formal permit. Rice Creek Watershed District Permit Application Number 03 -073 may be referred to for further details regarding the CAPROC conditions. An item of particular note is Anoka County Ditch No. 72 (Main and Branch 1), that runs through the church site and exists as drain tile. This ditch is regulated by RCWD. No current easement of record for the ditch has been verified to exist. This ditch drains property well beyond the church site itself, or an area of 590 -650 acres to the south and east of the site. It is proposed to maintain the ditch in a pipe condition and re -route it around the church site. As shown on the plan, an 18 -inch diameter RCP pipe is proposed to connect from the existing drain tile, run westerly along the south property line a distance of about 1100 feet, tum northward and flow to an existing ditch and wetland area. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted to the City for review to assure that the existing flow capacity is maintained or exceeded. Additional drainage and utility easements will also be required to provide perpetual maintenance. The drain tile running into the property further west (1200 feet west of County Road 21) is also shown connecting to the proposed 18 -inch pipe. At this location, it also appears that much of the surface water runoff from properties to the south flows into the Eagle Brook property through a natural low area or swale. The proposed grading plan appears to raise the ground level at the property line and cut off the overland drainage. It is suggested that the storm sewer and grading be designed and/or adjusted accordingly to assure that grading changes on the Eagle Brook property do not result in adverse impacts to the existing drainage patterns of neighboring properties. Again, hydraulic calculations must be submitted to assure that the existing flow capacities are maintained or exceeded. Based upon the information provided, there will be no increase in the developed rate of runoff from the site. A summary table has been provided showing that runoff rates for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year storm events show significant decreased in the runoff rate from the site under the proposed site conditions. However, full drainage calculations must be submitted to the City to verify the summary figures provided. Best management practices (BMP's) have been incorporated into the site design to limit and control the rate of runoff, and provide storm water treatment per RCWD requirements. The information provided states that County Road 21 drainage and runoff shall be maintained in its current operative state which includes discharge through vegetated swales to existing wetland areas. However, the grading plan is not entirely clear as to where the roadway ditch drainage will flow, especially with pending turn lane improvements and widening of the roadway. It would appear from the plan that the north part of the roadway will drain to an existing wetland at the north end of the site as it currently does. The ditch at the • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 4 November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota south end of the property appears to connect with the County Ditch 72 system, but the grading plan is not entirely clear. There is no filling and/or impact to existing wetlands or flood plain proposed. Existing woodlands and buffer areas adjacent to Peltier Lake are proposed to be left naturally as is. The site grading plan also proposes to incorporate effective use of stormwater retention and infiltration methods to control runoff, provide stormwater treatment, and enhance groundwater infiltration in accordance with RCWD requirements. Bioretention areas in the proposed parking lots and rain gardens are proposed in the design to assist in meeting RCWD requirements for rate control and stormwater treatment. Further construction details must be provided in the plans._ In addition, it is recommended that groundwater levels at proposed infiltration basin locations be verified to assure the effectiveness of infiltration at those locations. Phosphorus discharge from the site will be reduced from the existing site condition, based on the phosphorus load modeling provided by the engineer. The change of the property from agricultural use alone will assist in reducing phosphorus discharge levels from the site. Additional comments received regarding phosphorus are being reviewed. A permit in accordance with the requirements of the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) in accordance with the most recently adopted requirements of the MPCA and the City of Lino Lakes shall be attained by the church, and shall be administered as required. Wastewater Treatment In accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the church is located in an area designated as rural, and the extension of sanitary sewer into this area is not anticipated in the immediate future. An on -site treatment system is therefore necessary, and shall be subject to the review and approval of Anoka County and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Existing septic systems must be removed and/or abandoned in accordance with local and state requirements. An on -site wastewater treatment system is proposed, based on the Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Final Design Report and Specifications for Eagle Brook Church, dated October 8, 2003, by Eco Systems Engineering, Inc. The following comments are provided: 1. The treatment system proposed exceeds requirements. However, the system submitted for approval is considered a Performance (non - standard) system. According to Minnesota Rules 7080, the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, or appropriate permitting authority must adopt Minnesota Rule 7080.0179 in order for performance systems to be allowed. It should be verified that the appropriate agency or authority has adopted this rule. 2. The proposed system consists of a standard set of septic tanks, an intermediate pretreatment unit, and a final soil disposal system. The system would be a standard system if it did not have the intermediate pretreatment. • • • Eagle Brook Church Review Page 5 November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Percolation tests were not submitted, and must be provided. 4. For a performance system the following items are also required for submittal: 1. Estimated costs for construction, operation, monitoring, service, component replacement, and management. 2. Anticipated system life. 3. Hydraulic and organic loading rates to all components of the system. The Church or the design engineer must submit the required information, and verify that Performance systems are allowed. In addition, the Church will be responsible for the long term maintenance and upkeep of the on -site treatment system. Water Supply In accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the church is located in an area designated as rural, and the extension of water into this area is not anticipated in the immediate future. An on -site new well is therefore necessary, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The DNR has stated that if appropriated water exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons a year, a DNR permit will be required. Under the development as proposed, estimated water usage is proposed to be 2800 gallons per day with a peak usage (large events), of 4200 gallons per day. The DNR has also recommended the use of lake water to meet irrigation needs. It is likely that a deep aquifer such as the Prairie du Chien/Jordan would be utilized, and any impacts to wells on neighboring properties would be unlikely. Further details regarding the water supply distribution system will be required upon submittal of final construction plans, including design considerations for fire protection and adherence to local and State regulations as required. Plan Comments Full size and 11X17 -size Application for Conditional Use permit plan sets (14 sheets) dated October 13, 2003 have been provided. As previously stated, these plans suffice for preliminary review at this time but are considered incomplete for construction purposes. Following are some preliminary review comments: Site Plan As previously stated, at least some improvements to County Road 21 will be needed at the church site per the requirements of Hennepin County. The required improvements (turn lanes, widening, etc.) to County Road 21 are not shown adequately. The church has been in contact with Anoka County to establish appropriate access points on 20th Avenue North (County Road 21), and necessary improvements (widening and tum lanes). The plan must also show the proposed turn lanes, lengths, and other improvements as required by Anoka County. A construction plan must also eventually be provided that includes specific design details, Eagle Brook Church Review Page 6 November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota including tapers, pavement thicknesses, provisions for traffic control and safety, etc. as required by the County. The site plan must provide the following information as well: 1. Proposed improvement areas should be labeled accordingly, including delineation of driveway and parking areas with concrete curb and gutter (B -618), rain gardens, turfed areas, and additional dimensions for the property lines and site boundaries. 2. Construction related items such as standard construction details must be provided. This would include pavement thicknesses, and references to MnDot, County, and City standard details as required. 3. References to private utilities, including Gopher State One Call must also be provided. 4. It is presumed from the plan that the existing two housing units on the property will remain and not be removed. 5. The church building's main floor and lowest floor elevations must be provided on the plan. The lake, wetland, and proposed detention basin flood elevations are critical to the elevation to be established for the building. The lowest building opening must be a minimum of 1 -foot higher than the emergency overflow elevation. Basement floor elevations must be at least 4 -feet above the normal water elevation and 2 -feet above the design flood level. Grading Plan The grading plan provides a general overall plan of how the site is proposed to be graded. Detailed plans for construction will ultimately need to be provided and include the following: 1. Standard details for specific design items such as the rain gardens, erosion and sedimentation control measures, outlet and manhole details, seeding and turf restoration, importing of material as may be needed, and pipe sizes and invert elevations. 2. Any imported topsoil, fill material, or granular materials to be used as roadway or building pad fill must be approved by the City Engineer (material and source). 3. Any notes regarding clearing of trees should be revised to include language stating that clearing and grubbing shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes and Mn/DOT 2101, and the Tree Preservation Plan as approved by the City. 4. Notes regarding seeding, mulching and turf establishment should refer to the appropriate Mn/DOT. Specification for turf establishment (2575) and for the seed mixture. The City of Lino Lakes has a specific seed specification for ponding areas that the Church shall incorporate into the plans. • Eagle Brook Church Review City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Page 7 November 5, 2003 5. All grading shall be confined to the property. No additional runoff from the site shall enter upon neighboring properties. If grading requires any work into the adjoining property, the Contractor shall be responsible for attaining authorization as needed. The grading and stormwater routing for the County Road 21 ditch system in relation to the property must also be shown. 6. Proposed storm sewer outlet and inlet invert elevations, and drainage structure rim elevations must be shown on the Grading Plan at all locations. Pond outlet details for each outlet area are needed, and can be provided on a Detail Sheet. 7. Easements shall be provided around all wetland and stormwater detention areas. Utility Plan The Utility Plan submitted at this time provides a general overall design for the utility system (water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer). Much of the detailed information required for construction Plans has not yet been provided. However, the following general comments can be made regarding the Utility Plan at this time: 1. Profile sheets, construction notes, service locations, and other pertinent information typical of utility construction Plans shall be provided accordingly. All utility system materials and installation methods shall follow City of Lino Lakes engineering standards, and the requirements of the Standard Utilities Specifications of the City Engineers Association of Minnesota. These requirements must be specified on all Utility Plan, along with additional construction notes that include the following: a legend, provisions for private utilities, references to City of Lino Lakes requirements for utility notifications and shut - downs, traffic control and safety requirements. 2. All utility installations shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a geotechnical engineer. It is our understanding that a geotechnical investigation of the site has been conducted. A copy of the geotechnical investigation and report must be provided to the City. 3. All trenches (including services) shall be backfilled and compacted and meet 100% maximum Standard Proctor Density in the upper 3 -feet from finished road elevation, and 95% maximum Standard Proctor Density below the upper 3 -feet. 4. Water pipe and appurtenances shall meet the requirements of the City of Lino lakes, and as follows: Hydrants - Waterous Pacer WB -67; Valves - Mueller A2370 -20 or equal. DIP pipe shall be Class 52. City standards must be identified 011 the plan or provided on a detail sheet. Well installation shall and the water distribution system shall conform to the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health and Department of Natural Resources as applicable. 5. The Grading and Utility Plans shall include notes providing for erosion and sedimentation control. 6. All storm sewer pipes must be RC pipe. Pipe sizes, grades, and structure invert and rim elevations must be provided. Eagle Brook Church Review Page 8 November 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Additional Comments 1. Typical street and pavement sections (pavement section and design) must be provided. All street, driveway, and parking area components shall as a minimum, meet Mn/DOT and City of Lino Lakes Engineering Standards. 2. The building will be protected by a wet pipe fire sprinkler system in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code, Minnesota State Fire Code, and National Fire Protection Association Standards. Further requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, such as the number and location of hydrants shall be subject to review and approval of the City Fire Chief. 3. A 30kW generator is proposed to be installed for back -up and safety items only, such as emergency lighting, exit signs, fire alarms, security and communications systems. 4. An existing 100 foot wide utility easement (Document No. 1187297), located approximately 1300 feet west of and parallel to County Road 21 runs north -south across the entire site. Overhead power lines currently exist within the easement. The church site as proposed does not show any surface improvements within the easement area with the exception of some grading and underground sanitary and storm sewer work. A significant portion of the proposed County Ditch 72 realignment also falls within the boundaries of this easement. It is therefore recommended that the existing utility easement be reviewed to verify its extent of coverage (utilities, drainage, power lines, etc.). Expansion of the existing easement or the establishment of new easements as needed shall be required to cover the proposed storm sewer. 5. Full Drainage Calculations must be provided. Summary sheets showing storm water runoff rates for 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year events have been provided, as well as pond volume calculations. However, full calculations showing all supporting data, computations, and design assumptions must be provided. 6. A wetland delineation report has been received and accepted by the RCWD. There are no impacts to wetlands proposed as part of this project. • • • Memo To: Michael Grochalla CC: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asleson Date: November 4, 2003 Re: Recommendations of the October 29, 2003 Environmental Board Environmental Board Meeting Date: October 29, 2003 Topic: Eagle Brook Church Recommendations: Recommendation to deny Eagle Brook Church application. The recommendation to deny is based on the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for rural, or low density housing It is the belief of the Environmental Board that the church does not meet the intent of the zoning for this area. Should the application move forward for approval, than the following issues should be addressed: • The parking should be reduced to the City minimum. • A management plan (monitoring and Maintenance) should be developed for Stormwater ponds. • Address soil compaction - prevention procedures during construction. • The church should have an actual legal commitment to the proposed conservation easement (should be written now, before receiving approvals). The Conservation Easement should include the area described as a conservation area. • Require sewer hook up within two years of availability. • Work with City staff on native plantings. • Work with City staff on providing appropriate screening for neighbors, including neighbors on the Northeast parking lot. • Investigate additional methods of reducing phosphorous to the lake such as a program to sweep parking lots and roads regularly, and/or spreading water through the woodland area with leveling bars, or additional rain gardens. Recalculate • Page 1 • • phosphorus - export; with site management techniques and other engineered modifications to surface -water treatment- train. Demonstrate the phosphorous export can equal or exceed policy 2.3 of the Surface Water Management Plan. • Develop a monitoring plan for the herons during the nesting season with a stop action component if the herons are disturbed. This plan should should also addressee noise over the life of the church. • Addressee the use of salt and snow storage areas. • Require a management plan for prairie areas. • Lighting should be turned off after hours (after the need for outside lighting). Motion: By Donlin, Second by Grundhoffer to recommend denial of the Eagle Brook Church Application based on intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. Topic: Circle -Lex VFW Post 6583, 7868 Lake Drive, Site Plan Review Recommendations: The Environmental Board made the following recommendations of the VFW proposal at their October 29, 2003 meeting: • Parking should be reduced to the city minimum, or the VFW should use pervious paving. • Soil- compaction protection measures should be used during construction. • Staff should confirm that the lighting plan conforms to city ordinance. • Use City seed specifications for native plant areas. • Remove existing lighted sign. • Plant Northern pin oaks instead of Summit ash • Agree to clean exhaust vents in a non - polluting manner. • Develop a maintenance plan for native plant areas and frequent parking lot sweeping. Motion: Motion by Donlin, 2nd by Grundhoffer to recommend approval with the Environmental Board recommendations. All were in favor. Motion passed. • Page 2 COUNTY OF ANOKA (763) 422-7063 City of Lino Lakes c/o Jeff Smyser, City Planner 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, Mn 55014 COMMUNITY HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT Anoka County Government Center 2100 3rd Ave. Room 360 Anoka, MN 55303 -2264 November 3, 2003 Re; Eagle Brook Church proposed onsite wastewater treatment system Dear Mr. Smyser Fax (763) 323 -6150 I have reviewed the final design report for the proposed sewer system and I have two concerns, relating to freezing and damage to the mounds. The sewer line from the building drain to the septic tanks is greater than 600 feet and freezing is a distinct possibility. Either the tanks should be relocated closer to the building or additional emphasis should be placed on insulating the piping. My second recommendation is the construction of a barrier around the mounds to protect them from all terrain vehicles and snowmobiles. Thank you for the opportunity to review these plans and if you have questions concerning this matter please call me at 763- 422 -7066. Sjalcerely, on M. Christensen Public Health Specialist cc Eco Systems Eng. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer F .; - NOV 0 5 2003 CITY- OF d..ii, L Al,,:ES 1 R Q NDEAU 9 h���o Ern h mew ∎ WAIN 7 — — yy m .. , .•.•_ I • • ;.: ;LI • ,. cam ' ' Oki m.®0© P211521711 P:mcaEfq�j■ & ©),101 1 woorifiTtglone :1M. mo©e= norm ' 414. '►oCmatn_u m0 ep otbAdEm. poi 'I '1421PilfatrAmm m� o —,._ , ... 1111 Fraertil coo or,. a� i��� °0 ©�RLr� �� ray G n,1/1 ME 11417P, fir© UM I'S ,L,''' Qm rdm Qo E a0C96d rA0 ,r - axi_ 12 Mitt it= ©o,; Eirt ENNWA ■I ©°o °nntiiw ERVILLE LAKE Iplatiijkiifinfir 711 • -- A-4410Orpri'411111.11 (NDUSTRIAL \111,171-1-. PROPOSED LAND USE LINO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ..c44,440,444 4043xPitggpfttelloiS.4P...., Conceptual Greenway A A Rural II- II ,M1-111 Low Density Sewered Residential 4 Low Density Unsewered Resid. ,..... g,ggggg, eggrogrzegligggl.,,, ggig9.9,4ggaigg.iratP 1 4,4 Low Density Sewered Residential Ak, Isrp-Trrna, j,k4.:;e81 ....94,44:4444S4444"4. „ 444 #444 -1P,PT-P—L—P—F6:P•01-PPE.P-, i1j L! 7,71% '744 hl 4 zrzi rT7 1 1117:IL' 1:4 73 rilT1717S7dr. t FE v liergillulie . o X O-p m 1 • 0214; O..11■ uq— Offip lh4 : � �ue —� i,� ` � I" " j : u1111 .. r 4 �• 1UI1 :11 :f:! ::11 . 1 -�� y i 111111 - :% :n g. 22:4"1111141:. s„ :1,11111 •111111V MI. LIZ 411. onw Imlint� 1/ 111111111111111111 grnla11111/9 8SMhhIF�!!!1L uma • • AGENDA ITEM V. B. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: December 10, 2003 TOPIC: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to Conditional Use Peiiiiit For A Private Club Circle -Lex VFW 7868 Lake Drive BACKGROUND Staff met with the applicant on Thursday, December 4th to discuss the project design. The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the January 14, 2004 meeting. This will allow time to work out unresolved issues. RECOMMENDATION Continue public hearing to the January 14, 2004 meeting. bAGLF BROOK CHURCH CAMPUS LINOLAKFS,MN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROJECT TEAM OWNER EAGLE BROOK CHURCH 5212 130th Street N. White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Phone: (651) 429 -9227 Fax: (651) 429 -7663 ARCHITECT BWBR ARCHITECTS 380 St Peter Street, Suite 600 St Paul, MN 55102 -1996 Phone: (651) 222 -3701 Fax: (651) 222 -8961 GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHEEHY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 360 West Larpenteur Avenue St. Paul, MN 55113 Phone: (651) 488 -6691 Fax: (651) 488-4992 STRUCTURAL LANDSCAPE OSLUND AND ASSOCIATES 115 Washington Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: (612) 359 -9144 Fax: (612) 359 -9625 S CIVIL SULTING GROUP, INC One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Minneapolis, MN 55447 Phone: (763) 475 -0100 Fax: (763) 475-2429 ACOUSTICS ACOUSTIC DIMENSIONS' 15505 Wright Brothers Drive Addison, TX 75001 Phone: (972) 239 -1505 Fax: (972) 239-1504 SEPTIC SYSTEMS ECO SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 333 FAst Main Street PO Box 388 Elk River, MN 55330 Phone: (763) 441 -7509 Fax: (763) 441 -9176 MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL ERICKSEN ROED & ASSOCIATES 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 201 -S St. Paul, MN 55114 -1904 Phone: (651) 251 -7570 Fax: (651) 251 -7578 ERICKSEN ELLISON & ASSOCIATES 2635 University Avenue West, Suite 200 St Paul, MN 55114 -1231 Phone: (651) 632 -2300 Fax: (651) 632 -2397 lit E SHEET INDEX 0 , o 166.1 1T1LH SHEEP. CIVIL/LANDSCAPE MP X ' 0216.1 SSSIrE PLAN % 0103 GRADLNO PLAN C220.1 UTILITY PLAN:. x i i 260 X XI E- 265 10' ix LANDSCAPE PLAN TREE PRESERVATION PLAN PLANTING 00LOxS ARCHITECTURAL 116 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 117 SECOND FLOOR PLAN X $ 510.1 SOUTH AND PAST BLDG. ELEVATION x1. 1 511.1 NORTH AND WEST BLDG, ELEVATION ELECTRICAL 900.01' ELECI01CAL. ME PLAN RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES Eagle Brook Church LINO LAKES CAMPUS BWBR ARCHITECTS Lawson Commons 380 SL Pere Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651222.3701 ..w..,.,.. m.10 a 03: 00, L. COP SUBMITTAL Lute 10/13/03 OCTOBER 13, 2003 OS 2001.113.05 the.4eJ KL 91.1 T1k TITLE SHEET 100,1 ReCEIVED OCT 1 3 20o3 CITY OF LINO L,gkE s 100 0 100 Saab 1.et 10 O z S 89 °57'39" E 249.15 S 89 °50'59" E 1517.00 5 89 °52'99" E 100.00 CRDINAgY HIGH WATER LEVEL- -- PROVID D BY D.N.R. 5 89 °55'39" E 250.00 S 89 °49'15" E 489.21 4r z N 89 °59'39" W 495.00 SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. r 1 I odtn ' 5 89 °53'39" E 150.00 z P 0- 4,O t a 1 - w al • a N 89 °53'39 "'W� 231.00 • H10 { ,I ° 589 °53'39 "'EL. . 231.00 • .I. I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I f 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 3 AND 4, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 55 LOTS 5 8, 10, 12 13 AND 14,. AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 56i. THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY CONTAINS 90.1 ACRES EXCLUDING. RIGHT OF WAY. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON ANOKA COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY OTHERS LEGEND DENOTES IRON MONUMENT. N 89 °41'57 "9 EXISTING COUNTY DITCH 72 EASEMENTS ACROSS PROPERTY UNIDENTIFIABLE WITH. PROVIDED INFORMATION 1 hereby certify 'hat thle piety eurveY. or repo,' vois and tthhvh�I Ey me Limn... d SSurveyoo- od.°rr 0. toes of the State of Minnesota a' Pr I,H Nom DEAN DUSHECK Oat. 10/10/2003 Lim.n.. . 16679 - C f -e 0 M ° a 1 2596.34 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: EAOLE L 9 Ryl 0 Q I R N 1 eM 9 o 1 0 ROOK ©[MN©[. iA3 L:- :-1 c,„ L_. Iw 1 1 �1 II 331 I 1 7 � • PELTIEF2 LAKE WETLAND DELINEATION BOUNDRY DELINEATI ❑N B❑UNDRY 25' WETLAND SET —BACK` (VOLUNTARY) SECTION QUARTER LINES ;' r GENERAL AREA IDENTIFIED FOR PRIMARY DRAIN FIELD SITE 1111 \1 t -- PROPERTY •LINE\ 25' WETLAND SET- BACK `I +�I 4.+LP dth1 l� or` U41inu,l�" i is • n"m PPG. Ceit/v2 -1 _1 a4. \ ,r rte• it • 'r III I t'• I I I ! frt. i�. • L._• '4 TOTAL PARKING STALLS!- 760 (10 HANDICAP STALLS) TYPICAL PARKING STALJi. DIMENSIONS 9'x18' I 0 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK FOR FIRE SUPRES5ION SYSTEM, SEE ARCI- IITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS FOR DETAILS 0 STORAGE OF WASTE, GARBAGE AN RECYCLABLES LOCATED INSIDE BUILDING, SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. FOR DETAILS PERVIOUS AREA SURFACE 13.1 Acres IMPERVIOUS AREA SURFACE - 11.01Acrea - - - --1 I- PRUPERTY _LINE 1 \; L_ LJ - it 70 _ u I L7 53 0 0 0 PROPOSED COUNTY DITCI -1 REAL IGNME RIGHT _OF WAYS___:_ I; 12 T EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES. CAMPUS RECEIVED ADDITION OCT 1. 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES B W B R ARCHITECTS Lawson Commons 380 St Pets Sae¢, Strive 600 Saint Pool, MN 55102 -1996 651 729 7701 CONSULTING CROUP, INC. Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway -. Minneapolis, MN 55447.. Tel. 763-475-0010 Fax. 763- 475 -2429 hr. +,l d..tlry Out u.. .P.c - « r.pd. uu. prepared dy v:•:en aw O x ye « t I en a e BM, L csn.d ProNeys.ul &gin.. ,:,d: the w.. or u.. Bus. or Menenace. Imme Walter C Eshenaur gnoworei tale 10113/03 5-/ / 40029 Ilan Gil.: CUP SuOmll/al 1043/03 200 .mule EIISLE E97OC9 CHURCH Lute m u IC /I3/03 J. OULLIK5171 [ate. 6,.l0ed By IC/13,03 J TeKE5C61 tae Olened By 10/13/03 W E5HENJUR /heel The feet SITE PLAN �E \ER L NOTES, • SEE /ROSS S E T I O I I FOR G-R. -C It ks 4L0116 I.- i REFER TO5HE_TS C2305 a C2 O.0 FOR SPOT ELEVATIONS -MD SUR. EY CONTROL F=RCF=O =D E PL ING 555 ARCNITECTUR.;_ j°L. =tNS FOR DET L_ , • AFFF'OXIMATE OF DINARY HIGH WATER LIIIE FELTIEF> LAKE 100' WETLAND MITIGATIDII BUFFER ZONE SIOROLL, SEE. SHEET C2403 FOR DrTAILS SILT. FENCE TYFE MACHINE SLICED AF F' 150' O JET E IMA TE H , L BL DI E -E A WETLAND\ DELINEATION` BOUNDRY AFFFD .IMATE 1ul OH \- ✓L ._.✓ wt��,�� �lJ \111 25' WETLAND SET -BACK DELINEATION BOUNDRY 25' WETLAND s CV❑ NTA tECnav eu,trat 1.045,:` EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS ADDITION RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2 003 CITY OF LINO AKS. r�✓�t �-avz lilrod e11' ET -BA_ tIA E: H• IV C'47 :444= g otlit-,q -pl , DATE: DC T IJO 7 :HE' 24 ANI • BWBR ARCHITECTS 1.40/5012 Commove 360 St. Pct Street Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102 -1996 651 737 3701 Cd-dillantu CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Suite 150 One .Carlson Parkway Minneapolis,. MN 55447 Tel. 763 -475 -0010 F.. 763 -475 -2420 C.nin::aon I hereby carLIN Net ayp pbrt rp.artd•don ar r.pert vat prpe:aa me or weer my MM. su pouvs+en and that / duly Lizard. noro/Von/I Engines/ undo, W 40/ or Ow %Ado of Inlons•OnA. rtin< Walter C. EsOsnew [ae 5/13/03 Res. so. 40525 For Ilm CUP &boats 5/0/03 .coI. fiat EAGLE EiSC'23C 0,13/03 wte 0,13/03 [ata 543/03 Sou r0/ GRADING PLAN uses J. CiUK0CN Bevis.. By TYKESCN hated By W ESHENAOR PELTIER LAKE WETLAND DELINEATI ❑N B❑UNDRY 25' WETLAND s CVO NTARY) fi TURE SANI1rARY SEILER f CONNE TION ROUT FUTURE WA RMAIN CONNECTI ROU WETLAND DELINEATI ❑N B❑UNDRY 25' WETLAND SET —BACK PROPOSED L EASLE322612 016601 • 4 SY • 0 0 Protrwtoent Syatsn Detsa 213 / 1• Pon as satt NOTES: • SEE 51 -IEET 230.1 FOR PIPE LOCATION INFORMATION AND STORM SEWER TABULATIONS Pr FOP W e1. uE LT, r? t ,. r;--- l ( CONNECT TO EXISTING jTILE LIN 1) CONNECT, TO EXISTING' TILE 11.1 % • PROPOS COUNTY DITC4 -1 12 REALIGNMENT 1S° RCP RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES NAME: k: r_1 /il U17`.4 4 _1`•.t;* it_ -FJan. a LIATE'. DCT .G, 20.02 TINE 2:22 PM EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS ADDITION BWBR ARCHITECTS Lamson Cornanoua 380 St. Pet= Str eet, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102 -1996 651.222.3701 Caroultadet CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Suite 150 Otte Carlson Parkway Minneapolis. MN .55.147 Tel. 783 -475 -0010 Fax. 763-475-2429 Orreirleation I ...Cy ere ry Out Coo plan. p no or ry r Or 6 Iusou n t V cr cow Stets or Nana Walter C. E h ate Naar 4' 'p . kale 10/13/03 •xea 0.. 40?'•9 Dale CUP outmtts! 10/13/03 100 200 sepia - teat EAGLE ERCCK CHURCH Pal. Drown 1083/05 J.GULLIK_ON Date Prune1 By 1083/03. J. TKESLN [ale ttectut By 1083/03 W EN-ENAUR Sheet ❑De UTILITY PLAN FLOWS FROM TOP OF CASTING (L) - INV ELEV FROM PIPE SLOPE INV ELEV TO - FLOWS TO COORDINATES DRAINAGE TAHt A710N -. (This Sheet Only) STR. OR APRON INLET STR OR APRON OUTLET - : NEW - STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION 15•.: RC PIPE (DESIGN - -. 3006) 2' PVC PIPE PERF PVC PIPE RCARCFI ESP - (DEMON RC PIPE CULVERT (DESIGN 3006) RCPAR Fi CULVERT (D3EWBN CLAY DRAIN TILE LENGTH OF PIPE INCLUDES: 1 SOD - GUIDE POSTS FOOTNOTES ( - - - DESIGN (F) PAY HEIGHT CASTING ASSEMBLY (F) -: LR BEND WVERT. ELBOW (E) TEE SECTION .TYPE EROSION TYPE B . X Y -. POINT NO POINT :. NO. CL il. 18' CL 11 CL II 24' CL II - B' 10' - 17. 4' 44 : SPAN CL OA 15' CL II 18' CL II 21' - CL 11 24' 1 - 36' - CL II CI. 11 - 44• SPAN 10' FT FT FT/FT FT UN F TYPE L.F. APR LF. APR LF. APR LF. APR LF. APR LF. APR! L.F. APR LF. LF APR LF. APR LF.. CL IA DRAIN TILE 1 894 890.80 0.0060 890.50 2 4 557,501.95 156413.79 C OR G 3.1 APR LF. APR - L.F. APR, L.F. APR LF. I APR LF. APR H=HORIZ. NO.43 R=RI9ER SO YD EACH 2 880.50 .. 557.548.3 158,403.32 - APRON 11.0 3 884.5 881.60. _. 0.0100 890.30 4 " 557.747.37 : 158,487.94 - C, G. OR 11 2.9 68 114 4 - 890.30 557,642.2 158,410.95. APRON : 1 BA - (A) 5 893.3 890.65 0.0055 890.81 6 ..557,727.59 184185.12 C OR G 3.6 B-0 (0) 8 893.4 890.11 0.0048 - 869.48 B 857,724.65 - .158,18020 C OR G 42 - .1141' 140 - (0) 7 892.7 891.15 0.0030 891.86 : 10 I 557,898.07 15409924 - PLUG 90 - - 8 891.00 - 1 ' 657,803.. 154261.25 APRON - 15:0. (A). 9 894 891.45 0A030 891.00 10 - .557.895.10 156.20545 PLUG � 150 10 .- 893.8 881.00 0.0065 890.85 - 5 .. 567.75413 158,140.87 C. G, OR H 72 A-11 58 11 - 892.00 0.4000 804.00 `_1 557339.65 156,264.98 CONN 13 - 88400 -02200 888.30 14 557,662.93 168,214.04 APRON W 14 ... 890.50 400711 890.96 15 507,547.79 158,204.95 DES SPEC 14 (8):. 15 880.38 - 557,555.7 . 168,18821 APRON 95, - 18 -. 892. 89048 0.0020 890.13 - 19 - 657,673.01 155723.68. PLUG 189 .(A) - 17 892.75. 889.91 0.0020 889.59 18:.. 557,708.62. 155,760.71 PLUG ... - . 189 18 89275 890.23 0.0020 890.13 19 557,58839 155.66905. TEE - 80 .19 893.05 890.13 0.0030. 889.92 20 - 557,554.78 - 1548915,4 C, 91, OR H -. 3.3 M-11 70' 20 8933 589.92 0.0045 889.93 21 557489.38 155.85120 601898 48 3411 - 131 - 3 - 7.5' H ... (B) (D) 1020 .557,489.3 155,852.49 - .. 5574190 165.923.31 (C) 21 8833 88913 0.0030 889.00 22 557,37531 155.91843 654020 55 M-11 38 (D) W21 - _ 557,3743 156820.01 22 888.00 - - 557,3546 - 155.957.70. APRON 30.0 (A) 23 894 89129 0.0030 890.88 24. 557283.78 135418.32 PLUG 210 - 24 - . 883.3 890.51 0.0090 890.03 - 27 557.413.80 155.57E01 C, G, OR H 3.2 M-11 - 159 - - - 25 892.5 ' 890.12 0.0030 890.03 27 557428.03 155,747.07 - PLUG 26 692.5 880.301. 0.0030 890.03 27 557.48084 15579229 -' PLUG - 87 27 892. 890.03 0.0030 .889.92 20 557.473.83 ..154021.34. - C OR G 4.1 M-11 _ _ 39 - - . - (0) 28 - 895. - 891.55 0.0045 889.95 - 28 557,301.77 15442723 - PLUG 989 - 29 892.8 88939 - 0.0030 88453 30 557,36954 154910.50 C OR G 4A M-11 87 - - - - (0) 30 8933. 989.53 02035 889.33 21 557328.62 155.88887 54-4020 - 5.1 M-11 67 1030 557,328.5 155,88828 (D) 31. 894.25 89050. 0.0150 989.96 : 29 557,998.01 165,802.01 C OR G 3.7 B4 88 .. _ 32 895 890.25 0.0030 880.03 30 557,259.10 155,918.18 PLUG - 73 33 - .. 893.41 0.0168 893.33 101 558,275.68 15444728. APRON 29.0 1 (5,)(G) 34 894.80 558,180.6 158,451.05 . APRON 30.0 1 (A) (G) 102 -. 894.93 0.0188 894.90 34 558.1854 15845086 CONN 35 902.09 00155 901.91 103 -. 554284.15 155,83388 - APRON 12 1 13.0 1 00) (A) 03) 38 - 6925 -. 85988 0.0030 88479 37 657,521.73 158,024.75 -P150 .. 30 37 ' 9925 889.79 0.0030', 888.73 98 567,521.73 15402475 TEE 23 as 692. 889.73 0.0030 859.82 39 557,489.84 156,00437 TEE 34 39 - - - 682. 889.82 .0.00301 88433 . 21 ' 657,484.80 155,857.49 C, 5, OR H 9.5 ( 61.11 97 40 - - 892.5 889.89 0.0030 889.79 97 557,48122. 156,02347:. PLUG ". :. .. - 28 - - 41 - - 8525 865.82 0.0030 889.73 38 557,484.17' 158,009.15 P150 .. - - 90 42 893. 89028 0.0030 889.93 21 657.417.80 155914.98 PLUG 49 43 - 893 590.11 0.0030 888.93 21 657,413.94 165,88328 . P150 . :: - 58 44 8925 890.37 0.0090 859.92 ' 20 - 557,588.91 - 15596859 .. PLUG - - 189 - ... 48 858.00. -0.0250 886.25 49 556,45422. 155,951.48 APRON- I - '4 - 1 - .. (5) 49 888.96 0.0100 888.06 60 554457.2. 155987.10 DES SPEC 1 85 - (5,) h:) 50 _. 866.05 - 1 554477.9 164056.10 APRON - 1 .. - _ 140 (A) 51 - 890.50 0.0070 890.15 52 557.480.48 154095.18. .. APRON 82 1 - 10.0 W 52 - 880.18 557,400.6 . 154030.55 APRON 1 11.0 53 89030 0.0030. 89020 54 557,301.48 155,967.02 APRON - 28 1 10.0 .. (A) (A) 54 89020 557,2002 165.95620 APRON - - 1 - - 11.0 (A) 55 - 889.82 0.0050 889.40 58 568,972.7 155,827.70 .505011 - 37 1 - 19.0 (A) 58 88940 558.9441 .. 165,79423 APRON 164 '(A) 57 893.40 0.0013 893.01. 55 557,40821 155,334.73 . APRON : - .280 1 10.0 1 (A) 55 . 893.01 - :. 557,1912 - 155,305.02 APRON - 1 11.0 1 50 859.00 0.002 888.90 80 557,515.05 15400820 APRON - 32 1 I _ 10.0 - 1 (A) N) 00 - 89490 557,486.2 - 155,03228 APRON 1 11.0 1 (5) 61 90157 0.0092 901.54 62 554180.33 154,83921 APRON 45 1 60 1 (A) (3) 62 - 901.54 - 558,100.0 '154,989.64 APRON - 1 - 9.0 1 (A)(0) - 89 888.11 0405 887.14 64 554949.49 15461303 - BEND ... - .. 193. 1.32.3' H - (6) 04 867.14 558,857.. 155,782.92. OUTLET .. - - . 1 (94) 85 88200 0.005 891.18 85 557,235.17 156127.70 CONN 188 . 64 - 891.18 0.005 980.79 87 557,108.55 156,032.09 - TEE - - 73 57 890.79 557,090.7 156,86925 APRON 1 65 09200 0.0122. 891.16 68 557,175.62. 156,01735 CONN 89 .0.009 - 6 557,732.73 156,22925 - PLUG 48 - _ _ . - PI) 70 3208 a 557,767.51 158,187.76 PLUG 71 0.003 5 557.70745 156,150.79. ' PLUG 72 : OA03 31 55743157. 155,524.53.- PLUG . " - 40 73 0.003 - 91 557,410.14 155,76528 .. PLUG 101 - 89533 558,2735 1584733 CONK (11) 103. 901.01 - . 5542525 165,833.72 CONN 04) 104 889.7 0.006 88411 63 688,93000 15532100 : - CONN 293 _. 01) 105 894,14 - - 557.885.4 15431058 OUTLET (J) 108. 09400 557,4454 155,285.31. OUTLET - (J) 88400 OUTLET (J) - STORM PIPE TOTALS - - - - - 320 3 283 2 211 1 325 1 168 69 295 1 1681 36 1 45 2 121 8 37 2 12 1 7 2 290 2 - 486 1 290.0 9 - - - - GENERAL NOTE& 1. COORDINATES AND ELEVATIONS ARE GIVEN TO END OF APRON OR END OF SAFETY APRON. 2. CENTER OF CASTING OPENING AT 1.0 FOOT FROM FACE OF CURB. 3. CENTER OF CASTING OPENING AND ADDITIONAL COORDINATES AT CENTER OF BASE FOR DESIGN 4020 AND SD STRUCTURES. - NO7ES- W TIE LAST THREE JOINTS AT APRON END. TIED (B) LENGTH OF PIPE INCLUDES BENDS. TIE JOINTS - TIED JOINTS AND BENDS SHALL BE CONSIDERED (C) RADIUS POINT FOR LONG RADIUS BENDS. (D) PAY HEIGHT INCLUDES AN ADDITIONAL 1 FOOT CONCRETE FILL SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS FOR OUTLET STRUCTURE. (F) DESIGN REFERS TO MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT (G) SAFETY APRON. 01) CONNECT TO EXISTING DRAIN TILE. PAYMENT (J) DAYLIGHT DRAIN TILE TO PROPOSED DITCH. (() CONNECT TO EXISTING CULVERT. PAYMENT (L) TOP OF CASTING GIVEN TO CENTER OF GRATE (M) APRON SHALL BE METAL TOTAL APRON LENGTH (N) DRAIN TILE SHALL BE PLACED AT BOTTOM OF JOINTS SHALL AT ALL BEND INCIDENTAL SUMP. FILL TO OF TRANSPORTATION SHALL BE MADE SHALL BE MADE SHALL BE SUBCUT AT A BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO PIPE CONSTRUCTION. SECTIONS AND THREE JOINTS ON EACH SIDE OF BENDS. - TO PIPE CONSTUCTION. q9s -. - iO.A p•M_ SUMP WITH MN0007 MIX 3Y43 CONCRETE (OR EQUIVALENT). DRAINAGE STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION. STANDARD PLATES _ O 1 { 2003 V 8J UNDER 2502. UNDER 2503. CITY QF LINE LAKES 1 �1 4 FEET. - - - - - MINIMUM GRADE OF 0.3%. - „F,;E. 4. i_i., 04" 4440'ccl- 073 2071 .11 0 0' 4.21 F , EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES. CAMPUS ADDITION BWBR ARCHITECTS LaaaOn Common - 380 S1. Peter Sttee, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102.1996 651222370 CONSULTING GROUP. INC. SOite 150 One Carlson Parkway.'. Minneapolis, 016 55447 Tel 7533 -475 -0010 Fox. 703- 475 -24229 Cardrhretlen hereby ea. Pt.n c p • ..Pere e., peteened b9 . se or under [NU deed edge, elor end O Weaved p.P4.•81e1■1 bguv , of One Beene Wad Willa 0. Eshena 7 Sale 1073103. Re, 07, 409.29 CU' Ntbmiltai - 10,13'03 EAGLE BRECt 010447)1 .1003873 J. GULLK:JN .Sot.." 0ati910 By 1203100 J. TYKESGN M3 CMJN By 0703/03 W 051844UR TABULATIONS JI PELTIER LAKE • • \ /' J7� PROPERTY LINE I , — EXISTING WETLAND EXISTING WETLAND - \ • NEW POND \L/ k- W i PT iJ� ILI 1'11 \J'r ES �T.iiP aY' 0IIFT) \2_7_'L-i/ PROPOSED BUILDING (a,`, '1231, AF\ �1 trC 00 aq y. \222,/ 49 PROPERTY UNO Vii/ LEGEND.- Eyri0E6 •TRH I I 8714•213113 MONO MEW RANT 4,0•10•4 113 8EECWB11I SF) -. NEW POND • LAM MASS Bw 164171711 • OP.0ta e IVEr.mNer E ®...env ry PGB1g41dmPKB RNRYlY AIOOa CRE OPONO I•t01.16 TREES BEE 91EE71EI TREE PRE818NATC1IPLN raRORIONLL1aUtIwY (.11 NOTES °:. MAUER ,. OF RANTS •HOW N owl DE a BETWEEN SG•EDULS ANOTHER ...19 TIE RAxs wM., • E NM�Ma IR OEME TI MSS A1 w,MWNa6aeCC W OWIXC. FORA AREAS 1 SW CMEENONEEMIOCMWNCa FOR LOIATRNCTCN LAITNECEEMM FOR atM'N10 FR C. WORK SEE CM.ENOE.EENNO CHMNOOFgIUILIYMO OMPNO INFORMATION. 1N LEANWC4 TINTEN1MEW= AS 1.0711041.0711041.0711041.11E N E PUNTED 1m. • .E azALLx NMm NGRTIE QWPMMA 0f 1KB W INEUAREAS AT THE Ti NCGTEO 7 P1.171171' .d MEM,PN/17 E710,18111E1001 NUMER OF TE RAN1B N GCN MG POICA119. pe NUMBER a1uLLBE EOORLYONEECANONOI EI RAMS UMW IMETAw OAROwO.' • S NEARWAIER•OOEB WTI C ITRSNFAEBRFa. NORTH SCALE r :60'.0' 0' 30' 80' PROPERTY UNE • / 7 C. / 7 • • /— \�'_�75 I� PLANT MATERIALS SCHEDULE iouiSS menfaVeZel we.m� Sat mat sat Yee rows. pm. 'PF, 2 12t I ),,TIP. HFA FP .EN 4 r / y 12, CFnF ..ypy g:� �(IST1N0 HO USE% TiO REMAIN Yid • J -- LINO LAKES CAMPUS ADDITION BWBR AAC$ITECTS Lawson Commons 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 CRMatWih oslund.and.assoc. 115W....17071 NMI or feml PRa■ by an elty m„1.,N Nome Nand For Rem Date CUP SUBMITTAL 10/13/2003 01E PLAN REVIEW 10/13/2003 RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 LAKES CITY OF LINO awe 10/13/2003 non Na 2001.113.01 Suet Mk LANDSCAPING PLAN Dram M1 Medea saw Na 280 PELTIER LAKE LINE OF EXISTING DEC TREES —�I t 1) EXISTING DECIDUOUS �- TREE STAND TO BE - PRESERVED..- _. EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE STAND TO BE PRESERVED EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE STAND TO BE PRESERVED EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE STAND TO BE PRESERVED/ EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE STAND ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTY _ PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED EAGLE BROOK CHURCH PROJECT SITE EXISTING WETLAND dgL 5v3- fC .EXISTING CONIFEROUS - TREE STAND TO BE .PRESERVED- • • 500 l —: ',EXISTING "DECIDUOUS TREE STAND TO BE PRESERVED.. l LEGEND: COMM MINX • srN° .4450.0148111“6 10 a4. TwauNT®(UM W/ IANBawrewN FORemLMATlma OP TRWBPTIAMBCTRLb MOVETMESETRESS MAN UNCIFLABm UXKILIIIa WE OMNO C ONSTRUCTIONPRDIEC }TpE MEM UNIL TN ION.Ne B � F �RAPO A TIg NOTES. 411071.4 TRl3B,N1C TREELTANDSTOBB PR38ETIVEO WITH MOMD. a1RenGR<MMENN, CO NOT oemroAU3B WTTNW MM.& 1 MP OTECTTR338AAO1004 MAWS W A°mACBNT PPOPEMO W41 PBICNB L@WMUCTRI FOePYOmt. TOR114400 ATALLTREE PIIORCTMN MEAL TKO N3TUCAWW6b .. BEE CIVLLBNOWEENINCORAWNwFCR EXTEINTLf 01.410AM101.401.04WONC NORTH SCALE 1•.100' -0' •¢ PROPERTY LINE 100' 200' 500' , TREE TRANSPLANTING NOTES: muaem.e 10MATBNaN,CEBaNNO„�N.„.NI.,B , MYBURFAEOPP4MNGPn TORT ITEM LYNAM *NOOT PLUMED BOa SURFACE FOR BCmBmPENEfMre 3. APPLY ROOT =TM ST•ATOR MILL IR.■mgAlnm MILL THE MEN. 0 WALL WATE�LTe�B.mNTB,Y.FTe; L TNOROUOMWATIMPLSMALL OCCUR CNCEWFPLLYTC 3UPPLfN400 RAIN WAILLY/0 MALL COMM/4 FOR LHIKLI !WOW 01600 ON TMB 1.1114 CF TMB TRH FOR T16 FAST MOPIIN°.4.13011. L 7ME1.0G1100 FOR PNCENBn OF TWNBAM TIM OWLS MI LLI E=WO IiTOEGI OAAY VATBwLa • AAC NML3 1,1104044 wEGLL,Piai10ATBiEDT° T1m BE PLCC.=W ni uumawB ARCNRCT. • CONTVCTgINNLLPRUNB ALL MALMO BROWN LBW 41 A.I.. 4144001.10470 TO FAOI PNNT S PMOCOAR RE°NRENENK stse y / EXISTING HOUSE /. TO REMAIN EXISTINGTkEES AND TREE STAND -/ TO BE PRESERVED 3 EXISTING WETT.A-ND J61 OW' PROPERTY LINE e ° • t m • BB • EXISTING RdW OF CONIFEROUS TREES 'it, TO BEIPRES VED • PROPERTI LI ICI E rEEagle Brook Church LINO LAKES CAMPUS ADDITION B W B R ARCHITHCTS LawSGV Commons 380 St. Pam Street, Suite 600 Saint Paul, MN 5 51 02 -1 99 6 651 vin 1701 oslund.and.assoc. BUM 1:4 .T4.040 ILL 412744.9144 NN A 4.4 .gym pn 4000 no 044 m 1.4q00. Or.14,1 ends Le 444 110 Slate 4.444,,3 mW U. Dab 10/132060 Reg Na. 18562 bead Fee Item Oat. OUP SUBMITTAL SITE PLAN REVIEW 10/13%2003 RECEI OCT 1 3 CITY OF LINO 0.1. 10/13/2003 COMM ND 2001.11101 M01 Chocked Seat ilk TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 9tat ND 281 ED 003 AKES T V IL>Le1E ADCHRE F IF HESVT .CIA +• 1 SMLS RE E -,. xrtEFEO DJ IG E'rnl Ail IL FlHELT'SHRE00ED HARDWOOD S0F0 XULC PLANT*. SOIL .C1RIF -t EDGES OF Pu0m111O HOLE ` i , SINGLE-STEM DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING TYP. NO SCALE /s 31 F111a! I _ ("7-, SHRUB PLANTING TYP. \ 285. NO SCALE NATIVE GRASSES PEP turn OF UN0 :FF ES SEED SPEC • 1 � � .l— 6FFDi PJ (:.EL. 3HRE00ED- HARDWOOD e.11 — CRF.0 SAUCER. W /TOPSOL TIx+F SCi.F'.F. EL.ES OF PWITN PW A u SJIL UG1YL TWFEO SAAR SO UIBJPACBPO E:Fr R GS CC JNTED' FAPJ FLL 19410705I.OWO REFER. TO FLAN 0RAWItti. FJ8 E)TEIITS OF DIANTI50 i 4• 8141 I9.,VSVU_.UWI I y. 41" NI14 2 i — PLNnIw; SOIL SCARF; ELT0E5 CAF PUt111111.. '10 ( CONIFEROUS TREE PLANING TYP. ) NO SCALE • TAUPED 408501 rgS BOTRM CEF :Y 01(4441445444 . S ?iR. UNDIMMED EARTH OP COMPACTED eaG(FlLL 1'100002.1+05 Ft1EL, SHREDDED HARDWOOD: Fw41u 01 GROUt1000,ER PLANDIKS TO0000 1100000 02OO 11CIE GROUNDCOVERS / VINES PLANTING TYP. NO SCALE SECTION THROUGH LANDSCAPE SCREEN BERM AND ROAD ON SOUTH \ 222055 % SCALE: 118. • 1'-0• HEA MDT • EAGLE- BR!.0K ORME 192000n I.2•G 14:TIVE PER 0S•PAFjs O LA}E HEA /SEED SPEC • HGF 58 OF UN 111,i 11 ► 1r ■ 11�1111i1 I;I-I �11111�111111 —.1 RR EE SHEET 230 FOR PLANT *ATERIALS SCHEDULE SE.TIOr:^-0WG MULTI-STEM DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING TYP. NO SCALE n) "1 W1,":PE.R rtE 8(001. EIICJ 501 FATED J L PE C IITERED 0(.'114 E TPJII. — FIIIFL, SHREDDED. n- P0Y.11 40 0100 PL:HTH, 5041 5,P1F. EDGE; Y14G Hn ',AWED 14085411. — O 40E,BOTTGI M PIT no C'Al£:T E,CE5 WATER AT FEP..IEIEP 11801511.P(ED EARTH iR ,11.1PACTEO . RA•.I FlLL I�r1E1JHT OF (00110LL ,=WIDTH OF 810814 .) Fri() 0000 x`0000(0 0 0 0 0 0 1, PERENNIALS PLANTING TYP. 1980T003.OWG _,'P•5' NO SCALE 1750);00^_. DWG LINO LAKES A CAMPUS ADDITION ARCHITECTS Lawson Common. 380 SL Peter Sane, Suite 600 Sint Paul, MN 55102.1996'. 651.222.3701 Cow/tents oslund.and.assoc. .nmava WRIER Pl...71.1 117 WNSMINGTONAVEN Nord. 01h For CUP SUBMITTAL 1Qi/13. QQ3 SITE PLAN RENEW 1QLUi2093 RECEI OCT 1 3 ED 003 CITY OF LINO LAKES ads 10/13/2003 DO use Ns 2001.113.01 Shot MN PLANTING DETAILS Mad Tm 285 CODE SUMMARY NEW BUILDING 163110741 cauuENtm0N EIRE - RESISTIVE REOUREVEN0S v(1:lI71005 0411S505 7514471 4-1 :17606015- 5 ED FYI' EA 05150`.) (i*E51050 H'. lu 3. - 411.0W:EUE 4674. NNMEID rz N:UUIEp 4. gill. ;BEA Ara FIRST 57.53 UAUIRD 5517 5 21.477 94517E0 ® ziax xv 5 BUMS; r71•4 WOO FEET 1373 670756 4517503500451 FIRST FLOOR PLAN E,97s =Y-0 BUILDING ELEIIENT - ROM OM) 0.2 FLOC Ma fN SEE MP% TIPE5 . .5x73- _ 5666 516 1646 -Fit Csl r J/'' OCC� +rLWll FwE 11I � � - PPIf.YLEk 'i 1R4CE SUPPORT 7878 SO. PL� 0 t`1 I F\ WORSHIP SPAC� 22086 SO. FT. ( 542 FT. GATHERING SPACE 18087'60.. Ff. 7 Vf 1 t 1 1 111 ( c?I (F5) 51 1 Eagle Brook Church. LINO LAKES CAMPUS B W B R ARCHITECTS Lawson Commons 380 Sr. Pet= Street, Saito 600 Saint PRUt, MN 55102-1996 651.222.3701 sw.xlvaupIa • Y/*WA • 7'471 R.. REFERENCE FUR Ilern CUP SUB8BTPL - 0/13/03 RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES Dote bam OCTOBER 13, 2003 60 /RL 2001.113.06 - KL 5460 744 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN 116 IUD _gd CODE SUMMARY- NEW BUILDING BOLDING DOCUMENTATION ➢CCUPPN:I CLATMEMi7Si PIPE- RES/SiYE PEGJ'.EENENI0 FE 51 1S RUC1x BUILDING 17D41. - 6401NG (SPE) TEST ta.14.‘ ILLS IN rxvi Ni 144(S ;EE MOWN Ti PE'- Pn 4.4404. TT 4n 4E1LNL ATEA F4 F VNLas:E7 tHLM11ED UNLOVED - ._I,47.1 UNIfa744 ;rxxx' ® rxxx 4n 4E1LNL ATEA F4 F 57.40 - tHLM11ED iE(JIIU- - ._I,47.1 UNIfa744 ;rxxx' ® rxxx 5 61/117447 f40441 FEET N1;EAL416747 SECOND FLOOR PLAN LIBOR SO16..43.14.1 2AA -410 ( ( B) Eagle Brook Church LINO � /LAKES. CAMPUS } B A.RCHBECR Lawson Commons 380 Sc Paa Seen, Suite 600. Saint Paul, MN 55102-1996. 651777 1701 my .. a rr. smra • .rem.. Now Nae1 F!.- Ilem [ale CUP SUBMITTAL 10/13/03 I RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES Date(roan OCTOBER 13. 2003 MS /RL m. 14. 0,6,0 2001.113.06 KL SECOND FLOOR PLAN 514.1 N4.. 117 r,. TOP' _':F 1YALL EL. 1.1.T-0 GF DE, EL. 1'200 A-, SECOND FLOOR l EL. 1171 -0 °..- ALUMINUM WINDOW. SYSTEM. TYPICAL FIR=.T FLOOR .. j EL. IOC -0' PCC# l (:TALL CAP, TYPICAL PREFIP SHED METAL COPING' PREFIL SHED METAL PC .#;T WALL CAP PC :C#2 WALL CAP. F.', _ YCLL C-P. T4P'CAL.... C<�1 1111 NOT], HUPI_ONTAL' SEAL iFICAL. F ..ALL CAP. T PICAL INLE :TEL Cr?.. PFEFIIIISH D METAL FASCIA -- - 4LUM1NIIM y,URTAIII WALL SiSTE 1)0 WORSHIP CENTERCITAL EL 147-q"' -1 11 1•• T!_ r - SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION ALUMINUM CURTAIN —' M.;LL SYSTEM PAINTED .INSULATED DJOR AND FRAME 302'- 1' -0'. [es- apt-us PREFINISHED METAL COIFING, TYPICAL PCC #2 WALL CAP, TYPICAL s�R�OO_F DECP. EL. 78' -0 ALUMINIJM WINDOW 0((TEM. TYPICAL ALUMINUM CURTAN ALIMINUM CURTAIN— - PREFINISHED METAL — ALUMINUM WALL SYSTEM: WALL SYSTEM I OLLIMN DOOR /WINDOW FREFINISHEN METAL SYSTEM 'FASCIA PREFINAHED METAL COPING. TYPICAL FCC#: 'JALL CAP. TI PICOL ' "01 E'- WALL CAP, TYPICAL AbUE1IN11M WINDOW —. rAL ■1` PCC 1 WALL CAP. TYPICAL 000 #3 WALL CAP , TYPICAL ALUMINUM WINDOW SYSTEM, -- 'TYPICAL -,. PCC #2 WALL CAP, TYPICAL I CONTINUOUS HORIZONTAL REVEAL, TYPICAL PREFINISHED ETAL FASCIA, TYPICAL PREFINISHED METAL FASCIA 1 4 14ALL CAP T,'FICAL —P 01-IONEF STONE CS)'JRSE PCC #I EL DECK SE]OND.. FOOF EL. 114— TOP OFWALL EL 1 1 010S_T FU EL I00"-O-Ar ALL CAP, TYPICAL WORSHIP CENTER ROOF EL. 147 -4 PREFINISHED METAL 0001146, TYPIC ROOF'DE00 EL 128 -0 ROOF DECK L. 194-0 O'A7F DECK EL. 120 -U - PF.EF1NISHEO METAL FASCIA' SECOND FLOOR EL. 114. -0 ALUMINUM 00 Aliil L 8 R ('STEM TES, 4 EL 114. -u _ rIRST FLC. -I EL 100 _3 EAST BUILDING ELEVATION MS-ELM-NI PCCj4 WALL CAP, TYPICAL HONED STONE COURSE ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM. PC. C 2 WALL CAP. TYPICAL — -. ALUMINUM WINDOW SYSTEM, TYP( AL - PAINTEE INSULATED 'HM 000R AND FRAME FCC/I1 WALL CAP, TIPICAL- I RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES FIRST FLOOR EO Ui -0 LOA I )N� 1 CJCK EL 96 -0 Eagle Brook Church LINO LAKRS CAMPUS BWBR s - ARCHITECTS Lawson Commons 380 St. Parr Street, Skim 600 Saint Paul, MN 55102 -1996 651 997 0701 iha nen ry mm�a e, AO. dnel r egtivw None Ilma CUP SU8MIITAL Dale 10/13/03 DON [ram OCTOBER 13. 2003 DOH /S1B 2001.113.00 : KL Sheet nw SOUTH AND EAST BLDG. ELEVATIONS 510.1 r'1 [4 I DECK PROOF_ DECK P4412 WALL CAP. TrFICAL t. EL 120 0 ALUMINUM CURTAIN .WALL S'iSTEU EE0000 FLOOR PCC #4 WALL {TAP. TYPICAL MU EL. 114 -0 PREFINISHED- METAL COPING, . TYPICAL j_F_IROT FLOOR E0 100' -0. , FIRST FLOOR. '.J EL 9011.0'1--- PCC#C WALL CAP, TYPICAL 1 CONTINUOUS HORIZONTAL RE'JVL, T4FICAL PCC #1 WALL CAP TYPICAL Ni. PCC,>♦2 WALL CAP, T :PICAAL PREFINISHEE METAL COPING. —PCC11 WALL CAP, T4PIMAL PCC #4 WALL CAP. TIPIC.AL HONED STONE COURSE ALUMINUM WINDOW SYSTEM, 11PbU PAINTED INSULATED HM DOOR AND FRAME NORTH BUILDING ELEVATION PCC11 WALL CAP, TYPICAL.. — >� k WORSHIP CENTER ROOF EL 147 -4" PREFIN1SHED METAL COPING, TYPCAL jik ROOF DECK EL 124 PROOF DEI'I1 �'. EL 1 -U' O SEI'OND FLOOR A F1.tT FLOOR ` W EL. 100 -0 rBS-E1.01 -M INSULATED OVERHEAD IOOR Y i ErE T - — PAINTED PRAST INSULATED ONCR HM COLUMN DOOR ID FRAME -PREFINISHED METAL FASCIA, TIPICAL FAINTED STEEL STAIR AND RAILING PCC #2 WALL CAP, TYPICAL- - — PCC#1 WALL LAP, TYPICAL ) : PC.CJ_ WALL .CAP, Tr? CAL PAINTED INSULATED HM D000 AND FRAME-' PREFINISHEO METAL FASCIA ALUMINUM 4lJRTAII1- WALL SYSTEM PC 44 WALL CAP. TYPICAL HONED STONE COURSE P(C12 WALL CAP, TYPICAL - -, L E - PAINTED INSULATED HM DOOR AND FRAME WEST BUILDING ELEVATION ®s -111-41- — ALUMINUM WINDOW S, STEM, TYPICAL PCC' WALL AP, Ti PICAL n_G ALU ILIUM WINDOW /D00R SYSTEM -- ALU IINIIM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM ALUMINUM. WINDOW /DOOR SYSTEM 4(011 1041 WINDOW SYSTEM. Ti F ;AL FREFINRHED METAL COPING. T'0PICA PREFINISHEG METAL. FASCIA RO DE4l, EL. OF I20 O V ALUMINUM CURTAIN -WALL SYSTEM ALUMINUM WINDOW SYSTEM,; TYPICI SECOND FLOOR EL , 1.14 -0 `J INSULATED PANTED HM DOOR AND ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM FIRST FLOOR� EL 100 Eagle Brook Church LINO LAKES CAMPUS BWBR ARCHITECTS Lawson Commons 380 St, Pear Shat, Suite 600 Stint Paul, iiLN 50102 -1996 6012223701 RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES MM.** •M., nmb.r a • w ww..r Fog CUP SUBMITTAL Ode 10/13/03 RAME D,, - trarm OCTOBER 13, 2003 DGH /STB CM-AN 2001.113.00 snw nu, SOUTH AND EAST BLDG. ELEVATIONS 511.1 • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: ACTION REQUIRED: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM 5C Michael Grochala December 10, 2003 Public Hearing. Rezoning to Planned Unit Development; Development Stage Plan Review; Site and Building Review (Regent at Lino Lakes) Legacy at Woods Edge Simple Majority In 1998 the City of Lino Lakes, following award of a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Planning Grant, retained the services of the Calthorpe Associates to design a Master Plan for the City's Town Center District. The purpose of the Lino Lakes "Town Center" development is to provide for the orderly and integrated development of a high - quality Town Center which includes a mix of shops, offices, entertainment, housing, recreation, community facilities, and open space. The mix of uses is designed to implement the principles of the Livable Communities Act and the City's Comprehensive Plan by creating a Town Center for the community and providing more diverse, life -cycle housing — including affordable and rental housing — within an active and interesting pedestrian- oriented community. The development is a cooperative effort that will leverage public and private investment to create sustainable value, ecologically, economically and culturally. The City has concentrated its efforts to implement this plan on the land located adjacent to the Civic Complex, of which, approximately 6.7 acres has been reserved for the Chain of Lakes YMCA. PROJECT LOCATION The 48.84 acre property is located in the southeast quadrant of the Interstate 35/Lake Drive Intersection. It is bounded on the west by Lake Drive, on the north by I -35W, on the east by Rice Creek Regional Park, and on the south by the Civic Complex and the Marshan Lane residential area. The Civic Complex, an additional 10.01 acres, is included in the plat. PROJECT SUMMARY The Hartford Group, Inc., based in Eden Prairie, Minnesota is requesting approvals to allow for the development of the property consistent with the Calthorpe Master Plan and Town Center Design Standards, including Phase 1 development of a 122 unit senior apartment building with approximately 48,800 square feet of ground floor commercial area. In total the Legacy at Woods Edge project is proposed to allow up to 348,000 square feet of office, retail, and service uses. In Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 1/, 2003 addition approximately 450 multi - family residential units are proposed for the development. The residential units provide a variety of housing options and include townhomes, work -force or income - qualifying rental housing, senior housing and for -sale condominiums. The Hartford Group as obtained purchase agreements with both the City owned land as well as the northern 29 acres of the site, which is privately owned. ANALYSIS This review is based on the most current submittal, consisting of the following plans: 1. Boundary, Topographic and Tree Inventory Survey, prepared by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc., received November 10, 2003 2. Preliminary Plat, prepared by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 3. Master Site Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 4. Master Grading Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 5. Master Landscaping Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 6. Preliminary Senior Living Development Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 7. Preliminary Senior Living Architectural Plans, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. The following plans were prepared by the City's Engineering Consultant Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc., dated November 25, 2001 1. Sanitary Sewer and Water Plan 2. Site Grading and Erosion and Control Plan 3. Storm Sewer Routing Plan 4. Preliminary Storm Sewer Plan 5. Existing Drainage Plan and Storm Water Calculations 6. Preliminary Street Grading Plan 7. Street Lighting Plan 8. Preliminary Streetscaping Plan (Areas 1 through 4) Project Data: Total Site Area: 42.05 acres (58.82 including Civic Complex & YMCA) Upland Area: 34.55 acres Number of residential units: 450 Commercial sq. ft. 348,492 sq. ft. Net Residential Density: 13.02 units per acre Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) • Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.4300, subpart 32 requires the preparation of an EAW for mixed residential and industrial- commercial projects of this size for 3rd or 4th class cities. Subsequently 2 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • 1. A 65 -acre complex of buildings in a controlled setting. 2. An integrated mix of uses that responds to residents' needs. 3. A gathering place that creates a sense of community, civic identity and pride. 4. A place that defines the unique character of the community. 5. An economic development initiative to increase the value of the commercial tax base. 6. A distinctive, consistent architectural style that promotes high quality, aesthetically pleasing commercial buildings. • • The plan provides for a residential density of between 10 and 24 units per acre within mixed use districts. The proposed mix of residential and commercial, civic, and recreational uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Village Master Plan. Zoning The property is currently zoned LB, Limited Business District. The City's Zoning Ordinance provides for mixed -use development through the use of the Planned Unit Development process. Additionally, The eastern and southern portions of the site are located within the designated shoreland zoning districts for George Watch Lake and Marshan Lake. The Shoreland District extends 1,000 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of public waters. Growth Management Ordinance The City adopted Ordinance No. 01 -03, creating a Growth Management Policy in January of 2003. Section 2, Subdivision 16 of the Ordinance specifically exempts the "Village" area from the provisions of the policy. Design & Development Standards The Design and Development Standards are proposed as the regulating zoning standards for the Legacy at Woods Edge development. The standards establish the use, site layout, site amenity and architectural control guidelines for the Planned Unit Development. The Development Standards were prepared by Calthorpe Associates as part of the "Village" Master Plan process completed in 2000. The standards are being revised in conjunction with the Woods Edge project. Master Site Plan The Master Site Plan and its associated Site Development Summary provides the framework from which development will need to conform to. The plan referred to as the "Regulating Plan" within the development standards specifies the essential physical features for the development including: 4 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • Streets A minimum framework of streets is required as presented in the master plan. Town Center Parkway, including the traffic circle, Village Drive and the roads surrounding the "Community Green" have been established with specific design standards. The proposed street layout is generally consistent with the Calthorpe Master Plan. Build -to Lines Build -to Lines define locations where buildings must be built within a certain distance of the public right -of -way. Bringing building fronts close to the edge of streets enhances the continuity, attractiveness and intimacy of pedestrian spaces. The build -to line defines a location at which 1) a certain minimum percentage of the block length must contain buildings, and 2) those buildings must be built within a maximum distance from the right -of -way. As represented by the building layout on the Master Plan, build -to lines extend along Town Center Parkway, Village Drive, and around the Community Green. A minimum of 50 to 70 percent of the block must have buildings, parks, or plazas adjacent to the build -to lines. In these areas buildings may be setback no greater than 5 feet from the right -of -way line. • The proposed development conforms to these requirements. • Required Building Entries The plan will need to show the location where major building entries must be provided to create important pedestrian and visual connections. These entries should be located at important corners or intersections. An important entry provided for in the proposed plan is located mid block on both sides of the community green. This location is the primary access point to upper story residential units and provides an important link between the parking areas and the community green. Gateways Entrances to the Woods Edge development should be marked by distinctive features that announce your arrival at the Town Center. These should be indicated on the plan and the Town Center Parkway entrance. Site Development Summary The associated development summary provides the connection between the site layout and the intended use and size of individual buildings. Buildings 6, 7, 10, 16 and 17 represent the mixed commercial/residential structures. 5 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 Open Space Three types of Open Spaces are proposed within the Woods Edge development. These spaces provide recreation and relaxation space and functions as natural edges to the development. In addition to on -site open space the site provides unparalleled opportunities for recreation due to its proximity to the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park, located immediately to the east and south. The project will provide pedestrian/bicycle trail links into the regional park system. Accessible Commons The residential district must provide a minimum acreage of Accessible Commons equal to 10 percent of the District land area. Located within the center of the townhome area the commons is a neighborhood- oriented open space intended to provide limited recreation and gathering areas. City Parks & Plazas An approximately one acre community green is provided for in the heart of the development. This space provides for a public gathering area adjacent to the retail, office, higher intensity uses within the Mixed Use District. Natural Resource Area Natural Resource Areas protect valuable natural features while allowing pedestrian access along trails. The majority of the Open Space within the Woods Edge project falls within this category. As part of the site development approximately 9 acres of the site, comprising approximately 6.5 acres of wetland, will be preserved in its natural state. The wetland area, located along the northeastern boundary of the site is part of an 87 acre wetland complex that separates the site from George Watch Lake. Additionally, changes in site design have allowed for the opportunity to preserve approximately 1.6 acres of woodlands in the southeastern portion of the project in conjunction with the future YMCA development. Master Landscaping The master landscaping plan as submitted will require further definition as we continue through the review process. The plan calls for a mixture of shade and ornamental trees, shrubs and perennial plantings throughout the development. The plan does provide for landscaped "connected walkways" that link the parking areas with building entrances most notably between buildings 16 and 17 leading to the future YMCA. In accordance with the design standards, all parking lot islands are required to include trees and additional plantings. Shade trees will be required at a rate of 1 per 10 parking stalls. Trees should be included along the northern periphery of the site along I -35W. Appropriate locations should be identified for native plantings such as along the existing wetland in the northeastern portion of the site. 6 • • Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 A revised landscaping plan will need to be provided that identifies specific tree types and their locations as well as proposed ground covers. Streetscaping Plan SEH has prepared a preliminary streetscaping plan in accordance with the Calthorpe Design Standards. Streetscaping is one of the most essential elements to provide a welcoming pedestrian friendly environment. The proposed elements include landscaped medians, boulevard trees, decorative lighting and decorative pavers throughout the development. Also included in the plan is the preliminary design for the community green that will combine both seasonal gardens, a central green space and plaza area. Street furniture and other amenities will be incorporated as the project develops. Traffic /Circulation Access to the proposed development is provided via the Lake Drive/Town Center Parkway intersection. As shown on the Master Site Plan, Town Center Parkway will need to be widened to a four lane section and then taper to a two lane section north of the Civic Complex. A traffic circle is proposed within in the center of the development to promote the efficient flow of traffic at this main intersection. One -way streets are proposed circling the village green. The City's engineering consultant SEH is completing a traffic analysis for the site to evaluate traffic impacts both internally and externally of the site. As part of the study AM and PM Peak Hour trip generation rates were developed for the proposed development as well as the existing facilities (City Hall complex, Fairview Clinic, and Lino Lakes State Bank). Trips to /from each building have been assigned to the street system within the development. This provided a tabulation of traffic volumes at various locations within the development, as well as at the intersection of Town Center Parkway and Lake Drive (CSAH 23). According to this analysis, the Peak Hour traffic volume is 1,155 trips, which occurs from 4:30 -5:30 p.m. Based on the traffic analysis, a concept transportation improvement plan was developed for the Town Center Parkway and Lake Drive intersection. On Town Center Parkway, the plan includes three outbound lanes to separate left turn, through, and right turning traffic and also includes two inbound lanes. Signalization of this intersection would also be necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service. According to the 2020 Traffic Volume Forecast in the Lino Lakes Transportation Plan, traffic volumes on Lake Drive are anticipated to increase to over 17,000 trips per day. Regardless of the proposed development, improvements to Lake Drive are expected in the future. However, to accommodate the full development of the Legacy at Woods Edge Development, several additional improvements to Lake Drive will need to be made in the short term. The concept transportation plan has proposed the construction of two southbound left turn lanes between the intersection of Town Center Parkway and the I -35W bridge. Furthermore, traffic signals at Town Center Parkway and both ramps to I -35W are anticipated. To signalize the south ramp intersection, the existing off ramp and on ramp intersections, which are now separated, need to Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • be aligned to a single intersection, which would require the reconstruction of approximately 400 - feet of the on ramp. City staff and SEH representative are currently in the process of reviewing the study and the associated simulation program with Mn/DOT and Anoka County officials. Parking. The development standards establish parking requirements through the use of shared parking standards. By recognizing that peak parking demand occurs at different times for different land uses, shared parking facilities help minimize the amount of land and expense devoted to parking lots. Additionally, on- street parking has be included in the development plan were possible. A parking analysis was completed to determine if the site plan has provided adequate parking space for the proposed level of development. The analysis segmented the site into four zones to compare the availability of parking spaces for commercial and office uses to the potential demand within each zone. Based on the analysis, Block 1 was short approximately 12 spaces. However, staff is evaluating the availability of the Civic Complex parking lot due to its close proximity to this area. Otherwise the site has adequately addressed the parking demands within each zone for commercial/office uses. Residential parking is proposed to be provided entirely underground throughout the mixed use areas of the development. However there appears to be a 10 stall short fall in Block 3. Staff is continuing to work with the Hartford Group to remedy these situations. Additionally, the parking analysis will have to be revisited in conjunction with future development on the site to insure the needs of different land uses are satisfied. Architectural Standards Another key component of the project is the establishment of design standards. Architectural Standards for the proposed development fall into four Categories: 1. Facade Transparency. Facade Transparency guidelines help strengthen the relationship between buildings and the street and increase public safety by placing "eyes" and activity on the street. 2. Materials and Methods of Construction. Buildings shall support regional traditions and maintain a level of craft in the process of construction. Wood, masonry, and stone are appropriate building materials. 3. Building Scale and Definition. These guidelines are intended to create buildings with a human scale, making the development more pedestrian- friendly and a pleasant place to walk. 4. Energy Conservation and Climatic Response. The effects of the Minnesota climate can be mitigated through intelligent building design configuration and landscape treatments. The requirements contained within these categories will be incorporated into the building design throughout the development. Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 Master Grading and Drainage and Erosion Control Plan The City's engineering consultant SEH, Inc., has prepared a preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. Runoff from the site currently drains to the south and east and ultimately discharges to Marshan Lake and George Watch Lake. The development proposes to construct a drainage system within all the street improvements and parking areas to convey runoff to proposed ponding areas and infiltration cells (green space or underground storage chambers). Subsurface chamber technology takes advantage of the soil's inherent filtration and renovation capabilities to store and treat storm water runoff while providing the flexibility to plan for additional buildings and green space. To maximize pollutant removal efficiencies, the water quality control structures will be designed and constructed according to NURP, the City of Lino Lakes, and Rice Creek Watershed District standards. Storm water rate control and treatment will occur prior to any storm water being discharged to receiving water bodies. Therefore, water quality in the receiving waterbodies will not be adversely impacted. Treated storm water will either be naturally infiltrated into the groundwater or will be discharged to existing wetland basins located on and/or adjacent to the site. Water from these wetlands eventually will enter George Watch Lake, Marshan Lake, and the remainder or the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes system. 410 Master Utility Plan • The development is proposed to be serviced with public sanitary sewer and water utilities. The sanitary sewer service will be provided by the existing trunk sanitary sewer main that runs within both Town Center Parkway and Village Drive. The sanitary sewer laterals will be extended through the site. Water service will be provided by the existing trunk water main that runs within both Town Center Parkway and Village Drive. The water laterals will be extended through the site. It is anticipated that the trunk line will be extended northerly across I -35W to provide a planned improvement to the City's water system. Master Lighting Plan SEH has prepared a preliminary lighting plan for the public streets consistent with the Calthorpe Design Standards. Decorative lighting will be used throughout the development. Private lighting for internal parking areas will be reviewed in conjunction with proposed development. In accordance with the design standards lighting shall not exceed .4 foot candles at the property line and must contain a 90 degree cutoff angle. A lighting plan prepared by a qualified lighting consultant shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. 9 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • Development, Ownership and Management • • The Hartford Group will be the Legacy at Woods Edge master developer, and will contract with sub - developers to develop phases of the project. Sub - developers may be affiliated Hartford entities. The rental housing is proposed to be developed and owned by affiliates of the Hartford Group. The townhome and commercial locations are proposed to be developed distinctly by Hartford affiliates or separate sub - developers. The sub - developers for Legacy at Woods Edge have not been finalized at this time. Residences are proposed to be market -rate, with up to a twenty percent affordable component included. The Hartford Group's market studies will determine initial pricing, with flexibility to adjust to market changes. The Hartford may retain ownership, development, and management, or contract for development and management, or sell parcels. Market Analysis The proposed project represents the maximum intensity of development, due to physical and transportation constraints, that can be accommodated on the site. At this time the unknown is whether the market will support this level of development. The Hartford Group has commissioned a study which should be completed in the short term. However it should be noted that the majority of commercial square footage is contained within multiple story buildings. A reduction in the amount of commercial square footage, based on market availability would not necessarily change the overall layout of the site. Shoreland Requirements The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park boundary separates the project area from the OHWL of George Watch Lake and Marshan Lake by approximately 800 -feet and 250 -feet, respectively. Given the distance separation and forested nature of the regional park property, no visual impact to the public water bodies is anticipated. Additionally, there will be no disturbance of Shore Impact Zones. Both George Watch Lake and Marshan Lake are classified as Natural Environment Lakes. Impervious surface coverage of lots within the Shoreland District of a Natural Environment Lake cannot exceed 60% for commercial /industrial development and 35% for multi - family residential. The proposed impervious surface coverage within the Marshan Lake Shoreland District is classified as commercial development and has been calculated to be approximately 43% of the total area within the Shoreland District boundary. No impervious surfaces are proposed within the designated Shoreland District of George Watch Lake. The height of structures within the Shoreland Districts shall be limited to thirty -six feet. 10 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • Preliminary Plat • • The preliminary plat, as submitted, proposes 13 lots, including the Civic Complex and future YMCA parcels, and 3 outlots. There are no specific lot size standards provided for within the Design Standards. The lot sizes proposed conform to the building arrangements set forth in the Master Site Plan. Street Right -of -Way Adequate street right -of -way is provided for in the plat consistent with the Master Site Plan. However, the final geometrics of the northbound I -35W ramp relocation will need to be completed to determine if any additional right -of -way is required. Outlots D and E of The Village No. 1 plat, located adjacent to Lake Drive should be incorporated into the plat and dedicated as public right -of -way. Access Control Access control, dedicated to Anoka County, should be shown on the plat for those portions adjacent to Lake Drive. Access Control, dedicated to the Mn/DOT should be shown on the plat for those portions adjacent to I -35W. Drainage and Utility Easements Drainage and utility easements will be required. Typically, drainage and utility easements at least 10 feet wide are required along exterior lot lines and centered on interior lot lines. However, due to the nature of the development, in consideration of build to lines, these types of easements are not practical. Easements will be required around the 100 year flood elevation for all wetlands and stormwater drainage basins. Additionally easements will be required centered on all stormwater and utility lines not located within public right -of -way. The width of such easements will need to be determined by the City's Consulting Engineer in conjunction with plan approval. Ingress and Egress easements, by separate instrument, will also be required to provide for shared parking throughout the development. Park Dedication The proposed Outlot A should be shown as Park and dedicated to the City. Existing Easements of Record The preliminary plat references two roadway easements per Anoka County half section maps that run east -west across the northerly portion of the site. Title work should be prepared to verify the status of these easements. If they are existing easements of record they will need to be vacated or otherwise terminated. 11 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • Individual Site Development • • Upon approval of the Rezoning and Development Stage Plans individual site development will be reviewed in accordance with the adopted standards. The Hartford Group has submitted as part of their application a request for site and building approval for Phase I of the development. The Regent at Lino Lakes is a senior community housed on the second through forth floors above first floor retail of buildings 6 and 7. The project consist of 122 unit senior residential units with approximately 48,800 square feet of ground floor commercial area. The community offers rental apartment homes with services ranging from independent living to assisted living. Through the resolution of issues raised previously the primary review issue with the Regent project would relate to conformance to the architectural and regulating plan standards. City staff has reviewed the proposed building and offers the following comments: Building Design Preliminary building floor plans and exterior elevations for the proposed "Regent at Lino Lakes Senior Living Development" have been reviewed using Chapter 3, Mixed -Use, Highway and Civic District Standards from the Lino Lakes Town Center Design & Development Guide prepared by Calthorpe Associates and revised by City Staff, dated October 9, 2000. The proposed design meets the majority of the design standards: accessible street facing building entries, location of residential uses over commercial ground floor uses, building setbacks and build -to- lines, facade transparency, scale and definition and rooftop equipment. It is unclear from the preliminary plans if the proposed windows comply with the standard regarding Reveals, this standard states that "windows be recessed a minimum of two inches from walls or exterior trim to create shadow for visual interest." It appears that the building design as proposed exceeds maximum 45 foot height standard as described on page 23 of the standards. Measurements of the plans indicate that slightly less than 50% of the building' s length meets the 45 foot maximum height. The standards include provisions for minor projections such as clock towers, cupolas and ornamental projections of parapet walls to extend an additional ten feet above the maximum height, provided they make up no more than one third of the length of the building's facade. Also of concern is the manner in which the building design attempts to comply with the standards for Building Scale and Definition and Materials and Methods of Construction. The building's approximate 456 foot length and four level height along the park creates a very significant structure in the Town Center as well as the overall community. In attempting to mitigate this mass and scale the proposed design presents an overly generous variety of stylistic treatments, details and roof heights. The overall effect is unsuccessful in achieving a structurally legible, pedestrian friendly design. Such things as decorative window shutters placed along windows at building' s fourth level, are out of scale and character with a building of this size and 12 Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 • nature (vertically integrated, mixed -use.) The applications of brick and stucco/hardi -board are also too varied and do not tie the building together as coherent whole. • • It is recommended that the building design be further refined and perhaps simplified. It is also recommended that the two major wings of the building be detailed more independently so as to more effectively mitigate the appearance from the parking area and the park of a single, long facade. The buildings inherent design provides an opportunity to develop two distinctive yet coordinated facades. City Advisory Board Reviews Environmental Board The Environmental Board reviewed the EAW on November 6, 2003 and reviewed the development plans on December 3, 2003. Preliminary comments from the board will be forthcoming. Park Board. The Park Board has not reviewed the project at this time. City Department Reviews CEPTED. A preliminary CEPTED review was completed and is attached for your review. Public Services Community Development staff is working with the public services department on issues related to maintenance, snow plowing etc. Some minor design changes can be expected to address their concerns. Staff is anticipating addressing maintenance impacts as part of the overall approval process. Centennial Fire Department Community Development staff is working with the Centennial Fire Department to address Emergency Vehicle Access and routing. Some street design changes can be expected to address their concerns. Agency Reviews Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). A RCWD Land Development permit is required for the proposed project. The project is scheduled to be reviewed by the RCWD Board on December 17, 2003. Anoka County Plans have been forwarded to Anoka County for review. Conditions of approval will include the requirements set forth by Anoka County. Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) Plans have been forwarded to Mn/DOT for review. Conditions of approval will include the requirements set forth by Mn/DOT. 13 • • • Planning & Zoning Board Legacy at Woods Edge December 12, 2003 RECOMMENDATION Generally, the proposed development, is consistent with the original Calthorpe Master Plan and Design Standards. The Hartford Group has been very receptive to design modifications to insure a high quality development. There are some further changes and clarifications that need to be incorporated into the final plan as suggested in this report. Staff, consultants and Hartford are continuing to work on the many facets of this development. Additionally, design items such as the streetscaping element will go through further modification and review as part of the Public Improvement Design process. Due to the complexity of the project and the amount of information presented to the Board it is our recommendation to continue the public hearing until January. In addition to receiving preliminary comments from the Board and the general public, staff would also request consideration of a special Planning and Zoning Board meeting in January. ATTACHMENTS 1. General Location Map 2. CEPTED Report dated November 16, 2003 3. Boundary, Topographic and Tree Inventory Survey, prepared by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc., received November 10, 2003 4. Preliminary Plat, prepared by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 5. Master Site Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 6. Site Development Summary 7. Master Landscaping Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 8. Preliminary Senior Living Development Plan, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 9. Preliminary Senior Living Architectural Plans, prepared by Hartford Group, Inc., received November 10, 2003. 10. Sanitary Sewer and Water Plan, prepared by SEH, Inc. 11. Site Grading and Erosion and Control Plan, prepared by SEH, Inc. 12. Preliminary Storm Sewer Plan, prepared by SEH, Inc. 13. Preliminary Street Grading Plan, prepared by SEH, Inc. 14. Preliminary Streetscaping Plan (Areas 1 through 4), prepared by SEH, Inc. 15. Environmental Assessment Worksheet 14 • 5 4 2 NORTH 16 i5 2 14 13 12 11 10 3 4 5 L DON' 11 4 10 6 9 5 4 2 7 /�A RIE VI 6 / 9 10 8 4 OV AU D, �L 11 KEIT O LAKES AKES s PAC LAKES CENTER FTH -STREET 6 -L.INO STATE- TRUNK-HIGHWAY NO. 49. - 4 I a ro IAL .. / 12 5 ufll�S „ i 9 a 9 /0 —pp R /1 W 7 2 W Q AUK. 2- SUB. Department of Public Safety POLICE David J. Pecchia Public Safety Director / Chief of Police Officer Mike Rumpsa Lino Lakes Police Department CPTED Review 11 -16 -03 Marshan Townhomes: • I have reviewed the plans, and have one recommendation. House numbering needs to be clear and un cluttered • A sign indicating what units are in each individual building should be located at each of the buildings. • House numbers on row mail boxes does not work for emergency response personnel. • ERP are driving code to emergency situations and in many cases in the dark. By installing a sign at the entrances of each building, ERP will find the address quickly without wasting time. The Village: • The underground parking roadway that connects Town Center Parkway with Unit #17 has to be built so that motorists will not be tempted to take a left from the underground parking onto Town Center Parkway. The driveway should only be a right turn in only. • Addressing the plat needs to be done in a way that keeps it simple. Each building entrance should have a sign indicating what addresses are in each complex. • On street parking will have to done in a way that will not obstruct driveways and intersections. • Signage and road paint should be utilized. • Secured buildings could become a problem to law enforcement. Responding to critical call could be delayed if the police are not able to enter a locked door. Each secured building should have some sort of key or code that Police and fire can use to gain access to the building. Surveillance cameras should be utilized in the underground parking area. Access points to the garage should be keyed and/or proxy cards. The traffic flow in unit #10 appears that it will follow close to the building and around a median. If the median was shortened, traffic would not have to back around within the parking lot. Snow removal will be an issue in this development. • Snow will have to be removed and stored in areas that would not impede traffic and pedestrians. • Snow will also have to be removed to prevent retail areas becoming targets of criminal activity due to lack of surveillance. 640 Town Center Parkway • Lino Lakes, Minnesota • 55014 -1182 Public Administration /Records: 651 - 982 -2300 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2399 BOUNDARY 4 tOPOCIRAPHIC 4 TREE •vENTO URVEY — — FOR-, -- k14RTF —QIRD _CxRG?I�P INS -- _ _ _ —. I 2100 SINGI.ETREE LANE, SUITE 114 ECEN PR,Z,IR1E, MN 55344 -1933 VICPLTT MAP MOM• 55,111 "R pmatio, - 97 23 Ma t ul IMO I%I comer ul Seelum 17, iannaMiP JI. I(.nyv 11 a - na.v Di¢ero. IMO NOTES - 2 MI :sn!wn Gomm - Ip3Na.Y oyosay 74.mad Mute or Bud S Suds Bemoan Nqub quo Aupml of 2003 - WnNU , moan u Mount - Bde w WypgN•nimuul Inv Benda al Illb leant. Emam h oppulInomMuey m1•irt7p w fu Ilawe ub' ar Nl�emeniu'u'•tra? ee'SMur la Marc^. Wd Ionia, qW ,I5.t ,aria,. yoa.unmlo mound matins bsiaelyr not Mote. Sn Jinn 557721 ale My Mopm1Y eeac,pl 71, . LEGEND • Monument P,.d • Dmnl` m m Mw alanur0.3 Sul lB Manua. Sod Bed, , 1 Uwalea i3.0IY 11anme,l Sd Dm.N1 N:B omalve Sign • mmua Welty Pete . 'Meet NON m Dmale. D'aa Lleter E2 Omlal•e 4121a. ear a 'D•naw aJU• Max 19 Sae , Maw. O NAM ynm. B u a .a Sank, Sa.m Munlwl■ ❑ Omat•. QOM Bat • •,.oleo Swim Seam M0.MN. 04 Du�ulm doh, Volvo 0•nelm T,. Mtwara DenuIm EJ•O75 tam,au r • UmMe• a. BIN wNW —t— Domes IB.Iefm. 0.5otes Sanitary tlgva 9walau ragtag rum. m M Umtata Tr.. Iw• Immune ate, al. w hoP. rn tmoNs Eu.J PuMI LL DuM.. Bedad -a M•1.1 /a et 1m. IT, 1..11, 11. BL l _Jr E1ET A� Pen r EM'aY Woo. Tre. 0.ga3y �-- Demlm Men Miaow, lo Y1.nm Glolm Tram 1, troes 1451.1 5orifooiw. low drolouous burled an Might of d Might 1 I go 1 !71 e r / / 1/ / / / 1' /. % yy./�_ / / / / / / / l / ry1�M0 / / I6 / / // / // M— J. —. -7 p M+a � / 1 • / !' La. 4 / 1 •/ / R / / r % / / / / / ; / ,95 / / f , it / / / / / / / / / r ((/ / / f/ / / / 045.' I;. 1 / ar,,; ., se."- • >;° , w / 9�,y1IX Id •7 '' N 4" I% ' 5 /. awry. \ i ,M^ .Wn°4 ,.. M/'' J MM )wee. ,.uu`a •_ar sir. '..I ✓• ?, ' .aa.. `..„ .o ar • .,.2 -,.z :'!- ,a. --z: 50UUD4RY 4 TOPOGRAPHIC 4 TREE I1\114ik170RY SURVEY FOR: H14RTFORD GROUP, INC. 17100 &INCsLETREE LANE, SUIT 114 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 -'19 NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE (gym pm ) L w n 9 ▪ ' MU M. of ue,EV, else u, Too n. PG G. s�. OY e / I. %lei' % P•• r .00 1 • IL Ad. 15 PI-IOTO 13 `tea y ro one 'a .8 C'tw Plato 12 54. t`« fir,. '145 •� • _.9P " _fir % ---,,,,, . j 4" r:.,"*:. x..44 )41 i 4. 4,.. G ' , •Qxr.• 0.4 .p. /levy e ® > t` l 1to ,r# f« a t +Ir a� i \s s teat ..«a, ', = -�, \� w2. -1414:_ «r iF sr�.- -�-\ \. .\ - tt I D , r 110 --.. ..0.° ..... ,..... \ ,e... ...M. r a . / oyd,a ,,,_ __ . /- 01 ' «I ,e,oeo 10 \_, er«r-- - 1nxW Imo. -''r ,..M. Pr` 5- _.2.«_n «.3p_ _... « uA , ". n 1[..5..10 M. « 12425 AJ, -"' 1.1 e`« oIIF •e, 15 PItter r. L•AIC1p�„y-,�„C u ',Am. al dv. .1!) w .e .!` ..»„re-. 5112 OR 5151•1 / 9',,, o-� ���. �....... � �' 6.(ytw{`J PJATI 3 152.81 y 1r 1ElA.7 Bw, »4'1 -y1- •Vtl 22q �. =..., 15 of ',..OD . 5DSa( rE .4 WET LAND >v APT a graWliMARK Top of cud x12 mammal( el Woe. 114 dame of Seatlm IT, MGM* 21. Amps 22 Plemlho + 11421 (NAPA MP) - P .ot Ctn. Memel /MOM YMktl olum O -- - repoorephy coaled . Roe try Rod t Sons bdmm Mm.. pad A pact of 2001 - 8141145 4hpen we en maned dalum. - Inle purvey wes prepped without 105 4212501 of Nile .21. Eaeemmo, appurtenances. il 12121242 o addl0on la'n 1007, h «em Jlrb t..""y ll erd0*5 la -L / _ . 1:1111'1 of o I�IIe Mm,mtt 4trNlmmt m vllameye Ulo wlnkn' //f "� - Cme 555 Md tons, as other P.m Mryronmenle round e,fslbp bupdno, net laaaled. _ _ Cum abet tars em al . lop me eee4 of eu0. ■ - See aGal ie Pshoats far 0.1Y ma, ■ TREE DETAL Ownlea DING. 5 Dswwiin Tn. flo ntl8 M Inaba 05451 nee Type Motet Mamma 1 d loedaa end beg. or coniferous ben locale, 1 682.15 589•41139`13 nrfft Ire. nn. 01 5 .et It el tn. xs 1/4 "I Poo 1p-- O /1/ 139d511'431ff 1.•301 u x211°1 2.r' nYS 4 to. \WET LAND - `der , h Y 300' 01' i r e \4PproJ'83070P1,031 PU-hndry- Iqm -2dt9 AI/8/2000 2.4549 M4 CST Y 8.91 ^ NA9`33u5 "SV ;ya LEGEND • Predates km Mammon! round Deal.. Iron Monument Sat Denotes Soo Owing 4- 0,0,0,. County 2onumonl e Danoaes well - DDwwoe Sion Dlpily Pole p Denel:, SD.,I 5200 • Denooa Doe Molar ® Deneles Utley fie 2 Dena'w Coble O, m es Trop.. On 02 Donates Sanitary Sewer A1411Ne ❑ Dentes Col. SG. 0 0.ees Stxm Sewer ARM. Ud 0511°112 Cale Y2pe 7( Cmo0es Res O 21'•4 0)dr` I ,5meles Wee, atwr - +- DGGOlw ow5eed N2.. - 0«12155 N0lerme. Smaler Sandlay Sear Oen tea sewn Dmafe• .bO.p Fence .I011.2 OOGG. P.R.flnnlion. ti Omen' Gerd N.M. Concrete CI I� Denotes Olium.ms 0•00. rued Point A. Dm., Wetland POPP IPAro a 0- mat.w oar x403/Pn�rs, -ta2da m CRC. *MA," OM polygon xellow 00124 1105421 W adL4md two Gs now «wwly (n) CRY RV t EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS 5112...1 xwund sera sgrEl ben MO o Memel ei Gaol OGG, ▪ Sbkof le any .145^ ^55v oalM noblelkos of Gard GI a a. Ouw.440 d p.`p,Ny x n °I Men* pd0C69 art °.t .n1 lot P. lying .run ue x lhem5 Quads of Psalm rP T p R°ano.`PR Anoka wnrr......0114 lee n°elopv, u. r«ennp m.wmea u. A me ere el a A2 MPG I w 12x12 ^121 d Nw mlS•` it 1°`•M. o Mp of U2111n I' &2 de meat .212. Sound *0,0.,1222 semna raanr ' ee 0rmrU2a 512°11221^152. pot u. mm� lm. ,41st T a i k n „.�m�mmly :d 0 ^o", rat m:: 0: . .e o`er dd m: pesirns•nbn� n�.1 F. .a. n a 1n ,w tarn m:: a wv" Tm�u µ1a 114 P 21.::1:5 a 1455:1',I:t.mL :.Ion 14 mMl.wa a • 2. ua• orl49 '5 ,ll,. ` a .;l :n of wPo °, ° aoninn i `munrcgd vapu°Ikn PAR [Lip pad or 0amxnml40 2N, d.. I 041&2x1 brmr2 w Px P0•Mwob x1455125m,wiv� mi 0X5 .121141,. IP°iwp IanenNVe.•e•Iw.: ono rn 5525 mnPV a r pew Y:i 550 12^1455 as 5.12,E �a� am. Ip. 2x1 V.,=.4..=.111 ;;,,, � . PP o 14.x5:500 traUf l°q n °sm u Zara %raft `o 1° lota m^M.onxas4 ion val I54e leM2 pr�n�•�al,ldx a ,1.4 IVg6 °W°'Pwap, le onee &Y rn. ulY Of lea PA CO, Outi. h a me D DoE WALE x05 0. Nee Coe. lann0« E. P7411..mmpp Wr•w even. nil n «,x L Om,I ey Nly oI [uw 5141 m dual U O 01251 0Y cwalY of Anobs • 0°e Per. r part al row Gni., / u x°.. In TM Muff x4 I, anew avnln GONG ° 5 1"42J000 mewl, nplw ern �wb 4n °Imp ° Impmal .vw e V,`"? Ml . y 2 e twit.., 12:pN°: ineao�o rr. �.r i"u':"x"riaa.04i 1111^°1 1 w s°"llrw.ffi°P° "'1 « b. eat rnnm a aw:�a .nnnel: '• w x . T.waw v, wmx 2z = Na 22^141 a°`m.d °rvwn4`1pn.a° w r+M dv:.4tM. n° m`o` °'e --"'. 1 hne0y r<rtlly Ihat Mb aunty plan PI tepee Go Prepared by ma a under my direct per.. a that 1 am a poly Relate. Land Surrvpr miler me bwo of the Stole of Minnesota. 422 Mot / /- C- d045Rfp. Ne 41570 lb. MD 1 BGNB, INC. I.NID -'- -- 5. - 9160 LSNITI 1'ON A. NB CIRCLE P12122, w 40014 • SHEET 2 OP 2 SHEETS • � ( I iNA ° 1 ' P . 4 7 OP: THE v'ILI.AAM 2 FOR: THE HARTFORD C*ROUP, THE CITY OF LINO L/4KEa, AND THE YMCA GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1' .. H. 5 4 � � G. 0 i l 4mra, U m A / , / w`v i QM MOW d / •., / 4 i yf/ /1r i / ?A2fi / M1S / / 47 1 1._f__ h. / ? /1:„.,,,-,---7.- 4 Ej: / / " � _ Ap4qr�"C �B �\ C / 1 r/ ` 00µ }40906 ^rtFa': " 1.14C 1 .. /5 1 d) 21. / / 4 . - / , / / I . / / / / Y 4 a �.nw4 Sys el W I47/4 a ar A. i3O. Ml. qna ri 7- / ,i / S � } ,Nw ,;G�f pp 4 moo -I1- r ]'MGM wrt 2 r O z 0 Q 0 r ir•9 118s! oeur.�w ,1 0 - T PUBLICLY 0.144 el 4. wan Ian -I�DEPICATED I �s 14 ‘RDALLlrr07037' L • .17:;4 4 2 RJR was 0 • .. a. ... 5 . i. toady 000 01.0.10. r /ter r r 2 r:xr r s r r i ) _a7' � r h r 4, - 6 r'rl / b / • VICNITY rar I) ,` ;, D `UM L W a„0I IjI Y _Jt 119N mil_ . d+ P YYARC i. SKETCH* O 22100 N89d391341 • • w.lr 4••4 M1 989°41'04x8 614.15 N ar a Rah 110 I..L a /worn net U4 a 9CAI81 apt • XO PH$T 1 .-dotop of OVA Nsa 5.431,. a Ms 3'4 a r 998. d 0404 n. 100 i� iay. s: BEYFi4LJMtt4T DATA, - Tule peaperly 00.5 r .824 501,4 T rapu7N dr.•bpn,l /0044 le FILM (014r/J 4d1 000010.00 01400357 101010F. Ia 0. e Mtn Mw490/1 and the city Of Una Lake/ •110 /4004 311. plan - 7.04/ ..//00. 03 40x2 0usw, a or 0011du4 /aa and aoa /a to 7• 441.1511004 0400 mole 140001 74703143 la /I. /,4 04 el I°. NOTES' - 9.41347 04303 a•e an ay.. datum. - Prap,•d /4vn 0f way 01000#11 and me an/ bral4na per 444cad 147 4)' 3/41/414 Goup 40/00 11/01/00 - 141x/14 and /54040 shown In .041477 city Aar property (one's clly had Uurah p U aa°10d) 4 par 4011111411111011 mm. and lo/0x00 dal 4ad verld•d LEGF1•A • 30031, 4, 5m4rnl Soune u Iron 5mumml a i� 00• 0315//01 Com. 0074/•/1 LINE TABLE 14.0508'14 SIVadIrt ars. 01 IsreVow SUWON fsu6 ien•� ' EZISTNG`'4OPERTY DESCRIPTIONS ma Nrr. I . I .wdw n, 00341 n i w m: /1x003/ aai�,./ sniu 1. 0303/ •mm, „a a wu°nrmeilwr 044..0 wan RwI Uum 4mm w wel°e 0030.7 ay 0300/ w "114441 n wsexl 000003147 w M.rMV 4 4/a x °.r ,041ud 4 LH.w44n m• Nrawal 4rotn at Mroxm Iry Tovnwq JI. m4/ • a A�.• pd .80 00n man r A¢Mu a a wxr m a ef xe41 l ,l x 84 3a r".'"" °urpauvax ltl b 50100 Fn y o a' 4/° r e . /xa., 1 M Ii.w eMms 03wsMy F 1U 114 tde w r wm r1 r e • 7..0 74M '44?1 0,n 03 0.l ,. tF. A' h 4uab04 a .4?,4/ o 1 m a0 0004143. a/ 0wt 40/an !/ 10414 a hi `n nuaw Nr' a% °rui°C1t Ym'i) tilml m'"donwlu" .,1 .P0..03„14 03..03 1.404 1 and m.. Irw,51Fv nolc 477 � M �puw p+ 0343031 w ...a 03003,.4 n. 14+44. w /0340 M In. wmv w . Cwnsy 0.40331. Rrvr,y 014 3.40.0 a Na aly d w,e L.0 +7004 w /)Ip iinyYa)'�'Mdo ca 014 r11YNnuulaNOemNp asumnnan Yu OLxm A rm 140301] Ada t�yiardool navirx� ornwe•�•n41� M1.i Y /.tir/ a wea�nmnn,pAct wa m n. awan.a ar/. x004 d.� xww u l aWy 4,10.0 JOlom . of JM¢oU tml 0343]9+31 09 rva.. 19 u to n? 00004 •W°aul%: W; F 0310 alas• A' bw Mlu nilm .1N *Me 4wb�� In e.! 1]403 Fw, r aSexFV: � 40,44. n mYWU 9 va.�m x..lilnmOM la a. poFl .r e.gnoFp Was.: 03:°"4.1034. awn.,, a $n,M1y ri MI m °rrasIr •M vl°wp Sm '1] Wla�°I =OVAwln.i 4144 7144 ./ wle s.uw � ma ar. I.n�F.4o. tE 747701/7 / ,1/ /r 03-4,0 4..a 34/03x4 ,a 141.4/0 w /0.04 M as V 01. • 040037 4/a. 3440, Ian 0430lw ...b i4nupi .rp•nnx ° L•dUfEL< 75/17431 w 44,,/x54/ 3/0700, 1//511 001 ur10®t 03.40 o/ M.<4w n, 10 74 11, 431; 0.0 y. u, a 3U,p nwhw,y of Uu 003,4 190 /rat o/ •W0 ,0031 ,xivlr. e,e ynp .0sl.rty 0/UU IW4,o1q 103043 4/,v pp x +Mwa B 130043 aW aN teOn 1I dd 100.00 OM n • wad vest Mon a si 00 awtlw 1! wa 3034 430 V:4 Nat port o/ 4. Non 0431 at Imo don U 44410 w nFnF9 rs r of 4ab pr4h a: u4/ m m 744403 ./4177 41 N41n W darn. 14 m 1 al lase M Md 03004000/ on MIN: fw6 91.tl/ x•U Nwn w,a W n ]l md4w 444 near •141 l40V02w xra.am.y 4 tld4/aa t a44l003 /00amaa"" d 4400,,010/ 000 o wl le u yea 041 MyN 4011440• a 4• Mwr 004 Iwl u roIM 7..V r4nallmml N°c.,,", P'T �e 1«�lw 03/03 way /0.1403 1403'03 w :007.0" i °a": d1v a Lin. aV. emmMlnroaL 7.9515 • o : Ah, Oy..x1 0. vnp2 nW4L x0, , mad Rm4 04/707/4 x3030077 0;741111 L4aL�iai sArr4 .1f1; eil"O1LellVe M4nb A aNa an Br. me l ar lac rum OAR /0-74-10 414/4 •a .[a Iaw. Kt 03.70- ,..I.LJ4 WLL.F 43 a 0.w dmir Pmw, *1//0 x 103 U1UU x44 La. awry • 34,4°00 •03100x/, Laaxx Mo �m 'n. 1031 ,.wear am a./,0. yxi:•oy tiro x w a [ea 4mwro..a Fy mr 0007 b0. °03042 4/.c Mau Mw4 p op. . 6i 443/3 +n .Mon .:7004 a 10.10 4/•• r=otroZtit0; "17.1,1; 1 03'�i'6'".'•a.w. a°lw"v :Al .....'7�:v �' "::41"/,` w v..v%'I°. m. raxPa »n`.;nv 741+/430 I, , 31 110 W lnl5 4e Can 10aW Irol .I Ind 001 I/r4a an N sr r0 1430003./ aodv al M.eux 2 io.unM v u„4a 12 u..us x44 W..rOn x4'03.0 N hiwA'ia' ut0 4.,y rod don 0041 r.3 031/,303 p 1 rOry 0.111 /9 7aman mn asp M Res moored by ma or under my abut sup/nb b lon d 10M 1 was a duly OapH4M La,O Sumo. w ar low. of 1. 9100. of NruOno �lyswt .11110 0103. 44 -a• ).09 Bep N/ 41918 AOMC ■4. D 4 BOMB/ 1..4NO 9180 19X114751 9'101 161 aTi,'R /CPI 7 400 4/155tl4 .An II LINtl. • KE�I +e ps` _. . I ai ) %r'e Gm ae �1 * • ila° . 4 8 Isma�aa6ilws -- Paillestad rar I) ,` ;, D `UM L W a„0I IjI Y _Jt 119N mil_ . d+ P YYARC i. SKETCH* O 22100 N89d391341 • • w.lr 4••4 M1 989°41'04x8 614.15 N ar a Rah 110 I..L a /worn net U4 a 9CAI81 apt • XO PH$T 1 .-dotop of OVA Nsa 5.431,. a Ms 3'4 a r 998. d 0404 n. 100 i� iay. s: BEYFi4LJMtt4T DATA, - Tule peaperly 00.5 r .824 501,4 T rapu7N dr.•bpn,l /0044 le FILM (014r/J 4d1 000010.00 01400357 101010F. Ia 0. e Mtn Mw490/1 and the city Of Una Lake/ •110 /4004 311. plan - 7.04/ ..//00. 03 40x2 0usw, a or 0011du4 /aa and aoa /a to 7• 441.1511004 0400 mole 140001 74703143 la /I. /,4 04 el I°. NOTES' - 9.41347 04303 a•e an ay.. datum. - Prap,•d /4vn 0f way 01000#11 and me an/ bral4na per 444cad 147 4)' 3/41/414 Goup 40/00 11/01/00 - 141x/14 and /54040 shown In .041477 city Aar property (one's clly had Uurah p U aa°10d) 4 par 4011111411111011 mm. and lo/0x00 dal 4ad verld•d LEGF1•A • 30031, 4, 5m4rnl Soune u Iron 5mumml a i� 00• 0315//01 Com. 0074/•/1 LINE TABLE 14.0508'14 SIVadIrt ars. 01 IsreVow SUWON fsu6 ien•� ' EZISTNG`'4OPERTY DESCRIPTIONS ma Nrr. I . I .wdw n, 00341 n i w m: /1x003/ aai�,./ sniu 1. 0303/ •mm, „a a wu°nrmeilwr 044..0 wan RwI Uum 4mm w wel°e 0030.7 ay 0300/ w "114441 n wsexl 000003147 w M.rMV 4 4/a x °.r ,041ud 4 LH.w44n m• Nrawal 4rotn at Mroxm Iry Tovnwq JI. m4/ • a A�.• pd .80 00n man r A¢Mu a a wxr m a ef xe41 l ,l x 84 3a r".'"" °urpauvax ltl b 50100 Fn y o a' 4/° r e . /xa., 1 M Ii.w eMms 03wsMy F 1U 114 tde w r wm r1 r e • 7..0 74M '44?1 0,n 03 0.l ,. tF. A' h 4uab04 a .4?,4/ o 1 m a0 0004143. a/ 0wt 40/an !/ 10414 a hi `n nuaw Nr' a% °rui°C1t Ym'i) tilml m'"donwlu" .,1 .P0..03„14 03..03 1.404 1 and m.. Irw,51Fv nolc 477 � M �puw p+ 0343031 w ...a 03003,.4 n. 14+44. w /0340 M In. wmv w . Cwnsy 0.40331. Rrvr,y 014 3.40.0 a Na aly d w,e L.0 +7004 w /)Ip iinyYa)'�'Mdo ca 014 r11YNnuulaNOemNp asumnnan Yu OLxm A rm 140301] Ada t�yiardool navirx� ornwe•�•n41� M1.i Y /.tir/ a wea�nmnn,pAct wa m n. awan.a ar/. x004 d.� xww u l aWy 4,10.0 JOlom . of JM¢oU tml 0343]9+31 09 rva.. 19 u to n? 00004 •W°aul%: W; F 0310 alas• A' bw Mlu nilm .1N *Me 4wb�� In e.! 1]403 Fw, r aSexFV: � 40,44. n mYWU 9 va.�m x..lilnmOM la a. poFl .r e.gnoFp Was.: 03:°"4.1034. awn.,, a $n,M1y ri MI m °rrasIr •M vl°wp Sm '1] Wla�°I =OVAwln.i 4144 7144 ./ wle s.uw � ma ar. I.n�F.4o. tE 747701/7 / ,1/ /r 03-4,0 4..a 34/03x4 ,a 141.4/0 w /0.04 M as V 01. • 040037 4/a. 3440, Ian 0430lw ...b i4nupi .rp•nnx ° L•dUfEL< 75/17431 w 44,,/x54/ 3/0700, 1//511 001 ur10®t 03.40 o/ M.<4w n, 10 74 11, 431; 0.0 y. u, a 3U,p nwhw,y of Uu 003,4 190 /rat o/ •W0 ,0031 ,xivlr. e,e ynp .0sl.rty 0/UU IW4,o1q 103043 4/,v pp x +Mwa B 130043 aW aN teOn 1I dd 100.00 OM n • wad vest Mon a si 00 awtlw 1! wa 3034 430 V:4 Nat port o/ 4. Non 0431 at Imo don U 44410 w nFnF9 rs r of 4ab pr4h a: u4/ m m 744403 ./4177 41 N41n W darn. 14 m 1 al lase M Md 03004000/ on MIN: fw6 91.tl/ x•U Nwn w,a W n ]l md4w 444 near •141 l40V02w xra.am.y 4 tld4/aa t a44l003 /00amaa"" d 4400,,010/ 000 o wl le u yea 041 MyN 4011440• a 4• Mwr 004 Iwl u roIM 7..V r4nallmml N°c.,,", P'T �e 1«�lw 03/03 way /0.1403 1403'03 w :007.0" i °a": d1v a Lin. aV. emmMlnroaL 7.9515 • o : Ah, Oy..x1 0. vnp2 nW4L x0, , mad Rm4 04/707/4 x3030077 0;741111 L4aL�iai sArr4 .1f1; eil"O1LellVe M4nb A aNa an Br. me l ar lac rum OAR /0-74-10 414/4 •a .[a Iaw. Kt 03.70- ,..I.LJ4 WLL.F 43 a 0.w dmir Pmw, *1//0 x 103 U1UU x44 La. awry • 34,4°00 •03100x/, Laaxx Mo �m 'n. 1031 ,.wear am a./,0. yxi:•oy tiro x w a [ea 4mwro..a Fy mr 0007 b0. °03042 4/.c Mau Mw4 p op. . 6i 443/3 +n .Mon .:7004 a 10.10 4/•• r=otroZtit0; "17.1,1; 1 03'�i'6'".'•a.w. a°lw"v :Al .....'7�:v �' "::41"/,` w v..v%'I°. m. raxPa »n`.;nv 741+/430 I, , 31 110 W lnl5 4e Can 10aW Irol .I Ind 001 I/r4a an N sr r0 1430003./ aodv al M.eux 2 io.unM v u„4a 12 u..us x44 W..rOn x4'03.0 N hiwA'ia' ut0 4.,y rod don 0041 r.3 031/,303 p 1 rOry 0.111 /9 7aman mn asp M Res moored by ma or under my abut sup/nb b lon d 10M 1 was a duly OapH4M La,O Sumo. w ar low. of 1. 9100. of NruOno �lyswt .11110 0103. 44 -a• ).09 Bep N/ 41918 AOMC ■4. D 4 BOMB/ 1..4NO 9180 19X114751 9'101 161 aTi,'R /CPI 7 400 4/155tl4 .An ® COPYRIGHT 2003. x1272020 GROUP. RC. ARCMtmS/owN¢XB /rumlwRS SS SS SCALE l'= 100' EC I tip NOV 1 0 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES ARCHITECTIENGINEER DEVELOPER HARTFORD Ii maw PAT 11-1001 I A ,.04 ur B: On m.i -o3m beet sortie PR* I ° � n .x u: m 1, 03 Pat , x0027, Arid .dr 1. maa 22 Mt <I Mama Pd. 1 Om Re70.042 Xn Tell/ - TRUCTURAL ENGINEER Ron Nana2ahaR CemWlanh I2corporol2d MOON ST. MOW; WHO u.a.2oaaaok OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC PROJECT FRIO PROJECT NUMBER: DOD -00000 MASTER SITE PLAN AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE LNOLSCLS,MDDIL'SOrA ISSUE 17/10/03 - COY SUB0RML A REV. THIS SWEET 0 NO REV. THIS SWEET SHEET TILE: SITE PLAN SHEET NUMBER: C -1.0 7- 1 # © COPYRIGHT 3003. HARTFORD GROUP, NC. ARCHITECTS /ENGINEERS /PLANNERS # # # Y` # I # I # I 0. Plant Schedule Shade Trees Autumn Blaze Maple Northwoods Maple Swamp White Oak Hackberry Skyline Honeylocust Little Leaf Linden Ornamental Trees Plnksplre Crabapple Servlceberry Shrubs Bush Honeysuckle Gro -low Sumac Shrub Rose Roundabout Red Pine Bush Honeysuckle Perennials Little Bluestein Prairie Dropseed Black -eyed Susan Purple Coneflower Butterflyweed Lupine Monarda Sedum SCALE: 1' = 100' Rainwater Gardens Plnksplre Crabapple New England Aster Cardinal Flower Indian Grass Blueflag Iris Little Bluestein \ 0 20'3 ` E c, LAKyvl ARCHITECT/ENGINEER DEVELOPER HARTFORD ZIErna vm'e'�e&asvw�asv Rnite It14_ eiml I /weir, arih DRI the pl . >vaiex. eroe, em Pars by tn,ee�m divomvw ad IR. I on d4 Peydaed PWleimel tend., 21 /RAlep Lytle tlr Wv el Pr dv/e d Yevmlc [TRUC.TURAL ENGINEER r, Honuschak Consullanls Incorporated OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC PROJECT 0000 PROJECT NUMBER: 000 -00000 MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAN AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE LINO LAM, MINNESOTA ISSUE: 11/10/03 - CRY 502 100AL ore oil A REV. THIS SHEET 0 NO REV. THIS SHEET SHEET TITLE: LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEET NUMBER: C -3A • 0 COPYRIGHT 20123. HARTFORD GROUP, INC. .e0HnECTS /E.GNL 33 /PL.n01e= SCALE: 1' = 30' NOV 1 0 2003 Cal OF LI, LAKE.S. fTRUC1.URAL ENGINEER ■i CnoItoak Incorporated IneorpaTOled �_..� •.......ms OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC .. a412mt PROJECT HUD PROJECT NUMBER: 000 -00000 PRELIMINARY SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE IJNO LAKES, MINNESOTA ISSUE: 11/10/33 - t,ry SOSMOT.L A REV. THIS SHEET 0 NO REV. THIS SHEET SHEET NUMBER: C -4.0 ■ll•�■ © covYRi1'M 2003. 1-1 Mii020 CROUP. INC 0RC ITECrS /E2OgEERS /PEFNNE0S • ■I • !■ ■ • • RETAIL SPACE = 23 TOTAL SPACES TOTAL GROSS AREA= 50,703 SOFT. ® FIRST FLOOR PLAN IMP SCALE:1 /16° = 1' -0° LJ��vu LJ War • NOV 102003 I'Y OF 040 LAKES ARCHITECT/ENGINEER DEVELOPER R1 HARTFORD FA Pryryr99I� SSF lses I h.eq ,oO, Yel i2, pi= fpsd or nom .tgnpe..e N [ er Ww sonts12.mmm I e. a My Ffcm.m arme.f Yd. IN Yn or M Oak of IOmNY¢ _ MuW! Y P R1 m.m Xe. I0163 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER >i E Honuschak C onis I0corpo 0rpopot,d v [WOMAN SC OL 1/7 OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC lamA TA TI -ms Fwip i to PROJECT HUD PROJECT NUMBER: 000 -00000 PRELIMINARY REGENT AT LINO LAKES SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE L1NO LAKES, MINNESOTA ISSUE: II /10 /0F - CITY REVIEW A, REV. THIS SHEET 0 ND REV. THIS SHEET SHEET NUMBER: Al .1 No INN* III •i ❑ if i ram I •I• was MirUnC i 'TN ENS aik itit'Io% caul 11'11 =To an AMIE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS = 38 TOTAL GROSS AREA= 50,342 SO.ET. SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE 1/15" © Mr/RICH,' 2003. R.RT.ORO CROUP. INC. ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS /K /00MS a NOV 1 0 2003 c r( OF LINO LAKES ARCHITECT/ENGINEER DEVELOPER *I HARTFORD CIERDIRGI 41 tot or raparl vas rapand ,m. at =apNdon mE dot �mi a MI, .t_ . al Y Ar,ldrl inN bn of Y• 1 dah Xwadc Enid Y Pbm M.griral1m 110 IWQ STRUCTURAL ENGINEER eesm Hanusahak Consultants Incorporated El [MOMS St CV.114 IF) OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC 2.204117g4".., 7`«,911 r.Utp9j712,9L, PROJECT HUD PROJECT NUMBER: 000 -00000 PRELIMINARY REGENT AT LINO LAKES SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE LTNO CARES, MINNESOTA ISSUE: 11/10/03 - CITY REVIEW 0 REV. THIS SHEET 0 NO REV. THIS SHEET SHEET NUMBER: A1.2 .,mlalllll����IIbYGIUi �� §p /w �iiliiiRONN I I/ 61A lIlIlIlIlIlIlIk_ pl��l �gmm lid U 111111 l .. ��� I Elm 1111 wir in 0111 un u WWI MI mug - U ' =� -� 1111 .u1111� ���n1 ��nn unf_ = - ■■.11'■',,1 un Wn MMW E • -�-: =� 3- nn�uo z� ==s_ 51111111..- 11n; -u■ 1m_. imirffz- J■ MI II' ums■_ 1O ■1•1 ■ ■3 mml BR ii�i•iIiNIUtl I;�i�i% ,..41l CITY OF LINO LAKES © C3P.RI0R] 2003, HARTFORD GROUP. NG 0RCNI,ECTS/ENR NEERs /Pt.o,ERS ARCHRECTIENG,NEER DEVELOPER fact HARTFORD :u 1 wa our Fa nb p10 mud ed a m oa.+ M m. W dr.a mm w da ∎ dMtNtl oat dm I., Wile 3W. 01 Ara*. Drt M. 3 P 3.933,31e3 Ma ,0060 fTRUC.TLJRAL. ENGINEER to • Hanuschak ® C3333,1.13 Inwrporuled • Irreenr sr. OWNER LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE, LLC LdmA.ryryivi R413534�4]l03 a 161]0∎ PROJECT HUD PROJECT NUMBER: 000 -00000 PRELIMINARY REGENT AT LINO LAKES SENIOR LIVIN DEVELOPME� AT LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE MO LAKES, MINNESOTA ISSUE: 11/10/03 — CTY REVIEW REV. THIS SHEET 0 NO REV. THIS SHEET SHEET TITLE: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET NUMBER A3.0 7 r' '4-- 1 o WV/Ala/MAIN S1UB 10 910.5 INV 009.74 INV 892.37 R72 INV 892.04 0.40% Fri/,' .._ fl t"tf'!e• by - 9S111 -40 7G" 4 ,,ar r. :zkSi,MC; , set ix U -V ?3S9.y4 N01E: ALL WATERMAIN SHALL BEDIPOL02 X tNV. his p7^...., . MC 1 . 1!ilif:11 -R E ,fps r 0.28% - 7 o ` 4 'SEa1 LINO LAKES MINNESOTA LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE SANITARY SEWER AND WATER PLAN RIPRAP AT OUTLETS IRM M 02? OF MO II MOE NOM PM OTC A. OM MILL s MAO WOO WOK 7Y SNP MY MOON VENN FOX . LT ter. p rK wow M MS+r aw+ar "i�i►°�aia� i�i ie� BEEHIVE CASTING AND FLARED END SECTION EROSION CONTROL Yf, ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE JA:!--7,1 1' t9 /f / f�dr r i /7/ KensAnON IO IJ1 r ; 1. INSTALL NRT FENCE 2. OENir( 611E GRAONR 1 i greir12.21. r' / AM MM. Y:;i WILD MULCH MN= AREAS M. DMUS =D EAM i . 144D DAYS FROM OOIFLESO OF CRAM* Nii1JTY 001151NUOSO N S, "MEET 001151RUCTION NN MULCH WILY DIMMED 14 DAYS ThON OOINPLFMON CF POND 117111 ltli�l�i(Ill (�.,�u fry LINO LAKES MINNESOTA LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE SILT FENCE — STANDARD SITE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN FILE NO. ALINOL0305.01 DATE 11/25/03 DRAWING NO. 1 DESCRIPTION arrow rir NT NDIN DMsCIUP1ON O • NAY SALM DESCRIPTION DaRIIlloaeoE ... NflRAdOC DUCIIIPTION �:.� '<� ,,: �. !AO MIM � MID REEL LANETT DESCRIPTION ® Eas - *, WRAP DESCRIPTION IM MO NALL POND 117111 ltli�l�i(Ill (�.,�u fry LINO LAKES MINNESOTA LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE SILT FENCE — STANDARD SITE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN FILE NO. ALINOL0305.01 DATE 11/25/03 DRAWING NO. 1 2 8 0 8 0 Y 0 it CO \UNOL \030501 \EP 0 100 0 100 200 s 50 feet l s r 226 LF 24" RCP 0 1.207 30 LF 30" RCP 0 0.70% 151 LF 27" RCP 0 1.28% 42 LF 27" RCP ® 1.24% 73 LF 24" RCP 0 1.2 250 LF 18' RCP 0 1.10% 41 LF 5" RCP 03.60 28\.\21' RCP 0 1.e0% MIL 8•17 BOTTOM w»R @911 MK RIO MIL . — Amnat R/ RAIL WAR -RSA 0 1.00% 12" RCP I 0% CP 26 LF 15" RCP 0.88% 18" RCP 0% 116 CP .36% OKA - emu R7 R149A901 -9N 40 LF 15" RCP ® 0.56% BRIM 4s ounce - RA ROIL IKEA 34 LF 15" RCP ® 0.56% 33 LF 12" RCP ® 0.76% LF MIL A K60 a n KO KM MI KILO MM. KILO KIRIN COIL wa MI5 266 LF 18" RCP ® 0.40% MIL . 9R:/ 95 LF 12" RCP 0 0.80% 28 LF 18" RCP 0 0.40% LINO LAKES MINNESOTA NOTE: SKIMMER STRUCTURES WILL BE INSTALLED AT ALL POND OUTLETS TO WETLANDS. 75 LF 18" RCP 0 1.32% LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN FILE NO. ALI N OL0305.01 DATE 11/25/03 DRAWING NO. 1 o: 0 100 0 100 200 • 50 feet ii 0 0 A 0 U' tr aS ___ ME RAN tr ■oe LINO LAKES MINNESOTA N_ 1em IME Ora PLAN MI MA 1CWN ®itel PAN[WAY OZ PUN VIM LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE PRELIMINARY STREET GRADING PLAN FILE NO. ALINOL0305.01 DATE 11/25/03 DRAWING NO. 1 FTr Plan View 0 50' 100' 200' 300' 1i ri°14111/111115111111 .211111/0111111k V I ISIY/IIIII` V11111111,041111111. fob rile ki g Hi NEW Aliii 4, iyilr. 1111111 eAtit kyr' OP AY% 446 1 atillihn Imo I minim, , _sumiumanuctiziolurrialprA111111a111111.16.1r10111.21111111111111111111111111111117,11111,-.11111:115, Ilkilklmliglif.11,11.2111-11011121 1 mtaillti 1 il KOMI 13 1.1 1:19.111111" PK." — , 5.F.ARK, ell! •ii „„.. ..."'. ,Wilf iii -A TOUJN CENTER PARKWAY IMO 13' LANE B. LANE 13' TURN LANE 13' LANE 1.1+ MEM MMI leA11111.181141111.1111411111161411111019111147111161111111141.111116111111711116111110.2111111k 13' LANE MIN =MINI .40V f' 1 PP: wm_i_iingtamonmaummomarro--- Plan View 0 lo 20 40' 60' Section M 10' 15 ' A SIDEWALK 5' PARKING 13' DRIVE LANE 13 DRIVE LANE 16' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN 13' DRIVE LANE - MI 11,11 1.70*- '-'-''''-‘11111°.-01-11 Ill VII 175) Pit 7.i-fifAz-'10 11146...ors"- --- .100 014.11110-0-10 1111M1111111.111111■111111-••••• ■- ■■■■••■■■•111111/ "NNW' 13' DRIVE LANE 4' BLVD 6' TRAIL ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING 1 111 Plan View 13' DRIVE 13' DRIVE LANE. VILLAGE DRIVE (a 01 �♦ 13' DRIVE LANE 13' DRIVE LANE I in II. MilliMI�IO1111�C1I ■■1♦I�I�11MN _- _ _:_ = 111111•1111MMI■IM \wit/ ■ 1101M11 mis 0 10' 20' 40' 60' Section AA 0 s' In 0) A 13' DRIVE LANE �.,. _�TI_�_ � ►���I /I�I��GII�I���If•I��I /ill \ I \ � � � .. ...���_��.,�..�- �,_��..,,..��M4 .. 7 ►� /t�l�� %I�it► ■III�I \� %ICI \�II�I \� %If•1 ►vll�i \�� - s iii% ►S�i�ii alMEN)•. 111CIN/ MICIII• IIIMICIIII1• 111I10I• 111il1:1l■ 1. 1111311111111:111111111111112I11111111111C1I ■11111I11:1I111`i i ii ii.' I11�111•X111111•11�I•II X111111 /��II• MENIMMIIII��MINIPSI• \IMMPARI IIMMINIIMOINI=INIi•1MEN1�1•��1� I - "gmIiICGlIiiCCiiiilitiilG 29' LANDSCAPED AREA 10' 15' EXISTING DEVELOPMENT 0 Eft CD CO� Ca C 0) 0 N J Q iJ Plan View 0 10' 20' 40' 60' Section AA 0 5' 10' 20' 40' SIDEWALK 16' DRIVE LANE LANDSCAFED ROUNDABOUT 16 DRIVE LANE ' SIDEWALK 1_ 1-.4.._■■■-0\■ %ill\ ■21111\ ■III�\ ■II ■1\ ■III ■IMMIN► ■III ■I M■I ° _- ■■II■1►�IIIIII PAIlilMIM IIMill� ■1■,..._.____ ,,..���....__.____,\�;Al•: "`" _■■■ Iii■ ■ OI■>•■IDI ■I■lal■>•■ICI ■1■l01 ■t ■ICI ■ ■ ■l0 ■P.\ = = = == ��� 1►� 9........_,,,,, eft, IINIMEMINIIMMEM MIIMMMINNINOMII Plan View 0 10' 20' 40' 60' Arrt■ 4%4 ..111.3".1 VVoods " ° F / ��+Ede _ Hartford Group Inc. y lc ( ) C I T a Area 4 Plan T_ _ IaT IN F, 2� Linn Lakes, Minnesotan �. . • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. D. Jeff Smyser December 10, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Preliminary Plat: Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition Conditional Use Permit: Planned Unit Development Northeast Corner of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane Hokanson Development, Inc. Hokanson Development has submitted a request for a comprehensive plan amendment, a residential planned unit development/conditional use permit, and preliminary plat. The subject site is four acres of property at the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane, adjacent to the existing Marshan Lake Condominiums. The request is to change the land use category from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, and to plat the site as a planned unit development (PUD). A residential PUD requires only a conditional use permit under the 2003 ordinance, rather than a rezoning as before. This is the same site discussed by the P & Z previously on August 13th of this year when a comprehensive plan amendment was considered. The P & Z recommended denial of that application. The City Council then discussed the application at a work session on October 2211d and indicated that they would not support it. The applicant subsequently withdrew that application. A question did arise at the work session about whether or not a PUD could accommodate a higher density than the Medium Density category allows (3 -6 units /acre). The PUD requirements are in Section 2, Subd. 10 of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance requires that a PUD comply with the density in the comp plan. ANALYSIS The following is a summary of the of the proposal: Gross Site Area 4.05 acres Upland Area 4.05 acres Total Units 46 Gross Density 11.36 units /acre Net Density 11.36 units /acre • • • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 2 Land Use, Density, Zoning The table below identifies the existing land use and zoning as well as guided land uses for the area. Location Existing Land Use Guided Land Use Existing Zoning R -4 High Density Residential Site Single Family Home and Vacant Medium Density Residential North Marshan Lake Condominiums Medium Density Residential R -4 High Density Residential South commercial (Automotive Refinish Technol.) Performance Land Use R -1, Single Family Residential East Marshan Lake Condominiums Medium Density Residential R -4 High Density Residential West Lake Drive, Wenzel Farm townhomes Medium Density Residential R -3 Medium Density PDO The Marshan Lake Condominiums were approved in 1995, with the second phase approved in 1996. The City began work on a new comprehensive plan in 1996 -97. The future land use map in the comprehensive plan was created as part of the planning process. The comprehensive plan was approved by the City Council in 2002. The entire Marshan Lake Condominiums site and the remaining four -acres along Lake Drive is guided Medium Density Residential. This allows a density of 3 -6 units per acre. The existing condominium townhomes were built at a density of 6.4 units /acre, in accordance with the approved site plans. At its August 13, 2003 meeting, the P & Z recommended to keep the Medium Density classification on the site. The reasoning was that it could accommodate up to 6 units per acre, and this is more consistent with the existing neighborhood than a potential of up to 12 units per acre under a High Density land use classification. The concept plan presented with the comp plan amendment application showed 38 units on the four -acre site, a density of 9.5 u/a. This was viewed as inconsistent with the neighborhood. On October 22, 2003, the City Council discussed the application. The Council agreed with the reasoning of the P & Z, and indicated it would not support the request. The applicant subsequently withdrew the application. A question did arise at the work session about whether or not a PUD could accommodate a higher density than the Medium Density category allows (3 -6 units /acre). The PUD requirements are in Section 2, Subd. 10 of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance requires that a PUD comply with the density in the comp plan. Two passages are immediately relevant: • • • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 3 A residential conditional use permit PUD may include a variety of residential units, including single family and multifamily units as long as it complies with the density requirements. Subd. 10.A., Purpose and Intent Densities. The maximum allowable density within an urban residential PUD shall be consistent with the density directives of the Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 10.D.3., Urban Residential Planned Unit Development Requirements The new application includes a PUD and a higher density than the concept plan submitted with the first application: 46 units, for a density of 11.36 units /acre. The applicant now asks for comprehensive plan amendment and PUD to allow the density to be higher. It is not clear why a PUD would be necessary if the comp plan amendment is approved. As explained above, a PUD will not increase the density possibility. The applicant's reasoning for the higher density of this application is presented in a memo. In summary: "The proposed subdivision includes 46 dwelling units, as compared to 38 dwelling units previous shown with the concept plan. The resulting change in total units was based on the utilization of a dwelling/building footprint similar is scale and aesthetics as the Bruggeman (Miller property) development recently approved by the city of Lino Lakes.... "It is believed that the Community is far better off with the density on this particular site for many reasons. This is a very unique site with its current zoning classification. This density will have a much lower impact to the overall community, as this site has always traditionally been zoned high density. The concept plan for attached single family dwellings was well received by the nearby residents at the Planning Commission meeting. Additionally, it is possible that allowing density on this site based on its current zoning classification can help provide flexibility to the City by allowing a different density in another area." Excerpts From November 19, 2003 memo by Ronald G. Fuchs, Hokanson Development Zoning: The site is zoned R -4, a high- density zone. This is not consistent with the comprehensive plan's Medium Density classification. To address this inconsistency, either the comprehensive plan or the zoning should change. Based on the recommendation of the P & Z and the City Council work session discussions, the site should be rezoned to R -3. The site is within a shoreland overlay district. The specific requirements relative to the proposed project are discussed below under "Preliminary Plat/PUD ". • Marshan Townhomes 2"d Addn. page 4 Growth Management: The City's growth management policy (Ordinance 01 -03) implements growth policies of the comprehensive plan. It establishes limits on the number of new units to be approved as well on the use of MUSA reserve. The site is within the existing MUSA, so the MUSA reserve limit is not applicable. The 147 units per year have been reached for both 2003 and 2004. This project would exceed the goal for 2004 by 45 %. This exceeds the 20% discretion provided by the policy. PRELIMINARY PLAT/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Buildings, Units: The proposal includes four buildings. The two northern buildings have 10 units each. Another has 12 units, and the southern building has 14 units. This totals 46 units. All units are two - story. Each building is double- loaded. Building materials include vinyl siding, wood shakes in gable ends, and a stone base. Under the current building and fire code, sprinklers are required for all structures of 8500 sf or greater. This includes garage area. All proposed buildings would need sprinklers. * The minimum open space for an urban PUD is 50 %. A memo from the applicant lists the total site area as 176,362 sf, and the impervious area as 88,181 sf. This is exactly 50 %. If the project proceeds, this calculation should be re- checked. required proposed base lot area R -3: 24,000 sf R -4: 20,000 sf ample base lot width 100 ft 100+ ft between access drives unit lot width 24 ft 32 ft unit size R -3: 920 sf 1400+ sf setbacks local street arterial street side yard rear yard 30 ft 40 ft R -3: 10 ft R -4: 20 ft 30 30 ft 40 ft 25 ft -- impervious max. 65% 50% open space for PUD 50 %* height max. R -3: 36 ft R -4: 45 ft ? The proposal includes four buildings. The two northern buildings have 10 units each. Another has 12 units, and the southern building has 14 units. This totals 46 units. All units are two - story. Each building is double- loaded. Building materials include vinyl siding, wood shakes in gable ends, and a stone base. Under the current building and fire code, sprinklers are required for all structures of 8500 sf or greater. This includes garage area. All proposed buildings would need sprinklers. * The minimum open space for an urban PUD is 50 %. A memo from the applicant lists the total site area as 176,362 sf, and the impervious area as 88,181 sf. This is exactly 50 %. If the project proceeds, this calculation should be re- checked. s Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 5 III The submitted information does not include building heights. It is unlikely that they exceed 36 feet, however. Streets, Access: Access to all buildings would be via private drives off of Aqua Circle. The drives are 24 ft. wide, back of curb to back of curb, with a driving surface width of approximately 22 ft. The Miller's Crossroads project uses these same dimensions for the townhome access drives. The existing Marshan townhomes have wider access drives: 28' with 26' drive surface width. The northernmost access drive would be shared with the existing townhomes on the north side of the site. That drive already exists: it was constructed centered on the property line. A shared driveway agreement is necessary to address this. Utilities, Stormwater Management: The City Engineer's memo is attached. Under PUD requirements, separate public utility services shall be provided to each unit unless exempted by the City Engineer. Where more than one (1) property is served from the same service line, a shut off valve must be located in such a way that each unit's service may be shut off and secured by the City, in addition to the normally supplied shut off at the street. The method of connecting the existing Marshan Townhome units to water has proven problematic and should be improved upon for any new units. • Landscaping: The proposed landscaping is adequate. However, several species should be changed according to the Environmental Specialist's recommendations. • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD The Environmental Board reviewed the application on December 3rd. We will supply that board's recommendations when they are written up. OPTIONS 1. Approve the amendment to the comprehensive plan to change the land use category from Medium Density to High Density. 2. Approve the conditional use permit/planned unit development/preliminary plat. 3. Deny the amendment to the comprehensive plan to change the land use category from Medium Density to High Density. 4. Deny the conditional use permit/planned unit development /preliminary plat. 5. Continue the public hearing and return to staff with direction. • • • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 6 RECOMMENDATION Options 3 and 4, based on the findings listed below The Planning & Zoning Board recommended denial of the previous application to amend the comprehensive plan to change the land use classification of the site from Medium Density to High Density. No additional information has been submitted that justifies changing that recommendation. Staff will prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance to rezone the site to R -3 to bring it into conformance with the comprehensive plan. The recommendation to deny all aspects of the Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition application is based on the following findings: Findings 1. The comprehensive plan guides the four -acre site proposed for development and the existing Marshan Lake Townhomes site for Medium Density Residential: 3 -6 units per acre. 2. The existing townhomes were built at a density of 6.4 units per acre. That is, the land use map shows the development at a lower density than how it was actually approved and built. 3. The site is zoned R -4, High Density Residential. Under our current zoning ordinance, R -4 is intended for the High Density land use category: 6 -12 units per acre. 4. Therefore, the current R -4 zoning is not consistent with the current Medium Density classification. Such inconsistencies should be corrected by amending either the zoning or the comprehensive plan. 5. Hokanson Development has requested a comprehensive plan amendment. The request is to change the land use category from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential. 6. A residential conditional use pennit PUD may include a variety of residential units, including single family and multifamily units as long as it complies with the density requirements, as stated in the zoning ordinance, Section 2, Subd. 10.A., Purpose and Intent (for a planned unit development). 7. The maximum allowable density within an urban residential PUD shall be consistent with the density directives of the Comprehensive Plan, as stated in the zoning ordinance, Section 2, Subd. 10.D.3., Urban Residential Planned Unit Development Requirements. • • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 7 8. High Density of up to 12 units /acre is not consistent with the existing townhome neighborhood, which is 6.4 units /acre. Medium Density (six units /acre) will allow development that will be very close to and thus consistent with the existing neighborhood. 9. The site should be rezoned to R -3 to be consistent with the comprehensive plan classification of Medium Density. 10. The Lino Lakes Growth Management Ordinance, Ordinance No. 01 -03 establishes a goal to limit new growth n the city to an average of 147 new housing units per year, with discretion to exceed this target by 20 %. 11. The proposed Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition would exceed the growth goal by 45% if it were final platted in year 2004. This report is based on the following documents: • Addendum to Text Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Site Plan and Preliminary Plat Request, Ronald G. Fuchs, Hokanson Development, November 19, 2003 • Text Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Site Plan and Preliminary Plat Request, Ronald G. Fuchs, Hokanson Development, received October 28, 2003 • Certificate of Survey, November 19, 2003 • Existing Conditions, November 19, 2003 • Preliminary Plat, November 19, 2003 • Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, November 19, 2003 • Utility Plan, November 19, 2003 • Tree Preservation Plan, November 19, 2003 • Landscape Details, November 19, 2003 • Detail Sheets (2), November 19, 2003 • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. • • O CO °O N J H 0 N LC) 0) 'Cr N CO LC) N 0 r CO N 10 r N r r CO N Lo O O O N O I■ ct I- CO O O N O N- r 1-- O O N co co 1cc r I- 0 O O N CO ,:t- co N- N. in O O N N LC) 17) CO r O O N CO U) "71' 46 r N CO ' CO ° CO LC) d- C) O O N N LC) CO LC) N 0 r CO N N N r r 0) •t- r N ' N r year end N O 0 N r 10 r LC) E T ^ LL Plat C) 0 r 249 CO LO O I- CO 152 N r r ILOTS/UNITS Development Name approved prelim. plats Stoneybrook (2nd Addn Century Farm North Ravens Hollow minor subdivision lots Haley Manor (10 new lots) Crystal Cove (proposed) 1Bruggeman Lakeview Estates (2 new) Pheasant Hills Pres. 13th proposed: 'Justin's Preserve Marshan 2nd Addn. O (remaining of 147 exceeds target of 147 by percent Memorandum DATE: December 5, 2003 TO Jeff Smyser FROM: James E. Studenski, City Engineer RE: Marshan Lake Townhomes 2nd Addition P Attached is the TKDA review dated December 5, 2003, of the submitted documents for the Marshan Lake Townhomes 2nd Addition site. The following comments must be addressed prior to final approval given for this project. Please contact me with any questions. 600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014-1182 Phone: 651 - 982 -2400 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2499 • TDD: 651 - 982 -2410 TKDA ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: Copies To: 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com ames Studenski, City Engineer Reference: Marshan Lake Townhomes 2nd Addition City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Comm. No. 12701 -002 From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Routing: Date: December 5, 2003 The City of Lino Lakes has received plans providing for the construction of 46 residential units (townhomes) on a 4.05 acre parcel of property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane. According to the information provided, this proposed submittal is the last phase of the larger Marshan Lake project (a.k.a. " Marshan Lake Townhomes"). The following documents have been submitted for review: IP 1. Narrative for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, prepared by Hokanson Development, Inc., and received by the City of Lino Lakes October 28, 2003. 2. Yield Plan - Comprehensive Plan Amendment dated November 19, 2003 from Hokanson Development, Inc. 3. Stormwater Pond Calculations, dated October 28, 2003 and November 18, 2003 from Schoell and Madson, Inc. Also included is a grading plan (labeled as Exhibit D), prepared by R. Nelson Engineering, dated September 25, 1995. 4. Existing and Proposed Site Plans, provided by Houwan Architects, dated October 28, 2003 and revised November 18, 2003. 5. Preliminary Plans (Sheets 1 -11) for Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition prepared by Schoell and Madson, Inc., dated October 28, 2003, and revised November 19, 2003. These plans include a Certificate of Survey, Existing Conditions, Preliminary Plat, Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, Utility Plan, Tree Preservation Plan, Landscape Details, and additional Detail Sheets. Full size and 1/2 size sets have been provided. The following comments are provided at this time: 1. The plan essentially provides for the construction of 46 townhome units in 4 building units located between Lake Drive and Aqua Circle, and north of Aqua Lane. Access to the units would be from 4 individual driveways extending from Aqua Circle. Utilities (water and sewer) are proposed to be extended from Aqua Circle. No access to Lake Drive or work within the Lake Drive right of way is proposed. Therefore, it is not expected that any construction related permits from Anoka County will be required. However, because the property is adjacent to Lake Drive, review of the Preliminary and Final Plats by Anoka County will be required. Marshan Lake Townhomes Review Page 2 December 5, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 2. For drainage of the site, the plan utilizes an existing storm sewer and ponding system to the east of the property. Because the site exceeds 2.5 acres in size, stormwater treatment must be provided in accordance with the most recent version of NPDES requirements. In addition, a review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) will be required. The drainage and stormwater detention and treatment system must be provided in accordance with previous comprehensive plans for the larger immediate area, and meet current regulatory requirements. Ponding calculations have been provided and are currently being reviewed. 3 Because the site area exceeds one acre, the development also falls under the new rules requiring an NPDES permit. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining this pennut. This also includes the submittal of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City in accordance with NPDES requirements. Silt fence and erosion control details are provided on the plans and shall be installed accordingly. 4. Per the survey and existing conditions plan, several buildings including houses, barns, sheds, and a garage all exist on the site. Demolition, removal, and grading of the site will therefore be required. The Developer will be responsible for the complete removal of all buildings, foundations, underground and above ground items, capping of any existing utility connections and wells, and removal of any underground or septic systems that may exist. All debris and unsuitable material must be removed from the site. Any material imported to the site must be approved by the City Engineer. No soil or geotechnical report has been provided. It is recommended that the existing site soils and groundwater conditions be reviewed and verified prior to construction. Any imported topsoil, fill material, or granular materials for roadway and building foundation (material and source) must be approved by the City Engineer. 5. The plans provide building elevations. The lowest floor elevations must meet City of Lino Lakes requirements with regards to separation from adjacent high water elevations and groundwater levels. 6. The preliminary plat provides for standard drainage and utility easements (10 feet in width) around the perimeter of the property as required. In addition, standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easements must be provided along the interior property lines. 7. All utility work shall be performed in accordance with the City of Lino Lakes, City Engineers Association of Minnesota (CEAM) Specifications, and City of Lino Lakes building permit requirements. The plan proposes utilizing existing utility service stubs for each building (6 -inch sanitary sewer and 4- inch water services). An exception is Lot 3, where new stubs must be extended to the building from the existing mains on Aqua Circle. All street restoration must be restored per the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes. All sanitary sewer service pipe shall be SDR 26 or Schedule 40. Safety and traffic control during construction must be provided in accordance with the State of Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). All utility extensions and streets /driveways proposed are considered private and will not be owned or maintained by the City of Lino Lakes. J° ,2 R EHABILITATIO(!� �. CENTER ; 3 4. T 2 3 4 f4 f0 2 3 4 5 6 12 DRIVE 4 APOLLO,. I Tp0nOMES 3 LS.A.H. MEADOWS 7 4 • MARSHAN LAK CINNAMON • 7tAR COURT aios v 4 3 AOA ICE KE • RESH/ B PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN LINO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Public /Semi- Public I'H Low Density Sewered Residential Low Density Sewered Residential Private Airfield iiiliIiiiuI HOKANSON DEVEL PMENT F v HOKANSON DEVELO MENT, Nov 7d NOVEMBER 19, 2003 ADDENDUM TEXT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST AQUA LANE AND LAKE DRIVE MARSHAN LAKE SECOND 2603 The purpose of this narrative is supplement previously submitted information and to summarize information regarding the proposed Marshan Lakes development and comprehensive plan amendment. The information presented is meant to assist the City in the review of the applicant's submittal. The applicant is requesting to amend the comprehensive plan to allow the furthering of tiered residential development. This decision is driven by the applicant's desire to utilize four +/- acres of high- density lands, and a desire to maintain unique elements of the existing surroundings. By using the City's zoning ordinance, the proposed subdivision makes efficient and effective use of the land and is very compatible to the desirable characteristics and open space present on this and the immediate surroundings. Environmental protection, architectural guidelines, and land use controls would be assured through utilization of a homeowners association similar to existing Marshan Lake. The proposed subdivision includes 46 dwelling units, as compared to 38 dwelling units previous shown with the concept plan. The resulting change in total units was based on the utilization of a dwelling /building footprint similar is scale and aesthetics as the Bruggeman (Miller property) development recently approved by the city of Lino Lakes. As changes to plans are allowed through Article 2 Subd. 10.F.8.(e)(8) of the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance the following summarizes the minor changes set forth: 1. The northern most driveway has been revised to its current position which is split between the two adjoining lots; 2. The middle driveway have been combined into one, previously the driveway had a "Y" configuration. The previous drive alignment increased maintenance costs for snow removal and hardscape improvements to this site; 3 Units and drives.have been rotated to provide for a larger buffer and open space area between units and street; 4. All structures maintain same building footprint area; 5. Creation of a larger contiguous open space area; and, Total area = 176,362 square feet, Impervious Area = 88,181 square feet, Driveways = 39,218 square feet, Buildings = 48,963 square feet, and Pervious Area = 88,181 square feet We understand that the City is encouraged to maximize density within the MUSA. Our amendment to the Comprehensive Plan greatly meets the general needs of the City, 9174 Isanti Street N.E., plaine, Minnesota 55449 (763) 786 -3130 Fax (763) 784 -9136 Metropolitan Council and enhances the density on this site. It is believed that the Community is far better off with the density on this particular site for many reasons. This is a very unique site with its current zoning classification. This density will have a much lower impact to the overall community, as this site has always traditionally been zoned high density. The concept plan for attached single family dwellings was well received by the nearby residents at the Planning Commission meeting. Additionally, it is possible that allowing density on this site based on its current zoning classification can help provide flexibility to the City by allowing a different density in another area. We hope this summary will help in the consideration of the proposed amendment. We are very pleased to be able to offer affordable and highly desired residential units within Lino Lakes and request the City show their support for this amendment at Planning Commission and City Council. Please contact me with any additional questions or comments that you may have. Sincerely, Ronald G. Fuchs Hokanson Development CC: Thomas Zappia Roger Hokanson Rollin Crawford ENC: Plan Sets Yield Plan F1LE w �H j� hj:q. 3 rx �:.� q pk �a �.fca �.G�i �.: 7s j"'7. -i vx k1 E t 'A C.xfiT is A 4 HOKANSON DEVELOPMENT, NC HOKANS N DEVEL P `, ENT; INC. TEXT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PLANNED UNIT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST MARSHAN LAKE SECOND Request: Request to re- designate medium density land to high density lands, site design review and preliminary plat for 46 dwelling units in that portion of Lino Lakes that is generally located north of Aqua Lane and east of Lake Drive. Zoning: R-4, High Density Residential Applicant: Ronald G. Fuchs 9174 Isanti Street NE Blaine, MN 55449 763.786.6177 763.784.9136 - fax Property Owner: Hokanson Family Partnership 9174 Isanti Street NE Blaine, MN 55449 Location: The property is located generally north of Aqua Lane and east of Lake Drive ATTATCHMENTS Preliminary Plat Site Plan Landscape Plan Architectural and Elevation Drawings APPLICABLE CRITERIA: SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION Subd. 1. Administration: Amendments and Rezonings Subd. 2. Administration: Conditional Use Permits Subd. 6. Site and Building Plan Review Subd. 10. PUD, Planned Unit Development SECTION 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS Subd. 3. General Parcel, Lot and Yard Provisions Subd. 4. General Building and Use Provisions Subd. 5. Off-Street Parking Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 9174 Isanti Street N.E., Blaine, Minnesota 55449 (763) 786 -3130 0 Fax (763) 784 -9136 • Subd. 11. Drainage SECTION 4. DISTRICT PROVISIONS Subd. 1. General Zoning District Provisions SECTION 6. RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Subd. 6. R-4, High Density Residential District SECTION 9. SPECIAL DISTRICTS Subd. 3. PUD, Planned Unit Development District BACKGROUND & REQUEST: Request of an amendment to the 2002 City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan to allow the development of the last phase of Marshan (a.k.a. the "Marshan Lake Townhomes") comprising 46 dwellings. The approximate four-acre site is situated on R4 High-Density Residential zoned lands, portions of which were previously developed as an attached 134 unit residential development. Currently the site is partially developed with 2 older single family homes and number of out buildings. The site is a prime in-fill site surrounded by commercial developments to the south, phase one of Marshan townhomes to the east and north (Tier 3 density of 14.6 units per acre), higher density Wenzel townhomes to the west (density of 10 units per acre), and existing residential further to the west and north. The site is constrained by several existing features including Lake Drive, an arterial street, to the west and Aqua Lane to the south. These constraints prohibit street connections to the west by limiting potential connection locations to Lake Drive. To the north, is a 5 acre park (3+ acres dedicated as part of Marshan townhomes) and pedestrian connections to Marshan Lake to the east. As part of the initial review process, the site noted the future continuation of Marshan with access onto an existing internal street. This proposed four-acre extension of Marshan has been designed to include structures with ample open space separating each structure. Upon development of this tier, the site will be fully developed. The overall goal of the project has been to design an attached single-family complex that meets or exceeds the intent of many of the principles and policies of city plan. The project has been designed around an internal drive, built to City standards, parklands previously dedicated as part of it's initial filing, Marshan Lake and storm water improvements all built as part of the initial Marshan development. The plan also includes pedestrian walks with lawn and trees. The continuation of the last phase of Marshan includes attached single-family residential buildings similar in scale and setback to developed Marshan town homes. Marshan was initially developed with tiered density allowances of up to fifteen (15) dwellings per acre as allowed by the R4 zone, this phase will have an approximate density of eleven (11.35) dwellings per acre. Thereby, with just over eleven dwelling units per acre, it complies with current R4 zone Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 2 requirements allowing up to 12 dwelling units per acre. For comparison, the R -3 District permits up to 6 dwellings per acre. The proposed density with this application is in balance with surrounding areas such as Wenzel Townhomes to the west, which provides approximately 10 dwelling units per acre and Marshan Lake CIC 27 Tier 3 provides nearly 15 dwelling units (14.6) per acre. The proposed site plan is also within Shoreland Management Overlay Ordinance provisions which allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre (1 dwelling per 2,900 square feet of area). In 2002 the site was re- designated to medium density from the previous designation of high density. Due to recent developments, the re- designation of the subject lands from high - density posses future and current issues since they were developed to R4 standards. Hence, this re- designation causes the potential of severe financial hardship due to their non- conforming nature. The following include the rational and basis of our request: (1) Sets to accommodate the adopted goals and density requirements of the adopted Livable Community Goals of Resolution No. 98 -175. (2) The change conforms to all criteria imposed by applicable goals and policies of the comprehensive plan in light of its intent statements. (3) The site is bounded by higher - density development to the north, east and west and commercial development to the south. (4) The proposed change is logical and harmonious with the land use pattern for the greater area as shown on detailed and general plan maps. (5) The omission of Marshan Lake townhomes in the Comprehensive Plan does not recognize Marshan Lake development on all maps and text (i.e. data pertaining to Marshan is omitted on pages 7, 9, 13, 57, 109, 123, 125 and others; Marshan site improvements are noted on pages 69, 75, 105 and others). (6) The effect of the proposal on the neighborhood, the physical characteristics of the subject property, and public facility improvements and services: improvements required of Marshan first phase. (7) Utilizes existing public facilities; thereby, does not cause wasteful investment of public resources. (8) Improves on the variety of housing choices. (9) Developed and patterned as part of a phase determined not to be environmentally detrimental. (10)Rejuvenates a deteriorated site (11)Assures that growth is accompanied by adequate infrastructure. Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 OCT 2 8 2003 (12)Relatively small in terms of the number of units in relation to existing Marshan project. It is the last phase of an existing R -4 Development. POLICIES AND DISCUSSION SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION Subd. 1. Administration: Amendments and Rezonings. The Planning and Zoning Board shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed amendment. Its judgement shall be based upon, but not limited to, the following factors: 1. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to. be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. Discussion: The City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan sets forth several policies and objectives that generally apply to residential development within* the City of Lino Lakes. The specific standards and approval criteria set forth in the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance, Section 1 — Title /Application /Rules Subd. 1 Title and Application, implement the Comprehensive Plan. The Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance governs lot size, lot dimensions, yard setbacks, location of driveways, specifications of mandated improvements and all other development standards. Additionally, the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance sets forth the procedures for accepting land use applications and the process for decision - making. In relation to specific policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Marshan is consistent with the following objectives: Natural Environment: the development of this tier of Marshan affirms, due to it's proximity to Marshan Lake and previous tiered density allotment: is responsive to stewardship of the natural environment; excels in environmental design and conservation; and develops sufficient open space, i.e. buffer strips, pedestrian ways to /from Marshan Park. It was found that Marshan first tier complied with State of Minnesota Shoreland requirements that were more restrictive than the Lino Lakes Shoreland Ordinance provisions. Marshan improvements and provisions were taken and adhered to through the city review process by means of approval of it's Wetland Delineation Report, storm -water retention facilities, buffering strips and Shoreland Management guidelines. Through development of storm- water facilities for the entire Marshan site, density allotments, buffering, open space and park dedications, the city previously determined that Marshan would not be environmentally detrimental. The development of the last phase of Marshan will follow the same standards and practices. Growth Management: the last teir of Marshan assures that growth management is accompanied by adequate infrastructure through previous dedication and development of streets, pedestrian ways, park lands, landscaping, and storm drainage /retention facilities. Marshan will contribute to the desire of complementing urban densities adjacent to Lake Drive /I35, similar to "The Village" objectives while reducing the potential of dispersed growth Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 OCT 2 0 2503 cyY not conducive to Comprehensive Planning efforts. Cities typically request that future developments be shown as part of master planning effort; the development of this phase of Marshan was noted on numerous documents and reports reviewed by the city. Land Use: in December 1998 the city of Lino Lakes. adopted Resolution No. 98 -175, a resolution establishing Livable Community Goals; whereas, the City agreed to establish affordable and life- cycle housing goals by allowing multiple family densities of 10 -12 dwellings per acre. The Marshan site plan provides a solution and an infill redevelopment opportunity; the city of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan embraces and encourages such infill. Marshan blends in with the existing and surrounding land uses and promotes compact development along a major circulation corridor. Marshan has been designed with consideration to the visual character and the experience of the citizens who will use the street system and adjacent properties. The use of the dwellings, open space, parks, Marshan Lake, pedestrian ways, public facilities, and the layout of the street network will contribute to the character, form, and scale of the city. The Marshan site plan integrates the recently adopted housing variety guidelines to create visual interest as well as create a variety of people /residents to better blend with the greater surroundings. Transportation: due to its proximity to schools, parks and commercial activities, the physical organization . of Marshan supports the framework of transportation alternatives that maximizes access and mobility, while also reducing the dependence of only one means of transportation. Marshan has been designed and the second phase will complement and minimize conflicts between transportation modes. Marshan through it's interconnected street pattern, continues to adhere to the goal of reducing long street lengths of repeating architectural forms and introduce changes in the architectural massing and design elements as well as orientation. The overall street patterns /network (auto, pedestrian, and bicycle) will provide strong conditions between sub - neighborhoods /amenities as well as surrounding neighborhoods and commercial uses. It is compatible with surrounding land uses and meets the needs of the users. The city of Lino Lakes has previously found that Marshan ensured that adequate streets were built for the movement of people that maintained the integrity of existing streets. Dedications and investments were contributed to ensure that this phase would support the demands of travel. The city determined that Marshan met the level of service standards required for high - density development to occur on this site Community Facilities: Marshan meets the intent and desires of Lino Lakes comprehensive planning efforts and needs. Grading, drainage and utility plans for Marshan first phase were designed, reviewed and were intended as part of a multi- phased, residential development. Upon review it was previously determined that public and private facilities (streets, sewer and water mains, stubs, storm pond, and et cetera) were in place and /or built as part of Marshan first phase. Further, development of Marshan will ensure that those public investments not be underutilized resulting in wasteful investments of public and private monies. Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 OCT 2 2003 Administration: the current comprehensive plan proposes land uses not compatible with recent land developments being non - conforming in nature. The current application as designed complies with applicable criteria imposed by current zoning guidelines. 2. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area Discussion: Marshan has been designed to be integrated as an integral part of the broader community structure. Marshan is located in an area that provides access to most things a resident or household need on an everyday basis. Marshan was designed and will be built as part of the shared facilities initially constructed with the first phase of Marshan. Marshan as designed fits in conjunction with public facilities, streets and pedestrian ways, open spaces and the natural environment. The Comprehensive Plan encourages and promotes compact development patterns within well - defined boundaries. Marshan accomplishes the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by directing growth at an area desired for re- development, increases tax base while reducing the dispersed growth not conducive to policies outlined by the Comprehensive Plan and cohesive community development. Marshan focuses on higher density compact development along a major circulation route and is consistent and compatible with adjacent land uses. With development of the second tier of Marshan, the neighborhood maintains and fits within the greater context of Lino Lakes. It is joined to existing community facilities, employment areas, public amenities, and provides compact growth within the City's established MUSA boundary. 3. The proposed use conforms with performance standards contained herein. Discussion: Marshan has been designed to meet the requirements outlined in the General Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The architectural and design philosophy of Marshan has been and continues to be the creation of a strong sense of place for the neighborhood. With a focus on overall open space and density, Marshan provides and will continue to provide a great living environment. The development of Marshan complies with the design and construction standards set forth in following guidelines of Section 3 of the Zoning Ordinance: a. Building locational and separation requirements are met (setback from Lake Drive, setbacks from the property lines /local road, and building to building). b. ` Unit width will be a minimum of twenty -four (24) feet. c. Illustration of exterior building materials and colors including the provision of decks, porches, or additions to the maximum extent possible. d. Gable roofs having an eighteen (18) inch roof overhang. e. Exterior Building Finish: architectural elements and features with integrally textured facade materials and sloped roofs as outlined by City standards. f. Each unit will have two -stall garages. g. Homeowners' association will be established. h. Parking setback and drives meet code standards: a minimum of 2 1/4 parking spaces will be provided for each unit (2 garage, 2 drive (46 X 4 = 184) 104 required. The architectural design intent is to improve the overall street scene through de- emphasizing the garage with a balanced facade. With a high level of detail focusing on the streetscape and landscape design, Marshan will improve the overall residential streetscape through architectural Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 OCT 2- 2SO3 guidelines, interesting street pattern and a formalized landscape treatment for street plantings and open space areas. 4. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. Discussion: the City to ensure the adequate provision of facilities, required that Marshan invest in sewer stubs, water stubs, drainage facilities and transportation improvements to support increased demands that the site would create. Marshan is situated in an area that affords higher density residential densities due to close proximity to non- residential land uses. Adequate improvements were installed to help alleviate and mitigate traffic concerns as well as provide alternative modes of transportation. The overall open space plan creates destination or target areas for pedestrians to minimize automobile trips and encourage social interaction. Marshan provides for the integration of varied residential densities and fits well with demand management plans that support effective transit, an efficient roadway system and alternative transportation modes. Past improvements insure that this development phase occurs as to not overburden the City's service capacity; whether, fire, life safety, storm, water, vehicular or pedestrian. Marshan allows for compact urban development, re- development of lands into higher use property, increased tax, an interconnected roadway system, open space, utilization of MUSA; wherein, reinforcing the principles desired of future development in Lino Lakes. 5. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. Discussion: Marshan's streets conform to City street standards. Marshan was designed to accommodate it's unique characteristics, such as the importance of Marshan Lake, the distinctiveness of the sites pedestrian trail system, the accommodation of the neighborhood concerns, in turn providing vehicular and pedestrian safety, accessibility and maintenance requirements. The street system has been reviewed and approved to ensure the consideration of physical features, while being functional, safe and visually appealing. Marshan implements a balanced and an ideal land use pattern, building placement and sufficient off - street parking areas. Marshan's streets have been and will continue to be an integral extension of the community. The layout is simple, interconnected, direct and avoids circuitous routes. Marshan affords and ensures the provisions of adequate facilities for the movement of people and goods while maintaining the integrity of existing streets while minimizing travel - related impacts within residential neighborhoods due to close proximity to schools, commercial and transportation opportunities. Section 2. Subdivision 2. Administration: Conditional Use Permits. SECTION 2 Subdivision 6. Site and Building Plan Review. SECTION 2 Subdivision. 10. PUD, Planned Unit Development. Section 9 Subdivision 3. PUD, Planned Unit Development District Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 OCT 2 ri 2333 • • Chapter 1102 - Shore land Management Overlay Ordinance Discussion: The submitted plans indicate meeting City standards to ensure conformance to City standards. The plan balances existing development patterns with the surrounding areas, as this phase provides approximately 11 dwellings per acre. The proposed density 11.35 dwellings per acre, balances and transitions with surrounding areas as Wenzel Townhomes provides approximately 10 dwelling units per acre, while Marshan Lake CIC 27 Tier 3 provides nearly 15 dwelling units (14.6) per acre. The proposed site plan is also within Shore land Management Overlay Ordinance provisions allowing up to 15 dwelling units per acre (1 dwelling per 2,900 square feet of area). General Site Plan Information: Lot Areas: Lot 1 Block 2 36,515.14 square feet (0.84 acres) Lot 2 Block 2 36,278.08 square feet (0.83 acres) Lot 3 Block 2 41,561.49 square feet (0.95 acres) Lot 4 Block 2 62,007.37 square feet (1.42 acres) Setbacks: 40 feet from public streets arterial 30 feet from non-arterial street 30 feet from perimeter of site 18 feet from private drive to garage doors 25 feet building separation Private drives are 24 feet - back to back of curb. Soil Type: ZMA, ZMB Zimmerman Fine Sand. Silt fencing will be used around the perimeter of the entire site. It will serve as the tree protection fence along the western edge. The fence will be identified for tree protection where needed. As a previous farm site, the property is relatively flat with few trees. There will be minor grade elevations around the homestead area. The development would require grading the interior area of the site however with minimal excavation. The existing trees are also concentrated around the home and along the western edge. The proposed plan would preserve approximately 20 of the trees along Lake Drive plus add a variety of trees on the western edge (as a buffer strip) and within the site as shown on the landscape plan The site will drain west to east with storm water entering the city storm sewer system within Aqua Circle. Two new storm drains will be added on Aqua Circle. In the NW and SW corners minor drainage will occur to the west as it currently exists. Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request 8 October 28, 2003 OCT 2 2 2GO3 Low floor elevations are: Lot 1: 900.4 Lot 2: 900.8 Lot 3: 901.6 Lot 4: 901.8 The site plan utilizes a more efficient use of land and maximizes the smaller networks of utilities and streets; thereby, lowering development costs and public investments and provides the integration and coordination of land parcels. SUMMARY Marshan provides the framework for development of an exemplary higher- density residential neighborhood in the city of Lino Lakes. Marshan is ideally located to provide within its boundaries and adjacent employment and commercial districts all the elements of a high quality urban neighborhood within Lino Lakes. The Marshan development plan meets the general compliance criteria per the Zoning Ordinance and supports many of the principles and policies of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan. Marshan provides the opportunity to create a livable and sustainable community that offers its residents choices in their lives in the context of a well - defined, compact urban community. Marshan Second Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CUP, PUD and Site Plan Request October 28, 2003 1 Iii W C F T . 71 OCT 2C2'303 1 '.,Tvc... ... ,: i> ,li .: C\Mokon.on Construction \:oo3— m— t \A.p\ 2002 RLK- Kuusisto, LTD. Certificate of Survey for: Ins of Gov't. Lot 2, Sec. 20, T. 31. R. 22 naka Ca qqtly Monument at 1 NW. Cor. d ec f Gov't. Lot 2. S. 2q T. 31. R. & N. Line of Gov ec Gov't. Lot 2. S. 20, T. 31, R. 22 NE. Car. cif the NE1 /4 of the NE?/4 of Se d 19, T. 31, R. 22 I S 89'29'07"E Hokanson Construction, Inc. tit cop frp That part of Government Lot 2, Section 20 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, all in Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described os follows: j, / 40 / 45 1 1 w 8, 1 11 I 89'0'I 1 12954.21 7 E �9. �.1 2 r. house' a . .511. 1 1 l 1 - 240.001 .r - c 7- - - Parcels & 5 a 1 (25,704 7q. Ft.) 1 S 824 .01TE 2'201 200.33 SE. Cor of the N. 1849.40 of the W. 240.00 , of Govt. Lot 2. S fc. 20, T. 31, R. 22 - 261 ' 3. y - b.81 • I shed 1 M:= l Parcel 3 (Form Porcel) (47.485 Sq. Ft. (4.05 Apres) (3 parcels gxnbined) Porcel - (Remainder Parcel it (26,893 Sq. Ft.) sfa v;m �Oo c.2.52'S5'E .38.49 60 S 89'29707'E 17.34- (5 O 4p • N ).382 b0 /11 ) / a I I! / 1 •S 1 / 1 278.18 295.52 5 8929'0YE Porcels 1 & 2 (Commercial Parcel) (76,281 Sq. Ft.) OS ov N N. Line of the 5. 60.00 of 1 Gov't. Lot 2, Sec 20, L 31. R. 22 �- 60 ) 1, \ 278.18 - N (3920'25'W rt- RECEIVED NOV 1 9 2003 CITY OF LIMO LAKES AQUA LANE SW. Cor. of Gov't. Lot 2. Sec. O, T. 31, R. 22 S. Line of Govt. Lot 2. Sec 20. T. 31, R. 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: Parcels 1 and 2 (Commercial Parcel): Commencing • at the southeast corner of the north 849.40 feet of the west 240.00 feet of said Government Lot 2 (for the purposes of this description the west line of said Government Lot 2 is assumed to have a bearing of South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West); thence North 82 degrees 52 minutes 55 seconds East. a distance of 38.49 feet; thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West, parallel with the west line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 184.36 feet to the point of beginning of the property to be described; thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West, parallel with the west line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 233.22 feet to the north line of the south 60.00 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence North 89 degrees 20 minutes 25 seconds West, olong said north line, a distonce of 278.18 feet to the east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19; thence North 73 degrees 00 minutes 17 seconds West, o distance of 87.11 feet to the eosterly right -of -way line of Lake Drive (formerly known as State Trunk Highway No. 49); thence North 17 degrees 58 minutes 00 seconds East along said easterly right -of -way line, o distance of 217.83 feet to the intersection with a line drawn westerly, parallel with the north line of said Government Lot 2 and its westerly extension, from the point of beginning; thence South 89 degrees 29 minutes 07 seconds East. along said parallel line. a distance of 295.52 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 3 (Existing Description for Form Parcel): All thot port of. Government Lot 2, Section 20, Township 31, Range 22, lying within the following described tract: Beginning at the southeast corner of the north 849.40 feet of the west 240.00 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence North 82 degrees 52 minutes 55 seconds East, assumed bearing system, 38.49 feet; thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West. parallel with the west line of said Government Lot 2, 184.36 feet; thence North 89 degrees 29 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with the north line of said Government Lot 2, 295.52 feet, more or less to the intersection with the easterly right -of -way line. of Lake Drive; thence North 17 degrees 58 minutes East along said easterly right -of -way line 187.90 feet, more or less to the intersection with the south line of the north 849.40 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence south 89 degrees 29 minutes 07 seconds East along said south line of the north 849.00 feet, 200.33 feet, more or less to the point of beginning. Parcels 4 and 5 (Existing Description): The south 145.00 feet of the north 849.40 feet of the west 240.00 feet of Government Lot 2, Section 20, Township 31. Range 22, City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota which lies east of the easterly right -of -way line of Lake Drive (formerly known as State Trunk Highway No. 49). Remainder Parcel: (Parcel 6) Thot port of Government Lot 2, Section 20, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described os follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of the north 849.40 feet of the west 240.00 feet of said Government Lot 2 (for the purposes of this description the west line of said Government Lot 2 is assumed to have a bearing of South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West); thence North 82 degrees 52 minutes 55 seconds Eost. o distance of 38.49 feet; thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West, parallel with the west line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 103.39 feet to a point on soid parallel line distant 314.19 feet northerly of the point of intersection of said parallel line with the north line of the south 60.00 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence northerly along a curve concave to the east, said curve is tangent to said parallel line, has a radius of 230.00 feet and a central angle of 17 degrees 39 minutes 52 seconds, a distance of 70.91 feet; thence North 17 degrees 58 minutes 00 seconds Eost, tangent to said curve, o distance of 199.84 feet; thence North 71 degrees 00 minutes 13 seconds West, a distance of 246.54 feet to the easterly right -of -way line of Lake Drive, soid easterly right -of -way line is described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Government Lot 2, distant 354.43 feet easterly of the northwest corner thereof, for the purposes of this description, the west line of said Government Lot 2 is assumed to bear South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West; thence South 25 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 118.98 feet; thence southwesterly along a tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 2819.22 feet and a central angle of 07 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds. a distance of 385.44 feet; thence South 17 degrees 58 minutes 00 seconds West, tangent to said curve, o distance of 532.41 feet to the west line of said Government Lot 2, and there terminating. thence southerly along said easterly right -of -way line, a distance of 99.93 feet to the intersection with the south line of the north 704.40 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 29 minutes 07 seconds Eost along said south line, a distance of 154.21 feet to the east line of the west 240.00 feet thereof; thence South 00 degrees 18 minutes 08 seconds West. along said east line, a distonce of 145.00 feet to the point of beginning. NOTES: 1. Utilities ore not shown. 2. Legal descriptions are as provided. by Client in 2001. SCALE IN FEET 60 120 SCALE: 1 INCH = 60 FEET 180 • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND O DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE SET. BEARINGS SHOWN ARE BASED ON ASSUMED DATUM a J W1" O C 0. W Q J m 0 a z JEFFREY N. CAINE. 0 z 0 0 z€ o '.... V) w: z?zzz 0l a o 37!3 no wee nn! z a9ij ° 3 0. 9 F ° TREE LEGEI`l0^•. Number folio'`". -- ybreatieg denotes estimo in inches, three fe "•.•gve giburad level. Th n any) denotes amber trun ocoy es a dead tre'.' following denotes it's atnates dec. s tree. ;penotes cogfterous Yte Wes^ Y Dinot' A:/ Denot'A§ -.Agh Example""Th..., Denotes ifr"b'k YA[Qe A]J.. °�`•.,,,,,1 fi i d diameter sptohd t s qt that ' It Denotes shru.. 1 line. F Denotes am r'Jr• -.�„` %JA Denotesn'%Bass "BI Denote •''8icch t BE Denotes Box ter BN- Denotes "Bnttgr iut /7 BU Denotes Bush CA Denotes Catalpa ti CR Denlites Cedar r7 CH DeOtes Cherry K: CN Diotes Cottono OG Denotes Dogwao EL r}€notes Elm FR Denotes Fruit GN /Denotes Gingk H 'Denotes Hack Hg Denotes. Hor Ift fro Denotes Ju j,7CC Denotes K- tucky / %U Denotes Li .c /r. LO Denotes L•- st q M Denotes M MP Denotes M n 0 Denotes ak f PI Denot Pine It PO Denot s Poplar RO Deno Rus SM Den SP Den TD Den TE Deno WA D WI L CIRCLE 1 — — _ / J- ./ � / -- -- ._... —.21— __4at`. / 150 .� 1 ,y M q — -0O C1&G82-1-1fi. — i tr en l 1 I a..,„ 1 "1. - S 00°18'08 "W - 2�.22 00°18'08 "W 1 417.58 a t t uw1 1 i��y t IQ wx3 e- V' te, s t I ; tr7f i 1 Came r \ .w tn./ 1 1 1 1Ji 1.‘j 6 /° H- I i RD < cry U d u t z`' -, / 0' ,3 n m t i m 9, 06 4 ' u ti t • zCr" a K N CI • LEGEND 99 -121rre ofx'UN,10NT199t 2, Sec. 9 PROPOSED CONTOUR BOUNDARY LINE DRAINAGE /UTILITY EASEMENT Ti C TORM SEWER EXIST BUILDING EXISTING STORM MAN EXISTING FES /FES WITH RIPRAP EXISTING BITUMINOUS t< 0 m • 1 C EXISTING CONCRETE 5� 52 SPA ' d44 1 Wit.^ Line the NE1/4 of the NE See-- 9 T. 31, R. 22 287.02 00 °18'08 "E /4 o1 r (•�f '''`^mow..• :•4.J -1- rCf /7&L,7 O f WO �( •", 0s Ste of ok / RECEIVED NOV 1 9 2003 1 CfFY OF LINO LAKES '7 0. FEET 0 ai m m E m°. E _v 0.0,- •0 > 0 a. in C nm Op c Y m O U = c 08 o .- DCEg� G 0 E H. W e • n m gS'S 013 (3 U] Designed By: 5. 0 Checked By: m ,ll --j /1l 1 n ii CIRCLE L z Lt= ,3.55 * / =-, ii U1 S 00 °18'08 "W 5'R $ TYP 206.22 nUMHf1'a ii 1I I Line of eov't. L z vi 0 N Li Q) u1 • BUIL'D1Nees6413 Lot 2, Public Street — 40 ft. min Public Street (Non— arteriol) — 30 ft. min RIMET — 30 ft. min RNAT TR c TO A Gj 18 ft min SIDE (Bu din' g \se ¢rg ton) 25 ft min SITE AREAS: GROSS AREA 176,361.76 sq. Ft. 4.05 acre NET AREA 176,361.76 sq. Ft. 4.05 acre, Zoned: R -4 Guide Plan: Med. Density Request to Reguide to High Density SITE DENSITY: TOTAL UNITS = 46 NET DENSITY = 46/4.05 11.36 UNITS /ACRE LOT AREAS: 0 0R Sec. 20, T. 31, R. 22 4 LOT /BLK 1/1 Area. 32,882.25 sq. Ft. 0.75 acres LOT /BLK 2/1 Area: 32,093.33 sq. Ft. 0.74 acres LOT /BLK 3/1 Area. 35280.83 sq. Ft. 0.81 acres LOT /BLK 4/1 Area 76,105.63 sq. Ft. 1.75 acres DESCRIPTION: A / "- 54.52 - e oft SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON SHEET BENCHMARK: Top Net Hydrant in N.W. quadra intersection of Aqua Lane and P Elevation = 897.27 feet (N.G.V.1 2 of I of the uo Circle. 1929) fi U fi y ofeyay L`�` a, Stofe r Lokr!'Y4 LEGEND �1gh�, DENOTES EXISTING CONTOUR 287.02 00018'08 "E E. Line t:f the Sec: '9; T, 31 O R 4 of the NE1 /4 of i 2;` r�:a�s.— — — — — DENOTES BUILDING SETBACK Soil Type + ZMA, ZMB = Zinnern Y � • 49 1— A RECEIVE 1 NOV 1 9 2003 SCALE IN FEET, F. Y 0 0 o O 0 • r acg .e • 3--` c %9 Y GPO Z!!� 1 a 1•• 0 10 Sheet Title: PRELIMINARY PLAT Designed By: 3 0 0 m 0 CC 0 16 Stull Project Number. 63506 -0 CITY OF LINO LAKES EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. ALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL �"" L c• INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BASINS PRIOR TO SITE '»' .,,,» GRADING, - »»,» 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE SITE AND INSTALL UTILITIES. »`»,l i'` f'. 4. WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF SITE GRADING, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH SEED, SOD OR ROCK BASE. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR -"^•.�" MATERIALS. 5. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAIN 1 ACCORDANCE WITH CITY, AND WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT IN FRONT OF SILT FENCES DURING THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. 7. ANY EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 8. REMOVE ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION IS 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENT TRACKED EXISTING STREETS AND PAVED AREAS. STORM SEWER tI SEE UTILITY PLAN Vt. STORM SEWER EE UTILITY PLAN • F CIRCLE ,,j(' WARNING E •NTRACT`QR SHALL CONIACT ALL F ALL UNDERGROUND COND TS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES, STRU TURES BE ORE DIGGIN1. HE S EPLACE T ABOVE WHEN DAMA Lit CONSTR CTION AT NO:1COST TO UBL WIR 10 1• C UTI (TIES CA LES, ER URIED EPAI OR RIN • Ua! 00 °18'08 "W y • 10. IF BLOWING DUST BECOMES A NUISANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL . PL WATER FROM A TANK TRUCK TO ALL CONSTRUCTION AREAS O 2.573721 ROCK CONSTRUCTION 'ENTRANCE- - -. 11. SWEEP ADJACENT STREET IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MAINTENANCE: 1. INSPECT SILT FENCES AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL. IMMEDIATELY REPAIR FAILED OR FAIUNG FENCES. 2. REPLACEMENT - FABRIC SHALL BE REPLACED PROMPTLY WHEN IT DECOMPOSES OR BECOMES INEFFECTIVE BEFORE THE BARRIER IS NO LONGER NECESSARY. 3. SEDIMENT REMOVAL - SEDIMENT DEPOSITS SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH STORM EVENT. 4. ANY SEDIMENT REMAINING IN PLACE AFTER THE SILT FENCE OR FILTER FABRIC IS NO LONGER REQUIRED SHALL BE GRADED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED, AND SEEDED WITH THE APPROPRIATE SEED MIX AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. GRADING NOTES: 900.4 ERQ61ON CP NTROL FENCE f 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT 'GOPHER STATE ONE CALL' WITHIN TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/ CONSTRUCTION. FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS. TWIN METRO AREA: 651- 454 -0002 OR TOLL - FREE: 1- 800 -252 -1166. . �. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF - � _,• • 7 I " (�E7 d EXISTING UTIUTIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO START OF SITE -�„ 1 it, ,.;i v I ,\`'`' /��0 0 GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE PROJECT �' ^-........,..s. 1 `Y j ^Y¢ 9 T - ,E;, -O ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS. '�`�Yy" �+�, ` 'T•_` / �;7 L7 __ i 3. SUITABLE GRADING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF ALL SOIL ENCOUNTERED ON + T. \ I ` 8 1, ▪ �� .E' l - \ OTHER SITE WITH E MATERIAL OF STOCKPILE DEBRIS, ORGANIC R GRANULAR FILL IC TES: (CONT). '^-•` j OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIAL. STOCKPILE i0PS01L AND GRANULAR FILL AT--,- G I .' ` -\ ;if."J;r - RQ510 CONTROL LOCATIONS DIRECTED BY CONTRACTOR. �. 4••8 FENCE^ 6 4. SUBGRADE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXCAVATION 12. FINISH ...GROUND AND SOD EL TO HELP OFFSET ANY STABILITY PROBLEMS DUE TO WATER SEEPAGE OR BELOW FLOdR'•ELyATION. SLOP Of 6" IN 10 FEET"'$$EWQ.PiB -1 STEEP SLOPES. WHEN PLACING NEW SURFACE MATERIAL ADJACENT -TO EXISTING PAVEMENT, THE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED PROMPTLY TO AVOID UNDERMINING OF THE EXISTING PAVEMENT. 13. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTIgAL Gov' t CONTROL. 6. GRADES SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADES. CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH GRADE TO 14, SUBGRADE ELEVATION. LEAVE STREET READY FOR SUBBASE. 7. ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, BITUMINOUS SURFACING, CONCRETE ITEMS, A�I ABANDONED UTILITY ITEMS, AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIALS SHALL E THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OFF FFFFFF I'Hf CONSTRUCTION SITE. 8.. COMPLETION OF SITE GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL RESULT IN ALL AREAS BEING GRADED TO 'PLAN SUBGRADE ELEVATION'. BUILDING PAD AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY REFERRING TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. THE PARKING LOT AND DRIVEWAY AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY REFERRING TO THE SITE PLAN AND PAVEMENT SECTION DETAILS FOR LOCATION AND LIMITS OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONS. 9. REFER TO THE ARCHITECT'S SITE PLAN FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND SITE LAYOUT. 10. REFER TO UTILITY PLAN FOR SANITARY SEWER MAIN, WATER MAIN SERVICE LAYOUT AND ELEVATIONS AND CASTING. AND STRUCTURE SCHEDULE. 11. THE MINIMUM GRADED SLOPE FROM EDGE OF BUILDING SHALL BE 6 INCHES IN 10 FEET. CONTRACTOR GQROUND RESPONSIBLE PROVIDEd,OSMOOT LNG NIIFORM SLOPIN - PESE W NH `RiiOVIDE LA2 SASj, CAM CT SI IEIEI9'NA NTS RAGING PLANS ARE t��,,• REQUIRED. T 4 CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION, PAVEMENTS AND CUR ,{ AND GUTTER WITH SMOOTH UNIFORM SLOPES WHICH PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. CONTACT ARCHITECT IF FIELD ADJUSTMENTS ARE REOUIRED. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE UNDER CURB AND GUTTER. - - • 1 TNT PONOING OWER 2'3 54.52 '�.,,, Ripti 7A J LEGEND ___ ~f V 0 gi DENOTES BOUNDARY UNE DENOTES DRAINAGE/ UTILITY EASEMENT /, P`•.. DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING WATERMAIN DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER DENOTES EXISTING BUILDING DENOTES PROPOSED BUILDING DENOTES EXISTING STORM MANHOLE/ C8 DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE DENOTES EXISTING HYDRANT - - -99 98- ` l � -'- - EXISTINCa:`p RTO0 i PROPOSSeldr ONTO R r Of it) 87.02 00 °18'08 "E ine f the ;1_ i 4 of t o NEI L 901` - ODOODODDDDO6 EROSION CONTROL SILT FENCE 1.00X . 910.5 SOG PROPOSED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PERCENT OF GRADE PERCENT OF GRADE PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION DENOTES CURB CUT CONSTRUCTION. SAWCUT BITUMINOUS FOR CURB AND GUTTER REMOVALS. RESTORE STREET TO MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION. DENOTES SLAB ON GRADE RECEIVED NOV 1 9 2003 CITY OF IMO LAKES 0 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET 0 z° 0 m 0 Y 0 0 O m � m 0 E 0 co t0. 0 9• • <i Y OWCd L E (OM 24 92 8. 0 az as W 0-I 40 4z Z 00 ciz ..z0 140 mft CC (C1 m Designed By:. m. U m C1 0 0 00 5 9 0 m d E a 05 m kc 1 0fI o N 11.). T `O m L • SMI Project Number: 63506 -004 � • ) � J q I _ —"I EXISTING`6" SANITARY . SERVICE & 4" DIP WATER i : . E Ir /4" ` V+ - - " .. F - Project Name/Location: Marshan Townhomes 2nd d Adltlon Lino skas, innssots Sheet Title: UTLITY PLAN ii A `^- +_ '� =.it ._.. - - /% EXISTING 6" SANITARY ! - i '''- ' - x:cfeiyC CC T2" RCp r ''^�.�. SERVICE & 4" DIP """^.•"`�: '*»::;t�h 7.r. S ®0 �;+ SERVICE W /4" CV 1: r ii ri ! i S$ � ...,� .� EXISTNC 6" SAN/TAR-Y-4' ^I C LE i E (i a SERVICE & 4" !DIP WA R . l',„,„ ' ' �� i SERVICE W/4" �1 ,." aY1 r.11--- ' ;• �'� \ fr` iJ /J. 6" OR -46 Jr CB -702 ¢ i SANITARY - 'IM =897.7 / ,,,,, , - *a� 4o "rr �/y-� I .0 a„� �:^ ri /rr — � / MH 101 ° =,,e N \ i \ RIM =898.3 `°"•w,.,� h�. tr /i 4' DIP °"^�„". CUT -IN NEW ANITARY - i T -' SERVICE /� �. - - - -� ,.,RESTORE S{f$iEET TO �I WET TAP ORGINAL SECTION ,��. !�� • �,I\� ....1. x% \fir \ ` ►�� 4" WATER. RVICE ( n 'C K >A ' - k T DP NA1'= RUA`t f7 : - INV =892.88. C, I •r - WATERMAIN ! / 1 I }y' T &b' srorinfxJratPr'/> -ate / CB -103 -. . -._ .•.'./ I / I RIM =898.3 I 1 \ V= 893.34 /r6� 6SDR 2�\ / 1 6" SDR 26 SANITARY /'. F. SANI TAR / / \ ` ` � I — — — — 4" DIP WATERMAIN _ -BOCIL CaLSTBSLC"aO/3 — ENTRANCE 4" DIP WATERMAI i I _ W - ' Client: Hokanson Development, Inc. 8174 Mang Street N.E. Blaine, MN 55434 17631 786-3130 . - - / 4., �I. h 4r ` _ WA T' r r • _900.4 4 y ;y 4 — — — 6" SCR 26 SANITARY - / ....._............-A _ , I 1 A / I 2 • G FL 900.8 i /... S G .... / / / i CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ~`lJ� i�� _ t 1. REFER TO ARCHITECTS SITE PLAN �^ -,•. •`'4 -� `� - ` `\ ■ FOR BUILDING AND PARKING LAYOUT, `�� / �. `"� , . / �\ DIMENSIONS, AND LOCATIONS. �'y 1 1 1 2, THE UTILTY CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY "�/ "'••�- ' T 1 I THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE `'`�,, `"^,•.�, v y, ''T BUILDING PIPE SYSTEM PRIOR TO ~ ` ., * '`y' CONSTRUCTING SERVICE CONNECTIONS. tttijj 7� •`Y _ - 3. ALL PIPE CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES „}•mss s a t i i' �',`�..,, - `' TREE EROTEC �/ / STRUCTURES SHALL BE KOR -N -SEAL OR �..�` "[ j, yy,, ` �`^�•,,,,_ , j 141 �'�•` 1----(5,...." �-� N. - � � FENCE. (T.) , CITY APPROVED EQUAL. FOR CONCRETE i tam BLOCK OR BRICK STRUCTURES. CONSTRUCT �"s �. \ AN OPENING EOUAI i0 THE PIPE SIZE '�� "'�•.,, - GROUT AROUND PIPE TO CLOSE OPENING 0 ' P � J I / � �� AND REPAIR STRUCTURE TO CITY REQUIREMENTS. (,j A .,,`j 141 - - �/ .. _ t -- N. \ \ - CONNECTION CWITH CITY LENGINEERING EDEPARTMENT `^^`.•,., wV "t(J `^�,. "�..'` -,,.' � . _ ` -.. - \� i 1 �i `I `` % r Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning _ Soil Testing • Environmental Services www.srhoellmadson.com 10560 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55305 -1525 phone: (952) 546 -7601 - tam (952) 546-9065 AND COORDINATE ANY REQUIRED CITY DISINFECTIONS ,[� -- --,,,, - - / NEEDED FOR CITY ACCEPTANCE. """`. Kit s_y"'+ _ "^.•` ''','- \� �� �/ �`\ - 1 4Giif \\ ^ 1 / 4. STREET RESTORATION REQUIREMENTS `�.,,,�1 ~""'�+.�. �`"�.�,` `' -.. _ `` 1 1 -1 2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE . \ � ` ` , 3 -1 /2' BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE - - "D5' „ 8' CL 5 AGG. (100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE) - h • ",~ ^„ —` \ - / 1 _ 1 1 COMPACTED SUBGRADE AND TRENCH BACK FILL. - - 'IL✓ 8i7 ``''.,,"'���,,,JJ1 ��'^�1 \ _ 1 5. PRIOR TO UTILITY CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR �"'` --.,, s�,, �! ^�.�,, \ / �\ SHALL FIELD VERIFY EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS - - • -,.,.. ;` ""�. "„�`� 1\•,� 1 / Designed By: Drawn By: Checked By: AND INVERTS. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN P - - - ""�. d �- J` FIELD CONDITIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO OW R }y�/j' ^� ^.,_ IMMEOIA7ELY. ``�'�,„ _ -y y - •.,•.. at4in3" - \ �. i LEGEND VY ``� 'r. ` `' I hereby certify that this planes prgpared by me Or undl my direct supervision and that I am Licensed Pmfessio Engineer under to laws of Ne 5 of Minnesota' s &Od. • m o C DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER - � + c m ❑ a p m ■ DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER RECEIVED NOV 1 g� N ®0 1 07 2003 - CITY OF LINO LAKES „`" . ,� 4 % J ,� //� "� .1 - - 0 30 60 90 DENOTES EXISTING WATERMAN - DENOTES PROPOSED WATERMAN O DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER WARNING DENOTES PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES. - DENOTES PROPOSED HYDRANT W/ VALVE CONDUITS. PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTHER BURIED DENOTES PROPOSED GATE VALVE STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR 2 CC 0 n REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING - _ - CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. SCALE / - RRR,i 1 J\ ,;r- !7 KK CIRCLE • . - a 1 qq ff 11 c0.,8vax: x:n• �IIiSfl QQ[fF3 IIC3LR p. ®Cf 00°18'08"W 0 c. V W 41 k 6 SILT FENCE TO RUN JUST NEXT TO TREE PROTECTION FENCE (TYP) r.` INSTALLTZEE''PROT ES SIGNS ALONG TREE \, `. PRESERVATION (TYP) • • TREE LEGENQ Number following abbreviation denotes estimated diameter in inches, three feet above ground level. The second number (if any) denotes the number of trunks at that location- (1 denotes a dead tree). Number following shrubs denotes it's diameter in feet. Denotes deciduous tree. [) Denotes shrub. Denotes coniferous tree. /—•",Th Denotes tree line. Example: BE.8.2 {r. A Denotes Ash HC Denotes Horse Chestnut AV Denotes Arbor Vitae IR Denotes Ironwood 8F Denotes Balsom Fir JU Denotes Juniper BA Denotes Basswood KC Denotes Kentucky Coffee BI Denotes Birch 11 Denotes Lilac BE Denotes Box Elder LO Denotes Locust BN Denotes Butternut M Denotes Maple BU Denotes Bush MP Denotes Mugo Pine CA Denotes Cotolpa - 0 Denotes Ook CR Denotes Cedar PI Denotes Pine CH Denotes Cherry PO Denotes Poplar CN Denotes Cottonwood RO Denotes Russion Olive DG Denotes Dogwood . SM Denotes Silver Maple EL Denotes Elm SP Denotes Spruce FR Denotes Fruit TD Denotes Tree Deciduous GN Denotes Gingko TE Denotes Tree Evergreen H Denotes Hackberry WA Denotes Walnut WI Denotes Willow iS R. 22 LEGEND Denotes tree removal Denotes tree preserved 1`)y {,rr t 287.02 's �► +¢l 00" 8' 08 "E E, /(tine f ths'1j4 of the NE1 /4 of 're J; T. 31, R. 22 -,, 54.52 Lu o en 0 CO \ Denotes tree preservation limits ciy RECEIVED NOV 1 9 2003 art t OF LINO LAKES o 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET 0, 0 to N O • O C: =O• c09 0 W • , •ZCJ EON °e � z2 a V Designed By. a O Checked By: 0 GENERAL NOTES I. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS ON PROPERTY WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND BY CALLING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (454 -0002) PRIOR TO STAKING PLANT LOCATIONS. 2. CONTRACTOR 15 TO COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATIONS WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. WHERE EXISTING TREES AND /OR SIGNIFICANT SHRUBS MASSINGS ARE FOUND ON SITE. WHETHER SHOWN ON THE DRAWING OR NOT, THEY SHALL BE PROTECTED AND SAVED UNLESS NOTED TO BE REMOVED AND /OR ARE IN AN AREA TO BE GRADED, ANY QUESTION REGARDING WHETHER PLANT MATERIAL SHOULD REMAIN OR NOT SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO REMOVAL. 4. ALL EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN TO BE FERTILIZED AND PRUNED TO REMOVE DEAD WOOD AND DAMAGED OR RUBBING BRANCHES. 5. BB TREES AND SHRUBS ARE BALLED AND BURLAPED. 6. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL 15 REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF A BID AND /OR QUOTATION. 1. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. ALL MATERIAL SHALL BE OF HARDY STOCK AND FREE FROM DISEASE, DAMAGE, AND DISFIGUTATION 8. CONTRACTOR I5 RESPONSIBLE FOR ON -GOING MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. - - 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION. I. WARRANTY FOR LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BEGIN ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. II. CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH ONE CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE WITH ALL REPLACEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER CENTER TREE UPRIGHT IN PIT FASTEN TREE TO 14 GUAGE PLIABLE ZINC COATED WIRE CONNECTED TO BLACK RUBBER BANDS (BUT NOT THROUGH) SECURE ALL ENDS FIRMLY AND NEATLY. STAKING (OPTIONAL) 2 "X2 "X9' WOOD STAKE 14 GUAGE PLIABLE WIRE 3" LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO 6" OUTSIDE OF STAKE CIRCUMFIRENCE LAWN OR PLANTING BED EARTH SAUCER (3) 2"X2"X24" LONG FIR STAKES PLANTING MIXTURE -SEE SPEC b" LAYER OF PEA ROCK UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE NOTES: • IT IS THE CONTRACTORS OPTION TO STAKE TREES, HOWEVER THE CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. • STAKING METHODS TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PLANTING. • NO MULCH TO BE IN CONTACT 1.111T14 TRUNK. • SCARIFY BOTTOM 4 SIDES OF PIT PRIOR TO PLANTING. ® DECIDUOUS TREE NTS IN PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS I. PLANTING BED PREPARATION: ALL MASS PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF I0 ". AMENDMENTS SHALL BE APPLIED AFTER CULTIvATION. 2. BACKFILL SOIL: USE SOIL EXCAVATED FROM PLANTING I•IOLE5 AND PROVIDE AMENDMENTS. REMOVE ALL DEBRIS INCLUDING ROCKS LARGER THAN 3" DIAMETER. 3. FERTILIZATION: ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FERTILIZED UPON INSTALLATION WITH DRIED BONE MEAL OR OTHER SPECIFIED FERTILIZER MIXED IN WITH THE PLANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4. MULCH MATERIAL: AS SPECIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS. MASS MULCH ALL PLANTING BEDS TO 3" DEPTH OVER FIBER MAT WEED BARRIER. ALL PERENNIAL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NO FIBER MAT WEED BARRIER ALL EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUS TREES TO RECEIVE 3° DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK 5. TREE STAKING: IT SHALL BE TI-4E CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STAKE AND /OR GUY THE TREES ACCORDING TO THE DETAILS. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE EVERY STEP NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE TREES AND SHRUBS IN AN UPRIGHT AND PLUMB CONDITION AT ALL TIMES UNTIL THE END OF THE PLANT GUARANTEE PERIOD ESPECIALLY WHERE VANDALISM, SOIL OR WIND CONDITIONS ARE A PROBLEM. STAKING METHODS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE DETAILS AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 6. TREE WRAPPING: WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE QUALITY, HEAVY WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12 -1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING AFTER 5 -L 1. RODENT PROTECTION: PROVIDE ON ALL TREES, EXCEPT CONIFERS UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS. 8. PLANTING PLAN: ALL PROPOSED PLANTS 51-IALL BE LOCATED CAREFULLY AS 5l -1OWN ON THE PLANS. PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OvER PLANT SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. RESPECT STATED DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. 9. EDGING: ALL MASS PLANTING BEDS SHALL HAVE EDGING PLACED BETWEEN MULCH AREA AND ANY ADJACENT TURF AREA UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ANCHOR ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS, 10. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE THOROUGHLY WATERED TWICE DURING THE FIRST 24 -HOUR PERIOD AFTER INSTALLATION. ALL PLANTING 51-IALL BE THEN WATERED WEEKLY, OR MORE IF NECESSARY, DURING THE FIRST GROWING SEASON. II. ALL PARKING LOT ISLANDS TO RECEIvE A 3" LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH OVER FIBER MAT WEED BARRIER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. LAWN OR PLANTING BED 3" LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO DRIPL INE SAUCER PLANT MIXTURE SEE SPEC UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE 6" LAYER OF PEA ROCK NOTES: • IT IS THE CONTRACTORS OPTION TO STAKE TREES, HOWEVER THE CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. • STAKING METHODS TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PLANTING. • NO MULCH TO BE IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK. • SCARIFY BOTTOM 4 SIDES OF PIT PRIOR TO PLANTING. OCONIFEROUS TREE NTS FILE COPY MN PLANTING NOTES I. NO PLANTING TO BE INSTALLED UNTIL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. 2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL LOCATIONS MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ANY AND ALL DIGGING. 3. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOIL CONDITIONS, OR ANY OTHER SITE CONDITION WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT MATERIAL ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL, OR GUARANTEE, THEY SHALL BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 4. ADJUSTMENTS IN LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS MAY BE NEEDED IN FIELD. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 51-1OULD ANY ADJUSTMENTS BE ADVISED. 5. ALL PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER PLANTING DETAILS. 6. ONE SHRUB PER TYPE AND SIZE IN EACH PLANTING BED AND EVERY TREE SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED (COMMON OR LATIN NOMENCLATURE) WITH A PLASTIC TAG WI -IICH SHALL NOT BE REMOVED PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE. 1. WHERE SOD /SEED ABUTS PAvED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD /SEED SHALL BE HELD I" BELOW SURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC. 8. SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND 51-IALL NAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, THE 50D SHALL BE STAKED TO THE GROUND. 9. SEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING OTHER THAN THOSE AREAS NOTED TO RECEIVE 50D. 10. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT NO COST TO THE OWNER MI IRRIGATION NOTES LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROvIDING A SHOP DRAWING ILLUSTRATING AN IRRIGATION PLAN AND SPECIFICATION AS PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROvED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ORDER 2. VERIFY EXISTING/PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM LOCATION. 3. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ALL SOD /SEED AND PLANTING AREAS INDICATED ON PLAN SHALL BE 100% IRRIGATED. THE IRRIGATION SHALL INCLUDE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN PROPERTY LINE AND BACK OF CURB WHERE NEW LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSED. - - 4. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT ALL SODDED/SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREAS DIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION. 5. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A WATERING/LAWN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANT MATERIAL GROWTH REQUIREMENTS. 106.,L.; NA AM iil n p nw I I FRI l =II UNDISTURBED OR 9II IFS 3" LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. LANDSCAPE FABRIC -SEE SPEC PLANT MIXTURE -SEE SPEC LINE OF PLANTING PIT WHEN PLANTED INDIVIDUALLY -EDGER -SEE SPEC LAWN OR PAVED SURFACE F-11=- 1111Fkjj T II°II I -.1.1_ I I 1 --111 -111 I Wu I III -I I IrI I� COMPACTED SUESGRADE NOTES: • HAND LOOSEN ROOTS OF CONTAINERIZED MATERIAL PRIOR TO PLANTING (TYP). • SCARIFY BOTTOM 4 SIDES OF PIT .PRIOR TO PLANTING. © SHRUB NTS i RECEIVED I NOV 192003 CIry OF LINO LAKES 0 0 E a 0 •OC 0. 0.7:1 39i E 09 - be Y 0 0133 EC7N °e 0a A z� t 0 a Sheet Title: LANDSCAPE DETAILS Designed By: m 0 CC 0 n 0 Number: 63506- AMAX u 5' METAL OR 2 "x2'WOOD FENCE POST GEOTEXTILE WITH NET BACKING BACKFILL GEOTEXTILE TO OVERLAP THROUGH TRENCH. 6 NOTE —SILT FENCE SHALL CONFORM TO MNDOT 3886, TYPE B. — FENCING SHALL BE PLACED ALONG CONTOURS OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. SILT FENCE 4/23/97 of F KE STANDARD DRAWING NO. 601 RINGS (3 MIN., 1.0' MAX. OF RINGS & MORTAR). 1/2" MORTAR ON OUTSIDE. BETWEEN RINGS, CASTING & MANHOLE. 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 MH DIA. 48" 54" -102" "INFI- SHIELD" SEAL OR EQUAL. SLAB THICKNESS 6" 8" 108" 10" 120" 12" 01/05/00 0 z NO W000 SHALL BE USED FOR ADJUSTING CASTING; CEMENT MORTAR ONLY CAST IRON MANHOLE FRAME & COVER AS PER SPECIFICATIONS.. MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON, ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTIC PER ASTM C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS & BASE SLAB PER ASTM C478. FURNISH PRECAST MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH 0 -RING GASKETS & LUBRICANT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. A 12" OR 16" BARREL SECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED UNDER THE CONE WHENEVER POSSIBLE. FILL OPENING BETWEEN PIPE & NH WALL WITH CEMENT MORTAR. INSIDE SURFACE. SHALL BE FINISHED SMOOTH. STORM SEWER MANHOLE, TYPE 409 [IN [ KES TSTANDARD DRAWING NO. 409 COMPACTED SAND OR PIT RUN GRANULAR MATERIAL COMPACTED BACKFILL 4/8/97 GRANULAR MATERIAL BEDDING 0.0/2 0.1)/4 (4" MIN) 1 /20.D.I EARTH FOUNDATION PIPE FOUNDATION DETAILS CITY 0 RN KE STANDARD DRAWING NO. 101 1/2" MORTAR ON OUTSIDE, BETWEEN RINGS, CASTING & CATCH BASIN. FINISH SMOOTH ON INSIDE. NO MORTAR ON INSIDE. REMOVE CURB BOX BOLTS RINGS (3 MIN., 1.0' MAX. OF RINGS & MORTAR). 03/10/00 (4 MIN.) VARIABLE "INFI — SHIELD" SEAL OR EQUAL. PRECAST COVER SLAB (TYPE 2) PLACE 2 STRIPS BITUMASTIC. SEAL ON SLAB JOINTS. CEMENT MORTAR PRECAST BASE MH DIA. SLAB THICKNESS 48" 54• -102" 8" 108" 10" 120" 12" NO W000 SHALL BE USED FOR ADJUSTING CASTING; CEMENT MORTAR 061.2. CAST IRON FRAME & CRATE CASTINGS PER SPECIFICATIONS. MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE CAST IRON, ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED PLASTIC PER ASTM C478. LOCATION SHALL BE AS NOTED W THE SPECIFICATIONS PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE BASE SLAB & COVER SLAB PER ASTM C478• PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS PER ASTN C478. OR 8" CONCRETE MANHOLE BLOCK WITH 1/2" MORTARED EXTERIOR. FURNISH PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH 0 -RING GASKETS & LUBRICANT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. FILL OPENING BETWEEN PIPE AND MANHOLE WALL WITH CEMENT MORTAR. INSIDE SURFACE SHALL BE FINISHED SMOOTH. • MINIMUM PIPE COVER CAN BE REDUCED FROM 4• TO Y -6" WITH INSTALLATION OF PERFORATED PIPE DRAIN PER "GRANULAR SUBCUT AND PERFORATED PIPE DRAIN• DETAIL. CATCH BASIlN /MANHOLE., TYPE 406 CIT INN I STANDARD DRAWING jj NO. 406 I . �. LINO LAKES SAND OR PIT RUN GRANULAR BEDDING AND ENCASEMENT MATERIAL COMPACTED GRANULAR BACKFILL 0.D 0 D/4 (4" MIN) GRANULAR MATERIAL ENCASEMENT CONCRETE 4/8/97 CONCRETE CRADLE PIPE BEDDING DETAILS CIT OF L KES I!N STANDARD DRAWING NO. 102 NOTE: 6" Min. 1" To 2" Washed Rock Rock size should be 1" to 2" in size such as MnDOT CA -1 or CA -2 course aggregate. A geatextile fabric may be used under the rock to prevent migration of the underlying soil into the stone. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1- 27 -97, REV; 5 -98 GR0 -5 F/( COPY RECEIVED NOV 1 9 2003 CITY OF LINO LAKES 9 m N 10 -28 -03 0 N 0 C N 0 0 can to W E Sheet Title: DETAIL SHEET U c —�� Et s ^t aR2 N;i Ega 5. C4 co e W 32.7 dry a F 23 _' W O v i1J N II Designed By: m 3 0 L 0 z 0 0 N 5. m O a U 0 N C 0 N y 8O 5 • 2" x 2" HARDWOOD MARKER W /SPIKE. i —6' METAL FENCE POST MARKER PAINTED GREEN MAX. - CURB - _ 0 RECEIVED NOV 2003 W O m 01 iti A Sheet: 11 of 11 n o 4. o b - - - - . _ _ IcT L oa ■ =1 - SERVICE SLOPE 17. MIN. Lp =III— II' `o `1 kI R T I G H T LUG OR CAP Project Name /Location: Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition Lino Lakes. minneseta Sheet rue: DETAIL SHEET SMI Protect Is I— WYE .I,1I� -_I I_1 ' I 45' BEND r 6' METAL FENCE i POST MARKER .',.I1 — 11 -111 11 II1=1 11 =1I - - FENCE EPOST PROPOSED OR EXISTING PLANTED BLUE ROADWAY I11- GRANULAR BEDDING MATERIAL (COMPACTED) WITHOUT RISER kg 8' MIN COVER COVER AS SPECIFIED SIZE, LENGTH, MHO TYPE OF MATERIAL FOR SERVICE UNE AS SPECIFIED GATE - VALVE BOX 8' LONG AT FULL EXTENSION PL 2" x 2" HARDWOOD MARKER W /SPIKE. PAINTED GREEN I I - COVER AS SPECIFIED WATERMAIN SIZE VARIES 1 �I - —m ' GATE VALVE BOX I t DEPTHS GREATER THAN 14' WHERE RISER APPROVED BY ENGINEER. II _ — _' j I ` , �I_- x GATE VALVE 1 1/2" WASHED ROCK ALL �— J ,.�A - AROUND. MIN.1 /3 C.Y. r (MIN. 1 C.Y. IN IMPERVIOUS SOILS) 11� AIRTIGHT SLOPE I% MIN I Client Hokanson Development, Inc. 9174 IsIanti Street N.E. Blaine, MN 68494 17631 786 -3130 ` — PLUG OR I •(� .S�SUPPOflT O = ��116 CAP GATE VALVE WITH CONC. TEE BLOCK (SEE DEfML 203) - - WATER SERVICE DETAIL _ - 7/2/97 .. TEE •. �. :. ( ^. �. L•• >" - _ 4 - _ �)E ! - — '.'f I =T11 -- I1 - 45' BEND - - - GRANULAR BEDDING • �- MATERIAL (COMPACTED) I SERVICE - , —_ 1- /p • -1= SERVICE WYE TO BE i �,�/�,�LI- EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE �war . /��lD1w MAX. 45' NOTE: SERVICE PIPE TIE RODS 8 °X8"X16" CONC. BLOCK MNDOT 3733 TYPE 3 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC ATTACH TO TOP OF BONNET - - GAi E VALVE INS rAL. AI ION - 4/8/97 TO BE PVC, �_ SGH. 40 (ASTM D- 2665). I- -- — — WITH RISER SOLVENT WELD ALL JOINTS. 1 I -11 III (SANITARY SEWER SERVICE i 15/25/00 I !It I N0. STANDARD DRAWING 3 ( - CITY OF { IN ` J 1 *. KE J I C1T OF IN L ES STANDARD DRAWING NO. �Li - CITY � KES IN STANDARD DRAWING NO. - L:.l.�i Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Solt Testing • Environmental Services wwwschoeanadson.com 10580 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis. Minnesota 55305-1525 phone: (952) 546 -7601 - talc (952) 546 -9055 CI TY OF LINO LAKES i I I { - PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE VARIES VARIES 16' 16' VARIES SEE 20% - 3:1 (MAX') 1 /4 " /F1'(MIN.) VARIES 12' 12' BELOW I _ 2�_ MAN. SLOPE 2.07 T.V. TEL 0 i ` 0 GAS 0 O TEL. o GAS ELEC. ELEC. O CURB -1.5" -2350 TYPE LV 4 BIT. WEARING COURSE \ &1GUTTER. COMMON TRENCH I STORM 2.5' SAN. I O - 4" TOPSOIL & SOD (BY OTHERS) W.M. j ID m o m y U TACK COAT c 11' I O O 2" 2350 TYPE LV 2 OR 3 BIT. NON- WEARING COURSE I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that l am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the Slate of Minnesota.. e - o "' 8° 6.. • • • _ CURB 1O' 10' 5" AGGREGATE BASE, CL. 5 (PLACED ON APPROVED SUBGRADE) m o 24" SELECT GRANULAR BORROW • NOTE: MINIMUM GAS R/W TYPICAL SE tiTI i CROSSING DEPTH Z Revisions Date: Description: d 30" ELEC. (URBAN STREET /PERMANENT SECTION) URBAN STREET REET U ILITY LOCATION 9/15/97 STANDARD DRAWING ! CITY Of IN L KES r • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. E. Jeff Smyser December 10, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat • Includes Variance for Lot Depth • Includes Allocation of MUSA Reserve Acres Justin's Preserve, White Pine Road Carpenter Homes has requested approval of a preliminary plat for Justin's Preserve. This project involves splitting an existing fourteen -acre parcel into two lots of four acres and ten acres. Under the current subdivision ordinance, the creation of new lots on city sanitary sewer requires a plat rather than a minor subdivision. This application highlights an unusual situation that should be corrected. The existing house on the property, 171 White Pine Rd., is connected to city sanitary sewer and water. However, it is not within the MUSA. It should have been included when it connected to the utilities. This also • is the case with the 90' x 170' lot at 173 White Pine Rd. Neither of these properties is in the MUSA although both are connected to utilities. This should be resolved now by allocating MUSA reserve. The area being platted includes approximately four acres of upland. The smaller lot, which is not included in the plat application, is 0.35 acres. • To accommodate the proposal, the following approvals are necessary: 1. Preliminary plat 2. Variance for lot width: 70' instead of 85' 3. Allocation of 3.2 acres of MUSA reserve. ANALYSIS The following is a summary of the of the proposal: Gross Site Area 14.02 acres Upland Area 3.9 Total Lots 2 Gross Density 0.14 units /acre Net Density 0.51 units /acre (rough approximation) • 20091 TOTALI O Lo N f� (NI 10 0 O N ti O O N CD O 0 N O O N O O N Lh O O N RESIDENTIAL MUSA ALLOCATION O O Co O O (0 O O C0 O O M O N O O O N N C 0 0 0 N O Ravens Hollow O O O O co N 0) O O 0) CO O CO co r o) -n (U U) ✓ Z V! H 0 J Phasing plans by year (lots /units to be final platted) CA J O Q O O O N N C) N O LL) N O r CO N Ln r N 528 C)) 0 0 N 0 CO 0 0 N 0 1- 0 0 N CO CO 33 CO 0 0 N co 'Kt N c*) 75 CO 0 0 N N O T Ln 103 0 0 N LO CO 56 47 CO CO T M C 0 N N CO CO CO N O T CO N N N r r O) 'ct I- year end 2002 T in T Lo E- L- a.) d Q) N CO LO 0 T CO N CO T N r r Development Name approved prelim. pla !Century Farm North !Ravens Hollow !minor subdivision lots! Haley Manor (10 new 'Crystal Cove (propos(' IBruggeman I Lakeview Estates (2 d (Pheasant Hills Pres. 1 !proposed: !Justin's Preserve j 0 0 N N 7- T O 0) .c 0 E a) • • • Justin's Preserve page 4 Preliminary Plat/Development Stage Plan Lots: The new lot, Lot 2, wil be 3.86 acres, with 2.36 acres of upland. Lot 1, with the existing house, will be 10.16 acres, with approximately 1.5 acres of upland. These meet the minimum lot area. Variance: Lot 1 has only 69.95 feet of road frontage at the setback line. (Lot width is measured at the setback line.) Lot 2 has about 140' of width at the setback line. The odd configuration of the existing lot frontage at the corner of a road creates an unusual situation. moving the proposed lot line to the east may create problems fitting a driveway between the new lot line and the existing wetland. Shoreland: Baldwin Lake is a "recreational development" lake under the shoreland overlay ordinance. Minimum lot size is 20,000 sf with an 80' lot width. The proposed lots are large enough, though the lot width variance would be needed for Lot 1. Structures on sewered lots must be set back 75' from the ordinary high water level. The proposed house pad meets this requirement. Streets, Access: No new streets are needed. An existing driveway would be moved to remain completely on Lot 1. A new driveway will be needed for Lot 2. The driveways must be five feet from a property line. Parks: The subdivision ordinance includes park dedication requirements. Park dedication is $1665 per residential unit, less any land dedication. There is no land dedication needed. The park dedication will be $1665. Anoka County owns property that abuts the road on the west side of Rohavic Oaks 2nd Addition. The Anoka County trail map shows a future trail connecting to White Pine Road west of the site of the proposed plat. The additional house lot will not affect that future trail. Utilities: The existing house is connected to city water and sanitary sewer. The new house will connect as well. Grading and Stormwater Management: Wetlands cover the northern portion of the site. Drainage and utility easements will cover the wetlands. Easements also will be platted along property lines that do not run into wetlands. A Rice Creek Watershed District approval will be needed. Power Line Easement: There is an existing power line running along the southern edge of the property. There is a blanket easement over the entire property. The applicant is working on confining that easement. This will need resolution for final platting. Justin's Preserve page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD The Environmental Board did not review the project. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Approval of the project should include the following conditions: 1. Lot 2 shall connect to city sanitary sewer and water. 2. The final plat shall not be approved prior to 2004, when 3.7 acres of MUSA reserve is available. 3. Issues discussed in the City Engineer review memo must be addressed to his satisfaction. 4. Park dedication of $16,65 shall be paid. 5. The powerline easement must be confined prior to approval of the final plat by the city council. 6. A variance is approved to allow a lot width less than 80 feet for Lot 1, as shown on the preliminary plat. 7. Approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District must be obtained prior to final plat approval by the City. OPTIONS. 1. Approve the application as follows: a. Allocation of 3.7 acres of 2004 MUSA reserve b. Variance for Lot Depth c. Preliminary Plat 2. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 This review is based on the following plans and information: Justin's Preserve page 6 Preliminary Plat (Existing Conditions and Preliminary Plat, November 7, 2003 Preliminary Grading, Erosion Control and Utility Plan, November 7, 2003 • • • TKDA ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: James Studenski, City Engineer Reference: Justin's Preserve Copies To: 1500 Piper Jaffrey Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Comm. No. 12701 -002 From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Routing: Date: December 4, 2003 The City of Lino Lakes has received an application for a Preliminary Plat, labeled as Justin's Preserve. The proposed plat essentially splits an existing 14.15 acre parcel of property into two residential lots of 2.23 acres and 11.79 acres respectively. It is proposed that an existing single family home will remain on the larger parcel, and that a new single family home will be constructed on the smaller lot. The property is located along the south side of Baldwin Lake. The following documents have been provided: . 1. Existing Conditions and Preliminary Plat by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc., dated November 7, 2003. 2. Preliminary Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan by Plowe Engineering, Inc., dated November 7, 2003. 3. Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) determination by Plowe Engineering, Inc., dated November 7, 2003. The following review comments are provided: 1. The proposed subdivision will require the review and approval of the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Rules indicate that any subdivision of property over 5 acres in size requires a permit from RCWD. 2. A first floor elevation (FEB) of 890.0 is proposed. A low floor lowest opening elevation of 989.6 is provided on the plan, and appears to be in error and must be revised accordingly. The 100 -year high water elevation of Baldwin Lake is identified as 885.30 according to the survey provided. The City's minimum building elevation floor elevation (including basement), must be the greatest of the following: 2 feet above the design flood elevation, 4 feet above the water table, or 1 foot higher than the emergency overflow elevation. The elevations provided therefore would meet requirements based on Baldwin Lake flood elevations. However, the groundwater elevation is not known, and the lowest floor elevation would need to be 4 feet above the water table as required. In addition, the edge of the existing wetland bordering the future home site is at an elevation of roughly 887 -888 feet according to the survey, and an Ordinary Water Elevation (OHWL) of 887.59 has been determined An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Justin's Preserve Page 2 December 2, 2003 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota by the applicant's Engineer. However, the extent of the wetland's bounce or potential high water elevation (HWL) is not known or shown on the plan. Therefore, further documentation must be provided to show that the floor and building elevations proposed will meet City regulations in relation to the wetland. 3. The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining an NPDES Permit and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan in accordance with State of Minnesota Law. This will also require providing to the City a copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), required as part of the NPDES submittal. If the actual area of property to be disturbed is less than 1 -acre, an NPDES permit will not be required. However, the applicant would be required to demonstrate on the plan accordingly. Also, because of the close proximity to Baldwin Lake, and the existing wetland immediately adjacent to the proposed home site, sedimentation and erosion control measures must be fully implemented and enforced per City of Lino Lakes and RCWD requirements. 4. Drainage and utility easements are provided adjacent to property lines and over wetland areas in accordance with City requirements. These easements shall also be provided on the Final Plat. 5. Additional notes and details shall be included with the plans providing for adherence to the standards and requirements of the City of Lino Lakes. This shall include standard details for watermain and sanitary sewer services and appurtenances, and notes referring to utility construction requirements of the City of Lino Lakes and Utility Specifications of the City Engineer's Association of Minnesota (CEAM) as applicable. 6. The proposed subdivision and construction must adhere to Floodplain and Shoreline Management requirements of the City of Lino Lakes as applicable. • l®mI e � 0f •R Pe 13317 p 6 me norm Ill me ta b�GvmR m Q a 11 . ° vo � �. a v�ba a �� L FoO (Amami migewm. �� =° ph ® {0�� ®®o .o mo o QI% annum d b �i ® flu H 0011 sip A/ ZOIMEMIMMtigMMEAMIIIIIINIM © =, 1;t1,,M 9574 j =111111=1W 8:11§1. �mla1R©w iilla ® °� I EMA =ammo ANOKA COUNTY S VEY DRAWN SEP. 1974 REVISED JAN. 1987 REVISED NOV. 1978 REV. MAY 1988 REV. MAR.1980 REV. AUG. 1989 REV. SEP.1981 REV. FEB. 1991 REV. DEC.1982 REV. FEB. 1992 REV. JULYI985 REV. FEB. 1993 REV. DEC. 1985 REV. MAY 1994 SCALE III= 1 500' REVISED REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. REV. NOV. 1994 JAN. 1996 JULY 1997 JULY 1998 AUG. 1999 SEPT. 2000 MAY 2001 JULY 2002 1/4 v8 MILE 3/4 LOCATION MAP • PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN LINO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Manufactured Home Park Public /Semi - Public Stage 1 Growth Boundary MUSA Line Low Density Unsewered Residential Low Density Sewered Residential Medium Density Residential ZONING MAP • • EXISTING CONDITIONS and PRELIMINARY PLAT JTN' PEERVE CITY OF LINO LAKES FOR CARPENTER HOMES PROPERTY OWNER: DEANNA HAEG PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A piece of land situated in lot 2 of Section 31. Township3l. Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, described as commencing at a stake on the south line of said Lot 2 distant 305 feet West of the southeast corner of sold Lot 2: thence West on the south line of Lot 2 a distonce of 730 feet to o point; thence North 460 feet to a point on the Meander Line of said Lot 2; thence following sold Meander Line of sold Lot 2 to a stake on said line; thence South 900 feet to the place of beginning. Hereby meaning to convey the Shore of the Lake and the water thereof Sub Servient to the land described. Except the south 170 feet of the east 90 feet thereof. ZONING INFORMATION PROPERTY IS ZONED RI SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SETBACKS PER CITY FRONT 40 FEET (WHITE PINE ROAD) HOUSE SIDE 10 FEET GARAGE SIDE 5 FEET REAR YARD 30 FEET MINIMUM LOT SIZE • 106100 SOUARE FEET MINIMUM LOT W10TH w 80 FEET AT BUILDING SETBACK 1 7 2003 \d• E N. EOM 6Y✓ 1 1316lauu cu. .o4_�_, r a 51113'01Y 393.30 5 $Ira's.,= 7i'-` \ `-�'PR0P0 D DRAINAGE AND UTILITY SEMENT WET LAND ill,_ \ / 4 / 3 r / SH°GC w° 010-1, EpSEUENt BLOCK ONE Jlk ii b �o ‘1, \ f/ \ 4� \ 168.058 sq. ft. +b + \\ \ 3.86 acres • 1 \ + (UPLAND - 102.700. SOU ET) \ fit m + 4 / %f / r / /- r is T'rR'y 888 j GRAPHIC SCALE 10 0 30 60 110 • 240 MAME 80166.10x2 mu 11111 Not Rm.. UM 011x6N1111 2414 / / / r / / / i s/ ( IH FEET ) 1 Inch • 80 IL LEGEND: • Denotes monument found Denotes 2 fool contour Interval NGVD Vertical Dotum Denotes Existing Spot Devotion AL Denotes Wetland. Area Denotes Overhead Wires and Power Poles • 5S3 Denotes Proposed Elevation lkL 5% (7 WET LAND \� EDGE OF OELNEA7FD T�E'1 V4N j n 1 P /./ '•' 'l- --FBI f / ; ."- lAL =suns NEATED WET LAND � J��6 WET LAND %/ � i 13.73 LOT 1 442,690 sq. ft. 10.16 acres A.. 389'13'01"E� ly Li: in 6- TYPICAL EASEMENTS 1 d 1 Li en- p.M,sa. a,e 11111, wmnls s. een Um* I 1 eeh9 10 1441 11 4811, end ed04 Wren end rear IM reef areesf olhewlee Indlwled, end 5 1411 N .•15 nd a lein09 48. 1.41141. ed.0 0\6112x. 8dk.le0. 54 216.27 130 F0.ROAD EASENE61 DOC. N0. 521913 --2 9.04— EXCEPT1gN 1 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify thal this survey. plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am o duly Registered Lond Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnes Date /'- 7- a3Regis(ration No 41578 1. G. RUC) 4 8oN6, INC LAND euRVICYOR6 • 9180 LEXINGTON AYE, NO, CIRCLE PINES, MINNESOTA 56014 -3625 TEL. 1153.186 -5666 1/2' s' nm+ V. E.. 640.00 "b 389 °13'01 "E:, --730 DEED AND WAS.-- I VICINITY MAP 86 1Tt one. PI 29 .a. aROAq 0.10 8 8 ;7r) h i/\ \ r l 'Benchmark tIlu- 895.02 0 tell AT 5018E NO. 168 \ I\ o .•0Yb•un4� \\ c 119 - \ *KY -305 DESG- -- 304.55 NEAS. -- • j i (2.: /A\ SURVEY NOTES THERE IS A BLANKET EASEMENT FOR POWER IJNE PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE RURAL COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION PER DOC. N0. 287721 OVER ALL OF THE PROPERTY. THIS EASEMENT WILL BE CONFINED AT A LATER DATE. • TOTAL AREA w 14.151 ACRES WETLAND DELINEATION COMPLIED BY EARTH SCIENCE AND ASSOCIATES. (August 2003) FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED BY E.G. RUD AND SONS IN SEPTEMBER OF 2003. • Job No578PP pleafmAoky �2f�I1IN�, DRAINAGE EIZ'oSioN CO/OWL AND OM PION JUSTIN'S PRESERVE C.�.a lam, MN S OHW LOW FLOOR LOWEST OPENING 989.6 '7 886 ass? .•sea 8 WET LAND OHW \ 8 qs 11 11, \ r or/ .61 s 93, s00 _s- / S \\ // \CO3�\ E 890.2 83.94 aaa E 884.64 73 CASRNa 9/AIL 8E B' DLL BOLTED COVER. AS APPROVED BY ENciNEE112 FINISHED GRADE - 1541 r- 4' PVC 4' W7E 4• PVC N •' 11111EAOED PLUG 4' CONCRETE PAD 4• T 4B BEND NOTES` - ALL JOINTS SHALL BE SOLVENT WELD INCEPT AS NOTED. - 4' SUP MANY PLUG SHALL BE BLOCKED SUFFIOENILY TO BAIHSTANO AN PRESSURE 1ESTNIa. CLEAN OUT (DRIVEWAY) 8 'S> Rs 87.4a S •r, B86. 7 887.13 PROVIDE INSULATION OVER SANITARY /FR CO2 TO HOUSE (2" MINIMUM} STYROFOAM) EDGE ,IIr WET OHWL 887.59 OF DELINEATED WET LAND /'Cs // EASEMENT LINE / LAND 13.73 \ 1752 i ° —z — — L10 7.Qa.— 980 I �s - 69% IRO AV C OAFS \9 2 2. v OH 296.27 7 CO 2 RE 890.00 IE 882.94 .> 5L 1 %4)6' i I0 f 0 � IJ 7) 07 L. \ ► A 1 I /I\ \ + h\ I ' \ coon\ g 1 LZ. T� /4 "'1 CURB STOP � 009) pONNECT TO EXISTING 8 STUB W/ CLEANOUT - IE 881..94 • (SEE DETAIL) OHW aA,WN J.V. cnttaze `C.G.S. f 91E PLAN SIC £AG4AEERI G PLOWEIENGNEERIMQ AC 9780 LECI G7AV AVE NE CZKI.E AWES MN 5501E -2625 (763) 785 -10IY - -730 DEED AND MEAS. -- CO 1 RE 890.00 IE 881.94 OH I CONNECT TO EX. 6" DIP W/ 89 1 1/4" CORPORATION 4 ", MH 8 -3 RE 894.66 IEE 881.62 $ESN 881.81 T- -8I PVC © 0.329 EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1 PRIOR TO ROUGH GRIDlNG, IISTALL SILT STOP FENCES IN LOCATIONS SHOWN ADDITIONAL SILT STOP FENCES HILL BE REQUIRED %HERE LOCAL CONEJITlONS REQUIRE (2) ROUGH GRADING SHALL PROCEED ON AN AREA BY AREA BASIS TO MINIMIZE UNC01PLE1ED ARE:/S. (5) AS EAQI AREA IS GRADED. PROVIDE NATIVE TOPSDL. SEED, AND MULCH ANCHORED `MTh A SHWGHT SET DISC WITHIN 14 DAYS OF FINAL GRADING, (4) SRI) IAITILAEDfFEPAIR SLT(1OPLFENCES (INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF ACCUMU IS SILT FENCE HDGS11NG U11U11M 1) The Information shorn on these drawings concerning type and or all Inclusive. The contractor Is responsible for making hla awn determination oe to the type and location of utilities an may be necessary to ovoid damage to these utilities 2) The Contractor Nall Be reasonable for seating utIlty location. Call Gopher State One at (851) 454 -0002 for locations. STREETS 1) Removal and disposal of existing street maenads as required tar construction is Incidental. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCA11DN AND ELEVATION OF EXIST1NG U WD NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSIRU HITE 0 6"-eitP --- .s9 PINE ROAD 0.10 acres 4 1 A.reby cot)), that Her pion eve Prepared Dy me or under my dirod supervision cad that I am 8 day Lcer_ed Pro - faoaapl Enga..r undr Uri Afro of the Srote of A6rrnasanx 11 ucayse 295 I W FEET) 1 inch - 50 ft ALL SERVICE LOCATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL HE 4 PVC SOR 25 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. WATER SERVICES SHALL 80 1 1/4- COPPER TYPE K. CURB STOPS TO BE PLACED AT PROPERTY LINE. LEGEN D: "'=oV 0 7 2003 NO LAKES 1) — Denotes Direction of Drainage 2) Denotes Proposed Contour 3) — — Denotes Existing Contour 4) — 5 — Denotes Silt Fence 5) xaea.00 Denotes Proposed Spot Elevation 6) •xBI4.B4 Denotes Existing Spot Elevation 7) —>— Denotes Existing Sanitary Sewer 8)-1— Denotes Existing Watermain 9) —»— Denotes Existing Storm 10) — > — Denotes Proposed Sanitary Sewer 11) - 1 — Denotes Proposed Watermain 12) -o.- Denotes Proposed Storm FFEPAREO FOR CARPENTER HONES 23230 E MARTIN LAKE DRIVE NE STACY, MW 55078 PHONE (651) 461 -5188 • A41F 11/7/03 SHEET C> • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM VI. A Jeff Smyser y�LciGeiof '' /0, N4a414ep-ier 2003 Discussion: Banners and Temporary Signs As discussed at several previous meetings, there is concern about the use of temporary signage. Temporary signage includes banners, but we should consider the other types as well. We have seen an increase in these signs of late in Lino Lakes. Staff is seeking direction on how to address the issues. The goal is for the P & Z to recommend some specific requirements. Staff will take those recommendations and prepare an amendment of the sign ordinance. The next step would be a formal public hearing at the P & Z. After that, the amendment would go to the City Council for consideration. At the October meeting, the P & Z directed staff to invite business owners to the November discussion. We mailed letters to 29 businesses that are representative of the types of business that have or are likely to use temporary signage. There was no intention to exclude any businesses, but it was not practical to invite every single commercial property owner. The letter asks that the invitation be passed on to any interested business owners. The attached matrix lists some of the issues: type, size, location, and duration of temporary signage. The matrix is presented to help with the discussion. Each row presents some options for an issue. The last column summarizes the general feelings of the P & Z based on previous discussions. Each "option" column is not intended to form a related set of requirements —we can mix up options from the different columns, or create new ones. P & Z discussion should be restriction /regulation anything not permanently affixed - banners should be attached to building -but what about other temporary signage? 1 month each time, with limit on number of times per year OPTION 3 NO LIMIT /RESTRICTION NO LIMIT /RESTRICTION 1 MONTH N Z 0 1- a 0 ANYTHING NOT QUALIFYING AS A WALL, GROUND, OR PYLON SIGN ONLY ATTACHED TO A "PERMANENT" STRUCTURE MUST CONFORM TO, OR BE INCLUDED IN, EXISTING LIMITS FOR BUSINESS (OR INSTITUTIONAL) SIGNAGE MUST MEET EXISTING LIMITS FOR PORTABLE SIGNS * OPTION 1 NO RESTRICTIONS ANYTHING NOT "PERMANENTLY AFFIXED" TO THE BUILDING OR GROUND ONLY ATTACHED TO BUILDING 32 SQ. FT. - - NO LIMIT /RESTRICTION w m co N ALLOWABLE TEMPORARY SIGNAGE should they be allowed? DEFINITION OF TEMPORARY SIGNAGE ALLOWABLE LOCATION ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWABLE TIME LIMIT •