Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/10/2004 P&Z Packet• • CITY OF LINO LAKES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING Wednesday, March 10, 2004 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: February 11, 2004. IV. OPEN MIKE V. ACTION ITEMS A. Final Plat for Century Farm North 2nd Addition — Jeff Smyser B. PUBLIC HEARING for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat/PUD for Oakwood View, 125 Ash Street (Rice Creek Covenant Church) — Jeff Smyser C. PUBLIC HEARING for Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development /Preliminary Plat for Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition, south of 79th Street and Nancy Lane intersection — Jeff Smyser VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Process to Address Temporary Signs /Banners — Jeff Smyser VII. ADJOURN • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:36 p.m., February 11, 2004. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 14, 2004, January 28, 2004, amended approved minutes from December 10, 2003 Mr. Root requested the following correction on the January 12, 2004 minutes, put in the reconvene time of the reconvened meeting at 8:50 p.m. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION approve the January 14, 2004 Minutes, January 28, 2004 Minutes, and amended approved minutes from December 10, 2003 and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion carried 6 -0. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared open mike open at 6:38 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike • Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:39 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 2 V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING, for Preliminary Plat, Sue Carpenter, Justin's Preserve., 171 White Pine Road Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. Staff stated this was a resubmittal of the plat reviewed by the Board in December. Carpenter Homes has requested approval of a preliminary plat for Justin's Preserve. Under the current subdivision ordinance, the creation of new lots on city sanitary sewer requires a plat rather than a minor subdivision. The project involves splitting an existing fourteen -acre parcel. The plat changed to include a neighboring parcel. A portion of the land will be added to that neighbor's lot. Staff indicated this application highlights an unusual situation that should be corrected. The existing house on the large property is connected to city sanitary sewer and water. However, it is not within the MUSA. It should have been included in MUSA when it connected to the utilities. This also is the case with the existing lot at 173 White Pine Road. Neither of these properties is in the MUSA although both are connected to utilities. This should be resolved by allocating MUSA reserve. Staff presented its analysis of the application. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot 1 shall connect to city sanitary sewer and water. 2. Issues discussed in the City Engineer review memo must be addressed to his satisfaction. 3. Park dedication of $1,665 shall be paid. 4. Prior to approval of the final plat by City Council, the applicant shall submit proof that the powerline easement has been confined. 5. The new plat must obtain approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to final plat approval by the City Council. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Applicant had no comment. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. There was no one present from the public who made comment. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to close the public hearing to 6:47 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to recommend Preliminary Plat, Justin's Preserve, White Pine Road, subject to the conditions as noted in staff's February 11, 2004 report and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 6 -0. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 3 Ms. Lane made a MOTION to recommend Allocation of 3.7 acres of 2004 MUSA Reserve Acres, Justin's Preserve, White Pine Road, and was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 6 -0. B. PUBLIC HEARING for Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Preliminary Plat, Marshan Estates, Marshan Lane Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. Staff stated this property is located adjacent to Marshan Lane. The 4.94 -acre parcel is physically divided by the existing Marshan Lane. However, the parcel, including Marshan Lane, is all one property. Since there continued to be interest by some of the residents, in addition to the applicant, for sewer and water the City authorized preparation of plans and specifications, in July 2003, for the utility improvements. The intent was to provide a more accurate and up to date estimate of the project costs and allow the city to address more accurately the possible financing scenarios. Additionally, staff became aware of possible on -site septic system issues developing along the street and believed that it would be beneficial for the city, from a public health standpoint, to pursue the extension of utilities. Staff noted during this lengthy process the City's Comprehensive Plan was approved by Metropolitan Council and the City adopted a new subdivision and zoning ordinance as well as a growth management ordinance. Staff have since noted that while the property is zoned R -1 Single Family Residential, lies within a Stage One Growth Area and within the existing Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), the property is guided for low density unsewered residential. Additionally, due to changes in the subdivision ordinance all subdivisions of sewered residential lots must be platted. Staff stated Mr. Rehbein is now requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Low Density, Unsewered to Low Density, Sewered. Additionally, the applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval for a 5 -lot subdivision which includes the property located on both the north and south sides of Marshan Lane. Staff presented its analysis of the application. Staff recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Plat boundary is adjusted along the easterly lot line of Lot 1, Block 1 to correspond with existing occupation lines and monumentations. 2. A 20 feet wide conservation easement is provided, adjacent to County Ditch 10, across Lot 1 -4. 3. The City Council orders the sanitary sewer and water improvements. 4. Building Permit applications shall include a tree preservation plan and a grading plan in conformance with the approved grading plan. 5. Trees cover will be evaluated against Firewise requirements (ie, trees should be thinned) subject to review by the City Forester. 6. The Developer shall enter into a Development Contract with the City. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 4 7. Dedication of a l0 -foot wide trail easement adjacent to Lake Drive, which would overlay the required 10 -foot drainage and utility easement. Chair Schaps asked if the residents were all okay with this proposal. Mr. Grochala replied they had recently had a neighborhood meeting to discuss this, but there might be some residents in attendance tonight who wanted to make comment. Mr. Rafferty requested a condition stating that parkland dedication shall be in the form of a cash payment in lieu of land. Mr. Root asked if Marshan Lane had been built to City standards. Mr. Grochala replied it was basically a public street by default and the City maintained it. He stated they were unable to find the actual dedication to the City though. He stated the street would remain the same width and repaved once the utilities were put through. Mr. Studenski stated the work that would be done would put back the standard thickness of 1 ' /z" to 2" of blacktop and then the 6" gravel base, but they would not be going to the full width of a standard City street. He indicated there would be no curbs. Mr. Root inquired about the mixed use at the end of the street and asked if there would be any need to widen the street in the future and asked if there would be additional right -of- way needed. Mr. Grochala replied there would be sufficient right -of -way in this area. Mr. Tralle asked if the ponding issue that had occurred a couple of years ago was still an issue. Mr. Grochala replied that issue was a backup of the sewer lines and it had been resolved. Mr. Tralle asked if the existing homes would be required to have their septic systems checked. Mr. Grochala replied they did require pumping of all septic systems every three years and at that time they were inspected. If the systems were failing, the City would be notified at that time. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. Ron Strantz, Lot 16, stated he had gone to all of the meetings and he had little objections except there was something wrong with the property lines. He stated when the City did the survey in 1997, the road was an easement up to the corner of this property and during the meetings it came up as to who actually owned Marshan Lane because it had never been signed over. He asked if there was a legal easement and he asked for a copy of such an easement. He stated the cul -de -sac did not have an easement either for access. He requested before this went too far that they resolve the easement issue. He stated when this was deeded in he did not want to see his legal description changed. He thought the city should have documentation stating that they own the road. Chair Schaps noted the historical records of the City were not complete with respect to this area, however the city would discuss measures to officially acquire the road. Mr. Strantz agreed that the discrepancies in the property lines on the plat were minimal, and that generally speaking he was happy with the proposed arrangement. Mr. Strantz stated that he would absolutely hook up to city utilities once they are available. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 5 Mr. Grochala replied the property that the road lies on was owned by the current property owners. He stated the City had the right to continue to maintain or continue to improve the area because they had maintained the road for so many years. He noted nothing would be changed, except it would be shown permanently on a map. He stated the legal descriptions did not match up with the occupation lines or the monumentation in this area, so they were proposing to set the outside exterior limits consistent with the occupation lines and then set new monumentation to these lines. Mr. Kytonen, Surveyor, stated they would fix the eastern boundary of the larger lot and accept the monumentation as it was. He noted the properties would acquire land under this arrangement because they are going to give up the extra depth. Mr. Lane made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 7:31 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Tralle asked who paid for the legal costs for the redeeding. Mr. Grochala replied essentially, the platting was done by the applicant and they would prepare the Quit Claim Deeds for the outlots, which would then be turned over to the property owners. He noted there would only be a charge for a filing fee for the deed. However, if each property owner wanted to "clean up" their individual legal descriptions, this would be a cost to the property owners, but it was not necessary that this be done until the property owner wanted to sell their property. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to recommend the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from unsewered residential to sewered residential and was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat, Marshan Estates, Marshan Lane, subject to the conditions as noted in staff's February 11, 2004 report and adding a condition that the parkland dedication shall be in the form of a cash payment in lieu of land and a condition that applicant shall provide Quit Claim Deeds, or some other form of conveyance to be determined by the City Attorney to the property owners was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. C. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING For Rezone and Preliminary Plat, Legacy Holdings Lino Lakes LLC, Legacy at Woods Edge, SE corner of 25W and Lake Drive Chair Schaps reopened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Staff stated 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 Tow 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 DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 6 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. Staff summarized the project for the Board. Staff recommended approval of the rezoning from LB, Limited Business to Planned Unit Development and approval of the corresponding development standards. Staff recommended approval of the Development Stage Plan and Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The following modifications shall be incorporated into the Preliminary Plat: a. Additional right -of -way for the northbound I -35W ramps is required and should be incorporated into the preliminary plat as determined by SEH. b. Drainage and Utility easements and dimensions need to be shown on the preliminary plat. Easements are 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. c. Any portions of the plat bordering Mn/DOT or Anoka County right -of -way should include dedication of access control to the respective agency. d. Outlot A, should be labeled as park. Additionally, is Outlot C should be shown as park. If it is proposed to be retained by the developer a conservation easement shall be provided to the City. e. Title work should be prepared to verify the status of existing roadway easements i.e., public or private. If it is determined that they were public easements they shall be vacated in accordance with city and state requirements. f. The extent of the Shore land Districts of George Watch and Marshan Lakes (1,000 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level) should be delineated on the plat. g. The total upland area should be tabulated and included on the preliminary plat (gross acreage less area of wetlands). Specific lots with wetlands should show both gross acreage and upland acreage. 2. A development - phasing plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. 3. A feasibility study shall be prepared for the installation of Public Improvements. Such feasibility study shall include estimated costs and proposed assessments to benefiting property owners. 4. Developer shall provide and Economic Feasibility Study of the proposed project for review by the City. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 7 5. Developer shall provide an Operation and Maintenance Agreement for the development covering both Public and Private Improvements for review and approval by the City. 6. Developer shall enter into a development contract with the City. 7. Acquisition by the City of parcels adjacent to the site required for proposed Lake Drive improvements. 8. Requirements for project identify and signage will need to be established in conjunction with final plan/final plat approval. 9. The proposed Lakes Drive improvements will be subject to review and approval by Mn/DOT and Anoka County. Mr. Root asked what the City was getting with this project. Mr. Grochala replied the City wanted a "downtown" center for the City and that process started with looking at this area and the City purchasing the land for the City Hall, and that lent itself to the idea of a community and pedestrian friendly downtown area. He noted this would provide a wide range of housing opportunities not available in other parts of the City. He stated the City would get the tax base. Mr. Root asked what sort of variances was the developer getting. Mr. Grochala replied the density and setbacks were not typical for developments in the City, as well as the opportunities to use the air space to provide for residential opportunities. He indicated, however, that the City was also requiring high architectural standards there were not required in other areas of the City. Mr. Root asked what was the opinion regarding the traffic circle. Mr. Grochala replied traffic circles did work effectively in traffic control and the City believed this would be a benefit for this area. Ms. Lane asked if the housing units counted against the 147 housing units per year. Mr. Grochala replied they did not because this development was specifically exempted from that requirement. Mr. Tralle asked when would the completion date for the whole project be. Mr. Grochala replied it would be phased in and some of the completion dates were tied into financing, marketing, etc., but they were estimating it would be completed in 2 -5 years. Mr. Pogalz asked what was the first thing that would happen with this development. Mr. Grochala replied there would be a rough grading of the site and following that would be utility and internal street construction. Mr. Rafferty asked if the units in Block A were going to be the first phases of the project. Mr. Grochala replied he was relatively certain that Block A would go first on this. He noted they did want the southern half of the zone to be built because this area was not in the TIF area. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 8 Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Elizabeth Kautz, Vice President Hartford Group, stated in terms of phasing of the development, they were working hard to make sure they put product in the site into the TIF district within the next year also. Mr. Rafferty asked if some residential would be built first to support the commercial area. Ms. Kautz replied that was correct. Mr. Rafferty asked if there had been some success with this type of direction in other cities. Ms. Kautz replied this has been a successful development in other cities. She asked the community to identify what kind of retailers they would like to see and The Hartford Group so they could contact those retailers. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. There were no comments made by the public. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:37 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. Mr. Rafferty asked what happened with the park dedication for this project. Mr. Grochala replied there would probably be a land and a cash payment. He stated however that they were still discussing this. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to recommend the Rezoning from LB, Limited Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development and inclusion and approval of development standards and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 6 -0. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Development Stage Plan and Preliminary Plat subject to the conditions as noted in staffs February 11, 2004 report and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Chair Schaps stated they needed to have an election of officers and asked if the Board wanted to deal with this tonight. He noted they needed to elect a Chair and a Vice Chair. Mr. Rafferty recommended Mr. Schaps as the Chair. Mr. Hyden recommended Mr. Rafferty as the Vice Chair. The Board voted unanimously in favor of Mr. Schaps as Chair and Mr. Rafferty as Vice Chair. VII. ADJOURNMENT DRAFT MINUTES • • • Planning & Zoning Board February 11, 2004 Page 9 1111 Ms. Lane made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 6 -0. 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: March 10, 2004 TOPIC: Resolution 03 -101: Final Plat, Century Farm North BACKGROUND The preliminary plat for Century Farm North was approved by the City Council on April 28, 2003. The approval includes a phasing plan as required by the growth management ordinance. The final plat for phase 1 (56 units) was approved in July. The developer has submitted the final plat for phase 2. The submitted final plat includes individual lots for units in phase two of the approved phasing plan. This includes 65 units: 22 single family detached townhomes, 42 single family lots, and one single family lot for an existing house. This existing home was not expected to remain when the phasing plan was approved. In order to comply with the approved phasing plan, this lot must be counted as a new unit. ANALYSIS Because of the complexity of this project, each phase includes elements not necessarily included in previous phases. The final plat for each phase must be compared against the conditions of approval. The final plat substantially conforms to the approved preliminary plat and phasing plan. A revised title commitment is under review and must be approved by the City Attorney, along with the association declarations, before the final plat is considered by the City Council. The first phase's association document included the authority for the City to enforce the terms of the declarations. The City Attorney recommends including this in the second phase as well. A development contract is being prepared, and will include financial securities. Conditions attached to approval of the preliminary plat (Resolution 03 -60): Condition #4: "The submitted townhome housing types and building elevations be modified to specify finish materials and be subject to City approval. Side walls facing public streets shall include windows or other architectural features to avoid the appearance of a blank wall." • Century Farm North Final Plat page 2 New elevations were submitted. They include vinyl siding and shakes, and windows on the ends of the structures. The City's townhome building material standards in the zoning ordinance state: Exterior Building Finish: The exterior of townhome dwelling units shall include a variation in building materials which are to be distributed throughout the building facades and coordinated into the architectural design of the structure to create an architecturally balanced appearance. In addition, townhome dwelling structures shall comply with the following requirements: a) A minimum of twenty -five (25) percent of the combined area of all building facades of a structure shall have an exterior finish of brick, stucco and/or natural or artificial stone. b) Except for brick, stucco, and/or natural or artificial stone, no single building facade shall have more than seventy -five (75) percent of one type of exterior finish. c) For the purpose of this section, the area of the building facade shall not include area devoted to windows, entrance doors, garage doors, or roof areas. The front facades meet these requirements. However, the ends and garage sides (rear) do not. The building elevations must be revised. Condition #6. The original approval included specific height restrictions to • protect air space for the private air park. The applicant is requesting revisions to these. The revised building height plan includes a 7:1 "transitional surface" on the sides of the runway and a 20:1 "approach surface" off the end of the runway. We have discussed the proposed new restrictions with MnDOT Aeronautics. The new restrictions are more complete and more in line with MnDOT recommendations. • Under MnDOT rules, the approach surface (off the end of runway) must be maintained for the air park to continue having a license to operate. The transitional surface is recommended, but not mandatory. The City is not obligated to adopt these restrictions. It is in the air park's interest to do so. Public entities have to purchase land or development rights around public airports to maintain several safety zones. Placing restriction on the use of land to protect a private airport is a different situation. The City's comprehensive plan does includes an objective to adopt some airport zoning restrictions. This plat, with its new airpark lots that are part of the airpark itself, offers the opportunity to do so without imposing restrictions on land outside of the plat. These restrictions apply only to property within the Century Farm North development. Condition #10. This condition addresses park dedication for the plat, which was unresolved at the time of preliminary plat approval. Since then, it has been resolved. However, the park trails are to run within a powerline easement. The developer is negotiating with the powerline easement holder, Great River Engergy, to ensure that the • Century Farm North Final Plat page 3 trail is acceptable. Since the trail will be a City park trail, we must make sure that the trail is allowable. This is part of the negotiations over reducing the size of the easement. The easement actually covers a much larger area and the developer is negotiating confining the easement. Otherwise, it may not be possible to build the approved dwelling unit structures. This should be resolved before final plat approval. OPTIONS. 1. Approve the final plat for Century Farm North, including the revision of the height restrictions. 2. Table and return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 2 The P & Z included as a condition of approval that the building exteriors should be reviewed when the final plat for these townhomes is considered. Building materials on townhomes is an important issue, and was discusses during the consideration of the preliminary plat last year. The zoning ordinance was adopted March 10, 2003. The preliminary plat was approved on April 20, 2003. As noted above, additional attention to building exteriors is needed regarding the materials. The following issues also need resolution, as with any plat. 1. Title commitment must be approved by City Attorney. (A new one was submitted March 4th.) 2. Homeowners association declarations must include city enforcement authority. 3. Development agreement. 4. Powerline easement issues must be resolved, including the park trail. This report is based on the following: Final Plat, Century Farm North 2nd Addition, received March 4, 2004. Air Park Building Height Exhibit, received March 4, 2004 Building Elevations: received January 13 and February 17, 2004 ielpokn mom NO SCALE SEC. 7, T. 31 N., R. 22 W. VICINffY MAP MATCH LINE A CENTURY FARM NORTH 2ND ADDITION ( ( [.y d.Y3W ( e. b 40 g.14 4o -J \ 40.00 J \ H87'3o35 \I1 b JO q bile 1 /4 N / / y / V / 30 1 L STREET R — dv4,176 N871.207'E — 5528 nR 43767r is /1 Le6017 5182 r..; S1$e `'___ 804ig'22• 'I a 03• 6cSf d t� 1881 ;Ra ,nti 14S I rt 4I I c I OUTLQT �1 11 li I 1 15 „1 h 114 pi // • • let V I 1 i I I I ; I I I I I. EXISTING ORAWAQ & U0U1Y EASEMENT e _ I fdd. PER FLAT OF CENTURY FARM NORM �\ j Ne77C325 7a� L IFGEND er'"4, 41p • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND. MARKED RLS 17765, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED O DENOTES A 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS 17765 sk DENOTES WETLANO AREA DENOTES WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE NORTH BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED GRAPHIC SCALE 10 o 25 50 100 155 8181 nvi E -W t/1 UNE 22 I RLS 5332_ �= Ye 7, 1.31. R.22 -.r — - __ -- CARL S8T32' 14'W IRON PIPE OPEN ( N8T30'39 E A STREET 353.63 Yt , Scale In Feet RLS 5332 709.73 4 4 , N00•40'30 "E 4 4 CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA SECTION 7, T31, R22 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Century Form North Development. Inc.. a Minnesota Corporation. fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Anoka, Stole of Minnesota. to wit: Outlot 0, Outlot E. and Outlot H, CENTURY FARM NORTH. according to the recorded plat thereof, on File and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Anoka County. Minnesota Has caused the some to be surveyed and plotted as CENTURY FARM NORTH 2ND ADDITION and does hereby donote and dedicate to the public for public use forever the lone. street, trak, and parks: and the easements as shown on this plot for drainage ond utility purposes only. In witness whereof said Century Farm North Development. Inc.. a Minnesota Corporation. hos caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of 200 Signed Gary M. Uhde, President The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day o/ 200 by Gory M. Uhde, as President of Century Farm North Development, Inc.. a Minnesota Corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public, My Commission Expires County. Minnesota I hereby certify that I nom surveyed and plotted the property described on this plat as CENTURY FARM NORTH 2N0 ADDITION and that this plat is a correct representation of said survey. Not all distances ore correctly shown on the plot in feet and hundredths of o loot; Nat all monuments have been or will be correctly placed in the ground as shown: that the outside boundary lines are correctly designated on said plat and that there are no wet fonds as defined in MS 505.02, Sub. 1. or public highways to be designated other than as shorn on said plat. Ronald P. Alwin. Land Surveyor Minnesota Registration No. 17765 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing Surveyor's Certificate was acknowledged before me this day of 200_ by Ronald P. Alwin, Land Surveyor. Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission Expires This plat of CENTURY FARM NORTH 2ND ADDITION was approved by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota this day of 200_, and it applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been received by the city or the prescribed 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations. as provided by Minnesota Stotutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2. By Mayor By Clerk This plat has been checked and approved this day of 200_ Larry Hoium Anoka County Surveyor NOTE: THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, UNITED STATES CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCIES HAVE CATEGORIZED VARIOUS WETLANDS, WHICH ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED BY CHAPTER 505.02, SUBDIVISION 1 OF MINNESOTA STATUTES AND MAY NOT BE SHOWN HEREON. DEVELOPMENT OF LANDS CONTAINING SAID WETLANDS MAY BE SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR LIMITATIONS. RECEIVED MAR 0 4 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES _.._ ,71011111111111111111111111111111'. METRO LAND SURVE'fING & ENGINEERING ` 12550 Fletcher lane North -Unit B. Rogers. NN 55374 Telephone:(763)428 -5130 Fax:(783)426 -5172 E -mail surveymelrols.aom Tattle Co ado: (651) 766 -0112 Pine City: (320) 628 -3287 SHEET 1 OF 2 SEC. 7, T. 31 N., R. 22 W. VICINITY MAP CENTURY FARM NORTH 2ND ADDITION 1 EGFND N89'40'll "E ss4p. 77.96 soj, `PO .S:P 4. • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND, MARKED RLS 17765. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED O DENOTES A 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT SET. MARKED RLS 17765 It DENOTES WETLAND AREA - DENOTES WETLAND BOUNDARY UNE -a • r T� - Y � �66y6 *A 63. 588•3'41.6 N,,g s g5 E NOTE: THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, UNITED STATES CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCIES HAVE CATEGORIZED VARIOUS WETLANDS. WHICH ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED BY CHAPTER 505.02, SUBDIVISION 1 OF MINNESOTA STATUTES AND MAY NOT BE SHOWN HEREON. DEVELOPMENT OF LANDS CONTAINING SAID WETLANDS MAY BE SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR LIMITATIONS. N85.29'21 "E 206.36 zl 51 ° 87"36'23 "E 7110.37 lA �N 4o1.t O at -4 �5 Y'• t 2 • EXISTING POWERLINE EASEMENT_ • 4 , \ - PER DOCUMENT N0. XXXXX - / , \`` / N88.53'4l "E - - 201.10 / 91, `s / .56 A - ...; : PARK 68853'410 6015 1646.56 BLOCK 1 _ 68776'23'0 / 115.16 498,3'41W 8805? - _9,LN1fi �.. 686 6 4' . 1 \190.29 c- 7 NORTH BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED GRAPHIC SCALE 50 0 25 50 CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA SECTION 7, T31, R22 100 Scale in Feet 4h 1;45 �a� 5 N88.53'41 "E 68853'411 91.11 6:.4000 51.7. 3001 30.01 - jp1'06'19iS` ' •� - 7 68853'410 72.63 1 30 30 11.114' 68853'41 E A 00 / / $6z I l I � So r - DRAINAGE & UTIUIY EASEMENT-J. 1'• / / I` m OUTLOT B // I„ I 2 20.04 O 1 II_ R N S89340'43•E 12621 I " 20 586'2:'34 "N 40.85k 0' a. 25. :11;21r3 6 p0 00. * 51 q3 V509 15.76 - 673 7111' 8 M5\ \1 PS6N,C \ p0'� 0V 2634 566 ,466"24 640 L' 3p0 00 RZO"00'0 p AV-s4 51• '0 N z co 05 0 140.37 �N86`28'34 "E 110.67634'0 51650 '32'34 N8678'N'E • 98632034.0 yp- 5150 51.50 29.13 8 o 2100 - 3810 686-28.34-E "8678'34 862834E 68678'34'0" DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT 396.12 OVER ALL OF LOT 43, BLOCK 1 1486328'31'1 STALLION 3 E x8550361 7' 10.50 1 • 68628341 LANE _ 396.36 }96.64 48628'34'0 DRAINAGE & U1IUTY EASEMENT 65659341 , -10.50 %P 6 ALL OF LOT 17, BLOCK 2 1650 N8755'43E 6867874'0 68678'34'0 80.41 'r n L =28 27 X470'00' 2542 L• 5.92 30.00 06•4•3E00 f 77 0 30 8 30 58994'261 5576 26.10 I m IsI 0.;•'Y 1 PARK 589'4043E 14621 OUTLOT C \ 1 569340'43 "E 8 148.21 34, ° 589.40'431 12.50 6 589340'43'E 72.50 556 589.40'430 72.50 5 0 589340'43-E. 72.50 5%4,6 889340'43'E 72.50 s° Y 8 __. 4 589.4043E 72.50 $ 0 36 O 6-1 "V s 589340'431 72.50 3 589'40'430 72.50 0 5{ 5 O 5 5,50 786 E 68678'34'0 SAE 68678 31 E • N6 BLOCK 2 r °- 687.09'41"0 _� _19,16 - __ 5A� <- 1 =`,1`'DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT (- i 7 DRANAGE 4 UI1UIY EASEMENT F'ER 09056 ALL OF LOT 1870804E 2 (1p110r``•1;� _PLAT OF CENTURY FARMON06M t', nO- 0 6875834'0 687'58'34'0 5150 7 Y '1 SI.50 IN 51.50 1737f ( 401 5 \}0 i R R g, 53 gi �* 14 Ip 13 12 f 15 :,6 ? p A P P 10 10 51.50 51.50 E N1d5j1� 681358'34"E 5 ° '° 68758'34 C ° N8758'34•E77'E \ 1 .4-0' 6 0' N8158'34'E -.=1- ✓f 1 687358'341_,..f,' 10 679.1210.62 _ .., -5�^ 1 -- �� 58158'34 "N 165.00 - - - A 4 \0.59 126.7 338 METRO LAND SURVEYING ENGINEERING • • 12510 Fletcher Lane North -Unit 9, Rogers, MN 55374 Telephone: (763)428-5130 Far(763)428 -5172 E -mail: surveymetrols.com Little Canada: (651) 766 -0112 Pine City. (320) 629 -3267 E -W 1/4 UNE OF SEC 7, 7.31, 6.22 • • • • N 68158'34 0 51.50 11 .y0 '�� 6.43 ?6z 1 22.00 00" 51.50 87'58 34 0 202 O N87'32'oYE 67114'09'0/ L62.300M""$, 9.74 44 p. 13'2425 tin' 1 :0,01 '012651 /i N 40 1 91A I M STREET d 4326'•Y 05 a oy 28 13'26'71 L =60.77 7556 5392 a 15 S� RLS 5332 -7. MATCH LINE A SHEET 2 OF 2 N �® 1st ADDITION LOT BLOCK MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT ABOVE STREET CENTERLINE MAX. BUILDING ELEVATION MAX. HANGER •GABLE ELEVATION / MAX GABLE HEIGHT MAX. HANGER EAVE ELEVATION / MAX EAVE HEIGHT 4 1 79.00 FT. 984.00 NA NA 13 2 74.50 FT. 979.00 NA NA 14 2 73.92 FT. 978.92 NA NA 1 3 73.92 FT. 977.42 NA NA - 2 3 63.27 FT. 967.27 NA NA 3 3 67.89 FT. 971.89 NA NA 1 4 64.36 FT. 968.36 949.85/ 50 FT. NA 2 4 60.38 FT. 964.38 944.85/ 45 FT. NA 3 4 59.37 FT. 963.37 939.85/ 40 FT. NA 4 4 59.73 FT. 963.37 939.85/ 40 FT. NA 5 4 60.82 FT. 964.82 NA NA 6 4 61.46 FT. 965.46 NA NA 7 4 63.02 FT. 967.52 NA NA 8 4 63.10 FT. 967.10 NA NA 9 4 39.64 FT. 939.84 932.85/ 33 FT. NA 10 4 30.84 11. 934.64 929.10/ 28.4 FT. 924.8/ 24.1 FT 11 4 39.50 FT. 934.50 935.00/ 34 FT. NA 12 4 50.46 FT. 954.46 950.00/ 49 FT. NA 13 4 63.84 FT. 967.84 960.00/ 59 FT. NA - 3rd ADDITION LOT BLOCK MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT ABOVE STREET CENTERUNE MAX. BUILDING ELEVATION MAX. HANGER GABLE ELEVATION / MAX GABLE HEIGHT MAX. HANGER EAVE ELEVATION / MAX EAVE HEIGHT I I 54.4 FT. 956.5 960.0/ 59.0 FT NA 2 1 43.3 FT. 945.0 950.0/ 49.0 FT NA 3 1 32.9 FT. 933.6 937.5/ 36.5 FT NA 4 1 22.3 FT. 923.0 926.2/ 25.5 FT 921.9/ 21.2 FT 5 1 22.8 FT. 923.5 926.3/ 26.3 FT 922.0/ 22.0 FT 6 1 32.7 FT. 933.5 937.1/ 37.1 FT NA 7 1 43.3 FT. 945.0 950.0/ 50.0 FT. NA 8 I 54.5 FT. 956.5 960.0/ 60.0 FT NA 9 1 43.2 FT. 943.2 * 922.0/ 22.5 FT. NA 100 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 ■00 200 Scale: 1 Inch - 100 Feet * Proposed hangar for Lot 9. Black 1 shall be constructed no closer than 26.0 feet north of the existing drainage and utility easement. --� ���� XJfl,CT B A r NOTE: TRANSITIONAL SURFACE BEGINS 100' FROM RUNWAY CENTERUNE & UP 0 7:1 SLOPE APPROACH SURFACE BEGINS AT END OF RUNWAY & UP 0 20 :1 SLOPE • i f 10 Slr /■ „e./61. ilwil _ iinall■w"--,--iii ••)*°'" ,A. 1?1014616MOVST---rgilliPiraTillangliiiir 6)•0 ,� �si�-t. III ®N ® �.� _ ��uau -'�F91 �� a�/"1r�-- -lir AOL 000 IOW Of -,agebliiiii .00 ..I14 --1 "11-11410-.01_,Italletile I g 01•16 - ---*1.-19=-Wii91=4411211-Gintga iiWrii ,/ 10640 111 '--elniI"."'"--..00...41111111111_,,000TiCrIt--111111111-r-j t r . „igmmvw■Bzx=3"iffliwsimiljEsiffisl------------ • .... ?Y•.. ...SA E.Z rNE A• ....:........., i ; ........ 240'X1717')- Y ......,_- - -. r -- .. 5 • RECEIVED MAR 0 4 2004 "'QTY or LINO L m Q al 0 W C0) Q O N Z Z = Z Z Z f c • m Q U.. LL. QQ LL ^ <U w U K m r. REVISIONS BLDG HEIGHT .4111111111 11111 SSS alma Alaranaligennallk, `N. Ariessixonmalemer ,1111111111111111111111101117e1111111, Aina nainmeasen, Aurniumoinomietemarr- .isswarasallisonimmatts• ariviessos SSSSS auggr •Rmiumiewinwswinssamp,-- ••■•■ •11■10 RIM gfill mows mow glif MUM Aid s= 1651.11111. :=111111 no efqPnti'lln MINVNIYAW Now , 1111111111•■=111,1,5-,-4,17.0.0,'. 11111111111•111•1111. • 11•111111111M- 11111101.11k. sok iminweitiosisass 111111111•1111111/1111111111111 esrinintinmerintairre assosaitileamintormses ammusessming■ OOOOO • OO impisawassuresalnnsar atunissweesesawlesses- Agagnippokirtaint1101111111111111111e- -1 MS aVtli A* '.-72. •a !"--1-171W-77--.7:-;;,;24.:TIr...t,...: 12-1 MUM rea Attached Town Homes RP 0 1 JAN I 3 Z004 CITY OF LANG LAKES • • VI N91_, 51 NA-012- Moor-rrizit? 1 LiLA k\kf CVUL \)(sce_■Plyiz_vn Ci-vo \ 7.,:iin IN. As. 88888 Ir. 7 •Elf a. it mu .1110••••11•1111•11•••• _ ;ire 88 88 rliellili. .1111 lila 1111111PWW•1117,118,- --'411.assas.• • so • wirollai . 1•4111 M/111•I 1ai1r 11 1I 7 e2 • 610RA1 . 1 17 IM - • .1I.N■ MEM . 1•11111111141111111111•111111111 ..i.Aravorimmhimr9)____,..........., MENU MN IN MINN NM I IMMO. II• LI ENNUI yam MIMRINImami■. X. IN ?NM ....surnia re. ip•morile.,-- sum iesaluirmsty ........................ AMMO MI II Iln II riff' •• Mg = ammo mai = -...-..1 11■1•111M■11 R11•1111•1111• MN •1111111111111 111111 • NNE MN II MEM —NM \flF-L u..) uzy • -16 (2A Loe: CAS yl-PJA.3 c.) X> 1\1\ N) C-4e31%-1 A:ti-C122-1 (::'1-k% C"S ••■•••••■•••■• MM.= IN NM 111111111EM immilumporxmlimja — um ix bi in lor-_....'sappoolnall:30.- a MIMI IIIIIHIM.1111111=1:"-•11•11111111111•11 NI MI MI II =1111,111•1111111 MAIM 1== 011111111•1,11111•11•101 MIN —11111ACIII MINIMUM • LI0 IEWIlli=Fli=r3C110 DIDEsi mira: Toni a EIDMOLICDO ME00 • NI wit • m (ZA,L4r-t.G. 11212-.00 i■ F\12-e-C.)Wt \-C"P< -544- r C16L- -0 L.-0;- 1-/i14k--k--scC—eLEr Mil)P- • Ai 1111u. 411U.•1•11.• .11111imis111. 41I i ;NE FEE& ki.;,` N M•111.1111Mesri.,... -SI I11 I mum Lu1kg1 lis lor rN=E.. viia 11 min =:::11 IMRE 11 • IBM l:Lu=:Iia iiii 4 Isi n 111 _flu =--- .... -75 ="11---iitAliriliimmatilivi• :-W .2 ■ e ur 'll = ,......i...„ iii arn 111 .--;141111. 11 OM: 11 =BM 11 •In' •1111W11:61 11 4111• I[III-- ill'u MCI ill 11‘1, dak .151111-111iNII'm 1,11,161 M iat E81 IBM MIN WWI HIM FR II11111 1111111.- •1111t11111111 MIN MIN ;;111011 r as. INN MIMI En in raat- iv, MIN _MI = _ _ - re•lito•IIISS•a111 NU Ms al elmrlles Tu te-ci -Frve-r4i) • ...ez1>INg – – QtJ ikeT2,41--Y.1030t.E- 1YN ki•s Pet-c_lik W 0 RFCE!VED FEB 1 7 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES • 1-1=■•• It • c2 tTfl) De Eue.haen 6) f<wiln 120sw \A(12 Pc-e-an acil 11 •11 11 0 (L--; r■1 rEa-a3 ES jtUL ey2Ag-I "C-)P. 1\01/- 1.A.) 01- C.Y7--Q "VC': V 1N-3 LA-)C2_.-r % • ats-s Pc‘gAi-o12--rn I REM:7 VED 1 FEB I 7 2004 MY OF Lttit.; LAKES i ( • C=3" • • • • AGENDA ITEM V. B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser P & Z MEETING DATE: March 10, 2004 TOPIC: Public Hearing: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Low Density Resid. • Rezoning to Planned Unit Development • Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Oakwood View Rice Creek Covenant Church BACKGROUND The Rice Creek Covenant Church has submitted an application to further develop its current site at 125 Ash Street. The application includes several elements. The goal is to create ten single family detached home lots on the north part of the property as well as a lot for a duplex on the southern part of the property. The duplex is intended for a group home for people with disabilities. This project includes an odd mixture of actions because of the existing land use category and zoning. The following approvals are necessary to accommodate the proposal: 1. Amend the comprehensive plan to change the site from Public Semi- Public to Low Density Sewered Residential. 2. Rezoning of the southern portion from R -1X to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for mixed uses: the existing church and the group home. (The existing R1 -X zoning already accommodates the single family lots on the north.) 3. PUD development stage plan/preliminary plat A conditional use permit (CUP) was approved by the City in 1996 to provide for building the church. That CUP approval included a three -phase plan. Each new building must undergo a site plan review, but would not require a CUP amendment review. However, the CUP did not include a residential facility, as is being proposed now. Therefore, the CUP is not relevant here inasmuch as no additions to the church building itself are being proposed. The zoning ordinance provides for two different types of PUD. If only residential uses were included in the project, the PUD would require only a conditional use permit. However, the church and the group residence is a mix of uses. A mixed use PUD requires a rezoning to PUD. • Oakwood View page 2 ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan, Land Use and Zoning The table below identifies the existing land uses, guided land uses, and zoning for the area. Location Existing Land Use Guided Land Use Existing Zoning Site church Public /Semi- Public R -1X North residential Low Density Sewered Residential R -1X South residential City of Shoreview 24,296 East residential Low Density Sewered Residential R -1X West residential, vacant Medium Density Sewered Resid. R -1X The following table summarizes the project. Lot single family area church lot group home new ROW total Gross Site Area (acres) 6.33 7.28 2.23 0.85 16.70 Upland Area (acres) 4.22 12,829 24,296 4 Total Units 1 10 4,180 2 Gross Densiy: units /acre 1.58 0.90 Net Density: units /acre 2.37 7 Lot gross sf net sf (upland) wetland 1 55,383 20,283 35,100 2 41,176 12,826 28,350 3 37,125 12,829 24,296 4 26,779 22,599 4,180 5 21,490 21,490 6 16,306 16,306 7 23,835 23,835 8 13,591 13,591 9 14,209 14,209 10 26,039 26,039 total 275,933 184,007 91,926 acres 6.33 4.22 2.11 church lot 317,056 acres 7.28 duplex 97,226 acres 2.23 • • • Oakwood View page 3 The comprehensive plan currently guides the site for Public /Semi- Public (PSP) land use. This was done because of the existence of the church. The PSP category is not specifically for churches: the plan does not have a specific category for churches, nor are churches discussed in the plan. The zoning ordinance allow churches by conditional use permit in all residential zones. Because of the residential uses proposed for the site, the Low Density Sewered Residential classification is appropriate. This would allow for all uses proposed in the application. The plan shows single family detached lots in the northern area at a density of 2.37 units /acres. This falls within the 3 -6 u/a range allowed by the Low Density Sewered Residential land use category. The group residence duplex also falls within this range. The amendment to the comprehensive plan must be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review. Because of the small size of the project, we expect the Met Council review to be brief. Growth Management: MUSA Reserve: The comprehensive plan and the growth management policy establish a specific number of MUSA reserve acres to be allocated for residential growth for stage one (prior to year 2010). The site is within the existing MUSA, so no MUSA reserve is required. Growth Management, Units/Year: The comprehensive plan and the growth management policy establish a specific number of dwelling units of residential growth for stage one (prior to year 2010). The goal is 147 per year. The City Council has the flexibility to exceed the limit by 20% (29 units) in a year without amending the comprehensive plan. The table at the end of this report shows the status of the staging plans for final platting new residential units. Approvals for year 2004 have exceeded the goal by 18.4 %. An additional two units will raise that to 19.7 %. This is within the allowable discretionary range. At the discretion of the City Council, the duplex could be final platted in 2004. However, ten more lots would go beyond the 20% limit Therefore, final platting of the ten single family lots on the north side of the property will have to wait until 2005. In other words, if this project is to proceed, it must be phased over two years. Rezoning As stated in the zoning ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Board shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed zoning 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. Amending the comprehensive plan as requested would address the land use issue. Oakwood View page 4 2. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The church exists, and is surrounded by residential uses. Additional residential use on the site would be compatible with the area. 3. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein (in the zoning ordinance). Adjustment of the lot widths will address that issue. Providing for a future street connection will address the cul de sac length issue. 4. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. The creation of ten single family homes and two units for a group residence will not overburden city services. 5. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. The creation of ten single family homes and two units for a group residence will not generate enough traffic to overburden the road system. Planned Unit Development: Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Section 2, Subd. 10 of the zoning ordinance discusses the purpose of a planned unit development (PUD). The application should be compared to these purposes in order to justify the flexibility allowed by a PUD. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section of the Zoning Ordinance is to provide for the grouping of lots or buildings for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel by parcel, piecemeal, or sporadic approach to development. This section is intended to introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and open space through clustering of lots, buildings and activities, which promote the goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan or serve another public purpose. It is further intended that planned unit developments are to be characterized by central management, integrated planning and architecture, joint and common use and maintenance of parking, open space and other similar facilities, and harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. 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. A non - residential conditional use permit PUD may include a variety of commercial and/or industrial uses. A PUD that includes a mix of residential and • Oakwood View page 5 commercial/industrial uses must utilize the PUD zoning district as described in Sec. 9 Subd. 3 of this ordinance. The PUD, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Ordinance related to setbacks, heights, lot area, width and depths, yards, etc., by conditional use peiniit or a mixture of uses by rezoning to a PUD District, is intended to encourage: 1. A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Innovations in development that address growing demands for all styles of economic expansion, greater variety in type, design, architectural standards, and siting of structures through the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 3. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as existing vegetation, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly transition of varying land uses in close proximity to each other. 5. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering development costs and public investments. 6. Promotion of a desirable and creative environment that might be prevented through the strict application of City zoning and subdivision regulations. Lots: The minimum lot size in the R -1X zone is 12,825 sf of upland. As listed above, all lots meet this minimum. However, as explained under "grading and stormwater management" below, the easements must be enlarged and may reduce the buildable lot area. Lots 2 and 3 will have to be adjusted. The minimum lot width in the R -1X zone is 90 feet. Lot width is measured at the setback line. Lots 5 and 8 are only 85' wide. These must be adjusted to meet the minimum 90' requirement. The PUD is intended for the southern portion of the site. The northern portion is to retain its current R -1X zoning. 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. • • Oakwood View page 6 Utilities: The church currently has sanitary sewer and water service. The existing services come in from Oakwood Lane an run along the western edge of the property. These will be relocated within the Oakwood Lane extension. The existing pipes will be completely repalaced. The new lines will provide service for the group residence as well. Drainage and utility easements will cover all utilities. The subdivision ordinance requires that final plat approval be obtained before utilities can be constructed. However, utility service already exists, serving the existing church. Because of this, the relocation can occur without final platting the entire site. As noted in the City Engineer's review, the existing watermain is a long, dead end line. Water service and the possibility of looping the water needs re- examination. The City Engineer's report is attached. Grading and Stormwater Management: Four wetlands exist on the site. The plans include no filling of wetlands. Several stormwater ponds will be constructed. Drainage and utility easements will cover all wetlands and ponds. The subdivision ordinance requires that water courses must be protected by easement that will include at a minimum a ten (10) foot buffer extending outward from the delineated wetland boundary or the water course ordinary high water level. Lots with easements protecting water courses shall have sufficient dimensions and area outside the water course easement to meet or exceed the minimum lot area and width specified in the zoning chapter for the district in which the lots are located. The easement will need to be expanded from what is shown on the preliminary plat. This likely will reduce the lot sizes on a few lots. Lots 2 and 3 will have to be adjusted to ensure they have sufficient area without the easement. This can be done prior to final plat approval. Two "ponding and flowage" easements exist on the site. The plan proposes to vacate both. An easement vacation requires a public hearing at the City Council and two readings of an ordinance. The vacation hearing will occur when the project goes to the City Council for consideration. These are not P & Z action issues. The project requires the approval of the Rice Creek Watershed District. The City has not received geotechnical information on existing groundwater levels and soils. This must be determined in order to compare lowest floor elevations and soil suitability for construction. This must be ascertained prior to City Council consideration of the application. The grading plan is unclear in the are of the south end of the property. This must be clarified prior to City Council consideration of the application. • • Oakwood View page 7 Tree Preservation: The applicant must submit a tree preservation plan showing the grading plan superimposed on the tree inventory. Streets, Access: The Anoka County Highway Dept. has informed us that no additional right of way is necessary for Ash St. (CSAH 32). Typically, the County's policy is to require dedication of additional right of way to total 60' from centerline. The road is 100' wide (50' from centerline). Anoka and Ramsey Counties have agreed to a 100' right of way on this road to minimize impacts on existing homes. Driveway to Group Residence: On the south, the plan proposes a driveway off the church entry drive to serve the group residence. This driveway is narrow (10' -12') and squeezes between a pond and the property line. It is five feet from the property line, the minimum required distance, and it must be paved with curb. There also must be a shared driveway easement to allow the new lot to use the existing driveway. This will be a condition of approval. As drawn, this driveway may not be workable. The curve is tight, and it may not provide adequate access for large emergency vehicles. This must be corrected prior to consideration by the City Council. Oakwood Lane Extension: On the north, the proposal includes extending Oakwood Lane to provide access to the ten residential lots. This will exceed the 500' maximum cul de sac length allowed by the street standards, Sec. 302 of the City Code. Oakwood Lane was created as part of the Woodridge Estates plat in 1988 -89. Oakwood Lane runs from White Pine Road on the north to the north property line of the church site. A sketch by the City Engineer in July 1988 envisions the road to continue south to Ash Street with connections both east and west. However, Woodridge Estates did not provide for the eastern connection and the church was approved in 1996, which blocks a southern connection. It still is possible to plan for a connection of Oakwood Lane to a future neighborhood road to the west. Oakwood Lane could provide a temporary cul de sac with a connection to the western property line. Land to the west is guided for residential development (medium density) and itt is very likely that it will develop in the future. The 20 acres immediately west of the church site definitely could support development. Land further to the west likely will be able to as well, though to a lesser extent due to wetlands. Oakwood Lane could provide circulation and neighborhood connections, running south to Ash St. or west to Baldwin Lake Road. This would avoid the creation of new, long cul de sacs and may be the last opportunity to create any circulation route to connect neighborhoods in this part of the community. The comprehensive plan includes a policy and a recommendation for such connections: 6. Provide complete street systems to eliminate isilated neighborhoods and dead -end streets and allow for interaction between neighborhoods. Transportation policies, page 36, comprehensive plan • • Oakwood View page 8 6. Integrate low density sewered residential land uses within existing residential neighborhoods with local street connections, density transitions, and park planning. Recommendation for Planning District 4, page 135, comprehensive plan We recognize that many residents like cul de sacs because they minimize traffic on their streets. However, the lack of inter - neighborhood connections creates bottlenecks at points of access to collector and arterial roadways. Roads accessing Birch St. provide a clear example. Once the cul de sacs are built, the future problem is created. Creating connections creates options and distributes traffic, preventing the bottlenecks. Neighborhood street connections also provide for neighborhood social connections and allow for a greater sense of community. Staff recommends that the preliminary plat be revised to provide for a street connection to the west. The subdivision ordinance requires that final plat approval be obtained before roads can be constructed. The Oakwood Lane extension into the project cannot be constructed until the ten single family lots are constructed with phase two in 2005. The grading can occur earlier, and the utilities can be relocated as explained above. Group Residence Structure: Typically, we require architectural elevations and specific site plan information for a PUD. Since this project only includes one dupex (two units), it is not so critical. It is more similar to a house being built than a commercial structure. However, site plan information such as architectural elevations, floor plan, lot lighting, and the like will be required prior to a building permit being granted. It is not clear why so many parking stalls are needed. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD The Environmental Board reviewed this application on February 25. Recommendations are attached. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Approval of the project should include the following conditions: 1. The comprehensive plan amendment must obtain the approval of the Metropolitan Council prior to any further City project approvals. 2. The project shall be final platted in two phases. The group residence duplex may be final platted in 2004. The ten single family lots shall not be final platted until 2005. 3. The relocation of sanitary sewer and water services may occur with the 2004, phase one final plat because these utilities already existed. However, the construction of the Oakwood Lane street extension shall not occur until final plat approval of the single family lots in phase two, in 2005. All lots and units shall connect to city sanitary sewer and water. • • • Oakwood View page 9 4. Park dedication of $1,665 per unit shall be paid. Park dedication for the group residence, two units, shall be paid when that lot is final platted. Park dedication for the ten single family lots shall be paid with that final plat. 5. The new plat must obtain approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to final plat approval by the City Council. 6. Drainage and utility easements around all wetlands must be large enough to include at a minimum a ten (10) foot buffer extending outward from the delineated wetland boundary. 7. The applicant must submit geotechnical information on existing groundwater levels and soils in adequate time for review prior to City Council consideration of the application. 8. Prior to consideration by the City Council, the applicant must demonstrate the adequacy of the driveway to the group residence duplex in regard to emergency vehicle access, visibility, and other safety and practical issues. 9. Information on the grading plan is unclear in the are of the south end of the property. This must be clarified prior to City Council consideration of the application. 10. The adequacy of the water service must be determined prior to City Council consideration of the application. 11. Issues discussed in the City Engineer review memo of February 26, 2004 must be addressed to his satisfaction. 12. Lots shall be adjusted to ensure they have sufficient area without the wetland easement. 13. The preliminary plat shall be revised to provide for a future street connection to the west. 14. A revised preliminary plat showing the required changes shall be submitted for review prior to City Council consideration of the application. 15. The City seeding mix must be used for ponds and wetland areas. This must be noted on the plans. 16. The property owner must obtain approval from the City Council to vacate the existing ponding and flowage easements. 17. The applicant must submit a tree preservation plan showing the grading plan superimposed on the tree inventory prior to City Council consideration of the application. • • Oakwood View page 10 18. Site plan information for the group residence duplex shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. This shall include architectural elevations, floor plan, landscaping, and site lighting. 19. There must be a shared driveway easement to allow the new lot to use the existing driveway on Ash St. This easement must be submitted for review and be in order prior to final plat review by the City Council. OPTIONS. 1. Approve the application, including the following: a. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Low Density Resid. (entire site) b. Rezoning to Planned Unit Development (southern portion of site) c. Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat (entire site) with conditions 2. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 This review is based on the following plans and information: Preliminary Plat, 2/5/04 Preliminary Grading Plan, 1/26/04 Preliminary Utility Plan, 1/26/04 Certificate of Survey and Tree Inventory, 2/5/04 • • Phasing plans by year (lots /units to be final platted) 84 EN M I- O N II- OU (rrSO N Cl) r N01 N0000 E15 CA 8 N co 8 N O N. 8 N CO CO 33 CO 8 N CO N CO 75 Lc) 8 N N In r L.C) 10 O N CO r d' r- N co r O 561 O O 47 r N CO v.) 8 N LO CO ,-- O 10 CO N N r r year end 2002 r Cn r lf) E 75 a) d co r O o) N r 0 co 0 co 1521 N O r r d' N O O CO Development Name approved prelim. plats o O O Cn I2nd Addn 'Century Farms North 1 !Keefe: preliminary plat !Morton (minor subdiv) 1 Ravens Hollow Haley Manor (10 new lots) 'Crystal Cove (proposed) ,Millers Crossroads !Lakeview Estates (2 new) Snell (minor subdivision) Pheasant Hills Pres. 13th I 1Justin's Preserve 1 Marshan Estates (Rice Creek Church duplex Rice Church: Oakwood View 1 Highland Meadows East 2nd 'Pheasant Hills 12th island Td.,. O r r N. O CA O N. O O O O N C0_ o am d' c 0 n! r Q Q cis 0) E N U U E E X C2 2 N Memorandum DATE: February 26, 2004 TO Jeff Smyser FROM James E. Studenski, City Engineer p 4.4e RE: Oakwood View Attached is the TKDA review dated February 26, 2004, of the submitted documents for the proposed development. 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 55 01 4 -11 82 Phone: 651- 982 -2400 • Fax: 651 - 982 -2499 • TDD: 651- 982 -2410 TKDA 41 ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com To: James Studenski, City Engineer Reference: Oakwood View Copies To:. City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Comm. No. From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Routing: Date: February 26, 2004 12976 -002 A Preliminary Plat has been submitted by Glenn Rehbein Companies for Oakwood View. The proposed plat is located on 17 acres of property north of Ash Street (County Road J) and west of Hodgson Road (County Road 49). Documents received are as follows: 1. Wetland Delineation Report, hydrology calculations, hydrology summary and NPDES Phase II permit form, provided by Glenn Rehbein Companies (William A.T. McCully) dated January 23, 2004 and received by the City of Lino Lakes January 30, 2004. 2 Preliminary Plat, Certificate of Survey and Tree Inventory, Preliminary Grading Plan, and Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheets 1 -4), received by the City of Lino Lakes February 6, 2004. 3. HydroCad model and supporting data dated January 13, 2004 by Glenn Rehbein Companies. The proposed Oakwood View plans provide for essentially two different improvements on different sides of the property. For the north 1/2 of the site, it is proposed to extend existing Oakwood Lane southerly into the northwest corner of the site a distance of approximately 500 feet. The cul -de -sac would serve the construction of 10 new single family residential properties. The sizes of the single family lots would range between 0.3 acres and 1.3 acres. The larger lots would include significant amounts of wetland areas. At the southwest corner of the property is an existing church and parking lot. Proposed is to extend a driveway easterly from the existing church property and constructing an enabling residence (duplex) and parking area Remaining portions of the entire 17 acre property not proposed for grading or improvements are essentially wetland areas. The following comments are provided: Drainage and Drainage Calculations The following comments are provided with regards to the drainage calculations: 1. Existing curve numbers are acceptable. 2. Existing time of concentration figures provided are acceptable. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Oakwood View Page 2 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 3. For Subcatchment Area 7, NRCS Type A soils are used for the proposed conditions, while Type B soils are used for the existing conditions. This must be explained or clarified. 4. Further explanation or examination of the HydroCad model for the 1 -year event proposed conditions must be conducted. Pond 13P as shown having an outflow, but no inflow. 5. The wetland must not be utilized for rate control. 6. A copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be forwarded to the City. 7. Flood elevations for the wetlands must be shown on the grading plan. 8. The anticipated high ground water level must be known. 9. The calculations must account for future building and parking lot expansions for the church and/or enabling facility. Other general comments regarding drainage are as follows: 1. An NPDES Phase II permit has been forwarded to the MPCA. All requirements of the Permit, including the submittal of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) to the City, shall be completed prior to engaging in grading activities. 2. Review and approval of the Rice Creek Watershed District is required. The Developer shall provide a copy of the permit application and correspondence to date with the Watershed. The storm drainage plan requires further information regarding outlets. For example, PS5 appears to be an outlet structure that regulates flow from Pond 11 to the north and eventual discharge to the west through a proposed 21 -inch storm sewer. Further south, FES 3 discharges to a proposed detention area that appears to connect to Pond 11. An emergency overflow and elevation must be identified and shown. This portion of the plan, including a detail for PS5 should be clarified on the plan further. 4. Stormwater routing at the south end of the property (Ponds 2,3,4, and 5, and existing wetlands) is unclear and incomplete on the grading and utility plans. Flow directions and discharge locations (including emergency overflows and outlets) are not shown clearly. Much of the information that is provided is cluttered or difficult to read. . The grading and stormwater routing plan will be subject to the review and approval of the Rice Creek Watershed District. The Grading Notes on the Preliminary Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan should be numbered. Oakwood View Page 3 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Utilities 1. It is proposed to extend sanitary sewer and water south from existing facilities at the current termination point at Oakwood Lane. At this location, existing sanitary sewer and water are shown extending south along the west property line to the existing church building. 'It is proposed to abandon these lines and replace them with lines extending southeasterly down the new Oakwood Lane street extension, and then continuing those lines southwesterly and southerly back to the church facility. The new lines would then be extended southeasterly to serve both the existing church and new enabling facility. It is recommended that any lines to be abandoned that are located beneath proposed structures be removed in their entirety. 2. The existing watermain appears to be a very long dead end line. With the extension to the enabling facility, the long length raises at least some concern with regards to adequate pressures and circulation. It is suggested that any options to loop the pipe by way of County Road J be explored with the City. Additional utility easements for the extensions would be required. In addition, the sewer and water extensions to the enabling facility as shown cross beneath existing and proposed wetland and detention areas where minimum cover (8 feet) over the pipes will be compromised. Insulation over the pipes will be required in such instances. Also, infiltration into the sanitary sewer under the wetland/pond areas may be of concern, and it is suggested that the sewer be constructed to watermain tightness standards at that location. 3. The Plan shall be subject to the review of the City Fire Chief, including the number and location of hydrants. It is recommended that additional hydrants be added near the church and enabling facility. 4. Individual services for the proposed units on Oakwood Lane and for the church facilities must be shown on the plan. It is presumed that the existing church is already serviced by the existing sanitary sewer and water, and that the services will be re- connected to the newly installed mains. 5. A detail sheet shall be provided showing the Standard plates and details of the City of Lino Lakes. This would include manhole structures, utilities (hydrants, valves, services, etc.), and storm drain and erosion control details. 6. As previously stated the amount of filUcover over all sewer and water service pipes shall be a minimum bury depth of 8 feet, and shall be insulated per City of Lino Lakes standards if the minimum cover cannot be attained. 7. All trenches (including services) shall be backfilled and compacted and meet 1 00% maximum Standard Proctor Density in the upper 3 -feet from finished road elevation, and 95% maximum Standard Proctor Density below the upper 3 -feet. 8. A minimum of two feet of cover over storm sewer pipe is desired. Oakwood View Page 4 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Other Comments 1. A final landscaping plan shall eventually be submitted. Sight corner visibilities shall be maintained per City requirements as applicable. 2. Any existing well and septic locations on both the subject property and adjoining properties shall be confirmed to assure compliance with the Minnesota Department Health. This shall mean that any existing facilities on the subject property shall be removed or capped in accordance with regulations, and that sewer separation distances from any remaining facilities in close proximity shall be attained. The separation distance shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health. 3 The plan provides notes regarding seeding, mulching and turf establishment for disturbed areas. However, the City of Lino Lakes has a specific seed specification for ponding areas and a note referring to City of Lino Lakes seeding specifications shall also be provided on the plan. 4. Approval of the plat, including access from County Road J will be subject to the review and approval of Anoka County. 5. A geotechnical report has not been provided. Therefore, the existing soils and groundwater levels are not known. All building pad foundations, streets, and utilities shall be constructed on approved materials as required by the City of Lino Lakes, and groundwater levels shall be known in order to ascertain building elevation requirements (low floors) with regards to ground and surface water elevations. Many of the proposed units are walk outs adjacent to wetlands, and the high water elevations of the wetlands are not shown on the plan. Building elevations will therefore be subject to further review. 6. The wetland delineation report must be approved by the Ric' e Creek Watershed District. 7. Standard drainage and utility easements along all property lines (5 feet and 10 feet) shall be provided in addition to other easements required for utility lines, stormwater detention areas, wetlands, etc. 8. The existing church and proposed enabling facility will utilize the same driveway access. A cross access agreement or appropriate legal covenant is recommended. The driveway to the enabling facility appears to be less than 12 feet wide and is pressed tightly between the property line and Pond 5, including a curve which may at times be blind. The lack of room for snow storage and tight confines for vehicles of opposing directions may be of concern, especially for larger or special vehicles. It is recommended that this situation be reviewed further and improved. 9. A tree inventory plan has been prepared. It is suggested that existing trees be preserved as much as possible and practical. Oakwood View Page 5 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 10. With the extension of the existing Oakwood Lane dead end, a cul -de -sac of nearly 1000. feet in length will result. This far exceeds the City's maximum standard length of 500 feet. The City would be required to waive from its current standard to allow this construction. • Memo Environmental To: Jeff Smyser CC: Michael Grochala From: Marty Asleson Date: January 30, 2004 Re: Recommendations of the February 25, 2004 Environmental Board Meeting The Environmental Board met on February 24, 2004 and made the following recommendations: Rice Creek Covenant Church Land Cover • The developer needs to submit a tree preservation plan, and follow the subdivision ordinance for tree preservation plans. • We have identified a few rare -plant conditions on the southern part of the site. Environmental would like time to verify the presence or absence of rare plants. If found, the Environmental Board would like some flexibility in design. • Northern residential site grade plan indicates most of the aspen vegetation on the East Side proposed for removal (Attachment 1). Properties to the West also have rare plant indicators. Since nitrogen (lawn fertilizer runoff) has been shown to remove biodiversity, and Aspen buffers act as good filters for runoff, the Environmental Board would like the developer to look at ways to maintain more of this Aspen edge. The water from this area flows to the East. The Environmental Board would like to see a 50 foot buffer in this area. The Environmental Board would like to see signage at wetlands and drainage areas informing "no- dumping, cutting or filling." Lighting • • No -spill lighting should be. used. Lights should be turned off after activities are done. • Page 1 • Soils • There should be no importing or exporting of soils without City approval. The developer should include a plan for soil compaction prevention outside of construction limits. Surface Water • Would like RCWD input on wetland delineation, particularly on the developer delineation line on the northern part of the Plat. NWI shows quite a larger area surrounding the delineated area with facultative wetland. • Developer should submit the required NPDES control measures and best management practices. Additional rock stockpile should be on hand for when rock entrance fills in. • Depressional area in the parking lot should be graded so water flows to it. Landscaping • • The City native seed specification should be used in all rain pond areas, or potted plants installed with sufficient mulch to attenuate weed growth. • Parking • Look at reducing parking as much as possible since proposed parking is at more than the minimum. Motion by O'Dea, 2nd Bor to approve Marshan Estates with Environmental Board comments and recommendations. Motion was approved with all in favor. Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Tree Preservation The Environmental Board would like the developer to make final determination of some of the trees marked for removal only after further discussion /field meeting with City Environmental and Engineer. • Page 2 • • • Soils • Importing or exporting of soils without City permission should be prohibited. Soils should be of similar nature to what was removed. • A plan should be submitted on methods to be used to prevent compaction to soil areas outside of the construction limits. This includes the remaining tree areas. Parking • Reduce overflow parking if possible. Landscaping • The developer should show more landscape materials to buffer neighboring areas. • More oaks should be used. • Colorado spruce and Austrian pine should be eliminated. If evergreens are necessary, than white pine, Red pine or White spruce should be used. • City native seed specs should be used in drainage and pond areas. If ground vegetation is changed in the remaining tree areas, native seed mix should be used here as well. Sod will not grow in this heavy -shade type of a situation. A contractor experienced in establishment of native seed needs to be employed to manage these areas for the first 3 years. The City should approve this contractor. Open Space • The Environmental Board wants the developer to demonstrate the project meets the 50% pervious requirement for PUD. Motion to approve with staff and Environmental Board recommendations and comments made by O'dea, 2nd by Grundhoffer. All were in favor, motion approved. • Page 3 ID 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 10 12 INNECIPTI)n 51 4 4 LINDA 5 0 5 9gEi 1 [ KJ� M," / J U 11 Emausam 10 9 A .t •T ��� MIME '1 I 2 3 ,53 WMJ����� T.111 •I �0� s DSII2 6 OF�© ��© Q(� 13I II D /N 9 LAKE! oil 0©©l®a©atle 0 ©0D V W�0D_ 3 o I 0 IA cc .HIGHWAY R/W PL AT NO. 4B. 20 I m W-IE 111 a I19 21 ®,a-a� 17 a 32 18 ASH ST. N • • • Proposed Land Use Plan Comprehensive Plan Low Density Sewered Residential Commercial SITE • • Zoning Map SITE EX FES INN 555. 8 EX C9 15 -2A RIM: 895.17 INV:889.24 _ North Tine of SE 1/4 of SW 1/4, Section 31, TWP. 31, RNG. 22 y EX M 10 -4 RI •89540 185&25 '1.... w%7\ PRELIMINARY PLAT OF: OAKWOOD VIEW X71 00 Woodridge Estates 88'53'26 "E 92� 770 trtaotSS 28:74 515 KUNO I 7 111.891111.8913.34 wYeJ4 10011XSae1.W / 55,383 L SF ( iTotal ot 1__a Rice Creek Covenant Church 125 Ash Steet Lino Lakes, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 486 -0692 anew aL TUX. W. ally ES VICINITY MAP Net 7e 1nre 1 • Mau 15' 9q 41,176 SF Wetland Total Lot o p 11 415 0 "N\T3�7,125 SF \\ \otal Lot \ 9ti 6,54 15 \�0 SF,26,779 SF/ Total Liff /e9 iJ --696— X�t Wetland 0 551151 / A W . g91b.4 8 0)10 1 e1 O 6 z 696 1� l ig9 J-8 e l "4 Veu 96 X1 e =7\ / —896 — en.. l896--1./11141..... 55_ \tit i Wetland 11111`` r fa. 'CR j)( irtaiir- (\ / l *we 1 • •' \ , 7ra$s8� l✓ 347,056 SF (7:28 AC) \ 47,, { Drainage and Utility Easement .-898, does ✓g95/ \ IPA 7 Proposed 2 9/ \ •_.- ---- -- s Stall Garage — �j I. - WES Rlm INV r 00 Wetland Sao 09A1 a Drainage and 5 1 UtRity Eaement PIIcs� posed 'Er4bUng 12 Residence ex) _ -694 o Proposed Driveway L _`rkkp Lo i;;ount' Road J) R/ W Plot No. 48 280.74 N88'38'13 "W ASH STREET CD 8 x7,226 SF (0Z3—Ac.)—,/ ( t `- -�„� --/696, eratlj ..4) ''-' ens 588'38'13 "E \/rsr-r)-cl'./N1 (CS, 3l NO. 32) South line of Section 31, TWP. 31, RNG. 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The East 820.72 feet of the West 1120 feet as measured at right angles to the West line thereof, of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 31, Range 22, Except the East 340 feet of the West 1120 feet of the South 223 feet of said Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter, Anoka County, Minnesota. Subject To Easements. Contains 16.98 Acres AREA BREAKDOWN SINGLE FAMILY LOTS - 10 ENABLING RESIDENCE (DUPLEX) LOT EXISTING CHURCH LOT PROPOSED ZONING FOR NORTH PART - R -1X (Low Deneity SFR) PROPOSED ZONING FOR SOUTH PART - P.U.D. LEGEND �-WO -. DENOTES EMS1M0 CONTOUR X 000.0 ' DENOTES 860140 ELEVATION. .DENOTES FLOW DIRECTION ® DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION '•.A A-A-i DENOTES TREE LINE —X— DENOTES FENCE 0 DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT N.G.V.D. VERTICAL DATUM WETLAND DEUNEATED BY POLARIS GROUP r F F 'LLeL�j1Y L si 1 MWMAI 1m IT. �-•� 14970 ea L (m 7T.) - suln4u MINA 1I EASEMENT-2,1 e ' J NOTE: PROPOSED ZONING, FOLLOW THE CHAPTER 1000, SUBDMSION AND PLATTING GUIDELINES. GRAPHIC SCALE e0 /15 TUFF 1J1leisisiR O. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Data RegIstrotion No. 18213 GLENN 1 OF 4 MEETS EHBElN IAA ' 54 1 Job No. 03505 • • 10A r CM <WOOD VIEW PR '337.11-333 CV ITS . shrew so EX CB 15 -2* IM:695.17 609.24 —, LIN 9y, CONST.'""" X77` jJ ENTRANCE .- 1929 I\ARY GRADI \+G PLA\ rl: codridGe Ent :1'.es 92.0( NU v 991.0 (9101 188 891.0 MVP /a7A1E NM.99].0 ( g2,... 0927 9r� PUBLIC STREET .1.3 PAVEMENT DESIGN 2 BIT. WEAR TYPE 41 2" BIT. BASE TYPE 31 8" CLV RECYCLED OR CRUSHED) ' \G- /Ditch GRAPHIC SCALE 25 50 100 Enzarglei 1 I 11121 996 x 1 f. —896- 7 - .. ewe ).696 \ / /_ '95.2 `J:. / I Tea` -(5 8g 185915088 j 7 1 � I 995901 .--ges 6\ li Wetland 11 997 Age 411.11n —5 —s I1}y �9. 501.4 6�a rL ✓59x'1 � 1 %Mat 998---. >s we lape,a.a01. Arce"17.{Ie Sr. 091 2 505081 cnoveip783 CY. p0N00 i q meii rte. d7 rSi;787 ?. 19181 59800 009085,1158 CY.I roe 5 0504 119.99° "12517 tl1. (gep984 ae -eu7 ed s pale Existing Parking 5 /. 165 15* : Pit ":c. 43 r:^;pRend .;i CXIST1NG - Y- FILIT1ES_ ARC - SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE OR SHE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. to ti ((;118 OP N� c� A n2 29: 0 -1 foes -7fOns OW 896/ lies /... 99.9 IA tland ` \\ ._ -- —894 K 5952' 014) 3:1 Man. 142% Min. WORK WITHIN THE CSAH 32 (COUNTY) RIGHT -OF -WAY WILL BE SUB.LCT TU lot CONDTTONS' OF -AN9RA COUNTY. INCLUDING ANY PERMITS AND RESTORATION REQUIREMENTS. 111E CONTRACTOR SHALL ADHERE TO ANY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND WORKING HOURS AS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY OF LINO LAKES GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TWIN CITY AREA (651) 454 -0002 MN TOLL FREE 1- 800 - 252 -1166 30' 1' bZe. ( IN 56E7 ) . 1 Inch- 50 fL LEGEND 1 CLPT— PROP. FINISHED CENTERLINE LP LOW POINT HP — HIGH POINT FL FLOW LINE Q STORM STRUCTURE Ig PROPOSED ELEV. PROPOSED STOP SIGN. RAINWATER.. GARDEN LEGEND 2 SF-- -SF— SILT FENCE — EXISTING CONTOUR — — —(= PROPOSED CONTOUR x 895.69 SPOT ELEVATION — — — - WETLAND GRADING NOTES TUFFTURF PRE — VEGETATED EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SILT FENCE AS NECESSARY INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SEED AND MULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN 2 WKS OF FINAL DISTURBANCE PLANT RAINWATER GARDENS WITH - SUGGESTED PLANTS. SEE RAINWATER GARDEN GARDEN INFORMATION SOLID HATCH AREA DELINEATES RAINWATER GARDENS PROVIDE GRANULAR FILL WITH A INFILTRATION RATE OF 0.5 " /HR WHERE SHOWN RAINWATER GARDENS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AFTER STREET CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE SEED AND MULCH SHALL BE FURNISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES MAJORITY OF SITE DRAINS TO NW CORNER NO WETLAND FILL SHOWN, WETLAND DELINEATION PREPARED BY POLARIS GROUP MPCA PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO WORK ON SITE CITY ENGINEER TO APPROVE TIME FOR THE REMOVAL OF EROSION. CONTROL MEASURES SURMOUNTABLE CURBS SHALL BE USED ON CITY STREET CONCTRACTOR TO CONTACT GOPHER STATE, ONE FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO ANY WORK 1- 800 - 252 - 1166 CONTACT WILLIAM McCULLY, P.E. AT GLENN REHBEIN COMPANIES © 763 -784 -0657 STORM NOTES DRAINTILE (IF REOUIRED) SHALL BE 6" ADS N -12 PERFORATED WITHOUT SOCK SEWER PIPES, STRUCTURES AND APPURTENANCES SHALL ADHERE TO. CITY OF LINO LAKES STANDARDS \. 4e�:�. •, • 6" MINIMUM DEPTH 1" - 2" WASHED ROCK % OF ROAD I,. 1B" MINIMUM CUT OFF BERM TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF FROM SITE MAINTAIN ROC( EN1RANCE IF TRACKING BEGINS fy0 M 15 9A01N 0 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 16' 14' 2X - -> 3.6" crown 30' 24" R 1 1/2" 2341 Bituminous Wear, Placed ofler one winter 1. I L- — 2" 2331 Bituminous Base, Took Coat 1 L — 5" Aggregate Bose 1005( Crushed Recycled CI ms 5 L - - -- 24" Soled Granular Borrow, 5 % Mod. 0412 W /B6t2 At Catchbasins and Rodil's 4" of native topsoil and turf establishment. Seed, mulch and disc anchor remaining- R/W TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL STREET SECTION FL- 30' —FL BOC- 32' -BOC { -J 1-• 14' 4" PVC /ADS draintlle w /sock as shown on plans between CBs and along bottom of select * * *Recyled aggregate for base must meet class 5 speclficolion PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PP _AN OAKWOOD V EW RICE CREEK COVENANT CHURCH LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA 865f NAPLES 57. N.C. SLAW. NN 53448 -6724 M2,45, (672) 784 -6657 945, (672) 784 -6081 6' o. ei OAKWOOD VIEW .PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN 0 GSt GIP ®F1 49 Li' D.40% 50R 35 P C 0 T6 ST68 OMOJ l'l06 0'469 5469 OM8d 1'Z06 _ __ aaa'a'a 8'19.52 DIP r 149.92 LF 0 0.40x ' 8'. SDR 35 PVC \ . 0,3 T e / X01 0 1 s��a 5 Z'105 OMdS 5'969 0'962 ,IU tO0: ,. LL 'Z06 l'406 OME3 S'969 0'969 i (no �,,,") <Q■ y4j'c.� 359 71 LF 0 O.40S - 8' SDR 3 i 18 Q.52 DID II WORK WITHIN THE CSAH 32 (COUNTY) RIGHT -OF -WAY WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF ANOKA COUNTY, INCLUDING ANY PERMITS AND RESTORATION REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ADHERE TO ANY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND WORKING HOURS AS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY OF LINO LAKES g '96 Sdd I�nu31 y • a5 - my4 .. �WS j Vi 8 KBE 0001LYY0 GRAPHIC SCALE iii ( IN FEET ) 1 Inch v 50 AL UTILITY NOTES 1. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE 8" PVC SDR 26 2. ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 8" PVC SCH 40 3. ALL WATERMAIN SHALL BE 8" DIP CL52 - 4. WATERMAIN TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8' OF COVER, 5. SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN CROSSINGS TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION 6 LINO LAKE UTILITY SUPT. MUST BE CONTACTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO UTILITY WORK, WORK IN ROW OR UTILITY CONNECTIONS 7. SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN SHALL BE INSTALLED AND TESTED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF LINO LAKES, CEAM, MDH AND MPCA 8 CITY TO PAY FOR OVERSIZING AND EXTRA DEPTH OF THE WM AND SANITARY SEWER TRUNK SYSTEMS SERVING THE CITY 9. ALL WATERMAIN AND SEWER APPURTENCES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED WITH THE CITY OF LINO LAKES STANDARDS 10. GATE VALVES SHALL BE MUELLNER A- 2370 -20 WITH MECHANICAL JOINTS MEETING AWWA SPEC. C5D0 -61 11. LAKE DRIVE MUST BE RESTORED TO ANOKA COUNTY'S SATISFACTION 12. TRAFFIC CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PROVIDED PER MUTCD AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANOKA COUNTY 13. ALL STORM PIPES IN ROW SHALL BE CLV RCP 14. ALL STORM PIPES IN GREEN AREAS SHALL BE N12 HDPE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 15. RIP /RAP SHALL ALL BE CLIII 16. ®-® ABONDON EXISTING UTILITIES WHEN APPROPRIATE WHILE STILL PROVIDING SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICE TO THE CHURCH EXISTING UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE OR SHE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TWIN CITY AREA (651) 454 -0002 MN TOLL FREE 1 -800- 252 -1166 I RECEIVED JAN 2 8 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES I •1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA W.A.T. MGCULLY \GATE: REG NO.23j� >:�e8 Win ilgg WATM CHECKED WATM DATE 09/17/2003 VFiRTICAL SCALE HORIZ. 1 : 10' I' :50' JOB NO. 03505 BOWL PACE GRC FIELD #03505 SHEET 4 4 sHEETs EX FES 98 889.8 EX CB 15-2A I RIM: 895.17 NY:889.24 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY AND TREE INVENTORY OF: OAKWOOD VIEW z r- EX 4589 10-4 si . MS:2r -41"--------. -- 112[00 ...* .---- .S88'53'26"E 82074 Iv. le" irra s"9,4r, 02. r-Z, Ille fo. et . 7 .i\ tri .t;..= = 7 -, ;m* •493 nm1'1",.. .7 1 • ;351. a t, 113........282 tsitew. *2/3 .......1217 ern le1211 \ ferfedir W 214 to*/ , \ LNorth Ilne of SE 1/4 of $W 1/4, Section 31, VIP. 31, RNG. 22 owe Woodridga Estates nem 07.69212 172 417 \ irre 174:2.- 4,--oreo I ashes \•74fre 647's I „Atli tz, xt \ •,41% sehtt.. 904.401017, Volui *007 4311 csi \00 11 ,211.1 a"4".6441016/:4 .a."\ Noon od'n 10B r Men tirttre••• We. Ilig• IA.. eat 40. 378 2 qopd 11104717115C9 46- 1.0 97" Wetland • 212 6/31 311 4r, figs4 No.,P \0, Atrit *OM 01018 10041M5 a al 11317 WO 1.7; 46,4,... (o,,•,',- 0.1 -/ .. Wet! and '34°0161" I Ar - NNE 1 ew.,., ..01,4,10 .... e. •gr ...P. •or.....,9,9"2.2 444. 11.1 figt om % sta..Z'Iwz. -896- - .... -..., -1 .... et 4640.,... :saar3 ?II; Y3 0. 4)0., gj ig i -408- --- Ve k. --, ./' \so o Ilk. 4113,3* IliatiNIPTh .1ili Z 11.4 TAil/ 4P. fy,,,, etilig. =0".., '.-- oar S-- ‘-- waht" *J. \-... itch "‘" evr. ?PIR- O', Wu TAP"' 11" 588 898.5 11892.0 \ 47\ s / %oO V"" P10*\ Q. tri ••••-. I 00 / 04102a Wetland Fel •? IP:00e95\ sw eel ..11010m 1176 tit 41110.11% coo:\ 4422 896- We" OEM, eu 10,3 77t41"003/82 I e,yo 8 7 1 21. r•O' ars" „88 "4...7 -1PT_Aer es. -`64, .11°10,40;lir 110. arm ftwege, 41161.1", 4771 ipa.4" Igma omey. --__""74115 rn IPA sk. itLs4,41441 1067 ' au Os k, eloOem 1I0a. Sem /- , r and ii.etzet \ VAir C eon ) s°2 \ 6, ess ziganxii .oselit,f,w41:16118-643 , - ft. IP' 1/"""--- 7 t.sla - ostip. EX FES 1101,2 0475 ebOlrx 201 04..$001'.\11) x"" Existing Parking \s"loys / s2C *VA (County Road Ji RN: Plat No. 48 280.74 N8818131,1 ASH STREET 110017 10 3,0,7 ,E,K FEL% so. On Re Itir.s.89440 faigtigasa „Astormit7, 6 Om 11 Sim 895.-.\.\ „pens seek. \ (CSA/1 NO. 32) -894 : I•L 04):41•76 7 An 13724 X S8838'1 3E F;;OFF)T2'is4 South Inc of Section 31, TWF'. 31, RNG. 22 - Rice Creek Covenant Church 125 Ash Steet Lino Lakes, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 486-0692 1227131 21. 799 31. Pia 112 VICINITY MAP 162 51 Lake LEGAL DESCRIPTION lhe East 820.72 fest of the West 1120 feet as measured at right angles to the West line thereof, of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 31, Range 22. Except the East 340 feet of the West 1120 feet of the South 223 feet of said Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter, Anoka County, Minnesota. Subject To Easements. Contains 18.96 Acres LEGEND DENOTES EXISTING CONTOUR x Doom DENOTES cosnuo ELEVATION L'L1,".1 9E401E0 TREE LINE • DENOTES SIGNIFICANT TREE DENOTES FENCE 0 DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT -a DENOTES Loa POLE MO DENOTES TELEPHONE BOX DDIDIES HYDRANT N.G.V.D. VERTICAL DATUM WETLAND DEUNEATED BY POLARIS GROUP SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR TREE TYPE/SIZE TABLE GRAPHIC SCALE 28 10 ( nt par) '6.1.1.111416,11. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly RegIstered Land Surveyor under the iaws of the State of Minnesota Date__ RegIntmllon No. 18213 • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. C Jeff Smyser March 10, 2004 Public Hearing: Rezoning From R -1 to R -3 Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition TSM Development has requested approval of a preliminary plat for Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition. The project involves developing Outlot A of the Highland Meadows East development, approved in 1999. The comprehensive plan guides the site for medium density residential use. The applicant requests a rezoning to R -3 Medium Density. The request also includes a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in order to allow for a private road and other departures from standard zoning requirements. The project also requires a site plan review for the townhomes. This typically is an administrative review. However, it is an inherent part of the PUD, so it will be discussed here. To accommodate the proposal, the following approvals are necessary: 1. Rezoning from R -1 Single Family Residential to R -3 Medium Density Residential 2. Conditional Use Permit for a residential Planned Unit Development 3. Development stage plan/preliminary plat ANALYSIS The following is a summary of the of the proposal: Gross Site Area 3.47 acres Upland Area 3.47 acres Total Lots 20 Gross Density 5.76 units /acre Net Density 5.76 units /acre • Highland Meadows East 2nd Addn. page 2 Comprehensive Plan, Land Use and 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 -1 Site vacant Medium Density Residential North single family residential Medium Density Residential R -1 South single family residential & commerc. greenhouse Medium Density Residential R -1 East vacant Medium Density Residential R -1 & R -2 West residential, townhomes Medium Density Residential R -3 PDO The site is guided for Medium Density Residential and use. This accommodates 3 -6 units per acre. Growth Management: MUSA Reserve: The comprehensive plan and the growth management policy establish a specific number of MUSA acres for residential growth for stage one (prior to year 2010). The site is within the current MUSA, so no reserve allocation is needed. Growth Management, Units/Year: The comprehensive plan and the growth management policy establish a specific number of dwelling units of residential growth for stage one (prior to year 2010). The goal is 147 per year. The City Council has the flexibility to exceed the limit by 20% (29 units) in a year without amending the comprehensive plan. The goal for 2004 has been exceeded and the additional 20% also has been used. This means that new development cannot be final platted until 2005. This applies to this project. As seen in the table at the end of this report, year 2005 can accommodate this project without exceeding the annual goal. Planned Unit Development: Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Section 2, Subd. 10 of the zoning ordinance discusses the purpose of a planned unit development (PUD). The application should be compared to these purposes in order to justify the flexibility allowed by a PUD. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section of the Zoning Ordinance is to provide for the grouping of lots or buildings for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel by parcel, piecemeal, or sporadic approach to development. This section is intended to introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and open space through clustering of lots, buildings and activities, which promote the goals outlined in the • • • Highland Meadows East 2nd Addn. page 3 Comprehensive Plan or serve another public purpose. It is further intended that planned unit developments are to be characterized by central management, integrated planning and architecture, joint and common use and maintenance of parking, open space and other similar facilities, and harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. 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. A non - residential conditional use permit PUD may include a variety of commercial and/or industrial uses. A PUD that includes a mix of residential and commercial /industrial uses must utilize the PUD zoning district as described in Sec. 9 Subd. 3 of this ordinance. The PUD, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Ordinance related to setbacks, heights, lot area, width and depths, yards, etc., by conditional use permit or a mixture of uses by rezoning to a PUD District, is intended to encourage: 1. A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Innovations in development that address growing demands for all styles of economic expansion, greater variety in type, design, architectural standards, and siting of structures through the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 3. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as existing vegetation, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly transition of varying land uses in close proximity to each other. 5. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering development costs and public investments. 6. Promotion of a desirable and creative environment that might be prevented through the strict application of City zoning and subdivision regulations. Lots: There are no minimum unit lot sizes for multifamily dwellings. The ordinance requires that unit lots "shall be the minimum area necessary to include the living area, garages, decks, patios, or porches of the individual dwelling units." The table below compares the application to the minimum lot standards. • Highland Meadows East 2nd Addn. page 4 The 1999 report on the approval of the Highland Meadows East preliminary plat included the following statement: For future consideration, there will be 108±feet remaining between the rear lot line of Lot 1 and the Outlot A boundary directly to the south. This does not allow for the minimum lot widths or depths of the existing two- or multi family residential zoning districts. How Outlot A will be developed in the future has yet to be seen, but approval of the present plat application should not be considered implied approval of any future plan in Outlot A. The proposal includes a narrowed access road as well as reduced setbacks around the periphery of the site. The 26' private drive is narrower than a public street, which would be a minimum 28' (measured back of curb to back of curb.). The setbacks from this private drive are 22' for several units, less than the normally required 25'. The PUD requirements state that "front and side yard restrictions at the periphery of the Planned Unit Development site at a minimum shall be the same as imposed in the respective base districts. The PUD standards do not specify a rear setback minimum. Typically, a 30' rear setback is required in an R -3 zone. The goal is to maintain adequate buffering around the site while allowing flexibility inside the site. Several structures are shown approximately 20' from the north, south, and west property lines. The depicted patios would be 15± feet from the property lines. No landscaping is included. As noted below, a 20' landscape buffer is required on sides abutting single family zones. The City Engineer's review notes that a swale or storm sewer is needed along the south property line. It is not clear how or if the 15 feet could accommodate such a stormwater facility and buffer landscaping. This is problematic. A greater setback likely would go a long way toward providing for these elements. As required by the ordinance, the applicant submitted a "yield plan" to show what could be done on the site by adhering to the standard zoning requirements. The yield plan is reasonable, and R -3 zone PUD proposed unit lot width 24' 24' 46' setbacks from street side yard rear yard 30' 10' 30' 24' same as zoning same as zoning 22' from private drive 20' 20' impervious surface 65% max 40% building separation 10' open space 50% common open space minimum 61% The 1999 report on the approval of the Highland Meadows East preliminary plat included the following statement: For future consideration, there will be 108±feet remaining between the rear lot line of Lot 1 and the Outlot A boundary directly to the south. This does not allow for the minimum lot widths or depths of the existing two- or multi family residential zoning districts. How Outlot A will be developed in the future has yet to be seen, but approval of the present plat application should not be considered implied approval of any future plan in Outlot A. The proposal includes a narrowed access road as well as reduced setbacks around the periphery of the site. The 26' private drive is narrower than a public street, which would be a minimum 28' (measured back of curb to back of curb.). The setbacks from this private drive are 22' for several units, less than the normally required 25'. The PUD requirements state that "front and side yard restrictions at the periphery of the Planned Unit Development site at a minimum shall be the same as imposed in the respective base districts. The PUD standards do not specify a rear setback minimum. Typically, a 30' rear setback is required in an R -3 zone. The goal is to maintain adequate buffering around the site while allowing flexibility inside the site. Several structures are shown approximately 20' from the north, south, and west property lines. The depicted patios would be 15± feet from the property lines. No landscaping is included. As noted below, a 20' landscape buffer is required on sides abutting single family zones. The City Engineer's review notes that a swale or storm sewer is needed along the south property line. It is not clear how or if the 15 feet could accommodate such a stormwater facility and buffer landscaping. This is problematic. A greater setback likely would go a long way toward providing for these elements. As required by the ordinance, the applicant submitted a "yield plan" to show what could be done on the site by adhering to the standard zoning requirements. The yield plan is reasonable, and Highland Meadows East 2nd Addn. page 5 include the same number of units (20). However, the yield plan includes the minimum rear setbacks around the property edges, even with a full 60' right of way instead of the narrower private drive. The yield plan does remove a number of trees that would be saved by the proposed layout. Landscaping: Where a side or rear lot line in an R -3 District abuts an R, R -X, R -1, R- 1X, R -EC, or R -2 District, or public road right -of -way, a landscape buffer area not less than twenty (20) feet in depth shall be provided along such side or rear lot line and shall contain landscaping, planting, berming or other screening suitable to provide an effective visual screen. Property on three sides of the site is zoned R -1. Though future zoning likely will change, the site should include screening for the benefit of residents both around the site and within the site. Existing trees provide some screening on the east and west sides. No screening landscaping is shown on the north and south sides of the site. This should be corrected. The landscaping plan does not specify areas to be planted with grass seed or sodded. This should be corrected on a revised plan. The plan must include the City's seed mixture around the ponds. Streets, Access, Parking: The proposal includes a private drive of 26'. A PUD allows private streets with a minimum 26' width. The access drive will align with Nancy Drive on the north side of 79th St. The reduced pavement width will reduce impervious surface. When Highland Meadows East was platted, a 60' gap was created to allow for a public street right of way. The additional width would become part of the landscaped open space. The plan provides for guest parking stalls. This is a good idea because there is so little curb space that is not broken up by driveways. The minimum amount of offstreet parking is 21 /a spaces per unit. The garages and driveways provide this, but guest parking is a smart feature. The private drive exceeds the normal 500' maximum for a cul de sac. A private drive is allowable as part of a PUD, and the additional length is allowable for a private drive. 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, so the park dedication will be $1665 x the number of units. If 20 units ultimately are approved, this would total $ 33,300. Open Space: A PUD requires that a minimum of fifty (50) percent of land subdivided for development shall be reserved as common open space. Designated open space shall be exclusive of unit lots and driveways. The project provides for this requirement, as indicated by the following data: square feet Total Area of Site 151,150 Area of Private Street & Parking 21,769 Area of Buildings 25,363 • Highland Meadows East 2 "d Addn. page 6 Area of Individual Driveways 13,569 Total Impervious Surface 60,701 Impervious Percentage of Site 40.16% Total Pervious Surface 90,449 Pervious Percentage of Site 59.84% Common Open Space (Lot 21) 92,900 Open Space Percentage of Site 61.46% Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water service will connect to existing facilities in 79th St. and follow the private drive into the site. Individual units must have individual connections. The City Engineer's report notes that utilities will be private. Upon reconsideration, the sanitary sewer and water utilities in the private drive should be City facilities, just as they would if it were a public street right of way. All of Lot 21 is to be covered by a drainage and utility easement, which provides access to the utilties. Grading and Stormwater Management: Stormwater ponds will be created in the northern portion of the site. Drainage and utility easements will cover the ponds and stormwater facilities. Easements also will be platted along all the external property lines. The project requires the approval of the Rice Creek Watershed District. That review is pending. The City has not received geotechnical information on existing groundwater levels and soils. This must be determined in order to compare lowest floor elevations and soil suitability for construction. This must be ascertained prior to City Council consideration of the application. The project also will require the vacation of an existing ponding easement. The original Highland Meadows East plat included a drainage and utility easement in the northwest corner of the site. The 2 "d Addn. application includes a reconfiguration of the easement and pond. The "pond" existed for several years as a borrow pit for fill for Highland Meadows West areas. The development of the site will correct this. The easement vacation is not a P & Z item. Rather, the City Council holds a public hearing on it. Site Plan, Townhomes Buildings: Architectural drawings inlcude vinyl siding with "optional shakes" and a note: "Exterior to be a combination of brick & vinyl siding at builders option." This is not acceptable. The City's building material standards in the zoning ordinance state: Exterior Building Finish: The exterior of townhome dwelling units shall include a variation in building materials which are to be distributed throughout the building facades and coordinated into the architectural design of the structure to create an architecturally balanced appearance. In addition, townhome dwelling structures shall comply with the following requirements: Highland Meadows East 2°d Addn. page 7 a) A minimum of twenty -five (25) percent of the combined area of all building facades of a structure shall have an exterior finish of brick, stucco and/or natural or artificial stone. b) Except for brick, stucco, and/or natural or artificial stone, no single building facade shall have more than seventy -five (75) percent of one type of exterior finish. c) For the purpose of this section, the area of the building facade shall not include area devoted to windows, entrance doors, garage doors, or roof areas. If the brick is brought up to cover the entire first level facade on the front and a specified amount on sides and rear, the structures likely could meet these requirements. It is up to the applicant to demonstrate how this will be done. The maximum allowable height in an R -3 zone is 36'. The proposed structure heights are 22' The minimum floor area is 920 sf for a two - bedroom unit. The proposed units have two floors. The upper level is approximately 1100 to 1200 sf. The lower level is approximately 500 sf. The proposed units meet the height and floor area requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD • The Environmental Board reviewed this application on February 25th. Recommendations are attached. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Approval of the project should include the following conditions: 1. The project shall not be final platted until 2005, as dictated by the growth management policy. 2. Issues discussed in the City Engineer review memo must be addressed to his satisfaction. 3. Drainage and utility easements shall cover the ponds and stormwater facilities. Easements also shall be platted along all the external property lines. 4. The applicant must submit geotechnical information on existing groundwater levels and soils in adequate time for review prior to City Council consideration of the application. 5. Sanitary sewer and water utilities in the private drive shall be City facilities, just as they would if it were a public street right of way. 6. Park dedication of $1,665 per unit shall be paid: 20 units for a total of $33,300. Highland Meadows East 2nd Addn. page 8 7. A revised landscaping plan shall include: screening on the north and south property lines and specified sod or grass seeded areas. City wetland seeding shall be included and noted on the revised landscaping plan. 8. The project must obtain approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to preliminary plat review by the City Council. 9. New building elevations shall be submitted to demonstrate an exterior finish of brick, stucco and/or natural or artificial stone to meet the requirements in the ordinance. OPTIONS. 1. Approve the project, including the three elements: a. Rezoning From R -1 to R -3 b. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development c. Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat 2. Continue public hearing and return to staff with direction. • RECOMMENDATION Option 2 There is so little room provided for buffering and screening on the periphery of the site, that it may not be possible to provide it with the existing layout. On the south, additional drainage work is needed as well, and this will affect the screening options. Additional attention to building exteriors is needed as well regarding the materials. The retention of trees is a good goal, and the proposal probably retains some additional open space compared to normal standards. However, the proposal does not clearly justify the planned unit development flexibility. For these reasons, staff is recommending continuing the public hearing to allow the applicant the opportunity to revise the plans. • • • Phasing plans by year (lots /units to be final platted) G) Q E Q1 p < O r p 0 . N 1- 0 LN A N T T LO T O co LcV ) T N O T T N 0 N b M La 0) 8 N O co 8 N O 8 N c•) c) 33 U" 8 N co N (Y) L() N- Ln 8 N LN ■7) O O 00 r- T N L0 O T O CO Ln 0 0 L1 T CY N CO t` r 8 N (N 56 T 0 10 Cr) N CV N T T Op r year end 2002 T Ln T Lt) E 3 - co O O 249 T O G LO O T CO N r N O T T N O r O N CO Development Name approved prelim. plats 0 i C (1) 2nd Addn 1Century Farms North 'Keefe: preliminary plat Morton (minor subdiv) Ravens Hollow [Haley Manor (10 new lots) [Crystal Cove (proposed) Millers Crossroads Lakeview Estates (2 new) Snell (minor subdivision) Pheasant Hills Pres. 13th Justin's Preserve Marshan Estates Rice Creek Church duplex Rice Church: Oakwood View Highland Meadows East 2nd Pheasant Hills 12th island Tz i O Ln N N O NN 0 0 N. O CA 0 O di C O Q O O � 0) 0) .� ,--� C C 0 C C C 0 0 0 NNX Q • Memorandum DATE: February 26, 2004 TO: Jeff Smyser FROM: James E. Studenski, City Engineer , J4 RE: Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Attached is the TKDA review dated February 26, 2004, of the submitted documents for the proposed development. 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: 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292 -4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com James Studenski, City Engineer Reference: Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Copies To: City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota From: Scott A. Brink, P.E. Date: February 26, 2004 Comm. No. 12976 -002 Routing: The City of Lino Lakes has received documents providing for Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition as follows: 1. Preliminary Plan exhibits (11" x 17" and full size), prepared by James R. Hill, Inc. for TSM Development, dated January 12, 2004. 2. RCWD Permit application copy, dated January 12, 2004. 3. Drainage Calculations dated January 8, 2004 4. Full -size Existing and Proposed Drainage Area maps dated January 12, 2004. The proposed Plans provide for the construction of Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition, located south of the intersection of 79th Avenue at Nancy Drive. The project essentially will include the extension of a private drive (cul -de -sac) extending south and westerly from the intersection into the property and serving an area of 3.47 acres with 20 proposed residential dwelling units. This property was originally included within the bounds of a larger Highland Meadows East grading and drainage plan (encompassing 4.9 acres), reviewed and approved in 1999. This 2nd Addition portion was previously described as Outlot A (future multi - family) under the original approval. General Drainage and Drainage Calculation Comments 1. At the time of the initial approval, 4 new single family residential properties were constructed along the south side of 79th Avenue. A drainage pond was also constructed within the Outlot A area to serve the entire 4.9 acres of property, including Outlot A. This pond was originally designed to discharge to the adjacent property to the west (Highland Meadows). The original Highland Meadows site was designed to accept this drainage, and both plans (Highland Meadows and Highland Meadows East) were approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. However, as a result of modifications to the original grading plan, a permit application to RCWD has been re- submitted. For example, the configuration and discharge of the pond have both changed. Rather than discharging into the wetland immediately to the west, the pond is now shown discharging to an existing 21 -inch RCP located at the southwest corner of the property. Discharge to the 21 -inch pipe is feasible. However, discharge to the wetland as previously approved may be preferred. Further comments and conditions of the RCWD shall be considered and adhered to as required. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Page 2 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 2. The majority of the property's drainage is directed to the street (private drive) and the stormwater pond along the north side of the property. However, stormwater not directed to the pond must not flow to adjacent properties, particularly along the south side of the property. The property must either be graded to swale to the 21 -inch RCP, or storm sewer shall be installed along the property line to intercept the drainage. 3. The Contractor shall adhere to NPDES Phase II requirements prior to engaging in any grading activities. The Contractor shall also submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City prior to engaging in grading activities. 4. Only the 100 -year computations have been submitted. The 1 -year and 10 -year computations must be submitted. 5. Existing condition curve numbers and time of concentrations are acceptable. 6. Proposed conditions computations should assume Type "B" soils in all disturbed areas when computing curve numbers. 7. Outlet control structure details are required. Skimming must be provided for at least the 1 -year storm event. 8. No geotechnical report has been submitted. Groundwater levels are therefore unknown. Low floor elevations must be a minimum of 4 feet above the high groundwater and pond normal water elevations. 9. All requirements and conditions of the RCWD shall apply as provided. 10. All dwelling units must meet the City's minimum requirements for building elevations (low floor) with relation to groundwater and detention basin high water elevations. This would include 4 feet above normal water levels (including groundwater and detention basins), 2 feet above design flood elevations, and 1 foot above emergency overflows. Groundwater levels must be verified to adjust any elevations as may be needed. Additional Comments: 1. The proposed street serving the property is designated as a private drive. It is therefore presumed that the utilities (sanitary sewer and water) shall be private, and that the property owners or local association shall be responsible for owning and maintaining both the street and utilities. This shall include all maintenance and replacements as needed, including snowplowing and street repair. However, all public utilities shall be constructed per the standards and requirements of the City of Lino Lakes. This should all be spelled out very clearly in the City/Developer Agreement, and a written agreement designating responsibility to the homeowners or local association as appropriate Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Page 3 February 26, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota must be provided and recorded with each property. The private drive is included as part of Lot 21, and all of Lot 21 is designated as drainage and utility easement. 2. The City's standard width (minimum) for a residential street is 28 feet (back of curb to back of curb). The street as shown is 26 feet. In addition, the City's maximum length for a cul -de -sac (500 feet) also is exceeded by roughly 75 feet. However, if the street is to be private and maintained by others, the City may choose to waive the above standards as appropriate. 3. The utility plan provides for connecting water and sewer to existing facilities at 79th Street. The street and utilities must be constructed to the standards of the City of Lino Lakes. The utility plans provided show a general layout for the sanitary sewer and water and are not considered final plans for construction. Upon submittal of final detailed construction plans, further review and comments will be provided. 4. Services shall be shown on the plans. If the housing units are intended to be townhomes, individual services to each unit must be provided. 5. The Plan shall be subject to the review of the City Fire Chief, including the number and location of hydrants. • 6. The amount of fill /cover over all sewer and water service pipes shall be a minimum bury depth of 8 feet, and shall be insulated per City of Lino Lakes standards if the minimum cover cannot be attained. 7. 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. 8. A minimum of two feet of cover over storm sewer pipe is desired. - 9. A final landscaping plan shall eventually be submitted. Sight corner visibilities shall be maintained per City requirements. Removal of existing trees should be minimized as much as possible. 10. Any existing well and septic locations on both the subject property and adjoining properties shall be confirmed to assure compliance with the Minnesota Department Health. This shall mean that any existing facilities on the subject property shall be removed or capped in accordance with regulations, and that sewer separation distances from any remaining facilities in close proximity shall be attained. The separation distance shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health. 11. The plan provides notes regarding seeding, mulching and turf establishment for disturbed areas. However, the City of Lino Lakes has a specific seed specification for ponding areas and a note referring to City of Lino Lakes seeding specifications shall also be provided on the plan. Memo Environmental To: Jeff Smyser CC: Michael Grochala From: Marty Asleson Date: January 30, 2004 Re: Recommendations of the February 25, 2004 Environmental Board Meeting The Environmental Board met on February 24, 2004 and made the following recommendations: Rice Creek Covenant Church Land Cover ▪ The developer needs to submit a tree preservation plan, and follow the subdivision ordinance for tree preservation plans. . We have identified a few rare -plant conditions on the southern part of the site. Environmental would like time to verify the presence or absence of rare plants. If found, the Environmental Board would like some flexibility in design. • Northern residential site grade plan indicates most of the aspen vegetation on the East Side proposed for removal (Attachment 1). Properties to the West also have rare plant indicators. Since nitrogen (lawn fertilizer runoff) has been shown to remove biodiversity, and Aspen buffers act as good filters for runoff, the Environmental Board would like the developer to look at ways to maintain more of this Aspen edge. The water from this area flows to the East. The Environmental Board would like to see a 50 foot buffer in this area. The Environmental Board would like to see signage at wetlands and drainage areas informing "no- dumping, cutting or filling." Lighting • No -spill lighting should be. used. Lights should be turned off after activities are done. • Page 1 • • Soils • There should be no importing or exporting of soils without City approval. The developer should include a plan for soil compaction prevention outside of construction limits. Surface Water • Would like RCWD input on wetland delineation, particularly on the developer delineation line on the northern part of the Plat. NWI shows quite a larger area surrounding the delineated area with facultative wetland. • Developer should submit the required NPDES control measures and best management practices. Additional rock stockpile should be on hand for when rock entrance fills in. Depressional area in the parking lot should be graded so water flows to it. Landscaping • The City native seed specification should be used in all rain pond areas, or potted plants installed with sufficient mulch to attenuate weed growth. Parking • Look at reducing parking as much as possible since proposed parking is at more than the minimum. Motion by O'Dea, 2nd Bor to approve Marshan Estates with Environmental Board comments and recommendations. Motion was approved with all in favor. Highland Meadows East 2nd Addition Tree Preservation The Environmental Board would like the developer to make final determination of some of the trees marked for removal only after further discussion /field meeting with City Environmental and Engineer. • Page 2 • Soils • Importing or exporting of soils without City permission should be prohibited. Soils should be of similar nature to what was removed. • A plan should be submitted on methods to be used to prevent compaction to soil areas outside of the construction limits. This includes the remaining tree areas. Parking • Reduce overflow parking if possible. Landscaping • The developer should show more landscape materials to buffer neighboring areas. • More oaks should be used. • Colorado spruce and Austrian pine should be eliminated. If evergreens are necessary, than white pine, Red pine or White spruce should be used. • City native seed specs should be used in drainage and pond areas. If ground vegetation is changed in the remaining tree areas, native seed mix should be used here as well. Sod will not grow in this heavy -shade type of a situation. A contractor experienced in establishment of native seed needs to be employed to manage these areas for the first 3 years. The City should approve this contractor. Open Space • The Environmental Board wants the developer to demonstrate the project meets the 50% pervious requirement for PUD. Motion to approve with staff and Environmental Board recommendations and comments made by O'dea, 2nd by Grundhoffer. All were in favor, motion approved. • Page 3 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL • • • Proposed Land Use Plan Comprehensive Plan • • Zoning Map DRAWN BY RWD DATE 1/12/2004 REVISIONS CAD FILE 21381EX PROJECT NO. 21381 FILE NO. I / 1 ri `�TL)r -f -T TI A/11 I/\ I lT 1 VV IL.I \7r)1 R M9905.6 840.901.64 RIM.905.43 INV.901.32 OB .905.4 WV.901.47 9905.80 6.0 849.890.00 N, 249.890.00 rlvl \L_v 1 849.901.01 A r-N r1 "LJLJ. R114.905.18 INV.901.15 v 1 ri �TL)r r-T - I 1 \L -L_ 1 0 ( / EX STING WETLAND ( p I 1 YR HWL ■903.1 � I 1 1 100 YR HWL•903.5 -. I I 1 Mx HwHLAN9 IF400WS e15T C (y/.�) \ LAST KT 0- 26-00) t ASSOC 1 V ti < / I I /"' 5 1 �EX.15'RC FT'S r.., � �- p INV 902.65 I / EXISTING NOUSE LF 906.89 I II /\I 11 A NIr\ nI \7rlL.!"11NLJ EXIS11NG HOUSE LF 907.04 EXISTING HOUSE LF 906.59 EX. HVORANT \ TNN9900.02 / E A r- A r1 /11 A I I VI 1:_/-ILJU vy'- '. EX. 8' PVC RUG 929.890.17 EXISTING HOUSE .9 849.901.39 EX. 8' DIP PLUG r- A ^ T EXISTING 905.3 E% 904.9 6 C) ' - - - -- 7 L 1\ 0 // -- - / 1 / 1 / 0 / / /J' _ --- -__ / /i/ J/ /1/ r- / i / J r�1 11 / / / 1 ^� 1 / EX 926..1 90..3 EX 904.5 904.9 - -- ( / /' /(l` 1 ;; =C 1/ ( (1j I/ it \ ill ?1903.8 // 11F \ \ \ \ I - ��11� I I \ \1j 1 1 11\\111 I / ,r (II` /i `l P 0 o Q 4. 4. °GT4gtti� / / 904.5 0 \ ` / / \II '� _ 11 JJ / - � _,J0 o 0 . iilli I I) r�O C� ,1 1 1 1 1 1/ 00 0 � 5� pa O d III I I ) , / /1 o-f-- , ,, / / 11 // / ////i)1 \ -- 1111 1((1// / ) 1 1 1119 1 / J/ / //./f/ / 1 / / /� /\1y1/ 11 I/ / ( 1 111 1 /J 1 1 1 1- i11 i1 / I I (� 1 1 11111 fl( 0 - 1/ _- ~�-__� 1 �I/ X 1 1 / _- - -� -_ -_- / _ r/ 1// 4 / O- r - - - - -- --- -- - O - r T OL, EX ................. X - X� sags 9015 905.6 905.0 - 9013 905.7 07.0 EX x904.5 D%ISTING 21' RCP S1U9 849.901.34 EX 2905.1 X905.1 EX X904.9 04.7 EX 90 % 1 EX 96.1 ft, U 0 LEGEND +800.00 1000 O SCALE IN FEET 30 60 1 inch . 30 feet EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION WETLAND DELINEATION EXISTING CONTOURS TREE UNE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING WATER MAIN 90 EXISTING ASPHALT SURFACE EXISTING TREES NOTES: 1. ALL EXISTING SOILS ARE SODERVILLE (SoA), TYPE 'A' PER ANOKA COUNTY SOIL SURVEY. 2. THERE ARE NO WETLANDS ON THE SITE. RECEIVED JAN 122004 CITY OF LINO ENCHMARK(S) 1.) TNH SW OUAORANT 79tH ST. & NANCY DR., ELEV. 909.01 2.) TNH ACROSS STREET FROM 665 ARLO LANE, ELEV. 914.76 3.) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND DRIVE & ARLO LANE. ELEV. = 918.17 4.) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND TRAIL & MARILYN DRIVE, ELEV. . 914.06 cc zN 3 p ('3 Io CC m ° W Z CD - O cn ua 3 .. d. - K. E. W 2 -03 -039 SHEET 2 OF 7 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION OUTLOT A, HIGHLAND MEADOWS EAST, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County. Minnesota. NOTE$ ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM ASSUMES THE WEST LINE OF THE E 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 31. RANGE 22, TO BEAR N 00'37'02' E. THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT OR TITLE OPINION. A TITLE SEARCH FOR RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH MAY BENEFIT OR ENCUMBER THIS PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED BY THE SURVEYOR - ( LIJ 40115ROUSE E (4164'5708•w PLAT) N85 °11'20 "W " 82.10 TIA /II I /NI IT I vvIL.1 \7fl I 79 TH I 1 11/7 II A AIF1 i--iI \ ;nL- r,I4IJI HOUSE 0 ER1STN0 OUSE STREET 270TH= 26' BACK -BACK CUL-DE-SAC RADIUS= 45' r) A 111 LI V LJ. -564'Sr06'E PLAT 5°11'20" 4 r i 1 VI LJLJYV" (N94'57'00-91 PLAT) I 240.00 N85 °11'20 "W i 1■'I 411v Q: A (2t q N ° w Ac 4* ,' • rts 1 / 26 STREET _ ._ r- A C, a W L_n" • M t to 137 0). 41. N04- 4T Ht0. 3 w to 02„ 0cV fir CD umnsc O Q; m HOUSE mom/ ,tN33°03 _ �3 / 3534 .-- ,DRAINAGE AND UTIUTY EASEMENT TD SE VACATED-6::- . - - -- -- 151.4 21 • 92.900 S.F. ON 2133 At. F DRAINAGE AND UTIUTY EASEMENT OVER ALL OF LOT 21 '77.83- -- --- -•Qv1 -- f53.91 1133 S 1:1 1 13 - J 2024 S.F. 36.68 77.83 4s: 12 3235 S.F. 69.99 r 81 24.31 26.00 42.00 2 37.32 11 3094 S.F. 10 2024 S.F 3269 S.F 3269 5.F is 7 2024 S.F. 6 3255 S.F. 74 26.00 r 434.99 S87 °55'16 "E (03r4194•0 PLAT) 130.70 1;;70.68 (N64'Srorw PLAT) N85 °11'20 "W 83.37 155.98 589 °43'05 "E csantssE PLAT) SITE DATA DWELLING UNITS 20 TOTAL AREA 3.470 ACRES DENSITY 5.764 D.U. /ACRE EXISTING ZONING R -1 PROPOSED ZONING PUD OVERALL GROSS AREA = 151.150 SOUARE FEET OR 3.470 ACRES AREA OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 20 = 58,250 SQUARE FEET OR. 1.337 ACRES AREA OF LOT 21 = 92.900 SQUARE FEET OR 2.133 ACRES AREA OF LOT 21 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE = 23,900 SQUARE FEET OR 0.549 ACRES AREA OF LOT 21 PERVIOUS SURFACE - 69.000 SQUARE FEET. OR 1.584 ACRES LOT 21 CONTAINS 25.75 OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LOT 21 CONTAINS 74.35 OF PERVIOUS SURFACE Ann /"1 LJ LJ . n 90 02 Z �1 O SETBACKS REAR OF BUILDING TO EXTERIOR PROP. UNE- 20' FRONT OF BUILDING TO CURB- 20' MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS- 20' MINIMUM DECK SETBACK TO EXTERIOR PROP. UNE- 10' RECEIVED JAN 1 2 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES JRGEND IRON SET IRON FOUND SCALE IN FEET 30 60 I inch - 30 feet 90 DRAWN BY SPH,KTB DATE 1/12/2004. REVISIONS BOOK/PAGE NONE CONTROL NO. 21381 CAD FILE • 21381PP PROJECT NO. 21381 FILE NO. DRAWER SHEET 3 OF 7 RIM. 905.43 INV.901.32 ft EX. CB IN. INV =901.47 EX. 551AN RII4 -90500 E.W 190- 889.49 N,S 198 - 890.00 TI L, . FT �: 1 "IL.IT RW.905.62 198- 901.64 1 RC -S 0.901.01 .905.18 .99.901.15 ')0TH 1 %tl \l ..1 905. EX. 890RANT 1914.901.01 `SILT FENCE EX. Y PVC PL00 99.990.17 EX. 8' DIP PLUG LF 905.89 EX. C8 RI14- 90327 910.901.79 1ENP0RART ROCK CNSIRUCIION ENTRANCE 1F 907.04 T FENCE 10 906.59 L F I its I. EXISTING WETLAND NWL=903.0 1 YR HWL =903.1 1 1100 YR HWL =903.5 1 1 'CUOMO 51 Kw0U k 45500. • ' I LAST 911.1 FENCE SILT FENCE- 905.3 EX 904.9 T. FENCE SILT FENCE E 98. X 3 904.5 04. 1 1 I EX. 15" RC FES INV 902.65 1 •� 1 906 9LT FENCE - - AT FENCE 1-- .901 adi 1 +800.00 i L SILT -J •31 1000 1000 D0511N0 21' RCP S1U8 90- 901.34 9015 SILT FENCE 0904.9 905.0 905.3 9017 SILT FENCE 1 EX X904.5 900 905.1 x 0 111 // 1 'j 21 ►j,, SCALE IN FEET 30 60 1 inch = 30 feet 90 FDFND D^.4000 00000000W300 TP- TP- TP- I11- 1P -TP- PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION EXISTING ASPHALT SURFACE EXISTING CONCRETE SURFACE EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINE EXISTING. FENCE EXISTING TREE UNE/TREES EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM SEWER TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PROPOSED SILT FENCE TREE PROTECTION FENCE PROPOSED WOOD STAKED BALES INLET PROTECTION TO BE INSTALLED BY UT1UTY CONTRACTOR) PROPOSED BALE CHECK (DITCH) CHECK DAM (TO BE INSTALLED AFTER COMPLETION OF GRADING) BENCHMARK(S). 1.) TRH SW QUADRANT 79TH ST. & NANCY OR., ELEV. = 909.01 2.) TRH ACROSS STREET FROM 665 ARLO LANE, ELEV. - 914.76 3.) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND 0911/0 & ARLO LANE, ELEV. = 918.17 4.) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND TRAIL & MARILYN DRIVE, ELEV. = 914.06 DRAWN BY RWD DATE 1/12/2004 REVISIONS CAD FILE 21381PG. PROJECT N0. 21381 FILE NO. 2 -03 -039 SHEET 4 OF 7 M.905.43 V4901.32 EX. W INV.901,47 I I I .. 1"- I ry4905.80 7 E.w INV- 889.49 - N,S INV44890.00 RI144905.62 91V.901.64 RIM.905.18 517 - 901.15 DTI 1 - / 1 rl C"*TC) r -r-T� EX. HYDRANT 1NH.909.01 S . . 4 • A `r EX. 8' PVC PLUG BIV.890.17 8.906.58 1.4550.17 2.4. LT 21 0_ ,..NY9 •y4 df 10 ItW - EXISDNG 21' RCP STUB NV.901.34 SCALE IN FEET 30 60 90 1 inch . 30 Teel LEGEND O EXISTING SANITARY SEWER —� —I 1 EXISTING WATER MAIN >— a —>— EXISTING STORM SEWER • PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED WATER MAIN • >— PROPOSED STORM SEWER 4' PVC SDR 26 TYP. PROPOSED SANITARY SERVICE t' COPPER TYPE K 4 PROPOSED WATER SERVICE DELINEATED WETLAND RECEIVED JAN 1 2 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKES BENCHMARK(S1 1.) TNH SW OUADRANT 79714 ST. & NANCY DR., ELEV. 909.01 2.) TNH ACROSS STREET FROM 665 ARLO LANE. ELEV. - 914.76 3.) 71414 CORNER OF HIGHLAND DRIVE & ARLO LANE, ELEV. . 918.17 4.) MARILYN DRIVE, ELEV. � =N TRAIL & 9I 06 2ND ADDITION DRAWN BY RWD DATE 1/12/2004 REVISIONS CAD FILE 21381PU PROJECT NO. 21381 FILE NO, 2 -03 -039 SHEET 5 OF 7 j EGEND Two No. Elm/anon/ Type 01a. 1 O IL Save Remove 1000 939.00 POPLAR 8 X X. James R. Hill, Inc. PLANNERS / ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS ,,/-1) 2500 W. Cn. Ro. 42, Sort 120, BuoesuE, MN 55337 PHONE: (952)890 -6044 FAX: (952)890 -6244 EMAIL: JRHINCOJRHINC.COM "ate EXISTING ASPHALT SURFACE . 1001 938.93 CHERRY B X 1002 909.70 CHERRY 9 9 X 1003 939.90 OAK 12 X we+ ¢ r _ - FENCE 1004 93960 OAK 18 X 1005 908.20 OAK 10 X - EXISTING - - 1006 90920 MAPLE 10 X .Y. Y EXISTING TREE LINE/TREES i00s 90mro i __ 0 . EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED ' 1.1- i ,.: I - -- XQ EXISTING TREE TO REMOVED ' ■ L oo COTTONWOOD z z 1010 905.00 BIRCH 8 % 1012 905.00 POPLAR 10 X X BE 1015 9O POPLAR 7 X ocooecocvo-xecocco PROPOSED SILT FENCE i ; _ ------ • ��-- 1ozo 90530 POPLAR a x ,020 934.93 OAK e X ,- �" -- - -. 1 - ) ^ 1022 905.00 POPLAR a X 1P- TP= TP- TP- IP- 7P -Te- TREE PROTECTION FENCE T ; : ' - 7023 904.70 POPLAR 6 x 1024 934.90 POPLAR a x. • .-_- '' "�_ - _.� - --r 1000. PROPOSED CONTOUR ! T 1 1 �-- - - wo ' f 7 t `, r r r- - 1000 EXISTING CONTOUR i :� SCALE IN FEET - - - -'•-' L L t - , �. 0 3D 60 90 2 705 8.70 04 POPLAR 9 X 1028 904.90 POPLAR 14 X 1027 9aso POPLAR e x 1029 905.00 POPLAR 8 X _ '. --------- -_ < Q <- PROPOSED STORM SEWER r'> a ` `, 1030 eo4.eo POPLAR 7 x .r ------------------------ P -3-... , ^� • ,t ..' 1 inch = 30 feet . 1031 934.80 POPLAR 8 X 1032 904.90 POPLAR a X w. _ -J -- .. 5 11r±`6.a --- --------- K.,,aTEB ----------------- 3x04 _ % y 5, , _ ~ f ..r.1 1034 905.10 OAK 20 OO 14 J -_ ----, - - ". g�. , aa_,�m. � .satgv - ri,�` t u'eR ' �� v _ _ _ - 1 C..�'y I r� 1 L)r r- , 1043 904.70 7 X 1043 904.70 L POPLAR a x .. ti ILL L _ 1 _ _ v. 1044 1045 904.40 POPLAR 6 % '" var __R - �-- ---._" 1047 804.8° POPLAR 8 - X 1048 934.70 ELM a X _ I-- _'_•_sva �- oo • iI17 I ,050 804.30 ELM I 78 x 1051 904.2° POPLAR 9 X 1052 901.30 POPLAR B ->- .\- \ I __ `l / , t 9LT FENCE), ' I 1054 904.40 POPLAR 9 % 1058 804.80 POPLAR 7 X 1057 904.80 POPLAR B X 1061 934.40 POPLAR 7 X 1062 904.30 POPLAR 8 X 7083 93a.b .POPLAR 12 % I § E fr 0 d E- B I'll 7: ° 98 3 Sz Y -.� L $� _ &no vw� 1084 904.00 MAPLE 8 I / F . ! F � T FENCE �i I // LJ'2' SL 1 � i b / i }'7 / 1 % /1 6.! ` ^J t 1 1085 904.10 X 1088 90 4.20 20 PILE NLJ' 8 X X 1088 934.50 POPLAR X 1071 804.3° POPLAR a x 1072 904$1 POPLAR 8 X 7079 934.50 OAK 8 X 1078 904.50 POPLAR 11 X 7087 904.40 POPLAR 7 % _ I� i. L ( , p� ,1(1 A.. I / ( 4/ I ' / 1, � SLT FENCE DAT FENCE -� 1097 1°89 'A�i �•� - �� 1083 804.80 PINE 8 X 1088 904.40 POPLAR 10 X �'�- ' _ ,) - 1087 934.60 POPLAR 9 X tOBe 804.80 PLAR B X 7089 934.80 HIGHLAND MEADOWS EAST 2ND ADDITION UNO ORES. MINNESOTA TREE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR TSM DEVELOPMENT 222 MONROE STREET. ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 108- 0 4._ T FENCE ` ` 1091 934.80 . POPLAR i 18 ,082 904.60 PLAR X _ �-9LT MCC } // �` ti >�/1081 1099 ��� 09 097 _.. �4 - 1072 109 ~,� 096 \' . - - - -. _ _ . _ l6a slT FENCE O 1095 .9 :•. ; / �. - - - -'_... -- _ Ip �• J.' �• 1093 904.80 POPLAR • I .. (10 - 1. IOT 1 1123 1125 170 / , 1 1128 • 7132 I f 50.2 FENCE \, 4065 I/10631�.1 I . ) i da SAT `FENCE I 1 + I SLT FENCE . I,• 1094 904.50 POPLAR 8 106 Po 8 X 904.80 LM X 1097 .905.00 ELM 9 X q r 719 1 1y Gt l- / ^7 2 17178 / -' 1 `` ~ /, (' 11 aJ �+ \.V _ _ ' ' (� / .� --mt- . - - -_• . V g ..�_ ' 11N .. r ' rT �/ 121 1.7'1 (IL' 1 '� - / \ 11. • ($( �•• 1722 '- - ^�L ' `-g 4 im t� '. 1139 7733 \ �'tp'_� -•�- G.. • I• _O A I / ►� -�9. 137 \ "��- w r X �� t� ��8C') �i5.O11320 �4t, )I /p1 -~ •!t t' -� OO 7M ,�J1190 O\ _ A,� 30 X f gg t / t'j+'� � �99Q2 / �f " *1225 ii7 ` 1191 1� �F� �4�/ ..J 1 � � ( �• � •L7 � / \ � I & , 1194 1192 J X904 � A� - - ® / 1197/_ �_ "- -.` / ! ^`_C.` 1� 110° 904.6° ELM 7 X 1101 934.40 PINE 8 X 1702 804.70 PINE 9 X 1118 931.20 BIRCH 8 X 1117 804.30 POPLAR a x 1718 90440 POPLAR 8 X 1119 604.50 ELM 8 1720 904.40 PINE 12 X 1121 905.10 ELM 78 X 1122 809.70 ElM B % 1123 903.80 POPLAR X 1124 804.00 POPLAR 10 X 1125 804.10 POPLAR 9 X 1,28 933.80 POPLAR 8 9 X 1145 �',,�''��!..cc'�••������� ��`� /' ,.awl - a .•0404,' �f �c , 7 �4A..j�� ( �iI�y.( r I tat t , �i t C _ tat ,��7Ji / �� L, t1 i J / I T,4µ' Q + / �/ �4tj� 120°1145 rt / Q�J �tA zz+ 1B n 120 ,�....� ^.., / �F /Q_.'.� r 1 �'3 �. L7 X223F �,21, / ,203 I } , I ( I . „ �a ©0 6�2 0 «) 212V O � 1132 804.00 POPLAR 7 X „43 934.b POPLAR B ,2 X 18 x 904.30 POPLAR % 1148' 9M.70 POPLAR 8 x ,150 904.60 ELM a X •L 1151 604.60 POPLAR 7 X �I : RECEIVED -:. _ 2 2004 CIS Y CDF LltdO LAKES 1152 934.90 POPLAR 7 X v i } \ g„ .- 7 I I `B /✓ .. _ _I 1 }',��_402_•.lg_,216s1. ..j 1 ' ;� F 1 /-0 1��.. 1227 /tt3` 1217 1213 (l 1210 1155 934.80 POPLAR 8 X .: 105�I}}I,�{ 3 p •'� I } }1 'tVf - 1158 .804.80 POPLAR B X tii / -_- 1221 I t .- - 1159 904.70 PINE 20 1180 935.0 PINE 2a X 1I (>> r 1183 905.20 ELM a i I Lt; ;;� E v,It }► i . \1 I 1 S (' I I .�` .. 1177 _I I '�}I I , / �0. 9 OAK X 1189 909.40 OAK 12 X _ - - 1170 905.20 MAPLE 20 X 1174 804.5° ELM B X �7,\ - - ( 1034 ..1031 ` I _�4. _.' � /••/ ! 1175 � 8°5.80 OAK 9 % �� / I 1755 306.30 OAK t4 x (/ _a - -�/ / r I / / ` (- - ! i i NOTE. SIGNS SHALL RE PLACED APPROX.SOS APART CTIOS A TRARALED11 ! /� _ - ,179 808 0 CHERRY 3 B X 1180 008.10 CHERRY 7 - DRAWN RWD N 907.80 DAK e 908.80 ELM 12 11 810.10 OAK 10 14 i -. DAT117 ., 1/12 /2004 REVISIONS 11 BOB.90 ELM 909.00 CHERRY ,p2t °29 25 X _ � 1023 ; ©�♦. 024 ,(�) ( ,. i ' 11 1 , 1; I } I '� } 1180 910.00 ELM X 1191 910.70 OAK 12 X V J - - - R 1 / -:J _6 } �- ice'- �( ( / ' 1192 917.90 ELM s x 15 X / '� Pr L. pt�► 41 TOPS- ©4 ,[• L)��F012 �. ti.�..� 1195 970 o ELM X 1 1198 ELM x �I �.7010, _* . / 'lQ�, 1 (v'jl .-- /' / _ 1022 1016 \ - - war - - - - - �' _ -•. �• -- .� - - ��.- _ - 1 - /,i V T - - 1187 BOB.BO CHERRY 7 X 1798 908.80 ELM- 10 X 1199 910.90 CHERRY 9 X - •� ___ _ _ _ - - - __ - - / --- J ' - ,- -� ..� '�' 1 911.40 ELM 9 x 12011 1201 911.70 CHERRY 8 X . _ /. j / • . / ___ _____ _ :.. R�tP� O �. - 0 7 FENCE. T FENCE 1292 81200 ELM 8 X 1203 91270 ELM 10 X SILT FENCE / \ / .. OENCHMARK(S) H 91200 CHERRY 6 X ,217 911.30 CHERRY 8 X 1212 911.40 CHERRY 8 7L - - \ J �\ \ ti I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. SPECIRCAOON OR REPORT 1.) TNH SW QUADRANT 79TH ST. & 1213 911.30 CHERRY 8 x CAD FILE 21 �ITP . 1215 911.30 CHERRY a x 1218 871.20 ELM 10 X WAS PREPARED BY NE OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISOR / NANCY DR., ELEV. = 909.01 AND THAT 1 AMA DULY REOS1ERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DATED M6 2.) TNH ACROSS STREET FROM 12111 12,7 810.90 ELM 7 X 1275 909.90 ELM B X PROJECT NO. 21381 1220 91020 ELM 9 x DAY OF JANUARY 2004. 665 ARLO LANE, ELEV. = 914.76 _ - - 3.) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND DRIVE & - ARLO LANE. ELEV. = 918.17 JAMES STURM, ASLA 4) TNH CORNER OF HIGHLAND TRAIL & REGISTRATION NUMBER 18350 - MARILYN DRIVE, ELEV. =.914.06 . - 1221 910.70 ELM 9 10 X 1222 910.10 OAK 10 X NO. 2 -03 -039 1224 910.10 CHERRY 5 8 XFILE 12255 809.00 ELM 7 X 1717 809.10 ELM e . SHEET 6 OF 7 1229 908.80 OAK 11 X 1229 908.70 ELM 10 X