Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/09/2004 P&Z PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING • • Wednesday, June 9, 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: May 12, 2004 IV. OPEN MIKE V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING for Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development/ Preliminary Plat for Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition, a 23 -unit medium density residential development, NE corner of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane — Jeff Smyser B. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING for a Rezoning (from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive) and Preliminary Plat, as well as MUSA Reserve Allocation, for Junes Addition, located at 599 — 62nd Street — Dick Thompson, TKDA C. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING for a Rezoning (from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive) and Preliminary Plat, as well as MUSA Reserve Allocation, for West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition, located at 607 — 62nd Street — Dick Thompson, TKDA D. Elect chair and vice -chair for remainder of 2004. • VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Reminder of special meeting to discuss signage: June 16, 2004 - 6:30 p.m. VII. ADJOURN • • • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE : May 12, 2004 TIME STARTED : 6:32 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:56 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Hyden, Pogalz, Rafferty, Root, Schaps, and Tralle. MEMBERS ABSENT : Lane. STAFF PRESENT : Michael Grochala and James Studenski I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:32 • p.m., May 12, 2004. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 14, 2004 Mr. Hyden made a MOTION approve the April 14, 2004 Minutes and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 5 -0. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared open mike open at 6:35 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:36 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5 -0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING, for a Rezoning (from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive) and Preliminary Plat, as well as MUSA Reserve Allocation, for Junes Addition, located at 599 — 62 " Street DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 2 Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. Staff stated applicant had submitted an application to subdivide an existing lot into three lots. This would require a rezoning from Rural to R -1X, a preliminary plat, and the allocation of six acres of MUSA reserve. The site is guided for Low Density Sewered Residential land use and is within the stage 1 (pre -2010) growth area. He noted the project involves filling some wetland to create buildable area for one of the proposed lots. This needs the approval of the wetland mitigation from the Rice Creek Watershed District. This issue is key to proceeding with the project, but has not been resolved. He stated the notification for the public hearing was published and mailed to surrounding property owners. Therefore, the P &Z should open the public hearing. If anyone is present for the public hearing, comments can be heard. The P &Z should then continue the public hearing to the June meeting. Staff will have a full review of the project at that meeting. He indicated reconstruction of 62 "1 St. will occur this summer. Sanitary sewer and water will be extended west from the intersection with West Shadow Lake Drive to serve this property. These utilities will not be extended further west down 62nd St. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. Marvin Emily, 590 62nd Street, stated he was opposed to this project. He indicated he did not want the wetland filled in and expressed concern that the road was taking 20 feet of his property to dig a ditch and fill in the wetland. He expressed concern that the wetland being filled in would add drainage problems and excess water on his property. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to the June 9, 2004 meeting and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 5 -0. B. PUBLIC HEARING, for a Rezoning (from R, Rural to R -1X, Single Family Executive) and Preliminary Plat, as well as MUSA Reserve Allocation, for West Shadow Ponds 2 "d Addition, located at 607 — 62 "d Street Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. Staff stated applicant had submitted an application to subdivide an existing lot into two lots. This would require a rezoning from Rural to R -1X, a preliminary plat, and the allocation of 0.74 acres of MUSA reserve. The site is guided for Low Density Sewered Residential land use and is within the stage 1 (pre -2010) growth area. He noted the project involves filling some wetland to create buildable area for one of the proposed lots. This needs the approval of the wetland mitigation from the Rice Creek Watershed District. This issue is key to proceeding with the project, but has not been resolved. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 3 He stated the notification for the public hearing was published and mailed to surrounding property owners. Therefore, the P &Z should open the public hearing. If anyone is present for the public hearing, comments can be heard. The P &Z should then continue the public hearing to the June meeting. Staff will have a full review of the project at that meeting. He indicated reconstruction of 62nd St. will occur this summer. Sanitary sewer and water will be extended west from the intersection with West Shadow Lake Drive to serve this property. These utilities will not be extended further west down 62 "d St. Chair Schaps invited the public to make comment. Marvin Emily, 590 62nd Street, stated he was also opposed to this project because it would fill in the wetland. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to the June 9, 2004 meeting and was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5 -0. C. PUBLIC HEARING, for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning (from R, Rural to R -1, Single Family Residential) and Preliminary Plat, as well as MUSA Reserve Allocation, for Fox Den Acres, a 50 -acre development south of Birch Street and east of Deerwood Lane, at the east end of Fox Road Chair Schaps opened the public hearing at 6:41 p.m. Staff stated applicant had requested approval of single family residential development called Fox Den Acres. The comprehensive plan guides the majority of the site for low - density residential use and it is zoned R -1. The request also includes an amendment of the comprehensive plan and MUSA reserve allocation. This would allow the development to extend beyond the boundary of the area currently guided for development to provide for an additional eight lots. He noted there are several challenging design issues including a "ponding and flowage" easement, single access point due to past development designs, the growth management policies, and wetlands. The City must consider these issues in the project design while acknowledging that most of the property is guided and zoned for development, and has been for some years. There is usable upland outside of the growth boundary and the applicant wishes to utilize this upland. He stated the public hearing is for the comprehensive plan amendment and the preliminary plat. The allocation of MUSA reserve does not require a public hearing because such allocation must be in areas already designed for it under the comprehensive plan. The site is in the existing MUSA. Staff presented their analysis and recommended denial of the project because the City's growth management policy and subdivision ordinance prohibit development outside of defined growth boundaries. The proposed plat extends beyond the stage 1 (pre -2010) growth area, the MUSA, the Low Density Sewered Residential land use are, and the R -1 DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 4 zone. The proposer requests amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning map to accommodate the extra 3 -4 acres of development. It would also require the vacation of parts of a ponding and flowage easement. There is no clear justification for these actions other than to increase developable area. Section 1002 -6 of the subdivision ordinance lists criteria for determining if a proposed development is premature. These include consistency with the land use plan, including the staged growth area boundaries. A project that is consistent with these criteria is premature. And staff did not yet know if water service is adequate. If it is not, the project is premature. Mr. Tralle asked who owned the tower. Mr. Grochala replied it was a holding company, but he did not know the name. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, 1000 County Road E, Shoreview, showed the proposed wetland delineation for the site. He noted on a 50 -acre site, they were showing wetland impacts on less than 1 acre. He noted they had done their job in looking at the impact on the wetlands. He stated they were showing 64 lots on the 50 -acre site. He noted they were well below the typical single - family lot density. He indicated the lots were also wider than normal. He showed the Board where the access was being proposed. He showed the proposed phasing plan to the Board. He noted phase 3 was the phase that was affected by the Comprehensive Plan amendment. He had a neighborhood meeting in March and one of the concerns was a trail access. He stated he had provided for a trailway to the north by having an open space corridor proposed in their plan. Chair Schaps stated there was a lot of things missing in this plan and asked what had changed since the last meeting. Mr. Black replied they had taken soil borings since the last meeting. Chair Schaps stated they were requesting a comprehensive plan amendment without giving anything back. Mr. Black stated they had a meeting with staff after the last meeting and they were working on the issues. He noted this was a process and they were trying to address these things. He stated Rice Creek had not reviewed their wetland delineation at this time. He noted they wanted to wait until the growing season started, but he understood they were going to try and review it tomorrow. He stated they were still working with Tec Panel. Chair Schaps asked if going beyond the MUSA line was a financial issue. Mr. Black replied it made more sense for the development to use those ten lots. Mr. Pogalz asked if there had been any conversation with the property owner to the north to see if they were willing to sell. Mr. Black replied he had not and he did not know when a potential connection would be made, if at all. A resident of Fox Road expressed his concerns about increase in traffic and also the construction trucks. He stated he wanted to see an access to the north. He expressed concern regarding the drainage. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 5 John Callan, 784 Deerwood Circle, stated there had been nothing presented as to why the comprehensive plan should be changed. He stated the plan had that area zoned that way for a purpose and a reason, and if there was a change, he wanted to hear what the reasoning was in terms of planning were. He asked why was the zoning change good for the community. A resident from 6433 Deerwood Lane, stated there was a lot of violations of the plan including a long cul -de -sac; it did not meet the open green space requirements; and it did not fit the zoning. She expressed concern about the children's safety in the area with the increased traffic. She stated it was important this development had a second outlet. She stated it was her opinion that people would use Deerwood Lane more heavily. Paul Casanova, 6323 Deerwood Lane, stated he had done some research and talked to many of his neighbors, as well as the developer. He noted he respected the fact that people were allowed to do whatever they wanted to on their property to an extent, so he did not have a problem with the development itself, but he did have a concern with increase in traffic. He also believed more people would be driving on Deerwood Lane. He stated he did not agree with the single access point. He indicated waiting to get out onto Birch Street was an issue. He stated there was more potential of risk taking when people had to wait to get out into traffic. He expressed concern about the loss of wetlands and wildlife habitat. He expressed concern about the density of the project. He asked if a conservation plan would be looked into. Chair Schaps replied a conservation plan would be up to the developer. Mr. Casanova expressed concern about the stormwater runoff and drainage. He noted any more water on his property would not be good. He expressed concern about the impact to the wetlands and the increase in insect populations with more stagnant water. He requested a management plan for the wetlands. Steve Cavanagh, 6331 Deerwood Lane, stated he had serious issues with the traffic study. He stated having the developer conduct the traffic study was a conflict of interest. He noted the traffic study failed and then the developer changed an assumption in the study and then it passed. He noted there was no measurement taken on Fox Road, but they only made an assumption. Mark Pederson, 6307 Deerwood Lane, expressed concern that the developer had not spoken with the property owners to the north about an access. He expressed concern if there was a north entrance onto Old Birch he did not believe this was a safe access. Janice Beach, 6312 Deerwood Lane, stated she was on the Association Board and the Board's concerns had been well addressed by the previous comments including traffic, safety, and drainage. She expressed concern about only having one access for emergency vehicles. She indicated the Association was not pleased with the proposed development. A resident from 6379 Deerwood Lane, stated besides this development, there were four or five other developments going up in the area and expressed concern about a major increase in the amount of traffic. He asked why did they need another development at this time with all of the major traffic concerns. He asked if there were any plans to put DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 6 lights on County Road J and Highway 49. Mr. Grochala replied there were no plans at this time. Marvin Emily, 590 62nd Street, stated all of this property used to be good hunting ground and now it was not. He expressed concern about the wetland changes over the years. Cindy Lambert, 6339 Deerwood Lane, expressed concerns about the traffic and the new developments in the area and the increase of traffic with those new developments. She expressed concern about the water drainage. She noted they had a wetland section right outside of her backyard and asked what would that do to her wetland. Janice Beach, asked if there was going to be a decision made tonight or would it be continued. Mr. Schaps replied it was the intent to make a decision tonight. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 5 -0. Mr. Grochala indicated this was a challenging site. He stated if they could do a project that would benefit the City, then that was a reason to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tralle asked the traffic engineer what dictated the upgrade of a road and what was the prime mover of designing or redesigning the road. The Traffic Engineer replied the traffic volumes of the road dictated when it needed to be upgraded. He indicated this was not a straightforward calculation and was based on many different factors including accesses, driveways, etc. He noted Deerwood Lane had not been set up as a collector road and it was not fair to the residents to make this a collector road. Mr. Tralle stated the driving force to an improved road was after a development and not before. The Traffic Engineer replied that was the typical procedure. Mr. Tralle reminded the residents that the people who lived around the association before their development had been build had said the same concerns about traffic. However, he understood their traffic concerns. Mr. Pogalz asked if the neighborhood meeting was well received. Mr. Black replied there were 30 -40 residents at the meeting. He stated they had presented a concept plan that as very similar to this plan. He noted the general concern was traffic, but he struggled to find an answer to that concern. He indicated drainage was also expressed as a concern. He noted there were favorable and unfavorable comments made at that meeting. Chair Schaps asked if there was enough time before July 9 to rectify the issues. Mr. Grochala replied staff would be hard pressed to do this. He noted there were a couple of options available to the developer. He stated he would prefer to see an extension by the developer to extend the time period or withdraw this application and draw up with a new application. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 7 Mr. Black stated he would like a decision made at tonight's meeting and make a decision with staff as to whether he would carry the application forward to the City Council. Mr. Root stated challenging design issues were what many of the plans presented to the City were. He indicated the access issue was a big problem with this development. He agreed that a northern access to Old Birch would also be a problem. He stated he could not support this as it was currently presented to him. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to recommend denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5 -0. Mr. Root made a MOTION to recommend denying the MUSA reserve Root and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 5 -0. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to recommend denying the Preliminary Plat and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 5 -0. D. Final Plat for Justin's Preserve, Sue Carpenter, 171 White Pine Road Staff stated the City Council had approved the preliminary plat for Justin's Preserve on March 8, 2004. The applicants have requested approval of the final plat. He noted the submitted final plat conforms to the approved preliminary plat. There is no development agreement for this project as there are no improvements requiring City involvement. He recommended approval based on the following conditions as summarized in staff's May 12, 2004 report: 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 the City Council, the applicant shall submit proof that the powerline easement has been confined. 5. Approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District must be obtained prior to final plat approval by the City Council. Mr. Rafferty left the meeting at 7:56 p.m. Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Final Plat for Justin's Preserve, Sue Carpenter, 171 White Pine Road subject to the conditions as noted in staff's May 12, 2004 report and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 4 -0 (Mr. Rafferty was absent for the vote). E. Final Plat for Eagle Brook Addition Staff stated the City Council had approved the preliminary plat for Eagle Brook Addition on March 22, 2004 with Resolution 04 -17. The Church has now submitted a final plat. The final plat conforms with the approved preliminary plat. The City Attorney has reviewed the title commitment. Staff is preparing a development agreement, which will DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 8 include financial securities. The financial securities will include the cost of a turn lane on the northbound exit ramp off of I -35E as well as street lights at the site driveways. A revised right of way deed for the exception piece will be submitted prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. A number of other conditions of approval will be addressed in the development agreement, and some must be met prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Rafferty rejoined the meeting at 8:03 p.m. Staff recommended approving the final plat. Chair Schaps gave staff an e -mail he had received from Barbara Boar and the concerns of the Heron Group. Mr. Grochala replied he had responded to Ms. Boar regarding those concerns. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to approve the final plat for Eagle Brook Addition and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 5 -0. F. Master Planning process for 360 acres W. of 35E and N. of Main St. — Recommendation to City Council to proceed with process Chair Schaps left the meeting at 8:09 p.m. and rejoined the meeting at 8:11 p.m. Staff stated there was a meeting of all advisory boards and the City Council on April 29 to hear a proposal to master plan an area abutting 35E. John Fegis of Benchmark Community Builder Collaborative would like to conduct a master planning process for 360 acres on the west side of the freeway, north of Main St. The planning would be a collaborative effort with the City. This would involve revisiting the comprehensive plan guidance for development in that area as well as other policies. He asked if the P &Z wanted to proceed with the master planning. Chair Schaps asked if there had been a committee set up to come up with a plan. Mr. Grochala replied this was an option, but no committee had been set up at this time. Mr. Rafferty stated the previous meeting on April 29 they had a too vague, and the reality of coming up with a Master Plan was ideal for that area, but the problem was that there was nothing to go on. He indicated if they moved forward, the development firm was basically looking to spend money to change the Comprehensive Plan and the City did not know anything or have enough information. He expressed concern about attempting to develop two major developments (the town center and this development) and spreading staff too thin. He noted however, that Master Planning was the key to success for any type of project. Mr. Grochala stated he did not believe they were trying to create another town center on the east side and he believed the two projects would be totally different. He noted the project on the east side had been vaguely presented on purpose so the community could get involved and get the type of development they wanted for this area. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 9 Mr. Root stated he agreed with Mr. Rafferty. He asked that the development team give them something to start with. He agreed planning out the entire area was the correct approach and getting community involvement was also the correct approach, but to give the City a starting point. Mr. Rafferty stated he did not believe this development could be developed within five or six years as the development team had alluded to. He asked if this was a good plan for the City and asked if it was a good idea to change the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Root asked for concept plans as a starting point. He asked what would make sense economically for that area. Mr. Rafferty asked if staff could physically stretch themselves to do this, or would they need to hire additional staff. He indicated there were economics to look at also. Mr. Grochala replied staffing concerns were an issue and they would need to look at shifts of responsibilities, but that would happen with or without this project. Mr. Tralle stated the perception that Lino Lakes was extremely hard to deal with was a valid one and that was the reason it took so long to get developments into the City. He asked them to proceed with optimistic caution. Chair Schaps stated he heard they should proceed, but agreed they should look at concept plans as a starting point. Mr. Pogalz stated he was not concerned that they had not seen anything yet. He indicted he was not opposed to the blank sheet concept because if the community came together and developed what was wanted there, it would be a great asset. He noted this was the City's opportunity to work with a developer for a good development. He believed this was a good process to go through. Mr. Rafferty noted somebody still had to come forward and actually build the development. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to recommend that the City and staff proceed with the Mast Planning Process for 360 acres W. of 35E and N. of Main St. and was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5 -0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Confirm date of special meeting to discuss signage: June 16, 2004 Staff stated due to the lengthy agendas for the past several months, the P &Z has not had the opportunity to discuss the temporary signage issue to any great extent. Discussions of the issue began at the June 2003 meeting, and was tabled repeatedly. The last time this was discussed, the P &Z decided to have a special meeting devoted solely to the topic. Last month, staff suggested June 16, 2004 and asked the board members to check their calendars. Staff would like the P &Z to confirm this date so staff can send out notices to business owners. He noted staff was not attempting to mail a letter to every single DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board May 12, 2004 Page 10 business in the city, but to select representative businesses, and invite them to inform any other business owner who might be interested. He indicated the ultimate goal is to prepare amendments to the sign ordinance that will address temporary signage. OTHER Chair Schaps stated the June meeting would probably be his last meeting as a member of the Board due to his intended relocation to another City. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:56 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 5 -0. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Altman, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. DRAFT MINUTES • • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: TOPIC: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM V. A Jeff Smyser June 9, 2004 PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development and Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition Hokanson Development, Inc. Hokanson Development has submitted a request for a conditional use permit for a residential planned unit development (PUD), and development stage plan (preliminary plat). The subject site is four acres of property at the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane, adjacent to the existing Marshan Lake Condominiums. A PUD is required for multi - family development in a shoreland area. The applicant withdrew a previous application, so this is considered a new application. No rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment is needed or requested. The site was rezoned to R -3 earlier this year, making it consistent with the comprehensive plan. ANALYSIS Land Use, Density, Zoning The table below identifies the existing land use and zoning as well as guided land uses for the area. Location Existing Land Use Guided Land Use Existing Zoning Site single family home and vacant Medium Density Residential R -3 Medium Density Residential North Marshan Lake Condominiums Medium Density Residential R -4 High Density Residential South commercial (Automotive Refinish Technol.) & residential Performance Lane Use and Low Density Sewered Residential GB General Bus. and R -1X Single Family Executive East Marshan Lake Condominiums Medium Density Residential R -4 High Density Residential West Lake Drive, Wenzel Farm townhomes Medium Density Residential R -3 Medium Density PDO Marshan Townhomes 2 "d Addn. page 2 The following is a summary of the of the proposal: Gross Site Area 4.05 acres Upland Area 4.05 acres Right of Way Dedication 0.21 acres Resulting Area 3.84 acres Total Units 23 Resulting Density 5.99 units /acre The existing Marshan Lake Condominiums were approved in 1995, with the second phase approved in 1996. They were built at a density of 6.4 units /acre, in accordance with the approved site plans. The City began work on a new comprehensive plan in 1996 -97 and approved it in 2002. The entire Marshan Lake Condominiums site and the remaining four -acres now proposed for development is guided Medium Density Residential. This allows a density of 3 -6 units per acre. The project falls within this range. Zoning: The four -acre site recently was rezoned to R -3, Medium Density Residential to make it consistent with the comprehensive plan. The site is within a shoreland overlay district. The specific requirements relative to the proposed project are discussed below under "Preliminary Plat/PUD ". The shoreland ordinance requires a PUD for multifamily development in a shoreland overlay area. Growth Management: The City's growth management policy (Ordinance 01 -03) implements growth policies of the comprehensive plan. It establishes limits on the number of new units to be approved as well on the use of MUSA reserve. The site is within the existing MUSA, so the MUSA reserve limit is not applicable The 147 units per year have been reached for 2004 (see attached table). Previous applications account for all lots in 2005. However, none of the projects listed in the table as "proposed" have been approved. If other projects do not get approved, this project would be possible in 2005. The policy does not describe how to resolved such conflicts when other criteria are met such as adequate infrastructure being present and the sites being within the MUSA. • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT The following table summarizes project design elements: Buildings, Units: The proposal includes eleven buildings. Ten buildings are twin homes, the other is a three -unit. They are all two -story structures. Each unit includes 1633 sf. The garages are similar in size to other recently approved PUD projects. The submittal included no information on building materials. This must be provided. The zoning ordinance requirements are as follows (Sec.3, Subd. 4.B.2.b.4)): 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. Streets, Access: Access to most buildings would be via private drives off of Aqua Circle. The drives are 24 ft. wide, back of curb to back of curb. The Century Farm North project has the same design for the townhome access drives. The existing Marshan townhomes have wider access drives: 28' back of curbs. The proposal is acceptable. required proposed unit size R -3: 920 sf 1633 sf setbacks local street arterial street side yard rear yard 30 ft or 25 ft from internal streets in PUD 40 ft 10 ft 30 25 ft 40 ft 25 ft -- impervious max 65% shoreland: 35% 31% open space 50% for PUD 50.6% height max. 36 ft. 26 ft. at peak Buildings, Units: The proposal includes eleven buildings. Ten buildings are twin homes, the other is a three -unit. They are all two -story structures. Each unit includes 1633 sf. The garages are similar in size to other recently approved PUD projects. The submittal included no information on building materials. This must be provided. The zoning ordinance requirements are as follows (Sec.3, Subd. 4.B.2.b.4)): 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. Streets, Access: Access to most buildings would be via private drives off of Aqua Circle. The drives are 24 ft. wide, back of curb to back of curb. The Century Farm North project has the same design for the townhome access drives. The existing Marshan townhomes have wider access drives: 28' back of curbs. The proposal is acceptable. • • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 4 The plan shows separate driveways onto Aqua Lane for Units 1, 2, 3, and 4. It is not clear why this is necessary. Though the proposed design does not violate any City requirements, it is less desirable than other options. The two twin -home structures could face one another across a shared drive. A driveway exists that serves the existing townhomes on the north side of the site. It was constructed centered on the property line. This driveway could be used by the current proposal with a shared driveway agreement. This was the original intent of this driveway. However, the property to the north now is under separate ownership. The plan shows additional right of way to be dedicated for Lake Drive (CSAH 23). This would meet Anoka County's requirement for 60' from centerline. Utilities, Stormwater Management: There is no ponding or treatment included in the proposal. The existing stormwater management design for the area accommodates development on this site. However, stormwater treatment must be provided in accordance with the most recent regulatory requirements. This will be reviewed in greater detail as the project progresses. The Rice Creek Watershed District requires District review for multi -unit development over 2.5 acres. The Watershed District received the application May 20, 2004, and it is scheduled for its meeting on June 23. Landscaping: The existing townhomes screen this site from the lake, so screening is not an issue as it might be for lakeshore property. The proposed landscaping is adequate. However, several species should be changed according to the Environmental Board's recommendations, as listed in the conditions of approval. In addition, three spruce trees must be moved out of the line of sight for vehicles at the intersection waiting to turn onto Lake Drive. Lighting: No street or yard lighting is shown on the plans. There is no reason to provide any such lighting. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD The Environmental Board reviewed the application on December 3rd. That board recommended denial of the project because of lack if information on surface water management and the medium density designation. The comments are attached. • Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions should be attached to any approval of the project: 1. Additional right of way shall be dedicated to Anoka County to total 60 feet from centerline for Lake Drive (CSAH 23). 2. Right of access shall be dedicated to Anoka County along CSAH 23 on the final plat.. 3. A new landscaping plan shall be submitted with the following changes three weeks prior to City Council consideration of the application: -change black ash to green ash or a native oak species - change Colorado spruce to white spruce - change Austrian pine to red or white pine - change autumn applause to northern pin oak - three spruce at the Aqua Lane corner shall be moved east at least 20 feet 4. Exterior building materials must be submitted three weeks prior to City Council consideration of the application. 5. The project must obtain approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District prior to City Council consideration of the application. 6. The City Engineer's comments in the June 4, 2004 memo must be met to his satisfaction. OPTIONS 1. Approve the Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development and Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat, with conditions. 2. Deny the application. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addn. page 6 This report is based on the following documents: • Existing Conditions, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Preliminary Plat, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Utility Plan, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Tree Preservation Plan, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Landscape Plan, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Landscape Details, May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Detail Sheets (2), May 5, 2004, received May 7 • Building Elevations and Floor Plans, 2 -unit and 3 -unit Buildings, May 6, 2004, received May 7 • • • C.) cc CLI platted) 2003 -09 TOTAL N iC) 249 T T CO tC) O T CO 1521 N T T T 'Cr N O T O CO T CO T V O N O co M CD 0 0 N 0 co co 0 N co 1• O 0 N M CO CD 0 0 N 43 321 3P1 105 :o be final N O 0 N N (0 T In 10 CO T co- 341 N 23 ?? CO r yearjlots /units Tr 0 0 N LC) Cfl T 56 ti d' T Cr N 176 M 0 0 N N I1) 561 T O T CO N N N T T 148 LOTS /UNITS Phasing plans year end 2002 51 51 E iQ ^ = O- i a. 103 249 T Co If) O T c') 1521 N T T yr N 0 T CO T CO T 641 N CO N Development Name approved prelim. plats 1Stoneybrook 2nd Addn `Century Farms North Keefe: preliminary plat (Morton (minor subdiv) 1Ravens Hollow Haley Manor (10 new Tots) Crystal Cove Millers Crossroads Lakeview Estates (2 new) Snell (minor subdivision) [Pheasant Hills Pres. 13th Justin's Preserve Marshan Estates 1Rice Creek Church duplex (Rice Church: Oakwood View proposed Highland Meadows East 2nd 1 Pheasant Hills 12th island 1 West Shadow Ponds 2nd Add 1Fox Den Acres Junes Addn Marshan Townhomes 2nd total ti T N O ()) o- 0 N N � Cr) ti O O T O N ` • eL • CL • O C N 0 C (a T 4- 4- o o N 0) 0 �- c c (n CU a) U 2 2 a) • • TKDA ENGINEERS - ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS MEMORANDUM To: Copies To: From: Date: James Studenski, City Engineer Scott A. Brink, P.E. June 4, 2004 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2140 (651) 292-4400 (651) 292 -0083 Fax www.tkda.com Reference: Marshan Lake Townhomes 2nd Addition City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 12701 -002 Comm. No. Routing: Late last year, the City of Lino Lakes received plans providing for the construction of 46 residential units (townhomes) on a 4.05 acre parcel of property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Lake Drive and Aqua Lane. An Engineering Review dated December 5, 2004 was subsequently conducted. Since that date, the following new and revised documents have been received and considered in this review: 1. Cover letters from Hokanson Development dated May 6, 2004 and May 20, 2004. 2. Legal Counsel Facsimile dated February 20, 2004. 3. Letter regarding the Conditional Use permit dated January 12, 2004. 4. Narrative Addendum for Conditional Use Permit dated May 6, 2004. Stormwater Pond Calculations dated May 6, 2004. Lighting Information dated December 4, 2003. 7. Park Board Review dated December 1, 2003. 8. Architectural Plan Set Cover page received May 7, 2004. 9. Preliminary Plan Set (11 sheets - 11X17 and full size), prepared by Schoell and Madson, dated May 5, 2004. 10. Full size and 11X17 size Architectural Plans (3 sheets each), for both 2 -unit and 3 -unit buildings. Narrative for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, prepared by Hokanson Development, Inc., and received by the City of Lino Lakes October 28, 2003. 11. Soil Borings prepared by Braun Intertec dated June 16, 1995, and Geotechnical Evaluation by Braun dated July 24, 1995. 12. Wetland Delineation Report prepared by Lori J. Marco dated April 7, 1994. 13. Aerial photo of the site (date ?), received May 20, 2004. 5. 6. The number of dwelling units has been reduced from 46 units to 23 from the previous review, and the plans have been revised accordingly. The following comments are provided: 1. The plan essentially provides for the construction of 23 townhome units, constructed as (10) X 2 -unit buildings and (1) X 3 -unit building, all located between Lake Drive and Aqua Circle, and north of Aqua Lane. Access to 19 of the units would be from two (2) individual shared private driveways extending from Aqua Circle, with the other 4 units accessing directly to Aqua Circle. Utilities (water and sewer) are proposed to be extended from Aqua Circle. No access to Lake Drive or work within the Lake Drive right -of -way is proposed. Marshan Lake Townhomes Review Page 2 June 4, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 2. It is not expected that any construction related permits from Anoka County will be required. However, any side grading into the Anoka County right of way would require a permit. Because the property is adjacent to the County Roadway, the Preliminary and Final plats will require the review of the County. An additional dedication of 15 feet to the County right of way is shown as required by Anoka County. The applicant shall also be aware of intersection sight distance requirements, and that no trees or vegetation may be planted within the County right of way, or at locations that will restrict corner visibility sight lines. This would also include signs, berming, or other surface features. The final Landscaping Plan shall therefore be subject to further review and approval of the City and County as needed. 3. For drainage of the site, the Plan utilizes an existing storm sewer and ponding system to the east of the property. Drainage calculations were previously submitted for the December 5 review. Stormwater pond calculations dated May 6, 2004 have also been provided and reviewed. This site was previously reviewed by the Rice Creek Watershed district as part of a much larger developed area that includes the existing property to the east. The proposed site development (high density residential) is consistent with the property use considered in the previous original drainage design for the larger area. The proposed new construction therefore appears to fit and conform with the original submittal. However, approval and/or acknowledgement from the Rice Creek Watershed District will be needed to confirm compliance with the original permit. 4. Because the site area exceeds one acre, the development also falls under the new rules requiring an NPDES permit. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining this permit. This also includes the submittal of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City in accordance with NPDES requirements. Silt fence and erosion control details are provided on the plans and shall be installed accordingly. 5. Per the Survey and Existing Conditions Plan, several buildings including houses, barns, sheds, and a garage all exist on the site. Demolition, removal, and grading of the site will therefore be required. The applicant will be responsible for the complete removal of all buildings, foundations, underground and above ground items, capping of any existing utility connections and wells, and removal of any underground or septic systems that may exist. All debris and unsuitable material must be removed from the site. Any material imported to the site must be approved by the City Engineer. 6. Geotechnical information has been provided. The borings and associated report cover a larger area that extends beyond this proposed development. However, the same general comments apply and can be summarized as follows: Additional excavation of fine alluvial silts and replacement with compactable granular material may be required for construction of the buildings and private drives. Groundwater levels may also necessitate dewatering for the utility installations. Any imported topsoil, fill material, or granular materials for roadway and building foundation (material and source) must be approved by the City Engineer. Mars /um Lake Townhomes Review Page 3 June 4, 2004 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota 7. The plans provide building elevations. The lowest floor elevations must meet City of Lino Lakes requirements with regards to separation from adjacent high water elevations and groundwater levels. Based upon the geotechnical information provided, the elevations are acceptable. 8. The preliminary plat provides for standard drainage and utility easements (10 feet in width) around the perimeter of the property as required. In addition, 44 foot wide drainage and utility easements covering the two private driveways are also provided. It is recommended that the driveway easements as shown also be dedicated as access easements in addition to the drainage and utility dedication. 9. All utility work shall be performed in accordance with the City of Lino Lakes, City Engineers Association of Minnesota (CEAM) Specifications, and City of Lino Lakes building permit requirements. Water pipe and appurtenances shall meet the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, and as follows: Hydrants - Waterous Pacer WB -67; Valves - Mueller A2370 -20 or equal. DIP pipe shall be Class 52. All sanitary sewer service pipes shall be SDR 26 or Schedule 40. The location and number of hydrants will be subject to the review of the City Fire Chief. Safety and traffic control during construction must be provided in accordance with the State of Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 10. All utility extensions and streets /driveways proposed are considered private and will not be owned or maintained by the City of Lino Lakes. This must be detailed in an Agreement between the City and the • Applicant. It is also recommended that the utility plan show the specific locations of individual valve boxes and their service termination points (between street and building). Individual sanitary sewer and water services must also meet minimum separation distances. 11. All grassed or swaled drainage ways must have a minimum slope of 2 %. 12. It is recommended that the proposed storm sewer be extended to the foot of the south driveway to pick up drainage, similar to that proposed for the north driveway. 13. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining permits from the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for the water and sanitary sewer installations as required. 14. Multiple excavations into Aqua Circle are proposed for the utility connections. Depending upon the age and condition of the existing street, further restoration of the street may be required. All street restoration shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes. 15. The lighting layout, number of lights, and type of fixture is subject to the approval of the City of Lino Lakes. • • • Environmental Memo To: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asieson CC: Michael Grochala Date: June 1, 2004 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations From 5/26/04 The Environmental Board made the following recommendations at the May 26, 2004 Environmental Board meeting: Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addition 1. Ensure that the lighting plan conforms to the City code. 2. Make changes to the landscape plan species list as per December Environmental Board recommendations: • Change Black ash to Green ash or one of the native oak species. • Change Colorado spruce to white spruce. • Change Austrian pine to Red or White pine. • Change Autumn applause to Northern pin oak. 3. Reduce impervious parking surfaces if possible. 4. No soils should be imported or exported with out City permission. 5. Deep tilling should occur on all planting areas. • Page 1 3rd • 6. Re -seed native seed in pond area. Use the City specifications. This should be coordinated between the City, Developer, and the existing town home association. 7. All sod areas should be irrigated. Motion made recommending to approve by Grundhoffer, 2nd by O'Connell, all were in favor. West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition 1. Wetland areas and buffer areas proposed are identified with signage describing no fill, cutting or dumping. 2. The City should approve all imported or exported soils. 3. All soils to be restored with plantings should be deep tilled to a minimum depth of 6 to 8 inches before planting. 4. Item 5a of deed restriction document include language that includes specifications for City native seed mix in buffer areas if disturbance occurs or replanting occurs. 5. Show the location of tree preservation fences on the plan. Motion to recommend approval with suggestions made by Bauman, 2nd by O'Connell, All were in favor. • Page 2 i AUL1': 2 SUB. ` NO. TRACT IBC 182 MARSHAN L ELM — STREET 27 ti z 4 1 25 3 24 4 23 5 22 6 21 4V A 9 Q5 AT V R DO. a/6 5 /3 am as EMI t i5 2 UL D T GLA, r ENV D.L.A- OUTLOT A E 22 28 .RKVIEW OR. cX6- N 2 RICE LAKE • • PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN LINO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Public /Semi - Public Immo Low Density Imo Sewered Residential • ZONING MAP i r' �--' ' -J, • ! ) A I `^' ^a'1 der i • ee i m \ w p u \ ` N \I 1l ) o ! r. la i -•'ogi _._.__--- Iri}C+i, w .,..._.!a. _; ,, a a• i ` I I •- i 1 I I , 11 1 + � 1'P, / Iiv I tot i ui. r..� il • IXJ c I E7 L --,c p 0 Ci ..+' a `,� `�. CO rr �, i i s o� ry • NI < Qso }i I % QL •� m( C to '\ p Gt?aY 1 tV `r _ , ( Zi Q • ce,y ty` •��a er _CI) 'a �: `"� ..JryJ Mt 1Y Igxl r_ .. ,co ,< ct - / i tt ``' ` �. ...-• ti 3`- -AO". \< u t / \, •..g'' t I ' ♦..,, a I `-° r. / „ t`i = I i .w "-.. • I f I } t,76 H t \ W. Line of Gov't, Lot 2, Sec. 20, T. 31, R. 22 2A/ip ( �r TREF IFRFNJ) Number following abbreviation denotes estimated diameter 1a-- in inches, three feet above ground level. The second number i f any) denotes the number of trunks at that location (1 denotes o dead tree). Number following shrubs denotes it's diometer in feet. 1) V .)1a {tv Denotes deciduous tree. CD Denotes shrub. Denotes coniferous tree. 4—**•-",--, Denotes tree line. A Denotes Ash AV Denotes Arbor Vitae BF Denotes Balsam Fir BA Denotes Basswood 81 Denotes Birch BE Denotes Box Elder BN Denotes Butternut BU Denotes Bush CA Denotes Catalpa CR Denotes Cedar CH Denotes' Cherry CN Denotes Cottonwood CS DG Denotes Dogwood C EL Denotes Elm FR Denotes Fruit CN Denotes Gingko H Denotes Hockberry HC Denotes Horse Chestnut IR Denotes Ironwood JU Denotes Juniper KC Denotes Kentucky Coffee LI Denotes Lilac _ LO Denotes Locust M Denotes Maple MP Denotes Mugo Pine O Denotes Oak PI Denotes Pine PO Denotes Poplar RD Denotes Russian Olive SM Denotes Silver Maple SP Denotes Spruce r+t TO Denotes Tree Deciduous TE Denotes Tree Everoreen WA Denotes Wolnut tY WI Denotes Willow A Cor of Gov i 1 1 i 1 o A to ![evisions Date: 5/05/04 Description: REVISED PUT By DFD Date: Description: By: flA PO rn iIg/ of ~' f r Og , 0f 1 ^, ^--, fate ).,1,4e ,Drj 1 hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a Licensed Professional le of Minnesota. X....IL 0,4f Kenneth Adolf Date: 5/05/04 Reg No 12048 Designed By KA Nose By: DFD Checked By IU Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services wwwschoeirnadeoncom X10580 Wayrata Boueverd, Sure 1 554 Turd Street NW, &Ste 100 IMneepo84. Mineeota 55305 -1525 Ek River, Minnesota 55330 -1409 phone (952) 546 -7601 - tar (952) 546 -9085 phone (763) 241-0108 - far: (952) 546 -9065 Cienb Hokanson Development, Inc. 9174 Ietantl Street N.E. Blaine MN. 55434 07831 788 -3130 Example: BE.8.2 RECEIVED MAY 0 7 2004 CITY OF LINO LAKes LEGEND 0 88 0 EXISTING CONTOUR BOUNDARY UNE DRAINAGE /UTILITY EASEMENT EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING STORM MANHOLE /CB EXISTING FES /FES WITH RIPRAP EXISTING BITUMINOUS EXISTING CONCRETE 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET 'Project Nam /LocaBarr Mershon Townhomes 2nd Addtlon Lino Lakes, Minnesota Sheet Tdta EXISTING CONDITIONS Data 5/05/04 Sheet 30111 nil Project Number: 63506 -004 Project Name/Locators Mershon Townhomes 2nd Addtion Lino Lakes, Minnesota ;f Ijl • I I if • oI q 5 11 if CIRCLE .'�' [t 1.4 �) -;i 0 0 70.9i (o 5'R TYP e� 314.19 60.00 60.00 60.00 24 13 60.00' 1/ t�l 24 60.00' 60.00' 60.00 60.00 / 60 00' 30' 60.00 LAKE DRIVE �DER`ATION c 60' C0 44' 0 1NAAE�E AND UTILITY EASEBEVIL 24 244 44' DRAINAGE AND NULLITY EASEMENT 13.35' 41.16 0 4 a z <w = Chard, Hokanson Development, Inc. 9174 latent) Street N.E. Blaine MN. 55434 (7631 786 -3130 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the Slate of Minnesota. Kenneth Adolf Date: 5/05/04 Reg No Of 12045 Project NameILoeaSorr Manahan Townhomes 2nd Addtlon Lino Lakes, Minnesota Dale 5/05/04 0 i 30 60'-•...,-• , n 90,� �, SCALE N 1FCtl- yv.;' EROSION CONTROL FENC 4 Jr 6gr r l,, p l r /poi_ "ti..'(� -- -/w, / S% 1 v / TREE PROTECTION +. xy� .....r ; / 40 , ', FENCE TYP. i f �, / 1 � O a /;=` / j r' ` p oi ' l 1 p EXISTING BUILDINGS I OO TO BE DEMOLISHED / J_-' / t4 ,, • • r. \ 0 .. / f -'- ` l a EROSION CONTROL ■ I �-. .� ❑ FENCE / / V / 19 '. f t �� D \ fit. \f\ , p o ab • 1� `` r' 00000...ti- ©t ,(\I `gyp o -` -- r- -0. ff` 1 4,,E �� _.. B6 eI < �f mot; ii $ (:I pc CONCRET VALLEY EROSION CONTROL o i GUTTER FENCE t I WARNING , THE' CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATIONS OF At). UNDERGROUND ykjIRES, CABLES:. CONDUITS. PIPES. MA &fQA, VALVES, 0 OTHER BURIED STRUOTURES BEFORE DIGGING, HE SHALL REPAIR OR :: REPLACE THE ABOVE WHE, DAMAGED! DURING 1 CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO 0 NER. 1 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE is CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER I t 7 (30000 raTfraM to - _ oti000'oa0ao ©do❑ O 1 0 0 O D 9 GRADING NOTES `L$[*LT \ 12. FMISRED„CROUN A 00 ELEVATION ADJA 0 BUILDING S BELOW FLOOR , .EV*I1 N. SLOAl i�ROUND AWAY ROM„BUILDING A M OF 6- IN 10 FEET'"BEY„OND 10 REFER TO PLAN GRADES..,L. 13. CONTRCC • RESPONSIBLETOR,G_�ADtNG AD SLOPING,. FINISHED " GROUND - � 1 E, J PROVIDE SMObOTH-.dc"UNIFQRM SLOE WHICH PROVIDE'' -. "" POSITIVE a-- OM BUILDINGS ANO...QREVEN AIDING IN LOWER ^-- ..,"AREAS. CONTACY." "f r ELD ADJUSTMENTS _ QINC PL�ARE "` "`"• REouIS D. "K.'d "••..,,;� 14. CONTRAC"TOOR„ RESPONSIBLE FOR C STRUCTION, PAVEMENTS AND CARE , e AND GUTTER WITH SMOG-Tit UNIFORM SLOPES WHICH fj W'4DJc POSITIVE UIRED. 901. 901.0 14 901.'1 901.7 rn DRAINAGE. CONTACT ARCHITECT IF FIELD ADJUSTME 15.- NSTA(:E-A- MINIMUM, OF,-4-INCHES-CLASS- B's_AG REGA-FE-BASE Uhl AND GUTTER. LEGEND DENOTES BOUNDARY LINE DENOTES DRAINAGE/ UTILITY EASEMENT DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING WATERMAIN DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER DE,NQTES EXISTING BUILDING DENOTE' <K o a O DENOTES PR SED BUILDING T ' STORM MANHOLE/ CB DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY MAP* DENOTES EXISTING HYDRANT L.. RB-- g 0 4 F/ 901.7 998- --- - EXISTIN v0NTOUR • -`�,.. • ' ` „ "+ o „_ 3iY" 79Q,.„ -Y PROPOSAE Oy: „ Y .` • . ` .. - 0000090D00ECV- EROSION CONTROL 5 FENCE ` ~���9:;� 0'0-0-0- a-a-a'rra-a-a-a iaaaaaaad.�.aya. 1.00E x 910.5 / 7-7 rGF\SOG PROPOSED-"ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PERCENT OF RADE +~` PERCENT OFCRADE PROPOSED /POT ELEVATION RB CUT CONSTRUCTION. SAWCUT BITUMINOUS FOR CURB AND GUTTER REMOVALS. RESTORE ,STREET TO MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION./ . DENOTE SLAB ON GRADE DENOTES GARAGE FLOOR (ELEVATION) "-, ,� "''._' ",`' - ”bag"^..,. • " O it 4 I EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. ALL PERIMETER SILT FENCE AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BASINS PRIOR TO SITE GRADING. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE SITE AND INSTALL UTILITIES. 4. WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF SITE GRADING. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH SEED. SOD OR ROCK BASE. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR MATERIALS. 5. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY, AND WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMITS 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATED SILT IN FRONT OF SILT FENCES DURING THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION. 7. ANY EXCESS SEDIMENT IN PROPOSED BASINS SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR. B. REMOVE ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AFTER VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SOILS AND SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO EXISTING STREETS AND PAVED AREAS. • 10. IF BLOWING DUST BECOMES A NUISANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY WATER FR0M A TANK TRUCK TO ALL CONSTRUCTION AREAS 11. SWEEP ADJACENT STREET IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REOUIREMENTS. EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MAINTENANCE: 1. INSPECT SILT FENCES AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL. IMMEDIATELY REPAIR FAILED OR FAILING FENCES. 2. REPLACEMENT - FABRIC SHALL BE REPLACED PROMPTLY WHEN IT DECOMPOSES OR BECOMES INEFFECTIVE BEFORE THE BARRIEFUS___„_„. NO LONGER NECESSARY. 3. SEDIMENT REMOVAL - SEDIMENT DEPOSITS 171 ' ' ••••▪ EI 9 ED SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH STORM EVENT. 4. ANY SEDIMENT REMAINING IN PLACE AFTER THE SILT FENCE OR FILTER FABRIC IS NO LONGER REOUIRED SHALL BE GRADED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED, AND SEEDED WITH THE APPROPRIATE SEED MIX AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. MAY 0 7 2004 OF LINO GRADING NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT 'GOPHER STATE ONE CALL' WITHIN TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/ CONSTRUCTION, FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS. TWIN CITIES METRO AREA: 651- 454 -0002 OR TOLL -FREE: 1- 800 - 252 -1166. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO START OF SITE GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE PROJECT ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS. 3. SUITABLE GRADING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF ALL SOIL ENCOUNTERED ON THE SITE WITH EXCEPTION OF TOPSOIL, DEBRIS, ORGANIC MATERIAL AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIAL. STOCKPILE TOPSOIL AND GRANULAR FILL AT LOCATIONS DIRECTED BY CONTRACTOR. 4. SUBGRADE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXCAVATION TO HELP OFFSET ANY STABILITY PROBLEMS DUE TO WATER SEEPAGE OR STEEP SLOPES. WHEN PLACING NEW SURFACE MATERIAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING PAVEMENT. THE EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED PROMPTLY TO AVOID UNDERMINING OF THE EXISTING PAVEMENT. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL E8E RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL. 6. GRADES SHOWN ARE FINISHED GRADES. CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH GRADE TO SUBGRADE ELEVATION, LEAVE STREET READY FOR SUBBASE. 7. ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, BITUMINOUS SURFACING. CONCRETE ITEMS, ANY ABANDONED UTILITY ITEMS, AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIALS SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OFF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. 8. COMPLETION OF SITE GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL RESULT IN ALL AREAS BEING GRADED TO 'PLAN SUBGRADE ELEVATION'. BUILDING PAD AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY REFERRING TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. THE PARKING LOT AND DRIVEWAY AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY REFERRING TO THE SITE PLAN AND PAVEMENT SECTION DETAILS FOR LOCATION AND LIMITS OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONS. 9. REFER TO THE ARCHITECT'S SITE PLAN FOR MOST CURRENT HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND SITE LAYOUT. _ - 10. REFER TO UTILITY PLAN FOR SANITARY SEWER MAIN. WATER MAIN SERVICE LAYOUT AND ELEVATIONS AND CASTING AND STRUCTURE SCHEDULE. 11. THE MINIMUM GRADED SLOPE FROM EDGE OF BUILDING SHALL BE 6 INCHES •jt` IN 10 FEET. Revisions Date: Description: 5/05/04 REVISED PLAT By: Date: Description: DFD By Designed By KA Drown By OFD Checked By KA Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services WWW.schoeknedaoncom 110580 Wayzata Bo.Kaverd. We 1 554 Thrd Street NW, Sate 100 MmeaPota Mtneaola 55305-1525 Ek River, Minnesota 55330 -1409 phone (952) 546 -7601- far (952) 546 -9065 phone (763) 241-0108 - lax, (952) 546 -9065 Sheet Tdle GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Steep 511 SMI Project Number: 63506 -004 KES • ti a 410 0 v Z w_ LL Dates 5/05/04 -'"- CONNECT NEW .,._.INTO EXIS TINE SERVICE & TAP -INTO EXISTING SERVICE W /47 6" SERVICE i f 1' 6" SANITARY " �:i NEW 1" WATER ■ ... 4" DIP WA 7E9 GV ?'s RESTORE STREET TO ORIGINAL SECTION FOR NEW SEWER /WATER SERVICES (TYP 3 LOCATIONS) RESTORE STREET TQ ORIGINAL SECTION << BUILD MH -1 OVER EXISTING 8" SANI TARY1 RIM =898.7 INV EX. =886.70 I INV - 587.20 (W) !I I�►. -- RESTORE STREET TO `^^- �-- 9RIGINAL SECTION ; ,CONNECT IN TO 12" RCP 4 0•S0 j EXISTING STRUCTURE • BMH -102 RIM =899.17 INV =694.88 X!2' DIP WET TAP 6" DIP INTO EX 12" DIP BUILD MH -1 OVER EXISTING 8" SANITARY RIM -899.6 INV EX. =885.98 . ---11.- INV= BE6-4'0 rwy - � Tn MOVE-AND RELOCATE 6" HYDRANT - CONNECT INTO N 6' GV CBMH -101 RIM =89 .15- INV - :93.0 ROCK CONSTRUCTION r ENTRANCE 5 9 24 13 6 10 14 18 19 • 24 e 77's 15 / ` ■ 11 A 20 r0 kL, 4.- ./ y / " � / ) / ma' < l' N-- N. 30 • 60 90 S FEET Ookiv THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACTiCLL PUBLIC UTIL1ES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, 4614s. ) CONDUITS, PIPES. MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR ORr` REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. Revisions Date: Description: 5/05/04 REVISED PLAT 12 16 0 N 21 6" GV ■ BL C MH -4 RIM= 899.34 INV =888.07 17 24 TREE IPR r'Q FENCE (TYP) 6' HYDRANT W /6" GV 22 24 4 DR - " 1 ,/ /'� %. • / f `- 23 MH-I2 RIM1900.04 INV1887.64 • 4 69 CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS AND INVERTS, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN PLANS AND FIELD CONDITIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY. 2. THE UTILITY CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING PIPE SYSTEM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTING SERVICE CONNECTIONS. 3. ALL UTILITY WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF LINO LAKES SPECIFICATIONS AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. 4. 6" WATERMAIN SHALL BE CLASS 52 DIP CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF AN51 /AWWA CL51/A21.51 AND C104/A21.4. HYDRANTS SHALL BE THE PACER AS MANUFACTURED BY WATEROUS CO. OR APPROVED EQUAL COMPLYING WITH THE THE CITY OF LINO LAKES. GATE VALVES SHALL BE SINGLE DISC TYPE WITH RESILIENT SEAT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF AWWA C509 AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. 5. SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE 8" AND 6" PVC- SDR -35 UNLESS NOTED DIFFERENTLY. MANHOLES SHALL BE 48" DIAMETER PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C478. CASTING SHALL BE NEENAH R -1642 WITH TYPE "B" COVER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY TYPE OF CONNECTION WITH CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND COORDINATE ANY REOUIRED CITY INSPECTIONS NEEDED FOR CITY ACCEPTANCE. 6. UTILITY TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 9510 STANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (ASTM 0698.78 OR AASHTO T -99) FROM THE PIPE - - - ZONE TO WITHIN THREE FEET OF THE GROUND SURFACE AND 1009" STANDARD PROCTOR IN THE UPPER THREE FEET. A 7. CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER AND WATER REQUIRES INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF LINO LAKES. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF LINO LAKES 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF WORKING WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. CITY INSPECTORS MUST OBSERVE ALL WORK COMPLETED ON TOWN CENTRE DRIVE INCLUDING REMOVAL OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT, EXCAVATION OF TRENCHES, PLACEMENT OF WATER MAIN AND SANITARY SEWER, UTILITY CONNECTIONS Sp. EXISTING LINES, BACKFILLING AND PLACEMENT OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL, INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REMOVE THE NECESSARY SIGNAGE FOR LANE CLOSURES. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SIGNING SHALL CONFORM TO THE MMUTCD, INCLUDING FIELD MANUAL FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS, JANUARY 1998. ONE ELEVEN FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH LANE IN EACH DIRECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED AT ALL TIMES. 10. THE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH Mn /DOT SPECIFICATIONS. 11. CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE SEWER, WATER AND PLUMBING PERMITS FROM THE CITY'S BUILDING DEPARTMENT. 12. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WORK WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES. 13. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE SHALL BE 6" PVC AND WATER SERVICE SHALL BE 1" COPPER. 9lvEb AY 1.2004 LEGEND DENOTES BOUNDARY LINE DENOTES DRAINAGE/ UTILITY EASEMENT DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER 0 • 0 • 86 • 4 DENOTES PROPOSED STORM SEWER DENOTES EXISTING WATERMAIN DENOTES PROPOSED WATERMAIN DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER DENOTES PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER DENOTES PROPOSED BUILDING DENOTES EXISTING STORM MANHOLE/ CB DENOTES PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE/ CB DENOTES PROPOSED FES / FES W /RIPRAP DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE DENOTES PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE DENOTES PROPOSED HYDRANT DENOTES PROPOSED GATE VALVE DENOTES EXISTING HYDRANT By: Date: Description: By DFD 1 hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. 7i.:.AsssosalL 0 Kenneth Adolf Date: 5/05/04 Reg No. 12048 Designed By: KA Drawn By- Checked By: KA Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soli Testing • Environmental Services awvadaeknedeoneom j10580 Wayrate Boueverd. Mile 1 554 Th*d Street NW, Sure 100 Wwieepoga. Minesota 55305-1525 Ek R§eer, 1Anneaola 55330 -1409 phone (952) 546 -7601 - tar (952) 546 -9065 phone (763) 241 -0108 - fu: (952) 546 -9065 Hokanson Development, Inc. 9174 latent) Street N.E. Blaine MN. 55434 17831 788 -3130 Proeel Name/Leedom Marshan Townhomes 2nd Addtion Lino Lakes, Minnesota Sheet TlUs UTILITY PLAN 0. 0. rh N • 0 w Sheet 6e"11 SMI Project Number. 63506 -004 0 7 2 - CITY OF LINO LAKES 1 Cienb Hokanson Development, Inc. 8174 latent' Street N.E. Blaine MN. 55434 17631 786 -3130 } tri ,jrry,rr t/ Ni RCLE -- ir .;r I ji oI tidta 0 wbC+S r aoo000cy 9.0 (fa-0 1 0 10 SILT FENCE TO RUN JUST NEXT TO TREE PROTECTION FENCE (TYP) rr • gc4 — — 4 INSTALL TREE ROTEQTIOAL, SIGNS ALONG TREE PRESERVATION (TYP) p0T5poo .1 fit, .? / \ r l c. (POP.ilik; '*, / `o0 �0 O \ IN\ 1 00 �. fi / eiok BL t/ 24 1 1 J \ ..,-. 24 t '-- T V' ,,, �� x' \ e .- -- _ 13 14 E • • l 91 19 20 21 It �\ I ‘24i 23 I ®t 4 ^. ‘0d109F3D / • v.,, ,\ J :vim,, •.�.,� �II� ooaD-� / Bg / / 0 v Fs A • W "TREE LEGEND Number following abbreviation denotes estimated diameter in inches. three feet above ground level. The second number (if ony) denotes the number of trunks at that location (1 denotes o deod tree). Number following shrubs denotes it's diameter in feet. irks trer Denotes deciduous tree. Q Denotes shrub. Denotes coniferous tree. Example: BE.8.2 bt• Denotes tree line. A Denotes Ash HC Denotes Horse Chestnut AV Denotes Arbor Vitae IR Denotes Ironwood BF Denotes Bolsom Fir JU Denotes Juniper BA Denotes Basswood KC Denotes Kentucky Coffee BI Denotes Birch LI Denotes Liloc BE Denotes Box Elder LO Denotes Locust BN Denotes Butternut M Denotes Maple BU Denotes Bush MP Denotes Mugo Pine CA Denotes Cotolpo 0 Denotes Ook CR Denotes Cedar PI Denotes Pine CH Denotes Cherry PO Denotes Poplar CN Denotes Cottonwood RO Denotes Russian Olive DC Denotes Dogwood SM Denotes Silver Maple EL Denotes Elm SP Denotes Spruce FR Denotes Fruit TD Denotes Tree Deciduous GN Denotes Gingko TE Denotes Tree Evergreen H Denotes Hockberry WA Denotes Wolnut WI Denotes Willow LEGEND 9,. ,)ya fit} Denotes tree removal Denotes tree preserved Denotes tree preservotion limits 0 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET 6e visions Date: Descri Lion: 5/05/04 REVISED PUT B . Dale: Descri lion: DFD I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. /7.0 wdr r�a� 0,67 Kenneth Adolf Dale: 5/05/04 Reg No 12048 Designed 8y sa Deem By' DID Checked 8y ltd '�SchoetI & Madson, Inc. Engineering 6 Surveying o Planning Soil Testing 0 Environmental Services wwwachoeinadeoncom lose° Wayzata Boulevard, Stele 1 554 Third Street NW. Site 100 MtneapoeL Msnesota 553054525 9e giver, Kiveeota 55330.409 phone (952) 546 -7801 - far 1952) 546-9065 phone' (763) 241 -0108 - far (952) 546 -9065 Project Name/Location Morahan Townhomes 2nd Addtion Lino Lakes, Minnesota Sheet Tide: TREE PRESERVATION PLAN Dale 5/05/04 Sheet 7 0, 11 SMI Project Number: 63506 -004 Clew* Hokanson Development, Inc. 9174 Istanti Street PLE. Blaine MN. 55434 17831 788-3130 ••••...,, .4-3 , 0C1 •'.14rn, F-2 , IT ',......i,I ; --....„ -1 T T.-.) 0 I 17 .......‹. .. 3 lifn"..."--'•• 2,.. ./ i .i ‘.k1. / i•.-.' ..1..-.a ..g-J . '-t•.•••••-..t,.., .....••••■••.._.. ,.._,..,..._,...14___... t ;I :1 ■ .1..!1',,,•.!....,,,,,.,,,,... ^.44 58,2 • (fi-t 41(1122f. SUGGESTED PLANT SCHEDULE CODE QTY COMMON NAME LATIN NAME y 11 .D...... 441p1 Asi1t-1,0 •blmZit 1 i--,--rsi • 9 I: 11 11111 Emu Eism, k, ! Al l 1 pT- ■ 1 .41=v„MITo 6 el ....tli 11116-VIP,Olji 1 r46, 4111■1111Mrohigs h iiih....,k.,. iiat..41 !tier/ Emirs — num pi ill 111 ...m. !rai NW trEf Ertl rEI'8rrn-;'cTb''"Ero'T5"dt"L1orTt7r- P!iI— t 9 l< 13 14 4 cal\ erklb- Air..."imatir:■•__i• -:` 0 ,r- CO------* c-, frA; R `...„. •••• , , • ,...... ' I' 111441ft - ST t 4 ..."- 4 2-p .4,4-- , SIZE ROOT REMARKS A 15 AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE 2" B&B STRAIGHT LEADER Acer a freemonli 'Jeffersreer CAL. AND FULL CROWN B 10 AUTUMN APPLAUSE WHITE ASH 2" B&B STRAIGHT LEADER Frozinus americono 'Autumn Applause CAL. AND FULL CROWN C 6 BLACK ASH 2" B&B STRAIGHT LEADER Frazinus nigro CAL AND FULL CROWN D 9 RED OAK 2" B&B STRAIGHT LEADER Quercus rubro CAL. AND FULL CROWN E 11 HARVEST GOLD CRABAPPLE 1.5" B&B MULTI—STEM TREEFORM Betula z 'Crimson Frost' CAL AND FULL CROWN F 13 THORNLESS HAWTHORN 1.5" B&B MULTI—STEM TREEFORM Crateaqus crusgalli var. inermis CAL. AND FULL CROWN G 15 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6' CONT FULL FORM TO GRADE Piceo glauco 'densato' HT H 10 COLORADO SPRUCE 6' CONT FULL FORM TO GRADE Picea pungens HT I 18 AUSTRIAN PINE 6' CONT FULL FORM TO GRADE Pinus nigro HT PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTORS CONVENIENCE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN. ,... i P r r ----t- , r .,, 4 MI LANDSCAPE NOTES 1111.0........mg. ALL LANDSCAPE TREES, SHRUB, GROUNDCOVERS AND SOD AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED SOD AND IRRIGATE ALL DISTURBED AREAS. ALL LANDSCAPE ISLANDS WITH PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE IRRIGATED. REFER TO LANDSCAPE DETAIL SHEET FOR GENERAL PLANTING NOTES, IRRIGATION NOTES, PLANTING DETAILS REFER TO GRADING PLAN FOR GRADES AND EROSION CONTROL LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SHOP DRAINING OF IRRIGATION PLAN TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. ALL SHRUB BEDS AND TO RECIEVE 3" SHREDDED HARWOOD MULCH, AND TREES TO RECIEVE 4" DEPTH OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MUCLH. • REMOVE WIRING, TWINE OR ROPES AND BURLAP FROM THE TOP AND SIDES OF THE ROOT BALL FOR BALLED AND BURLAPPED PLANTS. • REMOVE CONTAINERS AND CUT CIRCLING ROOTS IF PLANTS ARE CONTAINER GROWN. • HEAVY COMMERCIAL GRADE EDGING SHALL BE USED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF ALL SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER MASSINGS • ALL TREES NOT IN PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE MULCH RINGS 3' IN DIA. • IF PLANTS ARE TO BE PRUNED, BRANCHES SHALL BE PRUNED AT THE BRANCH BARK RIDGE, NOT FLUSH YATH THE BARK. • MULCH DEPTH SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR INCHES, AND SHALL BE KEPT AT LEAST TWO INCHES AWAY FROM THE STEM OF THE TREES. • THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO THE SITE CAUSED BY THE PLANTING OPERATION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. • ALL PLANTINGS SHALL RECEIVE FERTILIZER AS FOLLOWS: *0-0-20 GRANULAR FERTILIZER APPLIED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AT A RATE OF 12 OZ PER 2.5 CALIPER INCHES OF TREE AND 6 OZ PER SHRUB. •10-0-10 FERTILIZER APPLIED THE FOLLOWING SPRING AT SAME RATE. ME PLANT LEGEND OVERSTORY DECIDLIOOUS TREE ORNAMENTAL TREES CONIFER TREES SHRUBS \GROUNDCOVER 111111111111111■1 AVG. 2.5" DIA. AVG. 1.5" DIA. RE'CEIVED MAY 0 7 2004 72 eirtf OF LINO LAKES AVG. HT 6' -7744.• • >7 0 30 14( 60 AVG. HT 18" 90 SCALE IN FEET WARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES, OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. .;evisions Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the Slate of Minnesota. Scott. Date: 5/05/04 Reg No 40647 Designed By SAY Drown Dr SAY Checked Dr 98,KA /ThSchoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services www.achoelmadsoncom 0560 Wayzata Botievard, &del 554 Third Street NW, Site 100 lAinneepole, Mirineaola 55305-1525 Bic River, Ainnesota gc:1317-1409 Phone: (952) 546-7601 - fax (952) 546-9065 phone, (763) 241-0108 - fax (952) 546-9065 Project Name/Localiorr Manahan Townhomes 2nd Addtion Lino Lakes, Minnesota Sheet Tdles LANDSCAPE PLAN Dale, 5/05/04 Sheet; 8 11 a SW Project Number: 63506-004 • It- •11 We" LleAr.krpod- Ecovr f6:/6' • ..-„„ :": : '' • O&M- Slag- Et.6-wf-no,/.1 Scther Yk • • ,„•.;.•••••:;;;;&>' ez,:afea;,-tf, • ''',.".7":.0.:Vee,Y91,14-44N • ,-4.-ieef, "•••-.:- • •••••.`,...,.. •••-e:.•••••■••>,..tis • ,CP$VED MAY 0 2004 CITY OP LINO L4 g( '.4010•41% qi eel/ • ,44' s?Yisfc • (g4 %.,..4-4( • mom :1 0.91==•t.aw Wirlarzi" iummiut i illi[tllU 111 EENAMIlt. • t. • ....4, ::.::::::...., .„..t7/.0,..,,,(1-,,--,:^1.::: .,....,::::4" ...,17::,:.7...:::7,—,,, 1,,,,,,i;;F:ic,,,;;•0 'T 0;3. 214?.4S. Son = 111111•1■••• NiimiFaitiseriminamaammen to 591121M- ...11 mmo. IMINIEM III Di es E ... .. sou No = •••;-).....7.....?1::::11....1:::.1L:::.1-;11;e:i;1:1.:: NMI I. ME : NM 10ece •,' ril .•/` .9 ■1 um ..,,..:4•1:•••••774,..;•„:. -, .6-.7i P^)•"4-46‘ -- _ ‘...te,••• • • - • ---e-.•••• • . . . . • • CHWIETERS OME ESIGN CONTRACTOR. RESIDENCE FOR _PIAR61P1A( 3 '2' PA= DRAWN m SCALE 5=6-04' S. 71,0 ?LAN PO • 3yY.. x 3a =Y' r24" 0 1_1LI T 00 00 00 M 0 0 Grtnac,r rN� t-a r 32Y 26'Y /0'z' • /o =y ,4 N N Yr8 p 4Nfr L f' 4471 Y? .4w MAY 0 2004 u3 S r iv( Fr- $Y7 ianX. /s'- pcaut 7_ 7 r(°33 Thfl L Pi" jo fr it 2 yoz.? • • c3D • • ■ • • 6,,7"?.. 32.jr a211"' tam_ etrk.-• • Allts011" L6er- 10; pt P1-4ht nr 23a • • Lori- Sw6 C-l.O 47)c • Sri p Q 12.t.vm e+4t#971 & ■216:7 SLOvr K70vr4)4 L Rsesiven ;Amy 0 r7 2004 CITY OF LINO t.a :sE • ■ • i�- • • INI OM MEW II II =N C' IONEW rr = ;1=1,1_ 1 r_ ____ FI 11 r— 1 r tow- • • �yp CHWIETERS 4ME ESIGN CONTRACTOR: po„,,r RESIDENCE FOR M_r$¢sH.+) _?awklAAIP5. 2)=`1!%?mrw,1■ PATE 1628 HI•Way 10 NE ' phone W: ORAWNBY, vlia LAN NO :4 -g • 12)Y" oinwrre" kerctem. ajd 3z1)0 tz:kf ReCtP,T, MAY 2004 I Chi'?" im40 LAKES O° MEM* eppll Gficr4mor PIMITTO- I t /5-12-4P 1.-Ivfitt 774117 4 12.V. 6441246'r- '32.1Y is '"2:. y jY• 3ajY- crib- tc' -it" fiot /1.4.4 faYoZ &17 1f .;/W y Pr Ag`j# „L l" 7. ibr-AL /7,/ 97w. 524- 3z}v 3-iv •\/ 11=-_;. • y113' f \ 3aw 321Y' 4 4' AGENDA ITEM V. B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Richard E. Thompson, AICP P& Z MEETING DATE: June 9, 2004 TOPIC: BACKGROUND: Junes Addition 1) Rezoning Request 2) MUSA Allocation 3) Preliminary Plat Approval The applicant, Mr. Wayne Junes, is proposing to create three lots from 6.18 acres located north of 62nd Street and west of West Shadow Lake Drive in Lino Lakes. The property currently has a home and barn located on proposed Lot 3. Mr. Junes' property is zoned as Rural (R) and he proposes the property be zoned Residential Exclusive (R -1X). Mr. Junes is requesting that sewer and water be supplied to the proposed Lots 1 and 2. The creation of these lots involves the disturbance of approximately 9,771 square feet of wetland. Mr. Junes has proposed to fill the wetland and relocate the wetland to the rear portion of Lot 3, where the existing barn is located. The applicant has sent this permit request to the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). The RCWD initially denied the request for permit based on Minnesota Rules 8420.0548. However, the applicant has since been directed by the RCWD to apply for sequencing flexibility under WACA, which would allow him to relocate the wetland. This review is based upon information contained in the following documents: 1. Preliminary Plat, Grading and Erosion Control Plan (March 15, 2003) 2. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Plan (February 25, 2004) 3. RCWD Permit Response Letter, Karl Hammers (March 22, 2204) 4. Wetland Delineation Report (July 25, 2003) 5. RCWD Permit Application (May 21, 2004) On April 9, 2004 the City sent a letter to Mr. Wayne Junes indicating that an extension for review was made due to a request for additional information from the Rice Creek Watershed District per the request to fill a wetland and construct a new wetland. ANALYSIS: Land Use and Zoning The following is a summary of the proposal: Gross Site Area 6.18 Acres Upland Area 1.37 Acres Total Lots 3 Net Density 2.2 Units /1.0 Acres The site is within the existing MUSA line, although a MUSA allocation is necessary. Properties to the north of 62nd Street are included and can be served by sewer and water. Properties to the south will not be a part of this service. The site is divided into two sections on the zoning map. It is guided for Rural and Residential Single Family Executive; which has a correlating density of 3.4 units /acre in the R -1X; and 1 unit per 10 acres in the Rural District. The table below identifies the existing land use, guided land use, and zoning for the area. Location Guided Land Use Existing Zoning Site R-1X R West R North R-1X East R-1X South R The current zoning for the parcel is Rural. The parcel is located adjacent to R -X and R -1X land, and as such, it is reasonable to rezone the parcel to Single Family Executive which is compatible with adjacent uses. This rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Lot Area Requirements The proposed zoning of R -1X requires that each lot be no less than 12,825 square feet, or approximately 0.30 acres. The applicant has proposed to create 3 lots, Lot 1 will have an upland area of 21,793 square feet, Lot 2 will have an upland area of 17,254 square feet, and Lot 3 will have an area of 20,468 square feet. All three lots as proposed exceed the minimum square footage and meet the requirements stated in the Zoning Ordinance. Setback Requirements The R -1X District has a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet, rear yard of 30 feet, and front yard setback of 30 feet. Lots 1, 2, and 3 as proposed meet all of the setback requirements. • • Driveway Location and Access The plat map provided does not indicate the proposed location of the driveways for Lots 1, 2, or 3. The proposed properties would have ingress /egress onto 62nd Street. Location of the driveways must be determined to ensure adequacy of site and time for safe entrance onto 62nd Street. Wetland Relocation and Drainage Easements The creation of the proposed lots will cause disturbance of a large wetland located on the property. The applicant applied for a permit from the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). The applicant proposed filling approximately 9,771 square feet of wetland, and replacing it with a new wetland created in the rear of Lot 3. In a letter from the RCWD, dated March 22, 2004, the RCWD recommended that the permit be denied on the grounds of Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0548 Subp 3 C5. In a conversation on May 6, 2004, with Mr. Karl Hammers from the RCWD, he rescinded his initial recommendation, and stated that he would approve the request to fill the wetland if the applicant applied to the RCWD to qualify for sequencing flexibility under WACA. Mr. Hammers stated that upon visiting the site, he determined the wetland was not high quality, and as such, relocating the wetland would be reasonable. On May 26, 2004, the RCWD approved the wetland replacement plan that was noticed on February 27, 2004 . The applicant has applied for a sequencing permit (03 -090) which is pending. ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) The Developer is to be aware that the City of Lino Lakes is currently reconstructing 62nd Street. Prior to final approval of the Site Plans, the Grading Plan must show the changes that the street project will cause to each of the proposed three lots. 2) Prior to final City approval of the Site and Grading Plans, the Plans need to show that Lino Lakes City Engineering Standards are being followed. That is, a detail Site and Grading Plan will need to be submitted before final approval is given. 3) Approval of the preliminary plat will be contingent upon the review and consequent approval of the City Engineer. Drainage and utility easements along property lines will be required. Easements over designated wetlands will also be required. 4) Copies to the City of the Rice Creek Watershed District permit approval process. 5) The homes to be constructed must follow City of Lino Lakes design flood elevations. For this location, the design 100 -year flood elevation to be used is 894.2. The emergency over flow elevation to be used is 895.3. Thus, City requirements are as follows: low floor/basement elevation must be two (2) feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, low floor/basement must be one (1) foot above the emergency overflow elevation and the low floor/basement elevation must be four (4) feet above the groundwater or normal ponding elevation. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend the following: 1) That the subject property be rezoned from Rural to Residential Executive (R -1X). 2) That the MUSA capacity be allocated for this parcel. 3) That the preliminary plat be approved subject to the following conditions: a) Issuance of the sequencing permit by the RCWD, based on Application No. 03 -090. b) That relocating the wetland will not adversely affect neighboring properties. c) That location of proposed driveways be shown. d) That appropriate park fees are provided. 4) The project shall not be final platted until 2005 to comply with the City's growth management policy. • • • • • MEMORANDUM June 4, 2004 to: Planning & Zoning Board from: Jeff Smyser L� subject: Growth Management Policy Junes Addition and West Shadow Ponds 2 ❑d Addition Both sites are in a Stage 1 growth area: utilities can be extended prior to 2010. The City's Growth Management Ordinance establishes annual limits on allocation of MUSA reserve and the number of new units that can be platted. To accommodate the proposed developments MUSA reserve is necessary, as follows: Junes Addition 1.37 acres West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition 0.74 acres total 2.11 acres As shown on the table below, we have reached the annual goal of 36 acres for year 2004. It is possible to go over the goal by 20 %, a flexibility provision allowed by the policy. This would be at the discretion of the City Council. There is ample MUSA available for year 2005. However, as seen in the second table, the lot/unit allocation has been used up for year 2004, including the 20% flexibility. Therefore these two projects cannot be final platted until 2005. This should be a condition of approval for both projects. • • • TOTAL 252.0) N o O) N- a N. I'••• t1) O CO r O N 1-0 N d- O) O r (0 N d' r RESIDENTIAL MUSA ALLOCATION 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 O CO CO O O remaining -7.0 0.0 20.4 30.6 26.6 36.0 36.0 O CO C'7 O O O CO Cr) O) d 0) CO c) Cn in O co c) L() co r l- c A <F O (.O i.fj r O CO c) d' r r O O N co O CO CO O CO M i,- f— N CO (C) r 0 Cr) d' 4) 1 i (0 (0 7 C C (0 fStoneybrook Farms North (Ravens Hollow Justin's Preserve 1 Junes Addition West Shadow Ponds 2"d Addn 1 total Q) 20% of 36 is 36 + 20% = • • 0) CO ti ti N O) O N N O N O N O N in 2491 T T CO I.0 O T CO 1521 N T T r 'c)' N O T O CO T CO T CO N O CO M CO 0 2008 0 331 M c) CO NT N CO O CO 11) 0 T N L() 51] O T CO r- CO T d' CO N 23 ?? (0 1- r iotsiunits t 2004 14) (O T (O L0 ti d' T N' N CO is r 52 CO 1.0 T O r CO N N N T T CO 'it r 51 r 1() 1031 249 T (O LO O T CO 1521 N T T CV O T CO T CO T •y (0 N CO N LOTS /UNITS Development Name approved prelim. plats Stoneybrook 2nd Addn Century Farms North 1Keefe: preliminary plat Morton (minor subdiv) 1Ravens Hollow 1Haley Manor (10 new Tots) Crystal Cove Millers Crossroads 1Lakeview Estates (2 new) Snell (minor subdivision) PPheasant Hills Pres. 13th Justin's Preserve 1Marshan Estates Rice Creek Church duplex Rice Church: Oakwood View 1 -o a) O Q. O a 'Highland Meadows East 2nd 1 Pheasant Hills 12th island 1 West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addl 1Fox Den Acres Junes Addn 1Marshan Townhomes 2nd total 0) CO ti ti N O) O N N O N O N re' BEET ANOKA COUNTY 0 0 x IGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. II OLD INERIbGE LJ 8 1 2 INTY // /2 5Ct4 S /1 7 DITCH NO. 25 /0 86 4 0 LANDUSEPLAN • PROPOSED LAND USE Low Density Sewered Residential Birchwood Acres Park Stage 1 Growth Area Border Zoning Map Detail Junes Addition Site • • • AGENDA ITEM V. C STAFF ORIGINATOR: Richard E. Thompson, AICP P& Z MEETING DATE: June 9, 2004 TOPIC: BACKGROUND: West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition Public Hearing 1) Rezoning 2) MUSA Allocation 3) Preliminary Plat KCR Investments LLC has submitted an application to subdivide an existing lot into two lots. This will require a rezoning from Rural to R -1X, a preliminary plat, and the allocation of 0.74 acres of MUSA Reserve. The site is guided for Low Density Sewered Residential land use and is within the Stage 1 (pre -2010) growth area. The project involves filling some wetland to create buildable area for one of the proposed lots. Filling a wetland needs approval of the wetland mitigation from the Rice Creek Watershed District. The applicant has revised his proposal to minimize wetland fill to 394 square feet, which qualifies as a de minimus wetland fill. The notification for a public hearing was published and mailed to surrounding property owners. The Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing and continued it to the June 9, 2004, meeting. Reconstruction of 62nd Street will occur this summer. Sanitary sewer and water will be extended west from the intersection with West Shadow Lake Drive to serve this property. This review is based on the following information: 1. 11 x 17 -size Preliminary Plat Grading and Erosion Control Plan dated March 10, 2004. 2. Letter to Richard Thompson dated April 8, 2004, from Richard C. Carlson regarding tabling the Environmental Review Board review, pending wetland delineation report. 3. Fax to Richard Thompson dated May 11, 2004, of contour maps showing proposed wetland fill area. 4. Fax to Richard Thompson dated May 12, 2004, with Memo from Tedd W. Mattke to Karl Hammer of the Rice Creek Watershed District addressing wetland delineation and proposed fill area. • ANALYSIS: Land Use and Zoning The following is a summary of the proposal: • • Gross Site Area 1.00 acres Upland Area 0.74 acres (16,832 square feet & 15,241 square feet) Total Lots 2 Net Density 2.7 unit /1.0 acres The site is within the MUSA Reserve area and will need to be moved into the MUSA area. Land to the north of 62nd Street is included in the MUSA and can be served with public sewer and water. Land to the south will not be served with public utilities at this time. In the Comprehensive Plan, the parcel is guided for Low Density Sewered Residential. Land to the east is already subdivided into low density unsewered residential; land to the south is guided as low density unsewered residential, and land to the west and north is guided as low density sewered residential. The proposed land use change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning of the parcel is split between Rural and Single Family Executive. The parcel is adjacent to R -1 X on the north and is guided for sewered residential use. Changing zoning of the entire parcel is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Lot Area Requirements The proposed zoning of R -1X requires that each lot have no less than 12,825 square feet of buildable land. Proposed Lot 1 will have 16,832 square feet of buildable and, while Lot 2 will have 15,241 square feet of buildable land. Both lots as proposed will meet the minimum lot size requirements of the R -1X Single Family Residential District. Setback Requirements The R -1X District has a minimum side -yard setback of 10 feet, rear yard setback of 30 feet, and front yard setback of 30 feet. Both lots as proposed can meet setback requirements of this District. Driveway Location and Access The plat map provided does not indicate the proposed locations of the driveways for Lots 1 and 2. The driveway for the existing house on Lot 1 enters 62nd Street. Given the topography of Lot 2, the driveway for this lot should enter 62nd Street as well. • Wetland Fill and Mitigation The applicant is proposing to fill 394 square feet of a wetland on proposed Lot 2. The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) will need to make a determination if this is a de minimus action, in which case the filling could proceed without any mitigation. Approval of this preliminary plat should be conditional upon RCWD approval of the de minimus action. Parkland or Payment in Lieu Since this parcel is too small for any kind of park land dedication, payment in lieu consistent with the City's requirements should be used. Environmental Review Board The West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition was before the Environmental Review Board (See Attachment 1) for the second time on May 26. The recommendations are attached. ENGINEER RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) The Developer is to be aware that the City of Lino Lakes is currently reconstructing 62nd Street. Prior to final approval of the Site Plans, the Grading Plan must show the changes that the street project with cause to each of the proposed lots. • 2) Prior to final City approval of the Site and Grading Plans, the Plans need to show that Lino Lakes City Engineering Standards are being followed. That is, a detail Site and Grading Plan will need to be submitted for before final approval is given. 3) Approval of the preliminary plat will be contingent upon the review and consequent approval of the City Engineer. Drainage and utility easements along property lines will be required. Easements over designated wetlands will also be required. 4) The homes to be constructed must follow City of Lino Lakes design flood elevations. For this location, the design 100 -year flood elevation to be used is 894.2. The emergency over flow elevation to be used is 895.3. Thus, City requirements are as follows: low floor/basement elevation must be two (2) feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, low floor /basement must be one (1) foot above the emergency overflow elevation and the low floor/basement elevation must be four (4) feet above the groundwater or normal ponding elevation. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the preliminary plat be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That driveway access for Lot 2 is determined. 2) That RCWD approval for the de minimus wetland fill be approved. • 3) The easement around the wetlands must include additional buffer as proposed by the applicant. Wetland and buffer areas are to be identified with signs saying no fill, cutting, or dumping. Native seed mix from the City's list is to be used in these areas. 4) The project shall not be final platted until 2005 to comply with the City's growth management policy. • • • • • MEMORANDUM June 4, 2004 to: Planning & Zoning Board from: Jeff Smyser subject: Growth Management Policy Junes Addition and West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition Both sites are in a Stage 1 growth area: utilities can be extended prior to 2010. The City's Growth Management Ordinance establishes annual limits on allocation of MUSA reserve and the number of new units that can be platted. To accommodate the proposed developments MUSA reserve is necessary, as follows: Junes Addition 1.37 acres West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition 0.74 acres total 2.11 acres As shown on the table below, we have reached the annual goal of 36 acres for year 2004. It is possible to go over the goal by 20 %, a flexibility provision allowed by the policy. This would be at the discretion of the City Council. There is ample MUSA available for year 2005. However, as seen in the second table, the lot/unit allocation has been used up for year 2004, including the 20% flexibility. Therefore these two projects cannot be final platted until 2005. This should be a condition of approval for both projects. • • I TOTAL' o N N ti o rn ti et ti 1--: tf) O c O N LO N c' O) O co N RESIDENTIAL MUSA ALLOCATION 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 O O co p O remaining -7.0 0.0 20.4 30.6 26.6 36.0 36.0 O co M O O (D () O) a) O (O ('7 '4) -4' U) 0 cOo Lc) ri t■ (") et C co O ('`) .t O) N N- O c) 0 (O CO N. 1` N CO cf) 0 M 'annual target IStoneybrook Century Farms North Ravens Hollow Justin's Preserve Junes Addition I West Shadow Ponds 2"d Addn 'total 0) exceeds target by N (� • • platted) 2003 -09 TOTAL O N CL) O) V N c- CO Cf) CO N U) ,-- CV v- c}' N O O CO c- CO r 641 N O CO C7 co O 0 0 N 0 CO 0 0 N O ti 0 0 N m co M M co 0 O N M -1' N C) p C) O 0 A- RS C C.= O 0 t4 0 0 N � 51 O r CO l- CO c- 341 N 23 ?? I CO ti v— eear (lots /units 1 0 0 N 65 A- CO LC) t- d' A- V CV 176 M 0 0 Cl 52 CO O r- I 10 Ch N N N r- CO r LOTS /UNITS Phasing plans year end 2002 51 511 E (6 -5 0_ a. 103 249 l- 56 O CO 152. N ,- c- CV O 1- 0 ,- 0 CO N CO N Development Name approved prelim. plats Stoneybrook 2nd Addn Century Farms North Keefe: preliminary plat Morton (minor subdiv) Ravens Hollow Haley Manor (10 new Tots) Crystal Cove Millers Crossroads Lakeview Estates (2 new) C 0 .7) 7 Cn O C •E C . Pheasant Hills Pres. 13th Justin's Preserve Marshan Estates Rice Creek Church duplex Rice Church: Oakwood View proposed Highland Meadows East 2nd Pheasant Hills 12th island IN/Vest Shadow Ponds 2nd Add1 Fox Den Acres Junes Addn Marshan Townhomes 2nd O r N O) Q) N N 0) 0) 0 N N ti 0) c- ti O • • • Environmental Memo To: Jeff Smyser From: Marty Asleson CC: Michael Grochala Date: June 1, 2004 Re: Environmental Board Recommendations From 5/26/04 The Environmental Board made the following recommendations at the May 26, 2004 Environmental Board meeting: Marshan Townhomes 2 "d Addition 1. Ensure that the lighting plan conforms to the City code. 2. Make changes to the landscape plan species list as per December Environmental Board recommendations: • Change Black ash to Green ash or one of the native oak species. • Change Colorado spruce to white spruce. • Change Austrian pine to Red or White pine. • Change Autumn applause to Northern pin oak. 3. Reduce impervious parking surfaces if possible. 4. No soils should be imported or exported with out City permission. 5. Deep tilling should occur on all planting areas. • Page 1 3rd • • 6. Re -seed native seed in pond area. Use the City specifications. This should be coordinated between the City, Developer, and the existing town home association. 7. All sod areas should be irrigated. Motion made recommending to approve by Grundhoffer, 2nd by O'Connell, all were in favor. West Shadow Ponds 2"d Addition 1. Wetland areas and buffer areas proposed are identified with signage describing no fill, cutting or dumping. 2. The City should approve all imported or exported soils. 3. All soils to be restored with plantings should be deep tilled to a minimum depth of 6 to 8 inches before planting. 4. Item 5a of deed restriction document include language that includes specifications for City native seed mix in buffer areas if disturbance occurs or replanting occurs. 5. Show the location of tree preservation fences on the plan. Motion to recommend approval with suggestions made by Bauman, 2nd by O'Connell, All were in favor. • Page 2 EET ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WA PLAT NO. 11 19 ; 0E1! a ADD. 3P X 2 3 2 1 17 10.11 12 10 3 18 9 5 Mir 4t, •••••......,. tA` tvili■ *14031 goi au; nt \,‘ itte ..gegg 041-114tutli masar3"*?-41 9 4 3 aiiiiiissaciinieditabit 9l0 5 5 4 OLD HicRgla ECIPP ul 'EAAiEsf UmAtilt V47 a wah'4111 BIRCH CT. UJ 'N4EhIbGE OITH In r-„„7 3 6 0 4 33 LIND 7 8 COYOTE 5 4 // 5 tt 4 /0 4 2 0 0 4 -1 NTY DITJ NO. 25 LANDUSEPLAN • • • PROPOSED LAND USE Low Density Sewered Residential West Shadow Ponds 2" Addn MEI& Zoning Map Detail Aptimmul a11111161 R -1 West Shadow Ponds 2°d Addn • • O� 0) 3 42,903 sq,ft. 0.98 acres 20,468 SF Upland e• eta r Block r -- 7' ---� gland Fill 9/ \`1 696 -- --- I \1 II 1 9111 / N89 839 SFie'ta(1d 111 q °' I'w i18.c1 -- 8'25" ° 429. -_e - 11\ 100 -Year Flood - 894.1 Lowest Floor ee 896.1 eO !NR 1.5 2004 .1130LAW' • GRAPHIC SCALE :ro ( 46 FErr ) 1 Slob - 50 S. Basle of Bearings Is Assumed. Property Description: The South 650.00 feet of the East half of the West half of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 32. EXCEPT the West 100.00 feet thereof, and EXCEPT the South 40.00 feet thereof; AND the South 430.00 feet of the West half of the East half of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 32, EXCEPT the South 40.00 feet thereof, All In Township 31, Range 22. Anoka County, Minnesota. The South Une of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32 ooaxo Sllttenee 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. et.,� t o .)j -az. Tedd W. Mattke, RLS Dote: 3 /f9 /eV Minn. Reg. No. 15511 N0. DATE ADDITIONS REVISIONS DRWN. CHKD. APPVD COMMENTS Total Acreage of Plat 6.18 Total Acreage of Upland 1.37 Proposed Zoning R -IX - - - - -- Existing Surface_ -` Proposed Surface Creation Wetland Cross — Section d Q Mattke Surveying & Engineering, Inc. 7671 Central Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 (612) 783 -0300 Wayne Junes AUTHORITY • (763) 442 -1176 PROJECT TITLE Junes Addition Preliminary Plat, DRAWING TITLE Grading & Erosion Control Plan DRAWN CADD APPROVED TWM DRAWING CHECKED DATE 3/15/03 SCALE: 1 " =50' OF • • • .„\ 00 O /N ' I • - 1 .019- sq.f3- -1Pg 0.39 ncres to I B95 -- 9. '116.832 SF Upland 1' 1 _- 3316Setsi 90.01 230.38 S8 100 -Year Flood = 894.1 Lowest Floor - 896.1 The South Line of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32 hereby certify that thle survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that 1 ern a duly Registered Land Surveyor . under the laws of the State of Minnesota. fir✓ )'1..r4 Tedd W. Mattke, RLS Date: 3/,o /.y Minn. Reg. No. 15612 J caocoo Siltfence I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duty Registered Professional Engineer under the - Stote of Minnesota Statutes Sections 326 02 to 326.16. :2-4-1 1:2-4-1 LJ rr..1% Tedd W. Mottke, P.E. Date: a/,. /vv Minn. Reg. 140. 15612 ADDITIONS / REVISIONS NO. DATE DRWN. CHKD. APPVDI COMMENTS • GRAPHIC SCALE ( ur FEET ) t inch - 80 St Basis of Bearings Is Assumed. Existing Legal Description: The North 189.08 feet of the South 229.08 feet of the West 230.36 feet of the East 1/2 of the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota. Proposed Zoning R1 -X e Mattke Surveying & Engineering, Inc. 7671 Central Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 (612) 783 -0300 04012 Richard S. Carlson Development, LLC Fridley, MN 5543 AUThORITY 7671 Central Avenue NE (763) 786 -1218 PROJECT TITLE West Shadow Ponds 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat -- Lot Split DRAWING TITLE Grading & Erosion Control Plan DRAWNG DRAWN CADD APPROVED TWM SCALE: 1"50' CHECKED DATE 3/10/04 _ OF 1