Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/29/2009 Env Bd Packet• • • City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting July 29, 2009 6:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Open Mike 5. Action Items A. Eagle Brook Church Parking Lot Expansion 6. Discussion Items A. Goals B. Garden Club C. Great Blue Herons of Lino Lakes D. Other Updates 7. Adjourn • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JUNE 24, 2008 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : June 24, 2009 TIME STARTED : 6:37 P.M. TIME ENDED : 7:40 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Mary Jo O'Dea, Paula Andrzejewski, Peter Brown and Martha DeHaven MEMBERS ABSENT : Barbara Bor and Kim Brouillet STAFF PRESENT : Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson 1. CALL TO ORDER Ms. O'Dea called the meeting to order at 6:37p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 29, 2009 Ms. O'Dea had a few changes. Page 3, paragraph 7: Change wells to wetland areas. Page 4, paragraph 1: Change hours to horrors. Page 4, paragraph 4: Change Bor to Borer. Page 4, paragraph 8: Change Mr. O'Dea to Ms. O'Dea. Ms. DeHaven made a motion to approve the April 29, 2009 minutes with changes. Ms. Andrzejewski seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Asleson added how the agenda is put together and Eagle Scout project at the Centennial Middle school under Discussion Items. Ms. Andrzejewski added update on Arbor Day under Discussion Items. Ms. DeHaven made a motion to approve agenda. Mr. Brown seconded the motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously 4. OPEN MIKE Open mike closed at 6:38 p.m. 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Foxborough Work Plan for 2009/2010. DRAFT MINUTES 1 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JUNE 24, 2008 Mr. Asleson presented his staff report on Expenditure Review and Yearly Work Plan for Foxborough Development. He presented the background, analysis and his recommendation. Mr. Asleson then presented Jason Husveth, Critical Connections Ecological Services, Inc.'s Restoration and Management Plan for 2009/2010. Mr. Asleson stated if the board is in agreement, there is a need to write a resolution approving the proposed work plan on this project. Mr. Brown made a recommendation to support the tasks outlined in the Critical Connections, Foxborough Restoration and Management Plan for 2009/2010 and for staff to prepare a Resolution and present it to the City Council. Ms. DeHaven seconded the recommendation. Recommendation carried unanimously. 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Blue Heron Days Parade — Garbage Pick Up It was noted that the upcoming Blue Heron Days parade will be held on August 22. Board members reviewed past recommendations to better improve visibility of the group at the parade. Members requested to have a banner made to hang on the Polaris Ranger ATV. B. Agenda Discussion. Mr. Asleson addressed Ms. Bor's email of how the board's agenda is put together. She also questioned if any of the members see this agenda before it is sent out. He stated other boards are cancelling meetings due to lack of development/review. He stated there has not been a subdivision application since last year. He stated members are welcome to call or email him if they have an item to put on the agenda. Mr. Asleson stated he would appreciate this. Ms. O'Dea mentioned board member know of anyone who may have a friend that would be interested in being on the Environmental Board let the City know as there are currently two positions open. C. Eagle Scout Project. Mr. Asleson stated there is currently a new Eagle Scout project underway at the middle school. He stated the Eagle Scout has raised all the money for seed needed. He stated the site will be ready for the seed in a few weeks. He mentioned that this site could be one to visit before the next meeting. D. Leaky Load Law. Ms. DeHaven stated if a garbage truck is spotted with garbage coming out the top of their vehicle to call the City, the garbage company and Sheriff's Department. The hauler will be held responsible to pick up anything that comes out of their trucks under the Leaky Load Law. DRAFT MINUTES 2 • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JUNE 24, 2008 E. Recycle Day. Mr. Asleson stated overall the tonnage collected on the Spring Recycle Day was very good. The City's tonnage goal has been met. He also mentioned there were higher charges on electronics than expected. F. Arbor Day. Mr. Asleson stated he received a call from the Principal at Rice Lake Elementary. He stated Rice Lake will be interested in Trish and the Toons performing at their school this next year. G. Workshop Update. Mr. Asleson stated that public education is very important. The last of the workshop put on by the Anoka County Conservation District and the City of Lino Lakes was held on Recycle Day. Ms. DeHaven stated she learned a lot from it. H. Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). Mr. Asleson stated the Emerald Ash Borer has been found in St. Paul. He stated he has been to a seminar and the presenter was the man who originally discovered EAB. Minnesota is probably one of the biggest Ash tree states. These trees can be saved if they are injected every year. The chemical itself is not extremely extensive. He stated in Lino Lakes there are approximately 427 ash trees on boulevards and about 268 in our city parks. He stated there is no way to tell if the EAB is in a tree until the tree starts dying. He will try to get an article on this ready for the next city newsletter. I. Blue Herons. Mr. Asleson stated he will be going out onto Peltier Island this coming Monday to count the Herons. J. Water Resource Task Force Committee. Mr. Asleson stated he has been sitting on the Water resource Task Force Committee. He has reviewed information that he has learned with the board. Mr. Asleson handed out a map on a study done by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) showing a drawdown of water. If this were to happen, there will be no lakes or wetlands left in the city. This is an ongoing study that the DNR will take a leadership roll in. He stated the DNR would not let this happen. He stated the city would probably be asked to put in a water monitoring system in. He sated this is a computer model, not a fact. If this did happen it will be a slow not something that would happen overnight. K. Drinking Water Report. Ms. O'Dea mentioned that the Lino Lakes Drinking Water Report, does not specifically state the water is good or comparable to other cities. She feels the report needs more information in it for residents. Mr. Asleson stated he will pass the information along. 7. ADJOURN DRAFT MINUTES 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JUNE 24, 2008 It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on July 29, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. There being no further business, Ms. DeHaven moved to adjourn at 740 p.m. Ms. Andrzejewski seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Lisa Hogstad Community Development Secretary DRAFT MINUTES 4 • • • • • Agenda Item 5A Environmental Board Meeting Date: July 29, 2009 Topic: Eagle Brook Church Parking Lot Expansion Background: In October of 2003, the City received an application for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of Eagle Brook Church. The church is conditional use in the Rural zoning ordinance. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared in 2002 for the project prior to it's start up. Planning and Zoning made recommendation to allow the conditional use. Terms of the Conditional use can be found in (Attachment 1). Eagle Brook Church was built in 2005. The church is now asking for a permit to build an additional parking lot to accommodate increased church membership. The parking lot is located in the SW parking area of the site and was graded in the initial development process to accommodate more cars. According to Eagle Brook Church the area is used as overflow parking now but turns to mud during wet weather. The church wishes to pave the overflow parking area. The original development created an impervious cover of approximately 15 acres and was permitted by RCWD. Analysis: This project falls under the new RMP -3 rule. The expansion area location is depicted in Attachments 2 and 3. The expansion would increase the amount of impervious on site approximately 1.7 acres. The new parking lot expansion area was not considered in the RCWD permit at the time of church construction. The findings of the RCWD can be found in Attachments 9, with the RMP -3 rules listed on Attachment 10. The following Findings are listed in the CAPROC report of the RCWD: Stormwater —The project is subject to section 8 of the RMP -3 The rule requires the retention of runoff from a 2.3 -inch rainfall by infiltration practices if possible. If infiltration is not feasible, the requirement must be achieved by bio- filtration or two -cell wetland treatment system. Volume control is also required for an additional 0.5 inches of wetland treatment system by measures specified in 8C of the rules (Attachment 10).This requirement is subject to the Volume Credits rules of Section 9 of the RMP -3 In regards to this requirement the applicant is proposing to provide an upland area in the existing conservation easement on the SW corner of the site. The existing conservation easement was not a RCWD permit requirement when the church was built. The upland conservation are must meet the requirements of the RMP -3 and be of high quality • • • Natural Heritage ranking of C or better or reestablishment of Native Prairie, woodlands or forest. Because the area meets these requirements, 0.85 inches of depth over the area will be given to meeting the 0.5 inch volume requirement when using the restored upland area. The results are the need for a 1.5 acre upland conservation area to meet the RMP -3 requirements. The Applicant will than convey the 1.05 acres to conservation to meet the RMP -3( c )b requirement.. According to the Findings of the RCWD, the applicant proposes to treat the runoff for the new impervious area created by two new bio- filtration basins adjacent to the new parking area. See (Attachment 6). The two new bio- filtration basins were designed to treat the volume from a 2.3- inch rainfall meeting the requirements of RMP -3 b (i). Also, rules C.8(a)(1) and C.8(a)(2) require pretreatment and limit the drawdown time for infiltration basins respectively. The applicant is proposing bio- filtration as the form of treatment and is not required to follow the design requirements in rule C.8(a). The bio- filtration basins will have either sod or a vegetated strip around the perimeter of the basin that will serve as pretreatment and the submitted hydrologic calculations show that the 2.3 -inch storm event will drawdown within 48 hours. The applicant will follow the RCWD Better Site Design worksheet to comply with rule RMP -3 8(b) techniques of better site design requirements. Rate control compliance has been verified and in compliance with rule C.6. Wetlands -- The proposed project does not impact any wetlands. The parcel is located in the landscape level Wetland Preservation Corridor. The applicant must according to the CAPROC, record a declaration establishing the vegetated buffer and upland habitat as part of the permit. The applicant must also submit a management plan for the vegetated buffer and must be approved by the Watershed district approval. Floodplain -- There are no floodplain impacts. National Heritage Issues —There are no National Heritage (threatened and endangered) issues of concern on this site. Erosion Control —An acceptable erosion control plan has been submitted. An NPDES permit must be obtained for this project. The erosion control plan, permits and inspection reports must be located on • • site and accessible to storm water compliance inspectors. A mail box on site is sufficient to meet the purpose of document accessibility. The applicant must show inlet protection on the plans. The applicant should also show protection measures for the engineered soils once installed on site, such as sod buffers and fencing to prevent sedimentation and compaction to the filtrate. Landscape Plan— Attachments 7 & 8 show proposed plant materials for the bio- retention basins. All are 4' potted native plants and acceptable to meet bio- filtration requirements. Existing trees are being preserved in Basin 2.. Screening issues were addressed at the time of the original platting. The plant schedule indicates Spruce Trees (by others). I believe these are the Spruce Trees that exist on the South side of the property. Lighting Plan —The Lighting Plan lacks the detail to determine whether the lighting meets Lino Lakes standards. Discussing the issue with SRF it was stated that the lighting fixtures would be of the same type that were installed on the previously designed parking lots of Eagle Brook Church. Recommendations and Comments -- Recommend that the project go forward with suggested Changes /Additions of City Staff as listed in the report and Environmental Board Comments. Attachments 1. Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit for a Church in a Rural Zoning District For Eagle Brook Church and Approving a Preliminary Plat for Eagle Brook Church 2. Photo and Overflow Parking Area 3. Detail Sheet C101 Parking Expansion Area 4. Detail Sheet C102 Grading and Storm Sewer Plan 5. Detail Sheet C103 Signing, Striping, and Lighting Plan 6. Detail Sheet C104 Filtration Basin Construction Details 7. Detail Sheet L100 Planting Plan 8. Detail Sheet L101 Planting Details 9. Rice Creek Watershed CAPROC Report 10. RMP -3 Rules Discussed in CAPROC Report • • • CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 04-17 4 - 0 4 1 4 - 4 0 4 . 6 - 4 r RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH IN A RURAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR EAGLE BROOK CHURCH, AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR EAGLE BROOK ADDITION WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared for the project in 2002, prior to the formal submittal of an application. On May 13, 2003, the City Council approved Resolution 03 -44 finding that there will be no significant environmental effects from the project and making a negative declaration regarding the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. 2. In October 2003 the City received an application for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of Eagle Brook Church. An application for a preliminary plat approval followed in November 2003. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see ATTACHMENT A) 4. The subject property currently is zoned Rural. 5. A church is a conditional use in the Rural zone as listed in the zoning ordinance. 6. The Planning & Zoning Board opened a public hearing on the conditional use permit application at their meeting on November 12, 2003. The Board continued the hearing. The Board opened a public hearing on the preliminary plat application on December 10, 2003, and continued the combined public hearing to the January meeting. At the January 14, 2004 meeting, the Board concluded and closed the combined public hearing and recommend approval of the conditional use permit and preliminary plat with conditions. 7. Updated traffic analyses by SRF were received by the City on February 2, February 23, March 5, and March 15 of 2004. 8. The traffic analysis concluded that a vehicle queue on the northbound I -35E exit ramp to Main St. (CSAH 14) would not stack into the travel lane of I -35E. • • 9. The zoning ordinance lists general criteria for conditional use permits in Section 2, Subdivision 2.7: a. The proposed development application has been found to be consistent with the policies and recommendations of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan including: Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, Utility (Sewer and Water) Plans, Local Water Management Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Policy Plan, Natural Environment Plan. While there are no specific statements or policies in these plans with which the proposed project clearly conflicts, the safety of the public is an underlying concern. Review of the project does not reveal a clear danger to public safety. b. The proposed development application is compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The site is guided for single family sewered development. This does not exclude churches, which typically are in single family zones. The majority of the site will remain as undeveloped open space (only 23% impervious surface). The lakeshore area will be protected and managed to provide a foraging area for birds in the heron rookery. c. The proposed development application conforms to performance standards herein and other applicable City Codes. With the conditions of approval, performance standards are met. d. Traffic generated by a proposed development application must be within the capabilities of the City when specific levels of service are observed. However, the City does not have jurisdiction over neighboring municipalities. With the conditions of approval, including turn lane improvements, the roads will have structural capacity to accommodate traffic. No City improvements are needed. The LOS requirements do not apply to the I -35W /Lake Drive or I- 35E/Main St. interchanges. e. The proposed development shall be served with adequate and safe water supply. f. The proposed development shall be served with an adequate and safe sanitary sewer system. The proposed new building would have its own well and onsite wastewater treatment system. The church will be required to connect to municipal sanitary sewer and water within two years of service availability. g. The proposed development shall not result in the premature expenditures of City funds on capital improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. There will be no city capital expenditures for this project. h. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The parking lot will be lit. The lighting will comply with city requirements and can be turned off after specified times. The Resolution 04 -17, page 2 project will generate traffic. The traffic impacts were the subject of extensive analysis and there is no clear public safety danger. i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet review process concluded that the project would have no significant environmental impacts. 10. As listed in Section 5, Subd. 1.G.8. of the zoning ordinance, churches are allowed as conditional uses in the Rural zone provided that: a. Side yard setbacks shall not be less than fifty (50) feet; b. Adequate screening from abutting residential uses and landscaping is provided; and c. Adequate off - street parking and access is and parking is adequately screened and landscaped. The project complies with the required setbacks. The plans include adequate off - street parking and access. The landscaping plan includes significant screening. 11. The maximum building height in the Rural zone is 35', though Sec. 3, Subd. 4.C. allows that church spires may go up to 60' and that building heights in excess of these may be allowed through a conditional use permit provided that: a. Demonstrated need is established for the increase in height and said increase will not violate the intent and character of the zoning district in which the structure is located. • Contemporary churches are commonly large, tall buildings. The large worship space requires a tall structure. The site is large and the structure will be set back significant distances from property lines. b. The site is capable of accommodating the increased structure size. • At 82 acres, the church lot can accommodate the additional building height. c. The potential increased intensity and size of use does not cause an increase in traffic volumes beyond the capacity of the surrounding streets. • The additional 14' of building height does not increase traffic volume. d. Public utilities and services are adequate. • The church will construct its own water and sanitary sewer facilities. e. For each additional story over the district limitation or for each additional ten (10) feet above the maximum allowed per district, front and side yard setback requirements shall be increased by ten (10) percent. • As noted in the zoning standards table above, the setbacks are well beyond minimum requirements. f. The construction does not limit solar access to abutting and/or neighboring properties. A shadow study shall be required illustrating shadow encroachment on adjoining properties. • The shadow study shows no impact on neighboring property. Resolution 04 -17, page 3 • • • g. The provisions of Section 2, Subd. 2. of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. • This refers to the general CUP criteria discussed in finding 9. 12. Protecting the public safety is a legitimate public purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lino Lakes City Council hereby approves the conditional use permit for a church in the Rural zone and the preliminary plat for Eagle Brook Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. This conditional use permit approval includes the 2100 -seat worship space, but not the additional 700 seats. This approval also includes the 50' building height as on the submitted building elevations. The addition of more seating requires an amendment of this conditional use permit. The review of the amendment will include, but not be limited to, the adequacy of the wastewater treatment system and traffic impacts on the transportation system. 2. If more than one worship service is to occur on the same day, starting times for services shall be scheduled at least two hours apart to allow time for traffic from the first service to disperse. 3. If weekday evening worship services are scheduled, they shall not occur prior to 7:00 pm in order to avoid conflict with the weekday peak travel period (rush hour). This condition does not apply to small worship activities that create no traffic issue. This does not apply to special holiday or other special events. 4. Traffic control personnel shall be employed, at the church's expense, during church traffic generation peak periods. These personnel shall be law enforcement officers provided by the City of Lino Lakes. a. Officers shall be at the I -35E interchange ramps, at the 20th Ave. and Main St. intersection, and at the two access driveways to the site. However, the number of officers, if any, their locations, and the events that warrant them shall be the decision of the Chief of Police, and may change from what is stated in this condition 4, subject to the Chief's discretion. b. During church worship services and large events, the northern driveway shall be entry only and the south driveway shall be exit only. 5. Within 60 days, after the first worship service, the Chief of Police shall call a review meeting of representatives from law enforcement officers providing traffic control, the church, and the neighborhood to review traffic issues. Additional meetings shall be held as determined by the Chief of Police. 6. Parking lot lighting and church spire lighting shall be turned off no later than two hours after services or other events at night, but no later than 10 p.m. This does not apply to special holiday or other special events. Resolution 04 -17, page 4 • • 7. Additional right of way shall be dedicated to Anoka County for 20th Ave. (CSAH 21), as indicated on the plans. This shall be shown on the final plat. 8. A separate deed for the right of way along the exception lot (7791 20th Ave.) shall be recorded with the final plat because this lot is not part of the plat. This deed shall be submitted for City review as part of the final plat submittal. 9. All necessary permits shall be obtained by the applicant from Anoka County for work in the 20th Ave. (CSAH 21) right of way. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the church must obtain written approval from Anoka County Highway Dept. that the westbound right turn lane at the CSAH 14 /CSAH 21 intersection will function as demonstrated in the submitted traffic analysis. The church must make any improvements to the turn lane as required by Anoka County. 11. The church shall be responsible for the construction and cost of a right turn lane on the northbound I -35E exit ramp at CSAH 14. a. The church shall obtain agreement on the design of this turn lane from Anoka County Highway Dept. and MnDOT, as necessary, and submit proof of the agreement, prior to issuance of a building permit for the church. b. This turn lane shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the church. 12. Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and permits are required for all signs. 13. Drainage and utility easements must be created over all ponds and wetlands. These must include land 25' from the delineated wetland edge, as proposed on the plans. These easements must be included on the final plat. 14. Easements must be placed over the relocated drain tile for Co. Ditch 72 and deeded to the Rice Creek Watershed District. 15. Issues listed in the January 7, 2004 memo by the City Engineer must be resolved to his satisfaction. 16. Stop signs shall be installed for vehicles exiting both church driveways. 17. The church shall enter into a site performance agreement prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The church shall enter into a maintenance agreement for the stormwater facilities prior to issuance of a building permit. • 19. A management plan for the prairie areas must be prepared and obtain approval from the City prior to issuance of a building permit. Resolution 04 -17, page 5 • • 20. The terms and dimensions of the conservation easement in the southwest portion of the site must be agreed to by the church and the easement holder prior to issuance of a building permit. The church is responsible for submitting to the City proof of the agreement. Access to the Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted and /or prohibited during the nesting season of the Great Blue Herons and other significant waterfowl. Access may be granted for observational and/or research purposes. Access will also be permitted for maintenance and management purposes in accordance with the approved management plan. 21. The sewer line from the building line to the wastewater treatment system tanks must be insulated to prevent freezing. 22. A fence or other barrier shall be built to protect the wastewater treatment areas. 23. The church shall submit to the City the servicing /monitoring plan acceptable to the City for the wastewater treatment system. 24. The church shall connect to the public sanitary sewer system within 24 months of the public service becoming available. 25. The church shall connect to the public water system within 24 months of the public service becoming available. 26. Street lights typical for road intersections shall be installed at the church's cost at the end of each access driveway on CSAH 21 (20th Ave.). 27. The City has the right periodically to review the conditional use permit for compliance with these conditions and for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. 28. The well drilling shall not begin prior to July 15th, 2004. Grading and construction on the site shall not begin prior to June 1st, 2004. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution is based on the following plans and related information: 1. Eagle Brook Church Traffic Study, Supplemental Analysis, Draft Memorandum, Including Updates: February 2, February 23, March 5, March 15, 2004 2. Preliminary Plat, 10/10/03, rec'd12 /18/03 3. Certificate of Survey, SRF, 10/10/03 4. Site Plan, BWBR and SRF, 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 5. Grading Plan, BWBR and SRF, 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 6. Utility Plan, BWBR and SRF, 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 • 7. Construction Plan, SRF 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 8. Landscaping Plan, BWBR, 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 9. Tree Preservation Plan, BWBR, 12/18/03, received 12/18/03 Resolution 04 -17, page 6 • • 10. Signage and Building Cross Details, 12/17/03, received 12/18/03 11. First and Second Floor Plans, BWBR, 10/13/03, corrected square footages e -mail from Ron Laughlin, BWBR 12. Building Elevations, BWBR, 10/13/03 13. Photometric Plan, BWBR and Ericksen Ellison and Assoc., 10/14/03, received 10/15/03 14. Lighting Fixture cutsheets, Lithonia Lighting 15. Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Final Design Report and Specifications, Eco Systems Engineering, Oct. 8, 2003 16. Narrative, SRF 17. Description of Fire Protection System and Electrical Generator System, Memorandum, Ericksen Ellison and Assoc., 10/13/03 Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2004. ATTEST: Ann Blair, City Clerk John J. Bergeson, Mayor Resolution 04 -17, page 7 • • • Eaglebrook Expansion Parking Area Attachment 2 0 90 180 H H 360 540 H I 720 Feet ' LEGEND: - SOIL BORING *TREE POWER POLE ,, WELL TELEPHONE PED ELECTRICAL BOX PROPERTY LINE EAGLE BROOK CHURC H LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION - • _ ® - " � I PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY . _ -- — SECTION I EXISTI - _— �_ NG RIGHT OF WAY CGORONUSUPLTIINNG pill . SEWSEW ER SSTRNOITM ARY ER A WBUATERRRIEMD AIN GAS BURIED TELEPHONE 4,01 BURIED ELECTRICAL Sute 50lnTtxc GROUP, INC Suite One Cartoon Parkway Minneapolis. MN 55447 Tel. 763 - 475 -0010 Fax. 763- 475 -2429 r4,;-,,,,,,i. PAVEMENT DETAIL A REMOVE AND REPLACE B618 i. CURB & GUTTER - - _ 4 1 i "EMOV AND REPLACE B618 CURB &GUTTER � EXIST. RIGHT OF WAY $lam' a 18 C & G TACK COAT Ct, CAA1- 1 I '( I 2 --: REMOVE AND REPLACE PAVEMENT WITH PAVEMENT DETAIL A CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER - - --- SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT r'f/�i% 6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE DRIVE f( SI O O { _ MNDOT SPEC. 2357 - �' eI i I ; GENERAL NOTES: • CONSTRUCT PARKING AREAS USING PAVEMENT DETAIL A. • INSTALL CURB CUTS IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN AND AT THE SPACING LISTED. WHERE CURB CUTS ARE LOCATED IN FRONT OF PARKING STALLS, CENTER CURB CUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STALL. ” ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. • THE CONTRACTOR IS HEREBY REMINDED OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY UNDER STATE LAW TO CONTACT ALL UTILITIES THAT MAY HAVE FACILITIES IN THE AREA. CONTACT MUST BE MADE THROUGH GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL. • WHEN MATCHING EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT WITH NEW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT, THE EXISTING PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT AND TACK COAT APPLIED PRIOR TO PLACING NEW PAVEMENT. • SEE GRADING PLAN FOR PROPOSED ELEVATIONS AND CONTOURS. • SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PLANTING LAYOUT AND BIORETENTION BASIN DETAILS • VERIFY ALL CURB CUT LOCATIONS WITH THE OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOTES: 1Q MATCH EXISTING CURB O MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT Q3 CONSTRUCT 6' DOVE TAIL AT ENDS OF CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER ® CONSTRUCT CURB CUT AND SOIL APRON PER DETAIL ' Ala iiP SHOWN ON SHEET C105 O5 CONSTRUCT CURB CUT AND CONC. APRON PER DETAIL e SHOWN ON SHEET C105 © CONSTRUCT DRIVEWAY CROSS GUTTER AS DETAILED ON SHEET C105 0 TIE INTO EXISTING AGGREGATE DRIVE 17 4 Eli 50 t �^`'`-- „:'''„$r''• 5 "`; 1 °, O • © ,,"' 8618 C At G a- 4 2" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE # scale Neel rmeoma.s nowt two Mo. am or me..i~ p.wd N me 1 .m a may nremam."ri &iavm.W° um I.n a wb Mau Am. JEFFREY N. TYXESON (SP EA340C) MNDOT SPEC. 2360 W F. • �s I II ► c�j • 1.11. I I 2.5" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE �; (SPWEA340C) MNDOT SPEC. 2360 I . boa 06 /12 /D. T. 42702 >� 6" AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 L ` k �' REVISIONS MNDOT SPEC. 2211 Na. DATE BY QMO AvRR ± I' -r ca 6424 C & G MNDOT SUBGRADE C. 2112 MNDOT SPEC. 21 12 ' ' q EBRD DETAIL A 4 I -e. Ot'. I ) I1 in is T i -i ,,...,.-, - i �I "T Y EAGLE BROOK DRIVE ) 1 4 4 4 4 — 1:' �� \ 4,,,,, k3 8424 C & G \ - DATE 0612 -2009 ■ � Q `.._� ' ,Y EXIST- RIGHT OF WAY F ¢: - — _ _ I COMM. N0. 00116799 EAGLE BROOK CHURCH PARKING LOT EXPANSION LINO LAKES, MN CONSTRUCTION PLAN x-- -- --- __ r I'- c_,\ SHEET C101 SHEET 3 OF 9 H: \Civil \047 \4443 \Phase 2 \Plan \Construction- plan.dwg CONSTRUCTION LIMITS N 1 FOR O'7 0' 894 m m TO EXISTING STRUCTURE TING INVERT ELEVATION EXISTING '.IN GARDEN SALVAGE AN STALL PLANTINGS N '. TO INSTALL 18" RCP as 0, CM Co m a CO IN a tU REMOVE EXISTING STORM ER PIPE 9 BIORETENTION BASIN 2 SEE SHEET L100 FOR PLANTING PLAN 4- --DRAIN TI BUILD STRUCTURE OVER EXISTING CULVERT 895 94 SHEET FOR EOC - WJTING 4' 900 9 ONSTRUCTION ����. 99 � CONSTRUCTION LIMITS 0 901 4" TOPSOIL AND SEED MATCH EXISTING GROUNDLINE 4 MIN. 2' RIBBON CURB — PARKING LOT PAVEMENT DRAINAGE DITCH TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE H: \Civil \047 \4443 \Phase 2 \Plan \grading— plan.dwg GENERAL NOTES: • REFER TO SHEETS L100 AND L101 FOR TYPICAL RAIN GARDEN DETAILS WORK OUTSIDE GRADING LIMITS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE OWNER • SEE SHEET C104 FOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURE AND STORM SEWER TABULATION • SUBGRADE SHALL BE SHAPED AND COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT SPEC 2112 SUBGRADE PREPARATION. NOTES: 0 CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AS DETAILED ON SHEET C105 6' —o— LEGEND: SPOT ELEVATION TO GUTTER LINE OF CURB GRASS AND FORB SEED MIX FOR UPLAND AREAS AND SURROUNDING RESTORATION AREAS COMPLY WITH CITY OF LINO LAKES STANDARD SEED SPECIFICATIONS CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED SEE SHEET C105 FOR DETAILS PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED DROP INLET EXISTING DROP INLET 4f PROPOSED CATCH BASIN Q EXISTING CATCH BASIN • PROPOSED APRON Q EXISTING APRON 4•. SOIL BORING TREE POWER POLE WELL TELEPHONE PED ELECTRICAL BOX PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY — — — SECTION LINE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY STROM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN BURIED GAS BURIED TELEPHONE BURIED ELECTRICAL EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SRF CONSULTING CROUP, INC Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55447 Tel. 763- 475 -0010 Fax- 763- 475 -2429 oD6 scale feet Owtleotim t ■m.r vcNry Out this Au. . 9. de sar report vs. pelpere■ 08— r zoo or • I u . duly 1A* n,N•d.e.l ram.. =as. M.. M.. .a Oa am. of Jlaa 989,JEF!ffi7 N. TYJ7SON 91nshoe n o. 08/12/09 ll.e. 4.. 42792 RECEIVED SUN. 8 2.119 cm/ OF LINO LAKES REVISIONS N0. DATE 87 01460 APPR DATE 0612 -2009 COMM. NO. 0089799 LINO LAKES, MN GRADING & STORM SEWER PLAN SHEET C102 SHEET 4 OF 9 Y 73 )4e- er S� LEGEND: i PROPOSED LIGHT POLE EXISTING LIGHT POLE 2" CONDUIT EXISTING BURIED POWER EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION - - : alb r 2 } t / 1 GENERAL NOTES: ' PARKING LOT STRIPING SHALL 4" YELLOW PAINT. . TYPICAL PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE 9.0" X 18.0'. • CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXISTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS OR STRIPING THAT CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED STRIPING PLAN. . THE CONTRACTOR IS HEREBY REMINDED OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY UNDER STATE LAW TO CONTACT ALL UTILITIES THAT MAY HAVE FACILITIES IN THE AREA. CONTACT MUST BE MADE THROUGH GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL. CONNECT TO EXISTING LIGHTING CIRCUIT O CONSULTING Wil GROUP, INC. - - . .. ., , ae�� -.. ,�� N / / /�% - ,�._ - .. - f 2 CONDUIT - SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55447 Tel. 763- 475 -0010 Fax. 763 - 475 -2429 ac9,e lea Ibe=.�„n,..�.91. Sul , • Nlaew. 7•wab.Y Via._ D.... U. S.. NlMsJCFFRET N. 7TidtiON 91100•1.1e 4" - -. -. 3 y 1^ 4 YELLOW — PAINT �3. _ Y. A \�` "I ■ 50 ." 1 1 , • '25 3 ^OQ \ c2, .' Z' ,�� ;_p_42 R - - CJ Ya D6 /12 /09 >•a l� 42792 REsoNS NO. GATE 9Y CHK° APPR 24 DATE 06-12 -2009 or t'! ...a .. ,.., 5 "'; CONK NO. 00857E9 "� �+' -. i �i, fi ;� .-y* -" b ■ II 2° CONDUIT i�. a ru A fU .!. N / C 0 \ —0/ EBRD `, EAGLE BROOK CHURCH PARKING LOT EXPANSION LINO LAKES, MN SIGNING, STRIPING & LIGHTING PLAN ,---- P . - I'-- J-- .."'- . .rte -, r---- SHEET C103 SHFFTS CIF 9 H: \Civil \047 \4443 \Phase 2 \Pion \Site Plan.dwg EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SPY CONSULTING GROUP, INC Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis. MN 55447 TeL 763- 475 -0010 Fax. 763- 475 -2429 Certlficatios 1 hereby eaxnry 1b.0 rrW p1 . gmeftle en m > eu prep.. oyd eap.?,,* . `e0 Memwa Eape 4 N6. Im Om � Oden.l 11.....121,08.4- N. 7060000 OtOW�a pMa 08/12/00 ti` Nu. 42792 REVISIONS NO. DATE BY CHKD APPR DATE 06-12 -2009 COMM. NO. 0006799 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS SHEET C104 SHEET 6 OF 9 FLOWS FROM TOP OF CASTING (A) INV ELEV FROM PIPE SLOPE INV ELEV TO F LOW COORDINATES DRAINAGE TABULATION STR OR APRON INLET STR. OR APRON OUTLET NEW STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION RC PIPE (DESIGN 3006) PERFORATED PVC PIPE LENGTH OF PIPE INCLUDES: RIP RAP (C) GUIDE POSTS DESIGN (B) PAY HEIGHT CASTING ASSEMBLY (B) STEPS RE- QUIRED LR. BEND V =VERT. H =HORQ CLASS 11 TYPE FOOTNOTES B X Y 15 " CL 11 18" CL 11 4" POINT NO. POINT NO. FT FT FT/FT FT LIN FT TYPE L.F. APR LF. APR L.F. APR CU YD EACH 200 894.30 890.55 0.0075 890.35 207 557,023.70 155,773.71 402-LL 3.6 R- 3250 -A 27 201 890.06 556,968.02 155,777.66 APRON 1 2.9 1 (C) 202 892.00 0.0030 891.52 203 557,312.48 155,456.65 PLUG 161 I 203 895.00 891.33 0.0030 890.77 EX 29 557,324.57 155,628.18 402-LL 3.9 M -11 186 i j ID) 204 890.95 0.0045 890.83 EX 29 557,356.56 155,787.57 CONNECTION 26 1 - 60" H (D) (E) 205 898.60 893.30 557,367.36 155,340.36 406-LL (66") 5.1 R- 3250 -A (F) 206 207 556,977.19 155,650.96 PLUG - 119 1 207 893.90 890.35 0.0075 890.06 201 556,995.12 155,768.48 402 -LL 3.4 M -11 38 EX 29 557.363.53 155,810.50 EXISTING DI ... STORM PIPE TOTALS 65 1 186 306 2.9 1 GENERAL NOTES 1. COORDINATES AND ELEVATIONS ARE GIVEN TO END OF APRON OR END OF SAFETY APRON. 2. CENTER OF CASTING OPENING AT 1.0 FOOT FROM FACE OF CURB. NOTES: (A) TOP OF CASTING GIVEN TO CENTER OF GRATE. (E) CONNECT 70 EXISTING ( (8) REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 334100 FOR STRUCTURE AND GRATE DESIGN STANDARD PLATES. (F) BUILD STRUCTURE OVER EXISTING 44-NCH SPAN PIPE. VERIFY EXISTING INVERT ELEVATION. (C) TIE LAST THREE JOINTS AT APRON END. TIED JOINTS SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO PIPE CONSTRUCTION. (D) CONNECT TO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE. INFILTRATION AREA ELEV. AO ELEV. Bp ENGINEERED SOL MIX© GRASS PRE - TREATMENT FILTER STRIP EAST 894.0 891.5 7OS SAND AND 30% COMPOST KEST 893.0 890.5 70S SAND AND 30X COMPOST 1:20 MAX SLOPE SOD. TYPE SALT RESISTANT SOD, TYPE SALT RESISTANT PER MnDOT SpEC 3878. WTH PER MnDOT SPEC 3878 WTN VARIES 'MOTH VARIES - SEE GRADING PLANS VARIES - -SCOUR STOP' D EOUIVALENT -SCOUR STOP' OR EOUIVALANT ' ROADWAY PAVEMENT - -- PATCH, SEE PAVEMENT DETAIL A ON SHEET 0. • SEE RAN FD SEE PLAN FOR 50D LOCATION )MOOT TYPE 6 _ 500 LOCATION - SHREDDED MUECH PARKING LOT SECTION. SEE ',J.(:4 MA K; S CPS J f 4 ON SHEET MOO PAVEMENT DETAIL A "appt� __'NR�I�' 1 �1 I l`u� 2' DROP FROM EDGED =I I I� 11-1 I =1 = n- I1„R_11 ,1= I p� (� : 1 iL , I I H I I' l CURB /CURB CUT TO FINISHED 1� g '+" M ICU BOTTEI GRADE SEE CURB AND SOIL DETAIL I I � 'P 'C° '+ ')"1:S" I OTER OF ENGINEERED SOIL 2' DD FROM EDGE OF B- TOPSOIL BORROW I- :`:X "�.,..? ^°"" CURB/CURB CUT TO FINISHED (SECTION A -A. SHEET 005) �' ' """- T. GRACIE SEE dURB AND SOIL DETAIL GRASS PRE - TREATMENT FLIER STRIP - -�� ;�•,:%;,. �3?,,..' °''�hS " -4 .. I I. (SECTOR A -A. SHEET 0105) �C,.n. 1:20 MAX SLOPE - I I I-J 7 �> C - yS. - `e ^�.i7 1:4 MAX SIDE SLOPE } ,- Y•"'�, -^ 1:1/2 ROPE Ia H I - - I- H I I -1 I -(I 1- UNDISTURBED, UNCOIPACTED . - CHI I I IICI- I I -11 I 114 11 IJ I1-- -1-11 IN -SITU SOIL - r--p i 1 111-1- III I�� 1I1��I -111 i-- 111 ©ENGINEERED SOIL _ 1 H� 1 !-I I tI I-CI I� 1 Gl 1 X11 (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) - I IEII--I IyE 1-11-1 I I-I I E E II II I-H CIEl 1 I I I CI 1 �IrH( Sq�LI T 1 EAST FILTRATION BASIN TYPICAL CROSS - SECTION (NOT TO SCALE) F-� FILTER _- `['-1 I _.._.. _- OWERT OF SCAM RFD E DRAIN H I I -I I` E TOP T OF SUBSURFACE DRAIN I1NE I -11 I 11 11- �111I I --1--- I1-I IE I �' MAdTN FILTER • AGGREGATE ■ E (MODIFIED) ' SURROUNDING SUBSURFACE DRAW 4' DIAMETER PERFORATED SUBSURFACE DRAIN WTH GEOTEXTLE SOCK SEE SHEET 0101 FOR LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE GRAINS SCARIFY 04-511) Sd15 TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF C PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (INCIDENTAL) C104 -.. GRASS PRE - 1:20 MAX SLOPE SOD, TYPE MATCH EXISTING GRADE PER Mn00T S® ALL OTHER DISTURBED %MTH VARIES - SEE GRADING PLANS VARIES "SCOUR STD' AREAS 1 SEE PLAN FOR . LIKOT TYPE 6 ( SOD LOCATOR 5HREDOED MULCH PARKING LOT :l SECTION. SEE 1 I. 1 4 MAKIPPE SEDE ON SHEET C100 4- t t 7 TREATMENT FILTER STRIP SALT RESISTANT SPEC 3378, WTI( OR EQUIVALENT PAVEMENT DETAIL A Y DROP FROM EDGE OF RIBBON E I E I f- Irtrn =n rB9�i ■ 1. If�IDIBI . -I I i -, '�"'" .L. EH ()SAAR TD OF ENQNEERED salt 1- rrA � -,-7 1' ' L J CURB. -I I Ala ts MAX 510E ROPE E p6 ...., ^" ..., . 0TOP OF COARSE FILTER OF SUBSURFACE 0AGGREGATE/ 11=1 I- II= - -1 11-1 I-L -i -I II EI I 1.1/2 SLOPE 111- I T I -111 1 1 1 -11 I II I III -11 I AT DOWNSTREAM END D DRAIN UNE UNDISTURBED, UNO PACTID -- I _ -�I IN-S111.1 SOIL 11 -1 1 (-I =1 i �J I 1 C 1 -1 1 -I f= 111 -1 I -I 1 1_111 -11 El . L ENGNERED SOIL I_ -H I I H CI I I EH 1I-77.1- FINE (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) -1 I L_1 �I I I I�1 I MAWTNNNDIN MINIMUM CAPER NN I- ��--1 -J(( 1e1 -I �j _,II, SURRWN a' SUBSURFACE MACE DRAIN 4' DIAMETER PERFORATED SUBSURFACE C101NFOR LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE DRAINS q P 1 , 'A y , r` Mme' ", �_� c /) jut-1 r, 2309 �,�/ LINO LAKES rI ( i OF LI! V V LAKES SCARIFY N -9111 SOILS TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6' PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF `f 2 WEST FILTRATION BASIN TYPICAL CROSS- SECTION (NOT TO SCALE) COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (NEMENTAL) C104 EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SPY CONSULTING GROUP, INC Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis. MN 55447 TeL 763- 475 -0010 Fax. 763- 475 -2429 Certlficatios 1 hereby eaxnry 1b.0 rrW p1 . gmeftle en m > eu prep.. oyd eap.?,,* . `e0 Memwa Eape 4 N6. Im Om � Oden.l 11.....121,08.4- N. 7060000 OtOW�a pMa 08/12/00 ti` Nu. 42792 REVISIONS NO. DATE BY CHKD APPR DATE 06-12 -2009 COMM. NO. 0006799 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS SHEET C104 SHEET 6 OF 9 • BIORETENTION NOTES: ezia SA GI feTS oil role e% L 17 F01 eilke '4%0 Pee 4.07 +��010 0 +0+_•1 V PLAN scale 20 leaf NSTALL METAL EDGER BETWEEN SOD AND PLANTINGS BIORETENTION BASIN 2 - PLANTING PLAN seeks 20 last 1. SEE PLANTING SCHEDULE ON SHEET L101. 2. SEE PLANTING DETAILS ON SHEET L101. 3. TREE LOCATIONS SHALL BE STAKED BY CONTRACTOR IN FIELD FOR APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. PLACE 12" TOPSOIL IN MASS PLANTING AREAS. EXCEPT AT BIORETENTION BASINS. 5. SEE BIORETENTION TYPICAL CROSS - SECTION ON SHEET C104. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROMPTLY NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DRAWING DISCREPANCIES. 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL TO LOCATE PUBLIC UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. B. ANY OBJECTS OR AREAS THAT ARE DAMAGED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY THE CONTRACTOR OR HIS -HER WORK SHALL BE REPAIRED /RESTORED TO THEIR PRE- DAMAGED CONDITION OR BtUILR AT NO EXPENSE TO THE OWNER. 9. PROJECT SITE SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AND AS HAZARD FREE AS POSSIBLE. REMOVE DEBRIS FROM SITE ON A DAILY BASIS. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE LAYOUT OF IMPROVEMENTS AND HAVE SUCH STAKING APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 11. REPORT ALL LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES IMMEDIATELY TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR DIRECTION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING. 12. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL PREVAIL OVER DRAWING. 13. FURNISH AND INSTALL METAL LANDSCAPE EDGER WHERE PLANTING AREAS ABUT SOD OR MULACH AREAS. H: \Civil \047 \4443 \Phase 2 \Plan \Landscape— Plan.dwg INSTALL META EDGER BETWEEN SO AREAS AND PLANTINGS TYP.) NTIION BASIN 1 - PLANTING P I N D■ acne fan EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis. MI4 55447 Tel. 763- 475 -0010 Fax. 763 - 475 -2429 GralNanna I haven star <Nat tu. pl.. nanDanna as or ants In Nan! .vr•1 .vs...l 1 Inn* a.l I as a dal, Ilm Pta 6epa.r am to Inn at On 686a Hann. DFPRXY N. TY10'SON 06/12/09 ya. >` 42762 LEGEND: 50D - TYPE SALT RESISTANT PER MN /DOT 3878 SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH AREA RG1 PLANTING MIX (4" HERBACEOUS PLUGS) RG2 PLANTING MIX (4" HERBACEOUS PLUGS) PERENNIALS AND GRASSES ccP SHRUBS GRASS AND FORS SEED MIX FOR UPLAND AREAS AND SURROUNDING RESTORATION AREAS COMPLY WITH CITY OF LINO LAKES STANDARD SEED SPECIFICATIONS (1111:) EXISTING TREES PROPOSED SPRUCE TREES (BY OTHERS) i REVISIONS NO. DATE 0Y C000 APPR DATE CONN. NO. 06-12 -2009 0066799 PLANTING PLAN SHEET L100 SHEET 8 OF 9 GENERAL NOTES PLANTING HOLE: AND BED CULTIVATION SEE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. THE PLANTING DETAILS REPRESENT ADEQUATELY DRAINED SOIL CONDITIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHOU,�D EXERCISE DISCRETION IN SETTING PLANTS 1 " -3 HIGHER IN POORLY DRAINED OO H ER T UMG J+LTERNATIVE PLANTING DETAILS THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ADEQUATE DRAINAGE IN HEAVY POORLY DRAINED OR IMPERVIOUS SOILS. LOOSEN ALL ISOLATED TREE PLANTING LOCATIONS ACID PLANTING BEDS TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 8 . SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE APPLIED DURING CULTIVATION. BACKFILL SOIL USE CULTIVATED AND AMENDED SOIL EXCAVATED FROM PLANTING HOLES. REMOVE ALL DEBRIS INCLUDING ROCKS LARGER THAN 3" DIA. FERTILIZER: _L _NONE —MN /DOT 3881 COMPOST: —NONE X Mn /DOT 3890 MATERIAL: Mn /DOT 3882 TYPE 6 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 3 X BALL DIAMETER BALLED & BURLAPPED STOCK 1. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. 2. ONLY PRUNE BRANCHES IF BROKEN DURING INSTALLATION. ROOT FLARE BACKFILL SOIL MULCH PLANTING HOLE UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL 3. SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL INSTALL PLANT SO THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOT FLARE 15 AT, OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE. THE FINISHED GRADE. 4. PLACE PLANT IN PLANTING HOLE WITH BURLAP AND PARE BASKET. (IF USED), INTACT. BACKFILL WITH THE BACKFILL SOIL SPECIFIED TO WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12' OF THE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL, THEN WATER PLANT. REMOVE THE TOP 1/2 OF THE WIRE BASKET OR THE TOP PNO HORIZONTAL RINGS. WHICHEVER IS GREATER. ALSO REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND NAILS FROM THE TOP 1/2 OF THE BALL REMOVE ALL TWINE - 5. PLUMB TREE TRUNK AND BACKFILL WITH THE BACKFILL SOIL SPECIFIED. 6 WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL VOIDS. 7, WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS. 8. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE CLEAR MULCH 3" FROM TREE TRUNK. PLANTING DETAILS FOR ISOLATED 3 X BALL DIAMETER CONTAINER STOCK TREE PAINTING: PLANTING PLAN: WATERING GUIDELINES: FINISHED GRADE 1. MAINTAIN MOIST ROOTS UNTIL PLANTING 2. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE 3. ONLY PRUNE BRANCHES IF BROKEN DURING INSTALLATION. 4. SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL INSTALL PLANT SO THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOT FLARE IS AT, OR SUGHTLY ABOVE, THE FINISHED GRADE. SPREAD ROOTS OUT EVENLY. 5. PLUMB TRUNK AND IMMEDIATELY BACKFILL WITH THE BACKF1LL SOIL SPECIFIED. 6. WATER TO SETTLE PLANTS AND FILL VOIDS. 7. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS 8. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. CLEAR MULCH 3' FROM TREE TRUNK. PLANTING LOCATIONS SUBSIDENCE OR DETERIORATION OF MULCH THROUGHOUT THE CONTRACT 15 ACCEPTABLE TO THE EXTENT THAT THE MULCH DEPTH IS MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES AT ALL TIMES AND UPON FINAL ACCEPTANCE. REPLACEMENT MULCH SHALL BE REOUIRED TO PROVIDE THE MINIMUM MULCH DEPTH SPECIFIED WHEN SUBSIDENCE OR LOSS 15 EXCESSIVE OR WHEN THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS HAVE CONTAMINATED THE MULCH WITH SOIL TYPE OF PLANT X CENTER OF PLANT TO MULCH LINE X1 EDGE OF BRANCHING TO MULCH LINE Y DEPTH OF MULCH MIN. MAX. Z DEPTH OF MULCH MIN. MAX. EVERGREEN TREES VARIES 3' MIN. 4" 6" 4" 6" DECIDUOUS TREES 3' MIN. N/A 4" 6" 4" 6" EVERGREEN SHRUBS VARIES 3' MIN. PLANT 4' O.C. REGENT SERVICEBERRY DECIDUOUS SHRUBS 3' MIN. N/A #2 CONT. VINES 2' MIN. N/A Rhus aromatica'GroLoW 56 GROUNDCOVERS AND PERENNIALS VARIES 2' MIN. 3" 4" 3" 4" MACHINE - TRANSPLANTED TREES 12" BEYOND EDGE OF HOLE 4" 6" 4" 6" NOTE REMOVE MULCH PLACED TO A DEPTH GREATER THAN THAT SPECIFIED WHEN DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. MULCH PLACEMENT DETAIL PAINT CRABAPPLE LINDENS LOCUSTS, ONLY UNDILUTED EXTERIOR WHITE LATEX PAINT IS ACCEPTABLE. PAINT TREE CIRCUMFERANCE FROM GROUND LINE TO FIRST MAJOR BRANCH. RESPECT STATED DIMENSIONS BEFORE SCALING FROM PLAN. AVERAGE AMOUNT OF WATER PLANT TYPE PER APPLICATION GALLONS MACHINE TRANSPLANTED TREES 42 AND UP BALLED & BURLAPPED TREES BARE ROOT TREES BALLED & BURLAPPED SHRUBS BARE ROOT OR CONTAINER SHRUBS WOODY SEEDLINGS PERENNIALS AND VINES 50 -100 20 15 10 7 4 3 IT 15 THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MONITOR AND MAINTAIN SOIL MOISTURE AT ADEQUATE BUT NOT EXCESSIVE LEVELS. THE ABOVE LISTED APPLICATION AMOUNTS ARE GUIDELINES, NOT REQUIREMENTS. ROOT FLARE BOTTOM OF ROOT FLARE GRAFTED TREE TRUNK /STEM GRAFT UNION (T -BUD) SWELLING ADVENTITOUS ROOTS (MAY BE VISIBLE) FINISHED SOIL ELEVATION PLANTING DEPTH DETAIL TREE ROOT FLARE MAIN ORDER) LATERAL ROOTS FINE FEEDER ROOTS NOTES: INSTALL PLANTS PLUMB AND SO AFTER BACKFILUNG, THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOT FLARE (TREES) IS OUT OF THE SOIL ELEVATION. 7' ROLLED STEEL POST Mn/DOT 3403 OR APPRO O EQUAL 16" LONG POLYPROPYLENE OR POLYETHYLENE 40 MIL 1.5" WIDE STRAPS. ATTACH WITH 10 go WIRE MULCH FINISHED GRADE NOTES: 1. STEEL POSTS TO BE NOTCHED OR DRILLED TO RETAIN GUY WIRES. PLACE OUTSIDE OF ROOT BALL DRIVE PLUMB REGARDLESS OF 2. GROUND REQUESTS TO ESTS SUBSTITUTE RUBBER VVEEpp HOSE AND VARE GUYING 3. SYSTEMS STAKING IS BE APPROVED. UNLESS SPECIFIED OR pNLECESSARY OR WIND CONDITIONS ARE PLUMB PBLEM, ORN45MREQUESTED BY IHE4 4. E REMOVE AFTER ONE YEAR. TREE STAKING DETAIL H: \Civil \047 \4443 \Phose 2 \Plan \Landscope— Detoils.dwg EAGLE BROOK CHURCH PHASE 2 PLANT SCHEDULE KEY COMMON/BOTANICAL NAME QTY SIZE ROOT REMARKS DECIDUOUS SHRUBS AA Amalenchier alnifolia 'Regent' 75 #2 CONT. PLANT 4' O.C. REGENT SERVICEBERRY CS Comus sedcea isanti' 125 #2 CONT. PLANT 4' O.C. - ISANTI DOGWOOD RA Rhus aromatica'GroLoW 56 #2 CONT. PLANT4' O.C. GROW LOW SUMAC PERENNIALS AND GRASSES RG1 846 TOTAL PLANT 24" O.C. RANDOMLY WITHIN GROUPING Agastache foeniculum FRAGRANT GIANT HYSSOP 169 4" CONT. 20% Iris versicolor — - BLUE FLAG IRIS 212 4" CONT. 25% Lobelia cardinalis CARDINAL ARDINAL FLOWER 4" CONT. 10% Sorghastrum nutans - — -- INDIAN GRASS 169 4" CONT. 20% Uatris pycnostachya - -------- - -- --- - -._- ___ _...._ _ __ PRAIRIE BLAZINGSTAR 85 4" CONT. 10% Heliopsis helianthoides --- _-_ -__ _._ COMMON OXEYE 127 4" CONT. 15% RG2 1052 TOTAL PLANT 24" O.C. RANDOMLY WITHIN GROUPING Butterfly Milkweed 158 4" CONT. 15% ASCLEPIAS TUBEROSA Liatris spicata 'Kobold' 210 4" CONT. 20% KOBOLD BLAZINGSTAR Asternovaeangliae Purple Dome' 105 4" CONT. 10% PURPLE DOME ASTER Schizachyrium scoparium 210 4" CONT. 20 °h LITTLE BLUESTEM Rudbeckia fulgida 'Goldstuml' 263 4" CONT. 25% GOLDSTURM BLACK -EYED SUSAN Zizia aurea_ 105 4" CONT. 10% GOLDEN ALEXANDERS BS Rudbeckia hirta 'Goldsturm' 184 4" CONT. PLANT 16" ON CENTER GOLDSTURM BLACK -EYED SUSAN EP Eupatodum purpureum Little Joe' 182 #1 CONT. PLANT 24" ON CENTER LITTLE JOE PYE WEED IC Ids subinca 'Caesars Brother 121 #1 CONT. PLANT 18" ON CENTER CAESAR'S BROTHER IRIS SP Spombolus heterolepis PRAIRIE DROPSEED GRASS 916 #1 CONT. PLANT 18" ON CENTER II�;J ,fit 2,2z S EAGLE BROOK CHURCH LINO LAKES CAMPUS PARKING EXPANSION CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SRF CONSULTING GROUP. INC. Suite 150 One Carlson Parkway Minneapolis. MN 55447 Tel. 763 - 475 -0010 Fax. 763- 475 -2429 °.resetba 1 he".y lathy that Mb Na . p..pe.Nm ar 'apart •• peep.. try • m - act pavan.= s that 1 — • Chap U .4 Pr....a Caghboar aim, uw law . the State }m•J0YFRKT N. TYZYSON ey.4.. era 06/12/08 � )1. 42782 REVISJONS NO. DATE BY t]1KD APPR DAIS 06-12 -2009 Conn. NO. 0096799 PLANTING DETAILS SHEET L101 SHEET 9 OF 9 Permit Application Number Permit Applicant Name: Applicant Mark Barton Eagle Brook Church 7015 201" Avenue N. Centerville, MN 55038 Ph: 651 -429 -9227 Fx: mark barton©eaglebrookchurch.com 09 -048 Eagle Brook Church — Parking Lot Expansion Consultant Walter Eshenaur, P.E. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. One Carlson Parkway N., Suite 150 Minneapolis MN, 55447 Ph: 763- 249 -6719 Fx: 763- 475 -2429 weshenaur@sriconsulting.com Project Name: Eagle Brook Church — Parking Lot Expansion Purpose: LD (Land Development) — Expansion of a bituminous parking lot. Site Size: 90± acres, 1.75± acres of new impervious Location: 7775 20th Avenue N., Lino Lakes T -R -S: SE Y4 Section 11, T31 N, R32W District Rule: C, D, RMP -3 Recommendations: CAPROC It is recommended that this Permit Application be given Conditional Approval Pending Receipt of Changes (CAPROC) and outstanding items related to the following items. RMP -3 1. The applicant must provide a recorded covenant for the upland conservation area to meet the volume reduce requirement of least 0.5- inches of runoff over the new impervious area on -site as described in RMP -3 8(c) and subject to the conditions in RMP -3 9(b)(ii). 2. The applicant must provide a draft declaration that prohibits plowed snow storage in a location from which runoff will be conveyed without adequate pretreatment or sheet flow directly into a wetland within the RMP area according to RMP -3 B(e). 3. The applicant must record a declaration establishing a vegetated wetland buffer adjacent to the delineated edge of the final Wetland Preservation Corridor and other wetland buffer and upland habitat approved as part of a permit under Rule RMP -3 7(a). 4. The applicant must submit a vegetation management plan for the vegetated buffer per RMP -3 7(d). 5. The applicant must provide an easement, in a form acceptable to the District, granting the District the authority to monitor, modify and maintain hydrologic and vegetative conditions within the WPC wetland and upland buffer or habitat area adjacent to the WPC wetland per RMP-3 11. Administrative Houston Engineering Inc. Page 1 of 4 7/16/2009 RCWD Permit Number 09 -048 6. The applicant must submit a draft legal document providing satisfactory form and description granting ponding and flowage easements over all onsite ponds, wetlands, and other hydrologic features if the municipality with jurisdiction requires such an easement 7. The applicant must submit a Draft Declaration for Maintenance of Stormwater Management Facilities acceptable to District engineer and attomey for proposed onsite stormwater management features. 8. The applicant must submit a copy of receipt from County Recorder and signed /notarized legal document(s). 9. The applicant must submit a cash surety in the amount of $1,500. Stipulations: The permit will be issued with the following stipulations as conditions of the permit By accepting the permit, applicant agrees to these stipulations 1. An as -built survey of all stormwater BMPs (ponds, rain gardens, trenches, swales, etc.) is to be submitted to the District for verification of compliance with the approved plans before return of the surety. Exhibits: 1. Wetland Delineation Report by Westwood Professional Services dated August 2001 and received 8 -27 -2001. (RWCD File #03 -073) 2. RCWD letter dated 11 -14 -2001 approving wetland delineation. (RCWD File #03 -073) • 3. RCWD permit application dated 6-12 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 4. Project Plan Set (Cover Sheet, Alignment Plan and Tabulation, Construction Plan, Grading and Strom Sewer Plan, Signing Striping and Lighting Plan, Construction Details (2 sheets), Planting Plan, Planting Details) dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 5. Project Narrative dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 6. CD submittal dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6-12 -2009. 7. Drainage and Infiltration Map dated 6-4 -2003 and received 6 -12 -2009. 8. Proposed Drainage Areas dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 9. Site Photos dated 6 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 10. Geotechnical Evaluation Report dated 8-8 -2002 and received 6 -12 -2009. 11. RCWD Better Site Design Techniques Worksheet dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6-12 -2009. 12. HydroCAD models dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 6 -12 -2009. 13. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan dated May 2009 and received 6-12 -2009. 14. Record of Meeting on 6 -30 -2009 by SRF dated 6 -30 -2009 and received 6 -30 -2009. 15. Response to Draft Engineer's Report dated 7 -2 -2009 and received 7 -2 -2009. Houston Engineering Inc Page 2 of 4 7/16/2009 • RCWD Permit Number 09 -048 16. HydroCAD Model Results dated 7 -1 -2009 and received 7 -2 -2009. 17. Upland Forest Floristic Assessment dated 7 -1 -2009 and received 7 -2 -2009. 18. Existing Conservation Easement Description dated 4 -23 -2004 and received 7 -2 -2009. 19. Existing Conservation Easement Map dated 6 -30 -2009 and received 7 -2 -2009. 20. Preliminary Plat for Eagle Brook Addition dated 10 -10 -2003 and received 7 -2 -2009. 21. Project Plan Set (Cover Sheet, Alignment Plan and Tabulation, Construction Plan, Grading and Strom Sewer Plan, Signing Striping and Lighting Plan, Construction Details (2 sheets), Planting Plan, Planting Details) dated 6 -12 -2009 and received 7 -2 -2009 22. Anoka County Conservation Easement Receipt of Recordings for Conservation Easement and Ponding and Flowage Easement dated 6-16 -2004 and received 7 -7 -2009. Findings: 1. Description — The 90± acre site is located in Lino Lakes. The applicant proposes to expand the existing parking facilities by 1.75± acres. The initial development of the site created 15± acres of impervious and was originally permitted in 2003. The site lies within RMP -3. 2. Stormwater — The project is located within RMP -3 and subject to the stormwater rules in Section 8. The rule requires the retention of runoff from a 2.3 -inch rainfall by infiltration practices if possible. If infiltration is not feasible the requirement must be met by bio- filtration or two -cell wetland treatment systems. RMP -3 also requires volume control for an additional 0.5- inches of runoff by measures specified by the following measures in 8(c): reestablishment of effectively drained wetlands and floodplain meadows, upland restoration /conservation, restoration of degraded wetlands, impervious disconnection, soil amendments /tilling. This requirement is subject to the conditions in RMP -3 9. The applicant proposes to provide an area of upland conservation located over an existing conservation easement in the southwest corner of the site. The existing conservation easement was voluntarily given to the RCWD in 2004 at the time of original site development to protect the natural resources and not to meet a requirement of the RCWD. According to RMP -3 9(b)(ii), upland restoration/conservation consists of high quality upland areas with a Natural Heritage ranking of "C" or better or restoration of Native Prairie, Woodlands or Forests. An assessment of the upland area Natural Heritage ranking provided by the applicant states that the proposed conservation area is a "C" ranking. According to Table in RMP -3, 0.85' of depth over the area will be given towards meeting the 0.5" volume requirement when using upland conservation. This results in a required conservation area of 1.05 acres. The applicant is proposing to convey 1.05 acres to upland conservation thereby meeting the requirements of RMP -3 8(c)b. The applicant proposes to treat the runoff from the new impervious area created under this permit by two new bio-filtration basins alongside the east and west side of the parking area, and by an existing bio - filtration basin adjacent to the new parking area. The new bio-filtration basins were designed to treat the volume from a 2.3 -inch rainfall meeting the requirements of RMP -3 b(i). Rules C.8(a)(1) and C.8(a)(2) require pretreatment and limit the drawdown time for infiltration basins respectively. The applicant is proposing bio - filtration as the form of treatment is not required to follow the design requirements in Rule C.8(a). However the bio - filtration basins will Houston Engineering Inc Page 3 of 4 7/16/2009 • • RCWD Permit Number 09 -048 have either a sod or vegetated strip around the perimeter of the basin that will serve as pretreatment and the submitted hydrologic calculations show that the 2.3 -inch rainfall event will drawdown within 48 hours. A RCWD Better Site Design worksheet has been provided by the applicant addressing the techniques of Better Site Design complying with RMP -3 8(b). The applicant has provided rate control analysis for the existing and proposed conditions. The submitted hydrologic modeling provides verification of compliance with Rule C.6. 3. Wetlands — The proposed project does not impact any wetlands. The wetlands of the site were delineated and approved under the previous project RCWD File # 03 -073. RCWD staff find the original delineation represents the wetlands of the site. The parcel is located in the landscape level Wetland Preservation Corridor and was further delineated at the site level. The applicant must record a declaration establishing the vegetated buffer and final Wetland Preservation Corridor and other wetland buffer and upland habitat as a part of a permit. The applicant must provide a vegetation management plan for District approval of the buffer area. 4. Floodplain — The proposed project does not impact the regulatory floodplain. 5. Erosion Control — The project proposes 3 methods of erosion and sediment control. They include silt fence, routine street sweeping, and rock construction entrance. These methods comply with RCWD standards. An NPDES Permit is required due to the disturbance of greater than 1 acre of land. As noted in the Recommendations Section, the applicant must identify the use of inlet protection on the plans. 6. Documenting Easements and Maintenance Obligations — Applicant needs to provide drainage and flowage easements, draft maintenance declaration, and receipt showing recordation once approved. 7. Previous Permit Information — Permit 03 -073 approved the existing site development. The permit approved the stormwater treatment. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was done at that time and included the current expansion proposal in the initial plans found in the EAW. The permit also involved the realignment of Anoka County Ditch 72 Branch 1. An easement was provided over the realigned section of the ditch. The applicant also provided a 14± acre conservation easement to the District I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota. Brent Johnson MN Reg. No 20378 oseph Lewis MN Reg. No 46215 r7 4, -Lo Houston Engineering Inc Page 4 of 4 7/16/2009 • 4_ fir} -c (4(1,t 2 wJ / 0 RMP -3 CAPROC Issues For Eaglebrook Church Parking Lot Expansion Project 2009 8(c) In addition to the BMPs required under 8(b), volume control measures are required reducing runoff by at least the volume from 0.5- inches of rainfall over impervious surfaces on the site (0.5 -inch multiplied by impervious area). Volume reduction required under this paragraph may be achieved only by the following measures: Reestablishment of Effectively Drained Wetlands and Floodplain Meadows Upland Restoration /Conservation, Restoration of Degraded Wetlands, Impervious Disconnection, Soil Amendments/Tilling. (See Accompanying table). 8(b) Better Site Design principles will be incorporated and water quantity BMPs (as defined in this Rule) must be incorporated to the following standards: (i) BMP volume must retain the one -year event by providing at least the volume equal to the runoff from a 2.3 -inch, 24 -hour storm over the tributary area within the site under proposed conditions. (1) Infiltration BMPs (see District BMP standard plates and design criteria) are to be incorporated in areas with A & B • hydrologic soil groups. Stormwater from impervious surfaces other than rooftops must be pretreated before discharge to infiltration BMPs, to remove sediment and floatables, or other materials that would restrict the BMP's capacity or contaminate ground water. (2) In the following areas, the volume required by paragraph 8(b)(i) is to be provided by bio- filtration features or two -cell wetland treatment systems (see District standard plates and design criteria): (b) Better Site Design principles will be incorporated and water quantity BMPs (as defined in this Rule) must be incorporated to the following standards: (i) BMP volume must retain the one -year event by providing at least the volume equal to the runoff from a 2.3 -inch, 24 -hour storm over the tributary area within the site under proposed conditions. (1) Infiltration BMPs (see District BMP standard plates and design criteria) are to be incorporated in areas with A & B hydrologic soil groups. Stormwater from impervious surfaces other than rooftops must be pretreated before discharge to infiltration BMPs, to remove sediment and floatables, or other materials that would restrict the BMP's capacity or contaminate ground water. (2) In the following areas, the volume required by paragraph • 8(b)(i) is to be provided by bio- filtration features or two -cell wetland treatment systems (see District standard plates and • • design criteria): (a) Areas of C or D hydrologic soil groups that cannot be routed by a gravity system to onsite A or B hydrologic soil groups; (b) Areas with a groundwater table within three (3) feet of surface, or otherwise at an elevation that poses a threat of groundwater contamination or renders the infiltration BMP ineffective; (c) Areas where soil contamination is present or land use history indicates a likely threat of soil contamination. (a) Areas of C or D hydrologic soil groups that cannot be routed by a gravity system to onsite A or B hydrologic soil groups; (b) Areas with a groundwater table within three (3) feet of surface, or otherwise at an elevation that poses a threat of groundwater contamination or renders the infiltration BMP ineffective; (c) Areas where soil contamination is present or land use history indicates a likely threat of soil contamination. 9(b)(ii) Upland Restoration /Conservation - Conservation of high quality upland areas with a Natural Heritage ranking of "C" or better or restoration of Native Prairie, Woodlands or Forests. (a) Volume credit will be given only for area protected in perpetuity by recorded covenants in favor of the District. (b) Volume credit will be given only for area contiguous with a Wetland Preservation Corridor OR area of at least 0.5 acres not contiguous with the Wetland Preservation Corridor. 8(e) The property owner must record a declaration, or a public owner execute a maintenance agreement, that prohibits plowed snow storage in a location from which runoff will be conveyed without adequate pretreatment (minimum of 25 feet of overland drainage on grassland or other rough vegetated surface to trap flow) or sheet flow directly into a wetland within the RMP area. This requirement does not apply to snow removed from public roadways. 7(c) All buffer required under section 7 must average at least 50 feet in width, measure at least 25 feet at all points, and meet the average width at all points of concentrated inflow. Buffer receiving secondary replacement credit as upland habitat area must be at least two acres in size. • 8(e) The property owner must record a declaration, or a public owner • • • execute a maintenance agreement, that prohibits plowed snow storage in a location from which runoff will be conveyed without adequate pretreatment (minimum of 25 feet of overland drainage on grassland or other rough vegetated surface to trap flow) or sheet flow directly into a wetland within the RMP area. This requirement does not apply to snow removed from public roadways. 7. VEGETATED WETLAND BUFFER AND UPLAND HABITAT AREA. (a) As a condition of permit issuance under this Rule, a property owner must record a declaration in a form approved by the District establishing vegetated buffer area adjacent to the delineated edge of wetland within the final Wetland Preservation Corridor and other wetland buffer and upland habitat approved as part of a permit under this Rule. The declaration must state that on further subdivision of the property, each subdivided lot of record shall meet the monumentation requirement of paragraph 7(b). On public land or right -of -way, in place of a recorded declaration, the public owner may execute a written maintenance agreement with the District. The agreement will state that if the land containing the buffer or upland habitat area is conveyed to a private party, the seller must record a declaration for maintenance in a form approved by the District. 7(d) The buffer or upland habitat area will consist of vegetated land, primarily plant species native to this region, that is not cultivated; cropped; pastured; mowed; fertilized; used as a site for depositing snow removed from roads, driveways or parking lots; subject to the placement of mulch or yard waste; or otherwise disturbed, except for periodic cutting or burning that promotes the health of the buffer or upland habitat area, actions to address disease or invasive species, or other actions to maintain or improve buffer or habitat area quality, each as approved in writing by District staff. The application must include a vegetation management plan for District approval. For public road authorities and stormwater system maintenance, the terms of this subsection will be modified as necessary to accommodate safety and maintenance feasibility needs. 11. EASEMENT. As a condition of permit issuance, the property owner must convey to the District and record, in a form acceptable to the District, a perpetual, assignable easement granting the District the authority to monitor, modify and maintain hydrologic and vegetative conditions within WPC wetland and upland buffer or habitat area adjacent to WPC wetland, including the authority to install and maintain structures within those areas and reasonable access to those areas to perform authorized activity. The WPC shall be identified and delineated as part of the recorded easement. 9. VOLUME CREDITS AND BANKING. An applicant may receive credit from the • District for stormwater volume reduction measures that provide more attenuation than required under this Rule. The volume reduction measures must be included in the project design and the application must include a statement of intent to generate excess credits. Measures receiving credit will be protected in perpetuity by recorded covenants on a form approved by the District. Credits may be used to meet the requirements of paragraphs 8(a) and (b) of this Rule. The District will maintain credit and credit transaction records, but credit transactions will be arranged by the interested parties. For District purposes, a volume credit is the property of the owner of the land on which the credit was created and may be conveyed only to meet a present obligation under this Rule. The following will be used to determine credits for volume reduction measures: (a) Banked volume credits may be applied to meet volume control requirements elsewhere within the RMP -3 area. Volume credits created in excess of the requirement of paragraph 8(c) are bankable only for Reestablishment of Effectively Drained Wetlands and Floodplain Meadows, Upland Restoration /Conservation, and Restoration of Degraded Wetlands as listed under paragraph 8(c). The District will administer the accumulation and sale of credits, but the price for the credits will be established by negotiation between the interested parties. The District will require proof of purchase and will track debits and credits. (b) Conditions for Volume Credits The following restoration activities qualify for volume credits, pursuant to a design approved by the District: • (i) Reestablishment of Effectively Drained Wetlands — Restoring hydrology and native vegetation to an effectively drained wetland. (a) The wetland must be in hydric soils. (b) The wetland area receiving credit must be fully vegetated. Credit will be given for the emergent vegetated part of a restored wetland based on the approved restoration plan design. (c) Reestablished wetland area must be protected in perpetuity by means of recorded covenants. (d) Soil excavation /alteration activity that results in a final surface elevation at or below the groundwater table is not eligible for credit. (e) Wetland treatment systems required to meet paragraph 8(b)(i) do not qualify for this credit. (f) Conservation easement is required over reestablished wetland area. (ii) Upland Restoration /Conservation - Conservation of high quality upland areas with a Natural Heritage ranking of "C" or better or restoration of Native Prairie, Woodlands or Forests. (a) Volume credit will be given only for area protected in perpetuity by recorded covenants in favor of the District. (b) Volume credit will be given only for area contiguous with a Wetland Preservation Corridor OR area of at least 0.5 acres not contiguous with the Wetland Preservation Corridor. 411 (c) Volume credit will be given only for buffer area in excess of the minimum requirements of paragraph 7(c). (iii) Restoration of Degraded Wetland — Restoring hydrology and native vegetative cover to a partially drained wetland. (a) No excavation is permitted; limited scraping is allowed. (b) No credit will be given for open water wetland. (c) Wetland treatment systems required to meet paragraph 8(b)(i) do not qualify for this credit. (iv) Impervious Disconnection — Spreading of runoff from small parking lots, courtyards, driveways, sidewalks and other impervious surfaces into adjacent pervious areas where it is filtered or infiltrated to promote volume reduction. (a)The contributing flow path from impervious cover must not exceed 75 feet. (b) In all cases, the disconnection length must exceed the contributing flow path. (c) Pervious area used for disconnection must have a slope no greater than five percent. (d) The total surface impervious area contributing to a single discharge point shall not exceed 1,000 ft2 and shall drain continuously through a pervious filter strip until it reaches the property line or drainage swale. (e) Soil tilling to restore infiltration potential is required to restore porosity in graded /disturbed areas that will contribute to runoff connection length. (f) Impervious disconnection and credit values must comply with District standard plates and design criteria. (v) Soil Compaction Mitigation — Upland areas protected from grading during construction, tilling of permeable soils compacted during construction, or amending and tilling of low- permeability soils compacted during construction. (a) This credit may be combined with the impervious disconnection credit. (b) Soil Compaction Mitigation must comply with District standard plates and design criteria. (c) The District must be contacted 48 -hours prior to soil compaction mitigation activities for verification of compliance • AGENDA ITEM 6A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson DATE: July 29, 2009 TOPIC: Goals Discussion I have attached copies of the last two years goals for the Lino Lakes Environmental Board. I thought this might be a good time to look at what we have done and how we are doing now. As part of this I would like to revisit the 2008 Garden Club Goal and discuss the Met Council Article (also attached). • • • Council Member adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 09-06 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD GOALS FOR 2009 WHEREAS, The City of Lino Lakes has an established Environmental Board, AND WHEREAS, ; The purpose of the Environmental Board is to provide aid and advice to the council in its efforts to encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between people and their environment ; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and stimulate the health and welfare of people; to enrich the understanding of ecological systems and natural resources important to the city; to advise the City in the use and management of its natural resources in order to preserve and enhance the environmental amenities for present and future residents, and to ensure a lasting quality of life within the city, • AND WHEREAS: The Environmental Board approved the following 2009 goals at their December 17, 2008 meeting: Proposed 2009 Goals • Promote environmental stewardship with the citizens of Lino Lakes by communicating environmental initiatives in the city using various means of communication such as: • City WebPages • Newsletter Spring- February 23rd Summer -May 26th Fall- August 10 Winter- November 6 • homeowners association meetings • the information kiosk • press coverage • Earth Day (April 18th) • Arbor Day (Maylst) • Recycling Day (May 2nd) • Participate in Blue Heron Days (August 15th), providing public service educational • material to the public. • • Participate in Earth Day (April 18th) activities in the community, promoting environmental awareness and collaboration with other environmental focused organizations. • Monitor any activity in the AUAR as well as other proposed development areas, focusing on the values Lino Lakes citizens have expressed in the vision for our city and the unique ecological aspects of our wetlands, lakes and streams and subsurface waters. Apply mitigation plan as defined for that area. • Perform an evaluation of past Environmental Board recommendations for development projects. Review a sampling of a variety of projects by site visits, discussion with city staff, and landowners, neighbors, on the outcomes of the Boards recommendations. If necessary, submit a summary of significant findings resulting from the review in writing to the Community Development Director. In 2008, the Environmental Board visited the following sites: 1. Legacy of Woods Edge 2. Marshan Meadows 3. Pine Glen 4. Eagle Brook Church Conservation Easement and planting areas 5. Oak Savanna and wetland restoration areas at the Middle School. • Promote conservation development within the City incorporating the Open Space /Trail Plan and Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development within the scope of the new Resources Management Plan, and the Resourcers Management Plan RMP -3 • To meet or exceed our City recycling goal of 50 (1737 tons) percent or greater of our Municipal solid waste. Find innovative ways to promote and encourage recycling as a city. Add recycling materials to kiosk. • Continue to monitor the Heron rookery and water quality in the northern one third of Peltier Lake and to support the protection of resources in that area. • Participate in comp plan and process. • The Lino Lakes Environmental Board passed a motion to endorse and follow the RMP /RMP -3 rule as a guide to the Resources Management Plan and acknowledeged the unique collaboration that it sets between the RCWD and the City as a result of the Resources Management Plan. • Offer a series of conservation workshops for residents through the Anoka County Soil Water Conservation District. The Programs would be as follows: • Shoreland Management -March 30th Landscaping For Wildlife -April 18th Water -Smart Landscaping -April 21St • Rain Gardens -May 2nd • • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: That the 2009 goals of the Lino Lakes Environmental Board be adopted. John Bergeson, Mayor Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 26th day of January, 2009 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • Council Member adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 08-31 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD GOALS FOR 2008 WHEREAS, The City of Lino Lakes has an established Environmental Board, AND WHEREAS, ; The purpose of the Environmental Board is to provide aid and advice to the council in its efforts to encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between people and their environment ; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and stimulate the health and welfare of people; to enrich the understanding of ecological systems and natural resources important to the city; to advise the City in the use and management of its natural resources in order to preserve and enhance the environmental amenities for present and future residents, and to ensure a lasting quality of life within the city, • AND WHEREAS: The Environmental Board approved the following 2008 goals at their February 28, 2008 meeting: • • Promote environmental stewardship with the citizens of Lino Lakes by: A. Communicating environmental initiatives in the city using various means of communication, i.e., City WebPages, newsletter, homeowner's association meetings, the information kiosk, and press coverage. Pursue providing articles and information to the local media. Inform the Citizens of Lino Lakes about the National Wildlife Federation opportunities for involvement in Backyard Wildlife habitat. • Participate in Blue Heron Days, providing educational material to the public. • Participate in Earth Day activities in the community, promoting environmental awareness and collaboration with other environmental focused organizations. • Monitor all activity in the 35E and 35W corridor as well as other proposed development areas, focusing on the values Lino Lakes citizens have expressed in the vision for our city and the unique ecological aspects of our wetlands, lakes and streams and subsurface waters. Apply mitigation plan as defined for that area. • • Perform an evaluation of past Environmental Board recommendations for development projects. Review a sampling of a variety of projects by site visits, discussion with city staff, and landowners, neighbors, on the outcomes of the Boards recommendations. Submit a summary of significant findings resulting from the review in writing to the Community Development Director and then forward report to city council. • Promote conservation development within the City incorporating the Open Space /Trail Plan, Resource Management Plan, Stormwater Management Plan, Comp Plan and Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development., Stormwater Management Plan, and Comprehensive Plan. • To meet or exceed our City recycling goal of 50 percent or greater of our Municipal solid waste. Find innovative ways to promote and encourage recycling as a city. Add recycling materials to kiosk. • Continue to monitor the Heron rookery and water quality in the northern one third of Peltier Lake and to support the protection of resources in that area. • Participate in comp plan and process, as well as become a partner with Rice Creek Watershed District in Implementing the Resource management Plan. • Participate in school nature area and pursue connectivity and networking between • schools and community with regard to the nature areas • Review Conservation Developments for conformance to yearly Conservation Easement work. • Support the start up of the Lino Lakes Garden Club. • Continue to support the Stream Health Evaluation Program (SHEP). • Establish a list of City Environmental Projects for Volunteers. • Initiate involvement with the city as a partner to Rice Creek Watershed District's Blue Thumb Program. • • • • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: That the 2008 goals of the Lino Lakes Environmental Board be adopted. John Bergeson, Mayor Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this th day of , 2008. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • : data.center @metc.state.mn.us . 1t Met 390 N. 1 Cities can support local gardens Interest in community gardens, urban agriculture and farmers markets is growing sky -high as people are becoming more concerned about how their food is grown, reduc- ing their carbon footprint, lowering their food costs and eating more healthfully. Take the City of Hopkins. Before this year, they had never sold all the plots in a City-run commu- nity garden located in one of their parks, according to Kersten Elverum, the City's community development director. This year, all the plots were taken in two days. Gardening Matters is a Minneapolis -based nonprofit that provides resources for individuals, groups and communities seeking to start and support commu- nity gardens. Executive Director Kirsten Saylor said they received more requests in the first three months of 2009 from people interested in joining a community garden than in all of 2008. The City of Minneapolis is addressing the issue of building a strong local food system through a project called Homegrown Min- neapolis. City officials, ]anna Schneider, Minneapolis, waters her heavily mulched garden plot at Soo Line Community Garden. community organizations and residents worked for more than six months to craft recommendations for consideration by the city council in late June. What cities can do. Saylor and other experts say that local government can do a lot to support the formation and success of community gardens and other urban agriculture. "Making land more accessi- ble, providing soil testing and access to water - these are just a few of the ways that cities and counties can support community garden- ing," Saylor said. Her organization has a set of recommendations, accessi- ble at www.gardeningmatters.org/ Resources /govtpdf. Community benefits. The benefits of community gardens and other local food sources are many, not the least of which is vastly reducing the number of miles food has to travel to get from farm to table. Community gardens also provide education, bridge age and ethnic differences, produce high - quality food and have been shown to increase property values. They can also lower family food bills and provide exercise for Tess mobile people.