The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-037 Council Resolution01 -37 Council Membe S ht. introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 01-37 RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION ON APOLLO DRIVE TO PROVIDE A SITE FOR SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION WHEREAS, Summit Fire Protection and Ryan Companies submitted an application for a minor subdivision of property within the City of Lino Lakes, and WHEREAS, the application included a Sketch and Description prepared by Metro Land Surveying, dated January 1, 2001 and received by the City January 16, 2001, and WHEREAS, the application meets the subdivision requirements of the Lino Lakes subdivision and zoning ordinances, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Lino Lakes approves the • minor subdivision to create the following parcels as described on the Sketch and Description: • (attach legal descriptions) Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this /9 . day ofij(12001 R, -C ' el Gaustad, CMC, Clerk/Treasurer Johii/J. Be eson a or Y The motion for ado ion of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member /Ch- and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same:4)01 _ Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. • • • AGENDA ITEM 7 D and 7 E STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jason Lindahl /Alan Brixius (NAC) CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 12, 2001 TOPIC: Resolution 01 -37 for Minor Subdivision and Resolution 01 -38 for Site & Building Plan Review Ryan Companies for Summit Fire Protection 2xx Apollo Road BACKGROUND The applicant, Ryan Companies on behalf of Summit Fire Protection, is requesting minor subdivision and site plan approval to allow the construction of a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse facility on the property located in the 200 block of Apollo Road. The site plan also illustrates a 22,800 square foot future expansion and parking for this expansion. Should the applicant wish to construct this expansion in the future, they will need to receive separate approvals. Summit Fire Protection was started in 1999. According to the company's biographic information, they design, manufacture, install, and service fire suppression systems. The company has approximately 80 employees with facilities in Savage, Roseville, Rochester, and Fargo, N.D. This facility will consolidate their Savage and Roseville operations. This review is based on the following plan submittals: Site Plan dated 1 -12 -2001 Utility Plan received by the City on 3 -2 -2001 Grading Plan received by the City on 3 -2 -2001 Preliminary Landscape Plan dated 1 -11 -2001 Proposed Floor Plan dated 12 -2001 Proposed Building Elevations dated 1 -12 -2001 Sketch and Description Plan dated 1 -12 -2001 Photometric Plan dated 2 -13 -2001 • • Summit Fire Protection Page 2 of 5 ANALYSIS Land Use and Zoning: The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the subject property for Industrial Use. The site's L -I, Light Industrial zoning classification is consistent with this land use designation. The chart below illustrates the surrounding existing and proposed land uses. Land Use and Zoning Data Location Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use Zoning Site Undeveloped Industrial L -I, Light Industrial North Undeveloped Industrial L -I, Light Industrial South Apollo Dr. and I -35 Apollo Dr. and I -35 L -I, Light Industrial East Industrial Industrial L -I, Light Industrial West Low & Med. Density Residential Low & Med. Density Residential R, R -1, and R -3PDO Lot Size and Setbacks: The lot and building performance standards for properties in the L -I, Light Industrial District are outlined in the chart below. The proposed lot, parking and building meet all of these standards Lot and Building Performance Standards Item Required Proposed Lot size minimum 1 Acre 4.92 Acres Lot width minimum 100 Feet 315 Feet Setbacks: buildings from street rear lot line side lot line residential parking from street rear lot line side lot line 50 Feet 15 Feet 10 Feet 75 Feet 15 feet 5 feet 5 Feet 135 Feet 39 Feet 41 Feet 240 Feet 39 Feet 5 Feet 53 Feet Bldg. height 45 Feet 16 to 28 Feet Green space 10% 62.3 Building: The applicant is proposing to construct a 30,076 square foot office/ warehouse facility. The building is considered one story; however, the office and warehouse portions will have different heights. The office section will be 16 feet high while the warehouse portion will be 28 high. Both of these heights conform to the 45- foot height limit for buildings in the L -I District. The site plan also shows a 22,800 square foot future expansion along with future parking, which will be subject to further review in the future. The buildings exterior materials conform to the standards in Section 3, Subdivision 4.B of the City Code. The warehouse portion of the building will be constructed of pre -cast concrete panels with a painted band. The office portion of the building will be constructed of a mix of pre -cast concrete panels, rockface masonry veneer, and aluminum • • • Summit Fire Protection Page 3 of 5 framed glass windows. The office section will also have pre - finished metal canopies over all entrances. Trash Enclosure: The applicant's plans indicate that all trash and recycling containers will be stored inside the principal structure. Lighting: The applicant's photometric plan is consistent with the lighting standards outlined in the City Code. In addition, the site plan shows shoebox light fixtures both on the building and in the parking area. Staff recommends that a condition of approval require that, prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant submit a detailed light fixture plan demonstrating that all exterior lighting will be shoebox type. Signage: Signage is governed by the City's sign ordinance and separate permits are required for all signs. All signs will be reviewed with the sign permit applications. Landscaping: The applicant's landscape plan presents a varying mix of coniferous and deciduous plants, trees, and shrubs. Most notably, the applicant's plan calls for a native mixture of prairie grasses and wild flowers throughout the site. Typical turf grass will only be used along the front of the building. The prairie mix can grow as high a five feet and will have a very natural appearance. The applicant must submit a maintenance plan for the native prairie grasses. During the February 13 Planning and Zoning Board meeting, the Board had some questions about the need for periodic burning of the native prairie grasses. The Board requested comments regarding this issue from the City's Fire Chief. According to a memo from the Chief dated February 15, 2001, he is very concerned about burning the prairie grass (see attached memo). The Board also directed the Environmental Specialist and the Environmental Board to research whether there are other types of prairie grass that do not require burning. This issue was discussed at the February 28 Environmental Board meeting (see report dated February 28, 2001). Staff recommends that a condition of approval require staff and the applicant to agree on any necessary changes to the landscape plan prior to issuance of a building permit. In general, the other trees and shrubs shown on the landscape plan should provide an effective screening of the front of the building and loading areas. However, the applicant should add screening along the western side of the site to screen the loading areas from the adjacent residential use. In addition, should the applicant decide to construct the future parking stalls along the western side of the site, they will need to add landscaping to screen it from the adjacent residential use. • Summit Fire Protection Page 4 of 5 Utilities: According to the applicant, sanitary sewer and water service will come from the existing sewer and water mains constructed as part of the Marmon/Keystone site to the east. Water access will be stubbed across Apollo Court and split to serve both the Summit Fire Protection site and the parcel to the north. Stormwater runoff from the subject property will be stored and treated on site. The City Engineer has review the Grading and Utility Plans (see attached memo). Parking: The standards for calculating the off - street parking requirements for office and warehouse uses are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code. For the purposes of calculating parking spaces, the ordinance requirement is to use 90% of the gross building area. As shown in the table above, the total number of required off - street parking stalls for this property is 55. The applicant's plan calls for 48 stalls and another 27 future stalls. If the proposed addition were constructed, it would need 10 additional stalls (22,800 X 90 percent = 20,520 and 20,520 / 2,000 = 10 stalls). Together, the proposed and future parking exceeds the total number of off - street parking stalls required by the ordinance. Roads, Access, Circulation. The standards for access and traffic circulation are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code and illustrated in the chart below. The subject property meets all of the requirements of this section. Access and Traffic Circulation Data Gross Area 90% of Gross Area Code Requirement Required Spaces Office 9,636 Sq. Ft. 8,672 Sq. Ft. 3 +1/200 Sq. Ft. 46 Warehouse 20,440 Sq. Ft. 18,396 Sq. Ft. 1/2000 sq. Ft. 9 TOTAL 30,076 27,068 Sq. Ft. N/A 55 As shown in the table above, the total number of required off - street parking stalls for this property is 55. The applicant's plan calls for 48 stalls and another 27 future stalls. If the proposed addition were constructed, it would need 10 additional stalls (22,800 X 90 percent = 20,520 and 20,520 / 2,000 = 10 stalls). Together, the proposed and future parking exceeds the total number of off - street parking stalls required by the ordinance. Roads, Access, Circulation. The standards for access and traffic circulation are outlined in Section 3, Subdivision 5 of the City Code and illustrated in the chart below. The subject property meets all of the requirements of this section. Access and Traffic Circulation Data Item Required Standard Proposed Standard Status Curbing Perimeter curbing Perimeter curbing Compliant Curb Opening 26 feet* 32 feet Compliant Curb Spacing 30 feet from intersection 61 feet from intersection Compliant Access Drive 24 feet 27 and 24 feet Compliant Stall Width 9 feet 9 feet Compliant Stall Depth 18 feet 18 feet Compliant *Measured at ROW line. May exceed with approval of City Engineer. The applicant's plans indicate that they will construct Apollo Court as part of this development. The right -of -way for Apollo Court is labeled as parcel H on their Sketch and Description Plan. This land must be dedicated to the City and Apollo Court must be constructed to City standards. All plans for Apollo Court are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Easements: The plans should show the necessary drainage, ponding, and utilities easements called for by the City Engineer. • • • Summit Fire Protection Page 5 of 5 Park Dedication Section 1001.14, Subdivision 4 states that the park dedication requirement for low labor intensive industrial uses shall be equal to $133 for each 1,000 square feet of proposed building. As a result, the applicant shall pay a cash park dedication fee of $4,000.10 (30,076 sq. ft. / 1000 = 30.076. 30.076 X $133 = $4,000.10). This fee must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. An additional park dedication fee will be required should the applicant construct the proposed expansion. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTION The Environmental Board reviewed the project on January 31, 2001 and on February 28, 2001. Their comments and recommendation are attached. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed this application at their February 13, 2001 meeting and they recommend approval of the minor subdivision and site plan to allow the construction a 30,076 square foot office /warehouse facility. This recommendation is based on the findings contained in this report and subject to the conditions listed below. 1. Maintain the perimeter curb setback along the northern fire lane at five (5) feet. 2. Store all trash and recycling material within the principal structure or apply for and receive approval for a trash enclosure. 3. Outside storage shall be prohibited without an approved conditional use permit. 4. The applicant shall submit detailed cut sheets of the proposed shoebox exterior lighting fixtures for City review prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Install additional screening along the western side of the site to screen it from the adjacent residential uses. 6. Plans must show all drainage, ponding, and utility easements required by the City Engineer and deeds conveying the easements shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. A maintenance plan for the native plantings must be submitted and is subject to the approval of the Environmental Specialist prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. The comments in the memo by the City Engineer /TKDA dated March 6, 2001 must be addressed to his satisfaction before a building permit is issued. 9. The applicant shall explore a non - burning strain of prairie grass to be used on the site and a revised landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Specialist before a building permit is issued. John Powell trom: Jason C. Wedel [wedel.jc @tkda.com] ent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 4:11 PM To: jlindahl @nacplanning.com Cc: jpowell@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us Subject: comm #11985012 / Summit Fire Protection Jason Lindahl, I have reviewed the revised plans submitted by Metro Land Surveying & Engineering, received on March 2, 2001, and have the following comments: 1. The sanitary sewer pipe material is mislabeled as HDPE on the utility plan. 2. The watermain located at the southeast corner of the proposed building is labeled as an 8" tee and as an 8" 90 degree bend. The 8" 90 degree bend label should be removed. 3. The type of connection to the existing 8" watermain located in Apollo Court must be noted. 4. There are several details included in the plans that do not pertain to this project. All unnecessary details need to be removed from the plans. If you have any questions please give me a call. Jason C. Wedel, P.E. phone: 651/292-4630 fax: 651/292-0083 e -mail: wedel.jc@tkda.com 4111oltz, King, Duvall, Anderson & Assoc., Inc 500 Piper Jaffray Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 -2140 • • MEMORANDUM February 15, 2001 to: Milo Bennet from: Jeff Smyser subject: Prairie Grass Controlled Burning cc: John Powell, Marty Aslesen, Brian Wessel At the February 13 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board, the Board had questions about the need to burn native prairie grass. The question came up during the discussion of the Summit Fire Protection project on Apollo Drive. The Board asked for Fire Dept. comment. (Merely a coincidence that this project — Summit Fire Protection — prompted a formal request for info.) The P & Z requests comment from the Fire Dept. regarding the burning of the prairie grass plantings. This request concerns not only this project, but the burns in general. There have been numerous commercial projects in past months that, based on recommendations from the Environmental Board and Marty, have included native prairie grasses in the landscaping plan. The P & Z has expressed concern about this in the past, but this time they specifically asked for Fire Dept. comment. This project will go to City Council in March, but I would greatly appreciate your comments as soon as possible to allow City staff time to examine the issue further before City Council review. Please address your comments to me and I will pass them on to the City Council and P & Z. Thanks for your help. Please feel free to call with any questions at (651)982 -2425. • Centennial Fire District 7741 Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55014 (651) 784 -7472 - Office (651) 784 -2427 - Fax MEMO DATE: February 21, 2001 TO: Jeff Smyser FROM: Milo Bennett SUBJECT: Prairie Grass Controlled Burning In my opinion, the use of prairie grass definitely creates a problem. We would like to reduce open burning, not increase it. In the spring and fall, the DNR will ask us not to issue open burning permits during the dry conditions. This always seems to be the time that they want to burn this prairie grass. It has been our policy to be uniform with the burning permits. This means that if we can't give a resident a permit, we will not give a company a permit either. This has created some controversy in the past but we will be sticking to that policy. The reason for a burning permit is to dispose of material for which there are no other practical methods of disposal. Leaves and grass clippings cannot be burned because they can be composted. We allow the burning of tree branches and such because there is no practical disposal site for this material. The intentional planting of prairie grass, which has to be burned on some regular basis, is wrong in my opinion. Just think of the problems we would have if we allowed residents to burn their lawns. This was a common practice many years ago but as population grew, it had to be stopped for both safety and pollution reasons. • • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT TRACKING SHEET CITY OF LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL Agenda Item 6B PROJECT #: 21 -11... PROJECT: Prairie Trac DATE OF ORIGIN: TO: Environmental Board Members City of Lino Lakes FROM: Marty Asleson Environmental Coordinator OVERVIEW STATEMENTS: fr, / +..1 %/. • Recommendations are made to incorporate native landscape materials into site designs for new developments. The recommendations for the use of this type of plant material have a scientific basis, and are discussed in the Lino Lakes Environmental Management Plan, Numerous technical papers have been written on this subject. The reasons are simple. Surface water runoff quality improvement by creating buffers to 1. Reduce run -off, 2. Reduce chemical use, 3. Reduce fresh water use all of which have effected the quality of our lakes and groundwater. Other reasons include labor and equipment cost savings to the City when used on public properties, and the aesthetic values that can be achieved. belie • The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the Summit landscape plan and questioned se of native materials. They have asked if there are any native plants that do not have to I* o e All native prairie types of plants adapted to fire. Fire is the best tool to use in any areas that have een invaded by non - native plants (because they have not adapted to fire). According to A Prairie Restoration Handbook For Minnesota Landowners, "If the location of your planting makes it impossible to burn, you can mow and then rake off the cut material to prevent the development of thatch. Mow and rake at the same time you would burn." So the answer is no. The alternative to burning is mowing if it is not physically possible to burn. However, some species may disappear from your planting over time, so one would need to interseed periodically to maintain diversity. Favoring competition (those plants not adapted to fire) gives non - natives an advantage. The same can be seen for most sod areas of the city that have been installed on poorly prepared soils or in areas that are unirrigated. Within a very short period of time they go to weeds, or want to go to weeds and are combatted with huge amounts of herbacides and fertilizers.(that for the most part end up in our lakes) • Mr. Jeff Smyser wrote a letter to Fire Chief Bennett after the last Planning and Zoning Board Meeting. Please find attached. •Chief Bennett responded back to Mr. Smyser. Letter attached. The Environmental Board needs to respond to the concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board. Hapico= &_Psxpsaztov_Boap5 Xtzt oO Atvo Aaxecr *STAFF COMMENTS/ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION: • The benefit cost of prairies (if burned) in relationship to chemical and nutrient poisoning of our lakes and drinking water is not comparable. Although there is not a lot of data on our ground water one can only expect they would reflect some of the chemical compositions found in our lakes. Our Lakes were classified as eutrophic (dead or dying) over 20 years ago. •. The City of Lino Lakes weed ordinance written several years ago specifically addressed the concerns of residents interested in prairie landscapes • The following is from the Environmental Protection Agencys' Document "Green Acres." Fire One of the most common arguments asserted in favor of local weed ordinances is fire prevention. As to natural landscapes this argument is predicated on the unproven contention that tall grass and forb stems, commonly planted as part of a prairie or meadow, constitute a fire hazard. This is not, in fact, true. In New Berlin v. Donald C Hagar, 66 United States Forest Service expert David Seaberg testified that a grass fire can sustain high heat for only twenty seconds. In order to ignite wood and sustain a fire potentially damaging to a home, a grass fire must burn within four feet of the home for seven and a half minutes. Jude Gramling agreed, finding no rational basis for the claim that natural landscapes create a fire hazard.16 According to John Diekelmann, a noted landscape architect and plant ecologist, most prairie or meadow plantings contain a large portion of green leafy material at ground level during most seasons and do not sustain fire.' 68 In short, restoring an area as prairie does not create a fire hazard. Moreover, if fire prevention were the purpose, a rational ordinance would prohibit the accumulation of biomass in a given area were on some index of flammability, not merely undefined weeds. • Fire departments spend large amounts of money fighting wildland fires that could be effectively controlled with periodic burns. • Yes, the business community dues have a preference. They should. The issue of designing with natives in an integrated fashion that is acceptable to our business men and is also resource functional has been accomplished. See attached article "St Jude Medical ". • The touring of sites like St. Jude was listed as an agenda item wish for the February meeting agenda by the Environmental Board at the last meeting. • .... define the following for first option .... Environmental ISSUES: • Defined to some abbreviated degree above • HapKQ &_Pexpearlov_Boap8 Xtii_o0 Aivo Aaxsa Jeff Smyser dirom: Marty Asleson ent: Friday, March 02, 2001 7:40 AM To: Jeff Smyser Subject: RE: Prairie grass burning memo Ok, The report should say that all prairie plants adapted to the prairie environment with fire. So, one will not expect to have as much success without this tool. Some plants will probably be lost and have to be replaced without a burn every 3 or 4 years. If it is not possible to burn native plants every 3 or 4 years, than the alternative is mowing and interseeding at the same times that a burn would be scheduled. I believe it was Milo's position that there is a permit regulation concern, when there exists a weather condition that would prohibit burning, a cultural (resident agreement) concern, or a safety concern in terms of fire and structures. The Chief showed concern for commercial companies obtaining permits from state permit regulators, and asking for permits from the local fire to burn , when residents are unable to obtain a state permit. Are you going to include the Environmental Board Report, or parts of it with this? MA • Original Message From: Jeff Smyser Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 5:11 PM To: Marty Asleson Subject: RE: Prairie grass burning memo The Summit Fire Protection project goes to City Council March 12, with the report finished March 7. A condition of approval added by the P & Z was to find out if there is a prairie grass that doesn't need burning and get Milo's comments. We have Milo's comments. What should the City Council report say about the not - need - burning question? NAC is waiting to know what to put in the report. Original Message From: Marty Asleson Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:17 PM To: Jeff Smyser Subject: RE: Prairie grass burning memo The Environmental Board asked me to make an appearance at the next P & Z Meeting. I would like to start there with Milo present. I think this is the procedure the Environmental Board wants to follow. If something needs to go to the Council after this I would be happy to do the report. What do you think? Let me know. MA Original Message From: Jeff Smyser Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 2:14 PM To: Marty Asleson Subject: Prairie grass burning memo Will there be a memo on the Environmental Board's discussion of prairie grass burning? I have your report for the meeting. Do you want another memo in the packet for City Council for the Summit report? If so, we will need it in the next day or two. 1 1▪ 33 i N88•22'57 "S 404.01' sofft Ian 'r d eve S 487400~'.47 RAIMENT CH - - -- -,,33 MARVY STREET ,1 la es 1 b l O1 30 FEA -I t1 _J NORTH UK OF IRE --+ SC4114EAST WARIER ss 561.18' PARCEL G 419.102 649. 6.02 • wa SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION FOR: SUMMIT FIRE MINOR SUBDIVISION AT APOLLO BUSINESS PARK 1188 22'57"E 2277.92' r- et r� b Pat ea EASEMENT 0.4 e'' "e I ism O)6. �Fs P'-;1 a !wan g A 0• �,p /8 r.1 vo ' i1 .4 3 1 !1 a LZ, `713.odl 7'n4 PARCEL E 4 POINT A ' 5ot•s7'o3"e s 17437 Seta / •••••,•• ?V is Ares* • •�'• • =•t •v 5021°, 451 ..:1;''..;• '- 485 o, 59` O•/ g1 . / 9.9 el L O ary0 4, o. 55 `' 10' /. sot.. fi 644}1' 509 4,c# 214.147 6414 2099.84 .5 tis • 12315.33 ®O93Y9211e LAND SURVEYING ! ENGINEERING /452 Rest Comely Sad 4 UUI. Gaud.. MN 3147 ' T•.ph•e.(51)704 -0112 r..(51)706 -0452. 1 -66.11. .0rs.yW news1•eem METRO • DENOTES 3RON MONUMENT FWNO (UNLESS OTHERWISE MARKED) •.DENOTES 010N MONUMENT SET AND MARKED 17763 harsh artily that this stows Ow or room Was lhapwad Dy ma undo m *set •.M • ,I . t 1 aro o duly Lk . aota Land • of - e \ kW. of • e 0,101d A. MWinI Oatc ./fJ_ . 1.1.050. Na 17765 T PARCEL F NO0TNEAST CORNER - - -•, 4.F SOU11IEAST QUARTER • Ault el ea w SmWe.t Oust. M Madan 148 T•6698. 31. New. 22. MW Cagey*. U .1mat• 4sse1. 4 w 465466..09 at w N.aast ever of ••4 Serenest Orer4 Wow. Sam 3 tigress 22 5.41.66 57 meows wax. .".d Marty airy w RH* Re• .7 .W Seuw•x 0.rtar. 2039.64 Net 0'.s• South 1 der. 37 .1488 03 some% test 64437 est Owes South 3 doyen 22 mart. 37 8.81.8 17x1. 71300 feet Wows Soma 1 Owns 37 m9utas 03 ..ewe Cat. 1600 NW .. Daft( to 8. hor.4.Rr Wow as Pabst Y a4 ..e w 6.54 M 1.19.912 W.1.. South S6 m6.... 22 miwt. 57 .new. Wed. 131.5 haft Dean. South 50 dsgrom 20 ..wt. 19 sweaty. Oas4 20159 feat 48 .. S8. 00 Mews 10 .eleuh. 27 sawed, West. 225.00 feet la w Mx 866 of .W 58028...1 Gwt8. Me. South 0 depose 01 ado.. 00 swami Wet. ale., alt list 0...25.00 het b w Nra.8.1017 9. M the Ctty ef Law lain 9191.! -.l-wl) Mx N. 1. Apo. 6... 848.1600 . w recorded wt .net thew N•a.Mtaly 414.02 4.N. 41e.90 s4 Narthw•ey W w alarm • .the- 1.96644 eve .ante... w 11.11.8.1 91A1 • mess ed 799.00 foot. • e.*4 .q. .4 24 derma u newt. 91 .. tands w • we .Nth bars NNW 65 derma 12 ..OUW 43 weeds Costs Wows Nara 50 88/.48 20 WNW. 20 ..credo Ont. 649661 b the lost N.a7nd move. 30614 fox . 08 0tr..et.8.M w Wme..p 48..00 199 b•9lmwep at 6...8x7 M554d Oriel -0'; Wen. South 1 Owree 37 owe.. 03 .848.0. Cat. 3600 Nat these S845stry 156.03 754 .660 • 1.596644 ases ..sew le the NaW.at 1..6. • roan N 235.00 151 w • mewl ay. of 3 dery 02 ...Wes 20 7.a.ed. Meow Sum ]9 degree. 39 ,.6400 31 thaw CY. Wyo. t. w WI 44856.4 wow 70.31 NM to 810 Nath.atay 0. w .4 10. them 8.0.41.46 0.e.4. Werth 39 d.gre. 39 .0064 31 ..w+. W.4 70.31 foot W..4. Nra.at.de 83903 hat We0 • tarme.U6 thaw =we . w N4w.t 19.09 • 1.448..4 23900 Mt w • antral wee ed 3 69.41.. 03 444.8 20 awes.. thews Web 1 owed 37 ..04166 63 ..ands ewe. . Wale. w last 4...454 ammo 3600 fox . Ws 1.91 M begs*. • W ax 4 •1 (O05.q. w 01007 fsemse4) A ,ratty 9•.en.(5 welt *Qwego w salty 011•.7. -. war w mew w !.3.640 sari. 6. P.111 That pot M w SBa.x 0.485 M SwIleo 16 Tows.. 31, Range 22. Mal. Comte 145496• yaw Nob M w Cif el Lbw Laos 6491st- •7-..y vela/ Nth 1 Awns 00M..ewYy le the .84.1..• pe thr4M. 448415. es 456.4* Caareewhg M We Nrwat ewer .5 alt Sm0..4 Osrtr, P.. S8th 3 derma 22 8008 37 ,.caws Met. c.a...4800 dap w North 1w et 844 Soothed 88..48 • 4sh w x 2039.84 feat OHM. Smith 1 .6.w 37 Noe 03 we.. Cat. • elste.. el 64637 Net mow.. Meth 39 d.9r••• 22 ..:saw 37 womb Wad 70.00 t.1 Wow. South 1 der.. 37 .w.. 03 wawa Cast. 1600 look Wee. Sena 5 22 6.04t. 57 sew. e. 131.5 1..88 6..e. South 50 derma 20 Wert. 29 swamis Ike. 20119 Wk thews South 5 dowses 18 mewl. 27 seconds W M. 11190 fat to the ode( of begbmise 0s.e• ces1 .09 South 00 Memo IS 4.048 27 mews Nrl 10602 Met a w 98.l it. M 484 Sauth.est arts: Wm. South 00 dery 01 W.I. 9 we.. Mot. along said Mx 9.9 425.00 1e4 le We Naa.Ytely It. .l w Oly MUM 1... Mpl- el-..y Mal 115 1. Wells 015.41 41.4.4.8 . We 1.6.0.4 pot Wrm& 4'.se Nraaxel7. 36624 SW along alt Nrtlemeoly li• w Mew • M1. -56.554 mow Wow.. w 0.11..1 M499 • ..W M 7M00 lad • anted rye el 25 dogma 49 minutes 57 rends w • 44484 WWI bows North 67 4.5aa 10 lobwes 19 .sew Cat thew Ora 53 4.q.. 43 newt. 3 mewls W.. 75.42 wk W66a ewe 72 doges. 57 .few 33 MONS 6..L 3626 wt Neva Nara 39 derv. 30 4...66 31 sew.. 6.4 4 .ri 7..88 than. Sous 50 ..5... 20 .0.tes 29 ...4.w. Wa4 was wt 00.. Wrt. 36 *wen 39 newt. 30 .6.64 W.I. 134.00 heft Wows Nara 3 Ogre. 20 .04t. 29 see.. Ca4 20.01 1.4 0.aa• North 07 doyen 33 ..et. 33 saes., Cast. 127.09 het • w pot M 88¢6.00 PARCEL G that art ed w Sasawt 055 M 3.54. 148 Tamwl.► 31. 6..q. 22. Mak. Coot, (i met. M.Si.d 66 en.ew04 et the 04888,1 erns. of s.4 So.the.t Oren lbw . South 5 News 22 mimes 57 saes. Was 40.,.84 0.40¢ dem the Nora 464 of add %yews' Oran. a dews M 2009.64 t.1 to w 441.4 of b9Miny d w eared to 4.8.4.1 thooaa 55.44 01 Mgr.4 37.404566 5 wands Cal • /slaw. M 64637 0088 tMe. South M M9r... 22 at... 57 saws. WeaL 7900 MC Wows S8W 01 New 37 .041. 03 .sew Cost. 1600 t.88 Mena Sou. 90 ow.. 72 mime. 57 .e.6. 9..t. 131.85 wk Wow Sea 50 dery 20 mimes 29 ..ands Wet 20149 t.k Wow Sous 02 agrees 1• newt. 27 swn. eat. 225.00 wt . w Wad .• M so. Sere.. Owrlor:..e. Norm, 00 Mqw 01 .04a 09 .8.664. Cat. alms mid .at 199 021.3 feat to w We It. M -700 S5W5x Warty: 0866• Nrth 5 degrees 22 WOUI6 57 rew Cat. slang .W North R.a 541.10 esl to w pest M (690.04 Nisei o-1 (0.004g. 0 WNW Ce..n66l) . tA •41.80. 41saen.t 5. 14685. WW1.. w .4647 Moses• es.. 5664 w scram we 8.46.09 aesv5 4 pre. wow.. at Ws N.W.at woe. M Me Sou0.e.9 Ore, M Seem. 14 78woe 31. Raga 22. AnW Cowie 404654 5 ens Ns.. 3 Wyman 22 .out. 57 .saws Cad dens w Nara .. M said S.W.. 088.5. 40.01 Net lbw. Serewat.ry to • 6.404 es the Wort We el said Southeast Oct. distant 39191 wt SmWe5y from w 8508.841 armor el 700 South.. Grano, a .,848.d along add Most 1041 Memo NarI1My la the paint M bg4w09. GRAPHIC SCALE r 64 a Wt. 0-2 (P.664 94.1.7 (.888660 A .armed 884 1* t N .was ro...1 WM.. ow. .war w wow w Wad 3900 Nat M w ear18. 395.00 feat M w SB.e.t Motor of S.W. 16 7awd.5 31. 6.6. 22. Mob C5419 N4w.19 . red o-3 (0.1049. 6 UNOy Ca..8el) A 558844 Pewee. for 6.649 b • 495.00 wt 048 ..1 drainage w 111RI7 wows. eve. 481.4. w thee. w West 5900 wt M w Nara ui00 we M S.mw 16 lewd* 3% 9sye 22. 6..W Caved} Y:Wrle seal w Wad Saco loot M w Nara O wed 0-4 (TeMrsy R....y Ce4wa1) A 5.6..0.7 .4rea1 5 pose rood... pewee. owe. 566 w wee. w SB..N amid M Seem.. 16 7.89858 31, 22. Mel. Cowen, 5506....55544 es commaeay et w 14r4Mast aver el 800 54.44655 Risen Wee Sousa 08 dove. 22 newt. 57 ....Os Most ..*sod 9•98 dwe the Nea It. d .W 0.0.5.4 thee.. n99.128 Met thee. Sea 0. de e. 37 804166 03 woe. E8L 5337 f54 le We veil el 0.90.09: thews 14.09 Sawa Ot ..One 37 84.15 53 ..s.44. Coss 14000 151 Woe. a 00 eq.... 32 800215 57 .sew. West. 140.00 feel: thew Nara 01 •ov5 37 8008 03 sound. WO. 82.000 945 arty Ns.. 40 dove. 22 .0e.. 57 . .04. Cwt. 140.00 h. la 0. 0104 d 0e95n09 411•1 0-5 01.041•• • 50017 CsemeN) A wooed eao.e. 5 6.644 eraia9a and allay mopes. 061.1, 5Mr w ass, w Smw.t O.15r M 5481066 16 Taws.p 31. lap. 22. MW Caw% 5 emsato d.v4.4 as conand46Ap .t w Na45..1 ewer M alt 5811..1 a014. thaw South 88 ow.. 72 84.18 37 mends Mae ...s. Weeny de.g W. North aw M said S84wpst Owl. 2009.04 loot to Mg pot d ••90.09 Wewa South 01 894. 37 ...Ws 03 wends Lost. 64637 0.8 0.0e88 1848 3 won. 22 .0466 57 swan. Most 70.00 Net aar.p North M dogmas I6 1iwl8 11 9.8.46 C.4. 250.10 wk Won Nara 07 4er40 37 W m.. 03 woods Walt 400.00 Id to w North 9..l solo Smama1 Rir8r. thanes North 3 Owe. 22 awl. 57 peals Wt. 40.00 lost . w 48001 . b6gwtp PARCEL H Sat sect M w 5811.81 Owen. M Saab.. 76 Taw985 31. bag. 22. 6... 5466874 161..9648 Ors*. as m*mw49 et w NrWast arw of sad 0.5*1 O.rle: mesa Seals 3 Wyo. 22 5.04(84 57 seconds Mao assumed 38.09 d.9 w North N. M .• Southeast Qurt. 200684 1.5 men. See. 01 Oe.. 37 nestles 03 weeds Cell 6.937 wt to • 6001 to be Mawr Mew es Point 'A -• da 049.2 the pot el 8490.54 lase Sea 3 d9rma 22 minutes 57 caw West. 70.00 feet Wee. South 01 o•gra 37 .eta 01 4,x4. Cast. 91.00 Wok these Sal8axry. 13.03 fool son • .8900 err. cane., to We 0488..( 4w.p 8 1.0,.. el 233.110 Net w e ewe. aye M 34 .era. 02 Wm.. 20 saaaw. Wore Sum M dower M Nowt. 3, swamis Coot. 55904 to Nast ..55• ors. 70.31 het to w Nar.matwy 5. of the City of b4 pLib...n a(4148 192M-667 Met Nth 1. Wale Or1.. 34,..59 la w recorded pot awes& a.nce Nara 50 Opreas 20 .1.t. 29 seas. Cwt. 4•.8 add W.0.8xely .5 70.00 lost. 4. Ns bess.c00 ham • e6. 0.5444 8 00.. d 44 r40454dy dew*. Meat -A; Wee.. 5848 01 Mgr. 37 admit. 03 swam. Est. 4600 6688 then 5. 6sss1.84 109.35 Nel dap 6 05966. mow owaew . w Namh41st •4.09 a 1.4.60 M 115.00 Not w • awed 5* ei 34 derma 02 .mime. 28 8.4284* P.. Sum 39 Open 39 newt. 31 ssmd. East. tangent tow wl 4a5*.d cow 7931 lest Os odd Nra.nlrly *s w ...a Wt. tomenatms Wes. North 39 doyen M nests 31 sawed. Med. 70.31 left 4..e Martematoey 10913 Met dan9 • (.09.14 mew wean* . w 8olhe.t MA. • .4055 M 165.00 Not w • 466444 amyl 48 L Mere. 02 Wooten 24 sees. awes Nam 01 Owe. 37 autos 03 see. 5nt tango. la w wsl sari.+ arty 4600 loot to Wo p504 M 349.0, tare,.) 1 WWI • 100R ctrs, 51 of too tiOs JOB N0, 613 -002 02000 RUC- Kuu.Nts. LTD. SUGGESTED PLANT SCHEDULE OVRReTOR! »1OIDUURDO! MRS - 0 CM na O AV0. 2• DIA. e MO. iMK i aw a e. sans COX 11ueelr OVIRSIMIT lzc1D11ROAro 1'RQ- SCALE: 1" = 30' i.� 1✓ LANDSCAPE NOTES • ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE TO BE SEEDED TO UNLESS OT11ERV65E NOTED. • ALL TURF AREAS. SHALL BE IRRIGATED TO BACK .OF CURB UNLESS OTHERIMSE NOTED. • REFER TO SEED MIX TABLES FOR RATE OF PUNTING. • REFER TO LANDSCAPE DETAIL SHEET FOR GENERAL PLANTING NOTES. IRRIGATION NOTES AND PLANTING DETAILS. SHRUBS ow Dome, 1101 rwa IMMO w11e CUOMO dtaWa 1010 IroRrenu rL aaneeadx data. 11011 S ven awed WM= esasemrr maw most AVO. 1)i• OW • AVG. HT V AVO.HT10' • LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SHOP DRANANG OF IRRIGATION PLAN TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL POND MIX Gammon Name elenteA big Caiwde mmnm. mllowse Nei/ Ended a Same _ &au Ohgad awl* WIN Shis7 43-trskl Mat pus, olsoar tltd aye WINN red Band Mame cue rad lam eel y meow T Ned Ryi bbkbdee Iktep y flow 1 arsld Switch draw trfag 80*- bind to Va+ goldenrod IVO Pub beta*N Cutoffs root QaNen Almaxis is Nag ar Rata 30 64/11011 (SJ ark kY can Notr S.dgen maw grawa aid mid@, fate are but hsteme. by nth mary 0 thou R *at pr- gamhaees tresbaes or Id If poodle. Also Boton<od Norms Anaap•ga - Anemone Ardepies Aster awdr�se Brand dkkesta. Oda/nada* ears** gnnodsh makes. ElVelle bleep/lea EepotteWn redden Studs d Obswie oblate b1 wslpYddrdked Lk* podiestodu ladle dant* Lase Rellturn Woad duns Nene* Sham Paean lioe Palates • 0Fb Stipa Salem Seabee podia% Verbena halals *koala fabai** Vera landlan dale um Call 48 Hours before digging GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin Culp Arsd 651- 454 -000 MN. Top Free 1 -800 -252 -1188 of at ai 0.5 0.5 0.6 10 0.2 0.4 10 40 14 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.4 14 0.1 10.0 0.1 0.5 35.0 1.0 10.0 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 40 3.0 03 0.2 0.1 0.4 Told 100.0 FORBS MIX C6mmon Name I i* MAbuttsr/y Astir, smooth-blue Watch, Carlo • Prates ddb Miaie doom puma Tie- trdoA, dewy carom Staingeter, roust/ Nisch-syed Swan Celdaaed stiff bhW Viva, gate Rita 51 d Prair. Ma dkuld not be dotal. Dbaiptioor Not. kits PRAIRIE MIX =on Name Cram, eldeooats d rye, Canadian ftwo grose emir gam. annual • Nankai Nano Aedpbs tuberose Ater *el* Marla* A hahaAa anelsna. *mod* n odnse Mrs ha/ M* • dab menestedau Mena* Realm . Rite* P Rabodal hide dq o Tkdesamtb Wends *bane tkkt. Zia awn • AI modes ehd be prodded In dud Mdghb. SbatlbVal to be aided to ridft goes lr0brs h Se MOmnote. Beaded Nam Spas c000densis Lo trodycada ca: Cads F-1. FA r F -3) NA NA Switch grass Padua *gam L luetem, little ShcNOderbn seaperhm Man grass Ugh/aunt mime • Rote: 30 be/acre (13 kg/1a). kdMx 40 10.0 40 40 10.0 34.0 40 2.0 12.0 12.0 Totak 100.0 Seeding Methods A) Sits Preparatial t the alts elrauld be prpa ed by plowing toe depth of la ad Van akin,. 8 Felker t Conduct ad test, If ngi*ed, foram per sot. 0.00 nemanndopal The Iatltry used Mould be eaninerdal dada of doe Maw carnet *Star. C) Seed Installation t Seed should *Installed rwith a seed *II that adsr ageuratdy meter types d The drill . seed to should contala mhh ma two i box., a file mixed seed and a box Wage / Hyy aide.. and N should be eguipPed with disc bxrov openers and parker assembly to cainpact the aoi directly oar the all onto ow row eked seed box. ndadt. abeds c . h ds hhndd t Obtain a And planting depth df R to I{ inch. Ail drill raring /Scold be done at a right m* to surfed. drainage. D Ssedh Rata 4Rabs are ed In the mbrbrre tabulation few 01. apedead mix. Pocking TCompapact to site irgtlh rrowiingd. r rdad . IOm s .d A°f rro g to rdted a tine seal awl 0) blued Tire sibs should be mulch and dbc- anchaid blowing pocket* using o weed kab mulch at a rote of 2.0 bens per aer.. 11) Ranting Swoon f Planting semen Is hatrem April 15 to July 20 and September 20 to Octobr 20. Dormant seedbg flan October 20 to Nowmbr 14 *01h a madman sot trnperabre 6150 1 RECEIVED JAN 1 2 2001 c ;T't OF LP1a ,• 610 6 NIT TO =MO 160 C211 N.. Da0210N6. D. CALL 60CYIAl6$ AT WARM 61N0lPTRAS A66A6 0.06637 TO NOS. ARIAS AT PAZ WOW NOLWD. SASdNU66. AREAS W16f FORMAL MAN* FROMM MCSOLK 7RAl6RION FROM MIRROR DOOR STOC? SRAM 66W/4X. SPOW lS,APR TO 131D6. LD6. WM NO CRAM NA memos 2S 1 2 IAN 2001 60 PAOCMG6.1 R IAN/AR(. ZOO OTT SIEMRTAL. SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION LAVO LAKES, MWNESOTA SITE PLAN 4 MO GTOL MOO COWEN- WALL • \l WEST ELEVATION yr -ry TOP Or raarrf l 4 AAIMRNTOP 1.16xA$T caracro PAN7i 616RMQ6 WORM MOW- MAW IMO Miff MIRE - WTTP. Re ROT CTION lierAl. UMW MOWN r1tAVE ROaPAR macaw 6IN Awn. TM. r SOUTH ELEVATION r" .1 •• 'iel 1- .9 _u••uu I I ,••■•• ••••••••••••••••1 moo III • Ammo yr -ro 4 ■31•x■ iiiri,. 111•• WNW. NEN ■.■ MINN ■ MIll ■1■ • MOZART 0 TOP Or TOP ar Ter Or row TOP OP TOf ar MAIO Tar cr ACCOO y 16 a .W2PDr MA4crer 191F Aaarr aAw r$� ••• ••• i INN � 11: NUMB i 2.Va06- NV‘60.110 621- 61IrFON09 6*122M1 6372.1 211 CST SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION aziMWT r PLUG r WALK r VALK r 7¢ 131.55 12 6'•06( 561 1 (E FINAL UTILITY PLAN L 15' r BOO NEENAH 8-4342 �� 0.765 -•-- 121 LP It 1� 2aa 160 LF RETENTION POND OLYIJR° ar .GJ i URU(W ar_ tlLt Nu:Y- ws-flS DRAW Sr NAY IDA7E 01/ID(ot 1J011 Na:l31 -001 4 02:27/01 AD■11001. 000MMENIS MAY 3 02/16/07 8591- Fat POWYS MAO 1 0/21/01 RCMS MAO 041E DESCRM7(O• 82 I KKR( CERTIFY T7MT 1011 PLAM. 07 0721GTION OR REPORT WAS PRC176C5 57 K EA f1KCS 67 DIRECT SIPCRVI57W 010 T1AT I AN A XLI 6001T060) PR7CSSIDAL E446242C2 MICA TIC LAWS 7 TIC STATE 7 NNKSDTA DATE. REG. NO (212TING SANITARY SEVER MANGLE • PROPOSED MANIOLE PROPOSER VATCRMAIN 442 Cry YJ A SNb (.5.14. 10 66511 T.1.PNec (601) 106 -6118 ML Nu) 166 -0612 EXISTING UTILITIES PROPOSED SANITARY CLEANISJT VALVE GRAPHIC SCALE (a7Qr) 11W.66 1I DEVELOPER RYAN COMPANIES US, INC. 700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 -3387 2, 2p01 G111 Of L,1T.0 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION PRELLAINARY UTA.JTY PLAN LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA C1.1 058 -000 Dk•pr- wre\.•dIs\c71- Wrs -rpd.9 02 /02/01 030.41 PR CST SUM? FIRE PROTECTION LEGEND T 0 aim 9, .�j�i�_:;,.i�� EXISTING CONTOURS PREPOSED [wTOURS PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS EXISTD10 ELEVATION SNOT PROPOSED LRA11>00 ARM/ O►71DI5L CD /TOURS I..uii VARIBLE FRONT - 3.00 FT. 0.70 FT. 0.00 DITCH 16.0*, 16.0" , 16.0" 1!!(? 0.5 FT. BOTTOM EARTH DIKE RIP RAP DITCH CHECK DETAIL FINAL EROSION + GRADING PLAN RIR MI MI RN GRAPHIC SCALE (N T77T ) 1W R r ,a•. R r.•VOMI 5012 POST 14570375.0 RcIIN VIM ICI ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE R. s „DIE.1 FCNCOfgOg1µyTYPCC Lrim •T. . • . -Oft K ROKCTES RT OSI9ai WG COMTOIK SILT FENCE Ml[ fiAL 905.35 AY ALE . IR eo humus IM MR& DRG DI GL ..' A' (R. 901.27 PROTEC7NE LAYER OF 5TL1ER FABRIC RUNOFF 00.154100 THROUGH UNDISEURBED SUBSOIL INFILTRATION TRENCH PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING, INSTALL SILT FENCE IN LOCATIONS 010514 R AS DIREOEED BY THE ENGINEER. 500710 SILT FENCE WU. BE REWIRED MERE LOCAL CONDI1104S REQUIRE ROUGH GRADING SHALL PROCEED ON AM AREA BY AREA BASK TO 1614192E UNCOUPLE=D AREAS AS EACH AREA OUTSWE THE STREET K GRADED. PROVIDE NATNE TOPSOIL. SEED. AND 54.01 ANCHORED WATT A 51RA10(2 SET DISC 5A710N 48 HOURS OF ENE GRADING. MANTAN AND REPAIR SILT FENCES (INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ACCUUUSA1ED SILT) UNIX VEGETATION K ESTABL)SHEO. SEED 10 BE 19001 TYPE 500, MULCT TYPE 1 (2 TONS /ACRE). SEED FOR PONDNG AREAS 70 BE M.DOT 11PE 15A (BET MEADOW 145). TOPSOIL TO BE RESPREAO TO A 0011W OF 4 INCHES ON AREAS TO Y SEEDED. INSTALL W000 FIBER BLANKET AT BAY OF NFILL1RAn0N DIKES TO NORMAL WATER OLVARO• (MNDOT 3883) UL4GNWL 00 JCJ IMLIXW 00 CRAW B7. MAY I DATE DI/IOAT 4 02/21/01 3 02/16/01 2 01/37/01 MO DATE AILL N4:LNyVWn -ar JOB 50:431 -001 ADDER:M . 000W,C575 ISSUE FOR POWYS COLNpITS- FOYIRATION OC'SRI550N MAY MAO BY 11CRCRT CERTIFY THAT nos PLM4. SPEC61CA710I OR REPORT VAS 5RE5ARED DT NC R 554100 NT DIRECT SIPCRVISI5 Nm 7157 1 AN A DILLY REGTS70500 PRO0ESS154A1. MINCE* ISW 780 LAUB OF TIC 5755E OF 8104C5075. DATE. REG N0. METRO • 417 S..t* 585 A 0 5 Canada. 5 MOT T.YPWr (MI) 714-81111 SAL (MI) 514-1419 DEVELOPER COMPANIES , INC. CENTRE 700 INTERNATIONAL 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 -3387 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION PFB.MJARY EROSION + ORADNO PLAN C1.2 LINO LAKES. MINNESOTA 058 -000