HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review
Wenck | Colorado | Georgia | Minnesota | North Dakota | Wyoming
Toll Free 800-472-2232 Web wenck.com
To: Ken Roberts, City of Lake Elmo Planning Director
From: Lucius Jonett, Wenck Landscape Architect
Date: February 15, 2019
Subject: City of Lake Elmo Landscape Plan Review
Bentley Village Preliminary Plat, Review #1
Submittals
Tree Preservation Plan, dated 1-25-2019, received 2-01-2019 .
Preliminary Landscape Plans, dated 1-25-2019, received 2-01-2019.
Location: Northwest quadrant of the intersection of Keats Ave. N & Interstate Hwy 94,
Lake Elmo, MN. South of the Savona Development.
Land Use Category: Urban Medium Density Residential
Surrounding Land Use Concerns: The property to the north (Savona Development) is
Urban Low Density Residential and is less intensive land use than this proposed Urban
Medium Density Residential. The properties to the west (Lampert’s lumber yard), east and
south are, or are guided, to be Commercial zones which are more intensive land use than
this proposed Urban Medium Density Residential.
Special landscape provisions in addition to the zoning code: This proposed
development will be required to provide screening along all borders North, South, West and
East consisting of either a masonry wall or fence in combination with landscape material
that forms a screen at least six feet in height and not less than 90% opaque on a year-
round basis.
Ken Roberts
Planning Director
City of Lake Elmo February 15, 2019
2
T:\6443 Lake Elmo\20 Bentley Village\01 Preliminary Plat\2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review.docx
Tree Preservation:
A. A tree preservation plan has been submitted that does not meet all requirements.
1. Significant trees are appropriately designated:
i. Over 6” DBH for hardwood deciduous trees (Birch, Cherry, Hickory,
Ironwood, Hard Maples, Oak and Walnut). Tree Tag # 1756, 1757, and
1758 are significant hardwood trees and were not included in the tree
replacement calculations.
ii. Over 12” DBH for common trees (Ash, Aspen, Basswood, Catalpa, Elm,
Hackberry, Locust, Poplar, Silver Maple, Willow and any other tree not
defined as a hardwood deciduous tree or a coniferous/evergreen tree).
Tree Tag # 992, 994, and 996 are not significant common trees and were
included in the tree replacement calculations.
Entire Site
Total Caliper Inches of Significant Trees On-Site: 915 Cal Inches
Common Trees 280
Conifer/Evergreen Trees 0
Hardwood Trees 635
Significant Inches Removed On-Site 767 Cal Inches
Common Trees 279
Conifer/Evergreen Trees 0
Hardwood Trees 488
30% Tree Removal Limits (Cal. Inches) Allowed Proposed
Subtract Common Tree Removals 84 279
Subtract Conifer/Evergreen Tree Removals 0 0
Subtract Hardwood Tree Removals 190.5 488
Removals in excess of 30% allowances
Removals in excess of 30% allowances 492.5 Cal Inches
Common Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 195.0
Conifer Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 0.0
Hardwood Removals in Excess of 30% Allowance 297.5
Common Tree Replacement Needed (1/4 the dia inches removed) 48.8 Cal Inches
Conifer Tree Replacement Needed (1/2 the dia inches removed) 0.0 Cal Inches
Hardwood Tree Replacement Needed (1/2 the dia inches removed) 148.8 Cal Inches
Common Tree Replacement Required @ 2.5" per Tree 20 # Trees
Conifer Tree Replacement Required @ 3" per 6' Tall Tree 0 # Trees
Hardwood Tree Replacement Required @ 2.5" per Tree 60 # Trees
B. There is a significant tree on the property. Tree ID #2742 – 44” DBH Oak. The tree is
not marked for removal.
C. Tree replacement is required because more than thirty (30) percent of the diameter
inches of significant trees surveyed will be removed.
Ken Roberts
Planning Director
City of Lake Elmo February 15, 2019
3
T:\6443 Lake Elmo\20 Bentley Village\01 Preliminary Plat\2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review.docx
D. Tree replacement calculations do not follow the current required procedure as of the
ordinance updates approved on 9-19-2018:
1. A calculation must be provided which breaks out the number of inches removed
for hardwood, evergreen/coniferous, and common trees. The 30% removal figure
applies to each category individually and trees over the 30% allowance are to be
replaced according to:
i. Common tree species shall be replaced with new trees at a rate of one-
fourth (1/4) the diameter inches removed.
ii. Coniferous/evergreen tree species shall be replaced with new coniferous
or evergreen trees at a rate of one-half (1/2) the diameter inches
removed. Since coniferous species are often sold by height rather than
diameter inch, the following conversion formula can be used: Height of
Replacement Coniferous Tree/2 = Diameter Inches of Credit
iii. Hardwood deciduous tree species shall be replaced with new hardwood
deciduous trees at a rate of (1/2) the diameter inches removed.
E. This project is residential development; therefore mitigation replacement trees shall be
in addition to landscape required tree counts.
Ken Roberts
Planning Director
City of Lake Elmo February 15, 2019
4
T:\6443 Lake Elmo\20 Bentley Village\01 Preliminary Plat\2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review.docx
Landscape Requirements:
The preliminary landscape plans meet the code required number of trees.
Preliminary Plan
(Code Required) Proposed
Street frontage 5908 Lineal Feet
Lake Shore 0 Lineal Feet
Stream Frontage 0 Lineal Feet
Total Linear Feet 5908 Lineal Feet
/50 Feet = Required Frontage Trees 119 Trees
Development or Disturbed Area - SF
Development or Disturbed Area 41.6 Acres
*5 = Required Development Trees 208 Trees
Interior Parking Lot Spaces* 28 Spaces
/10 = Required Parking Lot Trees 0 Trees
Required Mitigation Trees 80
Required Number of Trees (**) 407
Total Trees to Date 416
* Parking lot landscaping or screening trees are included in landscape required tree Counts.
None if 0 - 30 Parking Spaces ** Residential development - mitigation replacement trees are in addition to landscape required
tree Counts.
1. A minimum one (1) tree is not proposed for every fifty (50) feet of street
frontage.
2. A minimum of five (5) trees are proposed to be planted for every one (1) acre of
land that is developed or disturbed by development activity.
The landscape plans do not meet the minimum compositions of required trees:
• Up to 15% of the required number of trees may be ornamental tree
Master Plan Qty % Composition
Deciduous Shade Trees 168 40% >25% required
Coniferous Trees 181 44% >25% required
Ornamental Trees 67 16% <15% required
Tree Count 416
A. A landscape plan has been submitted that does not include all requirements.
1. Landscaped areas should be of adequate size to allow proper plant growth,
protect plantings from vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and provide adequate
areas for plant maintenance.
2. The landscape plan does not include required City standard notes and details.
3. All utilities and pavements are not shown on the landscape plan to review for tree
placement conflicts.
Ken Roberts
Planning Director
City of Lake Elmo February 15, 2019
5
T:\6443 Lake Elmo\20 Bentley Village\01 Preliminary Plat\2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review.docx
B. The landscape plan does not include the landscape layout requirements:
Topsoil Minimum ....................................................................................... 6‐inch
C. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping – The development does include interior parking lots,
but the number of parking spaces falls below the threshold of additional landscape
requirements.
D. Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping – The development does not include perimeter
parking lots.
E. Screening – The landscape plan does not meet screening requirements.
Screening is required by City code. Screening shall be used to provide visual and noise
separation of intensive uses from less intensive uses. Where screening is required in the City Code
between uses or districts, it shall consist of either a masonry wall or fence in combination with
landscape material that forms a screen at least six (6) feet in height, and not less than ninety percent
(90%) opaque on a year-round basis. Landscape material shall include trees, planted at a minimum
of one deciduous or coniferous tree per forty (40) linear feet along the property line. Additional
landscape material such as shade trees or trellises may be required to partially screen views from
above.
Special Landscape Considerations:
A. 5th Street – The development is along 5th Street, which has been previously or is
schedule to be constructed by other developments. No additional landscape
requirements are required of this applicant.
Findings:
1. Indication of 3 trees as significant and 3 trees as not significant was incorrect. This
impacts the tree replacement calculation. The application is also using an incorrect tree
replacement calculation and not following the updated formula that is required with the
updates to Ordinance 08-220 on 9-19-2018. Following the current replacement
calculation formula requires less tree replacement than the applicant is proposing.
2. Applicant rounded the required number of trees for road frontage at 118.16 down to
118. Application should round up on any fractions of trees.
3. Too many ornamental trees are used in the landscape plan, exceeding the 15%
maximum composition. Applicant should revise the planting plan and schedule as
needed to make sure the quantity of ornamental trees is less than 15% of the proposed
tree planting.
4. Tree symbols are not drawn to full mature size on the proposed landscape plans and
should be updated to make sure there is adequate landscape space between property
lines and buildings. An example is on the southern property line where the buildings are
approximately 18’ from the property line. The Austrian pines are drawn at 12’ diameter,
while their mature diameter is 30’ to 40’. There is not enough room for the mature trees
Ken Roberts
Planning Director
City of Lake Elmo February 15, 2019
6
T:\6443 Lake Elmo\20 Bentley Village\01 Preliminary Plat\2019-02-11 Bentley Village Landscape Plan Review.docx
in this location. Applicant should update the scale of the proposed plantings and make
adjustments to the layout (trees or buildings) as required.
5. City standard landscape details and notes have not been used. Applicant should include
the City standard landscape notes and details in the drawings and remove their notes
that are no longer applicable.
6. Utilities are not shown on the landscape plans to review for utility conflicts. Applicant
should include that layer in the landscape drawings.
7. Topsoil depth is incorrectly labeled in the planting notes on sheet 33 as 4” minimum.
City standard is 6” minimum. Applicant should update the note to the correct depth of
6”.
8. Top soil depth is to be 6” and is called out correctly on cross-section drawings, however
note 1 in the planting notes on sheet 33 states 4” of topsoil. Note needs to be updated.
9. A single, straight row of evergreen trees is inadequate for screening as proposed on the
West and South property lines. Vegetative screening should consist of more than one
row of evergreen trees and include a row of other trees or native shrubs in front of the
evergreens to soften the “development wall” effect. The layout of the proposed
screening on the East boundary is the minimum acceptable trees for screening and
should include native shrubs to provide additional screening depth. The applicant should
reconsider the layout of the proposed vegetative screen or consider other screening
elements such as masonry wall or fences in combination with landscape material to
provide screening.
10. Requiring full screening along the north property line (5th Street) is not recommended as
it will interfere with the required boulevard tree plantings in the 5th Street Design
Guidelines. The proposed plantings along 5th street are not drawn to mature scale and
when updated may require relocation so the trees are not growing into the 5th street
boulevard trees or the buildings. Applicant should update the scale of the proposed
plantings and make adjustments to the layout (trees or buildings) as required.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that condition of approval include:
1. Submit a revised landscape plan addressing the findings above.
Sincerely,
Lucius Jonett, PLA (MN)
Wenck Associates, Inc.
City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect
N
o~\.:-< ~ ~ ~-.j\€-~ ~~
fo\1-~ \""\~ uc1,o~
y> ~ €, \.. co~s1~ f0\1-~01
0 25 50 100 I
SCALE IN FEET I
LEGEND I
~ cP
OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS TREES
ORNAMENTAL TREES
I
I
Q;:P CONIFEROUS TREES I
cf.):zy FLOWERING &: EVERGREEN SHRUBS I /
PERENNIALS \ /
/
INFILTRATION AREA SEED MIX:
MN STATE SEED MIX 33-262 (DRY SWALE/POND)
SIDE SLOPE MIX:
MN STATE SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH & WEST)
SOD
E
WALKING PATH, TYP.
/ '----
(
/
L__ /
\
"'
/
"'
/
\
TREE PROTECTION FENCE, TYP.
(SEE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN)
6
ALLIANT
733 Marquette Avenue
Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
612.758.3080
www.alliant-inc.com
w s
...I >
~
...I
1-z w
ID
<(
l-o
If)
w z z
:i
...I g
:iii:
ID ::::>
(/)
5
D.
~
<( z g :iii:
-' w ::::i w a:
D.
...I w
0 a:
~
I-
~
z
~
D.
w
D.
<(
0
(/)
C z
~
I hereby certify that this pion
specification, or report was '
p:epared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTunder
the laws of the State of
MINNESOT~,1!/J.
~ARK KRONBECK, PLA, ASLA
1-25-19 26222
Date License No.
QUALITY ASSURANCE/CONTROL
BY DATE
DATE ISSUE
1-25-19 CITY SUBMITTAL
PROJECT TEAM DATA
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
PROJECT NO:
MPR
SIL
218-0165
32
SHEET 32 Of 33