HomeMy WebLinkAbout5a - PC Report - Inwood 8th Addn - 5.12.25 Memo1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 5/12/2025
ITEM #: 5a
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Nathan Fuerst, AICP, Consulting Planner
AGENDA ITEM: Inwood 8th Addition - Preliminary Plat, PUD, and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
REVIEWED BY: Jason Stopa, Community Development Director
Sophia Jensen, City Planner
BACKGROUND:
This application is returning to the Planning Commission for review after being tabled at the April 14,
2025, allowing for revisions to the project plans. On April 29, 2025 the preliminary plat and PUD plans
were resubmitted to the City for review after a redesign of the eastern half of the project was completed.
Additional background on prior approvals can be found in the April 14 staff report.
Per the Applicant’s resubmitted narrative, the following general revisions were made to their plans:
• Aligned access points east and west of Island Trail.
• New 28’ street through the center of the development for improved streetscaping.
• Stub streets removed.
• Landscaping features added to open space, and buffering added to south.
• Increased open space area.
As revised, this phase of the Inwood project would include a 123 unit apartment west of Island Trail,
and 148 attached townhomes primarily east of Island Trail for a total of 271 units. This is the same
number of apartment units and one fewer attached townhome unit than the version of the plan last
reviewed by the planning commission.
The following applications were required for this project:
1. Preliminary Plat – This project requires a Preliminary and Final Plat.
2. PUD – Any flexibility required to the City’s standards must be granted through a new PUD, no
flexibilities were granted in the initial Inwood PUD.
3. Comprehensive Plan Amendment – This is required to consolidate the future land use
guidance on the subject parcels from three separate categories to one, maintaining the site-wide
limit of 15 units per acre.
ISSUE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review the comprehensive plan amendment and revised
preliminary plat, and PUD requests to make a recommendation to the City Council.
2
REQUEST DETAILS:
Applicant:
M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC.
Property Owner: Vadnais Associates, LLC.
Location: Unaddressed parcel Southeast and Southwest of the intersection of 5th Street
North and Island Trail.
PID#: 33.029.21.14.0029, 33.029.21.13.0028, 33.029.21.42.0017, and
33.029.21.42.0018
Current Zoning: High-Density Residential (HDR)/Planned Unit Development (PUD),
Shoreland Overlay
Proposed Zoning HDR/PUD, Shoreland Overlay
Future Land Use: Mixed Use Commercial/High-Density Residential/Business Park
Surrounding: Low-Density Residential (LDR) PUD, Public Facility, Business Park PUD,
HDR PUD/Commercial
Deadline for Action: Application Complete: 2/14/2025
120 Day Preliminary Plat Deadline: 6/14/2025
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Site Data.
Total Site Area 19.27 acres
Total Wetland Area 0 acres
Total Units 272 units
Overall Net Density 14.12 units/acres
Comprehensive Plan Conformance.
A comprehensive plan amendment is proposed by the developer to reguide the land west of Island Trail
from Mixed Use Commercial to High Density Residential. The primary reason is to allow for the
residential net density to be blended across this part of the Inwood development.
The Inwood Townhomes project is currently proposed across two different Future Land Use Categories.
East of Island Trail, the future land use is designated as High Density Residential (HDR) which allows
residential uses at a density range of between 8.01-15 units per acre. West of Island Trail, the future land
use designation is Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C), which allows a density range of 10-15 units per
acre. On their own, the two different parts of the development would have a net density of over 23 units
per acre on the west side of Island Trail and 11.7 units per acre on the east side of Island Trail. There are
two small existing outlots guided Business Park which would also be reguided to HDR. Collectively, the
entire project’s net density is 14.06 units per acre which is within the allowable density of both future
land use categories.
This development had an approved preliminary plat and EAW which anticipated this level of density.
Additionally, the entire project is below the maximum density in both existing future land use
categories. Staff are therefore supportive of the request to amend the City’s comprehensive plan.
3
Land Use(s).
The City’s zoning map indicates that the subject property is zoned High Density Residential (HDR) with
a PUD overlay. The proposed land uses, Multifamily Residential and Single Family Attached
(townhomes), are permitted with conditions in the underlying HDR zoning district.
After a review of the Inwood PUD ordinance, staff have concluded that no PUD flexibilities or other
standards were created for this part of the overall Inwood Development Project. Therefore, the zoning
requirements for this property are all determined based on all current applicable standards from Lake
Elmo City Code.
Environmental Review. This project is covered under an existing Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) originally prepared for the Inwood Development at the time of the Inwood
Preliminary Plat. Staff have reviewed the EAW and determined it accounted for the number of units and
intensity of development proposed in this phase of the Inwood development. Furthermore, this project
does not trigger a mandatory EAW on its own under Minnesota state rules. No further environmental
review is required.
Project Phasing. As proposed, the Townhome portion of the development would be constructed in
three separate phases, with the first phase beginning in 2025. The apartment building is not included in
the phasing plan or narrative, but is assumed by staff be included as part of the project’s first phase as it
will be constructed by a separate developer, Rachel Development.
PUD Minimum Requirements.
The Developer is proposing private drives, which are allowed through a Conditional Use Permit by
ordinance, but which create a need for other flexibilities based on the lack of street frontage to the
residential units. A PUD is a negotiated zoning district, and according to the Lake Elmo Zoning Code
Article 18, Planned Unit Development Regulations, zoning flexibility can be granted in order to better
utilize site features and to obtain a higher quality of development.
City Code establishes minimum thresholds a project must meet in order to qualify as a PUD. Staff has
found that the proposed development does meet the following minimum requirements of a PUD:
a. Lot Area: The site area exceeds the minimum lot area for of five acres for a PUD development.
b. Open Space: The PUD ordinance indicates that at least 20% of the development area not within
roadway corridors is to be reserved as open space.
c. Street Layout: In existing developed area, the PUD should maintain the existing street grid,
where present, and restore the street grid where it has been disrupted. In newly developing areas,
streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in each cardinal direction, except where
environmental or physical constraints make this infeasible. All streets shall terminate at other
streets, at public land, or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets may
terminate in stub streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of the
development or adjacent developments.
PUD Identified Objectives.
When evaluating a PUD proposal, the City must find a PUD meets one or more objectives contained in
Article 18, which are listed below:
4
a. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than
conventional approaches.
b. Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential, commercial, and public
facilities.
c. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses.
d. Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities,
natural resource protection and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under
conventional land development techniques.
e. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities
and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for lifecycle
housing to all income and age groups.
f. Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful and sensitive
placement of buildings and facilities.
g. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within
the development and surrounding land uses.
h. Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand on
transportation, and the promotion of energy resource conservation.
i. Establishing measures to protect and preserve groundwater storage.
j. Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain areas of the
City and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be achieved.
In their narrative, the applicant claims to meet all identified objectives. Staff find that the development
may not meet all objectives, but could support findings for meeting b, c, e, and g.
Bulk Standard Review.
Cells in the ‘As Proposed’ column shaded in blue indicate a deviation requested from City Code.
HDR Zoning Standards
(105.12.720) Requirements Proposed - Single Family
Attached
Proposed -
Multifamily Dwelling
Single Family Attached -
Minimum Lot Area
1,750 sq ft/
unit 4,306 sq ft/unit -
Multifamily Dwelling -
Minimum Lot Area
1800 sq ft/
unit - 1608 sq ft/unit
Single Family Attached -
Minimum Lot Width 20 ft/unit 21.3 feet -
Multifamily Dwellings –
Minimum Lot Width 60 ft/ bldg - > 300 ft
Maximum Impervious Cover 75% Not Provided (Estimated
at 80-83%)
46.4%
Minimum Setback – Front 20 ft 9’ 50 ft
Minimum Setback – Side 10 ft 20 ft (between buildings) 30 ft
Minimum Setback – Corner 15 ft 20 ft -
Minimum Setback – Rear 20 ft 5’ to deck, 11’ to bldg 30 ft
Minimum Setback – 5th St.
N. 40 ft 26’- 36’ ft > 60 ft
Maximum Height 50 ft 30-40’ 38’
5
Specific standards for Single Family Attached in the HDR. City Code Section 105.12.740 (j)
contains standards for attached townhome units in the HDR Zoning District. The Development meets
requirements for buildings to be below ten units, and adequate open space is provided. The City’s
standards require buildings to front a public street with 15’ of frontage and with no parking between the
building and street. Private drives are permitted by the City’s ordinance through a conditional use
permit. The private lots are all greater than 15’ wide and front a private drive. Because all proposed units
are now double fronted, staff find the development is compliant with the intent of the City’s
requirements, and any necessary flexibilities will be approved through the PUD.
Specific standards for Multifamily Dwellings in the HDR. City Code Section 105.12.740 (k) requires
that parking be screened from the public streets and that common open space of a minimum 200 square
feet per unit. Both design standards are met by this proposed project.
Design Guideline Conformance. City Code Section 105.12.840 requires design review against
standards in the Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual. The proposed housing types are provided in the
packet and include elevations and floor plans. Staff review of conformance is below:
Townhome Site Design
• Building placement – Buildings are oriented perpendicular to the street, with entrances oriented
towards the street where possible. All townhome units are double fronted, and are oriented to a
street where feasible, and public open space with connected sidewalks where street frontage is
not possible.
• Streetscape – Concrete sidewalks are provided through the development, and run along the street
where feasible. Buildings are connected with sidewalks and fronted towards the street where
feasable.
• Landscaping – Overstory trees will not meet the City’s boulevard tree spacing standard of one
tree every 50’in areas outside of the proposed Street C. Landscaping with shallow root systems
which will not impact utility service lines should be planted between driveways to screen
mechanical and HVAC equipment. Preservation of existing trees will help the development
blend in with the existing development along the 5th Street North Corridor.
• Parking – All parking would be in enclosed spaces or on driveways and would not impede
pedestrian movement. Street parking is proposed as 90-degree stalls, however staff would
recommend parallel parking, instead, located in bump-outs consistent with engineering
standards.
Townhome Building Design
• Form and Façade – Buildings are proposed with architecture consistent throughout the site, and
the surrounding areas. Facades are articulated with little or no blank wall space.
• Building Materials – Vinyl siding is prohibited by the City’s design standards and approval
would be required through the proposed PUD. Otherwise, design and color appear to be
generally consistent with standards for townhomes.
• Mass and Scale – Buildings are articulated to create the appearance of multiple structures. Due to
the private street design approach, buildings are located more closely together than nearby
residential development, creating a denser appearance.
• Roof Design, Entries, Lighting – Features proposed are consistent with City standards for this
type of construction.
6
• Signage – No signage appears to be proposed on the site plan and is thus not reviewed as part of
this project.
Apartment Building Site Design
• Building placement – The building is oriented to both 5th Street North and Island Trail.
• Streetscape – Better connectivity has been provided from the north side of the apartment to 5th
Street North for people choosing to walk or bike to area commercial amenities.
• Landscaping – Overstory trees will line the edges of this site along the public right of way with
additional tree plantings and open space exceeding minimum requirements.
• Parking – The parking is central to the apartment site and is fully screened from public right of
way.
Apartment Building Design
• Form and Façade – The apartment building facades are articulated with blank wall space
minimized. No parking is proposed between the façade and street, meeting design standards.
• Building Materials – Materials and finishes are generally of quality with colors consistent with a
requirement for earth or muted tones.
• Mass and Scale – Given the surrounding land uses of the apartment building site, the scale and
mass of the building is an appropriate transition to lower intensity residential land uses east of
the site.
• Roof Design, Entries, Lighting – features proposed are consistent with City standards for this
type of construction and site layout.
• Signage – No signage appears to be proposed on the site plan and is thus not reviewed as part of
this project.
Parks and Trails. The City Code requires park land dedication for all new residential developments. The
City may also determine that land is not necessary and accept a cash fee in lieu for the purpose of
enhancing the existing park and trail system.
At its meeting on March 17, 2025, the City’s Park Commission discussed the proposed development and
made a recommendation to the City Council for acceptance of cash in lieu of land. Any park land or cash
dedication would be subject to a credit from dedication of park land (Ivywood Park) in previous additions
of the Inwood development. Staff recommend acceptance of cash in lieu of park land given proximity of
this project existing parks.
Subdivision Signs. Section 105.12.430 allows 1 subdivision sign per entrance to the residential
development. One primary sign is allowed with a maximum sign area of 32 sq. ft. and all other signs must
be 24 sq. ft. or less. No signs are currently identified on the development plans. Staff suggest a condition
of approval to clarify that no flexibility is granted for signage and that sign permits are required if and
when any signage is proposed.
Tree Preservation. There is an existing stand of primarily pine and spruce trees on the east side of the
property. The Developer is not proposing to remove any trees and will preserve what is on site. No
mitigation is required. It will be the developer’s responsibility to coordinate with city development staff
to appropriately install tree protections at the grading limits.
7
Landscaping. The City’s Landscape Architect has reviewed the prior planting plan for conformance
with the City’s ordinance. The Applicant is currently showing enough trees to meet the City’s Code. The
development does not meet requirements for 50’ spacing of boulevard (street tree) plantings. Flexibility
is requested to this standard.
Buffering and Screening. Given the location of this property adjacent to more intense land use, there is
not a requirement for the developer to screen their land use under City Code Section 105.12.480 (f). This
is because the more intensive land use (the Bremer services lot) is the one required by code to provide
screening.
In consideration of the land use to the south, Bremer, the Applicant has revised the project plans to have
the garage doors face south along with the addition of a landscaping buffer at the southern property
boundary. These changes are expected to aid in compatibility of the land uses.
Irrigation. An irrigation plan was provided with the submittal. This phase of the Inwood development is
not proposed at this time to utilize stormwater reuse. The Lake Elmo City Council has required
stormwater reuse in recent developments with approved PUDs.
Shoreland Standards. This project is located in the City’s Shoreland Overlay District. A buffer of 300’
surrounds an unnamed tributary on the southeast corner of the Inwood Development. Some minor
overlap exists between the shoreland overlay and improvements (driveway and parking area) on the
proposed apartment lot. The City’s staff has clarified with the Minnesota DNR that no shoreland
variances are needed because improvements within the master planned Inwood Development are well
below the 30% impervious surface maximum allowed in sewered districts.
Off-Street Parking, Single-Family Attached. Since all of the attached townhome units will have more
than 2 bedrooms, the City’s code will require two spaces per unit. City code will also require an
additional 30 parking spaces for visitors (10% of total parking required). The spaces required for parking
the units will be found in the two-car garages provided with each unit. The driveways for each unit are
deep enough to support an additional two parking spaces per unit. Additional street parking is available
throughout the townhome areas. The parking proposed for the townhome units will satisfy the amount
required by city code.
Off-Street Parking, Multifamily. City code requires one space per one bedroom unit, and two spaces
for all units over 2 bedrooms. An additional one space for every four units is required for visitor parking.
The Apartment site provides 123 enclosed stalls and 98 surface parking stalls for a total of 221 stalls.
There are 55 units with 2 or more bedrooms, and 68 that have one bedroom. Therefore City’s code
requires a total of 209 stalls, which includes 31 stalls of visitor parking.
Traffic and Access. The proposed land uses are consistent with the anticipated density range of future
development and access spacing requirements of the City. The Applicant has provided an assessment of
projected traffic volumes for this use. Collectively, the townhome and apartment AM Peak volume
would be 120 trips, with a PM Peak of 148 trips. The study concludes this project is within anticipated
volumes. The City Engineer has anticipated needs for turn lanes out of the site and along Island Trail,
and secondary access to all units. These requirements are reflected in the City Engineering memo.
8
Lighting. A photometric plan was provided for the apartment building. The plan shows that the building
complies with city code. All lighting fixtures proposed in the development will be required to be
downcast and compliant with applicable lighting standards.
PROPOSED PUD DEVIATIONS AND REVIEW.
The following list summarizes the proposed deviations from City Code that would be approved with this
PUD as presented. Strikethrough text is used where flexibilities are eliminated:
1. Minimum lot size for multifamily apartment building
2. Front and rear yard setbacks for townhome lots
3. Impervious Surface for attached townhome lots (individually)
4. Building setback from 5th Street North
5. Attached Townhomes not fronting a public street (private streets)
6. Boulevard Tree Spacing a minimum of every 50’
7. Parking between front façade of attached townhomes and the street (lots along southern project
boundary)
8. Lake Elmo Design Standards Manual
o Vinyl siding proposed on attached townhomes
o Access to apartment buildings is not located along a public street frontage
Staff’s concerns are reduced given the redesign of the attached townhome area. Strikethrough text is
used where concerns are eliminated or reduced:
• The plans do not exceed standards for landscaping, and in some cases, landscaping is fit into
tight spaces where it may not be viable long term.
• Sidewalks and trees are located very close to buildings and/or easements.
• The streetscape will lack trees/greenspace and be mostly paved driveway areas.
• Parallel Street parking is suggested along streets to create a better streetscape and maximize
green space. A condition has been added.
• Sidewalk connectivity is lacking in the southeast and southwest corners of the site east of Island
Trail. Staff suggest adding connections at those corners to better link this development with the
surrounding sidewalks. A condition has been added.
• The City’s design standards prohibit vinyl siding as a primary material and favor other, more
durable, materials for facades. Staff recommend that the vinyl siding be replaced with an
alternative that is consistent with the City’s design standard manual. A condition has been added.
• Except for an existing wooded area, the open space serving the attached townhomes east of
Island Trail largely consists of stormwater swales or mandatory setbacks between buildings.
Although it could technically meet minimum standards, this development is not providing high
quality open spaces or streetscapes.
• The proposed rear loaded design has created a combination of a street and alley, which does not
conform with the design standards in city code or guidelines. The site could be redesigned to
include a combination of public streets with private drives/alleys to create truly double-fronted
lots with better streetscaping.
• Access from the apartment building to the commercial uses west and north is lacking. The site
plan should be modified to make better use of the open space to the north of the building to both
connect the building to the sidewalk along 5th street north and possibly provide some amenities
to activate the open space.
9
• Screening of the parking lot to the south should be considered. Staff anticipate conflicts with the
parking area of Bremer financial.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS.
Given the plan revisions put forward by the Applicant, staff are supportive of a conditional approval of
the project. The project is closer to conformance with the City’s design standards and flexibilities
requested through the PUD are therefore more appropriate.
City Code Article XVIII provides for the requirements and process to approve a Planned Unit
Development. To approve a PUD, the project will need to meet minimum standards for a PUD found in
Section 105.12.1150 and meet at least one identified objective in section 105.12.1130. Both sections are
provided above in this report.
The process for the review of preliminary plats is established in City Code Section 103.00.090. A
development should be approved only if it does not meet the criteria for denial as follows:
• That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the city's comprehensive plan, development
code, capital improvements program, or other policy or regulation.
• That the physical characteristics of the site, including, but not limited to, topography, vegetation,
susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, and retention, are
such that the site is not suitable for the type or intensity of development or use contemplated.
• That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial
and irreversible environmental damage.
• That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the public.
• That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will conflict with easements on
record or with easements established by judgment of a court.
• That the subdivision is premature as determined by the standards of this title.
The Planning Commission is asked to create findings of fact in support of recommended action to the
City Council. Considerations for findings include the following:
• Is the project consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan?
• Is the project consistent with the City’s subdivision ordinance and criteria for approval or denial?
• Is the project consistent with the City’s minimum requirements and identified objectives for
Planned Unit Developments?
• Is the project conforming with the City’s zoning ordinance and design standards?
• How might the project impact surrounding land uses?
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS.
The process for the review of Comprehensive Plan Amendments is established in City Code Section
3.12.280 and Minnesota State Statutes. While specific findings are not established in that ordinance,
staff recommend the following findings:
1. That the applicant has submitted a request to the City of Lake Elmo to amend the Comprehensive
Plan in accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and
the Lake Elmo Planning Commission; and
10
2. That the request is to amend the Map 3-3, Future Land Use Map to change the future land use
category of the parcel addressed 8699 5th St N, with the PID 3302921130028, from Mixed Use
Commercial to High Density Residential; and
3. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan.
4. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the preliminary plat for the Inwood Development
granted by the Lake Elmo City Council on December 2, 2014.
AGENCY REVIEW:
The Applicant’s revised plans were circulated to City review staff for review. At this time, no revised
comments have yet been received. The following review comments are still noted:
• Fire Department – Memo dated March 4, 2025 provides comments on minimum standards for
roads, drives and parking areas, fire suppression requirements, building safety systems,
addressing and street naming, and fire department access.
• City Engineer – Memo dated April 7, 2025 provides comments on how the development would
be revised to meet minimum City engineering design standards.
• City Landscape Architect – Memo dated March 6, 2025 provides comments on conformance
with City tree preservation and landscaping requirements.
• South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) – Watershed District staff indicated there were
no comments.
• MN DNR – The MN DNR did not provide any comments.
• Washington County – County Staff indicated there were no comments on the project or
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
• City of Oakdale – City Staff indicated there were no comments on the project or Comprehensive
Plan Amendment.
• City of Woodbury – City Staff indicated there were no comments on the project or
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Minimum conditions of approval have been included to address agency review comments where
applicable.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Should the City approve the development, City staff suggest the following as minimum conditions for
approval:
1. Prior to the City finding any application for a final plat and final PUD complete, the applicant
shall fully address all comments in the following review memos, as may be subsequently revised,
to the satisfaction of the City:
a. City Engineer’s memo dated April 7, 2025;
b. City Landscape Architect’s memo dated March 6, 2025;
c. City Fire Chief’s memo dated March 4, 2025; and,
d. City Planning comments related to addressing.
2. The Applicant shall make the following plan revisions prior to resubmitting for Final Plat:
a. Replace 90-degree parking east of Island Trail with parallel parking, where appropriate, or on
street parking where street widths permit.
11
b. Create sidewalk connections on the southeast and southwest corners of the site east of Island
Trail to the proposed internal pedestrian network.
c. Replace proposed vinyl siding on the attached townhome facades with an approved alternative.
3. That prior to the City finding any application for final plat and final PUD complete, the applicant
shall demonstrate that the plans reflect compliance with South Washington Watershed (SWWD)
review requirements and that the applicant provide the City evidence that all conditions attached
to a SWWD permit will be met before the starting any grading activity on the site.
4. That the applicant shall obtain all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable
City permits (building, grading, sign, etc.), NPDES/SWPPP permits and South Washington
Watershed District approval before starting any grading or construction activities.
5. The final plat shall include all necessary and additional public right-of-way and easements.
6. The applicant/developer is responsible, at their own expense, for installing all required right of
way improvements.
7. A storm water maintenance and easement agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be
executed and recorded with the final plat.
8. The applicant/developer shall provide the City a fee in lieu of park land dedication as required by
Section 103.00.150, less any applicable credits, to be paid prior to recording of the final plat.
9. If landscaping is proposed in the City’s Right of Way, a landscape and irrigation license
agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat.
10. A sign permit will be required for any signage installed on site, and signage must comply with
applicable city standards.
11. The Applicant shall submit information demonstrating compliance with a Plat Opinion by the
City Attorney, to the satisfaction of the City, before execution or recording of the Final Plat.
12. If necessary, the applicant shall provide the City with a copy of written permission for any off-
site grading work and storm sewer discharges to adjacent properties before starting any site
work, grading and as part of any final plat or final PUD application.
13. Before the execution and recording of a final plat for the development, the developer or applicant
shall enter into a Developer’s Agreement or a Site Work Agreement with the City. Such an
Agreement must be approved by the City Attorney and by the City Council. The Agreement
shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction and payment for the required
improvements with financial guarantees therefore. The Agreement shall outline any approved
phasing plan.
14. The applicant or developer shall enter into a separate grading agreement with the City before
starting any grading activity in advance of final plat/ PUD approval. The City Engineer shall
review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat or final PUD, and said plan
shall document the extent of any proposed grading on the site.
15. That the Applicant must submit the final plat within 180 days after City Council approval of the
preliminary plat or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void unless a request for
a time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the City Council.
12
PUBLIC COMMENT:
A public hearing was sent to surrounding property owners on April 1st, 2025, and published in the
Stillwater Gazette on April 4th, 2025. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this project at
its regular meeting on April 14, 2025.
Community members present provided comments on the project which staff have summarized:
• Concerns for increase in vehicle traffic in areas surrounding the development project
• Concern for traffic speeds along 5th Street North
• Desire for safe crossing locations across 5th Street North
• Comments on stormwater reuse system in existing Inwood additions
OPTIONS:
The Planning Commission may:
• Recommend approval of the request;
• Recommend approval of the request with conditions;
• Recommend denial of the request. Citing findings of fact for denial;
• Table the request for consideration at a future meeting.
RECCOMENDATION:
Given the revisions made to the plans, staff are supportive of approval with conditions. A
recommendation to the City Council is requested to allow this project to move forward for review.
The Planning Commission should discuss the requests made by the Developer and provide a
recommended action with supporting findings of fact. Considerations for possible findings are provided
in the above sections of this report.
Example [Approval/Denial] recommendation motion:
“Move to recommend the City Council [approve/deny] the preliminary plat and PUD for the Inwood
Townhome Development requested by M/I Homes with the findings of fact proposed by the
Commission.”
Example Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval motion:
“Move to recommend City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request by M/I
Homes for the subject property with the findings proposed by City Staff.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Submittal Package (revised plans received April 29, 2025)
2. City Engineer Memo April 7, 2025
3. City Fire Dept Memo March 4, 2025
4. City Landscape Architect Memo March 6, 2025
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT,
PRELIMINARY PLAT,
DEVELOPMENT STAGE
PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT REQUESTS
Inwood Townhomes
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC (M/I Homes) is submitting application for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, Preliminary Plat, Development Stage Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for a development
containing 148 townhomes and a 123-unit apartment building. M/I Homes will be constructing the townhomes
and partnering with Rachel Development, Inc. for the apartment building. Townhomes and an apartment
building were shown on the approved Inwood preliminary planned unit development plans, and the Inwood
Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Resolution 2014-94 approved the PUD which includes
275 single family homes and 264 multifamily units. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and
Traffic Study were completed and approved with the approval of this preliminary plat. M/I Homes (dba
Hans Hagen Homes) developed Inwood, including the extension of sewer and water to the multi-family
property, as well as the construction of 5th Street and Island Trail. M/I Homes also constructed ponding and
an infiltration basin to serve the subject property.
We brought forth the application to the April 14, 2025, Planning Commission, and it was communicated that
some changes would need to be made to the plan in order for the Planning Commission to recommend
approval. Since then, we’ve made several changes to the site plan, which are outlined below.
S I T E P L A N
We are proposing private streets throughout the community with one street connection to 5th Street North and
one connection to Island Trail. All townhomes will be our City Collection Townhomes, which are our new rear-
loaded three-story townhomes. The proposed apartment is located on the northwest corner of the site,
separated from all but one townhome building by Island Trail. M/I Homes and Rachel Development have
experience working together on multi-family projects similar to this one. One such project is Marsh View which
is located at 137th Avenue North in Rogers, Minnesota. An aerial photo of this development is included in this
narrative.
Changes since Sketch Plan. M/I Homes previously submitted a sketch plan review application to City staff
and have subsequently made amendments to the proposed plan. We have revised the street layout to
eliminate dead-end road and have provided an additional access to the apartment building. We also
increased the front yard setbacks from the private street from 25 feet to 30 feet. Additionally, we have
combined two access points off Island Trail to one and have rotated the townhome buildings to the west of
Island Trail to face the public street and have combined those buildings, creating parking in the rear.
Changes since Planning Commission. As previously mentioned, the Preliminary Plat, PUD and
Comprehensive Plan applications were considered at the April 14, 2025 Planning Commission. Since this
meeting, the following changes have been made:
• We aligned the access points from the east and west of Island Trail.
• We created a 28-foot-wide street through the center of the development. This will create an
aesthetically pleasing streetscape with front entrances of the townhomes facing the entrance street.
Alleys will circulate the development to accommodate the rear-loaded garages.
• Stub streets were removed on the east side of the plan.
• Entrance landscaping was added as well as a landscaping feature in the middle of the site and
landscape buffering from the bank’s parking lot to the south.
• Increased open space from 8.63 acres to 9.21 acres.
Staff Report/Planning Commission Feedback Responses. The following provides response to comments
received from both the Staff Report included in the April 14, 2025 Planning Commission meeting packet as
well as feedback received from said meeting:
Inwood Townhomes
Page 2
• Traffic Concerns.
o Included in this resubmittal is a Traffic Review of the Inwood Development executed by SSTS,
LLC. The conclusion of this analysis is that the traffic volume shows less intense traffic volumes
than those previously studied in the 2014 Traffic Study for the Inwood development. No
adverse traffic impacts are anticipated on surrounding roadways and intersections. Traffic
from the proposed development is anticipated to be primarily to/from the south (I-94 and
retail) and west (I-694 and retail) with very low demand to use Island Trail through the
neighborhood to the north. Additionally, Island Trail is designated as a Minor Collector per the
City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan and was designed and built accordingly.
• Turn Lanes.
o The engineering memorandum indicates that turn lanes should be added along Island Trail for
both the east and west access locations, each having more than 35 units. The Inwood
Preliminary Plat contemplated a very similar site design to what has been submitted with this
application with a similar number of units, and Island Trail was designed and built to
accommodate this plan. No turn lanes were required at that time. There is not sufficient room
to accommodate turn lanes, and this would result in ripping up previously constructed
sidewalks. Additionally, the adopted Lake Elmo Engineering Design and Construction
Standards Manual do not require a turn lane for developments with 35 units or more.
• Design Comments.
o The staff report states that vinyl is prohibited, but the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and
Standards Manual state that materials which are prohibited as the primary façade material
include vinyl. This indicates that vinyl is allowed but must be secondary to the primary building
materials outlined in said manual. We would agree to use Hardie siding for the board and
batten on the townhomes but would not be amenable to using this material for the entire
façade for a number of reasons. First, Hardie requires more maintenance than vinyl including
painting and caulking. This would increase Homeowners Association dues and maintenance.
Vinyl breathes well, has a higher energy rating, and there is almost no possibility of water
intrusion with no requirement to paint or caulk. Second, Hardie would add a significant cost
increase, as much as $7,000 a townhome, where buyers see little to no value in this change in
material. We have provided a breakdown of the percentage of vinyl the townhomes would
incorporate if we used Hardie for the board and batten, and the total percentage would be
42.6% vinyl, with the front elevation consisting of only 30.7% vinyl. We have also included a
rendering of the apartment building from the 5th Street side in response to a comment about
the apartment design.
• Landscaping.
o We added additional entrance landscaping as well as a landscape feature in the middle of
the site and buffering from the bank parking lot. While there is not a tree proposed exactly
every 50 feet along the private streets, the ordinance reads that a minimum of one tree per
lot or one tree for every 50 feet of street frontage, lake shore or stream frontage, or fraction
thereof (whichever is greater) shall be planted and specifies that such trees may be clustered
or placed at regular intervals to best complement existing landscape design patterns in the
area. We also meet the requirement of providing a minimum of five trees per acre of
disturbance in addition to the aforementioned requirement.
C O M P R E H E N S IV E P L A N A M E N D M EN T
With the 2040 Comprehensive Update (well after the entire Inwood site had an approved preliminary plat),
a portion of the site to the west of Island Trail was re-guided from High Density Residential to Mixed Use
Commercial, and the east side of Island Trail remained High Density Residential. This Land Use Guide Plan
change was inconsistent with the approved preliminary pat for Inwood At the time of the Inwood PUD
approval the City of Lake Elmo allowed the blending of densities across parcels. Since, then, however,
Inwood Townhomes
Page 3
standards have changed, and a Comprehensive Plan amendment is necessary to allow the proposed
neighborhood as originally approved by the City. The parcel to the west of Island Trail has a proposed
density of 21.13 units per acre, which is above the allowed maximum density of the Mixed-Use Commercial
land use guidance of 15 units per acre. The east side of Island Trail proposes 141 townhomes, and with a site
area of 13.1 acres, has a net density of 10.76 units per acre, which is well below the allowed density of 15
units per acre. As such, we are requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to guide the parcel on the west
side of Island Trail back to High Density Residential and blend the density across the entire site as originally
approved in the Inwood PUD. The City’s land use plan has long designed the subject property as High
Density, which occurred before any of the existing homes were built in the single-family portion of the Inwood
PUD
Existing Land Use at time of Adoption of 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use at time of Adoption of 2040 Comprehensive Plan
The proposed development is zoned High Density Residential (HDR)
Re-
guided
area
Inwood Townhomes
Page 4
The proposed development includes the following parcels:
PID# 3302921140029 (12.7 acres)
PID# 3302921130028 (5.7 acres)
PID# 3302921420018 (0.4 acres)
PID# 3302921420017 (0.5 acres)
Total site acreage: 19.3 acres
With 271 units, this results in a density of 14.06 units per acre, which is within the allowable density.
G E N E R A L D EV ELO P M E N T S TAG E P U D / P R EL I M I N A RY P L AT
The proposed development is part of the approved Inwood PUD. The development meets the City’s minimum
PUD requirements in that it is larger than five acres, at least 20% of the site is open space which will be
protected by a drainage and utility easement, and streets are designed to maximize connectivity in each
cardinal direction.
We believe the following PUD objectives are met with this site plan:
1) Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than
conventional approaches.
Response: The original Inwood PUD included the use of private streets. Private streets are
necessary to implement the original Inwood PUD approval. We believe the site design
provides sufficient circulation and an eye-pleasing streetscape.
2) Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential, commercial and public
features.
Response: The Inwood PUD provides a mixture of commercial and a wide variety of housing
options including single-family homes, villa homes (which are targeted towards an aging
population), townhomes, and an apartment.
3) Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses.
Response: 5th Street North buffers the apartment site and townhomes. The townhomes are
mostly buffered from the apartment by Island Trail. This is consistent with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
4) Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities, natural
resource protection and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional
land development techniques.
Inwood Townhomes
Page 5
Response: The Inwood PUD includes a public park and a linear trail corridor than extends from
5th Street to 10th Street. Other trails and opens space areas are incorporated into the overall
Inwood PUD. Private open space areas are also incorporated into the townhome portion of
the Inwood PUD
5) Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or
commercial facilities; and emphasized to create additional opportunities for lifecycle housing to all
income and age groups.
Response: See response to 2.
6) Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful and sensitive
placement of buildings and facilities.
Response: An Environmental Assessment Worksheet, which included this site and contemplated
the multifamily and townhome portion of the site, was submitted and accepted by the City as
part of the approved original PUD. There are no significant environmental features on this site.
7) Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the
development and surrounding land uses.
Response: As previously mentioned, our rear-loaded City Collection townhomes will front all
public streets, providing visual interest from the single-family homes across from 5th Street
North. The apartment will include landscaping to provide a buffer from 5th Street North, and
the parking lot is screened from 5th Street North by the apartment building itself.
8) Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand on transportation,
and/or the promotion of energy resource conservation.
Response: Private streets will be owned and maintained by the HOA, which will reduce
demand on City infrastructure and snow removal services.
9) Establishing measures to protect and preserve groundwater storage.
Response: Ponding and an infiltration basin were constructed with the development of the
single-family home portion of the Inwood development. Stormwater reuse for irrigation is
being utilized in the single-family portion of the site.
10) Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain areas of the city
and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be achieved.
Response: This application will allow the completion of the Inwood PUD as originally
approved.
The following table demonstrates requested zoning flexibility.
Standard HDR Zoning Standard
(Single Family Attached)
Proposed
Minimum Lot Size 1,750 square feet
(acknowledges that common
lot areas will add a higher
total than 1,750 square feet)
19.3 acres=840,708 square feet
This divided by the number of units
totals 3,102.24 square feet per unit
Minimum Lot Width 20 feet 21.33 feet
Minimum Front Setback 20 feet 20 feet from Island Trail and 5th
Street North with stoop (15 feet)
abutting 5th Street North, Island Trail
and Street A. 30 feet to back of curb
on private streets.
Minimum Side Setback 10 feet 20 feet between buildings1
Minimum Corner Side Setback 15 feet 20 feet1
Rear Setback 20 feet 30 feet to boundary1
Street Frontage I5 feet of street frontage This is a requested flexibility because
the majority of townhome units are on
private streets.
Inwood Townhomes
Page 6
Impervious Surface 75% 60% (the existing plan shows 52%)
Maximum Number of Units
within a Single Building
8 8
Minimum Street Frontage 15 feet We are proposing private streets,
which are a conditional use per
Section 105.12.740 (g)(2)(a).
Common or Private Open
Space
300 square feet per unit for
single family attached (300 X
148 = 44,400 square feet or
1.03 acres) and 200 square
feet per unit for multifamily
(200 X 123 = 24,600 square
feet or 0.56 acres) or 1.59
acres total
8.63 acres of open space, which
excludes the public park and open
space areas already dedicated to
the City as part of the Inwood PUD.
Private Streets Private Streets are an
allowed conditional use in the
HDR district.
We are proposing 24-foot-wide
private streets with 30-foot front
yard setbacks.
Driveway setbacks No driveway or curb cute
shall be less than 50 feet
from any right-of-way line of
any street intersections.
A driveway must be at least
five feet from any side lot
line.
We are requesting flexibility from
these standards, as these are private
streets that will only be used by this
development’s residents and their
visitors.
Garage Design Guidelines Attached garages are
encouraged to be side or
rear loaded
All townhomes will be our City
Collection townhomes, which have
rear-loaded garages.
Parking Multifamily: One space per
one bedroom unit and two
spaces per two-bedroom unit
or larger (66 studio and one-
bedroom units and 57 two-
bedroom units or larger=180
required) and one space per
four units for visitor parking
(123X0.25=31, 211 total)
Single-family attached: Ten
percent of parking spaces for
visitor parking (148X0.1=15
visitor spaces
Multi Family: 99 above ground and
123 underground parking spaces
(222 total)
Single-family attached: Two garage
and two driveway parking spaces
plus staff has stated that street
parking will be provided on both
sides of Street A, which will
accommodate approximately 50
parking spaces as well as 18 off-
street parking spaces
1. City standards do not contemplate individually platted units on private streets with surrounding
commons area, which leads to noncompliance with strict interpretation of the code.
D E S I G N S TA N DA R D S
The following demonstrates how the proposed plan meets the City’s design standards:
• Buildings are located as close to and easily accessible by the street as possible while still meeting
setback requirement with allowed flexibility.
• Common open spaces are located at the interior and rear of the site.
• Sidewalks are provided parallel to the street and provide interconnectivity within the development.
Inwood Townhomes
Page 7
• Parking is screened from public streets.
• Townhomes that front a public street are rear loaded.
• Buildings provide multiple roof lines and visual interest.
P H A S I N G
We are proposing to begin construction on the first phase in spring of 2025, the second phase in the spring of
2026, and the third phase in spring of 2027.
L A N D S CA P I N G / TR E E P R ES E RVAT IO N
The landscaping plan is included with the submittal. M/I Homes has also previously completed all of the
landscaping and berming along 5th Street as part of the Inwood PUD. This landscaping includes the
boulevards adjacent to the subject property. There are only six boulevard trees proposed to be removed
along 5th Street North to facilitate construction, which will be replaced in similar locations. We have provided
sufficient boulevard trees, meeting the 50-foot spacing requirement for both the townhome and apartment
site and have provided the sufficient number of trees required per area of disturbance (this includes the trees
that will remain on site). Parking lot landscaping meets landscaping area and shade tree requirements.
TOW N H O ME IN FO R M AT I O N
The townhomes in the proposed development will consist of M/I’s Carriage and City Collection townhomes.
The different townhome designs provide for added character and visual interest within the neighborhood as
well as varying prices. The two-story Carriage Collection is planned to be positioned to the south and east of
the site, adjacent to the existing single-family homes, with the three-story City Collection along public street
frontages. A variety of exterior colors will be used throughout the neighborhood to provide additional visual
interest while avoiding a monotony of colors.
The Carriage Collection offers a range of design features and options and ranges in size from 1,667 square
feet to 1,772 square feet with 3 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms. The City Collection plans will provide up to 4
bedrooms and 3.5 bathrooms ranging from 1,898 square feet to 2,080 square feet.
R E S T R I C T IV E C OV E N A N TS
Inwood Townhomes will have a Homeowners Association (HOA) that will provide for the maintenance of the
overall common elements in the community, including landscaping and irrigation of the common areas, snow
removal from sidewalks and private streets, and exterior maintenance. In the unlikely event that the site runs
out of snow storage, the HOA service will haul out snow from the site. The HOA will also provide for
restrictions on outdoor storage, parking (no boats, campers, or trailers) in order to keep the community looking
orderly and well maintained.
FEES
With the single-family portion of the development, the Developers Agreements for each addition detailed the
following:
• Parkland. The Development Contract for Inwood dated June 9, 2015 detailed that park dedication
fees were satisfied for the single-family portion of the Inwood Development with the dedication of
Outlot L (net 10.73 acres) and that the 1.16 acres of excess park dedication credit was to be applied
for the future multi-family residential area as conceptually shown on the Inwood PUD concept plan.
• Sewer and Water Availability Charges. M/I Homes was responsible for paying $3,000 for both
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) and Water Availability Charge (WAC) per residential equivalency
Inwood Townhomes
Page 8
unit (REU) prior to recording the final plat. A $1,000 Sewer Connection Charge, the Metropolitan
Council’s Sewer Availability Charge ($2,435 at the time) and a Water Connection Charge of $1,000
per REU was due at the time of building permit.
• County Right-of-Way (ROW) Improvements. M/I Homes was responsible for improvements in the
Washington County ROW along Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13) including construction of a new median
crossing, turn lanes, and other improvements as were required by the County as well as its
proportionate share of the future traffic signal at the intersection of Inwood and 5th Street. There were
to be no further obligations to the City or County for the construction or payment of a future traffic
signal for any future phases of the Inwood PUD.
Inwood Townhomes
Page 9
E L EVATI O N EX A M P L E S
City Collection*
*Colors will vary, and slight design modifications are being made.
Apartment Building
Inwood Townhomes
Page 10
Marsh View Townhome/ Development
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O NI
N
W
O
O
D
4
T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
I
S
L
A
N
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_cover.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.COVER
1
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
VICINITY MAP
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
SITE
OWNER:OWNER:
OWNER:
OWNER:
EAGLE POINT BLVD.
IS
L
A
N
D
T
R
A
I
L
IS
L
A
N
D
TR
A
I
L
IV
W
O
O
D
CI
R
C
L
E
N
.
5TH STREE
T
N
.
5TH
ST
R
E
E
T
N
.
5
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
N
.
LEGEND
OWNER:
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-01_excon.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofINWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota EXISTING CONDITIONS
Thomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, plan
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Land Surveyor under
the laws of the State of Minnesota
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:12/20/24 40361
DRAWN BY:
ISSUE DATE:
FILE NO:
Revisions:
16
2NPC
12/20/24
1870
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments
3. 4/28/25 Per City Comments
OWNER:OWNER:
OWNER:
OWNER:
OWNER:
STREET A
LEGEND
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-01_preplat index.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofINWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota PRELIMINARY PLAT INDEX
Thomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, plan
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Land Surveyor under
the laws of the State of Minnesota
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:12/20/24 40361
DRAWN BY:
ISSUE DATE:
FILE NO:
Revisions:
16
3NPC
12/20/24
1870
SITE DATA SETBACK DATA
SEE SHEET 4
SEE SHEET 5
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments
3. 4/28/25 Per City Comments
OWNER:
STREET
A
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-01_preplat.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofINWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota PRELIMINARY PLAT
Thomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, plan
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Land Surveyor under
the laws of the State of Minnesota
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:12/20/24 40361
DRAWN BY:
ISSUE DATE:
FILE NO:16
4NJS
12/20/24
1870
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments
3. 4/28/25 Per City Comments
OWNER:
OWNER:
OWNER:
OWNER:
STREET
A
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-01_preplat.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofINWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota PRELIMINARY PLAT
Thomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, plan
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Land Surveyor under
the laws of the State of Minnesota
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:12/20/24 40361
DRAWN BY:
ISSUE DATE:
FILE NO:16
5NJS
12/20/24
1870
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments
3. 4/28/25 Per City Comments
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_site.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
6
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
PRELIMINARY SITE &
UTILITY PLAN INDEX
SITE PLAN LEGEND
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
I
N
W
O
O
D
4
T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
K
W
I
K
T
R
I
P
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_site.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
PRELIMINARY SITE &
UTILITY PLAN
7
K W I
K
T
R
I
P
E X I
S
T
I
N
G
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_site.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
PRELIMINARY SITE &
UTILITY PLAN
8
I N W
O
O
D
4 T H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_site.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
SMALL/DRY UTILITY
CORRIDOR LAYOUT
9
I N
W
O
O
D
4 T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_gr.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.GRADING INDEX
10
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O NI
N
W
O
O
D
4
T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D1 S T A D
D
I
T
I
O
N
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
K
W
I
K
T
R
I
P
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_gr.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
PRELIMINARY GRADING
& EROSION CONTROL PLAN
11
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_gr.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.
PRELIMINARY GRADING
& EROSION CONTROL PLAN
12
I N
W
O
O
D
4 T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
S T O C K
P I L E A R E A
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_details.dwgSave Date:04/28/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.DETAILS
13
PARKING
VEHICLE I D
REQUIRED
UP TO $200 FINE
FOR VIOLATION
VAN
ACCESSIBLE
NO PARKING
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_details.dwgSave Date:04/28/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.DETAILS
14
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_details.dwgSave Date:04/28/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.DETAILS
15
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\engineering\prelim plans\5172-01_details.dwgSave Date:04/28/25
16
Revisions:
1. 1/23/25 per City Comments.Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
KRO
12/20/24
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.
25063
BJK
#5172-01
2. 2/11/25 per City Comments.
3. 4/28/25 per City Comments.RETAINING WALL PROFILES 16
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
K W
I
K
T R
I
P
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
I
N
W
O
O
D
4
T
H
A
D
D
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
L1PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
3
BH
1
HO
2
HB
2
HL
3
HT
1
FM
3
BF
3
WP
3
WP
2
SB
1
BF
1
CA
2
KC
4
HL
4
FM
1
CA
1
BF
5
CH
2
BF
3
RM
6
WO
5
BH
3
RB
3
WP
3
BF
2
HO
3
WP
2
HO 4
WO
4
SB
3
WO
4
WP
1
BF
4
RB
3
BF
3
HT
3
JL
1
BF
4
FM
2
HT
1
CA
3
WO
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
L2PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
3
WP
3
3
BF
3
HL
5
WP
6
BL
1
WP
3
BF
6
WP
8
BH
3
BF
6
AE
1
WP
1
BH
2
FM
5
CH
3
HO
3
RB
3
WP
5
HB
3
HT
3
JL
1
BF
4
FM
3
BH
1
HO
3
WO
2
HL
6
KC
1
SB
2
WP
3
WO
1
WP
1
SB1
BH
1
HO
2
BF
2
BH
1
WP
2
CA
2
JL
6
CA4
JL
3
BL
1
WP
6
FM4
BL
2
HT
2
WP
2
BH
3
BF2
SB
1
CA
3
WO
11
RM
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
L3PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER
TREES
RM 3 Acer rubrum `Northwood`Northwoods Red Maple 2.5" Cal.B&B
FM 4 Acer x freemanii `Sienna`Sienna Glen Maple 2.5" Cal.B&B
RB 4 Betula nigra
Clump Form, 2.5" Cal Equivalent River Birch Multi-Trunk 10` Ht.B&B
HL 4 Gleditsia triacanthos inermis `Harve`Northern Acclaim Thornless Honey Locust 2.5" Cal.B&B
KC 2 Gymnocladus dioica `Espresso`Kentucky Coffeetree 2.5" Cal.B&B
WO 10 Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak 2.5" Cal.B&B
HO 4 Quercus x macdanielii `Clemons` TM Heritage Oak 2.5" Cal.B&B
CONIFEROUS TREES
BF 8 Abies balsamea Balsam Fir 6` Ht.B&B
BH 5 Picea glauca densata Black Hills Spruce 6` Ht.B&B
WP 12 Pinus strobus White Pine 6` Ht.B&B
ORNAMENTAL TREES
SB 4 Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`
Clump Form, 2" Cal Equivalent Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry 8` Ht.B&B
CA 2 Malus x `Prairiefire`
Red Flowers, Clump Form, 2" Cal Equivalent Prairiefire Crabapple 7` Ht.B&B
GROUND COVERS
DG 1,430 sf Decomposed Granite
Compacted, Non-Woven Geotextile Incidental Decomposed Granite 4" Depth
ROCK 12,322 sf Rock Mulch
Non-Woven Geotextile Incidental 1.5" Trap Rock Mulch 4" Depth
SOD 78,432 sf Turf Sod Bluegrass Kentucky Bluegrass sod
TII 5,960 sf
Type II - Stormwater Seed Mix
Refer to notes for acceptable seeding methods
Seeding Rate 52.0 lb/ac
MnDOT Seed Mix 33-261 seed
PLANT SCHEDULE APARTMENTS
SYMBOL CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER
TREES
RM 11 Acer rubrum `Northwood`Northwoods Red Maple 2.5" Cal.B&B
FM 13 Acer x freemanii `Sienna`Sienna Glen Maple 2.5" Cal.B&B
RB 6 Betula nigra
Clump Form, 2.5" Cal Equivalent River Birch Multi-Trunk 10` Ht.B&B
HB 7 Celtis occidentalis Common Hackberry 2.5" Cal.B&B
HL 7 Gleditsia triacanthos inermis `Harve`Northern Acclaim Thornless Honey Locust 2.5" Cal.B&B
KC 6 Gymnocladus dioica `Espresso`Kentucky Coffeetree 2.5" Cal.B&B
WO 12 Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak 2.5" Cal.B&B
HO 6 Quercus x macdanielii `Clemons` TM Heritage Oak 2.5" Cal.B&B
BL 13 Tilia americana `Boulevard`Boulevard Linden 2.5" Cal.B&B
AE 6 Ulmus americana `Princeton`American Elm 2.5" Cal.B&B
CONIFEROUS TREES
BF 18 Abies balsamea Balsam Fir 6` Ht.B&B
BH 20 Picea glauca densata Black Hills Spruce 6` Ht.B&B
WP 27 Pinus strobus White Pine 6` Ht.B&B
CH 10 Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 6` Ht.B&B
ORNAMENTAL TREES
SB 6 Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`
Clump Form, 2" Cal Equivalent Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry 8` Ht.B&B
HT 8 Crataegus crus-galli `Inermis`Thornless Hawthorn 2" Cal.B&B
CA 9 Malus x `Prairiefire`
Red Flowers, Clump Form, 2" Cal Equivalent Prairiefire Crabapple 7` Ht.B&B
JL 9 Syringa reticulata `Ivory Silk`
White Flowers Ivory Silk Japanese Tree Lilac 2" Cal.B&B
GROUND COVERS
SOD 253,791 sf Turf Sod Bluegrass Kentucky Bluegrass sod
TI 6,953 sf
Type I - Turf Seed Mix
Refer to notes for acceptable seeding methods
Seeding Rate 180 lb/ac
MnDOT Seed Mix 25-151 seed
PLANT SCHEDULE TOWNHOMES
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
L4PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
I
N
W
O
O
D
4
T
H
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
I N W O O D
1 S T A D D I T I O N
K W
I
K
T R
I
P
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_tree preservation.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
T1
TREE PRESERVATION PLAN
2
PRO
P
O
S
E
D
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
S
PRO
P
O
S
E
D
T
O
W
N
H
O
M
E
S
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
INWOOD TOWNHOMES
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS, LLC
5354 Parkdale Drive, #100
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
ofof
f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-01 - inwood\cad c3d\landscape\5172-01_tree preservation.dwgSave Date:04/29/25
4
Revisions:
1.01/23/25 - Per City Comments.
2.02/11/25 - Per City Comments.
3.04/28/25 - Per City Comments.
Print Name:
Signature:
Date:License #:
Drawn:
Designed:
Date:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Landscape Architect under
the laws of the State of Minnesota 12/20/24
RJR
12/20/24
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
56346
RJR
#5172-01
T2
TREE PRESERVATION PLAN
2
CAPRI
Job NumberJob Number
BARCELONA ATHENS
Job NumberJob Number
BARCELONAATHENS II
Job Number
CAPRI
Job Number
A
B
AA
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
CAPRI
Job Number Job Number
BARCELONAATHENS
Job Number Job Number
BARCELONA ATHENS II
Job Number
CAPRI
Job Number
3
1 1
33
12
1
3
1 2
1
2
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
A
B
A
AA1
A
PFG
05/17/2022
--
--
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
Ci
t
y
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
--
--
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
A
D
D
R
E
S
S
CI
T
Y
,
M
N
CU
S
T
O
M
E
R
BUILDING --
Front Elevation
1/8"=1'-0"
1
Left Elevation
1/8"=1'-0"
3
Rear Elevation
1/8"=1'-0"
4
Right Elevation
1/8"=1'-0"
2
Ex
t
e
r
i
o
r
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Drawing No.
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
:
Ad
d
r
e
s
s
:
Ci
t
y
:
Sh
e
e
t
T
i
t
l
e
:
53
5
4
P
a
r
k
d
a
l
e
D
r
.
#
1
0
0
St
.
L
o
u
i
s
P
a
r
k
,
M
N
5
5
4
1
6
76
3
.
5
8
6
.
7
2
0
0
Lo
t
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Da
t
e
By
Th
e
s
e
p
l
a
n
s
a
r
e
e
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
M
/
I
H
o
m
e
s
.
A
l
l
dr
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
se
r
v
i
c
e
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
e
d
b
y
M
/
I
H
o
m
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
a
n
d
m
u
s
t
b
e
re
t
u
r
n
e
d
u
p
o
n
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
.
T
h
e
s
e
p
l
a
n
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
o
n
l
y
.
T
h
e
s
e
p
l
a
n
s
m
a
y
v
a
r
y
fr
o
m
m
o
d
e
l
h
o
m
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
t
o
v
e
r
i
f
y
s
u
i
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
p
l
a
n
s
w
i
t
h
o
w
n
e
r
.
Th
e
s
e
p
l
a
n
s
a
r
e
e
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
M
/
I
H
o
m
e
s
.
Mo
d
e
l
:
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
:
Cl
i
e
n
t
:
This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17"
Date:
Drawn By:
Job #
X XFi
n
a
l
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
Da
t
e
mi
n
n
e
a
p
o
l
i
s
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
@
M
I
H
O
M
E
S
.
c
o
m
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
:
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 7, 2025
To: Nathan Fuesrt, Planning Consultant Re: Inwood Townhomes
Jason Stopa, Community Development Director Preliminary Plat/Plans
Marty Powers, Public Works Director
Nate Stanley, City Engineer
Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer
From: Jack Griffin, Sr. Project Manager
An engineering review has been completed for the Inwood Townhomes Preliminary Plat/Plans received
on February 27, 2025. The review consisted of the following documentation:
· Inwood Townhomes Preliminary Plat and Plans dated February 11, 2025.
· Stormwater Management Plan dated December 20, 2024.
STATUS/FINDINGS: A condition of Preliminary Plat approval, if granted, must require the applicant to
revise and resubmit Preliminary Plat/Plans to address each review comment and condition of approval to
the satisfaction of City staff prior to the City accepting a Final Plat/Plan application. Engineering has
prepared the following review comments to be addressed. A point-by-point response letter must
accompany the plan resubmittal.
SITE PLANS, TRAFFIC AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT
1. Right-of-way dedication. No additional right-of-way dedication is required along 5th Street.
Additional right-of-way dedication along Island Trail may be needed to accommodate turn lanes at
the new proposed site accesses.
2. Access Management for East Parcel. The east parcel is allowed a single access location to 5th Street
as shown at the Inwood Circle N. intersection, and a single access location along Island Trail.
3. Access Management for West Parcel. The west parcel may have a single new access location along
Island Trail. The west Island Trail access location should be aligned with the Island Trail access
location for the east parcel.
4. Turn lanes should be added along Island Trail for both the east and west access locations, each
having more than 35 new units.
5. The subdivision phasing must provide secondary access for 30 or greater units per Fire Code
adopted by the City.
6. No access will be allowed to Eagle Point Boulevard due to limited access spacing.
7. Secondary access for the proposed 124-unit apartment building is required per Fire Code. The
secondary access must connect to the shared driveway for Outlot A of the Inwood 6th Addition. A
shared driveway easement has been created for this connection as part of the Inwood 6th
Addition. The access design should be improved to encourage equal distribution of traffic to the
5th Street and Island Trail access locations.
Page: 2
8. The subdivision proposes 24-foot wide private streets with no sidewalks adjacent to the street.
City design standards require public streets for medium and high-density residential subdivisions
to be minimum 32-feet in width located within a 66-foot right-of-way. Sidewalks are also required
along both sides of the public street.
9. The proposed design is not recommended as presented due to significant narrowing of the street
and utility corridors, and increased conflicts between various design elements. If the City approves
the Preliminary Plat, the Plans must be further detailed and revised to eliminate encroachments
and conflicts between public watermain and public sanitary sewer, private storm sewer, small/dry
utility corridor preservation, trees and landscaping, drainage, and pedestrian facilities.
10. Whether the streets are public or private, all street intersections must be at 90 degrees and
maintain 50-ft of tangent with maximum longitudinal slopes of 2.5%. Plan revisions are required
accordingly.
11. Driveways must be further detailed, labeled and dimensioned to demonstrate compliance with all
requirements of the City Code. Plan revisions are required. Particular attention should be detailed
on the plans to demonstrate compliance with the required offsets from the right-of-way at
intersections, the required offsets from side lot lines, the driveway separation distance
requirements, and connection of each driveway to the public street at 90-degree angles.
Lot 64, Block 3 must be revised to increase the driveway setback to 50-feet from the Island
Trail intersection per City driveway standards.
Lots 9 and 10, Block 2; and Lots 19-22, Block 3; include driveways located on dead-end streets
with no City standard turn around. Redesign is recommended or approval is required from the
City Planning and Fire Departments.
Lots 13-17, Block 3 are located on a curve with the driveways failing to intersect the street at
90-degrees as required. Redesign is recommended for these lots to revise driveway layout, and
utility service layout. Horizontal geometrics for this curve must be detailed for City review.
12. Dedicated drainage and utility easements, minimum 10-feet wide, are required along all public
roadway frontage, including 5th Street and Island Trail. Small/dry utility corridor preservation is
also required along all private streets (if allowed). All easement areas must be free from all
encroachments other than those approved by the City Engineer and upon execution of an
easement encroachment agreement. Prohibited encroachments include, but are not limited to
trees, structures, landscaping, fences, retaining walls, storm sewer running parallel with the
easement, stormwater basins and BMPs, and grading that exceeds 4:1.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
1. The proposed development is subject to a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) meeting State,
South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) and City rules. A SWWD permit is required.
2. The Preliminary Plat includes improvements that reside within the larger Inwood subdivision in
which stormwater management provisions have been previously designed, permitted and
constructed. The site design will create 10.64 acres of new impervious surfaces, or 55 percent
impervious surfaces. The existing stormwater management system constructed with previous
Inwood development phases assumed these parcels would contain 75% impervious surfaces.
Therefore, the existing stormwater management system will accommodate the subdivision as
proposed.
3. Approval of the Preliminary Plat/Plans for the development is contingent upon all SWMP revisions,
as required by the SWWD or other applicable permitting agency, being submitted to the City for
review and approval.
4. Approval of the preliminary grading and storm sewer plans for the development is contingent upon
all grading plans being reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of any grading
or construction.
Page: 3
5. Overland emergency overflow (EOF) elevations are required throughout the site, requiring a
system of interconnecting drainage ways. Low openings for adjacent structures must maintain 1-
foot above any adjacent EOF in the as-built condition.
6. Plan revisions may be required to meet City design standards and to mitigate all encroachments.
7. All storm sewer systems internal to the subdivision will be privately owned and maintained. A
Stormwater Management Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form of
agreement must be executed and recorded with the Final Plat for all privately owned stormwater
facilities. Easement areas must incorporate all 100-year high water level areas including localized
low points, and to protect all overland emergency overflow locations and flow paths. Easement
revisions may be necessary to reflect any revisions to the construction plans.
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
1. Connection to the public watermain system is readily available to serve each proposed
development parcel. The developer will be required to connect to existing watermain stubs
located along 5th Street and Island Trail and extend the public watermain system internally
throughout the subdivision. All public watermain improvements must be installed in accordance
with the City engineering design standards and as approved by the City.
2. Hydrants and gate valves must be installed as directed by the Fire Department and Public Works
Department. All hydrants and connecting watermains shall be owned and maintained by the City.
3. All watermain improvements must be completed at developer’s sole cost including all City
connection and availability charges.
4. Watermain distribution lines and connections will be required wherever reasonably possible to
create a looped network throughout the proposed subdivision and as the project is phased.
5. Minimum 30-foot easements centered over the pipe/hydrant will be required when not located
within the public right-of-way. Easements must be free from all encroachments, including
retaining walls, trees, fences, small/dry utilities, or storm water management BMPs. Dedicated
utility easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility, and landscape plans when submitting
a Preliminary and Final Plat application.
6. Plan revisions will be required to meet City design standards and to mitigate all encroachments.
MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER
1. The proposed property is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA and current Regional Sewer
Staging Plan area and would discharge to the MCES WONE Interceptor.
2. Connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system is readily available to serve each proposed
development parcel. The developer will be required to connect to existing 8-inch sanitary sewer
stubs located along Island Trail and extend the public sanitary sewer system internally throughout
the subdivision to serve each platted lot/parcel and in accordance with the City engineering design
standards.
3. All sanitary sewer improvements must be completed at developer’s sole cost including all City
connection and availability charges.
4. All public sanitary sewer mains placed within the development will require minimum 30-foot
easements centered over the pipe/structure, if not located within a public right-of-way.
Easements must be free from all encroachments, including retaining walls, trees, fences,
small/dry utilities, or storm water management BMPs. Dedicated utility easements must be
shown on all site, grading, utility, and landscape plans when submitting Preliminary and Final Plat
applications.
5. Plan revisions will be required to meet City design standards and to mitigate all encroachments.
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education
“Proudly Serving Neighbors and Friends”
March 4, 2025
Ashley Monterusso, Planner
City of Lake Elmo
Re: Inwood 8th Addition – Apartments and Townhomes
Prepared by: Anthony Svoboda, Fire Marshal
Approved by: Dustin Kalis, Fire Chief
Applicable Codes:
• 2020 Minnesota State Fire Code
• 2020 Minnesota State Building Code
• Lake Elmo Fire Department Fire Code Policies
• NFPA 13, 2016 edition
• NFPA 13D, 2016 edition
Fire Department Comments:
Roads, Drive Lanes, and Parking Areas
• All roads and drive lanes shall meet the Lake Elmo Fire Department requirements for widths and turning
radiuses.
• Approved fire apparatus roads shall be provided and maintained throughout all development phases in
coordination with engineering, public works, planning, and fire departments.
• An approved signage and marking plan shall be determined for all No Parking and Fire Lane access roads.
On- street parking shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and Public
Works. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of private drive lanes.
• All parking areas shall be capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing up to 75,000
pounds.
Fire Detection and Suppression
• Fire sprinkler systems shall be installed in the townhome buildings compliant with provisions of 2016 NFPA
Standard 13D, Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two-Family Dwellings or IRC P2904. City permit
required prior to initiation of work.
• Fire sprinkler system shall be installed in the apartment building compliant with provisions of 2016 NFPA
Standard 13, Installation of Sprinkler Systems. City permit required prior to initiation of work.
• Standpipes shall be installed in the apartment building compliant with 2016 NFPA 14, Standard for the
Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems.
• Fire Department sprinkler connection locations to be approved prior to installation.
• Fire alarm system in the apartment building shall be installed compliant with provisions of 2016 NFPA
Standard 72, National Fire Alarm Code. City permit required prior to initiation of work.
• Fire hydrants and watermain shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and
Public works.
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education
“Proudly Serving Neighbors and Friends”
Building Systems and Equipment
• Locations of all EV charging stations or Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment shall be reviewed and installed in
approved locations. All electric vehicle supply equipment installed in the apartment building underground
parking area may require additional fire suppression considerations and restrictions on installation
locations. An electric vehicle supply equipment plan is required. This plan shall be reviewed by the fire
department, building contractor, building owner and building insurance provider.
• Emergency egress illumination shall be installed in the apartment building in the means of egress including
exit discharge compliant with 2020 MSFC.
• Compliant exit signage shall be installed in the apartment building as required by the 2020 MSFC.
• Provide and install in the apartment building, dry chemical fire extinguishers certified for service and tagged
as required. Service classification rating shall be a minimum 2A classification rating and maximum travel
distance of 75 feet to extinguishers. The minimum classification rating may be upgraded for special or extra
hazard areas within the occupancy.
• In the apartment building, rooms containing controls for air-conditioning systems, roof access, elevator
equipment, sprinkler risers and valves, or other fire detection, suppression or control elements shall be
identified for the use of the fire department. Approved signs required to identify fire protection equipment
and equipment location, shall be constructed of durable materials, permanently installed and readily
visible.
Address and Street Naming Systems
• Building address numbers shall be plainly visible from the street fronting the property and shall be
contrasting color from the background.
• Size and placement of address numbers shall be approved by the fire and planning departments.
• Street names and addressing shall be consistent with the Washington County Uniform Street Naming and
Property Numbering System. Street names shall be approved by the City of Lake Elmo.
Gates, Locks, and Access
• Project construction phasing shall always accommodate emergency access to the entire construction zone ,
generally meaning two separate means of entrance/exit as defined in the code. Phasing plan to be
approved by the fire department prior to construction.
Questions, clarifications, or the request to provide code documents can be made using the contact information
listed below.
Respectfully,
Memorandum
800 Washington Avenue North, Suite 207
Minneapolis, MN 55401
March 6, 2025
TO : ASHLEY MONTERUSSO
FROM: SARAH EVENSON, PLA
RE: TOWNS OF INWOOD LANDSCAPE AND TREE PRESERVATION CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW
SUBMITTALS
1. Concept Plan Submittal, dated 8/9/24, received 8/26/24
REVIEW HISTORY
1. 9/12/24 Concept Plan Review
2. 3/6/25 Preliminary Plat PUD Review
LOCATION: East of Inwood Ave N, between 5th Street N. to the north and east and Eagle Point Blvd. to
the south
CURRENT LAND USE CATEGORY: High-density residential and guided high-density residential
and mixed-use commercial
ADJACENT AND SURROUNDING LAND USE: Business Park to the south, high-density
residential to the west, low-density residential to the north, and Public Facilities to the north and east
SPECIAL LANDSCAPE PROVISIONS: none
TREE PRESERVATION PLAN: 105. 12. 470
• The applicant has provided a tree preservation plan that meets code.
LANDSCAPE PLAN: 105.12.480
• The following changes will need to be made to the landscape plans prior to acceptance:
o Provide a plant schedule showing the ground covers and tree species proposed on each sheet for
easy reference (currently only shown on one sheet all together at the end)
o Show the location of a topsoil stockpile on the grading plans
o Confirm that per 05.12.480 (b) (7), trees shall be planted ten feet away from utilities including water
and sewer stubs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Submit revised landscape plans per code.
Sarah Evenson, PLA (MN)
City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect
P: (262) 391-7653 E: sarah@hkgi.com
A great place to live, work and play…today and tomorrow
Government Center | 14949 62nd Street North | P. O. Box 6 | Stillwater, MN 55082-0006
P: 651-430-6001 | F: 651-430-6017 | TTY: 651-430-6246
www.co.washington.mn.us
Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer
ADMINISTRATION
Kevin Corbid, County Administrator
Jan Lucke, Deputy County Administrator
Jennifer Wagenius, Deputy County Administrator
March 7, 2025
Ashley Monterusso
City Planner
City of Lake Elmo
RE: Inwood Townhomes - Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Ms. Monterusso:
Washington County received and reviewed the documents for the Inwood Townhomes Comprehensive Plan
Amendment application requesting the Future Land Use Category be changed from Mixed Use Commercial to High
Density Residential.
The departments of Public Works and Public Health and Environment reviewed the documents provided by the
City of Lake Elmo on February 27th. It was identified through this review that the development proposed is located
in a DWSMA and known area of PFAS contamination. Best management practices as outlined by MDH and MPCA
should be implemented to protect public health. Washington County’s Public Works Department had no
additional comments.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Kelli Matzek
Senior Planner
Washington County – Office of Administration
Cc: Emily Jorgensen, Washington County Planning Manager