HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 5.14.07 PacketThe City of fake Elmo
Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on
Monday, May 14,2007, at 7:00 p.m.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approve Agenda
3. Approve Minutes
a. March 26, 2007
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Development Preliminary Plan (also known as OP
Development Stage Plan), Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit: An
application to allow an Open Space Preservation development called Whistling
Valley III (West) located north of 10th Street and west of the existing Whistling
Valley I development. — Ben Gozola
5. Draft Interim Zoning Ordinances Open Houses (Village Area, South of I Ota, Street) —
verbal update — Ben Gozola
6. Rock Point Church — I -lard Hat Tour — verbal update
7. City Council Updates
a. May I — Discover Crossing CUP Amendment denial
b. May 15 — Consider authorization for plans and specs for Lake Elmo Avenue
Infrastructure Project 1-94 to 30th Street (trunk sanitary sewer, water main
extension, street reconstruction, trail, and storm sewer improvements)
8. Adjourn
11--twIlm
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meetinj-
Minutes of March 26, 2007
Chairman Ptacek called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Ptacek, Lyzenga, Pelletier, Deziel,
Schneider, Fliflet, Roth, Armstrong, Helwig, Van Zandt, and McGinnis (7:05). STAFF
PRESENT: Senior Planner Gozola and Planner Matzek.
Agenda
M/S/P, Helwig/Armstrong to approve the agenda as presented. Vote: 9:0.
M/S/P, Helwig/Van Zandt to approve the minutes of February 26, 2007 as presented.
Vote: 5:0:1, Helwig abstained due to absence.
Public Hearing: Variance; XXXX Klondike Avenue
Senior Planner Gozola introduced the application for two variances to allow for the
construction of an off-site septic facility for a proposed new home on Lot 11, Block 1,
Ruth's I" Addition to Lake Elmo. Mr. Bush is requesting a variance from the one acre
minimum septic system requirement and to allow the septic system off-site. The
watershed district suggested conditions for the application and the DNR commented that
other parcels nearby may want to share a septic system. The parcel on the east side of
Klondike Avenue is not included in the area identified in the Comprehensive Plan for
sewer, whereas the parcel across the street upon which the septic system will be located is
within the area designated for future sewer. Mr. Gozola stated that any and all
requirements of the Engineer should be a part of an approval for this application. Staff is
recommending approval,
Commissioner Deziel asked if the combination of lot A and the proposed easement on lot
B greater than 1.5 acres.
Senior Planner Gozola stated that as a whole it is greater than 1.5 acres, but much of the
lakeshore lot is actually underwater.
Commissioner Deziel stated that a one acre lot is allowed to be built on as outlined. in
code.
Senior Planner Gozola identified a regulation in code that established a 60 percent rule.
However, there is a section of code identifying a one acre site for septic as well.
Commissioner Roth identified that this lot may realistically be eligible for sewer in the
future.
Joe Bush, applicant
The previous city planner knew it the site had difficulties. They had discussed waiting
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2007
DRAFT
for holding tanks as waiting for city sewer was not preferable. He had the property
percolated and had a septic system designed for that location. This allowed for two
locations (primary and secondary) for septic in the easement. He brought this back to the
Planner at that time. He went and had a document recorded at the County. He thought
the previous Planner was on board with this. He talked to a City Council member and
kind of indicated they were surprised this lot wasn't included in the future sewer area.
Chairman Ptacek said he had read the previous planner's letter to the applicant and it
states that he did not have any diagrams in front of him at that time. The Planning
Commission is not able to redraw the Comprehensive Plan sewer line at this time.
Joe Bush stated that if he redrew the easement to make it one acre on Lot B and put both
septic systems for the two lots in that easement, it would meet the requirements for both
Lot A and Lot B.
Senior Planner Gozola identified this as a grey area. There are shared septic areas
elsewhere in the City, but he would like to talk to other staff before he makes a comment.
THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:30 P.M.
No one spoke.
THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:31 P.M.
M/S Roth/Armstrong to table the application.
Joe Bush asked if the intent to table was because the commission did not want to vote on
the less than one acre septic requirement. If that is the case, please disregard that
variance and he would like to continue forward.
Commissioner Roth withdrew his motion.
M/S/P Deziel/Van Zandt to approve the variance application for the off-site septic system
and denial of the variance from the one acre septic size requirement. Vote: 9:0.
Public Hearing: Repeal of Commercial Social Outdoor Events
Planner Matzek stated that this has been a much discussed item both before the Planning
Commission and City Council at a number of meetings in 2006. The City Council has
received a number of calls with concerns about this ordinance and has asked that this
ordinance be revisited. The Council would like to see the ordinance repealed. The city
does not currently have an active application pertaining to this ordinance.
Kathleen Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln
She was trying to keep her comments broad and look at the ordinance as a whole. She
understands this ordinance could be for quaint weddings, but she has concern with what
could happen. The original intent might be good, but the next person might not be. She
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2007
0�
asked if this could include camping, cage fighting or other large scale events. The
ordinance is too vague. The event could be held on a small area of the property next to
residential properties as there is no distance requirement. Events could be held two or
three nights a week, every weekend, when she would like to be out enjoying her yard.
Neighbors told her they could hear music in their house with the windows and doors shut
with a neighbor's gathering last summer. The ordinance does not mention security and
the Washington County sheriff may be called and taxpayers would have to pay for it.
The noise ordinance may be difficult to enforce. There is a safety concern with high
volumes of traffic. There is no mention of alcohol and how much is appropriate. There
is no requirement for the property owner to be on site at the time of an event,
Scott Johnson, 12211 Marquess Ln
He has concerns about safety as there is the potential for alcohol to be present at the
events. The number of people allowed could mean a lot of trips adjacent to residential
neighborhoods. Mr. Johnson asked who is going to be enforcing those permits regarding
alcohol. A neighbor could be 50 feet away from a social event of 250 people - this could
take away the rural character of Lake Elmo,
Carol Palmquist, 12202 55`h Street, Stillwater
Ms. Palmquist said she is the only vineyard in Lake Elmo. A year ago a winery
approached her and asked her if she would consider holding weddings in her vineyard.
She checked with the previous planner. She submitted an application for a CUP with a
non-refundable check, which she later withdrew. The check was returned. This was not
ever intended to be something that goes late into the night. She had two events at her
vineyard last summer as favors. One wedding had a cello and a violin. A neighbor said
she could hear it the music and that her children play on a trail in the area. The neighbor
said she was afraid her children would be hit by a car. Ms. Palmquist said she spent
hours on the CUP application, She does not feel like she was treated respectfully. Many
of the issues brought up by the previous residents were previously covered by the
Planning Commission and City Council. She was not informed of it being brought to the
Council and does not like how it was handled.
Ben reads the letter handed out by Kathleen Haggard from neighbor Donna Sloan into the
record.
T14E CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:59 P.M.
Commissioner Schneider asked how alcohol was addressed.
Planner Matzek said that an alcohol license would need to be applied for.
Commissioner Fliflet said she understands the possibilities of what could happen with
events, but would like to know what the other two events were that were brought up.
Kathleen Haggard, 12154 Marquess Ln
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2007
Her neighbor, Donna Sloan who wrote the letter said she was not aware an event was
going on. Ms. Palmquist had a man directing traffic and that she could hear the music.
Chairman Ptacek stated this was hear -say. The corninission should address the ordinance
and not the instances of what happened.
Commissioner Armstrong said the ordinance applies to the whole city. The city should
consider when a property owner has an idea to utilize large acreage that would help them
keep the acreage and preserve the rural character. Though it is not a perfect ordinance, a
lot of time was spent on the standards. All the issues brought up were 'previously
addressed at the Planning Commission meeting. He would suggest tabling the item and
adding it into their work plan.
Commissioner Fliflet said specific issues could be addressed at the time the CUP
applications are submitted.
Senior Planner Gozola clarified that the City Council is looking for a recommendation.
Staff also has been proactive in trying to contact Carol Palmquist. The city has the ability
to deny any requests that do not meet all the requirements of a CUP,
Armstrong — in definitions could identify what is included as a Commercial Social
Outdoor Event; there was talk about it, but might not have gotten to that part
Pelletier — we need to protect our new neighborhoods; if they were to tweak the wording
it might address a lot of the concerns; there is a fine line between protecting rural
M/S/P Helwig/Pelletier recommend approval of a nine month moratorium on
Commercial Social Outdoor Events to do further study. Vote: 6:3.
City Council Updates
Planner Matzek stated that there was discussion at a council workshop about temporary
signs for home sales and it was thought to be appropriate for the commission to address
this topic under signs in the work plan. At the March 30th council meeting, the minor
subdivision and variance application for 3200 Lake Elmo Avenue was tabled. A village
area master plan open house was held at Oakland Junior High School on March list.
Informational Item
The Park Commission comments on the Village Area Master Plan were included in the
packet as an informational item.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelli Matzek
Planner
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2007
City Council
Date: 5/14/07
!TEM: Development Preliminary Plan (also known as OP Development Stag—e
Plan), Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit: An application to
allow an Open Space Preservation development called Whistling
Valley III (West) located north of I oth Street and west of the existing
Whistling Valley I development.
REVIEWED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator
KeUiK4mtznk'Assistant City Planner
Jack Griffin, Qty Engineer
Ryan 8bannpski.Assistant City Engineer
Jerry Fi||a, City Attorney
Greg Mo|mquist, Fire Chief
Jim K8oNamona, Building Official
Mike Bouthi|at. Public Works Superintendent
The planning commission is asked to review a preliminary plan for an OP
development being referred to as Whistling Valley 3 rd Addition, This type of
application technically includes a preliminary plan, a preliminary plat, and a CUP
�
Staff is recommending conditional approval of the preliminary plan, preliminary plat,
and CUP.
* During concept plan review, the City Council directed staff to view this request as a
stand alone OP development with consideration being given to the past development
characteristics. As such, any deviations from OP standards would ultimately require
approval by 4/5 of the City Council. A summary of all deviations can be found on
page 9 of the comprehensive staff report,
* The MN Land Trust is amenable to the proposal and the additional open space it
would create within their easement.
The proposed lots do conform to all lot requirements for OP development and for
shoreland district lots. With regards to Shoreland district codes, staff followed pa
interpretation of the requirements used in Additions I & 11.
At concept plan, the City Council recommended use of a hammerhead dead end
road as shown. Staff is still recommending the City obtain the additional ROW
necessary to extend this road to the west if ever desired by the City,
Engineering concerns regarding stormwater and sewer are outlined in the
comprehensive report. Engineering will be present at the 5-14-078 meeting to
answer any questions on these topics, I
OPTIONS:
AJ Recommend APPROVAL of the requested preliminary p|an, preliminary plat, CUP, and
deviations from OP development standards based on the applicant's submission, the
contents of this report, public testimony and other evidence available to the Council,
C) TABLE the request for further study.
CUP with the condition listed in the
Suggested motion for :
/ move that we recommend approval of the requested preliminary plan, preliminary plat, and
CUP based on the findings listed in the staff report and as articulated tonight, subject bzthe
conditions recommended bystaff
• Introduction ........ ........ ......... .............. ....... ............. Planning Commission Chair
= Staff report ............................. ................................... Ben Gozo|n'Planner
= Questions from commission to staff--------' Chair facilitates
• Questions/comments fnomtheopp|icont------. Chair facilitates
• Open/ClosePub|kcHearng------------- Chair facilitates
• EnhartonmantofMotion--------------' Chair facilitates
" Discussion ---------— Chair facilitates
ATTACHMENTS: Site map
Comprehensive Staff report
P PedinninaryHanSets for VVh��ingVaUey�� Addition
Department ofNatural Resources (ONR)correspondence
Valley Branch Watershed District (JBVVD) general comments
Valley Branch Watershed D|striot(VBVVD) comments on DHVVand floodplain
Whistling Valley 3'" Addition F|RK8ette (FEMA Floodplain map)
Landscape Plan Review
City of s Planning Department
Preliminary Plan, Preliminary Plat, & CUP Reviel,
To: City Council
From: Ben Gozola, City Planner
Meeting Date: 5-1407
Applicants: David Sorenson & Robert Forsythe
Location: Nest of loth Street Lane off the West Stub End of Whistling Valley Lane
Introductvr v Information
Request® The applicants are seeking approval of a preliminary plat for Whistling Valley Third
Addition to create an additional six (6) units in Whistling Valley on an additional 14.45
acres of gross buildable land.
Site Data: Existing Zoning — RIZ (Rural Residential)
Land Use Guidance — RAI) (Rural Agricultural District)
Parcel size — 14.45 acres
Property Identification Number (PID): 27-029®21-34-0005
IN GENERAL:
Concept flan During the concept plan review for this subdivision, the City Council decided that
Guidance® Whistling Valley III would be viewed as a stand alone Open Space application with
consideration being given to the previous additions already approved for the same
developer. Any proposed deviations from standard open space requirements would need
a 4/5 vote of the City Council to be approved.
Site Applicant Comments: The third addition [parcel] currently has a mix of deciduous trees
Character: and understory plants in the rolling, northern two thirds of the property. The south
portion contains a large open meadow surrounded by evergreen trees, which drops to a
creek bed along the southern boundary of'the property. These tow distinctly different
areas are separated by a mature conifer plantation that runs east -west from the western
property line, an attractive and unique feature of the property. Like the first tow phases,
the cures for landscape design will be taken from the existing qualities of the landscape,
with native plants dominating the species selection.
Staff Comments: None.
Land Area:
Page 2
According to code, applications for a residential OP development shall meet the
following criteria unless modified by a 4/5 vote of the City Council:
A. The minimum land area for the proposed OP development shall be 40 acres;
Staff comment: The development is proposed on a 14.45 acre parcel. The
applicants are requesting that council authorize this as a modification from OP
standard provisions.
B. Total preserved open space within the proposed development shall be at least
50% of the total Buildable Land Area as defined by Chapter 150 of the City
Code;
Staff comment: The proposal is currently setting aside 7.29 acres of the gross
land area, and therefore this standard provision is met.
C. Dwelling units are to be grouped so that at least 50% of the Buildable Land Area
of the proposed development remains in preserved open space.
Staff comment: The grouping of home sites in the central portion of the
parcel does allow for the preservation of 7.29 acres of open space which is
coordinated with the open space in Additions I & 11. Staff finds this standard
provision is met.
By code, open space created as part of an OP development must meet the following
criteria unless modified by a 4/5 vote of the City Council:
A. Open space created as part of an OP development must be protected by a
conservation easement;
Staff comment: The applicants have contacted the Minnesota Land Trust who
is interested in the proposed open space being created by this development.
While staff has not received any new correspondence from the Land Trust, we
have been told verbally that the conservation committee has voted in favor of
accepting the additional conservation area, and the matter will be voted on by
the full NIN Land Trust Commission on Thursday, May 17th. Their staff had
no reason to believe it would not be approved, but they will provide the City
with an official position following the meeting on the 17"'.
B. Not less than 60% of the preserved open space shall be in contiguous parcels of
not less than ten (10) acres;
Staff comment: Because the proposed development is on less than the
standard forty (40) acres, none of the preserved open space will meet this
1f -'p N`hi„,1�41s7-
N, �?r.1! 1 t' C,'ttt j _ 0"(i If a
requirement. The applicants are requesting that council authorize this as a
modification from OP standard provisions.
C. Preserved open space is to be maintained for the purposes for which it was set
aside;
Staff comment: In this case, the developers are proposing the new open space
be treated as a component of the 1St & 2„ a Addition open space. As such, all
restrictions and provisions placed on the existing open space would also govern
the new addition. Given that such restrictions have been approved for the past
two additions, staff finds this to be acceptable provided the open space is
accepted by the MN Land Trust.
D. Where applicable, a homeowner's association shall be established to
permanently maintain all residual open space and recreational facilities;
Staff comment: The same home owners association (HOA) documents
governing the lots in phases I & II would be used. in phase III. The primary
function of the HOA is lawn maintenance, septic site maintenance, and trail
maintenance. Staff find the proposal to be acceptable.
E. Preserved open space shall be contiguous with preserved open space or public
parks on adjacent parcels.
Staff comment: The proposed open space will form a ring around the
proposed home sites and will connect with the open space dedicated in
additions I & Il. The MN Land Trust finds that the proposed open space
configuration complements the already dedicated areas and they appear willing
to accept this additional open space under their conservation easement.
According to.• • are to be designedo achieve the following•• -
A. On the most suitable soils for sub -surface septic disposal.
B. On the least fertile soils for agricultural uses and in a manner which maximizes
the usable area remaining for such agricultural use.
C. Within any woodland contained in the parcel or along the far edges of open
fields adjacent to any woodland.
D, In locations least likely to block scenic vistas as viewed from Hwy 36.
E. Away from woodlands in open fields.
Staff comment: Staff finds the proposed lot configuration meets all of these lot design
criteria. First of all, the proposed six lots are to be served by the community septic site
constructed for the 1St & 2„a Additions. Second, a majority of the parcel is wooded so
open fields and agricultural areas are not present to protect. And finally, this
development clearly will not impact views from Hwy 36.
ii ... 4 _c«, .. 7. t , W'i f,t'i� f7 r„c� r 1 ,.'lf.^ r it .11a;,r.r. =,'fI. h. 1 t�: ,ao,
Structures: The applicant is proposing to construct homes similar in size and style to that which was
I previously approved for Whistling Valley I & 11. Staff finds this to be acceptable.
The required buffer zones from the properties to the north, south, and west are all
met as shown on the preliminary development plan.
By code, a 100 foot setback at a minimum is also required from adjacent OP
developments. Because this proposal is being viewed as a stand alone development,
a 100 foot setback would also be required from the eastern property line. The
applicants are requesting that council recognize the 3rd addition as a complement to
the previous additions, and to authorize a reduced buffer as a modification from OP
standard provisions. Staff does believe that a buffer of less than 100 feet from the
eastern property line is reasonable given the vegetative cover that would exist
between the proposed home sites and the existing Whistling Valley development,
A complete review of the proposed landscaping plan was conducted by Katharine D.
Widin, Ph.D., who is the City's acting Forestry Consultant. Her analysis is as
follows:
As requested, I have reviewed the plans for the proposed development, Whistling
Valley ill off Cty. Rd. 10 and I Oth St. La. N. in Lake Elmo. The plan sets which I
reviewed were received by the City 3/14/07 and 4/3/07. 1 also looked at an aerial
photo of the site and drove to the site to confirm tree species and distribution. I
have the following observations and recommendations regarding this project:
The development is proposed for a property which has areas of native oak woodland
and planted pine. These areas contain most of the significant trees (diam. > 8 in.) on
the site. The property also has open field areas, woodland openings and areas of
smaller trees and shrubs.
Pr ect De�sin
The project appears to have been designed in keeping with the topography and
significant treed areas as much as possible. Outlots and buffer areas have been set
aside to provide vistas and screening for the project. There are 7.53 A of preserved
open space (> 50% of total site area) which includes areas with trees in different
portions of the site. Six homes are planned for the site and the project design is
attractive and should complement the natural setting. House sites, infrastructure and
the trail appear to have been sited in consideration of the natural amenities. A
recreational trail is planned around the perimeter of the site on the south, west and
north sides and will go through or near wooded areas for much of its length.
SIM
A tree removal plan has been submitted as part of the development plans. A list
of significant trees to be removed in outlots as well as building lots is included and
corresponds well to the tree species distribution on the site. Using the listed
diameters of trees over 8 inches which are slated for removal, the project estimates
removal of 48 significant trees totalling 598 diameter inches. Representative species
of significant trees being removed are red pine, jack pine, red oak, white oak,
hackberry, ash, elm and cottonwood. Except for I cottonwood, most significant
trees being removed are under 20 in. in diameter (ave. diameter = 12.5 in.). The
"tree removal notes" on this plan indicate that the trees in the development area plus
trees and vegetation along the trail corridor will be preserved to the maximum extent
possible.
Tree Protection
Trees which are to be preserved will be protected by fencing according to detail
3/L10. If the fencing is installed per the detail, prior to any soil disturbance, this
should provide adequate protection for most trees in or near the construction area. I
did notice that the T -F line detail, which indicates where the tree protection fencing
is to be installed, was not present on sheet C2.1 in all areas where grading will be
near trees to be preserved. in order to preserve the maximum number of significant
trees, tree protection fencing should be installed in all areas where grading, other soil
disturbance or vehicle traffic will be near trees which are to be saved. Installing tree
protection fencing along all grading limits next to existing significant trees is one
way to be sure trees will be protected during construction activities. If erosion
control (silt S -F) fencing is to be installed in some areas of the grading limits, this
will be adequate to protect trees if construction equipment stays on the construction
side of the erosion control fence. Using orange erosion control fencing in areas
where it is to be used also as tree protection fencing can help draw workers'
attention to the barrier. Vehicle traffic or parking, piling/storage of building
materials, and clean-out of construction equipment should definitely not be allowed
within the dripline of any trees to be preserved in order to protect the root systems
from damage,
Oak Wilt — Because of the oaks which are present on this property, the site should be
inspected for oak wilt before, during and after construction of the development. If
any oaks are pruned or wounded between 4/1 and 10/15, the wounds should be
covered with paint immediately to prevent insect transmission of the oak wilt fungus
to fresh wounds and development of oak wilt disease.
The proposed Landscape Plan takes into account the natural resources on the
property. Boulevard trees have not been included as part of the landscaping due to
the wooded nature of the site and this is appropriate. Tree and shrub plantings, as
well as perennials are shown for the entrance area, rain gardens, stormwater pond
t?fe it
i't q-, i F )"I,
(co' 10
MM
and drainage swale. The designs are attractive and will fulfill their landscape
functions. There is an emphasis in these designs on the use of native plants (species
or cultivated varieties) which is appropriate and will decrease long-term maintenance
needs. The species represented are attractive, hardy and have few serious insect,
disease or cultural problems which would limit their usefulness or longevity or
require excessive landscape maintenance. There are 6 building sites in this
development, so, according to the city's OSP code, 60 trees would be required to be
planted (10 per building site). There are 146 trees indicated in the plan to be planted
on site and the trees specified in the Plant Schedule are larger than the minimum size
required. Gray dogwood were listed in the Plant Schedule (sheet L1.1) as a
deciduous tree, but it is a shrub. In all, an estimated 352 diameter inches of trees are
planned for the landscaping in this development.
The "Planting Detail" (I/L2/0, 2/L2.0, 4/L2.0) which has been submitted as part of
the landscape plan, is good and should be part of the specifications given to
landscape contractors who will be bidding on installation of landscape plants. The
planting detail should be adhered to and, if planting is not done according to the
approved plan and detail, it will need to be re -done.
The developer shall be required to provide an escrow for site inspections by the City
Forester for the following:
o Periodic inspections to ensure the tree protection fencing stays up throughout
the construction period; and
o Inspection of the plant material at time of delivery/planting; and
o Periodic inspections to ensure adherence to the planting methodology
included in the Planting Detail.
Pathwaj�s: The proposed 3rd addition does propose a trail system around its periphery that would
connect to the trails previously constructed for Additions I & 2. Staff finds this OP
criteria is net.
WIMM
Configuration:
The proposed lot configurations do conforming with lot requirements for OP
development. The following table summarizes the minimum lot requirements and how
the proposed subdivision compares:
FRONTAGE/DEPTH
SIZE RATIO
. ..... .. .. -
0.75 acres
1:3
......... .... .
0.98 acres
1 1.4
Lot 2, Blk 1: 1 1.19 acres I : 1.6
6, 0" " 1 0
114
Vcdh� 31, ? Addilk)"7
C, R# FA M"M ''i 41 I
Staff Comments: All of the proposed lots meet the basic requirements for lot
dimensions as spelled out in code.
01M
Proposed Staff Comments: The proposed density as calculated solely on the subject parcel is
Densifj7: 0.41 units per acre (6 units -- 14.45 acres). Such a density less than the 0.45 unit per
acre maximum density called for on a conforming 40 acre parcel (18 units + 40 acres).
As such, staff finds the proposed density to be conforming to open space requirements.
IN GENERAL
fm The surrounding parcels to the north and west can develop at some point in the
future, so it is important to consider how the current proposal will integrate with
those future developments.
As you can see in the graphic on the next page, the parcels to the north and west are
large and potentially developable at some point in the future. The two logical
extensions for future roads in this area would be off of 101h Street N. across from the
Stonegate development and up to the existing dead end 15t" Street North.
19 During concept plan review, the City Council directed the applicant to create a
hammerhead on the main road within the 3rd Addition, and to only stub right of way
to the north for a future road connection.
Staff is not against the placement of a hammerhead on the proposed road, but we
would suggest that at the very least right-of-way be platted to the western property
line of Whistling Valle� 3rd Addition to allow a possible future connection to the
likely road north of 10' Street.
SIZE
RATIO
REQUIRED:
. . .... .........
0. 75 acres
.. ... ... ...
1:3
Lot 1, Blk 2:
0.76 acres
1:1.5
....... ....
Lot 1, Blk 3:
0.98 acres
Lot 2, Blk 3::
0.83 acres
1 :2.5
Lot 3, Blk 3:
1.27 acres
1 :2.9
Staff Comments: All of the proposed lots meet the basic requirements for lot
dimensions as spelled out in code.
01M
Proposed Staff Comments: The proposed density as calculated solely on the subject parcel is
Densifj7: 0.41 units per acre (6 units -- 14.45 acres). Such a density less than the 0.45 unit per
acre maximum density called for on a conforming 40 acre parcel (18 units + 40 acres).
As such, staff finds the proposed density to be conforming to open space requirements.
IN GENERAL
fm The surrounding parcels to the north and west can develop at some point in the
future, so it is important to consider how the current proposal will integrate with
those future developments.
As you can see in the graphic on the next page, the parcels to the north and west are
large and potentially developable at some point in the future. The two logical
extensions for future roads in this area would be off of 101h Street N. across from the
Stonegate development and up to the existing dead end 15t" Street North.
19 During concept plan review, the City Council directed the applicant to create a
hammerhead on the main road within the 3rd Addition, and to only stub right of way
to the north for a future road connection.
Staff is not against the placement of a hammerhead on the proposed road, but we
would suggest that at the very least right-of-way be platted to the western property
line of Whistling Valle� 3rd Addition to allow a possible future connection to the
likely road north of 10' Street.
I
, COMt,
WIM
Staff is comfortable with the location of the proposed right-of-way to the northern
property line.
Lot Access® I ® All lots have direct access to a public road.
Driveways should be located so as to preserve existing trees in as much as possible.
Addresses for the individual homes should be posted at each driveway entrance.
Future parcel The proposed subdivision would fully divide the property under proposed zoning
development: and current comprehensive plan designations.
M All standard drainage and utility easements are currently being shown.
* All easements intended for utilities shall be a minimum of 10 feet on each side of the
utility and shall be shown on the plans. The proposed easement between Lot 1,
Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 meets this requirement.
* The current plans indicate utilities will cross Outlot G in Whistling Valley I"
Addition. Dedication of a 20' wide drainage and utility easement on this Outlot
would need to be a condition of any approval.
VUI/102! 1d1
''1
1 3
j
Whistling Valley 3rd Addition is proposed to vary from the standard OP development
requirements in the following manner:
• The development is proposed on a 14.45 acre parcel rather than a 40+ acre parcel;
• All three of the proposed open space parcels will be less than 10 acres in size;
• A one hundred (100) foot structural setback from Whistling Valley 1St Addition is
not being maintained;
Required boulevard plantings are proposed to be located near the entrance
monument and along the utility easements.
Again, a 4/5 vote of Council is required to approve each of these deviations.
Resident Applicant Comments: no comments were provided
Concerns® � Staff Comments: Staff has not received any feedback for or against this proposal,
INFRASTRMTLIRE:
Road System: ® Future west road connection should be graded and platted to property line.
Construction of the road to the hammerhead location would be all that is required at
this time.
* All Public Right -of -Way shall be linear.
* The applicants shall provide a street plan with dimensions.
® The street plan shall include typical sections for each varied street section.
* The minimum one-way street width around the rain garden area appears to be
sixteen (16) feet in width from flow line to flow line. This shall be confirmed via
additional street section drawings.
* Two-way street width must be 22 feet from flow line to flow line. This shall be
confirmed via additional street section drawings,
* The hammerhead turn -around dimensions shall be approved by Public Works.
* The applicants shall provide an Auto -Turn exhibit to demonstrate turning
movements at curves around rain garden for Public Works maintenance.
Water - Individual wells will serve each lot (wells are administered by the State Department
System(s): of Health Well Unit), The applicant shall provide the City with a copy of a MN
Department of Health permit in accordance with the Well Advisory Area.
0 Future plan sets shall show the watermain profile, size, and type. Watermain shall
be designed to City Standards in preparation for a possible future City connection.
T,
I'Fhi.; I,.,.9zT, "' ,7+L v 3i d Add'ftion J 14' 07', t{k.
111,'IdWiing Va//ey dditiorl
Cowm,,haion Rey-1ov-t: 5- 1 14 -0-,
The proposed sanitary sewer pipe shall be Re-routed to avoid wetlands and the
proposed storm water pond. Staff would suggest re-routing it along street right-of-
way to the extent possible.
* The applicant plans to use the existing wetland treatment system constructed in
Whistling Valley for these new lots. The existing treatment system is covered. by a
MPCA permit. This permit needs to be modified and approved before the
preliminary plat can be approved. Please submit documentation to support this plan,
* The current plans indicate utilities will cross Outlot G in Whistling Valley I't
Addition. Dedication of a drainage and utility easement (10' on each side of the
proposed utilities) on this Outlot would need to be a condition of any approval.
EngjReerinl Comments:
IN Storm sewer must be constructed using Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP).
The applicant's have been asked to revise and resubmit their drainage calculations
and stormwater plan to address all comments below:
1. Compute times of concentration for subcatchments with direct entry.
1. Outlet to Natural Depression Pond (1P): Using a 48" diameter horizontal
orifice to represent a. stool grate catch basin inlet will overestimate the
capacity of the structure. Update the model using the grate inlet capacity.
2. The compound outlet routing for Island Depression Pond (2P) is
incorrect. Device #3 (stool grate inlet BH2) should be routed into device
#1 (24" pipe leaving the structure). Using a 48" diameter horizontal
orifice to represent a stool grate catch basin inlet will overestimate the
capacity of the structure. Update the model using the grate inlet capacity.
What is Device 42? Provide more detail on the Island Depression design
and "Epic Storm Water Storage Device."
3. Provide a geotechnical report verifying the soil infiltration characteristics
and water table at the Island Depression location.
4. The Central Drainage Area (3S) is not routed into the proposed pond
system, although it appears to drain overland into Cell I (3P) on the
grading plan. Update the model and grading plans as necessary and
resubmit,
5. The South Area (4S) drainage area boundary goes right through Cell 2
(4P). Update the drainage area.
)iO AWWioi f, .do"
Utilities: 0 All public utilities and facilities such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply
systems to be located in the flood -plain district shall be flood -proofed in accordance
with the building code or elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
M Telephone, electric, and/or gas service lines are to be placed underground in
accordance with the provisions of all applicable City ordinances.
Parking There are no parking issues for the proposed project.
Facilities:
Required A new street sign will be required at the intersection of I 01h Street Lane North and
S the proposed Whistling Valley Trail,
Fire Hydrants: ®
One hydrant will be located at the end of the proposed hammerhead strictly for
public works maintenance purposes at this time. The hydrant must be posted as
being "out of service."
Streetlights. 1 1, No streetlights are required as part of this development.
th ftg, F(dle3 , I V
Jf'�(� A'0�� won 14 0".doc
Page II
ra, 6,
The East Area (5S) goes through the middle of the surface swale draining
into Cell I (3P). Update the drainage area.
7.
Provide details for the compound pond outlets for Cell I (3P) and Cell 2
(4P) showing orifices, weirs, and pipe sizes and inverts.
8.
Design Cell 2 to handle up to the 100 -year event, maintaining freeboard
and without flow over the emergency overflow.
9.
Add notes to the grading plan indicating the location and elevation of the
emergency pond overflows.
Additional Items:
1.
Provide a maintenance plan and agreement for Island Depression and
both cells of the storm water pond system.
2.
Pond I P (Natural Depression) pools up and flows over the roadway and
into Pond 2P (Island Depression) on 10- and 100 -year events. Flow over
the roadway is not allowed.
3.
Pond 2P (Island Depression) pools up and outlets over the roadway and
into the surface drainage swale on 10- and I00 -year events. Flow over the
roadway is not allowed.
4.
Verify the volume control. The site drains to landlocked Goose Lake. The
watershed district is likely to comment on the volume control.
Utilities: 0 All public utilities and facilities such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply
systems to be located in the flood -plain district shall be flood -proofed in accordance
with the building code or elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
M Telephone, electric, and/or gas service lines are to be placed underground in
accordance with the provisions of all applicable City ordinances.
Parking There are no parking issues for the proposed project.
Facilities:
Required A new street sign will be required at the intersection of I 01h Street Lane North and
S the proposed Whistling Valley Trail,
Fire Hydrants: ®
One hydrant will be located at the end of the proposed hammerhead strictly for
public works maintenance purposes at this time. The hydrant must be posted as
being "out of service."
Streetlights. 1 1, No streetlights are required as part of this development.
th ftg, F(dle3 , I V
Jf'�(� A'0�� won 14 0".doc
Monuments: In accordance with Section 400.14 Subd. 6; reference monuments shall be placed in
the subdivision as required by state law.
Environmental Staff does not foresee the need for an in-depth environmental analysis based on the
Impacts: current proposal (i.e. EAW, EIS, AUAR, etc.)
Wetlands: - The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) is the Local Government Unit
(LGU) responsible for administering the Welland Conservation Act (WCA). The
developer will need to follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the WCA,
and acquire the needed permit from the VBWD.
W The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) has conducted a. general review of
the site although no official wetland delineation has been submitted to date. They
have indicated that the lots topography suggests the only wetland locations are likely
near the ditch on the southern portion of the property, and near the location of the
proposed stormwater management pond.
IN Staff would recommend the applicant begin working with the VBWD as soon as
Possible to get necessary permits and approvals.
Shoreland A portion of the proposed site is within 1000 feet of Goose Lake, and therefore is
District: within the shoreland district.
By code, the minimum lot size for OP zoned properties is 0.5 acres. In accordance
with past practice for additions I & 11, staff is considering the intent of code to be
that the minimum lot size for open space development lots is 0.5 and that rezoning to
OP is no longer necessary.
Likewise, because the development utilizes a centralized sewer system for the entire
development rather than having individual septic sites for each lot, staff will again
defer to past practice and consider the area as sewered.; thereby removing the
requirement for a 200' lot width. While staff would argue that code language should
be changed to clarify the regulations in light of City practice, we do find this
interpretation to be reasonable as minimum lot sizes and widths are tools to ensure
the intensity of development is consistent with environmentally sensitive areas. In
the case of open space developments, half the property must be protected by
conservation easements, and all storm water/erosion concerns must be successfully
addressed by the City Engineer. The alternative tools being used by the City
arguably perform much better to address environmental concerns than do the basic
tools of lot size and width.
Erosion Silt fencing should be shown at the construction limits for the proposed houses or
Control: driveways with the future building permit application.
Onl, Sallev " (4 fill'C" 1, it,, QU 1, ion
ar it
Page 13
14, 07
Traffic: The proposed project will not significantly increase traffic volumes in the area.
According to the July 2, 1979 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, the floodplain
around Goose Lake is undetermined (Zone A).
According to the DNR and VBWD, the northern lobe of Goose Lake has been
determined to have an ordinary high water mark (011W) of 924.4, and a regulatory
flood protection elevation (RFPE) of 932.0. As such, all new structures in Whistling
Valley 3rd Addition would need to have low floor elevations above 934.0 (two feet
above the RFPE).
Docks: I Im I I he proJect does not include any lakeshore or deeded access to lakes.
Other Permits: All necessary permits must be provided to the City. (VBWD, MPCA, NPDES,
MDH)
CHARGES, FEES,& RE' SPONSIBILITIES:
In General® 'M As always, the applicant is responsible for all fees related to the review of this
application (including but not limited to planning, legal, engineering, wetland,
environmental consultants, or other such experts as required by this application).
Section 400,15 of City Code requires all subdivisions of land to dedicate a
reasonable portion of land to the City for public use as parks, trails, or open space.
The percentage for an OP development on RR zoned property is 7%.
14.45 acres * 7% required dedication = 1.012 acres of land (or 44,083 square
feet)
The comprehensive plan does not indicate the need for any additional park land in
this area, and no such need was identified at the time of concept plan review. Staff
therefore would recommend the City accept cash -in -lieu of land to satisfy the park
dedication requirements.
Prior to final plat approval and at the developer's expense, the City shall determine
the fair market value of the land by hiring a licensed appraiser. The required cash -
in -lieu of land payment shall be the fair market value of the 1.012 acres of land
required for dedication.
,Sewer AreaAs this subdivision will not access municipal sewer services, there will not be a
Charge: I sewer area charge assessed.
IN`h'k�' 'qlV"fle
'Y i''JI, " -d I 1 11 1
-,, I, �,u
1Q, I Ofzt�" �'I, � Page 14
Building As this subdivision will not access municipal services, hook up fees will not be
Mr'
I
applicable.
The Planning Commission must examine the proposed preliminary plan, preliminary
plat, and CUP to determine whether they meet all conditions of approval outlined by
city code. Keep in mind that an approval at this point provides the applicant the ability
to finalize the subdivision through the final plat process—all desired/required changes
must be addressed at this time,
The Planning Commission has the following options:
A) Recommend APPROVAL of the requested preliminary plan, preliminary plat,
CUP, and deviations from OP development standards based on the applicant's
submission, the contents of this report, public testimony and other evidence
available to the Council.
13) Recommend DENIAL of the requested preliminary plan, preliminary plat, CUP,
and deviations from OP development standards based on the applicant's
submission, the contents of this report, public testimony and other evidence
available to the Commission.
Q TABLE the request for further study.
The deadline for a Council decision on this item is August 7, 2007.
Staff recommends option A: Approval of the requested preliminary plan, preliminary
plat, and CUP with the following conditions:
Within six (6) months of preliminary plan approval, the applicant shall
complete the following:
a. The applicant shall provide adequate title evidence satisfactory to the
City Attorney;
b, The applicant shall pay all fees associated with the preliminary plat;
c. The applicant shall submit a complete application for final plat meeting
all conditions of preliminary approval;
All of the above conditions shall be met prior to the City accepting an
application for final plat,
II 'h'S 3 P "o/ �m, � 11, 11 ; ""fl� �"(" �, "Ih? I I , , I , 1. � 4
J� I S11 ( .11 "uf, (A�:"Yion �.
Page 15
2. The final plat application shall incorporate the following specific components
in addition to the requirements spelled out in City Code:
a. Final Plat (signature page and final plat per statutory requirements);
b. Final Development Plan (a final and updated version of the preliminary
site plan sets incorporating all conditions of preliminary plat approval);
3. The final plat application shall continue to incorporate all information shown in
the preliminary plat unless required to be updated by the City;
4. Fencing shall be installed per the proposed plan sets prior to any soil
disturbance on the site;
5. Sheet C2.1 of the plan sets shall be updated to include tree protection fencing in
all areas where grading will be near trees intended for preservation;
6. The site shall be inspected by the City Forester at the developers expense for
the existence of Oak wilt before, during, and after construction of the
development;
7. If any Oaks are pruned or wounded during development of the site, the wounds
should be covered with paint immediately to prevent insect transmission of the
Oak wilt fungus to fresh wounds and development of Oak wilt disease.
8. The "Planting Detail" " (I /L2/0, 2/L2.0, 4/L2.0) shall be provided to all
landscape contractors seeking to complete this work. All plans shall be adhered
to and, if planting is not done according to the approved plan and detail, it shall
be re -done;
9. The developer shall be required to provide an escrow for site inspections by the
City Forester for the following:
a. Periodic inspections to ensure the tree protection fencing stays up
throughout the construction period; and
b. Inspection of the plant material at time of delivery/planting; and
c. Periodic inspections to ensure adherence to the planting methodology
included in the Planting Detail.
10. Right-of-way shall be platted to the western property line of Whistling Valley
3rd Addition per the guidance of City staff;
11. The developer shall be responsible for the reconstruction of any roadway
impacted by the extension of utilities to service the proposed lots;
12. Driveways should be located so as to preserve existing trees in as much as
possible;
t': L; i I? " " , I ore/ilnq�vp 111"hW11"Pit I .
00"OJI, V6. I, J44.072oc
Page 16
13. Addresses for the individual homes should be posted at each driveway
entrance;
14. The developer shall dedicate a minimum twenty (20) foot wide drainage and
utility easement for any utilities proposed to cross Ontlot G. The easement
shall encompass at least ten (10) feet on each side of the proposed utilities;
15. The applicant shall provide the City with a copy of a NIN Department of Health
permit in accordance with the Well Advisory Area;
16. Watermain shall be designed and installed to City Standards in preparation for a
possible future City connection;
17. The proposed sanitary sewer pipe shall be re-routed to avoid wetlands and the
proposed storm water pond;
18. The MPCA permit for the shared septic facility shall be modified and approved
prior to the City accepting an application for Final Plat;
19. Storm sewer shall be constructed using Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP);
20. All drainage calculations and stormwater management plans shall be updated to
address all engineering comments;
21. The City of Lake Elmo may require specific BMP's on individual lots as a
condition of future building permits based on the most effective way to manage
water quality, quantity and rate control.
22. Silt fencing shall be shown at the construction limits for the proposed houses
and driveways with the future building permit application.
23. All public utilities and facilities shall be flood -proofed in accordance with the
building code or elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
24. Telephone, electric, and/or gas service lines shall be placed underground in
accordance with the provisions of all applicable City ordinances;
25. The applicant shall install a new street sign at the proposed intersection;
26. The hydrant near the proposed hammerhead shall be labeled as being "out of
service;"
27. In accordance with Section 400.14 Subd. 6; reference monuments shall be
placed in the subdivision as required by state law.
28. The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the
WCA, and acquire the needed permit from the VBWD.
O'1p, ,M, 'w; OLYIQ j r, .I I iO -1 "JI 4
Page 17
AWO
29. All new structures in Whistling Valley 3`a Addition shall have low floor
elevations above 934.0 (two feet above the RFPE of 932.0).
30. All necessary permits shall be provided to the City. (VBWD, MPCA, NPDES,
MDH)
31. At the developer's expense, the City shall hire a licensed appraiser to determine
the fair market value of the land for the purposes of determining the cash -in -
lieu value for park dedication.
32. The developer shall comply with any additional requirements established by the
City Engineer and City Attorney.
cc: Dave Sorensen, Developer
Bob Close, Developer
Derek Lash, Engineer
1, "Vh v o' J
z
u
X�
♦
WRI
r4 'm
LI I
J.
I r
.. ........
SNEFc—
CM
3Uh�z oFn
q
s f A
z£V �gw
,j
d
5 f
w q�
I
aa 7�r
€ Fnn fib
€J '16!
€€
o
1431
sig ,
...... 4 -le
s
d >N r
iMEN��$�EEE
�.: t
€�e
�
�yy9stHg %K&�$
a.
P�P' �
t� q
a ��p�p
{i${i�i�ygpg��
¢pq�Yga PpE E9pggOF��I €`field '� Y
pp 9Htt 4 � . d� g
w E
uC &P
M $F2
A !
i@
!e 4@
G@@36pe
§9'rdfi�xie Q W
,j
d
5 f
w q�
0
AA
0
I
'gal
R
JUR
fd�dt3
4g„
te
JUR
NN"
I
I
m
"I
tt
Y, trt
w
SIM log
R
te
NN"
I
I
m
"I
tt
Y, trt
w
SIM log
----------
-----------
- -- -
--------
0
z
V)
T
-
------------------
(D
I
U
W,6
w T
(D
I
I
Ld
I
% .
/)
)
u e s
�YO�is.In s'�
rt §zl i
iJ�Jy g`t :�, YY
sYan
0
Lala
1—
Ld
._J
F—
V E
T
zn �;
b fy !, p d Lf �t5 pi
AA°p o �y,�9t �ifa y 6 -
AY ytivt 9r'ftasaae� �i�
a
sit e� IL § s ti' re t°
Figfx pli�@ ffzjzs'i8� E{ a Epo [�[k�R3'5y
4= fd! { k Pfyi t k.. dtN Y laq kQ,/
+o- ups -fik. it (k 1 Et
Ca B Gp�YI i
€[— s
?U I't V'—
a s e
I,'a ,y
p {i4 S �'
it a S z Ya ga' f zs 3
qq s +r gz 7c
j43l
c-e>—
a
sg
d
��
rrT1�T1
i
--- =-fie
f
t
0
h
K:\Lend 3D Pre-Plat_C3D.dwg, S/7/2007g:44:S8AM, Lettor,
11UO
-�_��
200 Ft
S-tback
Line
Ben Gozola
From: Kelli Matzek [Kelli.Matzek@lakeelmo.org]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:18 AM
To: Ben Gozola
Subject: FW: application review
-----Original Message -----
From: Travis Germundson [mailto:Travis.Germundson@dnr.state.mn.us]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:56 AM
To: Kelli Matzek
Subject: Re: application review
No I do not,
Thanks
>>> "Kelli Matzek" <Kelli.Matzek@lakeelmo.orq> 4/12/2007 3:34 PM >>>
Travis,
Did you have any comments on the Discover Crossing CUP Amendment application or the
Whistling Valley III Preliminary Plat and CUP application?
-Kelli
Planner
City of Lake Elmo
1
April 11, 2007
Ms. Kelli Matzek
City of Lake Elmo
3806 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Dear Ms. Matzek:
Thank you for submitting the latest concept plan for the Whistling Valley Third Addition. On behalf
of the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD), I have reviewed the information and this letter
provides my preliminary comments. Because the project will require a VBWD permit, I will review
the PT'OjCCt more thoroughly once a VBWD permit application is submitted.
Concept Plan
The proposed concept plan appears to include some low -impact development techniques, e.g. a road
hammer -head turnaround, a rainwater garden, open space, etc. Reducing impervious surfaces and
encouraging infiltration practices will protect downstream Goose Lake and all water bodies from
negative water quality impacts and "flashy" inflows. Infiltration will also recharge groundwater,
which is needed to sustain a drinking water supply and support groundwater -dependent natural
resources.
The VBWD recently adopted new rules and regulations, which include a stormwater volume control
rule. The rules are posted to the VBWD's website: www.ybwd.org/2q1 itting.litin, For the one -
inch 24-hour design storm event, the stoimwater, runoff volume from the developed site cannot
exceed the existing runoff volume at all points where discharges leave the site. Runoff equal to one
half inch from the new impervious surfaces created from the project must be infiltrated.
The concept plan shows a rainwater garden within the road right-of-way, a small basin at the north
end of the project, and two stormwater ponds (which appear to be wet ponds) at the southeast corner
of the site. These runoff management facilities might be adequate, but the applicant will need to
submit calculations and design details proving they will control the stormwater runoff to the VBWD
standards.
Wetland Issues
The VBWD is the Local Government Unit responsible for administrating the Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA). The developer, will need to follow all of the rules and regulations spelled in the WCA, and
submit all of the necessary documentation. The VBWD will then review the information, forward the
ON
VALLEY BRANCH WATERSHED DISTRICT
P.O. BOX 338 LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 55042-0538
Ms Kelli Matzek
April 11, 2007
Page 2
information to the appropriate agencies for comments, and ensure the proposal conforms to the WCA and
other VBWD wetland rules and regulations. The intent of the WCA is to avoid wetland impacts.
No wetland delineation report has been submitted to the VBWD for the project. The topography does not
suggest there are any welands within the proposed site, except possibly along the ditch at the south end
and near, the location of the proposed southern stormwater management pond. Even if there are no
wetlands on the site, documentation needs to be submitted indicating that the site has been reviewed for
wetlands and none has been found.
Any projects with wetland impacts take a minimum of five weeks from the time a complete permit
application is submitted until a permit can be obtained. All developers proposing wetland impacts are
strongly encouraged to meet with a Barr Engineering Company wetland scientist and me before a VBWD
permit is submitted.
Miscellaneous Comments
• The VBWD is pleased to see that a road hammerhead turnaround appears on the plans.
Hammerheads require less impervious surfaces than cul-de-sacs.
® There are several existing and proposed steep slopes on the site. Controls will be critical to prevent
erosion.
® The VBWD will be investigating the stability of the ditch that is partially on the south end of the
property. The VBWD might wish to work with the developer to stabilize the ravine.
Permit Requirements
The proposed project will require a permit from the VBWD, and a complete permit application packet
should be submitted to me. Permit application material can be obtained from the District's website,
www.vb�yd,org/peqnijt�, Once a complete VBWD permit application is submitted, I will
review the project for conformance to the District's rules and regulations, including:
* Stormwater rates, volumes, and water, quality treatment
* Flood levels and minimum floor, elevations
® Wetland delineations and protection
* Erosion controls
* Potential downstream impacts
If you have any questions, please contact me at 952-832-2622.
Sincerely,
-_XhnP. Hanson, P.E.
BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY
Engineers for the District
VBWD Managers (via e-mail)
Derek Lash, Glenn Rehbein Companies (via e-mail)
Goose Lake
Fromm:
John Hanson Uhonaon@banconn8
Send:
Monday, May O7.20O711:38AM
To:
BenGozqla
Ben-
U|call you, too, but here's the Goose Lake information:
DNR's Ordinary High Water level (OHW): 924.4
VBWD's 1 00 -year flood level: 932.0
The DNR has established minimum statewide standards for shoreland development oflakes, and
standards vary with differing use classifications. Goose Lake isclassified hvthe DNR uounatural
euvim000nuot lake. Development requirements associated with aouburo\ environment classification
include:
m setbacks firon/the Dl|Wofl50 feet for mevverodand 2OO feet for uuoevvored lots
w ooinicuunn \cu sizes of40,D00 square feet for uon'nrcd and 80`000 square feet for unuovvorod
development.
More information regarding Goose Lake is in the VBWUs 2005-2015 Watershed Management Plan. See Section
John P. Hanson, P.E.
Barr Engineering Company
4700 West 77th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803
952.832.2622 phone
952.832.2601 fax
651.748.4230 VBWD project office
www-balr-r., com
5/8/2007
from: Katharine D. idin, Ph.D.
Forestry Consultant
Plant Health Associates, Inc.
651-436-8811
!i(,Jwidin(Wicomcast,net
4/11/07
As requested, I have reviewed the plans for the proposed development, Whistling
Valley Ill off Cty. Rd. 10 and 10`" St. La. N. in Lake Eli -no. The plan sets which I
reviewed were received by the City 3/14/07 and 4/3/07. 1 also looked at an aerial photo
of the site and drove to the site to confirm tree species and distribution. I have the
following observations and recommendations regarding this project:
Trees On Site
The development is proposed for a property which has areas of native oak
woodland and planted pine. These areas contain most of the significant trees (diam, > 8
in.) on the site. The property also has open field areas, woodland openings and areas of
smaller trees and -shrubs.
The project appears to have been designed in keeping with the topography and
significant treed areas as much as possible. Outlots and buffer areas have been set aside
to provide vistas and screening for the project. There are 7.53 A of preserved open space
(> 50% of total site area) which includes areas with trees in different portions of the site.
Six homes are planned for the site and the project design is attractive and should
complement the natural setting. House sites, infrastructure and the trail appear to have
been sited in consideration of the natural amenities. A recreational trail is planned
around the perimeter of the site on the south, west and north sides and will go through or
near wooded areas for much of its length.
Tree Removal Plan
A tree removal plan has been submitted as part of the development plans. A list
of significant trees to be removed in outlots as well as building lots is included and
corresponds well to the tree species distribution on the site. Using the listed diameters of
trees over 8 inches which are slated for removal, the project estimates removal of 48
significant trees totalling 598 diameter inches. Representative species of significant trees
being removed are red pine, jack pine, red oak, white oak, hackberry, ash, elm and
cottonwood. Except for I cottonwood, most significant trees being removed are under 20
in. in diameter (ave. diameter = 12,5 in.). The "tree removal notes" on this plan indicate
that the trees in the development area plus trees and vegetation along the trail corridor
Whistling Valley III Development Report — City of Lake Elmo 4/11/07 -- 2
will be preserved to the maximum extent possible
Tree Protection
Trees which are to be preserved will be protected by fencing according to detail
3/1-2.0. If the fencing is installed per the detail, prior to any soil disturbance, this should
provide adequate protection for most trees in or near the construction area. I did notice
that the T -F line detail, which indicates where the tree protection fencing is to be
installed, was not present on sheet C2.1 in all areas where grading will be near trees to be
preserved. In order to preserve the maximum number of significant trees, tree protection
fencing should be installed in all areas where grading, other soil disturbance or vehicle
traffic will be near trees which are to be saved. Installing tree protection fencing along
all grading limits next to existing significant trees is one way to be sure trees will be
protected during construction activities. If erosion control (silt S -F) fencing is to be
installed in some areas of the grading limits, this will be adequate to protect trees if
construction equipment stays on the construction side of the erosion control fence. Using
orange erosion control fencing in areas where it is to be used also as tree protection
fencing can help draw workers' attention to the barrier. Vehicle traffic or parking,
piling/storage of building materials, and clean-out of construction equipment should
definitely not be allowed within the dripline of any trees to be preserved in order to
protect the root systems from damage.
Question: Who will be inspecting the site to ensure that the tree protection fencing stays
up throughout the construction period?
Oak Wilt — Because of the oaks which are present on this property, the site should be
inspected for oak wilt before, during and after construction of the development. If any
oaks are pruned or wounded between 4/1 and 10/15, the wounds should be covered with
paint immediately to prevent insect transmission of the oak wilt fungus to fresh wounds
and development of oak wilt disease,
Landscane Plan
The proposed Landscape Plan takes into account the natural resources on the
property. Boulevard trees have not been included as part of the landscaping due to the
wooded nature of the site and this is appropriate. Tree and shrub plantings, as well as
perennials are shown for the entrance area, rain gardens, stormwater pond and drainage
swale. The designs are attractive and will fulfill their landscape functions. There is an
emphasis in these designs on the use of native plants (species or cultivated varieties)
which is appropriate and will decrease long-term maintenance needs. The species
represented are attractive, hardy and have few serious insect, disease or cultural problems
which would limit their usefulness or longevity or require excessive landscape
maintenance. There are 6 building sites in this development, so, according to the city's
OSP code, 60 trees would be required to be planted (10 per building site). There are 146
Whistling Valley III Development Report — City of Lake Elmo 4/11/07 — 3
trees indicated in the plan to be planted on site and the trees specified in the Plant
Schedule are larger than the minimum size required. Gray dogwood were listed in the
Plant Schedule (sheet L1.1) as a deciduous tree, but it is a shrub. In all, an estimated 352
diameter inches of trees are planned for the landscaping in this development.
The "Planting Detail" (I/L2/0, 2/L2.0, 4/L2.0) which has been submitted as part of
the landscape plan, is good and should be part of the specifications given to landscape
contractors who will be bidding on installation of landscape plants. The planting detail
should be adhered to and, if planting is not done according to the approved plan and
detail, it will need to be re -done.
Question: Who will be inspecting the plant material at time of delivery/planting and
accepting or rejecting plants? Who will be checking to make sure that the planting
methodology included in the Planting Detail is adhered to?
If you have any questions regarding this plan review and report, please contact me.
Kathy Widin
Forestry Consultant
City of Lake Elmo
651-4368811