Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout11-10-2020 Planning Commission Packet POSTED AT CITY HALL November 6, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 7:00 P.M. Meeting to be held telephonically/electronically pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 13D.021 Call-in Information: 612-517-3122 (Conference ID 429 409 862#) Electronic access (via Microsoft Teams): link available at https://medinamn.us/pc 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Weston Woods of Medina – Mark Smith – north of Hwy 55, east of Mohawk Dr. – Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development General Plan – Development of 76 twinhomes, 42 single-family, and 32 townhomes – PIDs 0311823420001,0311823410001, 0311823430005, and 0311823130002 6. Holy Name Lake Estates – Donavan DesMarais – north of County Road 24, northwest of Holy Name Lake – Preliminary Plat for six-lot subdivision on approximately 90 acres and variance from maximum cul- de-sac length – PIDs 2411823210001, 2411823220002, and 2411823240001 7. Three Rivers Park District – 4001 County Road 24 – Conditional Use permit for construction of shower facility and infirmary at the Outdoor Learning Center – PID 2011823210004 8. Approval of September 8, 2020 Planning Commission Minutes 9. Council Meeting Schedule 10. Adjourn Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 November 4, 2020 City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: October 28, 2020 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – November 4, 2020 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Meadow View Townhomes– north of Highway 55, west of CR116 – Lennar has requested final plat approval to develop 125 townhomes on approximately 20 net acres. The Council adopted documents of approval on September 15. Staff has conducted a preliminary review and requested revisions. The application is tentatively scheduled for review at the November 17 meeting. B) Holy Name Lake Estates – north of Pinto Drive, northwest of Holy Name Lake – Donavon DesMarais has requested preliminary plat approval for a six-lot rural subdivision. The applicant also requests a variance from the maximum cul-de-sac length to expand Pinto Drive to serve the site. A public hearing is scheduled for the November 10 Planning Commission meeting. C) Three Rivers Park Outdoor Learning Center CUP – 4001 County Road 24 – Three Rivers Park has requested a Conditional Use Permit for construction of a 1900 square foot building in the Outdoor Learning Center. The building would include showers and an infirmary for guests. A public hearing is scheduled for the November 10 Planning Commission meeting. D) Weston Woods Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan – east of Mohawk Drive, north of Highway 55 – Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) has requested a Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan for development of 76 twinhomes, 42 single-family, and 33 townhomes on the Roy and Cavanaugh properties. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and will schedule a public hearing when complete, potentially at the November 10 Planning Commission meeting. E) Schwarz Accessory Dwelling Unit – 1425 County Road 24 – Chaid and Jessica Schwarz have requested a conditional use permit to convert an existing home to an accessory dwelling unit to allow construction of a new home on their property. The CUP would also permit three accessory structures on the site. The applicant is considering withdrawing the application because they do not believe they will proceed with the renovation for the ADU at this time. F) Cates Ranch Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning – 2575 and 2590 Cates Ranch Drive – Robert Atkinson has requested a change of the future land use from Future Development Area to Business, a staging plan amendment to 2020, and a rezoning to Business Park. The application is incomplete for review, and the City has requested additional materials. G) Anderson/Hicks Rearrangement and Easement Vacation – 995 and 985 Medina Road – The owners have requested a lot line rearrangement between the two lots and to vacate the easements along the property lines being moved. The Council adopted a resolution of approval on the lot line rearrangement on October 6 and the easement vacation for October 20. The project will now be closed. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 November 4, 2020 City Council Meeting H) Deer Hill Preserve 4th Addition – Property Resources Development Corporation has requested final plat approval for the 4th Addition, which is proposed to include six lots. The Council reviewed and granted a resolution of approval at the October 20 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant on the conditions of approval before executing the plat. I) Roehl Final Plat – 1735 Medina Road – The Estate of Robert Roehl has requested a preliminary plat to subdivide 28 acres into two lots. The City Council granted preliminary plat approval on June 16. The applicant has requested final plat approval. The Council adopted a resolution of approval at the October 6 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant on conditions of approval before the plat is recorded. J) Ditter Subdivision – 2032-2052 Holy Name Drive – Tom and Jim Ditter have requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Interim Use Permit to replat their existing four lots into five lots. The City Council adopted documents of approval on September 15. Staff has submitted the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for review by the Met Council. K) Adam’s Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning – Jan-Har, LLP (dba Adam’s Pest Control) has requested various approvals for development of a 35,000 s.f. office building, restaurant, and 13,000 s.f. warehouse/repair shop north of Highway 55, west of Willow Drive (PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001). The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the November 12 and March 10 meetings and recommended approval. The City Council adopted approval documents on March 17. L) Johnson ADU CUP, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery – The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. M) Hamel Haven subdivision – These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plat is recorded. Other Projects A) Chippewa Road/Weston Woods EAW – The public comment period for the EAW expired on October 28. The City received nine comments from governmental agencies and no comments from residents. Staff is preparing responses and intends to present the EAW for consideration by the City Council at the November 17 meeting. B) Corcoran Annexation Request – The City of Corcoran has received a request for development of a mini-storage facility at 22410 Highway 55 (north of Highway 55 and west of Rolling Hills Road). The subject property extends approximately 0.3 acres into Medina. The applicant and City of Corcoran have inquired if Medina would be willing to allow Corcoran to annex this 0.3 acre. Staff has requested additional information related to the proposed development. C) Meander Road Analysis – Staff continues to review sightlines and other matters presented by the petition from residents of Fields of Medina. Staff had already intended to stripe the east side of Meander at County Road 116 to provide a wider shoulder for pedestrian use. Staff is preparing options to improve sightlines coming out of Jubert Drive onto Meander Road. TO: City Council FROM: Jason Nelson, Director of Public Safety, Through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: October 29, 2020 RE: Department Updates Election and Civil Unrest Preparation With the elections approaching, I have been working with the Lakes Area Emergency Management Group to ensure that plans are in place to assist if anyone has any issues that may arise. I have been in contact with our local election officials and have discussed what law enforcements role are in case we are called for an incident at a polling place. The good thing about Medina and Loretto, is that we do not have a lot of different polling places. I have been advised that there has been a significant amount of early voting that has taken place. The Lakes area continues to plan and prepare for any civil unrest that may occur due to elections, the former Minneapolis Police Officer trials or any other significant incident that could transpire in the normal course of police officer duties and responsibilities. New Community Service Officer Started On October 27th, Jackson Billman started with us as our second part-time Community Service Officer. He is in training and will fill the void left when Kaylen Boeddeker was promoted to Police Officer in August. CSO Patrick Johnson has done a fantastic job picking up extra hours while we were running shorthanded. Patrol Updates Patrol Updates 09/30/2020 through 10/27/2020 Patrol Activities – Between the dates of September 30, 2020 through October 27, 2020 our officers issued 79 citations and 195 warnings for various traffic violations. There were 10 property damage accidents reported, 2 personal injury accident, 10 medicals, 5 welfare checks/mental health calls, 4 business alarms, 7 residential alarms, 9 suspicious calls, 5 civil matter calls, 4 disturbances, and 32 assists to other agencies. On 10/01/2020 officer was dispatched to a reported property damage accident in the area of Highway 55 and Pinto Drive. The driver of one of the vehicles was suspected to be under the MEMORANDUM influence of a controlled substance and was placed under arrest for DWI. A blood search warrant was applied for and granted, and a blood sample was collected from the suspect. Charges are pending the results of the blood test. On 10/04/2020 officer was dispatched to the railroad crossing on Pinto Drive on a welfare check of a subject standing near the railroad crossing. Upon arrival an officer made contact with a known juvenile who likes to record trains as they pass. No issues were found. On 10/04/2020 officer was dispatched to a reported injury accident at the intersection of Highway 55 and County Road 19. A vehicle had been on the shoulder of Highway 55 and attempted to make a u- turn and had turned directly in front of a vehicle coming up from behind causing the collision. A citation was mailed to the driver that had attempted the unsafe u-turn. We continue to take theft of political signs in the city. This appears to be a metro wide problem as many other agencies report similar sign thefts. A trail camera had been set up at an address where numerous signs had been taken but the signs were not taken while the camera was in operation. On 10/11/2020 around 0300 hours an officer was checking on a vehicle in Hunter Park after hours. The driver of the vehicle fled into the Enclave Development and the officer pursued. The driver of the vehicle later struck a curb which disabled the vehicle and the driver, a juvenile female, was taken into custody. The juvenile was booked and released to her parents at our office. Charges are pending. On 10/17/2020 an officer stopped a vehicle along Highway 55 for a traffic violation. The driver identified himself verbally which was later found to be a false name. The driver was eventually identified and found to have a warrant for his arrest and was taken into custody. The driver was booked into Hennepin County Jail. On 10/17/2020 officer responded to assist Corcoran PD with an adult female choking at an address off Old Settlers Road. Upon arrival officers attempted CPR which was unsuccessful, and the victim was declared deceased by paramedics. On 10/19/2020 officer was dispatched to a reported business fire at Graphic Packaging on Willow Drive. Prior to arriving an employee was able to put out a small fire in the bail/receiving room of the business with fire extinguishers. The fire department continued to the scene and assisted with ventilation of the business to clear the smoke. On 10/20/2020 we experienced our first significant snowfall of the fall. Officers responded to multiple vehicles off the roadway in different parts of the city and one property damage accident. On 10/24/2020 officer was working a special traffic detail and was in Brooklyn Park when he received a hit of a stolen vehicle on a license plate he had ran. The officer confirmed he had run the correct plate, located the vehicle, and initiated a traffic stop. The driver and a passenger were detained until the vehicle was confirmed to have been stolen out of Brooklyn Park earlier that day. The driver was booked into Hennepin County Jail for possession of the stolen motor vehicle and an additional charge of driving with a canceled driver’s license. Investigations: On 10/24, I completed compliance checks for both alcohol and tobacco. We had two businesses fail the alcohol compliance checks. The employees who served the underage customer will be charged via formal complaint through the city attorney’s office. All other businesses passed the compliance checks. Target continues to experience theft of jewelry. A crew has been identified as being responsible for numerous thefts in the metro area. Numerous charges are pending, and the investigation is ongoing. Investigating the theft of cigarettes from a gas station. The suspect was wearing a face mask but pulled it down for a moment while in the store. Thankfully, the business security cameras were able to capture a picture of the suspects face. A crime alert was sent out to area agencies. Completed the background investigation for our new reserve officer. There are currently (14) cases assigned to investigations. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: October 29, 2020 MEETING: November 5, 2020 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • We had our first snow event last week which left us working at a fast pace to ready the trucks for winter. We also moved-up the scheduled DOT certifications, all trucks are now in compliance. • The final wear course and curb replacement is done on the Villa’s of Medina. We are working to resolve a few issues where the curb is holding a bit of water. • Jim Stremel and I are working to close out the dominium project, along with a few others. Completing the last few items can always be a challenge. • PW is working with our contractor to complete patching around manholes and valves along the roadways. This will help to prevent the snowplow from hitting what we call ‘high iron’ in the streets. Hitting one of these items with a plow could cause serious damage to equipment and infrastructure, as well as injury to the driver. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • WSB received quotes for the sewer lining project and they came in under the estimate. Jim Stremel has a memo in the packet with the results and a time schedule. • Final winterizing of the irrigation pumps for the Legion Park and Lennar Development were completed. PARKS/TRAILS • The trails have been plowed for the first time, with the addition of the Villas trail along County Rd 116. Each year we are adding more trail segments to the plowing route, we are now up to approximately 14 miles. This is a large increase form the 2 miles plowed 12 years ago. • Staff has secured easement rights from Loram for the Arrowhead Trail connection. This project will likely be next year. • As it turns colder in the next month, Public Works will prepare the skating rink and snow machine. MISCELLANEOUS • Public Works met with The Minnesota Safety Council, who offered guidance on current OSHA requirements. Staff is working to update internal documentation and Page 2 of 2 will launch Covid-friendly “video training” options, where course materials are available for all employees. • Public Works has been working for over a month to prepare the “old public works building” for election day. Preparations included a deep clean of the entire building, getting the heating system in working order, washing light fixtures, and various other items. • The gates for the compost/brush pile are on-order. Wiring and installation will be scheduled after the election. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 1 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director DATE: November 4, 2020 MEETING: November 10, 2020 Planning Commission SUBJ: Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) – Weston Woods E. of Mohawk Dr., N. of Hwy 55 and 1952 Chippewa Road – Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan of Development Review Deadline Application Received: September 30, 2020 Review Deadline: January 28, 2021 Background Mark Smith has requested Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) General Plan approval for a proposed residential development of two properties north of Highway 55 and east of Mohawk Drive. The applicant proposes 150 homes and a public park/natural area as described to the right: The City granted conditional approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment back in March and reviewed a PUD Concept Plan over the winter of 2019-2020. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment can be generally described as: • Change of land use of 17 net acres of the southern property from Business to Low Density Residential (2-3 units/net acre) • Change of land use of 4.75 net acres of the southern property from Business to Medium Density Residential (5-7 units/net acre) • Change of land use for the preserved area of the southern property from Business to public park and open space • Change of Staging of the northern property (approximately 28 acres) to allow development after 2020 instead of after 2025 An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found in the middle of the following page. The aerial shows existing land uses and describes planned land uses as follows: • The northern property is 80 acres in area but is over ½ wetland, with approximately 28 net acres after deducting wetland and required wetland buffer. Almost all of the upland property is tilled farmland. There is an existing home and farm buildings in the southwest corner of the site. • The southern property is 55 acres in size, with approximately 26.5 net acres after deducting wetlands and required wetland buffers. A large wetland is located along the east end of the site and drainageways divide the site into three areas (south, northwest, and northeast). In • 76 twinhomes on the northern property • Combination of uses on the southern property: o 42 single-family lots o 32 townhomes o 5.1 acres park/open space. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 2 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting addition, there are approximately 13 acres of woods which bisect the site along the ridge. These woods abut the large wetland in the southern portion of the site and bisect the northern portion of the site. There are two 4-acre farmed areas along Mohawk Drive and approximately 6.5 acres of vacant grassland on the northeast of the site. • Polaris and The Wealshire are located to the west of the site. OSI is southeast of the large wetland, along with additional future Business property to the north of OSI. The Bridgewater neighborhood is located across the large wetland to the east of the site. Homes on rural lots are located north and northwest of the site. These lots are zoned Rural-Residential-Urban Reserve, but included in the Future Development Area designation and may be considered for addition to the municipal sewer and water system in future Comprehensive Plan processes. Proposed Changes from PUD Concept/Comp Plan Amendment Review The Preliminary Plat/General Plan of Development includes the same number of proposed homes as was shown upon the Concept Plan, which is attached for reference. Minutes from this review are also attached for a reminder. The applicant proposes the following layout changes on the southern property from what was reviewed earlier this year. • One fewer townhome unit and one additional single-family detached home. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 3 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting • Change of location of the townhomes to the northwestern portion of the southern property. During the review of the Concept Plan, the townhomes were shown in the southwestern portion of the site. • Change to the layout of the public park/natural area. Swapping the location of the townhomes and single-family homes on the southern property does not alter the land uses or density of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, but does require adjusting the land use map to alter the location of the Low-Density Residential (LDR) and Medium-Density Residential (MDR) aspects of the development. Because the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is pending final adoption by the City, staff believes this can be accomplished a part of the pending approval. It should be noted that staff believes the City has the discretion, within the context of the conditional Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval and through the PUD, whether the proposed alteration of the location of the MDR and LDR is appropriate and should be approved. Upon review, staff did not have concerns with the proposed change, but seeks Planning Commission and Council direction on the issue. Comprehensive Plan On April 7, the City Council adopted resolution 2020-18, granting conditional approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The approval was contingent upon final approval of the Planned Unit Development and a development agreement related to the improvements which are related to the development. These include the streets, utilities, trails, landscaping and other improvements within the neighborhood and Chippewa Road through the subject site. This review assumes adoption of the Comp Plan Amendment which has been conditionally improved. The site would be designated for development in or after 2020 with the uses described to the right: One of the conditions of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment was that the overall density of the southern property be between 3.0-3.5/net acre. The proposed plan shows a density of 3.5 units/net acre on the southern property. Environmental Assessment Worksheet In September 2020, the applicant submitted information and the City completed information to complete an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), which was required because of the wetland impacts necessary for construction of Chippewa Road. The purpose of an EAW is to summarize and seek input on the potential environmental impacts of the project, provide information for planning and design especially related to ways to mitigate potential impacts, and determine if the project will cause any significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated through normal review processes such that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be required. Land Use Net Acres Density Northern parcel LDR 28 acres 2-3 units/net acre Southern parcel (portion) LDR 17 acres 2-3 units/net acre Southern parcel (portion) MDR 4.7 acres 5-7 units/net acre Southern parcel (portion PROSE 5.2 acres NA Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 4 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting The EAW is available on the City’s website. The public comment period extended through October 28, in which time the City received 10 comments from other agencies. None of the comments received recommended that an EIS should be required. The comments received by the City are summarized within the attached “Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision.” This document also includes draft responses to each comment. Based upon the information and comments, staff is recommending that no EIS should be required and the City Council is scheduled to review the responses and findings and determine whether an EIS should be required at the November 17 meeting. Planned Unit Development General Plan of Development The applicant has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to regulate development and construction. According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. The City has a good deal of discretion when determining whether a PUD should be implemented rather than standard zoning. The City should consider the purpose above when making a decision whether a PUD is preferred to standard zoning. The applicant has described how they believe the PUD addresses the criteria on pages 4-8 of their narrative. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 5 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Proposed Site Layout On the southern property, the applicant proposes 42 single-family lots between 9,000-12,000 square feet in size, 32 townhomes and 5.1 net acres for public parks and open space. As noted above, a PUD allows “deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards” to serve the purposes described in the PUD ordinance. To analyze whether to approve a rezoning to PUD, the City compares the request to the expectations of the underlying zoning designation. Single-Family Lots The R1 zoning district is generally utilized by the City to implement the LDR land use. The R2 zoning district is available “as an alternative to the R1 district, not to substantially increase density of development, but rather to allow the clustering of smaller lots to support: (1) The protection and enhancement of natural areas through the preservation of wooded areas, the provision of additional buffering for lakes, streams, and wetlands, or the creation of ecological connections with other protected lands. (2) The preservation of open spaces, provision of additional buffering from adjacent streets and uses, or the creation of additional recreational opportunities. The City Council, following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, shall have full discretion to determine in what cases zoning property R2 rather than the standard R1 district meets these purposes. If the City Council determines an R2 zoning does not meet these purposes, the property shall be zoned R1.” The following summarizes the single family lots proposed on the southern property compared to the R1 and R2 district requirements. The proposed lots in the PUD fall in between the R1 and R2 standards, which could be formalized through the flexibility of a PUD. R1 R2 Proposed Single Family Minimum Lot Size 11,000 s.f. 8,000 s.f. 9,000 s.f. Minimum Lot Width 90 feet 60 feet 70 feet Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 90 feet 130 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet Side Yard Setback (combined) 25 feet (15 & 10) 15 feet (10 & 5) 20 feet (10 & 10) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 30 feet 25 feet 30 feet Collector Road Setback 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet Max. Hardcover 40% 50% 40% Townhomes The R3 zoning district is utilized by the City to implement the MDR land use, which is the proposed land use for the townhome portion of this project. The R3 district permits townhome development up to 7 units/acre, provided design elements such as oversized garages, community amenities affordable housing or low impact development are provided. Because common elements, especially stormwater ponds, are shared between the townhomes and the single-family lots within the broader Planned Unit Development, staff believes the overall density of the project and the number of units is more relevant than determination the exact density of the Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 6 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting townhome portion of the site. However, it appears that if one includes approximately ½ of the area shared stormwater pond in the townhome calculation, the density is approximately 6.3 units/acre. In addition to allowing the blending of the density between the townhomes and single-family, the applicant requests flexibility through the PUD process to reduces the setback between townhome buildings, the minimum distance from the townhome buildings to the private roadway, and the minimum setback to a collector roadway (Chippewa Road). The requested deviations requested as part of the PUD are highlighted below: R3 Requirement Proposed Townhomes Minimum Net Area per Unit 6,222 s.f. 6,222 s.f. Maximum Net Area per Unit 12,500 s.f. 6,222 s.f. Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 45 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 45 feet Collector Road Setback (Chippewa) 50 feet 40 feet Local Road Setback (Mohawk) 40 feet 40 feet Private Road Setback 25 feet (generally min. 27 feet to curb, based on boulevard width) 23 feet to curb Min Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 31% Twinhome Lots On the northern property, the applicant proposes 76 twinhome units within 38 buildings. The applicant’s concept shows small lots under the twinhomes with Association owned open space between each pad and between the street and the building. For the sake of comparison to lot standards, staff has calculated the open space between the lots as part of the adjacent lots. As noted above, the R2 zoning district can be used to implement the LDR land use in certain circumstances. Staff believes that the northern property may likely be a reasonable use of the R2 district because of the narrow areas of upland amongst the wetland on the site. The following table summarizes the twinhome layout compared to the R2 district. The layout would seek flexibility to reduce the front setback to the private roadway as part of the PUD request. R2 Proposed Twinhomes Minimum Lot Size (Two-family) 5,000 s.f. per unit >5,000 s.f. including open space between lots Minimum Lot Width (two-family) 50 feet 50 feet Minimum Lot Depth 90 feet 90 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25’ to curb (equiv. to 13’ to right-of-way) Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 25’ to curb (equiv. to 13’ to right-of-way) Side Yard Setback (two-family) 10 feet 30 feet between buildings Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 66.4% of platted lot; 50% if including boulevard and open space between buildings Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 7 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Generally, the flexibility sought under the PUD allows for structures to be placed slightly closer together within the site than would be allowed by the underlying zoning districts. Doing so allows the same number of units to occupy a smaller footprint, which makes it more practical to preserve some of the natural area and while still provided similar open space on the periphery of the site. Architectural Design The R3 zoning district includes minimum architectural requirements for townhome construction. The R2 district does not provide specific architectural requirements with the exception of requiring elements if a garage occupies more than half of a building façade. The R3 zoning district requires the following standards for townhomes:’ • Minimum of 20% accent materials on façade facing streets • Modulation minimum of once per 50 feet of façade • Additional architectural features if garages doors occupy more than half of façade The applicant has provided the attached narrative of proposed architectural features and example sketches and photos. A higher level of architectural requirements can be required as part of the consideration for the PUD. Staff seeks feedback from the Planning Commission and Council on whether the additional standards proposed by the applicant in their narrative is sufficient. Tree Preservation, Buffer Yards, and Landscaping The southern site includes a wooded area approximately 14 acres in area. The northern 3-acres of the woods is designated as a moderate quality oak forest in the City’s land cover classification system. Approximately 1-2 acres of the southern wooded area is designated as a moderate quality maple-basswood forest. The remaining area is an altered deciduous woodland. Few trees are located on the northern site. The applicant’s concept proposes to preserve approximately 7 acres and dedicate the land to the City as part of the PUD process and park dedication requirements. The applicant proposes to preserve an additional ½ acre of wooded area in the eastern portion of the site. The City’s natural resource specialist provided observations on the woodlands. His conclusion was that the southern portion of the wooded area, especially located on the knoll which is proposed to be dedicated to the City, was well varied in terms of tree age and species, and had comparatively low levels of buckthorn intrusion. This portion of the woods appeared to be a long-term sustainable natural area of a comparatively good quality within Medina. The dedication of the property to the City would provide the opportunity to conserve the highest quality portion of the woodlands. Although the northern portion of this woodland is classified as a moderate quality oak forest, the City’s natural resource specialist noted that oak regrowth was very limited and the area was transitioning to be ash dominant and was also heavily infested with buckthorn. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 8 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Even though approximately ½ of the wooded area is proposed to be preserved, significant tree removal on the rest of the site is subject to the City’s tree preservation ordinance, which requires replacement for all removal in excess of 15% of the significant trees on the site. This results in the need to replace 584 trees, or a total of 5687 inches of trees. The applicant proposes to replace as many trees as possible on-site, including restoring the area east of the twinhomes on the northern property. Even if larger replacement trees are planted, the replacement will not be able to occur fully on-site. The City accepts a fee of $100/inch to the City’s reforestation/forest management fund for trees that cannot be replaced on-site. Staff believes there are opportunities to preserve additional wooded areas upon the site. By reducing the depth of the lots in the southwestern portion of the site, more of the wooded area can be preserved. The applicant is also proposing grading along the property line of the preserved area. Reducing the grading, potentially by using walls or additional stormsewer would provide additional preservation. Staff also recommends relocating pond 15P in the east-central portion of the site because this area is wooded. It appears a better location may be east of the cul-de-sac. To provide replacement for trees proposed to be removed, the applicant proposes to plant trees averaging 40 feet on center or as densely as is practical for long-term survivability. The result is that the plantings on site will far exceed the minimum requirements and would be as much as can be accommodated. Wetlands and Floodplain The City requires upland buffers to be established upon development based upon the management classification of the wetland. Portions of the large wetland to the east of the proposed development is a Preserve wetland which is mapped as a Site of Biodiversity Significance. This type of wetland requires an average buffer of 50 feet in width. The remaining wetlands require buffers with an average width of 25-35 feet. It appears that the average buffers are provide, but staff recommends a condition requiring the applicant to provide documentation to confirm. FEMA maps identified a Zone A floodplain within the location of the large wetland. The City has provided a model for a Base Flood Elevation, which is currently being reviewed by Elm Creek Watershed. The residential development does not appear to contain floodplain impacts, but the construction of Chippewa Road will. The applicant has agreed to provide compensatory storage upon the site to mitigate the impacts of Chippewa Road. Transportation The applicant proposes a single access to the twinhome neighborhood off of Mohawk Drive, across from the driveway of The Wealshire. The single-family area and townhome area are each proposed to have two accesses, one on Mohawk Drive and one on new Chippewa Road. The City Engineer recommends that the access point to the townhomes and the four twinhomes on Chippewa Road be shifted further to the east. The applicant has proposed to construct the Chippewa Road extension from Mohawk Drive to Arrowhead Drive as part of development of the property. This connection is identified in the Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 9 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting City’s Transportation Plan and was necessitated at this time as a result of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Construction of Chippewa Road is imperative because Mohawk Drive has limited right-in/right- out access to the south of the site. As a result, eastbound traffic would currently be required to travel west on Chippewa Road to Willow Drive in order to turn left onto Highway 55. This would add approximately 1.3 miles to each east-bound trip. Staff believes this connection is important to support development of the subject site and others in the area of Chippewa Road/Mohawk Drive. This connection is important for public safety purposes as well, providing better emergency access to the area and also providing an alternative route in case of an emergency on Highway 55. As described in the EAW, construction of Chippewa Road will result in significant impacts to the large wetland east of the site. The City will be responsible for wetland mitigation for the project, although the applicant has indicated that they would contribute toward the cost of mitigation rather than being responsible for the full cost of watermain construction from Arrowhead to Mohawk (see discussion below under sewer/water). The City Engineer has provided several comments related to the design of Chippewa Road. Staff recommends a condition that these comments be addressed. Of particular note is that the plans propose a stormwater pond on property owned by a separate private party. The applicant will need to relocate this pond or provide evidence of approval to construct in this location. Sewer/Water/Easements Existing sewer and water mains are located within Mohawk Drive, which the applicant proposes to extend throughout the site. Currently, the subject property and other sites in the area are served by a single water main along Highway 55 (to Mohawk) without any looping. As part of the consideration for the Comp Plan Amendment and PUD, the applicant has agreed to extend a second watermain from Arrowhead Drive to the site, which would relieve the City of the obligation of doing so. The applicant has stated that they would, at the City’s option, contribute towards the cost of wetland mitigation for the construction of Chippewa Road rather than being responsible for the full cost of the watermain. This could be implemented through water connection credits for the homes in the subdivision and may be a good opportunity for the City, because the watermain had initially been an anticipated cost. Staff recommends a condition that the plat provide drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of lots and over all utilities, stormwater improvements, drainageways, emergency overflows and wetland locations. Stormwater The applicant proposes several stormwater improvements throughout the site. Volume control is proposed to be provided primarily through stormwater reuse for lawn irrigation. The City Engineer and Elm Creek Watershed have provided initial review comments, and staff recommends a condition that these comments be addressed. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 10 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Park Dedication The Park Commission is scheduled to review at their November 18 meeting to provide a recommendation on park and trails. The applicant proposes the following: • Dedicate 7 acres of preserved woodland to the City. • Construction of public trail loop through the preserved woodland. • Construction of public trail along Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive to Arrowhead Drive. • Construction of trail along Mohawk Drive from “Hillside Lane” to Chippewa Road. • Construction of private trails through the twinhomes and townhomes to connect to the preserved woodland. City’s subdivision regulations require up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated for park purposes. The City may also choose to accept cash in-lieu of all or a portion of this land dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre-developed market value, with a minimum of $3500 and a maximum of $8000 per home. The proposed park and trail improvements were consistent with those discussed by the Park Commission and City Council during the Concept Plan Review. Review Criteria The City has a good deal of discretion when reviewing a PUD because it is a rezoning, which is a legislative action. A PUD should only be approved if it achieves the purposes of the PUD district (described on page 4), the Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. The City generally has a lower level of discretion on review of the preliminary plat, but in this case the plat is contingent upon approval of the PUD. If the PUD is approved, review of the preliminary plat is guided by Subd. 10 of Section 820.21: In the case of all subdivisions, the City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the following finding are made: (a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28. (b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. (d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. Public Comments Staff has received one comment from a nearby resident after the public hearing notice was sent, which is attached for reference. The resident notes that they previously opposed the request, but now are in support of the proposal. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 11 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Staff Recommendation Staff believes the use of the PUD provides a better means to address the objectives of the City as stated in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment which was conditionally approved earlier this year, as well as the other purposes described in the PUD ordinance. Based upon the density approved in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, providing for a reduced footprint for the lots and townhome allows for open space and natural resources to be preserved around the remainder of the site. Staff recommends approval of the PUD General Plan of Development and Preliminary Plat, subject to the following conditions: 1) Approval of the PUD General Plan of Development and Preliminary Plat is contingent upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 2) Approval is conditioned upon approval of a wetland replacement plan for proposed wetland impacts 3) Approval is conditioned upon establishment of a base flood elevation. 4) The Applicant shall update plans to provide additional preservation of the existing woodlands. This includes, at a minimum, reduction of grading adjacent to the public park land. 5) The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall include the conditions described below as well as other requirements by City ordinance or policy. 6) The Applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans dated 10/27/2020 except as may be modified herein. Final plans shall be provided at the time of final plat and shall address the comments of the City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Elm Creek Watershed, other relevant staff and agencies and the conditions noted herein. Plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 7) A site plan review of each townhome building within the development site shall not be required as described in Section 825.55 of City Code. However, each townhome building and single-family dwelling shall be subject to administrative review by City staff for consistency with the site plan which accompanies the plat, architectural requirements established in the PUD, relevant requirements of City Code, and the conditions noted herein. 8) The Applicant shall meet all requirements of the wetland protection ordinance upon the residential development site, including provision of easements, planting of vegetation and installation of signage. 9) The plat shall provide drainage and utility easements over all utilities, stormwater improvements, wetlands, and drainageways as recommended by the City Engineer. The plat shall also provide easements along the perimeter of the lots and between buildings as recommended by the City Engineer. 10) The Property shall be subject to the City’s lawn and landscaping irrigation regulations. No lawn or landscape irrigation systems shall be permitted to be connected to the City water system. The Applicant shall provide a description of any proposed irrigation system at the time of final plat application. 11) The Applicant shall provide documentation to show that the average buffers required for each wetland have been provided. 12) The Applicant shall update plans for Chippewa Road as directed by the City Engineer. Mark Smith – Weston Woods Page 12 of 12 November 10, 2020 Prelim Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting 13) The Applicant shall provide 5687 inches of replacement trees. This should include planting as densely as practical to support long term survivability. Replacement beyond that which can be located on-site shall be provided as $100/inch cash towards the City’s reforestation/forest management fund. 14) The access to Chippewa Road serving the townhomes and four twinhomes shall be located with additional distance from Mohawk Drive. 15) Plans shall be updated to improve trail and pedestrian alignment. 16) Park dedication shall be provided as required by the City Council after recommendation by the Park Commission. 17) The street and watermain connection between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Drive shall be constructed in connection with the development. 18) The Applicant shall submit HOA documents for City review and approval which shall describe provisions for maintenance of elements such as the private streets, trails, stormwater improvements, lawn irrigation, upland buffers, and bufferyard landscaping. 19) The Applicant shall submit a letter of credit in an amount of 150% of the cost of site improvements to ensure completion. 20) The request shall be subject to review and approval of Elm Creek Watershed, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health, Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council and any other relevant agencies. 21) The Applicant shall provide title documentation at the time of final plat application and abide by the recommendation of the City Attorney with regard to title matters and recording instructions. 22) The final plat applicant shall be filed within 180 days of the date of the resolution granting preliminary approval or the approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. 23) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Concept Plan reviewed in fall/winter 2019-2020 3. Excerpt from 10/8/2019 Planning Commission minutes 4. Excerpt from 3/17/2020 City Council minutes 5. Natural Resource Specialist comments dated 10/21/2019 6. Engineering Comments 7. DRAFT Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision 8. Public Comment received 9. Applicant Narrative 10. Architectural Description 11. Twinhome Photos 12. Plans OTSEGO, MINNESOTAWESTON WOODS OF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTANORTHNO SCALEAREA LOCATION MAPSITEHORSESHOE TRAILROLLING HILLS RD.ABBREVIATIONSMODULAR RETAINING WALLFIELDSTONE RETAINING WALLNEWCATVUNDERGROUND CABLE/TVEXISTING DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTIONSTORM SEWER WATERMAINFORCE MAIN SANITARY SEWER-WASTEROOF DRAIN SYSTEMGAS LINE-UNDERGROUNDFIRE LINE (IF SEPARATE) FIRE DEPT. CONNECTIONSOIL SUBDRAINTELEPHONE-UNDERGROUNDELECTRIC-UNDERGROUNDLAWN SPRINKLER SLEEVE>>>>RIPRAP>>FMSTSRDGATE VALVEWTRSANBLDG.FIREGASHYDTELEELECX"SSDLSSC.O.MAJOR CONTOURBUILDINGSPOT ELEVATION120CONCRETE SLOPE DIRECTIONCONCRETE CURBGUARD RAILFENCINGCONCRETE RETAINING WALLHEIGHT, TYPEPOWER POLELIGHT STANDARDEXIT LOCATIONUNDERGROUND STRUCTUREEDGE OF PAVEMENTBOLLARDCANOPY/OVERHANGBIT. EDGEFESCATCH BASINMANHOLESYMBOLSLANDSCAPINGGRAVELFLAG POLE>>>POWERPOLEGUARD POSTGAS METERTREESTRAFFIC SIGNWATER MAINSANITARY SEWER LINESTORM SEWER LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICMAJOR CONTOURSPOT ELEVATIONCONCRETE BUILDINGCANOPY / OVERHANG120GM12"STS8"SANLTFENCINGCONCRETE CURBRETAINING WALL OEMANHOLEWATER VALVEFIRE HYDRANTFLARED END SECTIONCATCH BASIN6"WTRXXHEIGHT, TYPE1NOTE NUMBERGUY WIREIRON MONUMENT FOUNDWATER SHUT-OFF VALVEllMEASURED DISTANCEDISTANCE PER RECORDED PLATUNDERGROUND TELEPHONEUTUNDERGROUND ELECTRICUEGAS LINEGPAVING BLOCKPAVING BLOCKSET 1/2" X 14" IRON PIPETRANSFORMERTREE LINEMBMAILBOXSURVEY DISK (BENCHMARK)WSOBITUMINOUSSOIL BORINGB-X123.45%1.00234.5LIGHT POLEMINOR CONTOUR123MINOR CONTOUR123SILT FENCESYMBOLDESCRIPTIONREVISED AREA (THIS ISSUE)REVISION - ADDENDUM, BULLETIN, ETC.NOTE REFERENCELARGE SHEET DETAILCOORDINATE POINTPARKING STALL COUNTDESCRIPTIONSYMBOLEROSION CONTROL SYMBOLSDRAWING SYMBOLSnnnLEGAL DESCRIPTIONBENCHMARKINLET PROTECTIONC21C7.31122GSID Station # 10300 USGS Quad: HAMEL County: HENNEPIN, MN Mn/DOT Name: 2722 T Stamping: 2722 T 1977Monument Type: SURVEY DISK Disk Type: ALUMINUM ALLOY ROD (NO SLEEVE) (DEPTH 8 FT)Directions:2.5 MILES WEST OF HAMEL, 2.4 MILES WEST ALONG TRUNK HIGHWAY 55 FROM THE JUNCTION OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 55AND COUNTY ROAD 101 IN HAMEL, AT TRUNK HIGHWAY 55 MILEPOINT 174, 73.0 FEET NORTH OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 55,166.0 FEET EAST OF MOHAWK DRIVE, 27.0 FEET SOUTHWEST OF A POWER POLE WITH GUY WIRE, 26.0 FEET SOUTH OF AFENCE LINE, 1.0 FOOT SOUTH OF A WITNESS POST.That part of the South Half of Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lyingNorthwesterly of the following described line:Commencing at the southeast corner of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 01 degrees 13 minutes 50 secondsEast on an assumed bearing along the east line of South half a distance of 833.09 feet to the point of beginning of the line to bedescribed; thence South 22 degrees 09 minutes 09 seconds West a distance of 86.32 feet; thence Southerly 173. 73 feet along atangential curve concave southeasterly, having a central angle of 11 degrees 25 minutes 46 seconds and a radius of 870. 89 feet;thence South 10 degrees 43 minutes 23 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 534.34 feet; thence southerly 29. 99 feetalong a tangential curve concave easterly, having a central angle of 10 degrees 06 minutes 25 seconds and a radius of 170.1 feet;thence South 00 degrees 36 minutes 58 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 30.00 feet to the south line of said SouthHalf and said line there terminating.Abstract propertyANDParcel1:The Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23, except the West 468feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 2:That part of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter lying West of a line extending from the Southwestcorner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter to a point on the North line of the Northeast quarter of theSoutheast quarter 660 feet West along said North line from the Northeast corner of the Northeast quarter of theSoutheast quarter, all in Section 3, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens property.Parcel 3:Outlot B, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Abstract propertyParcel 4:The North 468 feet of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 5:The West 468 feet of the South 590 feet of the North 1058 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarterof Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 6:That part of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North,Range 23, lying South of the North 1058 feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens property3DESCRIPTIONSHEET NO.CIVIL & LANDSCAPE TITLE SHEETPRELIMINARY PLAT - NORTHPRELIMINARY PLAT - SOUTHEXISTING CONDITIONSSITE PLAN - NORTHSITE PLAN - SOUTHGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSIONCONTROL-ENLARGED DETAILSGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSIONCONTROL-ENLARGED DETAILSGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSIONCONTROL-ENLARGED DETAILSGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSIONCONTROL-ENLARGED DETAILSMN SWPPP NOTESUTILITIES - NORTHUTILITIES - SOUTHVEHICLE TRACKING-NORTHVEHICLE TRACKING-SOUTHLINE/CURVE TABLES-NORTHLINE/CURVE TABLES-SOUTHCIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILSCIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILSCIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILSTREE PRESERVATION PLANTREE PRESERVATION PLANTREE PRESERVATION PLANTREE PRESERVATION PLANLANDSCAPE-OVERALLLANDSCAPE-NORTHLANDSCAPE-SOUTHLANDSCAPE DETAILSCERTIFICATIONSCIVIL / LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX & REVISION MATRIXOWNERC0.1C0.2C0-3C1.1C2.1C2.2C3.0C3.1C3.2C3.3C3.4C3.5C3.6C3.7C3.8C3.9C3.10C3.11C3.12C4.1C4.2C6.1C6.2C6.3C6.4C7.1C7.2C7.3L1.1L1.2L1.3L1.4L2.1L2.2L2.3L7.1PROJECT CONTACTS09.28.20 10.27.20XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSHEETS ISSUED BY DATECOMPOST/BIO LOG))))))))))))))))))))I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.CERTIFICATION IS FOR ALL SHEETS WITH NUMBERS BEGINNING WITH THE LETTER "C".RANDALL C HEDLUND, P.E.LICENSE NUMBER:DATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.CERTIFICATION IS FOR ALL SHEETS WITH NUMBERS BEGINNING WITH THE LETTER "L".JOSHUA K. POPEHN, L.L.A.LICENSE NUMBER:DATE:1957627 OCT 20204480327 OCT 2020DAngle&And@At100 YR.100 Year Flood ElevationA.B.Anchor BoltA.D.Area DrainA/CAir Conditioning UnitADD.AddendumADDL.AdditionalADJ.Adjacent / AdjustAHUAir Handling UnitALT.AlternateALUM.AluminumANOD.AnodizedAPPROX.ApproximateARCHArchitect / ArchitecturalAUTO.AutomaticAVG.AverageB.C.Back of CurbB/WBottom of WallBFEBasement Floor ElevationBITBituminous (Asphaltic)BLDGBuildingBMBenchmarkBSMT.BasementC.F.Cubic FeetC.F.S.Cubic Feet Per SecondC.G.Corner GuardC.J.Control JointC.L.CenterlineC.M.U.Concrete Masonry UnitC.O.CleanoutC.O.E.U.S. Army Corps Of EngineersC.Y.Cubic YardsCBCatch BasinCBMHCatch Basin ManholeCEM.CementCIPCast Iron PipeCMPCorrugated Metal PipeCONC.Concrete (Portland)CONN.ConnectionCONST.ConstructionCONT.ContinuousCONTR.ContractorCOP.CopperCU.CubicD.S.Down SpoutDEG.DegreeDEMO.Demolition / DemolishDEPT.DepartmentDET.DetailDIA.DiameterDIAG.DiagonalDIM.DimensionDIPDuctile Iron PipeDNDownDWG.DrawingE.EastE.J.Expansion JointE.O.Emergency OverflowE.O.S.Emergency Overflow SwaleE.W.Each WayEA.Each EL.ElevationELEC.ElectricalELEV.ElevationEMER.EmergencyENGR.EngineerENTR.EntranceEQ.EqualEQUIP.EquipmentEQUIV.EquivalentEXIST.ExistingEXP.ExpansionF & IFurnish and InstallF.B.O.Furnished by OthersF.C.Face of CurbF.D.Floor DrainF.D.C.Fire Department ConnectionF.V.Field VerifyFBFull BasementFBWOFull Basement Walk OutFBLOFull Basement Look OutFDN.FoundationFESFlared End SectionFFEFinished Floor ElevationFLR.FloorFT. OR (')FootFUT.FutureG.B.Grade BreakG.C.General ContractorGAL.GallonGALV.GalvanizedGFEGarage Floor ElevationGL.GlassGR.GradeH.HeightH.P.High PointHDPEPHigh Density Polyethylene PipeHGT.HeightHORIZ.HorizontalHVACHeating, Ventilation, Air ConditioningHYDHydrantI.D.Inside Dimension OR IdentificationI.E. or IEInvert ElevationIN. OR (")InchesINFO.InformationINL.Inlet ElevationINSUL.InsulationINV.Invert ElevationJT.JointL.F.Linear FeetL.P.Low Point / Liquid PetroleumLB.PoundLGULocal Government UnitLB.PoundLB.LongitudinalLT.Light / LightingMAINT.MaintenanceMAS.MasonryMATL.MaterialMAX.MaximumMECHMechanicalMED.MediumMFR.ManufacturerMHManholeMIN.Minimum / MinuteMISC.MiscellaneousMNDOTMinnesota Department Of TransportationMOD.Module / ModularMUL.MullionN.NorthN.I.C.Not In ContractNO. OR #NumberNOMNominalNTSNot to ScaleNWENormal Water ElevationNWLNormal Water LevelO.F.On CenterO.G.Outside DimensionO.H.Overhead ElectricOH.OverheadOHWLOrdinary High Water LevelOPNG.OpeningORIG.OriginalP.C.Point of CurvatureP.I.Point of IntersectionPIVPost Indicator ValveP.L. OR P/LProperty LineP.O.B.Point of BeginningP.S.F.Pounds Per Square FootP.S.I.Pounds Per Square InchP.T.Point of TangencyP.V.C.Point of Vertical CurvatureP.V.I.Point of Vertical IntersectionP.V.T.Point of Vertical TangencyPEPolyethylenePED.Pedestal / PedestrianPERF.PerforatedPREP.PreparationPROJ.ProjectPROP.ProposedPVCPoly-Vinyl-Chloride (Piping)PVMT.PavementQTR.QuarterQTY.QuantityRRadiusRAD.RadiusRERim Elevation (Casting)R.D.Roof DrainR.E.Remove ExistingR.O.Rough OpeningR.P.Radius PointRCReinforced Concrete PipeR.S.Rough SlabRSDRoof Storm DrainRE.RegardingREINF.ReinforcedREQ'DRequiredREV.Revision / RevisedRGURegulatory Government UnitROW OR R/WRight of WayS.SouthS.F.Square FeetSAN.Sanitary SewerSECT.SectionSESplit Entry /Side ExitSEWOSplit Entry Walk Out /Side Exit Walk OutSHT.SheetSIM.SimilarSLNT.SealantSPEC.SpecificationSQ.SquareSSDSubsurface drainSTMHStorm Sewer ManholeSTD.StandardSTRUCT.StructuralSYM.SymmetricalTThicknessT/RTop of RimT/WTop of WallTEMP.TemporaryTHK.Thick / ThicknessT.J.Tooled JointTNHTop Nut HydrantTYP.TypicalU.N.O.Unless Noted OtherwiseV.B.Vapor BarrierV.C.Vertical CurveV.I.F.Verify In FieldVER.VerifyVER.VerticalVEST.VestibuleWWidthW.PT.Working PointW.W.F.Welded Wire FabricW/WithW/OWithoutWOWalk OutVER.WetlandWPWaterproofWETL.WeightYD.YardYR.YearUNDERGROUND FIBER OPTICFOEROSION CONTROL BLANKETPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558105055MOHAWKROADHACKMORE RD.BASSLAKERD.HAMEL ROADPINTO DR.SETTLERS RD.OLDARROWHEAD DRIVE 551011911647115C001MEH003.dwgCIVIL & LANDSCAPETITLE SHEETC0.1MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVEST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558CONTACT: MARK SMITHLANDFORM105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401TEL 612-252-9070FAX 612-252-9077CONTACT: RANDY HEDLUNDCIVIL ENGINEERLANDFORM105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401TEL 612-252-9070FAX 612-252-9077CONTACT: LYNN CASWELLSURVEYORXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDRIVECHIPPEWAROADWILLOW XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CABXCABXCABXEMEMCABXCABXCABXCABXGAS510951105111WINV=984.36INV 27 RCPUEUEOE OE OEOEGGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G OEOE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>>>>IIIIIIIII>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIWETLAND 2DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)78910111213156566676869707275767778798081828384101105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129158159160161162174175176177178179180181182185208209210211212213214215232170 33333333333333333333WETLAND 1e WETLAND 1d WETLAND 1bWETLAND 1gSOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEROF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEROF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3S. LINE OF THE N. 1058 FT. OF THENE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 3DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6 9 8 0 . 6 980. 6980.6W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-1WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h WETLAND1a - South WL1d-1WL1d-2WL 1h454455456498499500501502503504505506515516517518536537538539592593MB12345614161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585961626364717374858687888990919293949596979899100102103104130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151153154155156157163164165166167168169170171172173183184186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390401402403404405406407410411412413414415417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434436438439440441443444445446447448449450451452453457458459460461462464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485488489490491492493494495496497507508509510511512513514519520521522523524526527528529530532533534535540541542543546547548549550551553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIII>7036970006700077000870009700107001170012700137001470015700167001770018700197002070021700227002370024700257002670027700287002970030700317003270033700347003570036700377003870039700407004170042700437004470045700467004770048700497005070051700527005370054700557005670061700627006370064700657006670067700687006970070700717007270073700747007570076700777007870079700807008170082700837008470085700867008770088700897009070091700927009370094700957009670097700987009970100701017010270103701067010970112701137011470115701167011770118701197012070121701227012370124701257012670127701287012970130701317013270133701367013770138701397014070141701427014370144701457014670147701487014970150701517015270153701547015570156701577015870159701607016170162701637016470165701667016770168701697017070171701727017370174701757017670177701787017970180701817018270183701847018570186701877018870189701907019170192701937019470195701967019770198701997020070201702027020570206702077020870209702127021370214702157021770218702197022070221702227022370224702257022670227702287022970230702327023370234702357023670237702387023970240702417024270243702447024570246702477024870249702507025170252702537025470255702567025770258702597026070264702657026670267702687026970271702727027370274702757027670277702847028570286702877028870289702907029170292702937029470295702967029770298702997030070301703047030570306703077030970310703117031270314703157031670317703187031970320703217032270323703247032570326703277032870329703307033170332703337033470335703367033770338703397034070342703437034470346703477034870350703517035270355703587036070363703647036570366703677036870370703717037270373703747037570376703777037870379703807038170382703837038470385703867038770388703897039070391703927039370394703957039670397703987039970400704017040270403704047040570406704077040870409704107041170412704137041570416704187041970420704217042270427704287042970430704317043270435704367043770438704397044070441704447044570446704477044870449704507045170452704537045470455704567045770458704597046070461704627046370464704657046670467704687046970470704717047270473704747047570476704777047870479704837048470485704867048770488704897049070491704927049370494704957049670497704987049970500705017050270503705047050570506705077050870509705107051170512705137051470515705167051770518705197052070521705227052370524705257052670527705287052970530705317053270533705347053870539705407054170542705437054470545705467054770548705497055070551705527055370554705557055670557705587055970560705617056270563801802803804805806807808809810811812813814815816817818819820821822823824825826827828829830831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850851852853854855856857858859860861862863864865866867868869870871872873874875876877878879880881882883884885886887888889890891892893894895896897898899900901902903904905906907908909910911912913914915916917918919920921922923924925926927928929930931932933934935936937938939940941942943944945946947948949950951952953954955956957958959960961962963964965966967968969970971972973974975976977978979980981982983984985986987988989990991992993994995996997998999100010011002100310041005100610071008100910101011101210131014101510161017101810191020102110221023102410251026102710281029103010311032103310341035103610371038103910401041104210431044104510461047104810491050105110521053105410551056105710581059106010611062106310641065106610671068106910701071107210731074107510761077107810791080108110821083108410851086108710881089109010911092109310941095109610971098109911001101110211031104110511061107110811091110111111121113111411151116111711181119112011211122112311241125112611271128112911301131113211331134113511361137113811391140114111421143114411451146114711481149115011511152115311541155115611571158115911601161116211631164116511661167116811691170117111721173117411751176117711781179118011811182118311841185118611871188118911901191119211931194119511961197119811991200120112021203120412051206120712081209121012111212121312141215121612171218121912201221122212231224122512261227122812291230123112321233123412351236123712381239124012411242124312441245124612471248124912501251125212531254125512561257125812591260126112621263126412651266126712681269127012711272127312741275127612771278127912801281128212831284128512861287128812891290129112921293129412951296129712981299130013011302130313041305130613071308130913101311131213131314131513161317131813191320132113221323132413251326132713281329133013311332133313341335133613371338133913401341134213431344134513461347134813491350135113521353135413551356135713581359136013611362136313641365136613671368136913701371137213731374137513761377137813791380138113821383138413851386138713881389139013911392139313941395139613971398139914001401140214031404140514061407140814091410141114121413141414151416141714181419142014211422142314241425142614271428142914301431143214331434143514361437143814391440144114421443144414451446144714481449145014511452145314541455145614571458145914601461146214631464146514661467146814691470147114721473147414751476147714781479148014811482148314841485148614871488148914901491149214931494149514961497149814991500150115021503150415051506150715081509151015111512NORTH0150300PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:L101MEH003.dwgTree Preservation PlanL1.1TREE PRESERVATION NOTES1.Tree replacement ratio is one caliper inch per one inch of removed significant trees and lost trees.2.Total Significant Trees Inventoried: 1720Total Trees Removed: 842TREE PRESERVATION LISTTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost1Ash, green28.0Fair22Ash, green11.0Good13Elm, American9.5Fair14Elm, American11.0Good15Ash, green10.5Good16Ash, green8.5Good17Ash, green9.0Good1X8Boxelder8.5Good1X9Boxelder13.5Good1X10Boxelder10.0Good1X11Oak, bur10.0Good1X12Ash, green9.5Good1X13Ash, green15.0Good1X14Ash, green10.0Good215Ash, green22.0Good1X16Willow10.0Fair117Willow38.0Good118Elm, American16.5Good119Ash, green15.0Good120Ash, green15.0Good121Ash, green8.5Good122Ash, green9.0Good123Ash, green12.0Good124Ash, green9.0Good125Ash, green10.0Good126Ash, green11.5Good127Ash, green15.5Good128Ash, green13.5Good129Ash, green8.5Good130Ash, green12.5Good131Ash, green10.5Good132Ash, green10.5Good133Aspen9.5Good134Ash, green14.0Good135Ash, green8.0Good136Ash, green12.0Good137Ash, green14.0Good138Ash, green15.5Good139Ash, green12.0Good140Ash, green9.0Good141Ash, green8.5Good142Aspen9.0Good143Ash, green9.0Good144Ash, green10.0Good145Ash, green12.5Good146Ash, green22.0Good247Aspen9.5Good148Aspen13.0Good149Ash, green10.5Good150Ash, green8.5Good151Ash, green8.5Good152Aspen11.5Good153Ash, green14.0Good154Aspen9.0Good155Aspen9.0Good156Aspen10.0Good157Aspen12.5Good158Aspen9.0Fair159Aspen8.0Good160Aspen8.5Good161Aspen11.5Good162Willow12.0Fair163Oak, bur13.5Good164Elm, American32.0Good165Ash, green13.0Good1X66Cherry, black22.0Fair1X67Ash, green11.0Good1X68Ash, green9.5Good1X69Ash, green11.0Good1X70Cherry, black9.5Good1X71Oak, bur36.0Good172Cherry, black17.0Good2X73Cherry, black19.0Good174Cherry, black8.5Good175Basswood8.0Good1X76Ash, green9.5Good1X77Ash, green8.5Good1X78Ash, green15.0Good1X79Ash, green10.0Good1X80Ash, green28.5Good2X Parcel TableParcel #4344454647484950515253545556575859606162Lot/Block1/72/73/74/75/76/77/78/79/710/711/712/713/714/715/716/717/718/719/720/7Area55005500550055005500550055005500550055005500550047674767394839483948394847674767Parcel TableParcel #6364656667686970717273747576777879808182Lot/Block21/722/723/724/725/726/727/728/729/730/731/732/733/734/735/736/737/738/739/740/7Area47674767394839483948394839483948526752675267526755005500476747674620462046204620Parcel TableParcel #8384858687888990919293949596979899100101102Lot/Block41/742/743/744/745/746/747/748/749/750/751/752/753/754/755/756/757/758/759/760/7Area44104410525052505500550055005500550055005500550055005500550055005500550055005500Parcel TableParcel #103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119157158Lot/Block61/762/763/764/765/766/767/768/769/770/771/772/773/774/775/776/777/7R/WR/W 2Area5500550055005500534253035461550055005500550055005500550055005500281093045246810202WETLAND 2WETLAND 1e WETLAND 1d W E T L A N D 1 b NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEROF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3660DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-1WL 3WETLAND1f W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h WL1d-1WL 1d- 2 1475147614771478147914811482148314841485148614871488148914901491149214931494149514961497149814991500150115021503150415051506150715081509151015111512CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE342 1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767774277DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTDrainage and Utility Easement505050505033 80750.050.095.350.050.095.395.350.050.0105. 3 50.050.0105.3 105. 3 5 0 . 0 5 0 . 0 105.35 0 . 0 5 0 . 0 105.3105.350.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.095.350.050.095.395.350.050.0105.050.050.0105.0105.0 50.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.0110.050.0 50.0110.050.0 50.0110.050.0 50.0 110.050.0 50.0 50.0 50.0110.050.0 50.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.0106.8 44.750.0106.8 50.050.0 110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.0 110.050.050.0110.0110.0110.0110.050.050.0 110.050.050.0 110.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.0 110.0 50.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.042.042.094.042.042.094.094.0 50.050.0110.050.050.0110.0110.0 42.042.011 0 . 0 42.042.011 0 . 0 11 0 . 0 42.042.010 5 . 0 42.042.010 5 . 0 10 5 . 0 42.042.0 94.042.042.094.094.042.042.011 0 . 0 42.042.01 1 0 . 0 1 1 0 . 0 42.042.0 94.042.042.094.094.050.050.095.350.050.095.395.342.042.094.042.042.094.094.042.042.094.042.042.094.0 94.0 50.0 50.0 110.050.0 50.0110.050.035.5110.050.050.0 110.0104.515.4 50.050.0 110.050.050.0 110.0110.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.0110.050.050.095.3 50.050.095.3 95.3 50.050.0110.050.050.0110.0 110.0 50.0 50.0110.050.0 50.0110.0110.092.3106.8142.3 60.029.029.037.032.032.032.037.056.056.056.0 76.0219.126.22617.033.0105.0 85.7 328.236.744.62 13 .0 34.36.71296.9 46.3 138. 4 180.3 287.1 110.0444.8278.5189.6537.7278.1215.594.576.076.084.3152.91275.0247.3189.6607.6170.0 1 2 2 . 529.680 333333N89°42'49"W 2676.18S00°20'44"E 2640.48 N01°14'20"E 518.96 86.3 2 S22° 0 9 ' 3 9 " W L=173.73 R=870.89 Δ=11°25'46" S10°43'53 " W 5 3 4 . 3 450Drainage and Utility Easement ARROWHE A D D R I V ENORTH0150300 PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C002MEH003.dwgPRELIMINARY PLATNORTHC0.2LEGAL DESCRIPTIONThat part of the South Half of Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 118, Range 23, HennepinCounty, Minnesota, lying Northwesterly of the following described line:Commencing at the southeast corner of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 01degrees 13 minutes 50 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the east line of South half adistance of 833.09 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 22 degrees09 minutes 09 seconds West a distance of 86.32 feet; thence Southerly 173. 73 feet along a tangentialcurve concave southeasterly, having a central angle of 11 degrees 25 minutes 46 seconds and aradius of 870. 89 feet; thence South 10 degrees 43 minutes 23 seconds West, tangent to said curve, adistance of 534.34 feet; thence southerly 29. 99 feet along a tangential curve concave easterly, havinga central angle of 10 degrees 06 minutes 25 seconds and a radius of 170.1 feet; thence South 00degrees 36 minutes 58 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 30.00 feet to the south lineof said South Half and said line there terminating.Abstract propertyANDParcel1:The Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23, exceptthe West 468feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 2:That part of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter lying West of a line extending from theSouthwestcorner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter to a point on the North line of the Northeastquarter of theSoutheast quarter 660 feet West along said North line from the Northeast corner of the Northeastquarter of theSoutheast quarter, all in Section 3, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens property.Parcel 3:Outlot B, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Abstract propertyParcel 4:The North 468 feet of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3,Township118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 5:The West 468 feet of the South 590 feet of the North 1058 feet of the Northwest Quarter of theSoutheast Quarterof Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 6:That part of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township118 North,Range 23, lying South of the North 1058 feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyLOT AREA TABULATIONZONINGTWINHOME SITE SUMMARYSETBACK SUMMARYUNIT SETBACKS:FRONT (FROM BACK OF PRIVATE ROAD)CORNER ( FROM BACK OF PRIVATE ROAD)BETWEEN BUILDINGSREAR (FROM BOUNDARY)FROM MOHAWK DRIVEFROM CHIPPEWA ROAD25FT.25FT.30FT.30FT.50FT.50FT.CURRENT ZONINGPROPOSED ZONINGRR-UR RURAL RESIDENTIAL-URBAN RESERVEPUDGross Site Area:74.74 Ac.(Less Chippewa, Mohawk, Hackamore R/W )Existing Wetland & Buffer Area:49.26 Ac.Net Developable Area:25.48 Ac.Twin Home Residential:76 Units(Lots and Local Roads, Private Roads @ 29' B-B )(38 Twinhome Bldgs)Overall Net Density:2.98 u/a(76 units / 25.48 ac.)OVERALL SITE SUMMARY - BOTH PARCELSNet Residential Developable Area:46.75Ac.(Less Chippewa, Mohawk, Hackamore R/W )Overall Net Residential Density:3.2 u/a (150 units / 46.75 ac.)SEE SHEET C0.3 Parcel TableParcel #123456789101112131415161718192021Lot/Block1/12/13/14/11/22/23/24/25/26/27/28/29/21/32/33/34/31/42/43/44/4Area17426140151401514015170721176812966205301619115653138161440915659117001062711413112731122099001019710984Parcel TableParcel #222324252627282930313233343536373839404142Lot/Block5/46/47/48/49/410/41/52/53/54/55/56/57/58/59/510/51/62/6404/65/6Area110551105510270120761219516956131151012810584144391181612440125981602813314133081109313787144371432414027Parcel TableParcel #120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140Lot/Block1/82/83/84/85/86/87/88/89/810/811/812/813/814/815/816/817/818/819/820/821/8Area174013201320132017401740132013201740174013201320132017401740132013201740207217921792Parcel TableParcel #141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158Lot/Block22/823/824/825/826/827/828/829/830/831/832/833/8OUTLOT AOUTLOT BOUTLOT COUTLOT DR/WR/W 2Area179220722072179217922072207217921792179220721532439966061913022400272889345246810202PID: 02118233200124250 ARROWHEAD DRIVEMEDINA, MN 55340PID: 02118233200084200 ARROWHEAD DRIVEMEDINA, MN 55340WETLAND 2 DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)WETLAND 1eW E T L A N D 1 g SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEROF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEROF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3660S. LINE OF THE N. 1058 FT. OF THENE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 3WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - S o u t h WL 1hCHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE LANEHILLSIDE BROOKVIEW COURTMEADOWVIEW COURT163214321123456789123454712343281234516171831OUTLOT AOUTLOT B450.050.0105. 3 105. 3 5 0 . 0 5 0 . 0 105.3105.342.042.0 94.042.042.094.094.042.042.094.062.872.343.260.957.818 7 . 3 4.521.470.748.24 6.9 46.0 57.829.7148. 7 98.190.4135.08 2 . 4 5 0 . 4 179.8150.1150.1160.4137.313 5 . 0 188 . 9 12.157.168.366.9199.3130.0145.6175.285.4 75.5118.177.080.1117.483.812.914.569.650.050.0 50.078.427.483.8121.875.372.5144.585.0 89.248.3139.1 84.886.8134.924.890.8113.3 47.442.044.991.960.5155.568.277.5111.950.990.7 90.0136.248.3 70.4 63.4 90.07.4130.075.0 75.0 75.0 106.8192.52 2 0 . 0 68.975.016 5 . 225.912.1138.875.0 59.0192.5142.321.3178.461.580.0 138.6144.932.076.285.075.054.220.875.075.075.015.7 60.060.029.022.022.022.029.060.029.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 29.060.060.060.060.060.029.022.022.022.029.060.029.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 29.060.060.060.060.060.029.022.022.029.060.029.0 22.0 22.0 29.060.060.060.060.029.022.022.029.060.029.0 22.0 22.0 29.060.060.056.037.032.032.032.037.056.037.032.032.032.037.056.056.056.056.056.0 37.032.032.032.037.056.037.032.032.032.037.056.056.056.056.037.032.032.037.056.037.0 32.0 32.0 37.0 56.056.056.056.076.0219.1184.4 73.776.076.076.094.5184.4 184.4184.4184.474.1129.631.731.764.396.5 125.370.9133.375.0 85.0132.0132.0132.0110.8134.050.375.070.8134.0108.8 59.34.2134.078.4 134.091.2 134.091.2 134.091.1 132.4117.1141.090.321.279.5463.9 611.0 444.8160.8131.3244.9 197.4316.3 278.5189.6537.7278.1215.533.017.694.576.076.049.0 84.3152.9294.1 1275.0247.3189.6607.61 2 2 . 529.6173.262.2541.1288.8108.8 120.8 224.788.3334.660.649.289.956789101567891023456789101112131415161718S39°29'22"W 481.87 N88°39'29"W 332.51S26 ° 3 3 ' 2 1 " W 1 4 6 8 . 0 9 S89°23'02"E 493.55S00°20'44"E 2640.4833.01N88°39'29"WN00°20'44"W1418.95N69°58'20"W 483.48N69°58'20"W 201.55N20°01'40"E5.00S10°43'53 " W 5 3 4 . 3 4L=29.99R=170.00Δ=10°06'25"30.02S00°37'28"W8080333333335050 R60R605050170 192021222324252627282930313233NORTH0150300PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C003MEH003.dwgPRELIMINARY PLATSOUTHC0.3LOT AREA TABULATIONLEGAL DESCRIPTIONThat part of the South Half of Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 118, Range 23, HennepinCounty, Minnesota, lying Northwesterly of the following described line:Commencing at the southeast corner of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 01degrees 13 minutes 50 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the east line of South half adistance of 833.09 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 22degrees 09 minutes 09 seconds West a distance of 86.32 feet; thence Southerly 173. 73 feetalong a tangential curve concave southeasterly, having a central angle of 11 degrees 25 minutes46 seconds and a radius of 870. 89 feet; thence South 10 degrees 43 minutes 23 seconds West,tangent to said curve, a distance of 534.34 feet; thence southerly 29. 99 feet along a tangentialcurve concave easterly, having a central angle of 10 degrees 06 minutes 25 seconds and a radiusof 170.1 feet; thence South 00 degrees 36 minutes 58 seconds West, tangent to said curve, adistance of 30.00 feet to the south line of said South Half and said line there terminating.Abstract propertyANDParcel1:The Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23,except the West 468 feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 2:That part of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter lying West of a line extending from theSouthwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter to a point on the North line ofthe Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter 660 feet West along said North line from theNortheast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter, all in Section 3, Township 118,Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens property.Parcel 3:Outlot B, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Abstract propertyParcel 4:The North 468 feet of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter ofSection 3, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 5:The West 468 feet of the South 590 feet of the North 1058 feet of the Northwest Quarter of theSoutheast Quarter of Section 3, Township 118 North, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Torrens propertyParcel 6:That part of the West 468 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3,Township 118 North, Range 23, lying South of the North 1058 feet thereof, Hennepin County,Minnesota.Torrens propertyZONINGSOUTH PARCEL SITE SUMMARYSETBACK SUMMARYUNIT SETBACKS:FRONTCORNERREARSIDESTRUCTURE FROM WETLAND BUFFERFROM MOHAWK DRIVEFROM CHIPPEWA ROAD30FT.30FT.30FT.10FT.15F.T.50FT.50FT.CURRENT ZONINGPROPOSED ZONINGRR-UR RURAL RESIDENTIAL-URBANRESERVEPUDGross Site Area:52.61Ac.(Less Chippewa, Mohawk R/W )Existing Wetland & Buffer Area:26.26Ac.Park / Open space:5.08Ac.Net Residential Developable Area:21.27Ac.(Lots and Local Roads, Private Roads @ 29' B-B )Residential Lots:74 UnitsSingle Family Lots 70' x 130' +/-42 lotsRow Townhome Lots33 lotsSingle Family Density:2.5 u/a(42 units / 17.00 ac.)Row Townhome Density:7.49 u/a(32 units / 4.27 ac.)Overall Net Density:3.5 u/a(74 units / 21.27 ac.) Wetlands were delineated by Kjolhaug Environmental and field located by LandformProfessional Services.OVERALL SITE SUMMARY - BOTH PARCELSNet Residential Developable Area:46.75Ac.(Less Chippewa, Mohawk, Hackamore R/W )Overall Net Residential Density:3.2 u/a (150 units / 46.75 ac.)SEE SHEET C0.2 CABXCABXWOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEWETLAND 2 N89°42'49"W 2676.18S00°20'44"E 2640.4833333333 333333WETLAND 1e W E T L A N D 1 d W E T L A N D 1 b 980.6W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-1WL 3WETLAND1f WL1d-1WL 1d- 2 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 74277353 5 3525253535505050353535502535 43215BLK 141516171824'22'40'22'24'19202122232432'36'36'32'36'32'32'CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE1516171824'22'40'22'24' 3 0 305 0 BLOCK 7NURP POND(3P)BTM = 973.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 984.099100 YR B-2-B = 984.97IRRIGATION POND(1P)BTM = 983.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 986.86NURP POND(9P)BTM = 979.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 987.16NURP POND(11eP)BTM = 979.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.23POND(5P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.96POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95WET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93WET 1eHWL = 983.93WET 2HWL = 986.48WET 1dHWL = 982.54WET 1cHWL =981.76WET 1b1HWL = 980.68WET 1bHWL = 981.6930B-B101030101025252525BITUM INOUSEDGE C7.36MOUNTABLE CURB& GUTTEREDGE OFGRAVELR20'R5'TYP. 6 24 6 80 ROW C7.36B618 CURBAT INTERSECTIONS(TYP.)C7.36MOUNTABLE CURB& GUTTERSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)C7.39CONC. CURB &GUTTER TRANSITION(TYP.)STREET SIGNSTOP SIGNR30'STREET LIGHT (TYP.)30B-BR30'STREET SIGNSTOP SIGNC7.38TYPICALBIKE PATH6NORTH0100200OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN, OR USE OF, PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.THE DIGITAL FILE, WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE ENGINEER, SHALL BE USED FOR STAKING. DISCREPANCIESBETWEEN THE DRAWINGS AND THE DIGITAL FILE SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT,AS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS, AND THE DIGITAL FILE, SHALL BE COMPARED TO THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSPRIOR TO STAKING.BUILDING LAYOUT ANGLES ARE PARALLEL WITH OR PERPENDICULAR TO THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE LOCATIONINDICATED.DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO BACK OF CURB AND EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.DELINEATE PARKING STALLS WITH A 4-INCH WIDE YELLOW PAINTED STRIPE. DELINEATE ACCESS AISLES WITH 4-INCHWIDE YELLOW PAINTED STRIPES 18 INCHES ON CENTER AND AT 45 DEGREE ANGLE TO DIRECTION OF TRAVEL.2.3.4.5.6.GENERAL NOTESTWINHOMES PARKING SUMMARYAREA SUMMARYZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARYSITE PLAN NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORM AT 612.252.9070.1.PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C201MEH003.dwgSITE PLANNORTHC2.1TOTAL SITE AREA - 5,880,541 SQ. FT. = 135.00 AC.RIGHT OF WAY AREA - 462,670 SQ. FT. = 10.62 AC.WETLAND AREA - 2,620,478 SQ. FT. = 60.16 AC.NET AREA - 2,797,366 SQ. FT. = 64.22 AC.NUMBER LOTS - 152NUMBER UNITS - 150NET DENSITY - 2.34 U/ANET IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE - 27.9%TOTAL PARKING STALLS REQUIREDREQUIRED PARKING:TWO SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT15234388EA.EA.EA.2 STALLS PER UNIT - GARAGESTANDARD STALLS (NOT ASSIGNED)OFF-STREET PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDED(9x19)152EA.152EA.2 STALLS PER UNIT - DRIVEWAYSEE SHEET C2.2TYPICAL TWINHOME LAYOUT6263646530' B-B 25'40.230' MIN.THE PROPERTY IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL/RURAL RESIDENTIALBUILDING SETBACK INFORMATION IS AS FOLLOWS:TWINHOMES:FRONT (FROM PRIVATE ROAD) - 25 FEETCORNER (FROM PRIVATE ROAD) - 25 FEETBETWEEN BUILDINGS - 30 FEETREAR -FROM BOUNDRY - 30 FEET-FROM MOHAWK DR. - 50 FEET-FROM CHIPPAWA RD. - 50 FEETWETLAND BUFFER LIST CABXEMEMCABXCABXCABXCABXGASOE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OEOEOEOEOEOEOTVOTV DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)S2 6 ° 3 3 ' 2 1 " W 1 4 6 8 . 0 9N88°39'29"W 332.51S 3 9 ° 2 9 ' 2 2 "W 4 8 1 . 8 7N69°58'20"W 201.55N69°58'20"W 483.48N20°01'40"E5.00N00°20'44"W 154.8233.01N88°39'29"WS00°20'44"E 2640.481703333333333333333 W E T L A N D 1 g 980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - S o u t h WL 1h140.075.0 181681725050 25 35252535 35 505050303025252525OUTLOT AOUTLOT B123456789BLK 27653421894323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK4BLK 5112345678910105BLK 1412345678910111213141516171824'22'36'24'22'40'24'22'40'24'22'40'22'24'22'24'22'24'22'24'192021222324252627282930313240'32'32'36'36'32'36'32'36'32'32'36'32'32'CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE LANE 25501516171824'22'40'22'24'153 0 305 0 305933BLK 8POND(16P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 987.81POND(19P)BTM = 978.50NWL = 984.06HWL = 986.15POND(18P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 986.00HWL = 987.30POND(20P)BTM = 976.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 986.11POND(14P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.86POND(15P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 982.77POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95POND(17P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.02PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 981.8450HILLSIDE BROOKVIEW COURTMEADOWVIEW COURTOUTLOT CWET 1hHWL = 983.91WET 4HWL = 985.33WET 5bHWL = 985.42WET 5aHWL = 985.42WET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93BITUM INOUSEDGEEDGE OFGRAVEL6 24 6 80 ROWSTREET SIGN (TYP.)STREET LIGHT (TYP.)STOP SIGN (TYP.)R30'STREETSIGN (TYP.)STREET LIGHT (TYP.)STOP SIGN(TYP)R44.5 'R28'28 B-BC7.39CONC. CURB &GUTTER TRANSITION(TYP)C7.36B618 CURBAT INTERSECTIONS(TYP.)C7.36MOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTERC7.38TYPICALSIDEWALKC7.36MOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER(TYP.)R44.5'R60'R48'R20'TYPC7.38FUTURE TRAILBY OTHERSSTREETLIGHT (TYP.)STREET LIGHT(TYP.)STREETSIGN (TYP.)STREET LIGHT(TYP.)STOP SIGN (TYP.)C7.36B618 CURBAT INTERSECTION(TYP.)NORTH0100200GENERAL NOTESAREA SUMMARYZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARYSITE PLAN NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORM AT 612.252.9070.1.PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C202MEH003.dwgSITE PLANSOUTHC2.2TOTAL SITE AREA - 5,880,541 SQ. FT. = 135.00 AC.RIGHT OF WAY AREA - 462,670 SQ. FT. = 10.62 AC.WETLAND AREA - 2,620,478 SQ. FT. = 60.16 AC.NET AREA - 2,797,366 SQ. FT. = 64.22 AC.NUMBER LOTS - 152NUMBER UNITS - 150NET DENSITY - 2.34 U/ANET IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE - 27.9%OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN, OR USE OF, PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.THE DIGITAL FILE, WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE ENGINEER, SHALL BE USED FOR STAKING. DISCREPANCIESBETWEEN THE DRAWINGS AND THE DIGITAL FILE SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT,AS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS, AND THE DIGITAL FILE, SHALL BE COMPARED TO THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSPRIOR TO STAKING.BUILDING LAYOUT ANGLES ARE PARALLEL WITH OR PERPENDICULAR TO THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE LOCATIONINDICATED.DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO BACK OF CURB AND EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.DELINEATE PARKING STALLS WITH A 4-INCH WIDE YELLOW PAINTED STRIPE. DELINEATE ACCESS AISLES WITH 4-INCHWIDE YELLOW PAINTED STRIPES 18 INCHES ON CENTER AND AT 45 DEGREE ANGLE TO DIRECTION OF TRAVEL.2.3.4.5.6.THE PROPERTY IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL/RURAL RESIDENTIALBUILDING SETBACK INFORMATION IS AS FOLLOWS:TOWNHOMES:BACK OF CURB - 23 FEET MINIMUM, RANGE 23 FEET TO 26 FEET TYP.REAR - FROM CHIPPAWA RD. -50 FEET-FROM MOHAWK DR. -50 FEETSINGLE FAMILY:FRONT - 30 FEETCORNER - 30 FEETSIDE - 10 FEETREAR - 30 FEETREAR - FROM BOUNDRY - 30 FEET- FROM MOHAWK DR. - 50 FEET-FROM CHIPPAWA RD. - 50 FEETSEE SHEET C2.1TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY LOT LAYOUT28' B-B 30'432BLK 110'30'SETBACKLINEEASEMENTLINE25'192021222324' B-B 24'TYPICAL TOWNHOME LOT LAYOUTWETLAND BUFFER LIST W>>>>>>>>>>>>>>WETLAND 2DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)170 33333333333333333333WETLAND 1e WETLAND 1d WETLAND 1bWETLAND 1g >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6 98 0 . 6 980. 6980.6WETLAND1cWL 1e-1WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h WETLAND1a - South WL1d-1WL1d-2WL 1hMBL.P.L.P.H.P.L.P.H.P.DROP 2CDROP2CDROP2CGF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=996.0988.5FBWO985.8GF=995.5988.0FBWO985.3GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=992.6986.5FBWO986.0GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=995.5988.0FB995.3GF=995.0987.5FB994.8GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=993.0885.5FB992.8GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0887.5FBLO990.0GF=997.0889.5FBWO989.0 GF=996.5889.0FBLO991.5GF=997.5890.0FBLO992.5EOF-0+001+002+003+003+14.73EOFGF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0 GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF = 994.0 99285.5EOF986988GF=993.5886.0FBLO988.5GF=993.0885.5FBLO988.0GF=993.5886.0FBLO988.5 GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=998.0890.5FBWO990.0 GF=993.8887.0FBLO989.5GF=998.0890.5FBWO990.0 GF=997.0889.5FBWO989.0 GF = 994.5GF = 994.5GF = 994.0GF = 993.5 EX.CL993.17DRP1C 93.988.588.596.596.0 91.092.094.5 89.592.5 92.3GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.099099099 0 %2.85%1.2%1.0 %1.4%1.66 95.094.0994.6GF = 992.5GF = 992.598698498298698498298498699299 4 9981000100085.385.384.884.887.587.586.086.094.086.086.094.0%1.0%1.0 986.586.594.586.586.586.586.593.893.894.093.894.894.894.894.594.394.394.093.593.893.8%1.088.588.585.085.093.085.585.593.094.586.586.594.586.586.5%1.3%2.85%1.285.085.091.685.585.0%1.3%4.585.085.093.085.085.0%3.0%1.0%1.3%1.0%1.0%1.7593.085.085.085.585.592.186.586.594.588.088.095.588.588.596.588.588.596.589.589.597.089.089.097.089.089.097.090.090.089.589.597.589.589.597.089.089.097.089.089.097.090.090.097.0%1.0%3.0 987.0987.0994.0986.0986.0%1.0%1.9%1.0%1.0%0.7%0.7%3.0G.B.%2.5H.P.%1.5%1.0%1.0%1.0 %2.2 %2.9 %4.1 %1.7491.989.495.889.597.595.189.595.588.594.291.989.395095.294.595.095.592.694.091.292.885.586.087.087.590.792.190.092.392.493.593.294.092.593.586.091.893.088.592.693.092.891.893.0 92.592.3 89.991.591.389.090.588.790.390.590.389.688.690.4 92.587.592.493.088.091.988.0%1.0%1.3%1.095.793.093.094.695.7 95.095.595.195.594.7 95.594.1 95.5 94.193.592.791.290.390.492.691.092.994.294.5 94.095.093.794.594.395.595.594.795.096.094.896.086.586.587.587.588.088.087.587.086.087.587.587.587.587.787.787.7%2.8%0.6 %1.0 %2.0%2.0 %1.0 %1.084.085.884.385.986.18 2 . 282.585.081.983.083.083.083.086.183.882.282.482.984.284.085.787.588.691.091.091.889.086.585.686.0 86.086.086.187.586.086.786.485.086.1 81.583.584.385.085.084.586.086.588.087.585.7 86.0 984984984992 988 984 99 8 10 0 0 %2. 0 %5. 0992 99298498899098 4 98 8 998990988990986988988984 9869889869849869909929949961004100099699 0 98 8 99499699 6 988992986985985988988985985 984 990986 986 986 986985 982984984 986 986 98498698698698898687.5EOF98698686.5EOF84.0EOF EOF86.0EOF983 85.5EOF 86.0EOF86.786.786.786.7 86.786.7GF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=992.1986.0FBWO985.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.0986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=991.0983.5FB990.8GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=993.5986.0FB993.3GF=993.7986.2FB993.5GF=993.0985.5FB992.8GF=992.0984.5FB991.8GF=991.0983.5FB990.8GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2993.3986.5FBWO986.0 84.9EOFEOF87.81EOF86.11 EOF87.30EOF 98898898898598498298097998698598487.0 EOF988988986988986988988986 98898698885.5 98598585.5 85.5 85.585.5985994 988992984 992994 992984982984988986992984990994990982996996996990994986994992994 996994998996992994996994996994996992992992990986988984984990984986984986982986 986986985982980983980982 983994992 988992988984990984988988100410021000998996994992990980984985982984980978976988984980990990988988986986994 992 990990990992986990985983.0988 986984986986 986 984 982 980 986 980982984986984984986985986992996994 996 994 992994996996994 986986988986986 990986 994980984 986 990 9909889949981002984980984988988992 990990990994994994994 988 990992994990992992990982986984990986992988992986990988986990992988994992 996990986996992986996986986990996982984986992990994994988984992992990986986992994994990986994986994994994994994 994 994994990 986994994992986990994994986 986988990988992994986994994988986990992986986992986986994994992994996996988992990992988994986990994994 990992994988992 994 992992994996994994996990994984988988985988992984 100010001004992992 990990988992 994983985985983988988988987985984987990988987982981981982983984983982980984985982982986986986986984983982980979984984984984987986985984983987987986987987992988988985985985986985986990988GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2992 992 996996983985982981980978976974973983985980974985982980976973973974978981982983985973974978981982983986982983%1.5%2.0%1.9%1.0%1.64%2.9 %1.0 %1.0 %3.3 DROP1C992990GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 VMA%8.0VMA%10.0VMAVMA%8.0 EOF12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 7420+001+002+0077OUTLOT AOUTLOT B123456789BLK 27653421894323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK4BLK 5112345678910105BLK 1412345678910111213141516171824'22'36'24'22'40'24'22'40'24'22'40'22'24'22'24'22'24'22'24'192021222324252627282930313240'32'32'36'36'32'36'32'36'32'32'36'32'32'CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE MOHAWK DRIVELANE1516171824'22'40'22'24'33BLK 8BLOCK 7-0+280+001+002+002+37.02NURP POND(3P)BTM = 973.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 984.099100 YR B-2-B = 984.97IRRIGATION POND(1P)BTM = 983.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 986.86NURP POND(9P)BTM = 979.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 987.16NURP POND(11eP)BTM = 979.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.23POND(5P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.96NURP POND(11P)BTM = 979.50NWL = 984.28 HWL = 986.13POND(16P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 987.81POND(19P)BTM = 978.50NWL = 984.06HWL = 986.15POND(18P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 986.00HWL = 987.30POND(20P)BTM = 976.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 986.11POND(14P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.86POND(15P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 982.77POND(12P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 986.09POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95POND(17P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.02PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 981.84PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 979.07HILLSIDE BROOKVIEW COURTMEADOWVIEW COURTOUTLOT CWET 1hHWL = 983.91WET 4HWL = 985.33WET 5bHWL = 985.42WET 5aHWL = 985.42WET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93WET 1eHWL = 983.93WET 2HWL = 986.48WET 1dHWL = 982.54WET 1cHWL =981.76WET 1a-northHWL = 979.07WET 1b1HWL = 980.68WET 1bHWL = 981.69C3.1C3.2C3.4C3.3C3.5C3.6C3.7NORTH0200400PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C300MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROLC3.0Contact utility service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning grading.Refer to the Geotechnical Report prepared by Braun Intertec, Dated 8/24/2020, For additional information on backfill material andgroundwater conditions.Remove topsoil from grading areas and stockpile sufficient quantity for reuse. Materials may be mined from landscape areas for useon site and replaced with excess organic material with prior Owner approval.Remove surface and ground water from excavations. Provide initial lifts of stable foundation material if exposed soils are wet andunstable.Rough grade Building Pad to 12 Inches below Finished Floor Elevation (FFE).Refer to Structural Specifications for Earthwork requirements for Building Pads.An Independent Testing Firm shall verify the removal of organic and unsuitable soils, soil correction, and compaction and provideperiodic reports to the Owner.Place and compact fill using lift thicknesses matched to soil type and compaction equipment to obtain specified compactionthroughout the lift.Compact cohesive soils in paved areas to 95% of maximum dry density, Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) except the top 3 feet whichshall be compacted to 100%. Compact to 98% density where fill depth exceeds 10 feet. The soils shall be within 3% of optimummoisture content. In granular soils all portions of the embankment shall be compacted to not less than 95% of Modified ProctorDensity (ASTM D1557).Coordinate with Architectural for building stoop locations. Slopes shown on adjacent walks and pavements should continue overstoops.Avoid soil compaction of infiltration practices. Any equipment used in Infiltration Areas should be small scaled and tracked. Installprotective fencing as shown <before work begins/after basin is constructed/other timing?>.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.Install perimeter sediment controls prior to beginning work and maintain for duration of construction. Remove controls after areascontributing runoff are permanently stabilized and dispose of off site.Limit soil disturbance to the grading limits shown. Schedule operations to minimize length of exposure of disturbed areas.Management practices shown are the minimum requirement. Install and maintain additional controls as work proceeds to preventerosion and control sediment carried by wind or water.Refer to SWPPP Notes on Sheet C3.8 for additional requirements.Excavate ponds early in the construction sequence. Remove sediment from ponds periodically and after areas contributing runoffare permanently stabilized.Contractor shall prevent sediment laden water from entering the infiltration system until the site is completely stabilized.All exposed soil areas must be stabilized within 72 hours of completion of work in each area. (If within 1 mile of Impaired Water usethe following note instead) all exposed soils areas shall be stabilized immediately to limit soil erosion in that portion of the site whereconstruction has temporarily or permanently ceased.Seed, Sod, Mulch and Fertilizer shall meet the following Specifications, as modified.ItemSpecification NumberEstimated QuantitiesSodMNDOT 3878; X S.F.SeedMNDOT 3876; MN TYPE 22-111 @ 30.5 LB/AC - Temporary Erosion ControlX LBS.MN TYPE 25-151 @ 120 LB/AC -Permanent TurfX LBS.MulchMNDOT 3882; (MNDOT TYPE 1 @ 2 TON/AC; Disc Anchored)X TON MNDOT 3881;General placementMNDOT 2575;See Landscape Sheets for permanent turf and landscape establishment.Scrape adjacent streets clean daily and sweep clean weekly.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.GRADING NOTES:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTIONEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachLEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX Each CABXINV=990.15FES 15 RCPINV=990.82FES 15 RCPOEOEOEOE>>>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>3333W E T L A N D 1 d W E T L A N D 1 b>>>>>>>>>>>>WL1d-1W L 1d- 2 INV=990.47FES 15 IN PVCINV=990.09FES RCP 15 INRE=992.02STMHH.P.%2.6%5.3 %4.7 %3.8 %5.0 H.P.94.28%5.4%4.2%3.6%4.8%6.0%7.2%6.8%4.8%3.2%2.6%2 . 7 %3 . 7 %3.7%4.6H.P.97.88H.P.L.P.95.6096.13L.P.95.99L.P.93.41%4.7%3.7%2.5%3.7%3.0%2.4 %7.8 %7.1 %4.0% 3. 6 % 4. 2 %3.3%4.3%4.8%3.9%2 . 5 %2 . 5 % 3. 8 % 3. 6 %2.1%2.5%2.5%5.6%4.4%4.5%4.5%5.6%5.9%4.6%5.1H.P.93.37GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=996.0988.5FBWO985.8GF=995.5988.0FBWO985.3 GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=995.5988.0FB995.3GF=995.0987.5FB994.8 GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.585.5EOFEX.CL992.75GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0%8.092.28%2.85%1.2%1.0 %1.4%1.66 G.B.%6.4%3.8%2.495.094.0994.685.385.384.884.887.587.586.086.094.086.086.094.0%1.0%1.0 986.586.594.586.586.586.586.593.893.894.093.894.894.894.894.594.394.394.093.8%1.094.586.586.594.586.586.5%1.0%1.3%1.0%1.0%1.7586.594.588.088.095.588.588.596.588.588.596.589.589.597.089.089.097.089.089.097.090.090.089.589.597.589.589.597.089.089.097.089.089.097.090.090.097.0L.P.91.73GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0 GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0H.P.94.90 97.37H.P.994990996996996990994986994992994 996994998996992994996994996994992992990 984 9 8 4 984986984986982986994 99699098699699298699 6 98 6986 9 9 0 9 9 6 9829849869929909949949889949 9 4 9 9 0 986994986994994994994994994 994994990 986994994992986990994994992 994 992992994996 992994 996996983985982981980978976974973983 985 980 974 985 982 980 976 973 973974978981982983985973974978981982983986982983VM A %8. 0 1234567891011353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 7420+001+002+000+001+002+003+004+005+007+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+00 23+00 24+00 25+0026+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0031+74.99 35353535BTM = 973.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 984.099100 YR B-2-B = 984.97IRRIGATION POND(1P)WET 1bHWL = 981.69INV=981.70OSC 1C7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONC7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)ENCAMAT (TYP)C7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEC7.17ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONC7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETC7.11SILT FENCEBORROW AREA3NORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C301MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.17:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).DENOTES BORROW AREA. AFTER MATERIAL IS REMOVED CONTRACTOR TO BRING BOTTOM OFPOND TO 873.0 WITH GRADING SPOIL.1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.SEE SHEET C3.2:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Wetland Impact AreaX Each3 ) ))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))CABXCB RECTRE=991.1W>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>WETLAND 23333333333 W E T L A N D 1 e W E T L A N D 1 dWL 1e-1WL 3W E T L A N D 1f H.P.89.73L.P.88.66H.P.93.48%4.6%5.4%5.4%3.387.83L.P.%5.0 %8 . 1 %9 . 2L.P.H.P.L.P.H.P.%8.3%7.1 %7.8 %7.1 %4.7%7.1DROP 2C%2.5%6.6DROP2CDROP2C% 4.5 % 6.3 %6.9 %7.3 %7.5%6.3CL CL%5.3%5.5L.P.92.39 %5.6%4.9%4.7%4.8GF=992.6986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=993.0885.5FB992.8GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0887.5FBLO990.0%8.7 GF=996.5889.0FBLO991.5GF=997.5890.0FBLO992.5EOF L.P. GF = 994.0 992986988%7.9 %8.1 %6.6 GF=993.8 887.0 FBLO 989.5 %9.2GF=997.0 889.5 FBWO 989.0 GF = 994.5EX.CL993.17CL CL%7.693.988.588.596.0 91.092.094.5 89.592.5 92.3990990GF = 992.5 93.593.893.8%1.088.588.585.085.093.085.585.593.0%1.3%2.85G.B.%1.285.085.091.685.585.0%1.3%4.585.085.093.085.085.0%3.0G.B.93.085.085.092.186.594.39%1.0%3.0 987.0987.0994.0986.0986.0%1.0%1.9%1.0%1.0%4.1 %1.74 89.5491.989.489.3CL CL93.33%1.0 L.P.92.40 %2.0%1.0 92.93H.P.%1.0%5.0%2.3%2.7%8.1%7.1%1.487.58 5 . 7 8 6 . 0 9909889909869889889 8 4 98698898698498699099299298898687.5EOF98698686.5EOF84.0EOF EOFGF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=992.1986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.0986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 98898598498298097998698598487 . 0 EOF988988986988986988 988 986 988986988L.P.91.6099298498298498898699298499098299699299298698899098599 0 9 9 2 990990990992986986994 992994986988 990994990 99 0994 988 990992994990992 992990982986984990986 992988992986990988986990 992988994 992984992992990986986992986 986988990988992994986994994988 986990992990992994988994994996 990994 984988988983985985983988988985984987990 988 987 982981984983982980979984 984 984984987986985984983987987986987987992986990988%1.5CL CLDROP 1C VMA%10.0VMA11121314151617181920212223242526272829303132355+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014 + 0 0 15+00 16+00 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 353 5 3525253550253 5 143215BLK 14141516171824'22'40'24'22'24'1920212223242532'36'36'32'36'32'32'CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE1516171824'22'40'22'24'305 0 14+00 15+00 15+50.48 6+00 7+00 7+52.253+004+004+65.18NURP POND(3P)BTM = 983.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 986.86NURP POND(9P)BTM = 979.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 987.16NURP POND(11eP)BTM = 979.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.23POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95WET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93WET 1eHWL = 983.93WET 2HWL = 986.48WET 1dHWL = 982.54C7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONC7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEENCAMAT (TYP)C7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.19&10TEMPORARY COMPOST BIO LOGENCAMAT (TYP)C7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEC7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONNORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C302MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.2:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.SEE SHEET C3.2:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX Each CABXW E T L A N D 1 g 468.00468.00590.00 >>980.6 WETLAND 5b WL 5a WL 1h% 7.1 % 3. 8 GF=993.0885.5FB992.8GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0887.5FBLO990.0%8.7%5.0%4.5GF=997.0 889.5 FBWO 989.0 GF=996.5889.0FBLO991.5GF=997.5890.0FBLO992.5L.P.EOF L.P . H. P .-0+001+002+003+003+14.73EOFGF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0 GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0 G F = 9 9 3 . 5 8 8 6 . 0 F B L O 9 8 8 . 5 %5.2%5.5%4.8FBLO988.5 %3.2GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=998.0 890.5 FBWO 990.0 %8.0%8.0%7.9 %8.1 %6.6 %9.2GF=998.0 890.5 FBWO 990.0 GF=997.0 889.5 FBWO 989.0 GF = 994.5GF = 994.0GF = 993.5 CL C L CL CL90.11EX.CL994.8693.3 2 H.P.90.2 8 %8.4%8.4%8.5%3.8DRP 1C 93.988.596.5% 4. 8 96.0 94.5 92.5 GF = 992.5GF = 992.5 93.4 6 % 1.0 % 2.2 G.B. %2.991.78 %4.1 94.5491.995.889.597.595.189.595.588.594.291.995095.294.595.095.592.694.091.292.885.586.087.087.590.792.190.092.392.493.593.294.092.593.586. 0 91 . 8 93.088 . 593.088.091.988.094.65H.P.%1.0%1.3G.B.%1.092.2995. 7 93.0% 7.1 % 4.8 %3.2%2.8%3.0% 4.2 % 6.8 93. 0 94 . 6 95.7 95.095.595.195.594.7 95.5 94. 1 95. 5 94.193.592.791.290.390.492.691.092.994. 5 9 3 . 7 9 4 . 5 % 5. 2 86.586.587.587.587.587.587.587.787.787.7L.P.91.90%2.8%0.6 H.P.93.8593.3493.33%2.091.20L.P.%1.0 92.93H.P.%1.0%2.3%2.7%3.1%2.3%3.8%3.1%5.4%7.1%1.4%4.7%4.9%-2.0%0.4%2.5%2.583.083.083.083.086.183.882.282.482.984.284.085.786.0 86.0 86.187.586.086.786.485.086.1 81.5 83.584.385.085.084.586.086.588.087.58 5 . 7 8 6 . 093.7998898685. 5EOF 86.786.786.786.7 GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.5 988.0 FBWO 987.5 GF=996.0 988.5 FBWO 988.0 GF = 9 9 5 . 0 987 . 5 FB W O 987 . 0 GF = 9 9 4 . 5 987 . 0 FB W O 986 . 5 GF=99 4 . 5 987.0 FBWO 986.5 G F = 9 9 4 . 0 98 6 . 5 FB L O 98 9 . 0 GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2993. 3 986. 5 FBW O 986. 0 EOF87.81EOF 86.11 EOF87.30EOF 85.5 98598585.5 85.5 85.585.5985994 988992984 9 9 2994 9929829809839 8 0 9 8 2 98399 4992 98899298898499 0 984 988988980984985982984 98 8 986 99 4 9 9 2 990985983.0986984986986 986 984 982 980 986 980982984986984984986 985 986992996994996 994994996996994 986986986986 980984 986 9 9 0 990 984 98098 4 992990990994994994994986986 992 986 986 994 994992994986990 9949889859889929849 9 2 990 99 0 98 8 992988987985984990 988 987984983982 980 984 985982982986986986986988988985985985986985GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.29 9 2 L. P .%2.0%1.9%1.0GB% 1. 0 91. 8 2 % 1.0 % 3.3 CL CLGF = 9 9 5 . 0 987 . 5 FB W O 987 . 0 VMA%8.0 EOF5050 25 3525 25 35 35 5025252525OUTLOT AOUTLOT B178934214323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK 512345678910412345678910111213141524'22'36'24'22'40'24'22'40'24'40'22'24'22'24'22'24'24252627282930313240'32' 32'36'32'36'32'32'36'25501524'40'15305 05933BLK 8-0+220+001+002+003+004+005+00-0+280+001+002+002+37.026+ 0 0 7+0 0 8+00 9+0 0 10+ 0 0 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00-0+500+001+002+00 3+00 4+00 5+00-0+200+001+002+00 3+004+004+65.18POND(16P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 987.81POND(19P)BTM = 978.50NWL = 984.06HWL = 986.15POND(18P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 986.00HWL = 987.30POND(20P)BTM = 976.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 986.11POND(14P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.86POND(15P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 982.77POND(17P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.02WET 1hHWL = 983.91WET 5bHWL = 985.42WET 5aHWL = 985.42C7.17ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEC7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONC7.11SILTFENCEC7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEC7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONMOHAWK ROAD SH O R T SHORT WAY RD. W A Y RD.C7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETNORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C303MEH003.dwgGRADING , DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROLC3.3:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.SEE SHEET C3.4:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX EachSEE SHEET C3.2SEE SHEET C3.7 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>25' - 12" RCP@ 1.19%>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>25' - 12" RCP@ 1.19%>>>>EMEMCABXCABXCABXCABXOE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OEOEOEOEOEOEOTVOTV >>170 333333980.6980.6 WETLAND 4 W E T L A N D 1a - S o u t hL.P.G F = 9 9 3 . 5 8 8 6 . 0 F B L O 9 8 8 . 5GF=993.0885.5FBLO988.0%7.1%7.1%8.0%5.8%2.9%3.2GF=993. 5 886.0FBLO988.5 %3.2%9.3%4.6EX.CL990.5088.32%1.0%1.0 91 . 8 93.088 . 592.693.09 2 . 891.89 3 . 0 92.59 2 . 3 89.991.591.389.090.588.790.390.590.389.688.690.4 92.587.592.493.088.085.787.588.691.091.091.889.086.585.686.086.086.7 86.786.7GF=991.0983.5FB990.8G F = 9 9 4 . 0 98 6 . 5 FB L O 98 9 . 0 G F = 9 9 3 . 5 9 8 6 . 0 F B 9 9 3 . 3 G F = 9 9 3 . 7 9 8 6 . 2 F B 9 9 3 . 5GF = 9 9 3 . 0 9 8 5 . 5 FB 9 9 2 . 8GF=992.0984.5FB991.8GF=991.0983.5FB990.81 0 0 4 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 9 9 8 9 9 6 9 9 4 9 9 2 9 9 0 984980978976988984980990 99098 8988986 986988 9 9 4 9 9 8 1 0 0 2 9889889889889929 9 2 H . P .%2 . 9 92 . 3 2 % 1. 0 9 9 2 99 0 505050303025765489BLK41210-0+500+001+002+003+004+00 5 + 0 0 OUTLOT CWET 4HWL = 985.33C7.13,4&5INLETPROTECTIONC7.17ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEC7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEMOHAWK ROAD SHORT WAY RD.C7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)NORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C304MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.4:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX EachSEE SHEET C3.2 INV=984.36INV 27 RCPINV=984.16FES 18IN RCPCBMH CLRE=992.2INV=990.14FES 15IN RCP>>DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)773550BLOCK 7PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 979.07WET 1b1HWL = 980.68HAC K A M O R E D R I V E NORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C305MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.5:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX EachSEE SHEET C3.6SEE SHEET C3.1 ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ))))))) ) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))980.6980. 6980.6WETLAND1c W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h MBL.P.86.83%4.7%7.1%6.6DROP2CDROP2CGF=992.6986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0990990 92.75CL CL97.198698498298698498298498699299 4 99885.085.585.592.186.586.5%0.7%0.7%3.0G.B.%2.51000.086.084.085.884.398498498491.99994.0+/-992 988 984 %2 . 0 %5 . 0 998.0+/-9929929849889909 8 4 98 8 9989909929949961004100099699 0 98 8 994996988986985985988988985985 984 990986 986 986 986985 982984984 986 986 984986986986988986 EOF86.0EOF98386.0EOF84.9EOF988988988984988985990 986990982986984 992984992990986986983985985983982981981982983 VMA3233343536505050130 30POND(5P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.96NURP POND(11P)BTM = 979.50NWL = 984.28 HWL = 986.13POND(12P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 986.09POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95WET 1cHWL =981.76WET 1a-northHWL = 979.07CHIPPEWA ROADC7.11SILT FENCEC7.11SILT FENCEC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)C7.16FES EROSIONCONTROL (TYP)ENCAMAT (TYP)ENCAMAT (TYP)C7.19&10TEMPORARY COMPOST BIO LOGC7.19&10TEMPORARY COMPOST BIO LOGC7.18EROSIONCONTROLBLANKETNORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C306MEH003.dwgGRADING, DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.6:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX EachSEE SHEET C3.2 SEE SHEET C3.5SEE SHEET C3.7 DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)9 8 0 . 6 980 . 6980.6MBGF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5%3.7 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5%4.8 99 4 99810001000G.B.%2.5H.P. 01.98 %1.5 92.994.2 94.095.093.7%5.294.395.5 %3.595.594.7%4.895.096.0%4.394.896.0%3.387.588.088.087.587.086.084.085.884.385.986.182.282.585.081.983.0992 988 984 9 9 8 10 0 0 9949961004100099699 6 985 984 990986 986 986 986985 98386.0EOFGF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5 988986986988 986994996996 988992990992988994 994100010001004%1.64168172123456BLK 230306+007+007+09.42POND(12P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 986.0950)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ))))))) )))))))))))))))C7.12SILT FENCEHEAVY DUTYC7.11SILT FENCEC7.19&10TEMPORARY COMPOST BIO LOGENCAMAT (TYP)C7.19&10TEMPORARY COMPOST BIO LOGNORTH050100PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C307MEH003.dwgGRADING , DRAINAGE &EROSION CONTROLC3.7:Inlet Protectionnn:Silt Fence:Pavement Sawcut:Construction Limits:Vehicle Tracking PadX EachX EachX FeetSYMBOLDESCRIPTION:Compost or Bio LogX Feet))))))))))))):Erosion Control BlanketX EachNO SCALETYPICAL LOT DETAIL1NOTES:1. GARAGE LOCATION INDICATED BY DRIVEWAY.: REAR ELEVATION: BUILDING TYPE - (CUSTOM GRADING BY BUILDER): MINIMUM BASEMENT ELEVATION: FRONT GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION: DRP 1' DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE FLOOR IS DROPPED FROM TYPICAL.DRP1'MAIN STREETBLK 15X 105.0X 105.0X106.5X106.5DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORNERELEVATIONSDENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITYEASEMENT20' FRONT10' SIDE10' REARUNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISEDENOTES BUILDINGSETBACKS BUILDING TYPES:FBWO = FULL BASEMENT WALK OUTFBLO = FULL BASEMENT LOOK OUTSEWO = SPLIT ENTRY WALK OUTFB = FULL BASEMENTDENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW4.5%DENOTES DRIVEWAY SLOPE(CG)108.3FB100.0GF=108.5GENERAL NOTESFOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORMPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AT 612.252.9070.SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENTCOMMISSION (ECWMC).1.2.LEGENDESTIMATED QUANTITYSYMBOLDESCRIPTION910908:MAJOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MINOR CONTOUR (PROPOSED):MAJOR CONTOUR (EXISTING):MINOR CONTOUR (EXISTING)GRADING NOTESSEE SHEET C3.1 FOR GRADING NOTESEROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTESSEE SHEET C3.0 FOR EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES.:Heavy Duty Silt FenceX Feet:Erosion Control Blanket:Wetland Impact AreaX EachSEE SHEET C3.2 SEE SHEET C3.5 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 7420+001+002+000+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014 + 0 0 15+00 16+00 17+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+00 23+00 24+00 25+0026+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0031+74.99 770+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 12343231BLK 65BLK 14101112131415161718192021222324252627CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE1516171833BLK 8BLOCK 7-0+500+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+0026+00 27+00 -0+220+001+002+003+004+005+0013+00 14+00 15+00 15+50.485+00 6+00 7+00 7+52.252+00 3+004+004+65.18NURP POND(3P)BTM = 973.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 984.099100 YR B-2-B = 984.97NURP POND(1P)BTM = 983.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 986.86NURP POND(9P)BTM = 979.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 987.16NURP POND(11eP)BTM = 979.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.23NURP POND(5P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.96NURP POND(11P)BTM = 979.50NWL = 984.28 HWL = 986.13POND(12P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 986.09POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 979.07MEADOWVIEW COURTWET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93WET 1eHWL = 983.93WET 2HWL = 986.48WET 1dHWL = 982.54WET 1cHWL =981.76WET 1a-northHWL = 979.07WET 1b1HWL = 980.68WET 1bHWL = 981.69CABX993.2993.1INV=990.15FES 15 RCPINV=990.82FES 15 RCPCABXCB RECTRE=991.1WSSMHRE=1005.5IE=974.93SSMHRE=996.8IE=975.43SSMHRE=989.8IE=976.44INV=984.36INV 27 RCPSSMHRE=988.8IE=977.27INV=984.16FES 18IN RCP>>G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G OEOEOEOE>>>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>>>>>IIIIIIIIIII IIIEX. MH 4ARIM:982.74INV:979.88(N)INV:979.88(E)INV:979.78(S)28' L 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 0.4%STUB 4CINV:979.88EX. MH 3RIM:990.71INV:979.25(N)INV:979.25(W)INV:979.25(E)INV:979.15(S)28' L 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 0.4%STUB 4CINV:979.36IIEX. MH 2RIM:987.30INV:978.20(N)INV:978.20(E)INV:978.10(S)EX. MH 1RIM:986.42INV:977.20(N)INV:977.20(E)INV:977.10(S)EX. SAN.MHRIM:992.55INV:976.3529' L 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 0.4%STUB 4CINV:977.3229' L 8" PVCSDR 26 @ 0.4%STUB 4CINV:978.31>>>>IIIWETLAND 233333333 333333WETLAND 1e W E T L A N D 1 d W E T L A N D 1 b>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-1WETLAND1f W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h INV=990.47FES 15 IN PVCINV=990.09FES RCP 15 INRE=992.02STMHMB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMH 18RIM: 997.88BUILD: 8.7'INV: 989.14MH 17RIM: 996.67BUILD: 8.8'INL (N): 987.95INV: 987.85MH 16RIM: 997.44BUILD: 10.1'INL (NW): 987.39INV: 987.29MH 15RIM: 996.22BUILD: 9.5'INL (NW): 986.83INV: 986.73MH 14RIM: 995.72BUILD: 9.5'INL (NW): 986.32INV: 986.22MH 13RIM: 995.89BUILD: 10.3'INL (NW): 985.69INV: 985.59MH 12RIM: 993.06BUILD: 8.0'INL (N): 985.15INV: 985.05MH 11RIM: 992.20BUILD: 8.0'INL (NE): 984.26INV: 984.16MH 10RIM: 990.91BUILD: 8.1'INL (E): 982.95INV: 982.85MH 9RIM: 992.48BUILD: 10.2'INL (SE): 982.40INV: 982.30MH 8RIM: 993.51BUILD: 11.7'INL (SE): 981.90INV: 981.80MH 6RIM: 991.97BUILD: 11.3'INL (E): 980.82INV: 980.72MH 5RIM: 991.71BUILD: 11.3'INL (E): 980.50INL (NW): 980.50INV: 980.40MH 19RIM: 993.08BUILD: 12.0'INL (N): 981.14INV: 981.04MH 20RIM: 993.93BUILD: 12.5'INL (N): 981.54INV: 981.44MH 21RIM: 993.56BUILD: 11.3'INL (N): 982.32INV: 982.22MH 22RIM: 995.80BUILD: 11.9'INL (N): 984.02INV: 983.928" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%12" PVC C90012" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C90012" PVC C90012" PVC C90012" PVC C9008" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%MH 4RIM: 991.52BUILD: 11.5'INL (N): 980.09INV: 979.99MH 3RIM: 992.91BUILD: 14.0'INL (NE): 978.98INV: 978.88MH 2RIM: 990.65BUILD: 12.9'INL (N): 977.89INV: 977.79INL: 976.45 (E)12" PVC C90012" PVC C900MH 1RIM: 990.73BUILD: 13.4'INL (E): 977.40INL (S): 977.40INV: 977.30>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> STM STM >>STMSTMSTMSTM STMSTMSTMSTM STMSTM>>>>STM>>STM>>>>OCS 1RIM (HIGH): 985.00INL (NW): 980.00INV: 982.00BOTTOM: 979.00FES 1INV=981.70STMSTM 15" RCP@ 0.28% 15" RCP@ 0.44%>>OCS 2RIM (HIGH): 985.50INL (N): 981.00INV: 983.00BOTTOM: 980.00FES 2INV=982.90FES 4INV=984.90OCS 4RIM (HIGH): 987.50INL (SE): 983.00INV: 985.00BOTTOM: 982.00 15" RCP@ 0.53% 12" RCP@ 0.84%OCS 3RIM (HIGH): 987.17INL (NW): 983.00INV: 985.00BOTTOM: 982.00FES 3INV=984.90>>>>FES 12INV=983.90 15" RCP@ 0.32%OCS 12RIM (HIGH): 986.78INL (E): 982.28INV: 984.28BOTTOM: 981.28OCS 13RIM: 987.00INL (E): 982.50INV: 984.50BOTTOM: 982.00FES 13INV=984.60 15" RCP@ 3.46%OCS 11RIM (HIGH): 985.17INL (N): 981.00INV: 983.00BOTTOM: 980.00FES 11INV=982.90 12" RCP@ 0.82%>>>>>>>>>>>>STMSTMCB 102BRIM: 991.39INV: 987.39CB 102ARIM: 991.39INV: 987.39STMH 102RIM: 991.42INL (S): 987.34INL (N): 987.27INL (W): 984.00INV: 983.80CBMH 101RIM: 991.80INL (W): 983.49INV: 983.49SUMP: 979.58CB 103BRIM: 992.00INV: 988.00FES 103AINV: 990.00STMH 103RIM: 994.27INL (N): 987.83INL (SW): 989.80INV: 984.60FES 100INV=982.00 18" RCP@ 1.00% 15" RCP@ 0.41% 15" RCP@ 0.41% 15" RCP@ 0.41% 18" RCP@ 0.55% 15" RCP@ 0.41% 15" RCP@ 0.40%CBMH 601RIM: 992.84INL (N): 988.69INV: 982.34SUMP: 978.34CB 601ARIM: 992.85INV: 988.81FES 600INV=982.00 15" RCP@ 0.40% 15" RCP@ 0.40%FES 500INV=982.00 18" RCP@ 1.00% 15" RCP@ 0.40% 15" RCP@ 0.40% 15" RCP@ 0.40% 15" RCP@ 0.41% 15" RCP@ 0.40%CBMH 501RIM: 995.43INL (S): 983.79INL (E): 990.31INV: 983.59SUMP: 979.59CB 501ARIM: 995.43INV: 990.43CBMH 502RIM: 996.38INL (SE): 984.27INV: 984.27CBMH 503RIM: 996.03INL (SE): 985.00INV: 985.00CB 504ARIM: 995.04INV: 989.68CBMH 504RIM: 995.04INL (NE): 989.56INV: 985.51FES 200INV=982.00CBMH 201RIM: 991.78INL (SE): 983.10INV: 982.90SUMP: 978.65CB 202ARIM: 991.03INV: 987.04CBMH 202RIM: 991.03INL (N): 986.89INV: 983.65 18" RCP@ 0.50% 15" RCP@ 0.50% 15" RCP@ 0.50%FES 400INV=983.00CBMH 401RIM: 987.26INL (W): 983.29INL (S): 983.29INV: 983.09SUMP: 979.11CB 401ARIM: 987.26INV: 983.35 15" RCP@ 0.20% 18" RCP@ 0.29%>>CB 301ARIM: 988.10INV: 984.10CBMH 301RIM: 988.10INL (N): 983.77INV: 983.77SUMP" 979.77FES 300INV=983.00>>>>>>>> 15" RCP@ 1.10% 15" RCP@ 2.23%HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.>>FES 800INV: 989.80FES 801INV: 988.00 24" RCP@ 0.27%>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>FES 3001INV=979.30FES 3000INV: 980.00>> 36" RCP@ 0.48%INV=980.00INV=980.00INV=980.75INV=980.752 - 130' - 96"Wx30"H RCPBOX CULVERTS @ 0.50%FES 304INV: 981.00FES 302INV: 981.00FES 303INV: 981.80FES 305INV: 981.80 18" ARCH RCP@ 0.53% 18" RCP@ 0.53%CB 401BRIM: 987.27INV: 983.31 15" RCP@ 0.33%8" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C900 12" PVC C90012"x12" WETTAP WITH VALVETIE 10" SAN. SEWER INTO EXIST. MH8"x12" WETTAP WITH 12" GV8" S A N @ 0. 4 0 %12" PVC C900CBMH 903RIM: 991.82INL (W): 987.73INV: 987.73CB 903ARIM: 991.82INV: 987.94CBMH 902RIM: 991.92INL (W): 987.80INL (N): 986.93INV: 986.73CB 902ARIM: 991.92INV: 987.92STMH 901RIM: 990.00INL (W): 985.70INV: 985.70 15" RCP@ 0.70% 15" RCP@ 0.59% 15" RCP@ 0.50% 15" RCP@ 0.70%STUBINV: 984.11NORTH0100200PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C401MEH003.dwgUTILITY PLANNORTHC4.1?Pipe MaterialsWatermain6" DIP Class 52-Hydrant Leads, 8" PVC C900 & 12" PVC C900 -Main Lines(ANSI A21.51/AWWA C151)Water Service1" Copper Type K (ASTM B88)Sanitary Sewer8" PVC SDR 35 (ASTM: D3034, D2665, & F891)Sanitary Sewer Service4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 (ASTM: D1785, D3034, D2665, & F891)Storm SewerRCP 12"-18" CLASS 5 (ASTM C76)RCP 21" CLASS 4 (ASTM C76)RCP 24"-48" CLASS 3 (ASTM C76)Draintile6" Perforated Draintile 1' Behind Curb with a 6"x4" Tee & 4" PVC To Property Line For HomeSump Pump ConnectionContact Utility Service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning.Contractor to field verify location and elevation of all utility points of connection prior to construction of any proposed utilities.Contractor to notify Engineer immediately if there is any discrepancy.Contractor to pothole all utility crossings prior to construction of new utilities to verify depths of existing lines. Contact Engineerimmediately if any conflicts are discovered.Provide means and measures to protect adjacent property from damage during utility installation.Pipe lengths shown are from center of structure to center of structure or end of end section.Install tracer wire with all non-conductive utilities in accordance with City of Medina Standards.Connect to City Utilities in accordance with City of Medina Standards.Contact Steve Scherer, City of Medina Public Works Department, at 763.473.8842 for Wet Tap inspection.Maintain 7.5 Feet of cover on water.Deflect water to maintain 18-inch minimum outside separation at sewer crossings. Center pipe lengths to provide greatest separationbetween joints.Contact Steve Scherer, City of Medina Public Works Department, at 763.473.8842 for flushing and pressure test inspections.All joints and connections in the storm sewer system shall be gastight or water tight. Approved resilient rubber joints must be used tomake watertight connections to manholes, catch basins, and other structures.Catch basins in curb and gutter are sumped 2 inches below the gutter grade. Refer to Detail STR-03 & STR-04 on Sheet C7.X.Irrigation sleeve to be 4" Schedule 80 PVC buried 24" below grade. Extend sleeves 3' beyond the edge of pavement. Mark eachend of sleeve with 3/4" rebar 12" below finish grade. (coordinate with irrigation contractor.)Compact cohesive soils in paved areas to 95% of maximum dry density, Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) except the top 3 feet whichshall be compacted to 100%. compact to 98% density where fill depth exceeds 10 feet. The soils shall be within 3% of optimummoisture content. In granular soils all portions of the embankment shall be compacted to not less than 95% of Modified ProctorDensity (ASTM D1557).Adjust structures to final grade where disturbed. Comply with requirements of Utility. Meet requirements for traffic loading in pavedareas.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.GENERAL NOTESUTILITY NOTESFor construction staking and surveying services contact Landform at 612.252.9070.1. 15161718293031320+00 1+00 2+00 OUTLOT AOUTLOT B123456789BLK 27653421894323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK4BLK 5112345678910105BLK 141234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE MOHAWK DRIVELANE1516171833BLK 8-0+500+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+0026+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00 31+00 31+43.71 -0+220+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+007+09.42-0+280+001+002+002+37.02-0+500+001+002+003+004+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 15+50.48-0+500+001+002+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 7+52.25-0+200+001+002+00 3+004+004+65.18NURP POND(9P)BTM = 979.00NWL = 985.00HWL = 987.16BTM = 979.00NWL = 983.00HWL = 984.23POND(16P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 987.81POND(19P)BTM = 978.50NWL = 984.06HWL = 986.15POND(18P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 986.00HWL = 987.30POND(20P)BTM = 976.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 986.11POND(14P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.86POND(15P)BTM = 980.00NWL = 982.00HWL = 982.77POND(12P)BTM = 981.00NWL = 984.50HWL = 986.09POND(13P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 986.18HWL = 987.95POND(17P)BTM = 982.00NWL = 984.00HWL = 985.02PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 981.84HILLSIDE BROOKVIEW COURTMEADOWVIEW COURTOUTLOT CWET 1hHWL = 983.91WET 4HWL = 985.33WET 5bHWL = 985.42WET 5aHWL = 985.42WET 11fHWL =985.47POND 23HWL =990.93HWL = 983.93WET 2HWL = 986.48CB RECTRE=991.1INV=988.16INV E RCP 15INV=988.16INV CMP 15HHCABXCABXCABXCABXCABX992.4992.4992.4HHINV=981.53CMP INV 36INV=984.57CMP TOPINV=984.68CMP TOPINV=981.87CMP INV 36INV=987.80CMP 12IN INVINV=988.08CMP 12IN INVWSSMHRE=1005.5IE=974.93INV=1003.07INV 12IN HDPE CPPINV=1001.95INV 12IN HDPE CPPSSMHRE=996.8IE=975.43>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OEOEOEOEOEOEGGGGGGGGGGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GOEOE OEOTVGOTV>>>>>IIII>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>>IIIIIII>I>I EX. SAN.MHRIM:992.55INV:976.35INV:977.32WETLAND 2 DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)170 3333333333333333WETLAND 1e W E T L A N D 1 g EX. SAN.MHRIM:995.01INL: 982.81 (W)INV: 974.76 (N)(S)80 LF. 6" PVC>>>>EX. SAN.MHRIM:984.80INV:973.56EX. 6" DIPEX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIPEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVC WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - S o u t h WL 1hEX. SAN.MHRIM:985.09INV:972.26EX. SAN.MHRIM:985.81INL:970.64INV:969.33RE=999.94IE=973.16SSMHRE=1001.97IE=973.78SSMHMBINV=1004.06INV CMP 15 IN>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>>>>EX. 6" PVC>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>12" PVC C90012" PVC C9008" SAN@ 0.40%INL: 976.45 (E)12" PVC C90012" PVC C900MH 1RIM: 990.73BUILD: 13.4'INL (E): 977.40INL (S): 977.40INV: 977.30>> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>STMSTM STM >>STMMH 23RIM: 993.69BUILD: 14.8'INL (E): 979.02INL (S): 979.02INV: 978.92MH 24RIM: 992.80BUILD: 12.6'INL (S): 980.25INV: 980.15MH 25RIM: 991.50BUILD: 10.5'INL (SW): 981.12INV: 981.02MH 26RIM: 993.61BUILD: 13.5'INL (S): 980.16INV: 983.16INV: 980.06MH 27RIM: 992.40BUILD: 10.6'INV: 981.82MH 35RIM: 990.14BUILD: 10.3'INV: 979.80MH 34RIM: 994.31BUILD: 15.1'INL (E): 979.27INL (N): 979.27INV: 979.17MH 33RIM: 990.41BUILD: 12.6'INL (N): 977.89INV: 977.79MH 36RIM: 992.55BUILD: 12.4'INL (E): 980.23INV: 980.13MH 37RIM: 991.89BUILD: 10.5'INL (SE): 981.45INV: 981.35MH 38RIM: 994.92BUILD: 10.5'INV: 984.41MH 32RIM: 993.56BUILD: 16.7'INL (NE): 976.96INL (NW): 982.50INV: 976.86MH 40RIM: 994.60BUILD: 10.5'INV: 984.05MH 39RIM: 993.52BUILD: 10.5'INL (NW): 983.12INV: 983.02MH 31RIM: 991.95BUILD: 15.9'INL (NE): 976.13INV: 976.03MH 30RIM: 989.06BUILD: 14.3'INL (NE): 974.89INV: 974.79MH 29RIM: 988.41BUILD: 14.2'INL (E): 974.35INV: 974.25MH 28RIM: 984.34BUILD: 11.2'INL (E): 973.10>>8" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C900 8" PVC C9008" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 1.30%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.95%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.70%8" SAN@ 1.00%8" SAN@ 0.90%8" SAN@ 1.70%8" SAN@ 0.70%8" SAN@ 0.70%8" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C9008" PVC C900 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>STMSTMSTM >>>>>>OCS 7RIM (HIGH): 986.50INL (SE): 982.00INV: 984.00BOTTOM: 981.00OCS 8RIM (HIGH): 988.50INL (NW): 984.00INV: 986.00BOTTOM: 983.00FES 7INV=983.80FES 8INV=985.7012" RCP@ 1.19%12" RCP@ 0.76%12" RCP@ 0.53%12" RCP@ 0.58%FES 5INV=984.30FES 6INV=983.86OCS 6RIM (HIGH): 986.56INL (NE): 982.06INV: 984.06BOTTOM: 981.06OCS 5RIM (HIGH): 987.00INL (N): 982.50INV: 984.50BOTTOM: 981.50>>>>OCS 14RIM (HIGH): 984.17INL (NE): 980.00INV: 982.00BOTTOM: 979.00FES 14INV=981.9012" RCP@ 0.28%FES 10INV=985.88FES 9INV=983.90OCS 10RIM (HIGH): 988.62INL (SW): 984.18INV: 986.18BOTTOM: 983.18OCS 9RIM (HIGH): 986.50INL (NW): 982.00INV: 984.00BOTTOM: 981.0015" RCP@ 0.64%15" RCP@ 1.65%OCS 13RIM (HIGH): 987.00INL (E): 982.50INV: 984.50FES 13INV=984.1015" RCP@ 3.46%>>>>>>>>>>>>>>STMSTM>>>>STM>>>>STMSTM CB 903ARIM: 991.82INV: 987.94CBMH 903RIM: 991.82INL (W): 987.73INV: 987.73CB 902ARIM: 991.92INV: 987.92CBMH 902RIM: 991.92INL (W): 987.80INL (N): 986.93INV: 986.73SUMP: 982.6515" RCP@ 0.70%15" RCP@ 0.70%15" RCP@ 0.59%15" RCP@ 0.80%15" RCP@ 0.50%FES 900FES=984.50FES 1200INV=984.50FES 1202AINV: 988.00FES 1203AINV: 988.00>>>>CBMH 1203RIM: 989.00INL (NW): 987.88INV: 984.99STMH 1201RIM: 989.15INL (W): 984.94INL (E): 984.94INV: 984.94SUMP: 980.94CBMH 1202RIM: 989.34INL (NE): 987.90INV: 984.9715" RCP@ 0.40%18" RCP@ 0.28%18" RCP@ 0.30%FES 1700INV=986.00CBMH 1701RIM: 989.57INL (W): 985.43INV: 985.43SUMP: 982.43FES 1800INV=984.40CBMH 1801RIM: 989.57INL (W): 985.55INV: 985.10SUMP: 981.1015" RCP@ 1.19%15" RCP@ 1.21%FES 1300INV=985.0018" RCP@ 0.31%CBMH 1301RIM: 989.75INL (SE): 985.31INV: 985.11SUMP: 981.11CB 1301ARIM: 989.75INV: 985.7515" RCP@ 1.57%CB 1001ARIM: 990.72INV: 986.72CBMH 1001RIM: 990.72INL (NW): 986.63INV: 984.94FES 1000INV=984.5015" RCP@ 0.40%FES 1103INV: 993.00FES 1100INV=986.00CBMH 1102RIM: 991.42INL (W): 992.65INV: 986.34CBMH 1101RIM: 991.42INL (NW): 986.24INV: 986.24SUMP: 982.2415" RCP@ 0.40%15" RCP@ 0.42%15" RCP@ 0.42%FES 1500INV=983.50CBMH 1501RIM: 987.79INL (S): 983.64INL (E): 983.24INV: 983.24SUMP: 982.69CB 1501ARIM: 987.79INV: 983.75CBMH 1502RIM: 988.41INL (NE): 983.92INV: 983.52CB 1503ARIM: 991.29INV: 987.3215" RCP@ 1.30%15" RCP@ 0.21%21" RCP@ 0.50%15" RCP@ 0.39%>>OCS 15RIM (HIGH): 986.50INL (SW): 982.00INV: 984.00BOTTOM: 981.0012" RCP@ 0.61%FES 15INV=983.90HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.HYD.FES 800INV: 887.80FES 801INV: 988.00FES 1402INV: 983.80FES 1403INV: 984.0042" RCP@ 0.21%24" RCP@ 0.27%CB 1801ARIM: 989.58INV: 985.58CB 1701ARIM: 989.58INV: 985.4615" RCP@ 0.50%15" RCP@ 0.50%8" PVC C900 8" P V C C 9 0 0 8"x12" WETTAP WITH 12" GV12"x12" WETTAP WITH VALVETIE 10" SAN. SEWER INTO EXIST. MH12"x12" WETTAP WITH VALVE12"x12" WETTAP WITH VALVEBUILD MH OVER EXISTING10" PVC SAN. SEWERCB 1503BRIM: 991.29INV: 987.28CBMH 1503RIM: 991.29INL (SE): 987.26INL (NE): 987.26INV: 987.2615" RCP@ 0.33%40' - 60"Wx24"H RCPBOX CULVERTS @ 2.50%>>INV=985.50INV=984.50>>>>INV=984.50INV=984.50INV=984.00INV=984.002 - 96' - 76"Wx24"H RCPBOX CULVERTS @ 0.50%8" SAN@ 0.40%8" SAN@ 0.40%NORTH0100200PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Randall C. HedlundLicense No:Date:C401MEH003.dwgUTILITY PLANSOUTHC4.2Pipe MaterialsWatermain6" DIP Class 52-Hydrant Leads, 8" PVC C900 & 12" PVC C900 -Main Lines(ANSI A21.51/AWWA C151)Water Service1" Copper Type K (ASTM B88)Sanitary Sewer8" PVC SDR 35 (ASTM: D3034, D2665, & F891)Sanitary Sewer Service4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 (ASTM: D1785, D3034, D2665, & F891)Storm SewerRCP 12"-18" CLASS 5 (ASTM C76)RCP 21" CLASS 4 (ASTM C76)RCP 24"-48" CLASS 3 (ASTM C76)Draintile6" Perforated Draintile 1' Behind Curb with a 6"x4" Tee & 4" PVC To Property Line For HomeSump Pump ConnectionContact Utility Service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning.Contractor to field verify location and elevation of all utility points of connection prior to construction of any proposed utilities.Contractor to notify Engineer immediately if there is any discrepancy.Contractor to pothole all utility crossings prior to construction of new utilities to verify depths of existing lines. Contact Engineerimmediately if any conflicts are discovered.Provide means and measures to protect adjacent property from damage during utility installation.Pipe lengths shown are from center of structure to center of structure or end of end section.Install tracer wire with all non-conductive utilities in accordance with City of Medina Standards.Connect to City Utilities in accordance with City of Medina Standards.Contact Steve Scherer, City of Medina Public Works Department, at 763.473.8842 for Wet Tap inspection.Maintain 7.5 Feet of cover on water.Deflect water to maintain 18-inch minimum outside separation at sewer crossings. Center pipe lengths to provide greatest separationbetween joints.Contact Steve Scherer, City of Medina Public Works Department, at 763.473.8842 for flushing and pressure test inspections.All joints and connections in the storm sewer system shall be gastight or water tight. Approved resilient rubber joints must be used tomake watertight connections to manholes, catch basins, and other structures.Catch basins in curb and gutter are sumped 2 inches below the gutter grade. Refer to Detail STR-03 & STR-04 on Sheet C7.X.Irrigation sleeve to be 4" Schedule 80 PVC buried 24" below grade. Extend sleeves 3' beyond the edge of pavement. Mark eachend of sleeve with 3/4" rebar 12" below finish grade. (coordinate with irrigation contractor.)Compact cohesive soils in paved areas to 95% of maximum dry density, Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) except the top 3 feet whichshall be compacted to 100%. compact to 98% density where fill depth exceeds 10 feet. The soils shall be within 3% of optimummoisture content. In granular soils all portions of the embankment shall be compacted to not less than 95% of Modified ProctorDensity (ASTM D1557).Adjust structures to final grade where disturbed. Comply with requirements of Utility. Meet requirements for traffic loading in pavedareas.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.GENERAL NOTESUTILITY NOTESFor construction staking and surveying services contact Landform at 612.252.9070.1. PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L102MEH003.dwgTree Preservation PlanL1.2TREE PRESERVATION LISTTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost180Arborvitae21.0Good1X181Spruce, white19.5Good1X182Boxelder22.0Fair1X183Boxelder18.0Fair1184Boxelder9.0Fair1185Boxelder32.0Fair1X186Ash, green11.5Good1187Ash, green10.0Fair1188Ash, green12.0Fair1189Willow23.0Fair1190Ash, green18.0Fair1191Willow19.5Fair1192Ash, green12.5Good1193Ash, green10.0Fair1194Ash, green9.5Good1195Willow22.5Good1196Willow33.0Fair2197Willow19.0Fair1198Ash, green9.0Good1199Willow16.5Good1200Ash, green13.5Good1201Cherry, black12.5Good1202Ash, green8.0Good1X203Crabapple14.0Fair1X204Ash, green10.5Good1X205Ash, green12.0Good1X206Cherry, black18.0Good1X207Ash, green16.0Good1X208Ash, green13.0Good1X209Ash, green28.0Good4X210Ash, green28.0Good3X211Ash, green11.0Good2X212Ash, green11.5Good1X213Ash, green12.0Good1X214Cherry, black9.0Good1X215Ash, green15.0Good1X216Ash, green14.0Fair2217Boxelder12.5Fair1218Boxelder13.0Fair1219Boxelder12.5Fair1220Ash, green8.5Good1221Ash, green10.0Good1222Ash, green8.0Good1223Ash, green8.5Good1224Ash, green10.0Good1225Ash, green11.0Good1226Ash, green23.0Good2227Ash, green15.0Good1228Ash, green12.5Good1229Ash, green12.0Good1230Ash, green10.0Good1231Ash, green12.0Good1232Ash, green9.0Good1X233Ash, green14.0Good1234Ash, green9.0Good1235Ash, green9.0Good1236Ash, green9.0Good1237Ash, green10.5Good1238Ash, green10.5Good1239Ash, green8.0Good1240Ash, green9.0Good1241Ash, green8.0Good1242Ash, green10.0Good1243Ash, green9.5Good1244Ash, green10.5Good1245Willow45.0Fair1246Ash, green9.5Good1247Ash, green8.0Good1248Ash, green11.0Good1249Ash, green15.0Good1250Ash, green13.5Good1251Ash, green8.0Good1252Ash, green13.5Good1253Ash, green8.5Good1254Ash, green8.5Fair1255Ash, green12.5Fair1256Ash, green9.5Good1257Ash, green12.0Good1258Ash, green10.5Good1259Ash, green18.5Good2260Ash, green29.0Fair1261Ash, green13.0Good1262Ash, green15.0Good1263Ash, green17.5Good1264Ash, green15.0Good2265Ash, green13.0Good1266Ash, green9.0Good1267Ash, green12.5Good1268Ash, green14.0Good1269Ash, green11.5Good1270Ash, green13.0Good1271Ash, green17.0Good1272Ash, green11.5Good1273Ash, green12.5Good1274Ash, green8.0Good1275Ash, green9.5Good1276Ash, green8.5Good1277Ash, green10.0Good1278Ash, green11.0Good1279Ash, green9.5Good1Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost280Ash, green18.0Good1281Ash, green9.0Good1282Ash, green8.5Good1283Ash, green15.0Fair1284Ash, green15.0Good1285Ash, green85.0Good1286Ash, green9.5Good1287Ash, green8.5Good1288Ash, green8.0Good1289Cherry, black14.0Good1290Ash, green10.5Fair1291Ash, green10.0Good1292Redcedar5.5Good1293Ash, green9.0Good1294Ash, green13.5Good1295Ash, green10.0Good1296Ash, green9.5Good1297Ash, green9.5Good1298Ash, green12.0Good1299Crabapple8.5Fair1300Cherry, black9.0Fair1301Ash, green30.0Good1302Cherry, black8.5Good1303Ash, green16.0Good1304Ash, green8.0Good1305Ash, green9.0Good1306Ash, green10.5Good1307Ash, green9.0Good1308Ash, green8.0Good1309Ash, green10.0Good1310Ash, green8.5Good1311Ash, green8.0Good1312Ash, green9.5Good1313Ash, green8.5Good1314Ash, green8.5Good1315Ash, green11.5Good2316Oak, red22.0Fair1317Oak, red24.0Fair1318Oak, red63.0Fair4319Ash, green11.5Good1320Boxelder32.0Fair1321Boxelder11.5Good1322Oak, red16.5Good1323Oak, red16.5Fair1324Hickory, bitternut12.0Good1325Oak, bur42.0Good1326Boxelder12.0Good1327Boxelder15.0Good1328Oak, bur11.0Good1329Basswood22.0Good2330Basswood13.5Good1331Basswood15.5Good1332Basswood34.0Fair2333Basswood15.5Good1334Ash, green10.5Good1335Boxelder18.0Fair1336Ash, green9.5Good1337Oak, bur18.0Good1338Basswood20.0Fair1339Basswood20.0Fair1340Ash, green8.0Fair1341Elm, American9.5Good1342Oak, bur18.5Good1343Oak, bur27.0Good1344Oak, bur31.0Good1345Oak, bur14.5Good1346Oak, bur16.0Fair1347Basswood12.0Good1348Oak, bur25.0Good1349Oak, bur20.0Good1350Oak, bur10.0Good1351Oak, bur25.0Fair1352Oak, bur14.0Good1353Oak, bur14.5Good1354Oak, bur35.0Good2355Hickory, bitternut10.5Good1356Elm, red10.5Good1357Oak, bur30.0Fair2358Oak, bur27.0Fair1359Ash, green12.5Good1360Oak, bur16.5Fair1361Oak, bur13.5Fair1362Oak, red20.5Good1363Oak, red18.0Good1364Oak, red20.0Fair1365Oak, red17.0Fair1366Oak, bur53.0Good3367Oak, red8.0Good1368Oak, bur12.0Good1369Ash, green9.0Good1Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost370Oak, bur13.0Fair1371Oak, bur28.0Good2372Oak, red11.5Good1373Oak, red11.5Fair1374Oak, bur17.0Good1375Oak, red12.5Good1376Oak, bur27.5Good2377Oak, bur20.0Good1378Oak, red17.5Good1379Oak, bur19.5Good1380Oak, bur20.0Good1381Oak, red13.0Good1382Oak, bur25.5Good1383Oak, red19.5Good1384Oak, bur21.5Good1385Oak, red26.0Good1386Oak, bur32.0Good1387Oak, bur16.5Good1388Oak, bur10.5Fair1389Cottonwood10.0Good1390Basswood35.0Fair3401Oak, red9.0Good1402Ash, green9.0Good1403Maple, sugar8.0Fair1404Oak, red25.0Good1405Oak, red25.0Good1406Oak, red22.5Good1407Maple, sugar9.0Good1408Oak, bur11.0Good1409Maple, sugar9.0Good1X410Ash, green8.5Good1X411Hickory, bitternut8.5Good1412Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1413Ash, green8.0Good1414Maple, sugar8.0Fair1415Maple, sugar9.5Good1416Oak, bur23.0Good1417Maple, sugar9.5Good1X418Maple, sugar12.0Good1419Maple, sugar9.5Good1420Cherry, black10.5Good1421Maple, sugar8.0Good1422Maple, sugar11.0Good1423Hickory, bitternut12.0Good1424Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1425Maple, sugar14.0Good1426Maple, sugar15.5Good1427Hickory, bitternut11.0Good1428Hickory, bitternut11.0Good1429Maple, sugar10.0Good1430Maple, sugar12.5Good1431Maple, sugar10.0Good1432Maple, sugar11.0Good1433Ash, green9.0Good1434Ash, green9.5Good1435Hickory, bitternut14.0Good1436Oak, bur21.0Good1X437Basswood9.5Good1438Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1X439Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1440Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1441Ironwood10.5Good1442Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1443Oak, bur25.5Good1X444Oak, bur31.5Good1445Elm, American29.0Good1446Hickory, bitternut12.5Good1447Elm, Siberian13.0Good1448Ash, green9.0Good1449Basswood9.0Good1450Elm, American9.5Good1451Elm, American11.0Good1452Hickory, bitternut13.0Good1453Ash, green11.5Good1454Elm, American8.0Good1455Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1X456Ash, green13.5Good1X457Elm, American10.5Good1X458Hickory, bitternut10.0Good1459Ash, green10.5Fair1460Ash, green20.0Good1461Ash, green8.5Good1462Ash, green12.0Fair1463Boxelder8.0Good1464Ash, green10.5Good1X465Ash, green8.5Fair1466Ash, green9.0Good1467Ash, green9.5Good1468Ash, green15.5Good1469Ash, green11.0Fair1470Ash, green8.0Good1471Ash, green11.0Good1472Ash, green10.5Good1473Ash, green10.0Fair1474Ash, green13.5Good1475Ash, green14.0Good1476Ash, green12.0Good1477Ash, green15.5Good1478Ash, green8.0Good1479Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost481Elm, American11.0Good1482Ash, green16.0Good1483Ash, green8.5Good1484Ash, green14.5Good1485Ash, green17.0Good1486Ash, green10.5Good1487Ash, green10.5Good1488Ash, green11.0Good1489Ash, green9.0Good1490Ash, green14.5Good1491Ash, green18.0Good1492Ash, green8.0Good1493Ash, green16.0Good1494Elm, American10.0Good1495Ash, green15.5Good1496Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1497Hickory, bitternut12.5Good1498Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1499Ash, green8.5Good1X500Basswood10.0Good1X501Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1X502Ash, green26.5Good1X503Cherry, black8.5Fair1X504Hickory, bitternut10.0Good1X505Basswood10.0Fair1X506Ash, green16.0Fair1X507Ash, green8.5Good1X508Ash, green12.0Good1509Ash, green14.0Good1510Ash, green9.0Good1511Ash, green12.0Fair1512Ash, green12.0Good1513Ash, green13.5Good1514Hickory, bitternut10.0Good1515Ash, green15.5Good1516Ash, green9.0Fair1X517Hickory, bitternut10.0Good1X518Ash, green8.0Good1X519Ash, green9.0Good1X520Ash, green9.0Good1521Ash, green24.0Good1522Ash, green10.0Good1523Ash, green8.5Good1524Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1525Oak, bur36.0Good1526Oak, bur15.5Fair1X527Basswood11.5Good1528Oak, bur32.0Good1529Cherry, black9.5Fair1530Oak, red17.0Fair1531Oak, bur16.5Good1532Oak, bur16.0Fair1X533Basswood8.0Good1534Oak, bur27.0Good1535Oak, bur21.5Good1536Oak, bur17.5Good1537Basswood12.0Fair1X538Hickory, bitternut14.5Good1X539Oak, bur24.0Good1X540Oak, bur24.0Good1X541Oak, bur20.0Good1542Oak, bur12.0Good1543Oak, bur18.0Fair1544Basswood9.0Good1545Basswood12.0Good1X546Basswood8.0Good1X547Hickory, bitternut8.5Good1548Basswood10.0Good1549Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1550Ash, green12.5Good1551Basswood12.0Fair1552Maple, sugar8.5Good1553Oak, white34.0Good1X554Oak, white26.0Fair1555Oak, red25.0Fair1556Ash, green8.0Good1557Elm, American8.5Good1558Ash, green9.0Good1559Aspen11.0Good1560Oak, white561Ironwood13.0Fair1562Maple, sugar9.0Good1563Ash, green9.0Good1564Oak, red9.5Good1565Oak, red11.0Good1566Ash, green9.5Good1567Oak, red10.0Good1568Cherry, black9.0Good1569Ash, green8.0Good1570Oak, red36.0Good1571Oak, red9.5Good1572Oak, red9.0Good1573Basswood9.0Good1574Oak, white47.0Good1575Maple, sugar12.5Good1576Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1577Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1578Oak, red10.0Good1579Basswood10.0Good1Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost81Ash, green8.5Good1X82Ash, green10.0Good1X83Ash, green11.5Good1X84Ash, green8.0Good1X85Ash, green8.0Good186Ash, green10.0Good187Ash, green8.0Good188Ash, green9.5Good1X89Ash, green17.0Fair190Ash, green8.5Good191Ash, green11.0Good192Ash, green8.5Good1X93Ash, green9.0Good1X94Ash, green10.0Good1X95Ash, green10.5Good196Ash, green12.5Good197Ash, green8.0Good198Ash, green13.0Fair299Ash, green12.5Good1100Cherry, black11.0Fair1101Spruce, Norway27.5Good1X102Spruce, Norway17.0Good1103Spruce, Norway20.0Good1104Spruce, Norway17.0Good1105Spruce, Norway24.0Good1X106Spruce, Norway20.5Good1X107Spruce, Norway20.0Good1X108Spruce, Norway25.0Good1X109Spruce, Norway23.0Good1X110Redcedar17.0Good1X111Redcedar13.5Good1X112Spruce, Norway20.0Good1X113Spruce, Norway19.0Good1X114Spruce, Norway8.5Fair1X115Spruce, Norway6.5Good1X116Spruce, Norway10.0Good1X117Spruce, Norway18.5Good1X118Spruce, Norway11.0Good1X119Boxelder15.5Fair1X120Boxelder13.0Good1X121Cottonwood20.0Good1X122Redcedar5.0Good1X123Cottonwood19.5Fair1X124Boxelder18.0Fair1X125Boxelder12.5Fair1X126Boxelder13.0Fair1X127Boxelder13.0Fair1X128Elm, American9.0Fair1X129Boxelder11.0Fair1X130Elm, American11.0Good1131Ash, green13.0Good2132Willow19.5Fair1133Boxelder23.0Fair1134Willow10.0Fair1135Willow47.0Good4136Willow22.5Good2137Boxelder9.0Fair1138Boxelder11.0Fair1139Boxelder13.0Fair2140Willow32.0Fair2141Cottonwood32.0Fair1142Ash, green10.0Good1143Willow18.0Good1144Willow17.0Fair1145Boxelder8.5Good1146Willow38.0Fair1147Boxelder13.5Good1148Boxelder9.0Good1149Elm, American12.0Good1150Willow36.0Fair1151Boxelder8.5Fair1152Boxelder8.0Good1153Boxelder10.0Good1154Boxelder9.5Good1155Boxelder8.0Fair1156Boxelder11.0Fair1157Boxelder8.0Good1158Boxelder10.5Fair1X159Boxelder8.0Fair1X160Cottonwood23.0Good1X161Cottonwood15.0Good1X162Cottonwood23.0Good1X163Boxelder8.0Fair1164Boxelder8.0Fair1165Boxelder15.0Fair2166Boxelder9.5Fair1167Willow32.0Good1168Willow53.0Fair4169Ash, green8.5Good1170Boxelder10.5Fair1171Boxelder10.5Fair1172Boxelder10.5Fair1173Boxelder9.5Good1174Boxelder8.0Fair1X175Boxelder18.0Fair1X176Boxelder9.0Good1X177Cottonwood26.0Good1X178Redcedar17.5Good1X179Redcedar21.5Good1XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost580Cherry, black8.5Good1581Basswood8.0Good1582Ash, green9.5Good1583Basswood9.5Good1584Ash, green9.0Good1585Ash, green9.0Good1586Hickory, bitternut12.0Fair1587Hickory, bitternut9.5Good1588Hickory, bitternut11.0Good1589Basswood25.0Good3590Basswood8.0Fair1591Ash, green10.0Good1592Oak, bur36.0Good1593Oak, bur33.5Good1X594Oak, bur26.5Good1X595Elm, American13.5Good1596Hickory, bitternut11.0Good1597Hickory, bitternut8.0Good1598Ash, green14.0Fair1599Ash, green8.5Good1600Hickory, bitternut12.0Good1601Oak, white45.5Fair1602Hickory, bitternut9.0Good1603Ash, green8.5Good1604Ash, green8.0Good1605Ash, green10.0Good1606Oak, red13.0Good1607Basswood19.5Fair3608Cherry, black9.0Fair1609Oak, red12.0Good1610Ash, green8.5Good1611Cherry, black9.0Good1612Oak, red8.0Good1613Oak, red9.0Good1614Oak, white34.0Good1615Ash, green14.0Good1616Oak, red8.0Good1617Ash, green10.5Good1618Oak, red9.5Good1619Oak, white21.0Good1620Oak, red8.5Good1621Oak, red12.0Good1622Oak, red13.5Good1623Oak, red11.5Good1624Oak, red10.5Good1625Oak, white9.5Fair1626Oak, red12.5Good1627Oak, white25.0Fair1628Oak, bur16.0Fair2801Ash, green8.5Good1802Ash, green14.5Good1803Ash, green16.5Good1804Ash, green14.0Good1805Ash, green18.0Good1806Ash, green9.0Good1807Elm, American17.0Good2808Ash, green8.0Good1809Boxelder8.5Good1810Ash, green11.5Good1811Ash, green8.0Good1812Ash, green11.5Good1813Ash, green12.0Good1814Ash, green12.0Good1815Ash, green25.0Fair1816Hickory, bitternut10.5Good1817Ash, green10.0Good1X818Ash, green8.5Fair1819Cherry, black8.5Good1820Ash, green10.5Good1X821Cherry, black9.0Good1X822Ash, green8.0Good1823Elm, American9.0Good1824Elm, American9.5Good1X825Cherry, black8.0Good1826Ash, green19.0Fair1827Ash, green12.0Good1828Ash, green8.5Good1829Ash, green9.0Good1X830Cherry, black16.0Fair1X831Ash, green14.0Good1832Ash, green13.5Good1833Ash, green8.0Good1X834Cherry, black10.5Good1X835Ash, green10.5Fair1X836Ash, green30.0Fair1837Ash, green11.5Good1X838Ash, green18.5Good1X839Ash, green8.0Good1840Ash, green9.0Good1841Ash, green10.0Good2X842Ash, green10.0Good2X843Ash, green18.0Good1X844Ash, green8.5Good1X845Ash, green16.5Good1X846Ash, green8.0Good1X847Ash, green12.0Good1X848Ash, green27.0Fair2X849Ash, green15.5Good1X850Ash, green13.0Good1X851Ash, green13.0Good1XI hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date: PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L103MEH003.dwgTree Preservation PlanL1.3TREE PRESERVATION LISTTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost852Elm, American15.5Fair1X853Ash, green23.0Fair1X854Ash, green9.0Fair1X855Ash, green13.0Fair1X856Ash, green9.0Good1X857Ash, green10.0Fair1X858Oak, bur10.5Good1X859Ash, green18.5Fair1X860Ash, green29.0Fair2X861Ash, green9.0Fair1X862Cherry, black9.0Good1X863Cherry, black9.5Good1X864Ash, green13.0Fair1X865Ash, green11.0Good1X866Ash, green8.5Fair1X867Ash, green9.0Fair1X868Ash, green9.5Fair1X869Ash, green8.0Fair1X870Ash, green8.0Fair1X871Oak, bur9.5Good1X872Ash, green12.5Fair1X873Ash, green13.5Fair1X874Cherry, black10.5Good1X875Willow22.0Good1X876Basswood28.0Good2X877Ash, green15.0Fair1X878Cherry, black16.0Good1X879Cherry, black14.5Good1X880Cherry, black8.0Good1X881Ash, green15.0Good1X882Ash, green15.0Fair1X883Ash, green9.5Good1X884Ash, green8.5Fair1X885Ash, green10.0Good1X886Ash, green8.0Fair1X887Ash, green10.5Good1X888Ash, green9.0Fair1X889Ash, green10.5Good1X890Ash, green8.5Fair1891Ash, green31.0Fair1892Ash, green17.5Fair1X893Oak, bur10.0Good1X894Ash, green17.0Fair1X895Oak, bur13.0Good1X896Ash, green18.0Fair1X897Oak, bur9.0Good1X898Ash, green13.5Fair1X899Ash, green8.5Fair1X900Ash, green8.5Fair1X901Ash, green12.5Good1X902Ash, green10.5Fair1903Oak, red13.0Good1X904Ash, green19.0Good1X905Ash, green8.5Fair1X906Ash, green9.0Good1X907Ash, green8.0Good1X908Ash, green9.5Good1X909Oak, bur9.0Good1X910Ash, green8.5Fair1X911Ash, green8.0Fair1X912Ash, green16.5Fair1X913Willow55.0Good3914Ash, green15.0Fair1915Ash, green12.0Good1916Ash, green9.5Good1917Ash, green11.0Good1918Ash, green21.0Good1919Oak, bur8.0Good1920Ash, green11.5Good1921Ash, green33.5Good3922Ash, green8.0Fair1923Willow14.0Fair1924Ash, green8.0Fair1925Ash, green19.0Good2926Ash, green11.0Good1927Ash, green10.5Good1928Ash, green8.5Good1929Ash, green22.0Good1930Ash, green11.0Good1931Ash, green11.5Fair1932Ash, green19.0Good1933Willow21.0Fair1934Ash, green10.0Good1935Ash, green18.5Fair2936Ash, green10.0Good1937Ash, green9.0Good1938Ash, green12.0Good1939Ash, green13.0Good1940Ash, green13.0Good1X941Ash, green8.5Good1X942Ash, green9.5Good2X943Ash, green11.5Good1X944Ash, green12.0Good1X945Ash, green11.0Good1X946Basswood20.5Good2X947Oak, red13.0Good1X948Ash, green11.5Good1X949Elm, American10.5Good1X950Ash, green8.5Good1X951Ash, green12.0Good1X952Ash, green9.5Good1953Ash, green12.5Good2Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost954Ash, green12.5Good1955Ash, green42.0Good1X956Cherry, black8.0Good1X957Ash, green13.0Good1X958Ash, green10.0Good1X959Ash, green8.0Good1X960Ash, green8.0Good1X961Ash, green8.0Good1X962Ash, green10.0Good1X963Boxelder10.5Good1X964Ash, green11.0Good1X965Ash, green9.5Good1X966Oak, bur28.0Good1X967Ash, green13.0Good1X968Ash, green10.0Good1X969Hickory, bitternut12.0Good1X970Ash, green11.0Good1X971Ash, green11.5Good1X972Ash, green12.0Fair1X973Elm, American9.0Good1X974Ironwood8.0Good1X975Oak, bur31.0Good1X976Cherry, black8.5Good1X977Elm, American8.0Good1X978Ash, green8.5Good1X979Oak, bur33.0Good1X980Ash, green8.0Good1X981Ash, green10.0Good1982Ash, green12.0Good1X983Elm, American8.5Good1X984Ash, green10.0Good1X985Ash, green9.0Good1X986Cherry, black10.0Good1X987Ash, green17.0Good1X988Ash, green14.0Good1X989Basswood19.0Good1X990Oak, bur23.0Fair1X991Oak, bur30.0Good1X992Ash, green11.5Good1X993Cherry, black13.0Fair1X994Oak, white36.0Good1X995Ash, green10.0Good1X996Ash, green8.5Good1X997Cherry, black11.5Good1X998Cherry, black8.5Good1X999Ash, green10.5Good1X1000Ash, green8.5Good1X1001Willow68.0Fair1X1002Ash, green9.5Good1X1003Elm, American13.0Good1X1004Ash, green9.5Good1X1005Ash, green11.0Good1X1006Ash, green8.5Good1X1007Ash, green15.5Good1X1008Ash, green12.5Good1X1009Ash, green8.5Good1X1010Ash, green8.0Good1X1011Willow14.0Fair2X1012Cottonwood22.0Good1X1013Willow11.0Good1X1014Cottonwood8.5Good1X1015Cottonwood17.0Good1X1016Cottonwood19.5Good1X1017Ash, green9.5Good1X1018Ash, green10.0Good1X1019Ash, green8.5Good1X1020Ash, green8.5Good1X1021Ash, green10.5Good1X1022Ash, green8.5Good1X1023Willow24.0Good3X1024Ash, green8.0Good1X1025Ash, green16.0Fair2X1026Boxelder13.5Good1X1027Cottonwood36.0Good1X1028Ash, green19.5Good1X1029Boxelder21.0Fair1X1030Ash, green41.0Good4X1031Boxelder15.5Fair1X1032Boxelder22.5Good2X1033Boxelder25.0Fair3X1034Ash, green11.5Good1X1035Elm, American12.5Good1X1036Boxelder11.0Good1X1037Boxelder9.5Good1X1038Boxelder26.0Fair3X1039Boxelder17.0Fair5X1040Boxelder12.0Good11041Boxelder9.0Good21042Ash, green20.0Good41043Boxelder9.0Good1X1044Boxelder9.5Good1X1045Boxelder25.0Fair2X1046Boxelder14.0Good1X1047Ash, green9.5Good1X1048Ash, green21.0Fair1X1049Basswood14.0Fair31050Basswood9.5Good11051Basswood20.0Fair1X1052Boxelder15.0Good1XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost1053Boxelder20.0Fair4X1054Boxelder8.5Fair2X1055Ash, green10.0Fair2X1056Boxelder9.0Fair1X1057Boxelder11.0Good1X1058Boxelder10.0Fair1X1059Boxelder10.0Good1X1060Ash, green9.0Good1X1061Ash, green13.0Fair41062Ash, green8.5Fair2X1063Ash, green9.0Good11064Ash, green8.0Good11065Ash, green9.0Fair11066Boxelder25.0Fair51067Cottonwood17.0Good1X1068Boxelder15.0Good1X1069Cottonwood9.5Good1X1070Boxelder8.5Good1X1071Boxelder10.0Good1X1072Boxelder8.0Good1X1073Boxelder10.5Good1X1074Boxelder8.5Good1X1075Boxelder15.0Fair1X1076Boxelder10.0Good1X1077Boxelder28.0Fair3X1078Ash, green8.5Good1X1079Boxelder8.0Good1X1080Boxelder8.5Good1X1081Boxelder11.0Fair1X1082Elm, American8.5Good1X1083Boxelder8.5Fair1X1084Boxelder14.0Fair3X1085Boxelder13.0Fair3X1086Boxelder19.0Good1X1087Boxelder19.0Good1X1088Boxelder14.5Fair1X1089Ash, green14.0Good2X1090Boxelder11.0Good11091Ash, green15.0Good2X1092Ash, green11.5Good1X1093Cottonwood14.5Good1X1094Ash, green16.5Good1X1095Boxelder18.0Fair2X1096Ash, green18.0Good1X1097Ash, green13.5Fair1X1098Ash, green12.0Fair1X1099Ash, green17.5Good11100Ash, green10.0Good11101Boxelder10.0Good11102Ash, green8.0Good11103Ash, green8.0Good11104Ash, green11.0Good11105Ash, green11.0Good11106Ash, green9.5Good11107Ash, green8.5Good11108Ash, green9.5Good11109Ash, green8.0Good11110Ash, green12.0Good11111Ash, green17.0Good11112Ash, green9.5Good1X1113Ash, green8.0Good1X1114Ash, green12.0Good1X1115Aspen11.0Good1X1116Boxelder8.0Good1X1117Boxelder21.0Good1X1118Ash, green9.0Good1X1119Ash, green9.5Fair1X1120Ash, green8.5Good1X1121Ash, green8.0Good1X1122Boxelder17.5Good1X1123Ash, green8.0Good1X1124Boxelder16.0Good11125Ash, green10.0Good1X1126Boxelder9.0Good1X1127Ash, green9.0Good1X1128Elm, American9.0Good1X1129Ash, green12.0Good1X1130Ash, green10.0Fair1X1131Ash, green12.0Good1X1132Boxelder11.5Good1X1133Boxelder12.5Fair11134Willow28.0Fair11135Ash, green14.0Good11136Elm, American10.0Good11137Ash, green8.0Good11138Ash, green9.5Good11139Ash, green10.0Fair11140Ash, green10.0Fair11141Ash, green8.0Good11142Ash, green8.0Good11143Ash, green9.5Good11144Ash, green10.5Good11145Ash, green8.5Good11146Ash, green9.5Good1Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost1147Ash, green8.0Good11148Ash, green9.5Good11149Ash, green13.5Good11150Elm, American17.5Good11151Elm, American13.5Good1X1152Boxelder11.0Good1X1153Boxelder8.0Good1X1154Boxelder20.0Good1X1155Boxelder25.0Fair1X1156Boxelder13.5Good1X1157Ash, green18.5Fair21158Ash, green17.5Good11159Ash, green11.5Good11160Ash, green14.5Good1X1161Cottonwood12.0Good1X1162Cottonwood14.5Good1X1163Ash, green27.0Fair4X1201Oak, bur19.5Good1X1202Oak, bur29.0Good1X1203Ash, green10.5Good1X1204Elm, American10.0Good1X1205Elm, American16.0Fair1X1206Oak, bur29.0Good1X1207Ash, green8.0Good1X1208Ash, green8.0Good1X1209Boxelder8.5Fair1X1210Cherry, black11.0Good1X1211Ash, green8.0Good1X1212Elm, American16.5Good1X1213Ash, green8.0Good1X1214Ash, green8.5Good1X1215Ash, green14.5Good1X1216Ash, green13.5Good1X1217Ash, green8.5Good1X1218Oak, bur22.5Good1X1219Elm, American9.5Good1X1220Oak, bur11.0Fair1X1221Oak, bur27.0Good1X1222Ash, green11.5Good1X1223Oak, bur14.5Good1X1224Hackberry13.5Good1X1225Ash, green27.0Good1X1226Boxelder13.0Good1X1227Cherry, black10.0Good1X1228Basswood9.0Good1X1229Ash, green8.0Good1X1230Ash, green8.0Good1X1231Basswood15.5Good1X1232Elm, American8.5Good1X1233Ash, green9.5Good1X1234Basswood18.0Fair1X1235Basswood28.0Fair1X1236Ash, green8.0Fair1X1237Ash, green11.5Good1X1238Ash, green32.0Fair3X1239Ash, green12.5Good1X1240Ash, green15.0Good1X1241Ash, green11.0Good1X1242Ash, green11.5Good1X1243Ash, green25.0Fair4X1244Boxelder14.5Fair1X1245Oak, bur17.0Good1X1246Ash, green8.0Good1X1247Boxelder10.0Good1X1248Oak, bur13.0Fair1X1249Elm, American9.0Good1X1250Ash, green10.0Good1X1251Elm, American13.0Good1X1252Ash, green12.5Fair1X1253Boxelder10.5Fair1X1254Elm, American13.0Good1X1255Elm, Siberian15.0Good1X1256Ash, green9.5Good1X1257Oak, bur20.0Good1X1258Elm, Siberian8.5Good1X1259Oak, bur16.0Good1X1260Oak, bur30.0Good1X1261Oak, bur14.5Good1X1262Elm, red9.5Good1X1263Elm, American13.5Good1X1264Elm, red8.5Good1X1265Oak, bur23.0Good1X1266Oak, bur22.5Good1X1267Oak, bur32.0Good1X1268Oak, bur23.0Good1X1269Oak, bur29.0Good1X1270Elm, red8.0Good1X1271Oak, bur21.5Fair1X1272Elm, American17.5Good1X1273Ash, green16.0Good1X1274Basswood26.0Fair1X1275Ash, green13.0Good1X1276Ash, green14.0Good1X1277Ash, green9.0Fair1X1278Oak, red12.5Good1X1279Ash, green23.0Good1X1280Ash, green8.0Fair1X1281Ash, green11.5Good1X1282Ash, green12.0Good1XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost1283Ash, green20.5Good1X1284Basswood28.0Good2X1285Ash, green9.5Good1X1286Ash, green10.0Good1X1287Basswood10.0Good1X1288Ash, green10.0Good1X1289Ash, green8.5Good1X1290Maple, sugar19.5Fair1X1291Elm, American20.5Good1X1292Ash, green10.0Good1X1293Oak, bur23.0Good1X1294Elm, red10.5Good1X1295Oak, bur24.0Good1X1296Ash, green16.5Good1X1297Elm, American10.0Fair1X1298Oak, bur28.0Good1X1299Oak, bur24.0Good1X1300Oak, white12.5Good1X1301Oak, bur30.5Good1X1302Boxelder9.5Good1X1303Ash, green17.0Fair1X1304Oak, bur14.5Fair1X1305Elm, red8.0Good1X1306Boxelder8.5Good1X1307Boxelder10.5Good1X1308Boxelder9.0Fair1X1309Cherry, black9.5Good1X1310Ash, green26.0Good1X1311Cherry, black11.0Fair1X1312Ash, green8.0Good1X1313Cherry, black16.0Good1X1314Basswood19.0Good1X1315Ash, green10.5Good1X1316Boxelder11.5Fair1X1317Ash, green10.5Good1X1318Ash, green15.5Good1X1319Ash, green10.0Good1X1320Ash, green10.0Good1X1321Ash, green9.0Good1X1322Basswood8.5Good1X1323Ash, green18.0Fair1X1324Elm, American8.0Fair1X1325Ash, green9.0Good1X1326Ash, green8.0Good1X1327Basswood26.0Fair1X1328Ash, green8.5Good1X1329Basswood8.0Good1X1330Ash, green8.0Good1X1331Boxelder8.0Fair1X1332Cherry, black15.5Good1X1333Ash, green19.0Fair1X1334Elm, red9.0Good1X1335Ash, green25.0Good1X1336Elm, red9.5Good1X1337Cherry, black14.5Good1X1338Boxelder8.5Good1X1339Boxelder9.0Good1X1340Boxelder8.5Good1X1341Boxelder8.5Good1X1342Boxelder11.5Good1X1343Ash, green9.5Good1X1344Oak, red30.0Good1X1345Cherry, black8.0Good1X1346Oak, bur23.5Good1X1347Ash, green29.0Fair1X1348Oak, red11.5Good1X1349Oak, red36.0Fair1X1350Oak, bur19.5Good1X1351Oak, bur11.0Good1X1352Oak, bur18.5Good1X1353Oak, bur15.5Good1X1354Ash, green21.0Good1X1355Oak, bur16.5Good1X1356Basswood8.0Good1X1357Basswood28.0Good1X1358Cherry, black12.5Good1X1359Oak, bur19.5Good1X1360Oak, bur36.0Good1X1361Oak, red11.5Good1X1362Basswood20.5Good1X1363Basswood13.5Fair1X1364Basswood11.0Good1X1365Ash, green12.5Good1X1366Ash, green18.0Good2X1367Ash, green13.5Good2X1368Ash, green14.0Fair1X1369Elm, American8.5Good1X1370Ash, green9.0Good1X1371Ash, green11.0Good1X1372Oak, bur16.5Fair1X1373Oak, bur37.0Fair1X1374Oak, bur26.0Good1X1375Ash, green9.0Fair1X1376Oak, bur31.5Fair1X1377Basswood9.0Good1X1378Cherry, black10.0Good1X1379Oak, bur34.0Good1X1380Ash, green12.0Fair1X1381Basswood15.0Good1XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost1382Oak, bur23.0Good1X1383Ash, green8.5Good1X1384Oak, red9.0Good1X1385Basswood8.0Good1X1386Ash, green10.0Good1X1387Ash, green40.0Fair3X1388Cherry, black15.5Good1X1389Oak, red8.5Good1X1390Ash, green10.5Good1X1391Oak, red19.5Good1X1392Basswood8.0Good1X1393Boxelder8.0Fair1X1394Ash, green9.5Good1X1395Ash, green8.0Good1X1396Ash, green9.5Good1X1397Ash, green8.0Good1X1398Ash, green35.0Fair5X1399Elm, American16.0Good1X1400Ash, green8.5Good1X5109TRDE 38X5110TRDE 44X5111TRDE 44X70006 Sugar Maple BD3470007 White Oak2870008 Red Oak3870009 Basswood1270010 Basswood970011 Red Oak1670012 Green and White Ash1370013 Basswood9X70014 Green and White Ash8X70015 Black Cherry12X70016 Bitternut Hickory12X70017 Bitternut Hickory10X70018 Bitternut Hickory8X70019 White Oak34X70020 American Elm11X70021 Bur Oak34X70022 Bitternut Hickory19X70023 Red Oak PDBD36X70024 American Elm BD10X70025 American Elm BD8X70026 Bitternut Hickory12X70027 Green and White Ash10X70028 Sugar Maple9X70029 Bitternut Hickory8X70030 Bitternut Hickory970031 Bitternut Hickory970032 American Elm870033 Basswood970034 Sugar Maple970035 Bitternut Hickory1370036 Green and White Ash18X70037 Green and White Ash X970038 Green and White Ash1070039 Green and White Ash1470040 American Elm1170041 Sugar Maple1270042 Sugar Maple1370043 Sugar Maple870044 American Elm1070045 Green and White Ash970046 Green and White Ash870047 Green and White Ash1470048 Bitternut Hickory1270049 Green and White Ash1070050 Bitternut Hickory970051 Green and White Ash970052 Black Cherry1070053 Green and White Ash BD1070054 Bitternut Hickory1170055 Bitternut Hickory1070056 Green and White Ash970061 Green and White Ash1070062 Green and White Ash870063 Green and White Ash16X70064 Green and White Ash9X70065 Green and White Ash10X70066 Bitternut Hickory8X70067 Bitternut Hickory13X70068 Green and White Ash10X70069 Bitternut Hickory11X70070 Bitternut Hickory10X70071 Bitternut Hickory9X70072 Sugar Maple8X70073 Basswood9X70074 Red Oak8X70075 Bur Oak38X70076 White Oak38X70077 Bitternut Hickory9X70078 American Elm10X70079 Red Oak36X70080 American Elm BD11X70081 Green and White Ash8X70082 Bitternut Hickory10X70083 Green and White Ash8X70084 Black Cherry PD BD16X70085 Bitternut Hickory8XI hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date: PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L104MEH003.dwgTree Preservation PlanL1.4TREE PRESERVATION LISTTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost70086 Green and White Ash9X70087 Red Oak13X70088 Red Oak8X70089 Basswood10X70090 Basswood8X70091 Basswood8X70092 Basswood14X70093 Green and White Ash9X70094 Bitternut Hickory8X70095 Green and White Ash13X70096 Bitternut Hickory9X70097 Aspen12X70098 American Elm8X70099 Green and White Ash10X70100 Bitternut Hickory10X70101 Green and White Ash970102 White Oak3070103 Ironwood1070104 Ironwood870105 Ironwood870106 Ironwood870107 Ironwood870108 American Elm1070109 American Elm870110 Green and White Ash1770111 Green and White Ash1070112 Bitternut Hickory1470113 White Oak PD BD3470114 Ironwood PD10X70115 Sugar Maple870116 Green and White Ash870117 Green and White Ash870118 White Oak2470119 White Oak2670120 Bitternut Hickory1170121 Ironwood870122 Green and White Ash1270123 Green and White Ash1170124 Bur Oak26X70125 White Oak3470126 White Oak2870127 Green and White Ash10X70128 Green and White Ash9X70129 Green and White Ash9X70130 Bitternut Hickory10X70131 Green and White Ash12X70132 Green and White Ash8X70133 Green and White Ash9X70136 Bitternut Hickory1070137 Green and White Ash PD BD11XX70138 Green and White Ash16X70139 Green and White Ash10X70140 Basswood10X70141 Green and White Ash12X70142 Green and White Ash11X70143 Green and White Ash8X70144 Basswood10X70145 Green and White Ash9X70146 Black Cherry9X70147 Green and White Ash14X70148 Basswood10X70149 Basswood12X70150 Green and White Ash13X70151 Green and White Ash10X70152 Green and White Ash8X70153 Green and White Ash14X70154 Green and White Ash970155 Green and White Ash970156 Bitternut Hickory970157 Green and White Ash870158 Green and White Ash870159 Sugar Maple970160 Green and White Ash1270161 Basswood870162 Green and White Ash1170163 Basswood1070164 Green and White Ash1070165 Green and White Ash10X70166 Green and White Ash10X70167 Green and White Ash9X70168 Bitternut Hickory12X70169 Black Cherry10X70170 Basswood12X70171 Basswood10X70172 Black Cherry9X70173X70174 Red Oak12X70175 Basswood8X70176 Bur Oak30X70177 Bur Oak20X70178 Bur Oak34X70179 Basswood26X70180 American Elm PD10X70181 Bitternut Hickory9X70182 Bitternut Hickory8X70183 Green and White Ash10X70184 Green and White Ash10X70185 Basswood12X70186 Green and White Ash8XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost70187 Green and White Ash8X70188 Bitternut Hickory8X70189 Green and White Ash12X70190 Green and White Ash10X70191 Green and White Ash870192 Green and White Ash1070193 Green and White Ash1170194 Green and White Ash870195 Green and White Ash1270196 Green and White Ash1470197 Bitternut Hickory1170198 Green and White Ash1570199 Green and White Ash1370200 Green and White Ash870201 Bur Oak2670202 Bur Oak BD2370203 White Oak2870206 Green and White Ash1070207 Green and White Ash1270208 American Elm BD1470209 Green and White Ash970210 Green and White Ash970211 American Elm970212 Red Oak2370213 Bur Oak2270214 Bur Oak1270215DSW 9X70216 Green and White Ash870217 Green and White Ash1070218 Green and White Ash870219 Green and White Ash970220 Green and White Ash970221 Green and White Ash1170222 Green and White Ash1170223 Green and White Ash1270224 Black Cherry970225 Black Cherry8X70226 Black Cherry8X70227 Basswood8X70228 Basswood10XX70229 Green and White Ash9X70230 Bur Oak24X70231 Black Cherry BD PD1270233 Green and White Ash1270234 Basswood970235 Green and White Ash1170236 Green and White Ash1570237 Bitternut Hickory970238 Green and White Ash870239 Green and White Ash870240 American Elm8X70241 White Oak12X70242 Red Oak1570243 Red Oak1270244 Bur Oak2670245 Red Oak870246 Red Oak1070247 Basswood10X70248 Basswood10X70249 Basswood12X70250 American Elm PD9X70251 Aspen14X70252 Aspen12X70253 Sugar Maple54X70254 Red Oak10X70255 Red Oak10X70256 Basswood9X70257 Bitternut Hickory PD20X70258 Basswood8X70259 Bur Oak9X70260 American Elm PD8X70261 Red Oak1070264X70265 Green and White Ash1270266 Green and White Ash1270267 Green and White Ash1270268 Green and White Ash870269 Green and White Ash970270 Basswood870272 Green and White Ash1170273 Green and White Ash970274 Green and White Ash970275 Green and White Ash1070276 White Oak2070277 Green and White Ash1070278 Bitternut Hickory870279 Black Cherry870280 Green and White Ash870281 Bitternut Hickory970282 Black Cherry1170283 Sugar Maple970284 White Oak1870285 Green and White Ash870286 Basswood1070287 Red Oak1170288 Basswood1170289 Green and White Ash970290 Green and White Ash1170291 Green and White Ash8Tree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost70292 Green and White Ash1670293 Green and White Ash1270294 Basswood870295 American Elm1070296 Bur Oak2270297 Basswood870298 Ironwood870299DTR 970300 Eastern Red Cedar1070301 Green and White Ash870302 Bur Oak3270303 Green and White Ash870304 Ironwood1070305 Green and White Ash1370306 Green and White Ash1270307 Green and White Ash1070308 Green and White Ash870309 Ironwood PD BD1070310 Black Cherry970311 Ironwood970312 Black Cherry970313 White Oak3270314 American Elm870315 Bur Oak2670316 Black Cherry970317 Ironwood870318 Black Cherry1470319 Red Oak1670320 Bur Oak2670321 Green and White Ash1170322 Green and White Ash1170323 Green and White Ash970324 Green and White Ash PD1170325 Green and White Ash1670326 Green and White Ash1470327 Green and White Ash970328 Green and White Ash1070329 Bitternut Hickory870330 Green and White Ash11PD70331 Basswood1070332 Basswood1270333 American Elm970334 Red Oak1270335 Red Oak1070336 Black Cherry1070337 Green and White Ash9X70338 Green and White Ash870339 Green and White Ash970340 Red Oak1070341 Bur Oak3670342 American Elm970343 Red Oak1170344 Green and White Ash PD1370345 White Oak3270346 Green and White Ash870347 Black Cherry1170348 Green and White Ash1170349 Green and White Ash1170350 Green and White Ash PD970351 Sugar Maple1370352 Green and White Ash970353 Bur Oak3170354 Bitternut Hickory870355 Green and White Ash1270356 American Elm PD BD970359 Bitternut Hickory1570360 Green and White Ash870361 Green and White Ash1370364 Aspen12X70365 Green and White Ash8X70366 Green and White Ash10X70367 Green and White Ash11X70368 Green and White Ash11X70369 Green and White Ash12X70370 Green and White Ash12X70371 Aspen10X70372 Green and White Ash12X70373 Aspen10X70374 American Elm10X70375 Green and White Ash9X70376 Basswood8X70377 Bur Oak26X70378 Bur Oak10X70379 American Elm PD10X70380 Bur Oak15X70381 Bur Oak PD BD20X70382 Bur Oak19XX70383 Green and White Ash PD26X70384 Black Cherry PD BD10X70385 American Elm16X70386 Bur Oak30X70387 American Elm18X70388 Bur Oak11X70389 Bitternut Hickory8X70390 Red Oak13X70391 Red Oak10X70392 Red Oak11X70393 Red Oak10X70394 American Elm18XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost70395 Basswood9X70396 Basswood10X70397 Red Oak8X70398 American Elm8X70399 American Elm8X70400 Bur Oak10X70401 Green and White Ash9X70402 Green and White Ash9X70403 Green and White Ash10X70404 Green and White Ash9X70405 Bur Oak9X70406 Red Oak9X70407 Red Oak9X70408 Bur Oak9X70409 Bitternut Hickory10X70410 Bur Oak9X70411 Bur Oak9X70412 Bur Oak10X70413 American Elm10X70414 American Elm1270416 Green and White Ash10X70417 Bitternut Hickory1270418 Green and White Ash14X70419 Green and White Ash1070420 Sugar Maple1270421 Black Cherry970422 Green and White Ash870423 Green and White Ash1270424 Green and White Ash1970425 Ironwood870426 Ironwood9X70427 Ironwood870428 Green and White Ash1070429 Red Oak1070430 Red Oak BD870431 Bur Oak970432 Green and White Ash970433 Green and White Ash1170434 Bur Oak870435 Red Oak1470436 Red Oak1070437 Green and White Ash1170438 Green and White Ash870439 Boxelder1370440 Red Oak1670441 American Elm1070442 American Elm1070443 Green and White Ash1070444 Red Oak870445 Red Oak1070446 Red Oak1170447 Red Oak1370448 Green and White Ash970449 Green and White Ash870450 Green and White Ash870451 Green and White Ash1170452 Green and White Ash1170453 Bitternut Hickory870454 Black Cherry1270455 Bur Oak25X70456 Bur Oak29X70457 Bur Oak2370458 Green and White Ash1470459 Green and White Ash12X70460 Green and White Ash10X70461 Bur Oak32X70462 Green and White Ash12X70463 Bur Oak26X70464 Green and White Ash10X70465 Green and White Ash9X70466 Green and White Ash11X70467 Green and White Ash10X70468 Green and White Ash11X70469 Green and White Ash18X70470 Green and White Ash9X70471 Green and White Ash12X70472 Red Oak11X70473 Green and White Ash14X70474 Green and White Ash12X70475 Basswood X12X70476 Green and White Ash8X70477 Green and White Ash10X70478 Green and White Ash9X70479 Black Cherry12X70480 American Elm13X70484 Green and White Ash9X70485 Green and White Ash13XX70486 Green and White Ash11X70487 American Elm8X70488 Green and White Ash13X70489 Bur Oak BD15X70490 Green and White Ash10X70491 Green and White Ash8X70492 Bur Oak24X70493 Black Cherry PD12X70494 Black Cherry8X70495 Green and White Ash9X70496 American Elm11X70497 Green and White Ash12XTree #SpeciesDBHConditionStemsLost70498 Green and White Ash9X70499 Green and White Ash11X70500 American Elm10X70501 Green and White Ash8X70502 Bur Oak10X70503 Green and White Ash8X70504 Black Cherry12X70505 Bur Oak32X70506 Green and White Ash13X70507 Green and White Ash10X70508 Green and White Ash13X70509 Green and White Ash10X70510 Green and White Ash10X70511 Green and White Ash10X70512 Black Cherry8X70513 Green and White Ash8X70514 Green and White Ash9X70515 Basswood16X70516 Black Cherry10X70517 Bitternut Hickory8X70518 Basswood8X70519 Basswood8X70520 Green and White Ash9X70521 Green and White Ash9X70522 Bur Oak30X70523 Green and White Ash8X70524 Green and White Ash10X70525 Bur Oak22X70526 Green and White Ash12X70527 Green and White Ash14X70528 Green and White Ash10X70529 Green and White Ash14X70530 Green and White Ash13X70531 Green and White Ash11X70532 American Elm9X70533 Bur Oak55X70534 Green and White Ash770535 Green and White Ash1070539 Black Cherry9X70540 Black Cherry8X70541 Basswood9X70542 Red Oak970543 Green and White Ash870544 Black Cherry BD870545 Green and White Ash970546 Bitternut Hickory970547 American Elm12X70548 Green and White Ash8X70549 Green and White Ash9X70550 Green and White Ash14X70551 Bitternut Hickory16X70552 Green and White Ash8X70553 Green and White Ash12X70554 Green and White Ash8X70555 Black Cherry10X70556 Green and White Ash14X70557 Green and White Ash14X70558 Green and White Ash8X70559 Black Cherry12X70560 Green and White Ash11X70561 Green and White Ash10X70562 Green and White Ash9X70563 Eastern Red Cedar9X70564 Green and White Ash9I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date: CABXCABXCABXEMEMCABXCABXCABXCABXGASWINV=984.36INV 27 RCP>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OEOEOEOEOEOE OEOEOEOE>>>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>OTVOTV >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>>IIIIIIIII>I>I IIIIIII>>>>IIIWETLAND 2 DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)182185WETLAND 1e WETLAND 1d WETLAND 1bWETLAND 1g 660>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>EX. 6" DIPEX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIP DNR WETLAND 27-493WNORTH PORTIONOHW = 978.3FLOODPLAIN = 979.2( As of 8/10/20)980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6 9 8 0 . 6 980. 6980.6W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-1WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - N o r t h WETLAND1a - South WL 1h498499500501502503504505506536537538539592593MB1234561416171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596162636471737489909195979899100130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151153154155156157163164165166167168169170171172173183184186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390401402403404405406407410411412413414415417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434436438439440441443444445446447448449450451452453457458459460461462464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485488489490491492493494495496497507508509510511512513514519520521522523524526527528529530532533534535540541542543546547548549550551553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>IIII>>>700067000770008700097001070011700127003070031700327003370034700357003770038700397004070041700427004370044700457004670047700487004970050700517005270053700547005570056700617006270101701027010370106701097011270113701147011570116701177011870119701207012170122701237012570126701367015470155701567015770158701597016070161701627016370164701917019270193701947019570196701977019870199702007020170202702057020670207702087020970212702137021470215702177021870219702207022170222702237022470232702337023470235702367023770238702397024270243702447024570246702657026670267702687026970271702727027370274702757027670277702847028570286702877028870289702907029170292702937029470295702967029770298702997030070301703047030570306703077030970310703117031270314703157031670317703187031970320703217032270323703247032570326703277032870329703307033170332703337033470335703367033770338703397034070342703437034470346703477034870350703517035270355703587036070363704167041870419704207042170422704277042870429704307043170432704357043670437704387043970440704417044470445704467044770448704497045070451704527045370454704577045870534705387054270543705447054570546>80180280380480580680780880981081181281381481581681881982282382582682782883183283683984089089190291391491591691791891992092192292392492592692792892993093193293393493593693793893995295395498110401041104210491050106110631064106510661090109911001101110211031104110511061107110811091110111111241133113411351136113711381139114011411142114311441145114611471148114911501157115811591164116511661167116811691170117111721173117411751176117711781179118011811182118311841185118611871188118911901191119211931194119511961197119811991200140114021403140414051406140714081409141014111412141314141415141614171418141914201421142214231424142514261427142814291430143114321433143414351436143714381439144014411442144314441445144614471448144914501451145214531454145514561457145814591460146114621463146414651466146714681469147014711472147314741475147614771478147914801481148214831484148514861487148814891490149114921493149414951496149714981499150015011502150315041505150615071508150915101511151212345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 74277OUTLOT AOUTLOT B123456789BLK 27653421894323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK4BLK 5112345678910105BLK 1412345678910111213141516171824'22'36'24'22'40'24'22'40'24'22'40'22'24'22'24'22'24'22'24'192021222324252627282930313240'32'32'36'36'32'36'32'36'32'32'36'32'32'1516171824'22'40'22'24'33BLK 8BLOCK 7NURP POND(3P)NURP POND(1P)NURP POND(9P)NURP POND(11eP)NURP POND(5P)NURP POND(11P)POND(16P)POND(19P)POND(18P)POND(20P)POND(14P)POND(15P)POND(12P)POND(13P)POND(17P)PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 981.84PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 979.07OUTLOT CWET 1hWET 4WET 5bWET 5aWET 11fPOND 23WET 1eWET 2WET 1dWET 1cWET 1a-northWET 1b1WET 1b%4.6%5.4%5.4%3.3%2.6%5.3%4.7%3.8%5.0%8.1%9.2%5.4%4.2%3.6%4.8%6.0%7.2%6.8%4.8%3.2%2.6%2.7%3.7 %3.7%4.6%8.3%7.1%4.7%3.7%2.5%3.7%3.0%2.4%7.8%7.1 %4.0%3.6%4.2 %3.3%4.3%4.8%3.9%4.7%7.1DROP 2C%2.5%2.5%3.8%3.6%2.1%2.5%2.5%6.6DROP2CDROP2C%4.5%6.3%6.9%7.3%7.5%6.3%5.6%4.4%4.5%4.5%5.3%5.5 %5.6%5.9%4.6%5.1%5.6%4.9%4.7%4.8%7.1%3.8 GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=996.0988.5FBWO985.8GF=995.5988.0FBWO985.3GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=992.6986.5FBWO986.0GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=995.5988.0FB995.3GF=995.0987.5FB994.8GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=993.0885.5FB992.8GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5% 3.7 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0887.5FBLO990.0%8.7%5.0%4.5GF=997.0889.5FBWO989.0 GF=996.5889.0FBLO991.5GF=997.5890.0FBLO992.5EOF-0+001+002+003+003+14.73EOFGF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0 GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF = 994.0 EOFGF=993.5886.0FBLO988.5GF=993.0885.5FBLO988.0%5.2%7.1%7.1%8.0%5.8%2.9%3.2%5.5%4.8GF=993.5886.0FBLO988.5 %3.2%9.3%4.6GF=996.0888.5FBWO988.0GF=998.0890.5FBWO990.0%8.0%8.0%7.9 %8.1%6.6 GF=993.8887.0FBLO989.5%9.2GF=998.0890.5FBWO990.0 GF=997.0889.5FBWO989.0 GF = 994.5GF = 994.5GF = 994.0GF = 993.5 %7.6%8.4%8.4%8.5%3.8DRP1C % 4.8 GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0%8.0%6.4%3.8%2.4GF = 992.5GF = 992.5%1.0%1.9%1.0%1.0%0.7%0.7%3.0%2.5%1.5 %7.1%4.8 %3.2%2.8%3.0%4.2%6.8 % 5. 2 %3.5 %4.8%4.3%3. 3 %5.0%2.3%2.7%3.1%2.3%3.8%3.1%5.4%8.1%7.1%1.4%4.7%4.9%-2.0%0.4%2.5%2.5%2. 0 %5. 0988986 EOFEOF EOFEOF983 GF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=992.1986.0FBWO985.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.0986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=991.0983.5FB990.8GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=996.5 989.0 FBWO 988.5 G F = 9 9 6 . 5 9 8 9 . 0 F BWO 9 8 8 . 5 GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=993.5986.0FB993.3GF=993.7986.2FB993.5GF=993.0985.5FB992.8GF=992.0984.5FB991.8GF=991.0983.5FB990.8GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2993.3986.5FBWO986.0 EOFEOFEOF985980979985985985994 988992984 992994 992984982984988986992984990994990982996996996990994986994992994 996994998996992994996994996994996992992992990986 988984 984990 984986984986982986986986985982980983980982 983994992 988992988984990984988988100410021000998996994992990980984985982984980978976988984980990990988988986986994 992 990990990992986990985983.098 8 986984986986 986 984 982 980 986 980982984986984984986985986992996994 996 994 992994996996994 986986988986986 990986 994980984 986 990 9909889949981002984980984988988992 990990990994994994994 988 990992994990992992990982986984990986992988992986990988986990992988994992 996990986996992986996986986990996982984986992990994994988 984992992990986986992994994 990 986994986994994994994994994 994994990 986994994992986990994994986 986988990988992994994994988992986986992986986992 994 99 6 9969889929909 9 2988994 986990994 994990992994988992 994 992992994996994994996990994984988985988992984 992992 990990988992 994983985 985983988988988987985984987990988 987 982981981 982 983984983982980984985982982986986986986 984983982980979984984984984 987986985984983987987986987987992988988 985 985 985986985986990988GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2GF=996.2988.7FBWO988.2992992 996996983985982981980978976974973983985980974985982980976973973974978981982983985973974978981982983986982983DROP1C992990GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 VMA%8.0VMA%10.0VMAVMA%8.0 EOF2 ABBA2 PIST1 ABBA2 PIGL2 ABBA1 PIST4 THOC3 PIST1 LALA3 PIGL1 ABBA5 PIGL1 LALA1 ABBA3 PIGL3 ABBA4 PIGL4 LALA3 PIST10 PIGL5 ABBA4 LALA2 PIST3 ABBA2 PIST2 LALA2 PIGL2 ABBA1 LALA2 PIGL2 LALA4 ABBA1 LALA3 PIGL1 LALA1 PIGL1 PIST3 THOC2 ABBA1 PIST1 ABBA3 PIGL1 PIST3 PIGL2 ABBA3 PIGL3 THOC1 PIST2 PIGL3 ABBA1 PIST5 THOC2 ABBA1 PIGL1 PIST2 ABBA1 LALA3 PIGL1 PIST3 THOC3 PIGL1 ABBA1 ABBA1 ABBAWWREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSEIRRIGATIONLINEREUSEIRRIGATIONLINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE IRRIGATION FILTRATIONAND PUMP HOUSE ANDBACKUP WELLIRRIGATION FILTRATION ANDPUMP HOUSE AND BACKUP WELL14TYP.L2.2LANDSCAPE PLANSOUTHL2.3LANDSCAPE PLANSOUTHCHIPPEWA ROAD MOHAWK ROADMOHAWK ROAD TREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.15ORNAMENTAL TREE30`H X 15`W2"CALB & B254OVERSTORY TREE60`H X 30`W2"CALB & BEVERGREEN TREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.ABBA39ABIES BALSAMEA / BALSAM FIR60`H X 30`W6` HT.B & BLALA18LARIX LARICINA / TAMARACK70`H X 50`W6` HT.B & BPIGL53PICEA GLAUCA / WHITE SPRUCE50`H X 20`W6` HT.B & BPIST20PINUS STROBUS / EASTERN WHITE PINE70` H X 40` W6` HT.B & BTHOC18THUJA OCCIDENTALIS / AMERICAN ARBORVITAE40`H X 15`W6` HT.B & BREUSE IRRIGATION LINENORTH0150300PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L201MEH003.dwgLANDSCAPE PLANOVERALLL2.1Contact Utility Service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning.Coordinate installation with Contractors performing related work.Seed mixture (Specify Native Seed Mix) as defined in current MNDOT Seeding Manual. Native Seeds shall be of Minnesota (or as specified) origin and certifiedby the Minnesota Crop Improvement Association (MCIA). Provide verifying documentation to the Owner 30 days minimum prior to installation.Plant material shall conform to the American Association of Nurserymen Standards and be of hardy stock, free from disease, infestation, damage, anddisfiguration. For discrepancy between the number of plants on the Schedule and the number shown on the Drawing, the Drawing shall govern.All existing deciduous/coniferous trees are to be trimmed of dead wood and pruned to a natural uniform shape.Planting soil shall consist of 4 parts topsoil to 1 part peat humus, with 3 pounds of commercial fertilizer added per cubic yard.Spread a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil and seed/sod all turf areas disturbed by Construction.Follow MNDOT Seeding Manual for planting instructions for establishment of native seed and provide coordination for required erosion prevention andsediment control.See Details for depth of planting soil.Install a 4-foot diameter shredded hardwood mulch dish around trees not placed within a Shrub or Perennial Planting Bed. Vinyl edging is not required, unlessnoted otherwise.In-ground irrigation systems may not connect to city water, they must connect to pond or well water.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.GENERAL NOTESLANDSCAPE NOTESThis Landscape Plan has been developed to meet three landscaping requirements as defined by code: (A) Lot landscaping for R-1,R-2, R-3 zoning, (B) Buffer Yards, and (C) Tree Replacement.(A)R-1, R-2, and R-3 requirements - tree locations have been provided as a guide for lot builders who are responsible forrequired landscaping at the time of home construction. A generic tree symbol is used in these instances. Tree speciesselection for these must conform with the provided list. No species should comprise more than 25% of the total planting.(B)Buffer Yards - tree locations and species have been provided to conform with City calculations and requirements. Anymodifications to this plan must be approved by the City of Medina at the time of building permit.(C)Tree replacement - areas for tree replacement have been hatched. Replacement trees may be planted in these areas at 40feet on center. Where these areas overlap with buffer yards, the buffer yard trees have been subtracted from the treereplacement area. Tree species selection for these must conform with the provided list. No species should comprise morethan 25% of the total planting.For construction Staking and Surveying services contact Landform at 612.252.9070.This page shows the overall plan, tree replacement areas, planting schedule, and allowed tree species. See Sheets 2.2 and 2.3 formore detailed view of lot landscaping and buffer yard plantings.1.2.3.Front Yard Trees:Minimum Size:Location:Type:LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS - LOTS AND BUFFER YARDSR1 and R2Yard Trees:Minimum Size:Type:R3 - R5Two overstory trees per lotDeciduous trees should be minimum 2 caliper inches measured 4 feet off the groundConiferous trees should be minimum 6 feet in heightFifteen feet from front lot line. Applies to both trees for single family dwellings and one tree for two-family dwellingsNative species are required. A variety of tree species are required, no one species should be more than 25% of the total.Final selections should comply with the provided list of trees, which also comply with City tree requirements.One tree per 60 feet of the lot perimeter shall be required. Where a buffer yard is also required, the perimeter may be excluded.Deciduous trees should be minimum 2 caliper inches measured 4 feet off the groundConiferous trees should be minimum 6 feet in heightNative species are required. A variety of tree species are required, no one species should be more than 25% of the total.Final selections should comply with the provided list of trees, which also comply with City tree requirements.Ornamental Trees:Minimum Size:Type:One tree per 120 feet of the lot perimeter shall be required. Where a buffer yard is also required, the perimeter may be excluded.Deciduous trees should be minimum 1.5 caliper inches measured 4 feet off the groundConiferous trees should be minimum 6 feet in heightNative species are required. A variety of tree species are required, no one species should be more than 25% of the total.Final selections should comply with the provided list of trees, which also comply with City tree requirements.Understory Shrubs:Minimum Size:Type:One tree per 40 feet of the lot perimeter shall be required. Where a buffer yard is also required, the perimeter may be excluded.24 inchesPottedBuffer YardsA buffer yard is required:When a developing property is adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district.Along arterial and collector roadways if the property on the opposite side of the roadway is the same or a more intensive zoning district. See City of MedinaZoning Ordinance 828.31 for specific tables and calculations.PLANTING SCHEDULE - LOTS AND BUFFER YARDSACCEPTABLE TREE SPECIES SELECTIONDeciduous TreesBasswood, American (Tilia Americana)Elm, American (Ulmus americana)*Hickory, bitternut (Carya cordiformis)Ironwood (Ostrya virginiana)Maple, Sugar (Acer saccharum)Maple, Red (Acer rubrum)*cultivars resistant to Dutch Elm DiseaseConiferous TreesCedar, Northern White (Thuja occidentalis)Fir, Balsam (Abies balsamea)Spruce, White (Picea Glauca)Pine, Eastern White (Pinus Strobus)Oak, Red (Quercus rubra)Oak, White (Quercus alba)Oak, Bur (Quercus macrocarpa)Oak, Swamp White (Quercus bicolor)Areas for planting replacement treesTree Replacement for loss of Significant TreesTotal Trees Inventoried: 1720Total Trees Removed: 842Allowed Removal (15%): 258Replacement Trees Required: 584Replacement Caliper Inches (smallest 584 trees): 5687Replacement Required by tree size:2.5 caliper inches = 2275 trees3 caliper inches = 1896 trees4 caliper inches = 1422 treesTotal Area = 968,520 S.F. (accounts for trees shown planted in these areas)775 replacement treesLANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS - TREE REPLACEMENT14.LEGENDIrrigationReplacement Trees provided:417 trees for landscaping and buffer yards1192 total treesTree Yield for these areas: 775 (assumes trees planted 40 feet on center = 1250 S.F. per tree)Remaining inches to be paid as a fee tothe city.40'20'(A)(B)(C)(C)(Typ)(B)(Typ)(A)(Typ)(C)(Typ)(B)(Typ)(A)(Typ)14.(Typ)14.(Typ)14.(Typ)14.(Typ)I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date:Floodplain ImpactFloodplain MitigationFloodplain Impact and Mitigation CABXCABXWOEOEOEOE>>>>OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>IIIIII IIIIII>>>>IIIWETLAND 2182185 N89°42'49"W 2676.18S00°20'44"E 2640.483333 333333WETLAND 1e W E T L A N D 1 d W E T L A N D 1 b>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>980.6W E T L A N D 1cWL 1e-11234561416171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596162636471737413013113213313413513613713813914014114214314414514614714814915015115315415515615716316416516616716816917017117217318318418618718818919019119219319419519619719819920022022122222322422522622722822923023123323423523623723823924024124224324424524624724824925025125225325425525625725825926026126226326426526626726826927027127227327427527627727827928028128228328428528628728828929029129229329429529629729829930030130230330430530630730830931031131231331431512345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677BLOCK 74277353 5 3525253535505050353535502535CHIPPEWA ROADMOHAWK DRIVE BLOCK 7NURP POND(3P)NURP POND(1P)NURP POND(9P)NURP POND(11eP)NURP POND(5P)WET 1eWET 2WET 1dWET 1cWET 1b1WET 1b%4.6%5.4%5.4%3.3%2.6%5.3%4.7%3.8%5.0 %8. 1 %9. 2 %5.4%4.2%3.6%4.8%6.0%7.2%6.8%4.8%3.2%2.6%2. 7 %3 . 7 %3.7%4.6L.P.H.P.L.P.H.P.%8.3%7.1%4.7%3.7%2.5%3.7%3.0%2.4 %7.8 %7.1 %4.0% 3.6 % 4.2 %3.3%4.3%4.8%3.9%4.7%7.1DROP 2C%2 . 5 %2 . 5 % 3. 8 % 3. 6 %2.1%2.5%2.5%6.6DROP2CDROP2C%4.5%6.3 %6.9 %7.3 %7.5%6.3%5.6%4.4%4.5%4.5%5.3%5.5 %5.6%5.9%4.6%5.1%5.6%4.9%4.7%4.8GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=996.0988.5FBWO985.8GF=995.5988.0FBWO985.3 GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=992.6986.5FBWO986.0GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=997.0989.5FBWO989.0GF=996.5989.0FBWO988.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=995.5988.0FB995.3GF=995.0987.5FB994.8GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5EOFEX.CL993.17GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0%8.0%2.85%1.2%1.0 %1.4%1.66 %6.4%3.8%2.4%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.3%2.85%1.2%1.3%4.5 %3.0%1.0%1.3%1.0%1.0%1.75%1.0%3.0%1.0%1.9%1.0%1.0%0.7%EOFEOF EOFGF=994.0986.5FBLO989.0GF=992.1986.0FBWO985.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5GF=995.0987.5FBWO987.0 GF=996.0988.5FBWO988.0GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=998.5991.0FBWO990.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0GF=993.5 986 .0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.0986.5FBWO986.0GF=995.5988.0FBWO987.5 GF=994.5987.0FB994.3GF=993.5986.0FBWO985.5GF=994.5987.0FBWO986.5 GF=997.5990.0FBWO989.5GF=998.0990.5FBWO990.0EOF985980979984982984988986992984990994990982996996996990994986994992994 996994998996992994996994996994996992992992990986 988984 9 8 4990 984986984986982986985988 990992994990992 992990982986984990986 992988992986990988986990 992988994 99299699098699699298699 6 98 6986 9 9 0 9 9 6 982984986992990994994988 984992992990986986992994994 990 986994986994994994994994994 994994990 986994994992986990994994986 986988990988992994994994988992 990992994988992 994 992992994996994 992994 983985985983982981981 982 983 984983982980979984 984 984984987986985984983987987986987987992986990988996996983985982981980978976974973983985980974985982980976973973974978981982983985973974978981982983986982983%1.5 %8.0 %10.02 ABBA2 PIST1 ABBA2 PIGL2 ABBA1 PIST4 THOC3 PIST2 LALA2 PIGL2 ABBA1 LALA2 PIGL4 ABBA1 LALA3 PIGL1 LALA1 PIGL1 PIST3 THOC2 ABBA1 PIST1 ABBA3 PIGL1 PIST3 PIGL2 ABBA3 PIGL3 THOC1 PIST2 PIGL3 ABBA1 PIST5 THOC2 ABBA1 PIGL1 PIST2 ABBA1 LALA3 PIGL1 PIST3 THOC3 PIGL1 ABBA1 ABBA1 ABBABCDBWREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE IRRIGATION FILTRATIONAND PUMP HOUSE ANDBACKUP WELLWREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE IRRIGATION FILTRATIONAND PUMP HOUSE ANDBACKUP WELLTREESQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.152OVERSTORY TREE60`H X 30`W2"CALB & BEVERGREEN TREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.ABBA21ABIES BALSAMEA / BALSAM FIR60`H X 30`W6` HT.B & BLALA5LARIX LARICINA / TAMARACK70`H X 50`W6` HT.B & BPIGL21PICEA GLAUCA / WHITE SPRUCE50`H X 20`W6` HT.B & BPIST10PINUS STROBUS / EASTERN WHITE PINE70` H X 40` W6` HT.B & BTHOC18THUJA OCCIDENTALIS / AMERICAN ARBORVITAE40`H X 15`W6` HT.B & BPLANT SCHEDULE NORTH - BUFFERREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINENORTH0100200PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L202MEH003.dwgLANDSCAPE PLANNORTHL2.2Contact Utility Service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning.Coordinate installation with Contractors performing related work.Seed mixture (Specify Native Seed Mix) as defined in current MNDOT Seeding Manual. Native Seeds shall be of Minnesota (or asspecified) origin and certified by the Minnesota Crop Improvement Association (MCIA). Provide verifying documentation to the Owner30 days minimum prior to installation.Plant material shall conform to the American Association of Nurserymen Standards and be of hardy stock, free from disease,infestation, damage, and disfiguration. For discrepancy between the number of plants on the Schedule and the number shown on theDrawing, the Drawing shall govern.All existing deciduous/coniferous trees are to be trimmed of dead wood and pruned to a natural uniform shape.Planting soil shall consist of 4 parts topsoil to 1 part peat humus, with 3 pounds of commercial fertilizer added per cubic yard.Spread a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil and seed/sod all turf areas disturbed by Construction.Follow MNDOT Seeding Manual for planting instructions for establishment of native seed and provide coordination for requirederosion prevention and sediment control.Install a 4-foot diameter shredded hardwood mulch dish around trees not placed within a Shrub or Perennial Planting Bed. Vinyledging is not required, unless noted otherwise.In-ground irrigation systems may not connect to city water, they must connect to pond or well water.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.GENERAL NOTESLANDSCAPE NOTESFor construction Staking and Surveying services contact Landform at 612.252.9070.1.LANDSCAPE R1 - R3R2Total Overstory Trees: 152AreaABCProposedDevelopementR2R3R3R2RequiredBuffer YardOpacity0.30.10.10.2Width ofBuffer Yard25353535Minimum PlantingPoints per 100Lineal Feet2766262140Length ofBuffer Yard847797'100'400'Total PointsRequired2338 494.162560Total Overstory TreesProvided(50 planting pointseach)4710012Total Medium Deciduous /Coniferous Trees Provided(20 planting Points each)0040ABCLANDSCAPE - BUFFER YARDSLEGENDBWSR Mesic Short Urban South and West45.95 lbs/acreAdjacentDistrictRuralR2R2R1PLANT SCHEDULEAADIrrigation Line11.11.(Typ)11.(Typ)11.(Typ)I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date: CB RECTRE=991.1CABXEMEMCABXCABXCABXCABXGASOE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OEOEOEOEOEOEGGGGGGGGGGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GOTVGOTV DNR WETLAND 27-493WSOUTH PORTIONOHW = 980.6FLOODPLAIN = 981.5( As of 8/10/20)170 333333333333W E T L A N D 1 g EX. SAN.MHRIM:995.01INL: 982.81 (W)INV: 974.76 (N)(S)80 LF. 6" PVCEX. SAN.MHRIM:984.80INV:973.56EX. 6" DIPEX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIP EX. 12" DIPEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVCEX. 10" PVC 980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6980.6 9 8 0 . 6 980. 6980.6WL 3WETLAND1fWETLAND 4 WETLAND 5b WL5a W E T L A N D 1a - S o u t h WL 1hEX. SAN.MHRIM:985.09INV:972.26EX. SAN.MHRIM:985.81INL:970.64INV:969.334984995005015025035045055065365375385395925934014024034044054064074104114124134144154174184194204214224234244254264274284294304314324334344364384394404414434444454464474484494504514524534574584594604614624644654664674684694704714724734744754764774784794804814824834844854884894904914924934944954964975075085095105115125135145195205215225235245265275285295305325335345355405415425435465475485495505515535545555565575585595605615625635645655665675685695705715725735745755775785795805815825835845855865875885895905915945955965975985996006016026036046056066076086096106116126136146156166176186196206216226236246256266276287000670007700087000970010700117001270030700317003270033700347003570037700387003970040700417004270043700447004570046700477004870049700507005170052700537005470055700567006170062701017010270103701067010970112701137011470115701167011770118701197012070121701227012370125701267013670154701557015670157701587015970160701617016270163701647019170192701937019470195701967019770198701997020070201702027020570206702077020870209702127021370214702157021770218702197022070221702227022370224702327023370234702357023670237702387023970242702437024470245702467026570266702677026870269702717027270273702747027570276702777028470285702867028770288702897029070291702927029370294702957029670297702987029970300703017030470305703067030770309703107031170312703147031570316703177031870319703207032170322703237032470325703267032770328703297033070331703327033370334703357033670337703387033970340703427034370344703467034770348703507035170352703557035870360703637041670418704197042070421704227042770428704297043070431704327043570436704377043870439704407044170444704457044670447704487044970450704517045270453704547045770458705347053870542705437054470545705468018028038048058068078088098108118128138148158168188198228238258268278288318328368398408908919029139149159169179189199209219229239249259269279289299309319329339349359369379389399529539549811040104110421049105010611063106410651066109010991100110111021103110411051106110711081109111011111124113311341135113611371138113911401141114211431144114511461147114811491150115711581159118111821183118411851186EX. 6" PVCOUTLOT AOUTLOT B123456789BLK 27653421894323121423BLK 6BLK3BLK4BLK 5112345678910105BLK 141234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132CHIPPEWAROADMOHAWK DRIVE LANE 1516171833BLK 8POND(16P)POND(19P)POND(18P)POND(20P)POND(14P)POND(15P)POND(13P)POND(17P)PROPOSED 100-YRHWL = 981.84HILLSIDE BROOKVIEW COURTMEADOWVIEW COURTOUTLOT CWET 1hWET 4WET 5bWET 5aWET 11fPOND 230+00 %7.1 % 3. 8 % 3. 7 %8.7%5.0%4.5EOF EOF%5.2%7.1%7.1%8.0%5.8%2.9%3.2%5.5%4.8%3.2%9.3%4.6%8.0%8.0%7.9 %8.1 %6.6 %9.2%7.6%8.4%8.4%8.5%3.8% 4. 8 3.0%1.0%1.9%1.0%1.0%0.7%1.0%1.0%1.0 %2.2 %2.9 %4.1 %1.74%1.0%1.3%1.0%7.1%4.8 %3.2%2.8%3.0%4.2%6.8 % 5. 2 %3.5 %4.8%4.3%3. 3%2.8%0.6 %1.0 %2.0%2.0%1.0 %1.0%5.0%2.3%2.7%3.1%2.3%3.8%3.1%5.4%8.1%7.1%1.4%4.7%4.9%-2.0%0.4%2.5%2.5988986EOFEOF985985985994 988992984 9 9 2994 9929869869829809839 8 0 9 8 2 9 8 3 994992 98899298898499 0 984988988100410021000998996994992990980984985982984980978976988984980990990988988986 986 994 992 990990990992986990985983.098 8 986984986986 986 984 982 980 986 980982984986984984986985 986992996994996 994 992994996996994 986986988986986 990986 994980984 986 990 9909889949981002984980984988988992 990 990990994994994994986986 992 986986 992994 99 6 9969889929909 9 2988994 986990 994994994996990994 984988985988992984992 990 990988992 988988988987985984987990 988 987984983982 980 984 985982982986986986986988988985985985986985992992 %2.0%1.9%1.0%1.64%2.9 %1.0 %1.0 %3.3992990 VMA%8.0 EOF4 THOC3 PIST1 LALA3 PIGL1 ABBA5 PIGL1 LALA1 ABBA3 PIGL3 ABBA4 PIGL4 LALA3 PIST10 PIGL5 ABBA4 LALA2 PIST3 ABBA2 PIST2 PIGL2 ABBA1 LALA2 PIGL2 LALA3 PIGL1 ABBA1 ABBA1 ABBAWREUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSEIRRIGATIONLINEREUSEIRRIGATIONLINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINE REUSE IRRIGATION LINEREUSE IRRIGATION LINEIRRIGATION FILTRATION ANDPUMP HOUSE AND BACKUP WELLTREESQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.15ORNAMENTAL TREE30`H X 15`W2"CALB & B102OVERSTORY TREE60`H X 30`W2"CALB & BEVERGREEN TREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEMATURE SIZEPLANTING SIZEROOT COND.ABBA18ABIES BALSAMEA / BALSAM FIR60`H X 30`W6` HT.B & BLALA13LARIX LARICINA / TAMARACK70`H X 50`W6` HT.B & BPIGL32PICEA GLAUCA / WHITE SPRUCE50`H X 20`W6` HT.B & BPIST10PINUS STROBUS / EASTERN WHITE PINE70` H X 40` W6` HT.B & BPLANT SCHEDULE SOUTH-BUFFERREUSE IRRIGATION LINENORTH0100200PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALREVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTSRCHRCH28 SEPT 202027 OCT 2020PROJECT NO.FILE NAMELANDFORMc IF THE SIGNATURE, SEAL OR FOUR LINES DIRECTLY ABOVE ARE NOTVISIBLE, THIS SHEET HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTENDEDREADABILITY AND IS NO LONGER A VALID DOCUMENT. PLEASE CONTACTTHE ENGINEER TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.PROJECTCERTIFICATION105 South Fifth AvenueSuite 513Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel: 612-252-9070Fax: 612-252-9077Web: landform.netLandform®and Site to Finish®are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.DATEISSUE / REVISIONREVIEWCONTACT ENGINEER FOR ANY PRIOR HISTORYISSUE / REVISION HISTORYDEVELOPERMUNICIPALITYWESTON WOODSOF MEDINAMEDINA, MINNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL10.27.2020MEH170032020 MARK SMITH2120 OTTER LAKE DRIVESAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110TEL (612) 490-0558L203MEH003.dwgLANDSCAPE PLANSOUTHL2.3Contact Utility Service providers for field location of services 72 hours prior to beginning.Coordinate installation with Contractors performing related work.Seed mixture (Specify Native Seed Mix) as defined in current MNDOT Seeding Manual. Native Seeds shall be of Minnesota (or asspecified) origin and certified by the Minnesota Crop Improvement Association (MCIA). Provide verifying documentation to the Owner30 days minimum prior to installation.Plant material shall conform to the American Association of Nurserymen Standards and be of hardy stock, free from disease,infestation, damage, and disfiguration. For discrepancy between the number of plants on the Schedule and the number shown on theDrawing, the Drawing shall govern.All existing deciduous/coniferous trees are to be trimmed of dead wood and pruned to a natural uniform shape.Planting soil shall consist of 4 parts topsoil to 1 part peat humus, with 3 pounds of commercial fertilizer added per cubic yard.Spread a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil and seed/sod all turf areas disturbed by Construction.Follow MNDOT Seeding Manual for planting instructions for establishment of native seed and provide coordination for requirederosion prevention and sediment control.Install a 4-foot diameter shredded hardwood mulch dish around trees not placed within a Shrub or Perennial Planting Bed. Vinyledging is not required, unless noted otherwise.In-ground irrigation systems may not connect to city water, they must connect to pond or well water.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.GENERAL NOTESLANDSCAPE NOTESFor construction Staking and Surveying services contact Landform at 612.252.9070.1.LANDSCAPE R1 - R3R1R3 - R5Total Overstory Trees: 84Total Ornamental Trees: 15Total Overstory trees: 18A buffer yard is required on all sides of the R-3 District and therefore exempt from general landscape requirements.LANDSCAPE - BUFFER YARDSAreaEFGHProposedDevelopementR3R1R2R1RequiredBuffer YardOpacity0.10.30.20.1Width ofBuffer Yard35303030Minimum PlantingPoints per 100Lineal Feet6225214965Length ofBuffer Yard500'942'300'695'Total PointsRequired 3142374447452Total OverstoryTrees Provided(50 planting pointseach)74899Total Medium Deciduous /Coniferous Trees Provided(20 planting Points each)0000EFGHLEGENDAdjacentDistrictCommR3R3R2BWSR Mesic Short Urban South and West45.95 lbs/acrePLANT SCHEDULEEEFFFFGGHHIrrigation Line11.11.(Typ)11.(Typ)11.(Typ)I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me, or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the state of MINNESOTA.Signature shown is a digital reproduction of original. Wet signed copy ofthis plan on file at Landform Professional Services, LLC office and isavailable upon request.Joshua K. PopehnLicense No:Date: Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 1-UNIT ELEVATIONS Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 2-D2 FLOOR PLANS Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 3-E4 FLOOR PLANS Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 4-E4 DETAILED FLOOR PLANS Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 5-TOWMHOME ELEVATIONS Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH WESTON WOODS OF MEDINA · Medina, MN Preliminary Plat / PUD · 09.28.2020 EXHIBIT 6-SINGLE FAMILY ELEVATIONS 11/6/2020 Project: LR-20-280– Weston Woods The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant Document Received Document Date Pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 9/30/2020 9/30/2020 3 Yes Yes Deposit 9/30/2020 9/29/2020 1 Yes Yes $21,000 Narrative 9/30/2020 9/30/2020 8 Yes Yes Narrative-Updated 11/6/2020 11/6/2020 8 Yes Yes Plans 9/30/2020 9/28/2020 34 Yes Yes Plans-Updated 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 36 Yes Yes Civil Only Stormwater Plan 9/30/2020 9/29/2020 805 Yes Yes Stormwater Plan-Updated 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 692 Yes Yes Floodplain Info 9/30/2020 6/24/2020 8 Yes Yes Geotechnical Information 9/30/2020 9/22/2020 16 Yes Yes Architectural Narrative 11/6/2020 NA 1 Yes Photos 11/6/202 NA 2 Yes Eng Response 10/27/2020 10 Yes <OVER> 11/6/2020 Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineer Comments 10/14/2020 7 Y Engineer Comments 11/5/2020 8 Y Legal Comments 10/13/2020 2 Y Elm Creek 11/1/2020 12 Y MnDOT 10/28/2020 3 Y Notice 10/30/2020 13 Y 18 pages w/ affidavit Planning Commission Report 11/6/2020 12 Y Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Mackey 11/5/2020 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 1 Public Hearing – Mark Smith – Weston Woods – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Planned Unit Development Concept Plan – East of Mohawk Drive and North of Highway 55 Finke presented a request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for property east of Mohawk Drive and north of Highway 55. He explained that the request would be to change the land use of the southern property from a business designation to a residential designation, noting that two different residential products would be proposed ranging from low to medium density. He advised that five acres of property would be proposed to be deeded to the City for conservation/park/open space. He stated that the second half of the request would be to amend the staging of the northern property, which is designated for development after 2025, to 2019/2020. He stated that the PUD Concept Plan would include 76 twinhomes on the northern property, and 41 single- family and 33 townhomes on the southern property. He stated that the norther parcel is approximately 80 acres, but only 20 acres would be developable after exclusion of wetland and buffer. He stated that the southern parcel is 55 acres in size with 28 acres buildable. He reviewed the surrounding land uses, noting business to the west and southeast, low density residential to the east, and land identified as future development to the north. He displayed the Concept Plan, identifying the different residential products proposed throughout the sites. He noted that the applicant would propose to extend Chippewa Road from Mohawk to Arrowhead Road as part of this development, noting that the applicant would propose to pay for that extension. He noted that the park/open space would be proposed for the southeast portion of the southern site. He stated that the City’s natural resource specialist visited the site a few years ago and identified that area to be a higher quality wooded area. He reviewed the existing land uses for the northern and southern portions of the site, comparing that to the proposed land uses through this request. He also reviewed the current staging of the properties, comparing that to the proposed staging. He noted that the City reviewed a similar Concept Plan a few years ago from the same applicant, while still in the Comprehensive Plan process, and noted that minutes from previous discussions were provided in the Commission packet for review. He suggested that the Commission focus on the Comprehensive Plan amendment, as that decision would drive the request. He suggested that the Commission also provide input on the PUD but concentrate on the question of use. He provided additional details on how the staging plan of the City was developed, noting that it focused on the supported infrastructure, not only of the City but also regionally. He explained that the staging in this area focused on the ability to extend Chippewa Road, which the applicant is proposing with the request. He stated that a second watermain would also be needed in this area, noting that the applicant is also proposing to construct that improvement at their cost. He stated that staging is also intended to reduce concentration of development in different areas and timeframes and to control growth. He stated that this property is included in the MUSA but the change in land use would remove 23 to 28 acres of land guided for business development and instead changing that to residential and adding additional homes to this area. He noted that three public comments were included in the packet and three additional written comments were received after the report but before the hearing and all will be included in the record for tonight’s meeting. Amic asked for details on the comment “going west to go east”. Finke explained that Mohawk drive access would be restricted as right-in/right-out and therefore explained how vehicles would travel west in order to move east. He confirmed that there would not be another way to go east to Highway 55 from these properties. Bill Griffith, representing the applicant, explained that this is a concept that was brought forward to the City two years ago when it was close to the end of the discussion related to the Comprehensive Plan and therefore it was difficult to consider making changes. He noted that the developer decided to wait and give the City time to complete that process. He explained that they believe that this is a good plan that also provides public benefits and that is why they are bringing it back at this time. He stated that the Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 2 Comprehensive Plan amendment would consider the overall goals for the community and how that can be addressed. He noted that this would provide a mix of housing and provides for the preservation of open space. He asked if the City wants to provide for the joint development of that parcels or would rather rely on a market driven response to the staging and use. He stated that they have combined the request for the Comprehensive Plan amendment with the PUD Concept Plan, noting that the PUD over both the north and south parcels allows the developer to balance the density between the parcels while providing buffering and preservation of open space. He commented that the development is focused on the westerly portion of both the north and south parcels, to create a 1,300-foot open space buffer to the nearest neighboring parcels. He stated that 60 percent of the site would be preserved with the inclusion of wetlands and wetland buffers. He noted that Mark Smith has purchased both the northern and southern parcels and is now a landowner in the community. He reviewed the single-family homes and townhomes proposed for the southern parcel and the twinhomes on the northern parcel, noting that this would provide a range of housing types for residents and potential residents. He stated that the southerly wooded area would create a nice buffer to the highway, but they will need to review that to ensure that the trees are healthy. He stated that the park area would have 20 parking stalls for visitors. He stated that they understand that this development could not move forward without providing public benefit. He noted that they attempted to keep the density low, while still meeting the requirements for being within the MUSA. He again summarized the public benefits that would be provided through the development. He noted that the sites will ultimately develop but noted that the joint development of the parcels would provide public benefit in return. Reid stated that during the last review of this concept there was discussion on why the southern parcel was not appropriate for business development and asked the developer to provide a brief statement for the Commissioners that were not a part of the Commission at that time. Griffiths explained that the main reason this parcel would not be appropriate for business development would be the topography of the site and the natural features that should be preserved. He noted that a small portion of the property close to the highway could develop as business but much of the site is covered in wetlands and therefore would not be suitable for a campus development. He noted that Mr. Smith has owned the properties for two years and has had very little interest in business development. He noted that residential development provides additional flexibility to work within the topography and wetland locations. Reid stated that she would like assurance that there would be a variety of styles and colors in the material and architectural design and as she would not want to see copycat homes throughout the development. She asked how the staging of the development would be completed. Mark Smith, applicant, replied that he would mass grade the site and noted that the single-family and townhome market have strong demand right now. He stated that the twinhome development may be staged for a later time. Amic asked the cost benefit of the infrastructure improvements. Griffiths stated that he does not have that exact information. Finke stated that the City is completing a corridor study to provide updated costs. He noted that the costs two years ago estimated about $800,000 to $1,000,000 for street construction with significant wetland mitigation that would have an additional cost. He noted that the developer would not propose to fund the mitigation costs, that would be a City responsibility. He noted that the corridor study will continue irrespective of this request. He stated that the watermain has been identified in the City’s CIP with a cost Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 3 of $300,000. He noted that if the properties do not develop, the City would ultimately move forward on that infrastructure improvement. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. Chris Hillberg, 4459 Trillium Drive, stated that he is passionate about preserving the rural character of Medina and finds this request in opposition of the work the City put into the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that throughout that process there were many opportunities for different uses and staging for the properties. He urged the Commission not to go against the wishes of the people that put so much time and effort into developing the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that although the applicant is proposing to build the road, he believes that would be more expensive than expected. He questioned why the City would be responsible for permitting and wetland mitigation as that would be very expensive. He stated that the applicant has stated that the increase in density would allow the applicant to provide a higher investment in infrastructure. He stated that he interprets that as the developer will build the road if they are allowed to build more homes. Reid closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Nester stated that R-1 is typically used for low density residential and therefore the density of the northern parcel does not meet that. She noted that the business designation was strategically chosen for the parcels closest to Highway 55 in order to promote traffic moving west during peak commuting hours. She stated that this plan would create additional residential traffic that would add to congestion. She stated that if business parcels are converted to residential that does not meet the goal of promoting business development. She stated that another community goal is to spread residential development, and this would instead add to the concentration of this area. She stated that while she appreciates the benefit of infrastructure needs, she did not believe that was worth selling out the vision or the time that was spent creating the current Comprehensive Plan. Galzki stated that after waiting for the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, he does not believe it would make sense to change this many elements of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are so many changes that are not in line with the intentions and vision for the area. He stated that it a great development, but there are more negatives than positives. He stated that the residents in that area already have hardships with traffic and the City attempted to plan to help mitigate those concerns. He stated that he would have a hard time supporting the concept. Nielsen stated that she would have a hard time seeing why there would need to be a uniformity between the two properties. She commented that it would seem strange to have residential along the Highway 55 corridor. She noted that she does appreciate the preservation of the wetlands and trees. Amic stated that this is an elegant design given the topography of the area. He stated that the tradeoff would be you know what you get with this, but you would not know what you would get in five years. He stated that while he could be talked into things, it does not seem to matter with the opinions of the other Commissioners that spoke. Piper stated that her biggest concern would be related to access of trying to go east. She commented that it would be senseless to put that many homes into this spot and not provide the ability to travel all directions. Reid stated that she sees this differently. She explained that this would be a PUD and therefore flexibility is provided in density, related to the R-1 comment. She stated that initially she was concerned with having housing next to Highway 55 but with layout the homes will not be that close to the highway. She Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 4 stated that there is an opportunity that should be considered. She stated that she does not see a solution for the problem at Arrowhead and asked if there are plans to deal with that, as Arrowhead will continue to stall development in this area. Finke stated that is why the corridor study is continuing to move forward, in attempt to find a solution for Arrowhead and Chippewa to allow for development of the properties staged into the future. Reid stated that she does not think the southern parcel is suitable for business development and therefore would not be opposed to changing that property to residential. Piper asked if the southern parcel could have access from Highway 55 for business. It was confirmed that the parcel would only have access from Mohawk. Reid stated that these parcels will develop eventually. She stated that the concept does a nice job of making use of what is there while preserving the wetlands, wooded areas and open space. She noted that one developer cannot support the road and therefore combining the development of the northern and southern parcels would allow for the construction of the road. She stated that this is the first development in a long time that provides a variety of housing products, which is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that she likes seeing a variety of price points for homeowners, which this provides. Mark Smith provided the range for the pricing of the homes, noting that the twinhomes would begin around $300,000 while the single-family and townhomes would begin around $500,000 to $600,000. He noted that there is also a large creek that runs through the southern parcel that would restrict typical business development. Reid stated that as a taxpayer, the developer is offering to contribute quite a bit of infrastructure that the City has identified need for. She stated that she sees a lot of advantages to this development, recognizing that there are tradeoffs. She believed this to be a good use of the properties and the City would be unsure of what would come in the future. She noted that the area around this is developed and therefore would not have a problem with this developing. She commented again that it would not seem the southern parcel would be appropriate for business development. She stated that although this would include Comprehensive Plan amendments, there would be a lot received in return. She noted that the wetlands and trees that are currently visible from Bridgewater will remain as a buffer. Brett Palmer, 4673 Bluebell Trail, referenced the traffic study, which included three roundabout options and reconfiguration of the OSI entrance. Finke stated that the Chippewa and Arrowhead study will continue irrespective of this development, noting that there will be an open house the following week. He noted that those elements are part of the corridor study. Nielsen asked if the Chippewa extension has been included in the last two Comprehensive Plan process. She stated that if that is important why were the properties not staged differently with the hope that someone would come in and complete that road. Reid noted that previous developers walked away from the properties because of the cost for the road. She stated that one developer will not fund the road and that is why it would make sense to combine the development of the two parcels into one. Finke commented that infrastructure is not the only element that goes into staging, noting that all the elements weighed on the staging proposed. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 5 Amic stated that this would have four football fields of buffer between this and the next development and he believed that this could be a good deal for the City. He stated that in five years this will develop anyway, and the City might not like that plan more than this. Galzki stated that while it is great that someone is offering to fund the infrastructure needs, the City can fund that as well rather than developing for development sake. He stated that as good as the plan is and the public improvements that would be provided, the City would be liable for the wetland mitigation, there would be increased traffic congestion, and traffic improvements would be needed. He stated that the road and watermain improvements are already included in the City’s CIP and he would prefer to use the Comprehensive Plan to guide the vision for the City into the future. He stated that he has a hard time believing that the public improvements would be worth the additional tradeoffs. Motion by Nester, seconded by Nielsen, to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Motion carries 4-2 (Amic and Reid opposed). (Absent: Williams) Finke stated that there will be an open house for the Arrowhead and Chippewa corridor study the following Tuesday from 5:00 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. He noted that this application will go before the Park Commission at their next meeting and then to the City Council on November 6th. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 1 Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) – Weston Woods – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Concept Plan Review – East of Mohawk Drive, North of HWY 55 and 1952 Chippewa Road (7:26 p.m.) Finke stated that the Council previously reviewed this request at the November 6, 2019 meeting and tabled the request to allow for a neighborhood meeting that took place on January 20th. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan amendment would change the staging of the northern parcel from 2025 to 2020 and would change the use of the southern parcel from business development to a mix of residential development and dedicated park property. He provided an update on the neighborhood meeting, stating that approximately 50 to 60 residents, mostly from the Bridgewater neighborhood, attended. He stated that most of the comments opposed the request, specifically the change in staging, while one comment supported the request as it would allow for the more imminent completion of Chippewa Road. He state d that there was not a lot of discussion related to the change in land use on the southern property but more focused on the timing of the project and additional traffic that would be brought to the area. He stated that there is also a PUD concept plan for comment but noted that the PUD would be contingent upon the Comprehensive Plan amendments. He stated that the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan should be considered as guides for the request. He explained that the purpose of staging is to ensure development of infrastructure that could support the development. He commented on the limited access of Mohawk Drive at Highway 55 and the need for an extension of a watermain. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan also includes language related to population growth and the desire to slow that growth. He review ed the objectives as they would apply to the southern parcel, noting that both parcels are within the MUSA. He stated that the applicant provided a narrative which includes the public benefits of the two parcels developing as one parcel rather than two separate developments under two different land uses and time frames. He reviewed those benefits including dedication of the highest value natural resource area, that exceeds the minimum park dedication requirements, to the City, the full construction cost of Chippewa Road from Mohawk to Arrowhead along with floodplain mitigation costs and stormwater management areas, and construction of the watermain. He stated that it would be difficult to project the costs for the infrastructure improvements in the future. He noted that, while it would be likely that the City would receive some contributions from adjacent landowners, there would still be a City contribution to those projects if completed in the future and not in conjunction with this proposed development. He stated that a Comprehensive Plan amendment provides the City with the highest level of discretion. He advised that a number of public comments received were included in the packet, along with comments from other jurisdictions. He reported that the Planning Commission held a publ ic hearing in fall of 2019 and recommended on a vote of 4-2 to recommend denial. He stated that the minutes from that meeting were included in the packet as well. Pederson stated that it might be interesting for the Council to hear about the staging and the potential to jump ahead if this were not approved. Finke stated that there is flexibility to the staging plan, provided through the Comprehensive Plan, which would allow the parcel to develop up to two years prior to the staging time, which would equate to 2023. He explained that the flexibility is linked to a point system in the Code. Anderson referenced the comments from financing and administration, noting that WSB has provided estimates of over $6,000,000 to complete Chippewa Road. He stated that the applicant is offering to pay for the majority of those expenses with the exception of the $600,000 expense for wetland mitigation. He stated that an outline of public benefits from the applicant was provided in the packet and identifi es a cost of $2,500,000 and $3,400,000 plus right-of-way Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 2 for the construction of the roadway. He asked if the City would be responsible for that gap between the projected costs. Finke explained that the difference in most of the numbers is trying to project difference scenarios. He stated that if the project moves forward the applicant would fund the construction of Chippewa Road, along with the adjacent trail, and noted that the outstanding amount would be wetland mitigation and would have an estimated cost of $600,000. He stated that the difference in cost between the engineer’s estimate and applicant’s estimate is that the engineer’s estimate does not include efficiencies that might be provided by completing the road project in conjunction with adjacent development. He explained that materials from the adjoining sites could be used for the road projects, along with other cost savings elements outside of hard construction costs. He explained that if the project is approved as proposed, the wetland mitigation would be the outstanding amount contributed by the City. He stated that the applicant could contribute towards the wetland mitigation in return for water connection fee credits, if desired by the City. Anderson stated that it sounds like the developer could construct the road for about half of the cost of the City. Stremel confirmed that it would cost the City more to construct the road as a public project. Anderson asked if staff anticipates any additional City costs associated with the construction of Chippewa Road, outside of the $600,000 for wetland mitigation costs. Finke stated that he did not anticipate any additional City costs. He noted that there would be costs for permitting and such, which are comparatively small amounts. Martin asked if staff is comfortable that whatever is proposed by the developer would yield a completed road and watermain at no cost to the City, outside of the wetland mitigation cost estimated at $600,000. Stremel stated that he believes the preliminary plans to be complete and would include the items discussed. He stated that staff would be involved during the process of plan development and construction to ensure that City requirements are being met. DesLauriers stated that he appreciated the clarification that the developer could construct the road at about half the cost of the City. He asked if the City would still anticipate the same contributions from the developer if the project is not allowed to move ahead in staging to 2020 and instead jumps ahead to 2023. Finke stated that the staging plan flexibility does not require a Comprehensive Plan amendment but would still be a PUD that also has a high level of discretion. He stated that the PUD and jump ahead would only link to the northern parcel and therefore the necessary land may not be secured from both parcels as the parcels may not develop at the same time. He stated that a lack of right-of-way co uld prevent a public project from moving ahead. Albers asked the net change between this proposal and the proposal reviewed by the Council in November of 2019. He asked if the only change was the developer holding the public meeting and agreeing to fund the construction of the road. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 3 Finke replied that the PUD concept plan and proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments remain the same from those reviewed in November. He confirmed that some of the infrastructure costs that the developer is willing to contribute have been made more concrete, as requested by the Council. He confirmed that the neighborhood meeting was also held as directed. Martin reviewed the requests from the public that she has received to speak on this topic and asked for input from the Council on whether that public input should be received. It was the consensus of the Council to allow those members to speak. William Griffith, representing the applicant, stated that this project started almost three years ago and has evolved since that time with the intention of identifying the public benefit. He stated that they have understood that it is the developer’s burden to prove the public benefit that would warrant the PUD and Comprehensive Plan amendments. He stated that the surrounding communities have pr ovided input and have either not provided comment or provided support. He stated that staff has also commented on the significant public safety improvements and preservation of natural open space that would be provided as a benefit. He believed that the Council has significant legal basis to approve the requests. He recognized that this will come down to timing. He stated that the desire would be allow this project to move forward as soon as 2020, but more likely work would begin in 2021. He stated that during the current climate it will be important to have projects that bring work to the community. He stated that this project will provide certainty on public infrastructure and will provide opportunity to the marketplace. He stated that this project is not final until it is all final, noting that the Comprehensive Plan amendments would be dependent upon approval of the PUD and preliminary and final plat, along with the infrastructure plans and development. Mark Smith, applicant, thanked the City for allowing the meeting to be held in this manner during this challenging time. He commended staff for their cooperative efforts over the past years. He stated that they have met with staff since the November meeting to determine ways to better identify the infrastructure costs. He hoped that the City would see the benefits of the development and approve the requests. Kim Hofstede, 4418 Bluebell Trail S, stated that she has frequently emailed members of the Council and urged the Council to abide by the Comprehensive Plan that the residents and staff worked hard to create. She did not see a reason to change the staging from 2025 for the northern parcel. She stated that PUDs are negotiable and therefore it is unknown as to the benefits that could be provided in the future. She stated that all the Bridgewater residents at the public meeting opposed the development, with the exception of one resident that does not live in the adjacent neighborhood. She stated that if the Council does approve the project, she would want to see that the developer is held to his promises, especially with the possibly impending recession ahead. Eric Zehnder, 4400 Bluebell Trail S, stated that he disagrees with the applicant’s comments that neighbors have spoke in support of the project as all the Bridgewater neighbors spoke in opposition at the community meeting. He stated that there was overwhelming opposition and felt like that input is not being listened to. He commented that it seems the main reason for allowing the change in stagin g would be in return for the road construction but believed that could occur along with a PUD request in the future. He noted that Mr. Smith already owns both the northern and southern parcels and will likely develop those parcels himself, whether that occurs now or later. He stated that the City could take the right-of-way when the south property develops and then take the northern right-of-way when t hat parcel develops. He asked the Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 4 Council keeps the staging as it exists. He stated that he does not oppose the project, but just objects to the change in staging. Monica Dawson, 4544 Trillium Ave N, stated that she has been a Medina resident since 2003 and stated that the Wayzata schools are under an oppressive amount of pressure because of development in its member cities. She stated that this development would place additional burden on the Wayzata School District and its taxpayers, as the school district continues to operate under the needed amount. She state d that change in zoning from business to residential would place additional burden on the school district. She did not believe that the staging should be changed as it will allow additional planning time for the school district and with adjacent communities. Pederson stated that this property is within the Rockford School District, not the Wayzata School District. Finke clarified that the northern parcel is within the Rockford School District while the southern parcel is in the Wayzata School District. Peter Nohre, 4412 Bluebell Trail S, echoed the comments made by residents thus far. He recognized the input and feedback from residents that helped to shape the Comprehensive Plan, noting that staging was developed for a reason. He did not see a reason to accelerate the staging. He stated that the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial and the majority of residents have spoken out agains t this proposed development. He stated that he is having a hard time to see the rationale to change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there is certainty in the Comprehensive Plan, identifying the guiding and staging for development. He did not see anything driving the need to make the changes requested and asked the Council to consider the guidance and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, leaving the staging as it exists. Anderson asked the applicant what the cost to the City would be if the project is approved, as it appears that the primary cost would be $600,000 for wetland mitigation costs. He asked if there would be other costs anticipated, outside of typical development expenses the City may have. Mr. Smith replied that the only real cost to the City would be the cost of the wetland mitigation. He explained that the development would propose to handle the stormwater for Chippewa Road, noting that they worked with staff and the watershed to develop those plans. Albers stated that when the City set forth the Comprehensive Plan, that was the vision for how the City wanted to develop the different parts of the City. He recognized the amount of development that continues to occur within the Wayzata School District and the pressure that is placing on the schools. He stated that it is the City’s obligation to work within its Comprehensive Plan, as the schools use those plans to create its plan. He asked if the applicant has considered the burden that this could place on the school district. He asked for details on the type of housing that would be placed in the development and the market for those housing products. Mr. Smith provided details on the three different housing products proposed for the property. He stated that the north property would be proposed for one level, empty-nester type housing that would cater to older individuals and single residents, which would not add stress onto the schools. He stated that the southern parcel would be proposed to have 40 single-family homes, which would cater to fami lies, and 33 townhomes that would likely cater to young working individuals. He stated that the development would have a combination of housing products that Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 5 would cater to a variety of residents and therefore would not place a huge burden onto the school districts. Martin recognized the comments related to the school district. She stated that she would want to ensure that the proper letters of credit and sureties would be posted for the infrastructure improvements in advance to building on the property. Batty confirmed that letters of credit and surety would be required prior to permits being issued. He noted that plats and development agreements would need to be approved prior to reaching that step. He explained that public improvements are included in the development agreement, with cost estimates provided by the developer and confirmed by the City Engineer with surety being collected at a rate of 150 per cent of the estimated improvement cost. Martin stated that she was a member of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee and noted that part of the issue in addressing staging of land at various times was to ensure a variety of housing that would not negatively impact existing property values. She stated that this proposed development would seem to provide a variety of housing products with pricing focused on purchasers in a different price range compared to the surrounding neighborhoods and therefore would not compete in the sales market. She stated that there is a wetland between the Bridgewater neighborhood and this development and asked for additional information on topography and whether the existing tree line would provide some buffering. Mr. Smith stated that the three different types of housing would attract three different types of customers in the market and again reviewed those details. He stated that there would be over one quarter mile from the closest home in Bridgewater to the townhomes that would back up to the development. He stated that there are some existing trees but recognized that the wetland causes gaps in the tree line. He noted that the upland area would become the floodplain mitigation area and therefore building of homes would not occur in that area. Pederson stated that the answers that have been provided have been good answers and appreciated everyone’s cooperation in working together on this project. Martin asked the Council for input on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and whether the amendments would be appropriate based on the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Pederson stated that he lives the closest to this development of any person in the City, noting that his property is zoned rural residential. He stated that he spoke with Batty and he does not have a reason to recuse himself from the discussion. He commented that this type of development with the public benefits would be positive things that the City needs. He stated that the watermain is included in the City’s CIP at a cost of $325,000, should this project not move forward. He stated that with only one water tower and a 40-year-old watermain under Highway 55, that is a safety concern for the community. He stated that he has lived on Mohawk Drive for a number of years and when there was a fatality, there was no other option to direct traffic therefore there is a great need for the road to be constructed. He stated that there is a future park planned for this area that would provide a benefit to residents in this area as well. He stated that City staff have stated that these improvements are needed, and the City does not own the necessary right-of-way to construct the road. He noted that land acquisition costs can be expensive and, in this case, there is opportunity as the developer owns the land on both sides of the road. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 6 Anderson stated that he was a part of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee that directed the development of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that one of the core elements of that plan was to maintain the rural character of the community and work to control the growth and development. He stated that he has changed his opinion on this project and is swayed by a single developer controlling these two parcels and coordinating the development in a manner that will provide public benefit, including important public safety improvements. He stated that the developer is willing to invest a significant amount of money in public infrastructure and controls the two developments to ensure that they work together harmoniously and therefore will support this endeavor. DesLauriers echoed the thoughts of Pederson and Anderson. He stated that there was a Comprehensive Plan amendment in the past for Arrowhead Drive to allow the Bridgewater development. He stated that the savings to the City for the public infrastructure would be between $3,000,000 and $6,000,000 and therefore that is something that has to be considered. Albers stated that he was also a part of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee and they put thoughtful input into the staging plan and type of proposed development. He recognized that changing the southern parcel guiding from business to residential does add unplanned housing to the City, which seems to go against the goal of slowing growth in Medina. He stated that this would potentially put stre ss on the school districts. He stated that he understands the contribution that would be provided to the City with the construction of the public improvements and therefore struggles with whether he could support changing the long-term vision and goals. Martin stated that she finds it to be a difficult decision and appreciated everyone’s willingness to discuss this openly. She stated that she tends to support the request because the public benefits are compelling enough to move forward. She stated that she struggled with the change to the staging plan but noted that the goal in staging properties for development was to ensure diversity of housing and minimize competition between new and existing developments. She believed that there was sufficient variety to support that change. She stated that she also believes that it would be difficult to develop the southern parcel as business and therefore supports the change to residential. She stated that she would support the Comprehensive Plan amendments on a conditional basis, with the recognition that there are still hurdles to be overcome. Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to direct staff to prepare a resolution conditionally approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and authorizing submission to the Metropolitan Council, subject to the conditions and comments noted in the staff report and discussed by the Council. Motion passed unanimously. Martin asked if there are additional comments related to the proposed PUD concept plan. Finke stated that from the initial review by the Council, the concept plan remains unchanged. He stated that at this time, through the discussion with the applicant, this is not a fully developed plan at this point and there is an opportunity for comments to guide the design of the development. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan amendments relate to the use and timing on the property with ultimate design to be completed upon formal application. Martin stated that there is some distance between the proposed development and the existing neighborhood to the east. She stated that she would like to see a more amplified landscaping plan that would speak to the viewshed from Arrowhead or Chippewa. She stated that she would Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 7 also like additional information on the diversity in housing elevations and building materials for the homes. Pederson echoed the same concerns with having adequate screening around the project to the best ability of the developer from the adjacent neighborhoods and roadways. He commented that the driveway would be across from the Wealshire entrance and hoped for a grandiose entrance that would be aesthetically pleasing. Albers echoed some of the thoughts related to additional screening. He also proposed some boulevard trees along Chippewa Road. He asked if the road would be lit with streetlights. Finke replied that the road would be a public improvement and therefore the City would provide guidance. He stated that there should be discussion in the future, noting that the roadway would most likely not be lit but lighting for the trail could be important. 1 Dusty Finke From:Tony Havranek <THavranek@wsbeng.com> Sent:Monday, October 21, 2019 8:49 AM To:Dusty Finke Cc:Steve Scherer; Jodi Gallup; Jim Stremel Subject:Mark of Excellence_woodlots Attachments:MAP_MarkofExcellence_woodlots.pdf Dusty,     This email summarizes our site visit to the Mark of Excellence site on October 16, 2019 to review the woodlot  composition/quality of the parcels.  This visit was a follow up to our initial survey completed on October 6, 2017.     Attached is a map of the different forest stands that we observed.  I labeled them 1‐5.     Stand 1 is similar to what we observed on our 2017 site visit:      “The northeastern portion of the woodland, north of the ditch, is correctly classified by the Hennepin County Nat Res  layer as a mesic oak woodland. Both white oak and red oak occur in this portion of the forest. All oak would be  classified as large to very large trees (DBH > 21”). The oak component would be classified as even age, meaning that  these are all mature trees. No oak regeneration was observed (sapling/seedling size class). The number of individual  trees is small compared to other species (ash), but the size of the trees causes them to be the dominant species in terms  of canopy coverage and basal area.  It should be noted that there were a small number of very large sugar maple as well.  The understory in this location was dominated by buckthorn, with some ironwood. Without management, this area  would more than likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality due to wind events, disease,  and old age.” (From 2017 summary)     It appears that buckthorn is more common in the understory compared to the 2017 visit.        Stand 2 is also similar to the 2017 visit except, similar to stand 1, buckthorn is more common:      “The area between the knoll and south of the ditch, maintains an oak component similar to the one described above,  but  ash becomes more prevalent (pole to medium tree size 5‐10” DBH). The buckthorn is much smaller here (seedlings) and  is not as dense.” (From 2017 summary).     Stand 3, the top of the knoll, is still in state of regeneration (mostly maple) with some buckthorn occurring under canopy  openings.  One thing that was different from our 2017 visit is that we observed oak (white/bur) seedlings on the forest  floor in a few areas.  These may continue to grow under shady conditions along with the maple.  Below is the 2017  summary:     “The knoll consists of a uneven‐age sugar maple stand with some large ‐very large white oak. This portion of the forest  would more than likely be sustainable for the long term since the seedling/sapling/pole size class will succeed the  mature trees as they die. Very little to no buckthorn is found here. This area is typed as a basswood/sugar maple by the  Hennepin County Nat Res inventory. The basswood component is present, but somewhat minor when compared to the  sugar maple component.”     2 Stand 4 was not walked in 2017, but general comments were provided:      “The southern portion of the forest is similar to what was observed in the northeast portion described in the first  Paragraph (stand 1).”     We did walk this site during the 2019 visit.  This stand consisted of various age classes and species.  Oak appeared to  dominate the canopy, but many poletimber sized ash and maple were found within the stand, with some regeneration,  but not as much as was observed in stand 3..  Buckthorn was also present.     Stand 5 was not surveyed in 2017, but was surveyed during our 2019 site visit.  Buckthorn (mature, sapling, and  seedling) dominated the understory and was the only tree/shrub species present along the periphery.  Oak, ash, and  willow were also found within this stand, with oak being the most dominant tree species.  However, the number of  individual oaks was small and no oak regen was observed.     Overall, stand 3 provides the highest quality woodlot as it contains the least amount of buckthorn, and supports uneven  age tree species, while also supporting quality mature seed trees.     Take care,                                                        Tony Havranek Senior Ecologist 651.286.8473 (o) | 612.246.9346 (m) WSB | wsbeng.com This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. 1 2 3 4 5 1 inch = 288 f eet Document Path: K:\014630-000\GIS\Maps\MAP_MarkofExcellence_woodlots.mxd Date Saved: 10/21/2019 8:29:47 AMMark of ExcellenceCity of Medina Figure 1- Woodlot Survey ¯ K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM November 5, 2020 Mr. Dusty Finke Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review City Project No. LR-20-280 WSB Project No. 016964-000 Dear Mr. Finke: We have reviewed Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan submittal dated October 28, 2020. The plans propose to develop 131 gross acres of land located north of Highway 55 and East of Mohawk Drive with a mix of residential properties including single-family, twin homes, and row townhomes. The proposed project also includes the construction of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive to Arrowhead Drive. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. General 1. Provide soil borings and geotechnical analysis for Chippewa Road. In-progress, awaiting freeze-up within wetland areas. 2. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and required turn around space (cul-de-sac, hammerhead, etc.) as required by the Fire Marshall. A Hammerhead may be required by the Fire Marshall at the dead end streets (without a cul-de-sac). Complete, the applicant revised to a cul-de-sac, the City Fire Marshall will provide a final review of all emergency access. Preliminary Plat (C0.2, C0.3) 3. See comments from City Planner and City Attorney. 4. Provide specific drainage and utility easements outside of roadway areas instead of noting them as outlots. In-progress, applicant noted outlots will have blanket D&U easement over entire outlots. 5. Provide perimeter drainage and utility easements along the boundary of the property, where applicable. Complete. 6. Provide 100’ right of way in and around the Arrowhead Drive connection for future turn lanes and/or widening. In-progress with Chippewa Road design revisions. Existing Condition Sheet (C1.1) 7. Note removals occurring in and around Arrowhead Drive. In-progress, final removals plan to be provided with Final Plat submittal. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 2 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx Site Plan Sheets (C2.1, C2.2) 8. Include hatching for differing pavement types (streets, concrete sidewalk, bituminous trail, etc.) with a legend. Reference the applicable typical sections located on the detail sheets. 9. Include the rest of Chippewa Road on the final site and paving sheets. Streets, Grading, & Drainage, Erosion Control Sheets (C3.0 to C3.7) Street Design: 10. City design standards require horizontal and vertical curve lengths to meet a 30 MPH design speed for local/private streets, at minimum. The geometrics of the new Chippewa Road extension (classified as a collector roadway) should be based on a 40 MPH design speed. For private roadways the City will allow a 20 MPH design if signed a such. The minimum curve radius for a 20 MPH curve is 96’. 11. An 8’ wide trail will be required along the new Chippewa Road extension. The preferred location is on the north side. Complete. 12. The City may require that a trail corridor is established through the property to connect to future developments to the north. See City Planner comments. In-progress by applicant. 13. The developer is proposing private roadways through the development. If the City requires public streets, wider right-of-way will be required. Complete, the applicant is proposing private streets. 14. Show the Wealshire access on the plans. The access shown to Mohawk Drive will need to align with that of the Wealshire site on the west side. Complete. 15. Add parking at the location of the proposed playground. Complete. 16. Add street names to all applicable sheets. 17. With Final Plat submittal, include the following: a. With future submittals, provide profile view of streets that include stationing, curve length, percent grade, and other standard geometric/design information. Add stationing to plan view on all sheets and horizontal curve information on the street design sheets. b. Applicable City standard detail plates, see specific notes in section below. c. With final construction plans, provide a signing and striping sheet(s). d. The typical section for street widths provided for Chippewa Road is generally acceptable, but through the curve of Chippewa Road provide a 2’ wide paved shoulder (reduce the gravel shoulder width respectively). Grading and Erosion Control: 18. Add storm sewer and sanitary manhole structure numbers to grading sheets. 19. Grading for Pond 12P is located outside of available property/right-of-way. In-progress, the applicant is working with the adjacent property owner to determine if a shared pond is feasible. 20. On the north side of Chippewa Road there are several instances of low points in the ditch sections where there is no storm sewer to convey runoff to the adjacent ponds. 21. Provide EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway. 22. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the lots. Complete. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 3 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 23. Maintain all surface grades within the minimum 2% and maximum 33% slopes. Acknowledged by applicant. 24. Label the 100-yr floodplain elevation on the grading plans. 25. Label the 100-yr HWL elevation of the wetlands on the grading plan. Complete 26. Label the EOF elevation for Wetland 1d. 27. Verify the EOF spot elevation for Pond 18P. Complete. Watermain, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Utility Sheets (C4.1, C4.2) General: 28. Provide confirmation of MDH (watermain) and MPCA (sanitary sewer) plan review and permitting with final construction plans. 29. Describe and label all connections to existing utilities. 30. With Final Plat submittal provide profile view of utilities noting size, type, and percent grade. Include structure information with rim and invert elevations. 31. Any public sanitary sewer and watermain shall be encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert of the utility with a minimum of 20’ centered on the utility. Watermain: 32. Note the size and pipe type of the proposed watermain on the utility sheets. Complete. 33. Watermain looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. The City will require a 12-inch watermain loop between Mohawk Road and Arrowhead Drive. Provide watermain stub for future connections to the northerly property as far to the east as possible. A looping connection will be required to connect the north end of the watermain on Short Way Rd/Ct to the 12” watermain on Chippewa Road. The City’s preference would be to connect as close to the end of the cul-de-sac as possible. 34. With Final Plat submittal, include the following: a. Include the location of water service lines and curb stops. b. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water. c. The watermain alignment and connection along the proposed Chippewa Road alignment will be reviewed by the City in further detail with future submittals. The City’s preference for watermain materials is PVC C900. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the Fire Marshal; typically, a maximum of 250’ radius is required to serve the immediate residential areas. d. The City’s preference is to utilize the existing utility crossings on Mohawk Road to minimize the need to disturb the street. This may require removing the existing service stubs from the casings and extending larger mains to the existing north/south trunk line on Mohawk. e. A review of the proposed gate valve locations will be provided by the City Public Works Department. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 4 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx Sanitary Sewer: 35. City design standards require 10.5’ sanitary sewer manhole builds, but at no point shall build depths be less than 8’. With final construction plans, show sanitary sewer service lines and invert elevations on plans; the City requires a minimum depth of 4’ from low floor elevations. 36. Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities (Ten States Standards) guidance does not allow oversizing of mains to achieved full-flow velocities at flatter grades. Confirm capacity and need for larger main, if shown. Complete, 10” pipe changed to 8”. 37. Provide a sanitary sewer stub to the northerly property if gravity sewer is feasible. Complete, stub provided where feasible but applicant noted northerly property will likely need a lift station. Storm Sewer: 38. At the northerly entrance off of Mohawk Road, it appears the FES on the north and south sides of the roadway will not have adequate cover. Consider the use of a catch basin in these locations. Review plans for other instances of pipe cover inadequacies. Complete. 39. Consider adjusting the slope of culvert segment FES801-FES800 to reduce velocity to less than 6 fps as it discharges to Wetland 2. Complete. 40. The maximum design flow at a catch basin for the 10-yr storm event shall be 3 cfs, please review segment CB1503 to CB1502. Complete. 41. With Final Plat submittal, the City will require a common draintile collection system (rigid PVC) for sump pump discharges. A separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharge system should be considered where full basements are proposed. Standard Details Sheets (C7.1 to C7.3) 42. On the typical sections provided, list each street with the proposed street design. For Chippewa Road include with the typical section where the trail is located and the appropriate boulevard width and slopes. 43. Confirm street design with the geotechnical analysis. 44. Provide typical sections for proposed stormwater treatment areas. 45. Provide specific details for each control structure. Traffic & Access 46. The private streets accessing Chippewa Road just east of Mohawk Drive from both the north and south side need to line up with each other. The street should be located as far east as possible. In-progress, the roadways now line up (northerly moved west and southerly moved east) but should be moved to the east as far as possible (line up with what was the northerly location in the previous submittal). 47. Turn lanes should be provided at each site access on the new Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive. An analysis documenting the required length of each turn lane should be provided. 48. Provided a detailed plan showing the required turn lanes at the intersections of Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive and Chippewa Road at Arrowhead Drive consistent with the Chippewa Road Visioning Study recommended improvements. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 5 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 49. Provide safety (sight line) analysis at the site driveways on Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive. Stormwater 50. The developer will need to submit a Stormwater Management Plan and modeling consistent with Medina’s Stormwater Design Manual. Complete. 51. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards and submit for the required permits. Provide permit to City when complete. 52. The City requires two feet of freeboard from structure low openings to 100-year high water levels and EOF’s. a. Freeboard is not met from the 100-yr HWL for lots 19-20, 23-32, Block 8. Complete b. Freeboard is not met from the EOF for lots 71-74, Block 7. c. With an EOF elevation of 987.5 for Wetland 1f, freeboard from the EOF is not met for lot 5, Block 6. d. Freeboard is not met from the 100-yr HWL of Pond 20P for Lots 1, Block 5 e. Lowest basement elevation is mislabeled off by 100 on the following: a. lots 1-5, Block 6 b. 1-3 & 7-10, Block 5. 53. Provide and label maintenance access to all ponding facilities. Easement width shall not be narrower than 20-feet. Clarify access route for Ponds 16P and 15P 54. The table below summarizes the 100-yr bounce in the wetlands from the existing to proposed condition. It also identifies wetland protection classification. According to the City of Medina Stormwater Design Manual, the bounce of water level within the wetland is restricted as summarized below. Please add the wetland protection classification to the table in the appendix of the Stormwater Management Plan. The table below is the allowable bounce for each Manage Classification: The bounce restriction is not met for a majority of the wetlands onsite. 55. The development will need to meet the City’s volume control requirement. The provided narrative indicates stormwater ponds 1P and 20P will be constructed for water reuse. A water reuse design submittal must at a minimum include the following: · An analysis using the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Stormwater Reuse Calculator. Complete City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 6 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx · Provide the stage storage tables for Ponds 1P and 20P, for the permanent pool storage amount, to verify the Estimated reuse storage volume in the calculator. City requires that 2 feet of the permanent pool from the bottom of the pond be maintained and not counted towards reuse total. Complete · Provide an exhibit of the application areas described at 18.75 acres and 11.79 acres for Pond 1P and Pond 20P respectively. · Documentation demonstrating adequacy of soils, storage system, and delivery system. Complete · Operations and maintenance plan. 56. Provide a summary and exhibit showing the floodplain impacts. Filling activities must not increase the stage of the 100-yr flood. Compensatory storage for any filling in the 100-yr floodplain shall be at a ratio of 1:1. 57. Provide an EOF for Wetland 5a/5b at Short Way Road crossing. HydroCAD Modeling: 58. Wetland 1e model information is off by 100. The HWL elevation in the model is reported as 883.92 and should be 983.92, please correct. Complete 59. Drainage from properties to the west of Mohawk Drive are conveyed through the southeasterly portion of the Weston Woods property via the existing creek into the wetland(s). The stormwater modeling and storm sewer design will need to accommodate this flow and conveyance. Model Wetland 5a/5b with storage to ensure proper sizing of the culvert under the roadway and estimate the HWL of this basin area. Provide Culvert sizing information for the culvert at the Short Way Road crossing, this culvert does not appear to be modeled in HydroCAD. Wetlands & Environmental 60. The concept plan shows wetland impact in several locations. Wetland replacement plan approval is required prior to any wetland impact. a. Ensure that culvert outfalls and associated riprap are included in the overall impact calculation. b. Interior roadways are shown to cross wetlands in multiple locations. In order to maintain hydrology between the wetland basins, plans should include culverts under these roadways. If culverts are not proposed, any secondary impacts to wetlands because of reduced hydrology will require replacement at a minimum 2:1 ratio. 61. Consider design alternatives that reduce wetland impacts along Chippewa Road through the DNR wetland such as: c. Use an urban rather than rural section. If urban, utilize surmountable curbing to minimize entrapment of turtles/wildlife. d. Design the trail parallel to the roadway (assuming urban section) or move trail away from roadway alignment (consider using existing roadbed). 62. Include turtle crossing culverts in the design of Chippewa Road within the DNR wetland. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 7 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 63. Various wetlands may not meet the average and/or minimum buffer requirements approved by the city, as shown in the table below. A variance from the City’s buffer ordinance will be required for these areas. Wetland ID Proposed Buffer Width (ft) City-Approved Buffer Width (ft) WL1d 35 35 avg (25 min) WL1e 50 35 avg (25 min) Confirm these above-listed wetlands meet the minimum buffer width requirements. Specifically, WL1d along the northern boundary and WL1e along the southern border abutting Chippewa Road. 64. Confirm that WL1h meets the average and minimum buffer widths as noted in the table on C2.2. Based on the scale it does not appear to meet the minimum width. 65. Specify the native seed mix to be used to vegetate the upland buffers. 66. Comments provided with EAW responses from governing agencies may require special considerations for endangered species. General notes and informational sheets may need to be incorporated into plans. Further review will be provided with future submittals and resolution of EAW comments. 67. Page L2.1 Landscape Requirements- Tree Replacement identifies 1,720 significant trees on the site with 842 significant trees being removed (49% significant trees removed). Medina City code 828.41 subd. 6 requires that for parcels larger than 20 acres during initial site development up to 10% of significant trees may be removed during initial site development. This would allow the developer to remove 172 trees without needing to provide tree replacement. The plan set identifies allowed removal of 15% or 258 trees which is not correct, unless a waiver has been granted. Based on the proposed % of tree removal the developer will need to provide replacement. 68. Tree replacement is based on caliper measurement, not number of trees. The applicable ratio is 1 caliper inch of replacement tree to 1 caliper inch of significant trees lost. The plan identifies the number of trees required (584) and uses the diameter of the smallest 584 trees, but 828.41 does not have a provision that allows the use of the smallest diameter trees, rather the sum of the inches of tree to be removed should be summed and provided. 69. Acceptable trees species list matches the list provided in 828.10. However, it should be noted in the plans that each of the planted trees will need protection (fencing/bud caps) to protect from herbivory. 70. One of the tree replacement areas identified in the northeast corner of the development is also identified as a potential borrow site in Figure 3-site plan of the EAW document. This may not be conducive to tree planting. Soil amendments may be necessary prior to planting. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 8 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City’s standards. We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet. Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet November 5, 2020 RGU PROPOSER City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dusty Finke, Planning Director Phone: (763) 473-4643 dusty.finke@medinamn.gov Mark Smith and City of Medina 2120 Otter Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55110 Mark Smith, Owner Phone: (612) 490-0558 markmoeinc@aol.com i CITY OF MEDINA Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet CONTENTS Title Page INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period ..................................................................... 1 COMMENTS RECEIVED ................................................................................................................. 1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ........................................................................................................... 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) .......................................................................................... 2 Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) ........................................................... 2 Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) ......................................................................... 3 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) ...................................................................... 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) .................................................................................. 4 Hennepin County (County) ................................................................................................................ 6 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) ................................................................. 8 Metropolitan Council (Met Council) ................................................................................................ 11 City of Corcoran (Corcoran) ............................................................................................................ 12 FINDINGS OF FACT ........................................................................................................................ 13 Project Description ........................................................................................................................... 13 Proposed Project ........................................................................................................................... 13 Site Description and Existing Conditions .................................................................................... 13 Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects ........................................ 13 A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects..................................................... 13 B. Cumulative Potential Effects .................................................................................................. 15 C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation .................................. 15 D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled ......................... 16 RECORD OF DECISION ................................................................................................................. 17 TABLES Table 1. Permits and Approvals (updated from EAW Table 3) ........................................................... 16 APPENDICES A. Written Comments Submitted to the City of Medina Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 1 INTRODUCTION Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods are proposed on 139 acres of land in the northern part of the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The project will include approximately 0.5 mile of collector roadway, 108 attached residential units, 42 detached single-family lots, and 30,000 square feet of commercial building space. Site development will include installation of municipal sewer and water, mass grading, and construction of stormwater management systems. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses, including streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater basins. The project includes preservation of approximately 55% of the site, including natural features such as grasslands, wetlands, woodlands and natural habitat. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared as required because of wetland impacts proposed for the construction of Chippewa Road pursuant to Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300, Subp. 27.B. (Public waters, public waters wetlands, and wetlands). The EAW and the respective comments have been reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 to determine if the project has potential for significant environmental effects. This document includes responses to comments received by City of Medina (City), the Findings of Fact supporting the decision, and the Record of Decision indicating an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary for this project. EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1500, the EAW was completed and distributed to persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) distribution list. The notification was published in the EQB Monitor on September 28, 2020, initiating the 30-day public comment period. A public notice or press release was submitted to the Crow River Newspaper. The comment period ended on October 28, 2020. COMMENTS RECEIVED The City received 10 written comment letters from 9 public agencies: 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, September 24, 2020; 2. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission, October 6, 2020; 3. Minnesota Department of Transportation, October 21, 2020; 4. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, October 26, 2020; 5. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, October 27, 2020; 6. Hennepin County, October 28, 2020; 7. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2 letters), October 28, 2020; 8. Metropolitan Council, October 28, 2020; and 9. City of Corcoran, October 28, 2020. None of the comments recommended preparation of an EIS. The City of Medina did not receive comments from individual residents, members of the public, or nonprofit organizations. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS This document responds to comments letters individually. It includes summaries of comments followed by responses. Complete comment letters are included in Appendix A. Responses to comments are generally confined to substantive issues that “address the accuracy and completeness of the material contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation before the project is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed project.” (MN Rules 4410.1600). Some comments Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 2 included general remarks, recommendations, or permit requirements. Such comments are noted for the record. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Water Resources The USACE submitted an acknowledgement letter to identify the USACE project number and file number. Response The comment is noted. Wetland permit application(s) will be prepared and submitted to the USACE as necessary. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) Permits and Approvals The ECWMC will require application and approval of site plans in compliance to Rule D - Stormwater Management, Rule E – Erosion and Sediment Control, Rule F – Floodplain Alteration, Rule G – Wetland Alteration, Rule H - Bridge and Culvert Crossings, and Rule I - Buffer Strips. Table 3 only mentions stormwater management and erosion control approvals. Geology The EAW referenced the 1989 Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County. The Hennepin County Geologic Atlas was updated in 2018. Wetland Buffers The ECWMC requires average buffer widths of 25 feet with, a 10-foot minimum width, around all wetlands and watercourses. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The Hennepin County Interactive Map at https://gis.hennepin.us/naturalresources/map/default.aspx identifies three ecologically significant areas on the site. Two appear to be preserved, and a 3.08-acre mesic oak forest will be destroyed according to the preliminary layouts. We would request the applicants consider preservation of the oak forest area. Response Permits and Approvals The comment is noted. Permit application(s) will be prepared and submitted to the ECWMC as necessary. Table 3 has been updated, as Table 1 in the Findings of Fact section of this document, to change “Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Approval” to “Overall Site Plan Approval.” Geology The reference the 1989 Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County was an error. The EAW should used and should have referenced the Minnesota County Geologic Atlas Story Maps located at: https://umn.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=45158d92cd88426598e2826abb565163. The Hennepin County Geologic Atlas Story Maps use the 2018 Hennepin County Geologic Atlas data. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 3 Wetland Buffers Wetland buffers will comply with ECWMC requirements. As shown in Table 11 of the EAW, avoided wetlands will have minimum buffer widths of at least 20 feet. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The City acknowledges that Hennepin County Ecologically Significant Areas located within the EAW area include: 1. a 1.61-acre moderate quality maple-basswood forest, which will be preserved as parkland; 2. about 9.54 acres of a 16.80-acre moderate quality cattail marsh, which will be preserved; and 3. a 3.08-acre moderate quality mesic oak forest that has been invaded by common buckthorn and will be developed into parts of 11 residential lots and two streets. Recognizing the natural resources on the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. Impacts to the maple-basswood forest and surrounding woodlands as well as the cattail marsh have been avoided. Preservation of the 3.08-acre oak forest is not practicable because the 11 lots and street connections are integral parts of the cohesive project design. As discussed in more detail under the response to Hennepin County, the project will seek additional opportunities to preserve additional woodlands and will need to comply with tree preservation and replacement requirements set forth under Section 828.41 of the Medina City Code. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Signal Operations Regarding the Arrowhead Dr and MN 55 signalized intersection: 1. On page 168 in Appendix of the EAW, it states: “There may be a potential need to split the phase of opposing left turning movements impact each other if the southbound dual left turn lane configuration is considered.” To clarify, a split phase would not be allowed. 2. Turn templates will be needed to determine the feasibility of the southbound dual left turn on Arrowhead Dr. This will be needed with or without widening Arrowhead Dr, and the accompanying Level 2 layout. 3. Any lane reconfiguration would require additional/updated detection. Traffic signal pole mast arms will need to be extended to align with intersection approach lanes, and flashing yellow arrows would be needed for traffic entering MN 55. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 4 Pedestrian/Bicycle MnDOT encourages the trail along the east side of Arrowhead Dr to continue south so that it intersects with MN 55. This would help form a continuous trail system on the east side of Arrowhead Dr. We also encourage non-motorized connections between the developed residential units and the adjacent major employers to give people the opportunity to have convenient travel mode choices. Consider connecting the park trail located to the south of the Mohawk Dr/MN 55 intersection. Permits Any work that affects MnDOT right-of-way will require an appropriate permit from MnDOT. Response Signal Operations The City of Medina will coordinate with MnDOT and Hennepin County on future improvements at Arrowhead Drive and Highway 55. Pedestrian/Bicycle The extension of a multi-use trail is planned along the east side of Arrowhead Drive both north and south of Highway 55. Permits Comment noted. The EAW project area does not include connections to MnDOT right-of-way. Appropriate permits will be obtained for projects outside of the EAW area that affect MnDOT right-of- way. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Historic Properties Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Response Historic Properties The comment is noted. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Surface Waters Additional in-water BMPs are required if the project impacts wetlands below the OHWLs. The EAW should include the MPCA as a regulator of all surface waters as defined by Minn. Stat. 115.01 Subd. 22. (Waters of the state). Even if surface waters do not fall under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction or are exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act, all surface waters are regulated by the MPCA and any surface water impact described in the EAW may require mitigation. The MPCA requires applicants for 401 Water Quality Certification to complete an Antidegradation form. The Antidegradation form and Draft Certification must be public noticed by the MPCA. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 5 Wastewater A map showing the project sewer and downstream sewer path to the wastewater treatment plant would be useful. Stormwater Because the project will disturb at least 50 acres of land, the SWPPP for the project will require review and approval from the MPCA prior to obtaining MPCA NPDES General Construction Stormwater(CSW) Permit coverage. The EAW does not mention additional requirements for construction sites that drain to impaired waters. The Project will be required to install additional BMPs during construction. The CSW Permit requires maintenance of 50-foot undisturbed buffers adjacent to all surface waters or redundant down gradient sediment control BMPs to protect these waters. Wetlands on the site may not be utilized for treatment of stormwater unless they have gone through the wetland mitigation process. The MPCA General CSW Permit requires that volume reduction practices be considered first, prior to wet sediment basins, for some or all water retention. The project owner will need to ensure that lots sold to new owners such as contractors or homeowners maintain CSW Permit coverage via use of the subdivision registration process. Response Surface Waters Comment noted. The EAW noted the potential need for Section 401 Water Quality Certification or Waiver from the MPCA. It is understood that waters of the state include all surface waters and that some waters of the state serve stormwater storage, conveyance, or quality functions. The proposed project will include a stormwater management system perpetuate those stormwater functions after development. Wastewater The EAW stated that wastewater from the project will be routed through the City of Medina sanitary sewer system and ultimately to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (MWWTP). The MWWTP is located on the Mississippi River near Pig’s Eye Lake in St. Paul and is operated by Metropolitan Council. The EAW further stated that the MWWTP is on the east bank of the Mississippi River, approximately 3 miles south of downtown St. Paul, and that the City and Metropolitan Council have planned for increased capacity to convey and treat sanitary wastewater. The EAW indicated wastewater facilities are sufficient to treat anticipated demand, and therefore a map is not needed to address environmental effects or comply with state rules or guidelines. Stormwater Permit requirements have been noted and shared with the project owner. The project will be required to comply with the NPDES/SDS General Construction Stormwater (CSW) Permit. This is indicated under Items 10.b and 11.b.ii of the EAW. The suitability of soils for infiltration will be assessed during project engineering. Soils over uplands on the site include loams and clay loams, and the fine texture of these soils is expected to limit the potential for infiltration. The project will consider water reuse of stormwater for irrigation and other methods of volume reduction will be considered during engineering design for the project. This approach will ensure compliance with requirements of the General NPDES/SDS Permit for Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 6 Construction Activities. The City acknowledges that the CSW Permit will require preservation of a 50- foot natural buffer, or if such buffer is infeasible, redundant (double) perimeter sediment controls (e.g., silt fence), to protect wetlands and surface waters within 50 feet of earth disturbance during construction. Hennepin County (County) Land Use What is the long-term plan for the upland acres in the north-central portion of the site? Are these slated for development in future efforts or are these available for restoration or some long-term easement? Restoring these acres could be considered as an offset to removing trees in other areas (with preference to avoiding removal of native, good quality contiguous forestlands). Stormwater Using design storms based on historical rainfall is unlikely to be sufficient for the lifespan of the proposed homes in this development. We strongly encourage using design storms that reflect recent record rainfall patterns and future projected conditions and consider placement of buildings that are likely to not be in conflict with future highwater levels. The project area does not drain to County Ditch 16. The project drains north to an unnamed creek (DNR Public Watercourse ID 27017a), then into South Fork Rush Creek just north of County Road 10. It then drains NE to Rush Creek (confluence near Interstate 94), Elm Creek, and eventually the Mississippi River. Is there information on existing site drainage, such as drain tile, that could affect runoff rates? Existing drain tile should be decommissioned during or as stormwater infrastructure to prevent future flooding concerns. We encourage consideration of outside funding to exceed stormwater requirements. Wetlands Please specify what party is responsible for inspection and maintenance of buffers and how accountability will be established. Can you specify where wetland credits will be purchased from? Wildlife and Ecological Resources Contiguous forest provides critical habitat and migratory space for numerous terrestrial species. Other than Baker Park, only a handful of tracts of this size still exist in Medina. County staff encourages site developers to find ways to maintain this wooded area for new and current Medina residents. In addition, Medina City Code Section 828.41 states that no more than 10% of Significant Trees may be removed for Initial Site Developments greater than 10 acres. This appears to be inconsistent with the proposed amount of removal as shown in Figure 12. A Tree Preservation Plan should be added to the list of necessary approvals in Table 3. We disagree that the removal of tens of acres of grassland and forestland habitat wouldn’t have a significant impact in wildlife habitat within the City of Medina. Removal of acres of forests and destruction of the grassland has potential to cause displacement of species like migratory songbirds that rely on woodlands for stopover habitat. These impacts should be more clearly stated. Transportation A dual left turn is assumed at Hwy 55 & Arrowhead and discussed in a “Visioning” study. This study also mentioned the need to add capacity for the southbound left movement at Hwy 55 & Arrowhead. This intersection is owned by MnDOT and would require their approval to do this. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 7 Response Land Use As indicated in the text and on Figure 3 of the EAW, the upland area in the north-central portion of the site is a potential borrow area. Soil excavated from this area may be used to help balance earthwork and provide opportunities for compensatory floodplain storage. Following grading, the area will be restored and provide additional preservation and habitat. Much of the area may be converted to open water habitat, some more than six feet deep. Stormwater Final stormwater design for the project will follow industry standard protocols. Protocols have not yet been developed to exceed industry standards. Atlas 14 precipitation frequency estimates have been used to design the stormwater management features and establish flood elevations for this development. At this time, Atlas 14 is the industry’s best available information for design and operating stormwater infrastructure. At least two feet of vertical separation will be established between HWLs basins, emergency overflow elevations, and lowest openings of nearby buildings. The ultimate overflow route for the site is a large wetland complex that has a large capacity to attenuate extreme flow events. Water from stormwater basins may be reused for irrigation. This practice is expected to help reduce stormwater runoff volumes. County Ditch 16 is labelled on part of the DNR watercourse, downstream from the project area and upstream from the South Fork of Rush Creek, as shown on the National Map and USGS Topographic Map (https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/). Drain tiles are not known by the owner to occur onsite and were not observed onsite during the wetland delineation. Drainage will be addressed in detail during final engineering. The possibility of state or county grants for enhanced stormwater practices is noted. Wetlands The City of Medina will be responsible for construction inspection for compliance with wetland buffer requirements. Once buffers are established, the Homeowners’ Association will be responsible for wetland buffer maintenance, with oversight by the City of Medina. Wetland credits will be purchased from approved wetland banks with available credits in appropriate geographic area(s) at the time of wetland permit application and approval. Details are unknown at this time. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Recognizing the natural resources upon the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes woodland preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 8 mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. The project proponent will need to submit a Tree Preservation Plan as part of the Preliminary Plat application, which was listed in Table 3 of the EAW. The Tree Preservation Plan will need to comply with tree preservation and replacement requirements set forth under Section 828.41 of the Medina City Code. The project design is consistent with City land use plans for the area, which include extension of municipal utilities and a collector roadway. The proposed design minimizes tree removal when compared to an earlier development proposal. Opportunities for additional tree preservation practices will be considered as project design and review advances. Such practices may include those listed in Section 828.41, Subd. 8 of the Medina City Code. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses. The project is designed to impact mostly cropland and this design helps minimize impacts on other more sensitive habitats like woodlands and wetlands. Nearly 55% of the project site will be preserved in open space, including grasslands, woodlands, wetlands and natural habitat. The City acknowledges that the habitat impacts may displace species like migratory songbirds. See the Response to the MN DNR for additional discussion. Transportation Comment noted. The City is coordinating with MnDOT regarding intersections and turn lanes. See the Response to MnDOT for more detail. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) Permits and Approvals A DNR Water Appropriation Permit is required for pumping both surface water (ponds and streams) and groundwater. Pumping water from wetlands is not exempt from DNR permitting requirements because wetland water is not stormwater from ponds constructed in upland areas. Surface Waters The DNR Public Water Wetland on the site is actually 27-493W (not 27-419W). Stormwater The increase in impervious surfaces will also increase the amount of road salt used in the project area. Chloride released into local lakes and streams does not break down, and instead accumulates in the environment, potentially reaching levels that are toxic to aquatic wildlife and plants. Consider promoting local business and city applicator participation in the Smart Salting Training offered through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Winter maintenance staff from cities and private companies have attended Smart Salting training and used the knowledge to reduce salt use and save money. Groundwater Appropriation A DNR Water Appropriation Permit will be required for pumping water for irrigation in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or one million gallons per year. A DNR Water Appropriation Permit may be needed to construct roadway crossings of ditches and streams on the site. Wetlands and Watercourses Further discussion with DNR is needed regarding the anticipated impact to Public Waters. A modified design that follows the existing Chippewa Road impact corridor could increase the likelihood of permit approval. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 9 Wildlife and Ecological Resources The EAW states that there are 20 acres of woodland onsite, and the project would retain less than 30% of that land cover. We recommend retaining more than 5.8 acres of remnant woodlands onsite. The forest in the south half of the project area should be prioritized for retention. Leaving more can provide a great value as source of outdoor activity and involvement for the residents living in this neighborhood. Consider making a walking path through the park to encourage residents to get outdoors and enjoy their neighborhood woods. Tree trimming and removal is discouraged April 1 through July 15 unless all cuts and wounds on oaks are painted within 10 minutes with a water-soluble paint or shellac. Part of the project area has been identified as a site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance by the Minnesota Biological Survey. This site contains part of a Northern Wet Meadow/Carr native plant community. Consider alternatives that avoid or minimize disturbance to this biodiversity site. The project has the potential to impact Blanding’s turtles, a state-listed threatened species, through direct fatalities or habitat disturbance/destruction due to dewatering, excavation, fill, or other activities. To minimize and avoid Blanding’s turtles: 1. avoid working in Type 3 wetlands; 2. avoid bisecting wetlands with roadways; 3. avoid wetland impacts during turtle hibernation (October 15 to April 15) unless the area has water less than 14 inches deep; 4. use surmountable curbs whenever new curbs are to be installed on roadways; 5. limit use of erosion control blankets ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural netting’ types that do not contain plastic components; and 6. note that hydro-mulch products may contain small plastic fibers that should not be used near Public Waters. The Blanding’s turtle flyer must be given to all contractors working in the area. Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR Nongame Specialist. If turtles are in imminent danger, they must be moved out of harm’s way by hand. Consider using native seed mixes in landscaping to provide habitat for the federally endangered rusty patched bumble bee. Trumpeter swans, a state-listed species of special concern, have been documented nesting in the vicinity of the proposed project. Construction activities that occur during the nesting season, late April through early June, could disrupt nesting swans if present. Response Permits and Approvals Comment noted. It is anticipated that one or more DNR Water Appropriation Permits may be needed for construction and that water will be pumped from stormwater basins and metered during reuse in irrigation. Surface Waters Use of the DNR wetland number 27-419W was an oversight, as the MN DNR correctly stated, it should have read 27-493W. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 10 Stormwater The City reviews and implements educational and long-term chloride strategies set forth in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq- iw11-06ff.pdf). Educational programs such as the Smart Salting Training can be made available to private contractors as well as City staff. In addition, project developers and builders have the ability to require that water softeners in new homes are metered by water use rather than by time, softening only when necessary. Accordingly, chloride reduction strategies will be considered to the extent practicable. Groundwater Appropriation Comment noted. Wetlands and Watercourses The project team will need to coordinate the MN DNR public waters work permit process with the DNR area hydrologist to consider design alternatives, permitting standards, and mitigation. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Recognizing the natural resources upon the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes woodland preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. The woodland in the southern part of the site was prioritized for protection, as the 7.15-acre mostly wooded park will be located in this area and will include trails where residents will be able to appreciate nature. The preferred July 16-March 31 season for tree trimming and removal is noted. The project design minimizes tree removal to the extent practicable. Opportunities for additional tree preservation may be identified during the final design process. Responses to the ECWMC and Hennepin County include additional discussion on this topic. The MN Biological Survey site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance is a sedge meadow located in the northeastern part of the EAW area, and the proposed project area will completely avoid this area. The EAW noted that the development could have effects on the state-threatened Blanding’s turtle, even though the lack of sandy soils limits upland habitat suitability for Blanding’s turtles in the project area. The development has been designed to minimize wetland impacts in part to minimize potential effects on Blanding’s turtles. The project design will incorporate surmountable curbs and the construction process will specify erosion control materials constructed of organic fibers rather than plastic. Blanding’s turtle stipulations will be added to project construction plans with a Blanding’s turtle detail sheet that will: 1. specify use of surmountable curbs whenever new curbs are to be installed on roadways; Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 11 2. limit use of erosion control blankets to ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural netting’ types that do not contain plastic; 3. include the Blanding’s turtle flyer, noting that turtles observed during construction should be moved to safe undisturbed habitat; and 4. include DNR Nongame Specialist contact information for reporting Blanding’s turtles if any are observed. Use of native seed mixes containing wildflowers beneficial to animal pollinators will be considered for disturbed wetland buffer areas and the stormwater basin margins during detailed design. The EAW noted that trumpeter swans, a state-listed special concern species, have been observed on nearby water bodies. The seasonal vulnerability of nesting swans during late April-early June is noted. As noted in the EAW, wetlands in the project area contain only small areas of open water and lack the larger open water areas generally preferred by trumpeter swans. The EAW therefore concluded that the project has low potential for disturbance of trumpeter swans and other waterfowl. Metropolitan Council (Met Council) Trails The Diamond Lake Regional Trail Search Corridor currently being master planned by Three Rivers Park District has a potential trail route that travels north-south along Arrowhead Drive in Medina, immediately adjacent to the proposed site development: https://www.letstalkthreerivers.org/diamond-lake-regional- trail-master-plan. The City should coordinate future development activities in this location with Three Rivers Park District to consider future routing of the Diamond Lake Regional Trail. Medina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for neighborhoods well connected with roads, trails, or sidewalks. Sidewalks within the development provide better pedestrian facilities. Permits and Approvals Met Council needs to review, comment, and issue a non-objection decision relative to the MPCA construction permit before connection can be made to the City’s wastewater disposal system. This should be noted in Table 3 under Item 8 in the EAW. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Met Council staff recommends use of surmountable curbs on roadway medians and curbing to accommodate movements of Blanding’s turtles and other wildlife. Council staff recommends use of landscaping with native plants to support pollinators, wildlife, and reduced chemical use. The development should provide a carbon sink to offset the increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the additional natural gas and electricity production. Response Trails The City is actively involved with Three Rivers Park District in the Diamond Lake Regional Trail Master Plan process. At this point, potential regional trail routes are not located on the subject property, but local trails will be provided within the project area. Pedestrian connectivity will be reviewed and improved as opportunities arise during development review. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 12 Permits and Approvals Table 3 has been updated, as Table 1 in the Findings of Fact section of this document, to include Metropolitan Council approval of the Sanitary Sewer Connection. Required permits will be obtained. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The City intends to utilize surmountable curb wherever possible in the project area. Native and pollinator-friendly landscaping will be implemented as practical in common areas such as wetland buffers and stormwater basin margins. See the response the MN DNR for more discussion on this topic. City of Corcoran (Corcoran) Trails and Traffic As noted in our June 22, 2017 comments on your draft Comprehensive Plan, we hope that the City will continue the trail planned on Mohawk all the way north to the municipal boundary. This trail connection to the planned trail in Corcoran is even more important with the planned change to residential land use. The connection (shown as Chippewa Road) to Arrowhead Drive to the east, as well as Mohawk Drive to Horseshoe Trail to the north, will increase traffic through a corridor that is currently inadequate to handle increased traffic. North and east bound traffic will also enter the Hackamore/CR116 intersection. Improvements to this intersection and Hackamore Road are currently under study and this project will be considered in development of the design for shared improvements. Response Trails and Traffic The properties north of the EAW area in Medina are designated Future Development Area and are not planned for development prior to 2040, but may be considered for potential development in future Comprehensive Plan processes. Medina’s trail plan will be evaluated in future Comprehensive Plan updates. The Chippewa Road Extension and other improvements were analyzed in the Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study, included in Appendix E of the EAW, and the project Traffic Study, included in Appendix F of the EAW, also addressed traffic demands of the area. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 13 FINDINGS OF FACT Project Description Proposed Project Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods are proposed on 139 acres of land in the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The project will include approximately 0.5 mile of collector roadway, 108 attached residential units, 42 detached single-family lots, and 30,000 square feet of commercial building space. Site development will include installation of municipal sewer and water, mass grading, and construction of stormwater management systems. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses, including streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater basins. Site Description and Existing Conditions The project area is dominated by cropland and wetland. The project area is roughly 45% wetland, 30% cropland, 15% woodland, and 10% grassland and turf. Site topography ranges from rolling to flat. The area has mostly loamy and organic soils and 30 feet of topographic relief. Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp. 7 lists four criteria that shall be considered in deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Those criteria and the City’s findings are presented below. A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (A) indicates the first factor that the City must consider is the “type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.” The City’s findings are set forth below. 1. Cover Types. The project will convert about 64 acres of cropland, woodland, wetland, and grassland to collector roadway, streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater features. After development, the project area will include about 75 acres of open space consisting of wetlands, wetland buffers, parkland, and stormwater features. Avoided wetlands will be protected by about 15 acres of buffers. 2. Shorelands and Floodplains. The project area is not within or adjacent to a wild and scenic river, critical area, agricultural preserve, or shoreland overlay district. The project area includes part of DNR public waters wetland 27-493W, which corresponds to a mapped floodplain. Chippewa Road is expected to impact less than one acre-foot of flood storage and the residential development is expected to be constructed on lands above existing flood elevations. Floodplain storage mitigation for Chippewa Road will be incorporated into the stormwater management systems of Weston Woods to minimize effects on regional flood elevations. 3. Land Use. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project is consistent with the City of Medina 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which guides the northern part of the area for Low Density Residential (LDR) use and the southern part of the site for a combination of LDR and Medium Density Residential (MDR) use. 4. Geology and Soils. Development grading is expected to affect about 68 acres of land and involve movement of about 275,000 cubic yards of soil to construct streets, residential areas, a commercial area, a park with a trail, and stormwater features. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 14 5. Water Quality. Compliance with stormwater requirements will minimize and mitigate potential adverse effects on receiving waters. Project construction will add about 19.9 acres of impervious surface to the site, consisting of streets, parking areas, buildings, and driveways. Stormwater management practices will be implemented to manage stormwater from the increased impervious surface area as required to control runoff rates, runoff volumes, and pollutants. Concentrations of agricultural pollutants, such as pesticides, fertilizers, and sediment, may decrease after development. 6. Wetlands and Surface Waters. The project has been designed to avoid and minimize effects on wetlands to the extent practicable. Up to 4.81 acres of wetlands, watercourses, and ditches may be impacted for roadways, stormwater basins and residential lot development. The project proponents will be required to demonstrate compliance with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, potentially the Minnesota Public Waters Act, and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. These may require water appropriation permits, evaluation of alternatives, avoiding and minimizing effects on wetlands, and replacing unavoidable wetland impacts at a 2:1 ratio. 7. Wastewater. The project is expected to produce normal domestic wastewater that is typical of residential and commercial developments. The City and Metropolitan Council have planned for sufficient wastewater conveyance and treatment capacity to serve the proposed development. 8. Hazardous Materials. Much of the project area has been used as cropland since at least the 1930s. The site is not known to include environmental hazards. One water well, known to previously exist on the site, has been sealed and abandoned. The agricultural land use history suggests a low potential for environmental contamination. 9. Ecological Resources. Project development will convert about 64 acres of cropland, woodland, wetland, and grassland to collector roadway, streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater features. This habitat conversion is expected affect the number and type of wildlife species in the area, but changes in wildlife abundance are not expected to be regionally significant. The site design prioritizes preservation based on site analysis while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. 10. Historic Resources. A Phase I Archaeological Survey completed for the project area in September 2019 found no previously documented sites within the project area. A site survey consisted of a surface survey over plowed fields and shovel testing in higher probability areas like uplands next to wetland. No prehistoric cultural resources were documented during the site survey. The project is not expected to adversely affect archaeological or historic resources. The State Historic Preservation Office concluded there are no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. 11. Visual Resources. There are no scenic views or vistas on or adjacent to the project area. Substantial effects on visual resources are not anticipated in conjunction with project development. 12. Air Quality. Estimated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the project are not considered to cause potential for significant environmental effects. There are no readily available GHG emission estimates that show a comparably sized Minnesota project with potential to exceed the mandatory EAW threshold of 100,000 tons of CO2e per year (Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300, Subp. 15.B.). Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 15 13. Noise. Local noise levels are expected to increase temporarily during project construction, but noise levels are expected to be at or near existing levels after construction is complete. Noise levels are not anticipated to exceed state standards. Noise generated by construction equipment and residential building construction will be limited primarily to daylight hours when noise levels are commonly higher than at night. 14. Transportation. The traffic to be generated by the proposed project does not raise capacity or safety concerns. The Traffic Study concluded that extension of Chippewa Road will result in improved operations at the Willow Drive and Arrowhead Drive intersections with TH 55. When accompanied by extension of Chippewa Road, the proposed development will not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) at area intersections. 15. Climate Change. The project will be affected by climate change and it will also make an incremental contribution to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases. These effects are similar to comparable developments, as everything on earth either contributes to climate change, is impacted by climate change, or both. B. Cumulative Potential Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (B) indicates the second factor the City must consider is “whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Projects typically combine to produce cumulative effects on municipal resources like water supply and wastewater treatment. The City of Medina has planned for growth and increased capacity to address these cumulative effects. The proposed project will be consistent with land use policies for areas served by municipal sewer and water. Cumulative effects of residential development on natural resources may include the loss of agricultural land and the loss and fragmentation of wildlife habitat. Surface water runoff from the project area will infiltrate into the soil or be treated in basins prior to discharge to wetlands and streams. Stormwater regulations and water quality BMPs are expected to minimize cumulative effects of post-development runoff on downstream waters. Climate change impacts are incremental and cumulative in nature. Land development contributes to climate change primarily through combustion of fossil fuels for space heating, electricity, and transportation. Energy efficient building materials, appliances, utility-sponsored renewable energy programs, are intended to reduce climate change impacts. C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (C) indicates the third factor the City must consider is the “extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Environmental effects on surface waters, wetlands, wastewater, and traffic are subject to additional approvals and/or mitigation through requirements of local, state, and federal regulations, ordinances, management plans, and permitting processes. The following permits and approvals are required for the Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 16 project addressed under the EAW. These processes will provide additional opportunity to require mitigation. Potential environmental effects associated with this project will be mitigated in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. The City of Medina therefore finds that potential environmental effects of the project are less than significant and “subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority.” Table 1. Permits and Approvals (updated from EAW Table 3) Unit of Government Type of Application Status City of Medina EAW Decision To be applied for City of Medina Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approved City of Medina Rezoning, PUD, and Preliminary Plat To be applied for City of Medina Final Plat and PUD To be applied for City of Medina Wetland Delineation Approval Approved City of Medina Wetland Impact and Replacement Approval To be applied for City of Medina Grading Permit To be applied for City of Medina Demolition and Building Permits To be applied for City of Medina Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Approval To be applied for City of Medina Municipal Water Connection Permit To be applied for City of Medina Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit To be applied for Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Overall Site Plan Approval To be applied for Metropolitan Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approved Metropolitan Council Sanitary Sewer Connection To be applied for Minnesota Department of Health Water Main Extension Approval To be applied for Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit To be applied for if needed Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Public Waters Work Permit To be applied for if needed Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Utility Crossing License To be applied for if needed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency NPDES/SDS General Permit To be applied for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Approval To be applied for if needed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Section 401 Water Quality Certification or Waiver To be applied for if needed U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Concurrence and Waters of the U.S. Approved D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (D) indicates the final factor the City must consider is the “extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 17 1. The proposed project design, plans, EAW, related studies, and mitigation measures apply knowledge, approaches, standards, and best management practices gained from previous experience and projects that have, in general, successfully mitigated potential offsite environmental effects. 2. The EAW, in conjunction with this document, contains or references known studies that provide information or guidance regarding environmental effects that can be anticipated and controlled. 3. Other projects studied under environmental reviews in Minnesota have included studies and mitigation measures comparable to those included in this EAW. 4. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be addressed by project design, assessment, permitting and development processes and by ensuring conformance with regional and local plans. 5. The environmental effects of this development can be anticipated and controlled by the City’s PUD application and review process and other regulatory processes. 6. Considering the results of environmental review and permitting processes for similar projects, the City of Medina finds that the environmental effects of the project can be adequately anticipated and controlled. Based on the EAW, comments received, responses to comments, and criteria above, the City of Medina finds that the Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods project does not have potential for significant environmental effects and does not require the preparation of an EIS. RECORD OF DECISION Based on the EAW, the response to comments, and the Findings of Fact, the City of Medina, the RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following: 1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700; 2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained; 3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects; 4. The City makes a “Negative Declaration;” and 5. An EIS is not required. November 6, 2020 Dusty Finke AICP City Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Weston Woods of Medina; Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Development Plan for PIDs 03-118-23-42-0001, 03-118-23-41-0001, and 03-118-23-43-0005 Dear Mr. Finke: We represent Mark of Excellence Homes (“MOE”) regarding the proposed Weston Woods of Medina project (“Project”) located in the City of Medina (“City”). The Project includes development on approximately 131 gross acres of land located north of Highway 55 and East of Mohawk Drive with a mix of single-family development, twinhomes, and row townhomes. This letter is the narrative in support of the following applications by MOE: (1) rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD); (2) approval of PUD development plan; and (3) Preliminary Plat This narrative describes the Project’s compliance with requirements for approval of the applications, as well as the significant public benefit associated with the Project. Background and Project Description The Project includes four parcels (the “Properties), consisting of the “Southerly Site,” totaling approximately 52.61 acres, located east of Mohawk Drive and north of Highway 55; and the “Northerly Site” an approximately 74.74-acre parcel located east of Mohawk Drive and immediately north of and adjacent to the Southerly Site. MOE is seeking to develop the Properties with a mix of single-family homes, twinhomes, and row townhomes with an average overall density of approximately 3.08 units per acre. The Northerly Site will include approximately 47.33 acres of wetland and buffer area. The Southerly Site will include approximately 26.42 acres of wetland and buffers, and 7.17 buildable acres of open space (which includes 5.1 net acres of parkland). Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 2 Gross Area Wetlands/Buffer Parks/Open Space Net Developable Northerly Site 74.74 acres 47.33 acres 0 acres 27.41 acres Southerly Site 52.61 acres 26.42 acres 5.1 net acres 21.3 acres Project Total 127.35 acres 73.75 acres 5.1 net acres 48.71 acres The net developable acreage is based on the Metropolitan Council’s formula for calculation of net residential density calculated by the gross acres less wetlands, buffers, public parks and open space, arterial road rights-of-way, and floodplains. The resulting density of the proposed PUD Development Plan is as follows: Proposed Net Developable Dwelling Units Density Northerly Site 27.41 acres 76 proposed 2.80 units/acre Southerly Site 21.3 acres 74 proposed 3.47 units/acre Project Total 48.71 acres 150 Units 3.08 units/acre The proposed units within the Project will be allocated among single-family residences, twinhomes, and row townhomes as follows: Housing Types Acres Number Single-Family Residences 16.6 acres 42 Units Twinhomes 27.41 acres 76 Units Row Townhomes 4.7 acres 32 Units Project Total 48.71 acres 150 Units The Project will also include the improvement of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive on the west to Arrowhead Drive on the east, as well as the completion of a water loop connected to the City’s municipal water system. Land Use Applications MOE is seeking approval of the following zoning and subdivision applications: 1. Rezoning: Planned Unit Development The predominant zoning district for the Properties is Rural Residential-Urban Reserve (RR-UR), with approximately 5.25 acres of the southernmost portion of the Southerly Site zoned as Commercial-Highway (CH). MOE is seeking a rezoning of both Properties to the Planned Unit Development (PUD), along with review and approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD Development Plan. The PUD District will allow for the flexible application of the City’s Zoning Code (“City Code”) while allowing for higher standards of site and building design, along with the preservation of high-quality natural resources located on the Properties. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 3 The applications are consistent the Comp Plan amendments which were recently approved by the Met Council and subject to conditions adopted by the City Council. The Comp plan amendment moved staging of development from 2025 to 2020 on the Northerly Site. On the Southerly Site, the Comp Plan designation was changed from Business to Mixed Residential (MR) designation to accommodate the proposed mix of residential development and staging of the Properties. The overall density will be 3.08 units per acre over the entire Project, with higher density located on the Southerly Site. On the Northerly Site, the underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R2. The R2 zoning district is consistent with the Low Density Residential (LDR) land use guiding and allows clustering of smaller lots to support protection and enhancement of natural areas through the preservation of open space, wetlands, and woodlands, as well as buffering from adjacent streets and uses, or the creation of additional recreational opportunities. R2 Proposed Twinhomes Minimum Lot Size (Two-family) 5,000 s.f. per unit 3,948 to 5,500 s.f. Minimum Lot Width (two-family) 50 feet 42 feet Minimum Lot Depth 90 feet 94 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet to curb (equiv. to 13 foot to right-of-way) Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 25 feet to curb (equiv. to 13 foot to right-of-way) Side Yard Setback (two-family) 10 feet 30 feet between buildings Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 66.4% maximum, not including open space between lots On the Southerly Site, the underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R3 for the townhomes. The R3 zoning district is consistent with Medium Density Residential (MDR) land use guiding and allows for development of townhome portion of the Project. The underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R2 for the single-family homes. The R2 zoning district is consistent with Low Density Residential (LDR) land use guiding and allows for development of single- family portion of the Project Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 4 R2 Proposed Single Family Minimum Lot Size 8,000 s.f. 9,738 to 17,058 s.f. Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 70 feet Minimum Lot Depth 90 feet 130 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 30 feet Side Yard Setback (combined) 15 feet (10 & 5) 20 feet (10 & 10) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 30 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Collector Setback 40 feet 50 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 34% maximum R3 Requirement Proposed Townhomes Minimum Net Area per Unit 7,920 s.f. not including reductions 6,472 s.f. Maximum Net Area per Unit 8,700 s.f. 6,472 s.f. Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 40 feet Local Road Setback 40 feet 40 feet Collector Road Setback (Chippewa) 50 feet 40 feet Private Road Setback 25 feet 23 to 26 feet to curb Minimum Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 30.5% for the total area 2. Consistency with PUD Criteria The Project is consistent with the standards and purpose of the City’s PUD Ordinance under Section 827.25 as follows: a. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. The Project is designed to accommodate a mix of housing types and densities while preserving and protecting wetlands, tree stands and open spaces. The Project includes a combined 73.75 acres of wetland and buffer conservation areas, as well as a combined 7.17 acres of wooded open space or parks. The 5.1-acre park and adjacent open space on the Southerly Site includes over 300 hardwood trees. The park area will become a neighborhood asset providing open space and Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 5 trail facilities for use by the residents of the development and the general public. This protects and preserves one of the City’s natural resources. b. Higher standards of site and building design. The PUD allows the Project to provide a variety of high-quality housing styles, including single family lots, twinhomes and row townhomes in a high-quality design, integrated into the open space and wetlands. The single-family homes will be located adjacent to natural areas, including wetlands, park and open space, and preserved woodlands. The townhomes have high-end features and the exteriors will use an extensive amount of glass creating an abundance of natural light on three sides. Deep garages will provide homeowners room to store trash and recycling bins indoors. To improve exteriors, the Applicant has hired a designer to create a variety of architectural features to enhance the front of the building units. The addition of the row homes in the northwest quadrant of the Southerly Site provides a housing option for newer families in proximity to the park and open space. c. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high-quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. To the north on the Northerly Site, more than two-thirds of the site will be preserved as wetlands and woodlands providing natural buffer areas within the development. All of the proposed residences on the Northerly Site are clustered on the west of the property, which provides more than a 1,300-foot buffer between the Bridgewater neighborhood and the nearest home in the development. To the south on the Southerly Site, nearly sixty percent (60%) of the site is preserved in wetlands, woodlands, park and open space. Specifically, the developer will dedicate a 5.1-acre park with adjacent open space area preserving the existing wooded area including over 300 hardwood trees. This preservation effort will become a defining feature of the development and will preserve one of the City’s finest natural resources. d. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. The Development Plan shows several ponding areas designed to manage storm water and minimize storm water impacts from the development. MOE will work with the City to incorporate low impact development and best practices throughout the development. For instance, the plan proposes construction of stormwater reservoirs to provide irrigation to landscaping on the Northerly Site. e. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 6 The Project preserves and enhances wetland and woodland areas creating large buffers to surrounding development and large portions of the Properties will be dedicated as parkland and open space. MOE will work with the City to enhance buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. For instance, heavy landscaping and tree planting along Mohawk Road will provide a buffer to roadways. f. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. The Project is the result of a creative use of land that allows the placement of a variety of home sites on the Properties in a way that preserves wetlands, woodlands, and open space while still meeting the required density contained within the City’s land use regulatory documents. The Project ranges in density with the higher density located nearest to the corner of Mohawk Drive and Chippewa Road. The overall net density in the Project is 3.2 units per acre, which is consistent with both City and Metropolitan Council guidance for new residential development. g. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. MOE has designed the PUD to maximize the use of developable land while preserving natural features such as wetlands, woodlands, and upland buffers to nearby development. On both Properties, the footprint and density of housing maximized in a manner that reduces the impervious surfaces and reduces the in the size and length of infrastructure serving the development. In addition, the Applicant has planned construction of new infrastructure, including the extension of Chippewa Road between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Road, as well as the water loop which will serve surrounding neighborhoods and reduce the City’s need for public investment in infrastructure. h. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) Met Council and the City have approved a Comp Plan amendment that allows for the concurrent development of both the Northerly and Southerly Sites as a single residential PUD offering a variety of housing types and densities, while preserving natural and opens spaces. Preserving the wetlands, buffers, open space, and tree stands is consistent with the Comp Plan, and extending Chippewa Road and the water loop will further the Comp Plan’s infrastructure goals. The Project will effectuate the objectives of the Comp Plan as proposed. i. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. The use of the PUD not only results in a more desirable and creative environment but is essential to approval of the plan as proposed and permits a mix of densities while preserving natural and opens spaces. The Project provides several public benefits, including the preservation of Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 7 woodlands, wetlands, and open spaces and a reduction in impervious surface as discussed above, along with the extension of Chippewa Road and the water loop. 3. Public Benefit In conjunction with the City Council’s review of the PUD Concept Plan on March 17, 2020, the Developer proposed significant and specific public benefit as follows: a. Park Dedication (1) The Developer will dedicate a 5.1-acre park and adjacent open space which includes the wooded knoll on the Southerly Site. (2) The Developer will construct a paved trail segment through the park which is accessible. The estimated cost for the trail is $110,000. (3) The Developer will provide an 8-foot wide bituminous trail from the park entrance to Mohawk Road, then along Mohawk Road up to Chippewa Road. The cost of the trail is $71,000, not including the value of the right- of-way. (4) The Developer will provide an 8-foot wide bituminous trail along the new Chippewa Road, from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. This cost of the trail is estimated at $150,000. With staff input, the trail may be constructed over the existing Chippewa Road right-of-way to allow for water control between the north and south basins. (5) The Developer will provide an internal 8-foot wide bituminous trail from the twin homes on the Northerly Site to the new Chippewa Road. The estimated cost of this improvement is $18,000. b. Street Dedication and Construction (1) The Developer will dedicate an 80-foot wide easement from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road for the construction of Chippewa Road. The estimated value of the right-of-way is $220,000. (Note: The Project will require reduced setbacks for the lots on either side of Chippewa Road for the dedication of right-of-way.) (2) The Developer will construct and pay for the extension of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. We will agree that it will be constructed as a rural street section, except in locations where it is beneficial to construct an urban section for mitigation of floodplain impacts. This construction includes a box culvert under the roadway to provide for stormwater flows north and south of the roadway. The estimated cost of construction of the roadway is $2,500,000. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 8 (3) The Developer will construct the sweep connection between Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Road, provided the City acquires the right-of-way from OSI. The Developer will grade the right-of-way and complete that section of roadway. (4) The Developer will install a 12” watermain from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. The estimated cost of this project is $460,000. (5) At the City’s election, the Developer will also contribute to wetland mitigation in exchange for an equal reduction in connection fees for the twin home project proposed on the Northerly Site. (6) The Developer will provide 3.5 to 4 acres of land needed for floodplain mitigation. The estimated value of the acreage is $395,000. In addition, the Developer will excavate the floodplain mitigation area to a depth and dimension provided by the City. (7) The Developer will oversize stormwater ponds within the Project to meet the stormwater requirements for Chippewa Road. If the City and the Developer agree that the most efficient way to manage and treat stormwater for the Chippewa Road project would be to capture and treat stormwater from Mohawk Road, then the Developer will construct and pay the cost of the oversized ponds. We look forward to working with City staff, the Park Commission, Planning Commission and the City Council on moving these applications and the Project forward. Please contact me with any questions about the above narrative or the enclosed materials. Sincerely, William C. Griffith, for Larkin Hoffman Direct Dial: 952-896-3290 Direct Fax: 952-842-1729 Email: wgriffith@larkinhoffman.com cc: Mark Smith 4852-7782-4204, v. 5 TWINHOMES Weston Woods Townhomes are spacious, bright, open, and airy with extensive use of glass in every home creating an abundance of natural light. The design is timeless but practical with expansive soaring vaults, gourmet kitchens, and a cozy 4 season porch. The exteriors will feature a variety of defining features and including a side porch entry, a kitchen garden window, and changing roof lines and bay windows that make them intriguing and inviting. The exterior facades will feature a variety of finishes, textures, and features like shake siding and cultured stone on no less than 25% of the street facing exterior. The rear of the homes will be enhanced by a gable roof that covers our 4 season porch.. Our homes look and live like single family homes. Most of these homes will have lower levels that will overlook the vast open space wetlands. These homes range in size from 2,600 to 3,300 square feet. ROW TOWNHOME Like twin homes these homes will feature interesting architecture and design featuring multiple products that will make them interesting and unique on no less than 25% of the street facing exterior. The homes will also have varied roof lines and extra roof features to make the home have their own identity and feel. These homes feature 3 and 4 bedrooms with anywhere from 1,800 to 2,300 square feet. SINGLE Family The single family homes will meet or exceed all City requirements. They will feature interesting and unique facades, roof lines, window features, and accents that will cover well over 25% of the face of the building. The features will include stone, shakes, brick, and concrete type siding. Plans will be architecturally approved prior to building. Efforts will be made to modify rear rooflines or exteriors to enhance the rear façade. 11/6/2020 Project: LR-20-280– Weston Woods The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant Document Received Document Date Pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 9/30/2020 9/30/2020 3 Yes Yes Deposit 9/30/2020 9/29/2020 1 Yes Yes $21,000 Narrative 9/30/2020 9/30/2020 8 Yes Yes Narrative-Updated 11/6/2020 11/6/2020 8 Yes Yes Plans 9/30/2020 9/28/2020 34 Yes Yes Plans-Updated 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 36 Yes Yes Civil Only Stormwater Plan 9/30/2020 9/29/2020 805 Yes Yes Stormwater Plan-Updated 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 692 Yes Yes Floodplain Info 9/30/2020 6/24/2020 8 Yes Yes Geotechnical Information 9/30/2020 9/22/2020 16 Yes Yes Architectural Narrative 11/6/2020 NA 1 Yes Photos 11/6/202 NA 2 Yes Eng Response 10/27/2020 10 Yes <OVER> 11/6/2020 Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineer Comments 10/14/2020 7 Y Engineer Comments 11/5/2020 8 Y Legal Comments 10/13/2020 2 Y Elm Creek 11/1/2020 12 Y MnDOT 10/28/2020 3 Y Notice 10/30/2020 13 Y 18 pages w/ affidavit Planning Commission Report 11/6/2020 12 Y Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Mackey 11/5/2020 0+001+000+001+002+002+51.15 CHIPPEWAROADPOLARISROADCONNECTION DR.SHORT WAY RD.MOHAWK ROADMOHAWK ROADSITE DATA SITE DATA - ROY PARCEL 80.09 Ac. Site Area:75.42 Ac. ( Less Chippewa, Mohawk, Hackamore R/W ) Existing Wetland & Buffer Area:47.33 Ac. Net Developable Area:28.09 Ac. ( 75.42 - 47.33 ) Twin Home Residential:76 Units ( Lots and Local Roads, Private Roads @ 29' B-B ) Setbacks: 25' front from curb 30' from county road 30' min. between building 15' structure setback from wetland buffer Overall Net Density: 2.7 u/a ( 76 units / 28.09 ac.) SITE DATA - CAVANAUGH PARCEL 54.91 Ac. Gross Site Area:52.99 Ac. (Less Chippewa, Mohawk R/W ) Existing Wetland & Buffer Area:26.42 Ac. Park / Openspace: 5.47 Ac. (10% Required Park Dedication = 5.47 ac.(28.09 + [52.99 - 26.42] = 54.66 x 0.10 ) Net Residential Developable Area:21.10 Ac. (Lots and Local Roads, Private Roads @ 29' B-B ) Overall Residential Units:74 Units Single Family Lots 70' x 130' +/-41 lots Row Townhome Units 33 lots Setbacks: 30' front / rear 35' from county road 10' side 15' structure setback from wetland buffer Single Family Density: 2.5 u/a (41 units / 16.39 ac.) Row Townhome Density: 7.0 u/a (33 units / 4.71 ac.) Overall Net Density: 3.5 u/a (74 units / 21.10 ac.) SITE DATA - BOTH PARCELS Net Residential developable Area:49.19 Ac. (Less Chippewa,Monarch,Hackamore R/W ) Overall Net Residential Density: 3.0 u/a (150 units / 49.19 ac.) * All areas are approximate. Developable area estimated from County GIS Data as measured from local codes. Wetlands were delineated by Kjolhaug Environmental and field located by Landform Professional Services. Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: MARK SMITH ROY & CAVANAUGH SITES ∂ Medina, MN Concept Planning∂ 09.30.2019 CONCEPT PLAN G NORTH 0 150 300 Concept G combined sites.dwg Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 1 Public Hearing – Mark Smith – Weston Woods – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Planned Unit Development Concept Plan – East of Mohawk Drive and North of Highway 55 Finke presented a request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for property east of Mohawk Drive and north of Highway 55. He explained that the request would be to change the land use of the southern property from a business designation to a residential designation, noting that two different residential products would be proposed ranging from low to medium density. He advised that five acres of property would be proposed to be deeded to the City for conservation/park/open space. He stated that the second half of the request would be to amend the staging of the northern property, which is designated for development after 2025, to 2019/2020. He stated that the PUD Concept Plan would include 76 twinhomes on the northern property, and 41 single- family and 33 townhomes on the southern property. He stated that the norther parcel is approximately 80 acres, but only 20 acres would be developable after exclusion of wetland and buffer. He stated that the southern parcel is 55 acres in size with 28 acres buildable. He reviewed the surrounding land uses, noting business to the west and southeast, low density residential to the east, and land identified as future development to the north. He displayed the Concept Plan, identifying the different residential products proposed throughout the sites. He noted that the applicant would propose to extend Chippewa Road from Mohawk to Arrowhead Road as part of this development, noting that the applicant would propose to pay for that extension. He noted that the park/open space would be proposed for the southeast portion of the southern site. He stated that the City’s natural resource specialist visited the site a few years ago and identified that area to be a higher quality wooded area. He reviewed the existing land uses for the northern and southern portions of the site, comparing that to the proposed land uses through this request. He also reviewed the current staging of the properties, comparing that to the proposed staging. He noted that the City reviewed a similar Concept Plan a few years ago from the same applicant, while still in the Comprehensive Plan process, and noted that minutes from previous discussions were provided in the Commission packet for review. He suggested that the Commission focus on the Comprehensive Plan amendment, as that decision would drive the request. He suggested that the Commission also provide input on the PUD but concentrate on the question of use. He provided additional details on how the staging plan of the City was developed, noting that it focused on the supported infrastructure, not only of the City but also regionally. He explained that the staging in this area focused on the ability to extend Chippewa Road, which the applicant is proposing with the request. He stated that a second watermain would also be needed in this area, noting that the applicant is also proposing to construct that improvement at their cost. He stated that staging is also intended to reduce concentration of development in different areas and timeframes and to control growth. He stated that this property is included in the MUSA but the change in land use would remove 23 to 28 acres of land guided for business development and instead changing that to residential and adding additional homes to this area. He noted that three public comments were included in the packet and three additional written comments were received after the report but before the hearing and all will be included in the record for tonight’s meeting. Amic asked for details on the comment “going west to go east”. Finke explained that Mohawk drive access would be restricted as right-in/right-out and therefore explained how vehicles would travel west in order to move east. He confirmed that there would not be another way to go east to Highway 55 from these properties. Bill Griffith, representing the applicant, explained that this is a concept that was brought forward to the City two years ago when it was close to the end of the discussion related to the Comprehensive Plan and therefore it was difficult to consider making changes. He noted that the developer decided to wait and give the City time to complete that process. He explained that they believe that this is a good plan that also provides public benefits and that is why they are bringing it back at this time. He stated that the Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 2 Comprehensive Plan amendment would consider the overall goals for the community and how that can be addressed. He noted that this would provide a mix of housing and provides for the preservation of open space. He asked if the City wants to provide for the joint development of that parcels or would rather rely on a market driven response to the staging and use. He stated that they have combined the request for the Comprehensive Plan amendment with the PUD Concept Plan, noting that the PUD over both the north and south parcels allows the developer to balance the density between the parcels while providing buffering and preservation of open space. He commented that the development is focused on the westerly portion of both the north and south parcels, to create a 1,300-foot open space buffer to the nearest neighboring parcels. He stated that 60 percent of the site would be preserved with the inclusion of wetlands and wetland buffers. He noted that Mark Smith has purchased both the northern and southern parcels and is now a landowner in the community. He reviewed the single-family homes and townhomes proposed for the southern parcel and the twinhomes on the northern parcel, noting that this would provide a range of housing types for residents and potential residents. He stated that the southerly wooded area would create a nice buffer to the highway, but they will need to review that to ensure that the trees are healthy. He stated that the park area would have 20 parking stalls for visitors. He stated that they understand that this development could not move forward without providing public benefit. He noted that they attempted to keep the density low, while still meeting the requirements for being within the MUSA. He again summarized the public benefits that would be provided through the development. He noted that the sites will ultimately develop but noted that the joint development of the parcels would provide public benefit in return. Reid stated that during the last review of this concept there was discussion on why the southern parcel was not appropriate for business development and asked the developer to provide a brief statement for the Commissioners that were not a part of the Commission at that time. Griffiths explained that the main reason this parcel would not be appropriate for business development would be the topography of the site and the natural features that should be preserved. He noted that a small portion of the property close to the highway could develop as business but much of the site is covered in wetlands and therefore would not be suitable for a campus development. He noted that Mr. Smith has owned the properties for two years and has had very little interest in business development. He noted that residential development provides additional flexibility to work within the topography and wetland locations. Reid stated that she would like assurance that there would be a variety of styles and colors in the material and architectural design and as she would not want to see copycat homes throughout the development. She asked how the staging of the development would be completed. Mark Smith, applicant, replied that he would mass grade the site and noted that the single-family and townhome market have strong demand right now. He stated that the twinhome development may be staged for a later time. Amic asked the cost benefit of the infrastructure improvements. Griffiths stated that he does not have that exact information. Finke stated that the City is completing a corridor study to provide updated costs. He noted that the costs two years ago estimated about $800,000 to $1,000,000 for street construction with significant wetland mitigation that would have an additional cost. He noted that the developer would not propose to fund the mitigation costs, that would be a City responsibility. He noted that the corridor study will continue irrespective of this request. He stated that the watermain has been identified in the City’s CIP with a cost Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 3 of $300,000. He noted that if the properties do not develop, the City would ultimately move forward on that infrastructure improvement. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. Chris Hillberg, 4459 Trillium Drive, stated that he is passionate about preserving the rural character of Medina and finds this request in opposition of the work the City put into the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that throughout that process there were many opportunities for different uses and staging for the properties. He urged the Commission not to go against the wishes of the people that put so much time and effort into developing the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that although the applicant is proposing to build the road, he believes that would be more expensive than expected. He questioned why the City would be responsible for permitting and wetland mitigation as that would be very expensive. He stated that the applicant has stated that the increase in density would allow the applicant to provide a higher investment in infrastructure. He stated that he interprets that as the developer will build the road if they are allowed to build more homes. Reid closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Nester stated that R-1 is typically used for low density residential and therefore the density of the northern parcel does not meet that. She noted that the business designation was strategically chosen for the parcels closest to Highway 55 in order to promote traffic moving west during peak commuting hours. She stated that this plan would create additional residential traffic that would add to congestion. She stated that if business parcels are converted to residential that does not meet the goal of promoting business development. She stated that another community goal is to spread residential development, and this would instead add to the concentration of this area. She stated that while she appreciates the benefit of infrastructure needs, she did not believe that was worth selling out the vision or the time that was spent creating the current Comprehensive Plan. Galzki stated that after waiting for the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, he does not believe it would make sense to change this many elements of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are so many changes that are not in line with the intentions and vision for the area. He stated that it a great development, but there are more negatives than positives. He stated that the residents in that area already have hardships with traffic and the City attempted to plan to help mitigate those concerns. He stated that he would have a hard time supporting the concept. Nielsen stated that she would have a hard time seeing why there would need to be a uniformity between the two properties. She commented that it would seem strange to have residential along the Highway 55 corridor. She noted that she does appreciate the preservation of the wetlands and trees. Amic stated that this is an elegant design given the topography of the area. He stated that the tradeoff would be you know what you get with this, but you would not know what you would get in five years. He stated that while he could be talked into things, it does not seem to matter with the opinions of the other Commissioners that spoke. Piper stated that her biggest concern would be related to access of trying to go east. She commented that it would be senseless to put that many homes into this spot and not provide the ability to travel all directions. Reid stated that she sees this differently. She explained that this would be a PUD and therefore flexibility is provided in density, related to the R-1 comment. She stated that initially she was concerned with having housing next to Highway 55 but with layout the homes will not be that close to the highway. She Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 4 stated that there is an opportunity that should be considered. She stated that she does not see a solution for the problem at Arrowhead and asked if there are plans to deal with that, as Arrowhead will continue to stall development in this area. Finke stated that is why the corridor study is continuing to move forward, in attempt to find a solution for Arrowhead and Chippewa to allow for development of the properties staged into the future. Reid stated that she does not think the southern parcel is suitable for business development and therefore would not be opposed to changing that property to residential. Piper asked if the southern parcel could have access from Highway 55 for business. It was confirmed that the parcel would only have access from Mohawk. Reid stated that these parcels will develop eventually. She stated that the concept does a nice job of making use of what is there while preserving the wetlands, wooded areas and open space. She noted that one developer cannot support the road and therefore combining the development of the northern and southern parcels would allow for the construction of the road. She stated that this is the first development in a long time that provides a variety of housing products, which is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that she likes seeing a variety of price points for homeowners, which this provides. Mark Smith provided the range for the pricing of the homes, noting that the twinhomes would begin around $300,000 while the single-family and townhomes would begin around $500,000 to $600,000. He noted that there is also a large creek that runs through the southern parcel that would restrict typical business development. Reid stated that as a taxpayer, the developer is offering to contribute quite a bit of infrastructure that the City has identified need for. She stated that she sees a lot of advantages to this development, recognizing that there are tradeoffs. She believed this to be a good use of the properties and the City would be unsure of what would come in the future. She noted that the area around this is developed and therefore would not have a problem with this developing. She commented again that it would not seem the southern parcel would be appropriate for business development. She stated that although this would include Comprehensive Plan amendments, there would be a lot received in return. She noted that the wetlands and trees that are currently visible from Bridgewater will remain as a buffer. Brett Palmer, 4673 Bluebell Trail, referenced the traffic study, which included three roundabout options and reconfiguration of the OSI entrance. Finke stated that the Chippewa and Arrowhead study will continue irrespective of this development, noting that there will be an open house the following week. He noted that those elements are part of the corridor study. Nielsen asked if the Chippewa extension has been included in the last two Comprehensive Plan process. She stated that if that is important why were the properties not staged differently with the hope that someone would come in and complete that road. Reid noted that previous developers walked away from the properties because of the cost for the road. She stated that one developer will not fund the road and that is why it would make sense to combine the development of the two parcels into one. Finke commented that infrastructure is not the only element that goes into staging, noting that all the elements weighed on the staging proposed. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/8/2019 Meeting Minutes 5 Amic stated that this would have four football fields of buffer between this and the next development and he believed that this could be a good deal for the City. He stated that in five years this will develop anyway, and the City might not like that plan more than this. Galzki stated that while it is great that someone is offering to fund the infrastructure needs, the City can fund that as well rather than developing for development sake. He stated that as good as the plan is and the public improvements that would be provided, the City would be liable for the wetland mitigation, there would be increased traffic congestion, and traffic improvements would be needed. He stated that the road and watermain improvements are already included in the City’s CIP and he would prefer to use the Comprehensive Plan to guide the vision for the City into the future. He stated that he has a hard time believing that the public improvements would be worth the additional tradeoffs. Motion by Nester, seconded by Nielsen, to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Motion carries 4-2 (Amic and Reid opposed). (Absent: Williams) Finke stated that there will be an open house for the Arrowhead and Chippewa corridor study the following Tuesday from 5:00 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. He noted that this application will go before the Park Commission at their next meeting and then to the City Council on November 6th. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 1 Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) – Weston Woods – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Concept Plan Review – East of Mohawk Drive, North of HWY 55 and 1952 Chippewa Road (7:26 p.m.) Finke stated that the Council previously reviewed this request at the November 6, 2019 meeting and tabled the request to allow for a neighborhood meeting that took place on January 20th. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan amendment would change the staging of the northern parcel from 2025 to 2020 and would change the use of the southern parcel from business development to a mix of residential development and dedicated park property. He provided an update on the neighborhood meeting, stating that approximately 50 to 60 residents, mostly from the Bridgewater neighborhood, attended. He stated that most of the comments opposed the request, specifically the change in staging, while one comment supported the request as it would allow for the more imminent completion of Chippewa Road. He state d that there was not a lot of discussion related to the change in land use on the southern property but more focused on the timing of the project and additional traffic that would be brought to the area. He stated that there is also a PUD concept plan for comment but noted that the PUD would be contingent upon the Comprehensive Plan amendments. He stated that the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan should be considered as guides for the request. He explained that the purpose of staging is to ensure development of infrastructure that could support the development. He commented on the limited access of Mohawk Drive at Highway 55 and the need for an extension of a watermain. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan also includes language related to population growth and the desire to slow that growth. He review ed the objectives as they would apply to the southern parcel, noting that both parcels are within the MUSA. He stated that the applicant provided a narrative which includes the public benefits of the two parcels developing as one parcel rather than two separate developments under two different land uses and time frames. He reviewed those benefits including dedication of the highest value natural resource area, that exceeds the minimum park dedication requirements, to the City, the full construction cost of Chippewa Road from Mohawk to Arrowhead along with floodplain mitigation costs and stormwater management areas, and construction of the watermain. He stated that it would be difficult to project the costs for the infrastructure improvements in the future. He noted that, while it would be likely that the City would receive some contributions from adjacent landowners, there would still be a City contribution to those projects if completed in the future and not in conjunction with this proposed development. He stated that a Comprehensive Plan amendment provides the City with the highest level of discretion. He advised that a number of public comments received were included in the packet, along with comments from other jurisdictions. He reported that the Planning Commission held a publ ic hearing in fall of 2019 and recommended on a vote of 4-2 to recommend denial. He stated that the minutes from that meeting were included in the packet as well. Pederson stated that it might be interesting for the Council to hear about the staging and the potential to jump ahead if this were not approved. Finke stated that there is flexibility to the staging plan, provided through the Comprehensive Plan, which would allow the parcel to develop up to two years prior to the staging time, which would equate to 2023. He explained that the flexibility is linked to a point system in the Code. Anderson referenced the comments from financing and administration, noting that WSB has provided estimates of over $6,000,000 to complete Chippewa Road. He stated that the applicant is offering to pay for the majority of those expenses with the exception of the $600,000 expense for wetland mitigation. He stated that an outline of public benefits from the applicant was provided in the packet and identifi es a cost of $2,500,000 and $3,400,000 plus right-of-way Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 2 for the construction of the roadway. He asked if the City would be responsible for that gap between the projected costs. Finke explained that the difference in most of the numbers is trying to project difference scenarios. He stated that if the project moves forward the applicant would fund the construction of Chippewa Road, along with the adjacent trail, and noted that the outstanding amount would be wetland mitigation and would have an estimated cost of $600,000. He stated that the difference in cost between the engineer’s estimate and applicant’s estimate is that the engineer’s estimate does not include efficiencies that might be provided by completing the road project in conjunction with adjacent development. He explained that materials from the adjoining sites could be used for the road projects, along with other cost savings elements outside of hard construction costs. He explained that if the project is approved as proposed, the wetland mitigation would be the outstanding amount contributed by the City. He stated that the applicant could contribute towards the wetland mitigation in return for water connection fee credits, if desired by the City. Anderson stated that it sounds like the developer could construct the road for about half of the cost of the City. Stremel confirmed that it would cost the City more to construct the road as a public project. Anderson asked if staff anticipates any additional City costs associated with the construction of Chippewa Road, outside of the $600,000 for wetland mitigation costs. Finke stated that he did not anticipate any additional City costs. He noted that there would be costs for permitting and such, which are comparatively small amounts. Martin asked if staff is comfortable that whatever is proposed by the developer would yield a completed road and watermain at no cost to the City, outside of the wetland mitigation cost estimated at $600,000. Stremel stated that he believes the preliminary plans to be complete and would include the items discussed. He stated that staff would be involved during the process of plan development and construction to ensure that City requirements are being met. DesLauriers stated that he appreciated the clarification that the developer could construct the road at about half the cost of the City. He asked if the City would still anticipate the same contributions from the developer if the project is not allowed to move ahead in staging to 2020 and instead jumps ahead to 2023. Finke stated that the staging plan flexibility does not require a Comprehensive Plan amendment but would still be a PUD that also has a high level of discretion. He stated that the PUD and jump ahead would only link to the northern parcel and therefore the necessary land may not be secured from both parcels as the parcels may not develop at the same time. He stated that a lack of right-of-way co uld prevent a public project from moving ahead. Albers asked the net change between this proposal and the proposal reviewed by the Council in November of 2019. He asked if the only change was the developer holding the public meeting and agreeing to fund the construction of the road. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 3 Finke replied that the PUD concept plan and proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments remain the same from those reviewed in November. He confirmed that some of the infrastructure costs that the developer is willing to contribute have been made more concrete, as requested by the Council. He confirmed that the neighborhood meeting was also held as directed. Martin reviewed the requests from the public that she has received to speak on this topic and asked for input from the Council on whether that public input should be received. It was the consensus of the Council to allow those members to speak. William Griffith, representing the applicant, stated that this project started almost three years ago and has evolved since that time with the intention of identifying the public benefit. He stated that they have understood that it is the developer’s burden to prove the public benefit that would warrant the PUD and Comprehensive Plan amendments. He stated that the surrounding communities have pr ovided input and have either not provided comment or provided support. He stated that staff has also commented on the significant public safety improvements and preservation of natural open space that would be provided as a benefit. He believed that the Council has significant legal basis to approve the requests. He recognized that this will come down to timing. He stated that the desire would be allow this project to move forward as soon as 2020, but more likely work would begin in 2021. He stated that during the current climate it will be important to have projects that bring work to the community. He stated that this project will provide certainty on public infrastructure and will provide opportunity to the marketplace. He stated that this project is not final until it is all final, noting that the Comprehensive Plan amendments would be dependent upon approval of the PUD and preliminary and final plat, along with the infrastructure plans and development. Mark Smith, applicant, thanked the City for allowing the meeting to be held in this manner during this challenging time. He commended staff for their cooperative efforts over the past years. He stated that they have met with staff since the November meeting to determine ways to better identify the infrastructure costs. He hoped that the City would see the benefits of the development and approve the requests. Kim Hofstede, 4418 Bluebell Trail S, stated that she has frequently emailed members of the Council and urged the Council to abide by the Comprehensive Plan that the residents and staff worked hard to create. She did not see a reason to change the staging from 2025 for the northern parcel. She stated that PUDs are negotiable and therefore it is unknown as to the benefits that could be provided in the future. She stated that all the Bridgewater residents at the public meeting opposed the development, with the exception of one resident that does not live in the adjacent neighborhood. She stated that if the Council does approve the project, she would want to see that the developer is held to his promises, especially with the possibly impending recession ahead. Eric Zehnder, 4400 Bluebell Trail S, stated that he disagrees with the applicant’s comments that neighbors have spoke in support of the project as all the Bridgewater neighbors spoke in opposition at the community meeting. He stated that there was overwhelming opposition and felt like that input is not being listened to. He commented that it seems the main reason for allowing the change in stagin g would be in return for the road construction but believed that could occur along with a PUD request in the future. He noted that Mr. Smith already owns both the northern and southern parcels and will likely develop those parcels himself, whether that occurs now or later. He stated that the City could take the right-of-way when the south property develops and then take the northern right-of-way when t hat parcel develops. He asked the Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 4 Council keeps the staging as it exists. He stated that he does not oppose the project, but just objects to the change in staging. Monica Dawson, 4544 Trillium Ave N, stated that she has been a Medina resident since 2003 and stated that the Wayzata schools are under an oppressive amount of pressure because of development in its member cities. She stated that this development would place additional burden on the Wayzata School District and its taxpayers, as the school district continues to operate under the needed amount. She state d that change in zoning from business to residential would place additional burden on the school district. She did not believe that the staging should be changed as it will allow additional planning time for the school district and with adjacent communities. Pederson stated that this property is within the Rockford School District, not the Wayzata School District. Finke clarified that the northern parcel is within the Rockford School District while the southern parcel is in the Wayzata School District. Peter Nohre, 4412 Bluebell Trail S, echoed the comments made by residents thus far. He recognized the input and feedback from residents that helped to shape the Comprehensive Plan, noting that staging was developed for a reason. He did not see a reason to accelerate the staging. He stated that the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial and the majority of residents have spoken out agains t this proposed development. He stated that he is having a hard time to see the rationale to change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there is certainty in the Comprehensive Plan, identifying the guiding and staging for development. He did not see anything driving the need to make the changes requested and asked the Council to consider the guidance and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, leaving the staging as it exists. Anderson asked the applicant what the cost to the City would be if the project is approved, as it appears that the primary cost would be $600,000 for wetland mitigation costs. He asked if there would be other costs anticipated, outside of typical development expenses the City may have. Mr. Smith replied that the only real cost to the City would be the cost of the wetland mitigation. He explained that the development would propose to handle the stormwater for Chippewa Road, noting that they worked with staff and the watershed to develop those plans. Albers stated that when the City set forth the Comprehensive Plan, that was the vision for how the City wanted to develop the different parts of the City. He recognized the amount of development that continues to occur within the Wayzata School District and the pressure that is placing on the schools. He stated that it is the City’s obligation to work within its Comprehensive Plan, as the schools use those plans to create its plan. He asked if the applicant has considered the burden that this could place on the school district. He asked for details on the type of housing that would be placed in the development and the market for those housing products. Mr. Smith provided details on the three different housing products proposed for the property. He stated that the north property would be proposed for one level, empty-nester type housing that would cater to older individuals and single residents, which would not add stress onto the schools. He stated that the southern parcel would be proposed to have 40 single-family homes, which would cater to fami lies, and 33 townhomes that would likely cater to young working individuals. He stated that the development would have a combination of housing products that Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 5 would cater to a variety of residents and therefore would not place a huge burden onto the school districts. Martin recognized the comments related to the school district. She stated that she would want to ensure that the proper letters of credit and sureties would be posted for the infrastructure improvements in advance to building on the property. Batty confirmed that letters of credit and surety would be required prior to permits being issued. He noted that plats and development agreements would need to be approved prior to reaching that step. He explained that public improvements are included in the development agreement, with cost estimates provided by the developer and confirmed by the City Engineer with surety being collected at a rate of 150 per cent of the estimated improvement cost. Martin stated that she was a member of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee and noted that part of the issue in addressing staging of land at various times was to ensure a variety of housing that would not negatively impact existing property values. She stated that this proposed development would seem to provide a variety of housing products with pricing focused on purchasers in a different price range compared to the surrounding neighborhoods and therefore would not compete in the sales market. She stated that there is a wetland between the Bridgewater neighborhood and this development and asked for additional information on topography and whether the existing tree line would provide some buffering. Mr. Smith stated that the three different types of housing would attract three different types of customers in the market and again reviewed those details. He stated that there would be over one quarter mile from the closest home in Bridgewater to the townhomes that would back up to the development. He stated that there are some existing trees but recognized that the wetland causes gaps in the tree line. He noted that the upland area would become the floodplain mitigation area and therefore building of homes would not occur in that area. Pederson stated that the answers that have been provided have been good answers and appreciated everyone’s cooperation in working together on this project. Martin asked the Council for input on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and whether the amendments would be appropriate based on the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Pederson stated that he lives the closest to this development of any person in the City, noting that his property is zoned rural residential. He stated that he spoke with Batty and he does not have a reason to recuse himself from the discussion. He commented that this type of development with the public benefits would be positive things that the City needs. He stated that the watermain is included in the City’s CIP at a cost of $325,000, should this project not move forward. He stated that with only one water tower and a 40-year-old watermain under Highway 55, that is a safety concern for the community. He stated that he has lived on Mohawk Drive for a number of years and when there was a fatality, there was no other option to direct traffic therefore there is a great need for the road to be constructed. He stated that there is a future park planned for this area that would provide a benefit to residents in this area as well. He stated that City staff have stated that these improvements are needed, and the City does not own the necessary right-of-way to construct the road. He noted that land acquisition costs can be expensive and, in this case, there is opportunity as the developer owns the land on both sides of the road. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 6 Anderson stated that he was a part of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee that directed the development of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that one of the core elements of that plan was to maintain the rural character of the community and work to control the growth and development. He stated that he has changed his opinion on this project and is swayed by a single developer controlling these two parcels and coordinating the development in a manner that will provide public benefit, including important public safety improvements. He stated that the developer is willing to invest a significant amount of money in public infrastructure and controls the two developments to ensure that they work together harmoniously and therefore will support this endeavor. DesLauriers echoed the thoughts of Pederson and Anderson. He stated that there was a Comprehensive Plan amendment in the past for Arrowhead Drive to allow the Bridgewater development. He stated that the savings to the City for the public infrastructure would be between $3,000,000 and $6,000,000 and therefore that is something that has to be considered. Albers stated that he was also a part of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee and they put thoughtful input into the staging plan and type of proposed development. He recognized that changing the southern parcel guiding from business to residential does add unplanned housing to the City, which seems to go against the goal of slowing growth in Medina. He stated that this would potentially put stre ss on the school districts. He stated that he understands the contribution that would be provided to the City with the construction of the public improvements and therefore struggles with whether he could support changing the long-term vision and goals. Martin stated that she finds it to be a difficult decision and appreciated everyone’s willingness to discuss this openly. She stated that she tends to support the request because the public benefits are compelling enough to move forward. She stated that she struggled with the change to the staging plan but noted that the goal in staging properties for development was to ensure diversity of housing and minimize competition between new and existing developments. She believed that there was sufficient variety to support that change. She stated that she also believes that it would be difficult to develop the southern parcel as business and therefore supports the change to residential. She stated that she would support the Comprehensive Plan amendments on a conditional basis, with the recognition that there are still hurdles to be overcome. Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to direct staff to prepare a resolution conditionally approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and authorizing submission to the Metropolitan Council, subject to the conditions and comments noted in the staff report and discussed by the Council. Motion passed unanimously. Martin asked if there are additional comments related to the proposed PUD concept plan. Finke stated that from the initial review by the Council, the concept plan remains unchanged. He stated that at this time, through the discussion with the applicant, this is not a fully developed plan at this point and there is an opportunity for comments to guide the design of the development. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan amendments relate to the use and timing on the property with ultimate design to be completed upon formal application. Martin stated that there is some distance between the proposed development and the existing neighborhood to the east. She stated that she would like to see a more amplified landscaping plan that would speak to the viewshed from Arrowhead or Chippewa. She stated that she would Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/17/2020 Meeting Minutes 7 also like additional information on the diversity in housing elevations and building materials for the homes. Pederson echoed the same concerns with having adequate screening around the project to the best ability of the developer from the adjacent neighborhoods and roadways. He commented that the driveway would be across from the Wealshire entrance and hoped for a grandiose entrance that would be aesthetically pleasing. Albers echoed some of the thoughts related to additional screening. He also proposed some boulevard trees along Chippewa Road. He asked if the road would be lit with streetlights. Finke replied that the road would be a public improvement and therefore the City would provide guidance. He stated that there should be discussion in the future, noting that the roadway would most likely not be lit but lighting for the trail could be important. 1 Dusty Finke From:Tony Havranek <THavranek@wsbeng.com> Sent:Monday, October 21, 2019 8:49 AM To:Dusty Finke Cc:Steve Scherer; Jodi Gallup; Jim Stremel Subject:Mark of Excellence_woodlots Attachments:MAP_MarkofExcellence_woodlots.pdf Dusty,     This email summarizes our site visit to the Mark of Excellence site on October 16, 2019 to review the woodlot  composition/quality of the parcels.  This visit was a follow up to our initial survey completed on October 6, 2017.     Attached is a map of the different forest stands that we observed.  I labeled them 1‐5.     Stand 1 is similar to what we observed on our 2017 site visit:      “The northeastern portion of the woodland, north of the ditch, is correctly classified by the Hennepin County Nat Res  layer as a mesic oak woodland. Both white oak and red oak occur in this portion of the forest. All oak would be  classified as large to very large trees (DBH > 21”). The oak component would be classified as even age, meaning that  these are all mature trees. No oak regeneration was observed (sapling/seedling size class). The number of individual  trees is small compared to other species (ash), but the size of the trees causes them to be the dominant species in terms  of canopy coverage and basal area.  It should be noted that there were a small number of very large sugar maple as well.  The understory in this location was dominated by buckthorn, with some ironwood. Without management, this area  would more than likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality due to wind events, disease,  and old age.” (From 2017 summary)     It appears that buckthorn is more common in the understory compared to the 2017 visit.        Stand 2 is also similar to the 2017 visit except, similar to stand 1, buckthorn is more common:      “The area between the knoll and south of the ditch, maintains an oak component similar to the one described above,  but  ash becomes more prevalent (pole to medium tree size 5‐10” DBH). The buckthorn is much smaller here (seedlings) and  is not as dense.” (From 2017 summary).     Stand 3, the top of the knoll, is still in state of regeneration (mostly maple) with some buckthorn occurring under canopy  openings.  One thing that was different from our 2017 visit is that we observed oak (white/bur) seedlings on the forest  floor in a few areas.  These may continue to grow under shady conditions along with the maple.  Below is the 2017  summary:     “The knoll consists of a uneven‐age sugar maple stand with some large ‐very large white oak. This portion of the forest  would more than likely be sustainable for the long term since the seedling/sapling/pole size class will succeed the  mature trees as they die. Very little to no buckthorn is found here. This area is typed as a basswood/sugar maple by the  Hennepin County Nat Res inventory. The basswood component is present, but somewhat minor when compared to the  sugar maple component.”     2 Stand 4 was not walked in 2017, but general comments were provided:      “The southern portion of the forest is similar to what was observed in the northeast portion described in the first  Paragraph (stand 1).”     We did walk this site during the 2019 visit.  This stand consisted of various age classes and species.  Oak appeared to  dominate the canopy, but many poletimber sized ash and maple were found within the stand, with some regeneration,  but not as much as was observed in stand 3..  Buckthorn was also present.     Stand 5 was not surveyed in 2017, but was surveyed during our 2019 site visit.  Buckthorn (mature, sapling, and  seedling) dominated the understory and was the only tree/shrub species present along the periphery.  Oak, ash, and  willow were also found within this stand, with oak being the most dominant tree species.  However, the number of  individual oaks was small and no oak regen was observed.     Overall, stand 3 provides the highest quality woodlot as it contains the least amount of buckthorn, and supports uneven  age tree species, while also supporting quality mature seed trees.     Take care,                                                        Tony Havranek Senior Ecologist 651.286.8473 (o) | 612.246.9346 (m) WSB | wsbeng.com This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. 1 2 3 4 5 1 inch = 288 f eet Document Path: K:\014630-000\GIS\Maps\MAP_MarkofExcellence_woodlots.mxd Date Saved: 10/21/2019 8:29:47 AMMark of ExcellenceCity of Medina Figure 1- Woodlot Survey ¯ K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM November 5, 2020 Mr. Dusty Finke Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review City Project No. LR-20-280 WSB Project No. 016964-000 Dear Mr. Finke: We have reviewed Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan submittal dated October 28, 2020. The plans propose to develop 131 gross acres of land located north of Highway 55 and East of Mohawk Drive with a mix of residential properties including single-family, twin homes, and row townhomes. The proposed project also includes the construction of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive to Arrowhead Drive. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. General 1. Provide soil borings and geotechnical analysis for Chippewa Road. In-progress, awaiting freeze-up within wetland areas. 2. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and required turn around space (cul-de-sac, hammerhead, etc.) as required by the Fire Marshall. A Hammerhead may be required by the Fire Marshall at the dead end streets (without a cul-de-sac). Complete, the applicant revised to a cul-de-sac, the City Fire Marshall will provide a final review of all emergency access. Preliminary Plat (C0.2, C0.3) 3. See comments from City Planner and City Attorney. 4. Provide specific drainage and utility easements outside of roadway areas instead of noting them as outlots. In-progress, applicant noted outlots will have blanket D&U easement over entire outlots. 5. Provide perimeter drainage and utility easements along the boundary of the property, where applicable. Complete. 6. Provide 100’ right of way in and around the Arrowhead Drive connection for future turn lanes and/or widening. In-progress with Chippewa Road design revisions. Existing Condition Sheet (C1.1) 7. Note removals occurring in and around Arrowhead Drive. In-progress, final removals plan to be provided with Final Plat submittal. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 2 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx Site Plan Sheets (C2.1, C2.2) 8. Include hatching for differing pavement types (streets, concrete sidewalk, bituminous trail, etc.) with a legend. Reference the applicable typical sections located on the detail sheets. 9. Include the rest of Chippewa Road on the final site and paving sheets. Streets, Grading, & Drainage, Erosion Control Sheets (C3.0 to C3.7) Street Design: 10. City design standards require horizontal and vertical curve lengths to meet a 30 MPH design speed for local/private streets, at minimum. The geometrics of the new Chippewa Road extension (classified as a collector roadway) should be based on a 40 MPH design speed. For private roadways the City will allow a 20 MPH design if signed a such. The minimum curve radius for a 20 MPH curve is 96’. 11. An 8’ wide trail will be required along the new Chippewa Road extension. The preferred location is on the north side. Complete. 12. The City may require that a trail corridor is established through the property to connect to future developments to the north. See City Planner comments. In-progress by applicant. 13. The developer is proposing private roadways through the development. If the City requires public streets, wider right-of-way will be required. Complete, the applicant is proposing private streets. 14. Show the Wealshire access on the plans. The access shown to Mohawk Drive will need to align with that of the Wealshire site on the west side. Complete. 15. Add parking at the location of the proposed playground. Complete. 16. Add street names to all applicable sheets. 17. With Final Plat submittal, include the following: a. With future submittals, provide profile view of streets that include stationing, curve length, percent grade, and other standard geometric/design information. Add stationing to plan view on all sheets and horizontal curve information on the street design sheets. b. Applicable City standard detail plates, see specific notes in section below. c. With final construction plans, provide a signing and striping sheet(s). d. The typical section for street widths provided for Chippewa Road is generally acceptable, but through the curve of Chippewa Road provide a 2’ wide paved shoulder (reduce the gravel shoulder width respectively). Grading and Erosion Control: 18. Add storm sewer and sanitary manhole structure numbers to grading sheets. 19. Grading for Pond 12P is located outside of available property/right-of-way. In-progress, the applicant is working with the adjacent property owner to determine if a shared pond is feasible. 20. On the north side of Chippewa Road there are several instances of low points in the ditch sections where there is no storm sewer to convey runoff to the adjacent ponds. 21. Provide EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway. 22. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the lots. Complete. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 3 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 23. Maintain all surface grades within the minimum 2% and maximum 33% slopes. Acknowledged by applicant. 24. Label the 100-yr floodplain elevation on the grading plans. 25. Label the 100-yr HWL elevation of the wetlands on the grading plan. Complete 26. Label the EOF elevation for Wetland 1d. 27. Verify the EOF spot elevation for Pond 18P. Complete. Watermain, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Utility Sheets (C4.1, C4.2) General: 28. Provide confirmation of MDH (watermain) and MPCA (sanitary sewer) plan review and permitting with final construction plans. 29. Describe and label all connections to existing utilities. 30. With Final Plat submittal provide profile view of utilities noting size, type, and percent grade. Include structure information with rim and invert elevations. 31. Any public sanitary sewer and watermain shall be encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert of the utility with a minimum of 20’ centered on the utility. Watermain: 32. Note the size and pipe type of the proposed watermain on the utility sheets. Complete. 33. Watermain looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. The City will require a 12-inch watermain loop between Mohawk Road and Arrowhead Drive. Provide watermain stub for future connections to the northerly property as far to the east as possible. A looping connection will be required to connect the north end of the watermain on Short Way Rd/Ct to the 12” watermain on Chippewa Road. The City’s preference would be to connect as close to the end of the cul-de-sac as possible. 34. With Final Plat submittal, include the following: a. Include the location of water service lines and curb stops. b. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water. c. The watermain alignment and connection along the proposed Chippewa Road alignment will be reviewed by the City in further detail with future submittals. The City’s preference for watermain materials is PVC C900. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the Fire Marshal; typically, a maximum of 250’ radius is required to serve the immediate residential areas. d. The City’s preference is to utilize the existing utility crossings on Mohawk Road to minimize the need to disturb the street. This may require removing the existing service stubs from the casings and extending larger mains to the existing north/south trunk line on Mohawk. e. A review of the proposed gate valve locations will be provided by the City Public Works Department. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 4 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx Sanitary Sewer: 35. City design standards require 10.5’ sanitary sewer manhole builds, but at no point shall build depths be less than 8’. With final construction plans, show sanitary sewer service lines and invert elevations on plans; the City requires a minimum depth of 4’ from low floor elevations. 36. Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities (Ten States Standards) guidance does not allow oversizing of mains to achieved full-flow velocities at flatter grades. Confirm capacity and need for larger main, if shown. Complete, 10” pipe changed to 8”. 37. Provide a sanitary sewer stub to the northerly property if gravity sewer is feasible. Complete, stub provided where feasible but applicant noted northerly property will likely need a lift station. Storm Sewer: 38. At the northerly entrance off of Mohawk Road, it appears the FES on the north and south sides of the roadway will not have adequate cover. Consider the use of a catch basin in these locations. Review plans for other instances of pipe cover inadequacies. Complete. 39. Consider adjusting the slope of culvert segment FES801-FES800 to reduce velocity to less than 6 fps as it discharges to Wetland 2. Complete. 40. The maximum design flow at a catch basin for the 10-yr storm event shall be 3 cfs, please review segment CB1503 to CB1502. Complete. 41. With Final Plat submittal, the City will require a common draintile collection system (rigid PVC) for sump pump discharges. A separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharge system should be considered where full basements are proposed. Standard Details Sheets (C7.1 to C7.3) 42. On the typical sections provided, list each street with the proposed street design. For Chippewa Road include with the typical section where the trail is located and the appropriate boulevard width and slopes. 43. Confirm street design with the geotechnical analysis. 44. Provide typical sections for proposed stormwater treatment areas. 45. Provide specific details for each control structure. Traffic & Access 46. The private streets accessing Chippewa Road just east of Mohawk Drive from both the north and south side need to line up with each other. The street should be located as far east as possible. In-progress, the roadways now line up (northerly moved west and southerly moved east) but should be moved to the east as far as possible (line up with what was the northerly location in the previous submittal). 47. Turn lanes should be provided at each site access on the new Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive. An analysis documenting the required length of each turn lane should be provided. 48. Provided a detailed plan showing the required turn lanes at the intersections of Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive and Chippewa Road at Arrowhead Drive consistent with the Chippewa Road Visioning Study recommended improvements. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 5 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 49. Provide safety (sight line) analysis at the site driveways on Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive. Stormwater 50. The developer will need to submit a Stormwater Management Plan and modeling consistent with Medina’s Stormwater Design Manual. Complete. 51. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards and submit for the required permits. Provide permit to City when complete. 52. The City requires two feet of freeboard from structure low openings to 100-year high water levels and EOF’s. a. Freeboard is not met from the 100-yr HWL for lots 19-20, 23-32, Block 8. Complete b. Freeboard is not met from the EOF for lots 71-74, Block 7. c. With an EOF elevation of 987.5 for Wetland 1f, freeboard from the EOF is not met for lot 5, Block 6. d. Freeboard is not met from the 100-yr HWL of Pond 20P for Lots 1, Block 5 e. Lowest basement elevation is mislabeled off by 100 on the following: a. lots 1-5, Block 6 b. 1-3 & 7-10, Block 5. 53. Provide and label maintenance access to all ponding facilities. Easement width shall not be narrower than 20-feet. Clarify access route for Ponds 16P and 15P 54. The table below summarizes the 100-yr bounce in the wetlands from the existing to proposed condition. It also identifies wetland protection classification. According to the City of Medina Stormwater Design Manual, the bounce of water level within the wetland is restricted as summarized below. Please add the wetland protection classification to the table in the appendix of the Stormwater Management Plan. The table below is the allowable bounce for each Manage Classification: The bounce restriction is not met for a majority of the wetlands onsite. 55. The development will need to meet the City’s volume control requirement. The provided narrative indicates stormwater ponds 1P and 20P will be constructed for water reuse. A water reuse design submittal must at a minimum include the following: · An analysis using the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Stormwater Reuse Calculator. Complete City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 6 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx · Provide the stage storage tables for Ponds 1P and 20P, for the permanent pool storage amount, to verify the Estimated reuse storage volume in the calculator. City requires that 2 feet of the permanent pool from the bottom of the pond be maintained and not counted towards reuse total. Complete · Provide an exhibit of the application areas described at 18.75 acres and 11.79 acres for Pond 1P and Pond 20P respectively. · Documentation demonstrating adequacy of soils, storage system, and delivery system. Complete · Operations and maintenance plan. 56. Provide a summary and exhibit showing the floodplain impacts. Filling activities must not increase the stage of the 100-yr flood. Compensatory storage for any filling in the 100-yr floodplain shall be at a ratio of 1:1. 57. Provide an EOF for Wetland 5a/5b at Short Way Road crossing. HydroCAD Modeling: 58. Wetland 1e model information is off by 100. The HWL elevation in the model is reported as 883.92 and should be 983.92, please correct. Complete 59. Drainage from properties to the west of Mohawk Drive are conveyed through the southeasterly portion of the Weston Woods property via the existing creek into the wetland(s). The stormwater modeling and storm sewer design will need to accommodate this flow and conveyance. Model Wetland 5a/5b with storage to ensure proper sizing of the culvert under the roadway and estimate the HWL of this basin area. Provide Culvert sizing information for the culvert at the Short Way Road crossing, this culvert does not appear to be modeled in HydroCAD. Wetlands & Environmental 60. The concept plan shows wetland impact in several locations. Wetland replacement plan approval is required prior to any wetland impact. a. Ensure that culvert outfalls and associated riprap are included in the overall impact calculation. b. Interior roadways are shown to cross wetlands in multiple locations. In order to maintain hydrology between the wetland basins, plans should include culverts under these roadways. If culverts are not proposed, any secondary impacts to wetlands because of reduced hydrology will require replacement at a minimum 2:1 ratio. 61. Consider design alternatives that reduce wetland impacts along Chippewa Road through the DNR wetland such as: c. Use an urban rather than rural section. If urban, utilize surmountable curbing to minimize entrapment of turtles/wildlife. d. Design the trail parallel to the roadway (assuming urban section) or move trail away from roadway alignment (consider using existing roadbed). 62. Include turtle crossing culverts in the design of Chippewa Road within the DNR wetland. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 7 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx 63. Various wetlands may not meet the average and/or minimum buffer requirements approved by the city, as shown in the table below. A variance from the City’s buffer ordinance will be required for these areas. Wetland ID Proposed Buffer Width (ft) City-Approved Buffer Width (ft) WL1d 35 35 avg (25 min) WL1e 50 35 avg (25 min) Confirm these above-listed wetlands meet the minimum buffer width requirements. Specifically, WL1d along the northern boundary and WL1e along the southern border abutting Chippewa Road. 64. Confirm that WL1h meets the average and minimum buffer widths as noted in the table on C2.2. Based on the scale it does not appear to meet the minimum width. 65. Specify the native seed mix to be used to vegetate the upland buffers. 66. Comments provided with EAW responses from governing agencies may require special considerations for endangered species. General notes and informational sheets may need to be incorporated into plans. Further review will be provided with future submittals and resolution of EAW comments. 67. Page L2.1 Landscape Requirements- Tree Replacement identifies 1,720 significant trees on the site with 842 significant trees being removed (49% significant trees removed). Medina City code 828.41 subd. 6 requires that for parcels larger than 20 acres during initial site development up to 10% of significant trees may be removed during initial site development. This would allow the developer to remove 172 trees without needing to provide tree replacement. The plan set identifies allowed removal of 15% or 258 trees which is not correct, unless a waiver has been granted. Based on the proposed % of tree removal the developer will need to provide replacement. 68. Tree replacement is based on caliper measurement, not number of trees. The applicable ratio is 1 caliper inch of replacement tree to 1 caliper inch of significant trees lost. The plan identifies the number of trees required (584) and uses the diameter of the smallest 584 trees, but 828.41 does not have a provision that allows the use of the smallest diameter trees, rather the sum of the inches of tree to be removed should be summed and provided. 69. Acceptable trees species list matches the list provided in 828.10. However, it should be noted in the plans that each of the planted trees will need protection (fencing/bud caps) to protect from herbivory. 70. One of the tree replacement areas identified in the northeast corner of the development is also identified as a potential borrow site in Figure 3-site plan of the EAW document. This may not be conducive to tree planting. Soil amendments may be necessary prior to planting. City of Medina – Weston Woods Preliminary Plat & PUD Plan – Engineering Review November 5, 2020 Page 8 K:\016964-000\Admin\Docs\2020-10-27 Submittal\_2020-11-05 Weston Woods Prelim Plat & PUD - WSB Comments.docx The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City’s standards. We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet. Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet November 5, 2020 RGU PROPOSER City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dusty Finke, Planning Director Phone: (763) 473-4643 dusty.finke@medinamn.gov Mark Smith and City of Medina 2120 Otter Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55110 Mark Smith, Owner Phone: (612) 490-0558 markmoeinc@aol.com i CITY OF MEDINA Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet CONTENTS Title Page INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period ..................................................................... 1 COMMENTS RECEIVED ................................................................................................................. 1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ........................................................................................................... 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) .......................................................................................... 2 Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) ........................................................... 2 Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) ......................................................................... 3 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) ...................................................................... 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) .................................................................................. 4 Hennepin County (County) ................................................................................................................ 6 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) ................................................................. 8 Metropolitan Council (Met Council) ................................................................................................ 11 City of Corcoran (Corcoran) ............................................................................................................ 12 FINDINGS OF FACT ........................................................................................................................ 13 Project Description ........................................................................................................................... 13 Proposed Project ........................................................................................................................... 13 Site Description and Existing Conditions .................................................................................... 13 Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects ........................................ 13 A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects..................................................... 13 B. Cumulative Potential Effects .................................................................................................. 15 C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation .................................. 15 D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled ......................... 16 RECORD OF DECISION ................................................................................................................. 17 TABLES Table 1. Permits and Approvals (updated from EAW Table 3) ........................................................... 16 APPENDICES A. Written Comments Submitted to the City of Medina Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 1 INTRODUCTION Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods are proposed on 139 acres of land in the northern part of the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The project will include approximately 0.5 mile of collector roadway, 108 attached residential units, 42 detached single-family lots, and 30,000 square feet of commercial building space. Site development will include installation of municipal sewer and water, mass grading, and construction of stormwater management systems. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses, including streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater basins. The project includes preservation of approximately 55% of the site, including natural features such as grasslands, wetlands, woodlands and natural habitat. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared as required because of wetland impacts proposed for the construction of Chippewa Road pursuant to Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300, Subp. 27.B. (Public waters, public waters wetlands, and wetlands). The EAW and the respective comments have been reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 to determine if the project has potential for significant environmental effects. This document includes responses to comments received by City of Medina (City), the Findings of Fact supporting the decision, and the Record of Decision indicating an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary for this project. EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1500, the EAW was completed and distributed to persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) distribution list. The notification was published in the EQB Monitor on September 28, 2020, initiating the 30-day public comment period. A public notice or press release was submitted to the Crow River Newspaper. The comment period ended on October 28, 2020. COMMENTS RECEIVED The City received 10 written comment letters from 9 public agencies: 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, September 24, 2020; 2. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission, October 6, 2020; 3. Minnesota Department of Transportation, October 21, 2020; 4. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, October 26, 2020; 5. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, October 27, 2020; 6. Hennepin County, October 28, 2020; 7. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2 letters), October 28, 2020; 8. Metropolitan Council, October 28, 2020; and 9. City of Corcoran, October 28, 2020. None of the comments recommended preparation of an EIS. The City of Medina did not receive comments from individual residents, members of the public, or nonprofit organizations. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS This document responds to comments letters individually. It includes summaries of comments followed by responses. Complete comment letters are included in Appendix A. Responses to comments are generally confined to substantive issues that “address the accuracy and completeness of the material contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation before the project is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed project.” (MN Rules 4410.1600). Some comments Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 2 included general remarks, recommendations, or permit requirements. Such comments are noted for the record. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Water Resources The USACE submitted an acknowledgement letter to identify the USACE project number and file number. Response The comment is noted. Wetland permit application(s) will be prepared and submitted to the USACE as necessary. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) Permits and Approvals The ECWMC will require application and approval of site plans in compliance to Rule D - Stormwater Management, Rule E – Erosion and Sediment Control, Rule F – Floodplain Alteration, Rule G – Wetland Alteration, Rule H - Bridge and Culvert Crossings, and Rule I - Buffer Strips. Table 3 only mentions stormwater management and erosion control approvals. Geology The EAW referenced the 1989 Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County. The Hennepin County Geologic Atlas was updated in 2018. Wetland Buffers The ECWMC requires average buffer widths of 25 feet with, a 10-foot minimum width, around all wetlands and watercourses. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The Hennepin County Interactive Map at https://gis.hennepin.us/naturalresources/map/default.aspx identifies three ecologically significant areas on the site. Two appear to be preserved, and a 3.08-acre mesic oak forest will be destroyed according to the preliminary layouts. We would request the applicants consider preservation of the oak forest area. Response Permits and Approvals The comment is noted. Permit application(s) will be prepared and submitted to the ECWMC as necessary. Table 3 has been updated, as Table 1 in the Findings of Fact section of this document, to change “Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Approval” to “Overall Site Plan Approval.” Geology The reference the 1989 Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County was an error. The EAW should used and should have referenced the Minnesota County Geologic Atlas Story Maps located at: https://umn.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=45158d92cd88426598e2826abb565163. The Hennepin County Geologic Atlas Story Maps use the 2018 Hennepin County Geologic Atlas data. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 3 Wetland Buffers Wetland buffers will comply with ECWMC requirements. As shown in Table 11 of the EAW, avoided wetlands will have minimum buffer widths of at least 20 feet. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The City acknowledges that Hennepin County Ecologically Significant Areas located within the EAW area include: 1. a 1.61-acre moderate quality maple-basswood forest, which will be preserved as parkland; 2. about 9.54 acres of a 16.80-acre moderate quality cattail marsh, which will be preserved; and 3. a 3.08-acre moderate quality mesic oak forest that has been invaded by common buckthorn and will be developed into parts of 11 residential lots and two streets. Recognizing the natural resources on the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. Impacts to the maple-basswood forest and surrounding woodlands as well as the cattail marsh have been avoided. Preservation of the 3.08-acre oak forest is not practicable because the 11 lots and street connections are integral parts of the cohesive project design. As discussed in more detail under the response to Hennepin County, the project will seek additional opportunities to preserve additional woodlands and will need to comply with tree preservation and replacement requirements set forth under Section 828.41 of the Medina City Code. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Signal Operations Regarding the Arrowhead Dr and MN 55 signalized intersection: 1. On page 168 in Appendix of the EAW, it states: “There may be a potential need to split the phase of opposing left turning movements impact each other if the southbound dual left turn lane configuration is considered.” To clarify, a split phase would not be allowed. 2. Turn templates will be needed to determine the feasibility of the southbound dual left turn on Arrowhead Dr. This will be needed with or without widening Arrowhead Dr, and the accompanying Level 2 layout. 3. Any lane reconfiguration would require additional/updated detection. Traffic signal pole mast arms will need to be extended to align with intersection approach lanes, and flashing yellow arrows would be needed for traffic entering MN 55. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 4 Pedestrian/Bicycle MnDOT encourages the trail along the east side of Arrowhead Dr to continue south so that it intersects with MN 55. This would help form a continuous trail system on the east side of Arrowhead Dr. We also encourage non-motorized connections between the developed residential units and the adjacent major employers to give people the opportunity to have convenient travel mode choices. Consider connecting the park trail located to the south of the Mohawk Dr/MN 55 intersection. Permits Any work that affects MnDOT right-of-way will require an appropriate permit from MnDOT. Response Signal Operations The City of Medina will coordinate with MnDOT and Hennepin County on future improvements at Arrowhead Drive and Highway 55. Pedestrian/Bicycle The extension of a multi-use trail is planned along the east side of Arrowhead Drive both north and south of Highway 55. Permits Comment noted. The EAW project area does not include connections to MnDOT right-of-way. Appropriate permits will be obtained for projects outside of the EAW area that affect MnDOT right-of- way. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Historic Properties Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Response Historic Properties The comment is noted. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Surface Waters Additional in-water BMPs are required if the project impacts wetlands below the OHWLs. The EAW should include the MPCA as a regulator of all surface waters as defined by Minn. Stat. 115.01 Subd. 22. (Waters of the state). Even if surface waters do not fall under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction or are exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act, all surface waters are regulated by the MPCA and any surface water impact described in the EAW may require mitigation. The MPCA requires applicants for 401 Water Quality Certification to complete an Antidegradation form. The Antidegradation form and Draft Certification must be public noticed by the MPCA. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 5 Wastewater A map showing the project sewer and downstream sewer path to the wastewater treatment plant would be useful. Stormwater Because the project will disturb at least 50 acres of land, the SWPPP for the project will require review and approval from the MPCA prior to obtaining MPCA NPDES General Construction Stormwater(CSW) Permit coverage. The EAW does not mention additional requirements for construction sites that drain to impaired waters. The Project will be required to install additional BMPs during construction. The CSW Permit requires maintenance of 50-foot undisturbed buffers adjacent to all surface waters or redundant down gradient sediment control BMPs to protect these waters. Wetlands on the site may not be utilized for treatment of stormwater unless they have gone through the wetland mitigation process. The MPCA General CSW Permit requires that volume reduction practices be considered first, prior to wet sediment basins, for some or all water retention. The project owner will need to ensure that lots sold to new owners such as contractors or homeowners maintain CSW Permit coverage via use of the subdivision registration process. Response Surface Waters Comment noted. The EAW noted the potential need for Section 401 Water Quality Certification or Waiver from the MPCA. It is understood that waters of the state include all surface waters and that some waters of the state serve stormwater storage, conveyance, or quality functions. The proposed project will include a stormwater management system perpetuate those stormwater functions after development. Wastewater The EAW stated that wastewater from the project will be routed through the City of Medina sanitary sewer system and ultimately to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (MWWTP). The MWWTP is located on the Mississippi River near Pig’s Eye Lake in St. Paul and is operated by Metropolitan Council. The EAW further stated that the MWWTP is on the east bank of the Mississippi River, approximately 3 miles south of downtown St. Paul, and that the City and Metropolitan Council have planned for increased capacity to convey and treat sanitary wastewater. The EAW indicated wastewater facilities are sufficient to treat anticipated demand, and therefore a map is not needed to address environmental effects or comply with state rules or guidelines. Stormwater Permit requirements have been noted and shared with the project owner. The project will be required to comply with the NPDES/SDS General Construction Stormwater (CSW) Permit. This is indicated under Items 10.b and 11.b.ii of the EAW. The suitability of soils for infiltration will be assessed during project engineering. Soils over uplands on the site include loams and clay loams, and the fine texture of these soils is expected to limit the potential for infiltration. The project will consider water reuse of stormwater for irrigation and other methods of volume reduction will be considered during engineering design for the project. This approach will ensure compliance with requirements of the General NPDES/SDS Permit for Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 6 Construction Activities. The City acknowledges that the CSW Permit will require preservation of a 50- foot natural buffer, or if such buffer is infeasible, redundant (double) perimeter sediment controls (e.g., silt fence), to protect wetlands and surface waters within 50 feet of earth disturbance during construction. Hennepin County (County) Land Use What is the long-term plan for the upland acres in the north-central portion of the site? Are these slated for development in future efforts or are these available for restoration or some long-term easement? Restoring these acres could be considered as an offset to removing trees in other areas (with preference to avoiding removal of native, good quality contiguous forestlands). Stormwater Using design storms based on historical rainfall is unlikely to be sufficient for the lifespan of the proposed homes in this development. We strongly encourage using design storms that reflect recent record rainfall patterns and future projected conditions and consider placement of buildings that are likely to not be in conflict with future highwater levels. The project area does not drain to County Ditch 16. The project drains north to an unnamed creek (DNR Public Watercourse ID 27017a), then into South Fork Rush Creek just north of County Road 10. It then drains NE to Rush Creek (confluence near Interstate 94), Elm Creek, and eventually the Mississippi River. Is there information on existing site drainage, such as drain tile, that could affect runoff rates? Existing drain tile should be decommissioned during or as stormwater infrastructure to prevent future flooding concerns. We encourage consideration of outside funding to exceed stormwater requirements. Wetlands Please specify what party is responsible for inspection and maintenance of buffers and how accountability will be established. Can you specify where wetland credits will be purchased from? Wildlife and Ecological Resources Contiguous forest provides critical habitat and migratory space for numerous terrestrial species. Other than Baker Park, only a handful of tracts of this size still exist in Medina. County staff encourages site developers to find ways to maintain this wooded area for new and current Medina residents. In addition, Medina City Code Section 828.41 states that no more than 10% of Significant Trees may be removed for Initial Site Developments greater than 10 acres. This appears to be inconsistent with the proposed amount of removal as shown in Figure 12. A Tree Preservation Plan should be added to the list of necessary approvals in Table 3. We disagree that the removal of tens of acres of grassland and forestland habitat wouldn’t have a significant impact in wildlife habitat within the City of Medina. Removal of acres of forests and destruction of the grassland has potential to cause displacement of species like migratory songbirds that rely on woodlands for stopover habitat. These impacts should be more clearly stated. Transportation A dual left turn is assumed at Hwy 55 & Arrowhead and discussed in a “Visioning” study. This study also mentioned the need to add capacity for the southbound left movement at Hwy 55 & Arrowhead. This intersection is owned by MnDOT and would require their approval to do this. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 7 Response Land Use As indicated in the text and on Figure 3 of the EAW, the upland area in the north-central portion of the site is a potential borrow area. Soil excavated from this area may be used to help balance earthwork and provide opportunities for compensatory floodplain storage. Following grading, the area will be restored and provide additional preservation and habitat. Much of the area may be converted to open water habitat, some more than six feet deep. Stormwater Final stormwater design for the project will follow industry standard protocols. Protocols have not yet been developed to exceed industry standards. Atlas 14 precipitation frequency estimates have been used to design the stormwater management features and establish flood elevations for this development. At this time, Atlas 14 is the industry’s best available information for design and operating stormwater infrastructure. At least two feet of vertical separation will be established between HWLs basins, emergency overflow elevations, and lowest openings of nearby buildings. The ultimate overflow route for the site is a large wetland complex that has a large capacity to attenuate extreme flow events. Water from stormwater basins may be reused for irrigation. This practice is expected to help reduce stormwater runoff volumes. County Ditch 16 is labelled on part of the DNR watercourse, downstream from the project area and upstream from the South Fork of Rush Creek, as shown on the National Map and USGS Topographic Map (https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/). Drain tiles are not known by the owner to occur onsite and were not observed onsite during the wetland delineation. Drainage will be addressed in detail during final engineering. The possibility of state or county grants for enhanced stormwater practices is noted. Wetlands The City of Medina will be responsible for construction inspection for compliance with wetland buffer requirements. Once buffers are established, the Homeowners’ Association will be responsible for wetland buffer maintenance, with oversight by the City of Medina. Wetland credits will be purchased from approved wetland banks with available credits in appropriate geographic area(s) at the time of wetland permit application and approval. Details are unknown at this time. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Recognizing the natural resources upon the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes woodland preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 8 mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. The project proponent will need to submit a Tree Preservation Plan as part of the Preliminary Plat application, which was listed in Table 3 of the EAW. The Tree Preservation Plan will need to comply with tree preservation and replacement requirements set forth under Section 828.41 of the Medina City Code. The project design is consistent with City land use plans for the area, which include extension of municipal utilities and a collector roadway. The proposed design minimizes tree removal when compared to an earlier development proposal. Opportunities for additional tree preservation practices will be considered as project design and review advances. Such practices may include those listed in Section 828.41, Subd. 8 of the Medina City Code. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses. The project is designed to impact mostly cropland and this design helps minimize impacts on other more sensitive habitats like woodlands and wetlands. Nearly 55% of the project site will be preserved in open space, including grasslands, woodlands, wetlands and natural habitat. The City acknowledges that the habitat impacts may displace species like migratory songbirds. See the Response to the MN DNR for additional discussion. Transportation Comment noted. The City is coordinating with MnDOT regarding intersections and turn lanes. See the Response to MnDOT for more detail. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) Permits and Approvals A DNR Water Appropriation Permit is required for pumping both surface water (ponds and streams) and groundwater. Pumping water from wetlands is not exempt from DNR permitting requirements because wetland water is not stormwater from ponds constructed in upland areas. Surface Waters The DNR Public Water Wetland on the site is actually 27-493W (not 27-419W). Stormwater The increase in impervious surfaces will also increase the amount of road salt used in the project area. Chloride released into local lakes and streams does not break down, and instead accumulates in the environment, potentially reaching levels that are toxic to aquatic wildlife and plants. Consider promoting local business and city applicator participation in the Smart Salting Training offered through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Winter maintenance staff from cities and private companies have attended Smart Salting training and used the knowledge to reduce salt use and save money. Groundwater Appropriation A DNR Water Appropriation Permit will be required for pumping water for irrigation in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or one million gallons per year. A DNR Water Appropriation Permit may be needed to construct roadway crossings of ditches and streams on the site. Wetlands and Watercourses Further discussion with DNR is needed regarding the anticipated impact to Public Waters. A modified design that follows the existing Chippewa Road impact corridor could increase the likelihood of permit approval. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 9 Wildlife and Ecological Resources The EAW states that there are 20 acres of woodland onsite, and the project would retain less than 30% of that land cover. We recommend retaining more than 5.8 acres of remnant woodlands onsite. The forest in the south half of the project area should be prioritized for retention. Leaving more can provide a great value as source of outdoor activity and involvement for the residents living in this neighborhood. Consider making a walking path through the park to encourage residents to get outdoors and enjoy their neighborhood woods. Tree trimming and removal is discouraged April 1 through July 15 unless all cuts and wounds on oaks are painted within 10 minutes with a water-soluble paint or shellac. Part of the project area has been identified as a site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance by the Minnesota Biological Survey. This site contains part of a Northern Wet Meadow/Carr native plant community. Consider alternatives that avoid or minimize disturbance to this biodiversity site. The project has the potential to impact Blanding’s turtles, a state-listed threatened species, through direct fatalities or habitat disturbance/destruction due to dewatering, excavation, fill, or other activities. To minimize and avoid Blanding’s turtles: 1. avoid working in Type 3 wetlands; 2. avoid bisecting wetlands with roadways; 3. avoid wetland impacts during turtle hibernation (October 15 to April 15) unless the area has water less than 14 inches deep; 4. use surmountable curbs whenever new curbs are to be installed on roadways; 5. limit use of erosion control blankets ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural netting’ types that do not contain plastic components; and 6. note that hydro-mulch products may contain small plastic fibers that should not be used near Public Waters. The Blanding’s turtle flyer must be given to all contractors working in the area. Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR Nongame Specialist. If turtles are in imminent danger, they must be moved out of harm’s way by hand. Consider using native seed mixes in landscaping to provide habitat for the federally endangered rusty patched bumble bee. Trumpeter swans, a state-listed species of special concern, have been documented nesting in the vicinity of the proposed project. Construction activities that occur during the nesting season, late April through early June, could disrupt nesting swans if present. Response Permits and Approvals Comment noted. It is anticipated that one or more DNR Water Appropriation Permits may be needed for construction and that water will be pumped from stormwater basins and metered during reuse in irrigation. Surface Waters Use of the DNR wetland number 27-419W was an oversight, as the MN DNR correctly stated, it should have read 27-493W. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 10 Stormwater The City reviews and implements educational and long-term chloride strategies set forth in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq- iw11-06ff.pdf). Educational programs such as the Smart Salting Training can be made available to private contractors as well as City staff. In addition, project developers and builders have the ability to require that water softeners in new homes are metered by water use rather than by time, softening only when necessary. Accordingly, chloride reduction strategies will be considered to the extent practicable. Groundwater Appropriation Comment noted. Wetlands and Watercourses The project team will need to coordinate the MN DNR public waters work permit process with the DNR area hydrologist to consider design alternatives, permitting standards, and mitigation. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Recognizing the natural resources upon the site, the City completed a woodland assessment well before the EAW was completed. A senior ecologist consultant reviewed woodlands on the site to advise the City on woodland preservation priorities and balancing woodland preservation with public infrastructure and land development. The woodland review found that, without management, the 3.08-acre oak forest would likely transition to buckthorn/elm/basswood/ash due to oak mortality resulting from wind events, disease, and old age. In contrast, review of the woodland to be preserved as parkland found that it had less buckthorn and more young oak and maple trees regenerating in the understory. The review found that the proposed tree preservation area provides the highest quality woodland with the least buckthorn and the most tree regeneration. The site design prioritizes woodland preservation based on these findings, while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. The woodland in the southern part of the site was prioritized for protection, as the 7.15-acre mostly wooded park will be located in this area and will include trails where residents will be able to appreciate nature. The preferred July 16-March 31 season for tree trimming and removal is noted. The project design minimizes tree removal to the extent practicable. Opportunities for additional tree preservation may be identified during the final design process. Responses to the ECWMC and Hennepin County include additional discussion on this topic. The MN Biological Survey site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance is a sedge meadow located in the northeastern part of the EAW area, and the proposed project area will completely avoid this area. The EAW noted that the development could have effects on the state-threatened Blanding’s turtle, even though the lack of sandy soils limits upland habitat suitability for Blanding’s turtles in the project area. The development has been designed to minimize wetland impacts in part to minimize potential effects on Blanding’s turtles. The project design will incorporate surmountable curbs and the construction process will specify erosion control materials constructed of organic fibers rather than plastic. Blanding’s turtle stipulations will be added to project construction plans with a Blanding’s turtle detail sheet that will: 1. specify use of surmountable curbs whenever new curbs are to be installed on roadways; Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 11 2. limit use of erosion control blankets to ‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural netting’ types that do not contain plastic; 3. include the Blanding’s turtle flyer, noting that turtles observed during construction should be moved to safe undisturbed habitat; and 4. include DNR Nongame Specialist contact information for reporting Blanding’s turtles if any are observed. Use of native seed mixes containing wildflowers beneficial to animal pollinators will be considered for disturbed wetland buffer areas and the stormwater basin margins during detailed design. The EAW noted that trumpeter swans, a state-listed special concern species, have been observed on nearby water bodies. The seasonal vulnerability of nesting swans during late April-early June is noted. As noted in the EAW, wetlands in the project area contain only small areas of open water and lack the larger open water areas generally preferred by trumpeter swans. The EAW therefore concluded that the project has low potential for disturbance of trumpeter swans and other waterfowl. Metropolitan Council (Met Council) Trails The Diamond Lake Regional Trail Search Corridor currently being master planned by Three Rivers Park District has a potential trail route that travels north-south along Arrowhead Drive in Medina, immediately adjacent to the proposed site development: https://www.letstalkthreerivers.org/diamond-lake-regional- trail-master-plan. The City should coordinate future development activities in this location with Three Rivers Park District to consider future routing of the Diamond Lake Regional Trail. Medina’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for neighborhoods well connected with roads, trails, or sidewalks. Sidewalks within the development provide better pedestrian facilities. Permits and Approvals Met Council needs to review, comment, and issue a non-objection decision relative to the MPCA construction permit before connection can be made to the City’s wastewater disposal system. This should be noted in Table 3 under Item 8 in the EAW. Wildlife and Ecological Resources Met Council staff recommends use of surmountable curbs on roadway medians and curbing to accommodate movements of Blanding’s turtles and other wildlife. Council staff recommends use of landscaping with native plants to support pollinators, wildlife, and reduced chemical use. The development should provide a carbon sink to offset the increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the additional natural gas and electricity production. Response Trails The City is actively involved with Three Rivers Park District in the Diamond Lake Regional Trail Master Plan process. At this point, potential regional trail routes are not located on the subject property, but local trails will be provided within the project area. Pedestrian connectivity will be reviewed and improved as opportunities arise during development review. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 12 Permits and Approvals Table 3 has been updated, as Table 1 in the Findings of Fact section of this document, to include Metropolitan Council approval of the Sanitary Sewer Connection. Required permits will be obtained. Wildlife and Ecological Resources The City intends to utilize surmountable curb wherever possible in the project area. Native and pollinator-friendly landscaping will be implemented as practical in common areas such as wetland buffers and stormwater basin margins. See the response the MN DNR for more discussion on this topic. City of Corcoran (Corcoran) Trails and Traffic As noted in our June 22, 2017 comments on your draft Comprehensive Plan, we hope that the City will continue the trail planned on Mohawk all the way north to the municipal boundary. This trail connection to the planned trail in Corcoran is even more important with the planned change to residential land use. The connection (shown as Chippewa Road) to Arrowhead Drive to the east, as well as Mohawk Drive to Horseshoe Trail to the north, will increase traffic through a corridor that is currently inadequate to handle increased traffic. North and east bound traffic will also enter the Hackamore/CR116 intersection. Improvements to this intersection and Hackamore Road are currently under study and this project will be considered in development of the design for shared improvements. Response Trails and Traffic The properties north of the EAW area in Medina are designated Future Development Area and are not planned for development prior to 2040, but may be considered for potential development in future Comprehensive Plan processes. Medina’s trail plan will be evaluated in future Comprehensive Plan updates. The Chippewa Road Extension and other improvements were analyzed in the Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study, included in Appendix E of the EAW, and the project Traffic Study, included in Appendix F of the EAW, also addressed traffic demands of the area. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 13 FINDINGS OF FACT Project Description Proposed Project Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods are proposed on 139 acres of land in the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The project will include approximately 0.5 mile of collector roadway, 108 attached residential units, 42 detached single-family lots, and 30,000 square feet of commercial building space. Site development will include installation of municipal sewer and water, mass grading, and construction of stormwater management systems. The project will convert about 41.9 acres of cropland, 14.2 acres of woodland, 4.8 acres of wetland, and 3.4 acres of grassland to suburban uses, including streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater basins. Site Description and Existing Conditions The project area is dominated by cropland and wetland. The project area is roughly 45% wetland, 30% cropland, 15% woodland, and 10% grassland and turf. Site topography ranges from rolling to flat. The area has mostly loamy and organic soils and 30 feet of topographic relief. Decision Regarding the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp. 7 lists four criteria that shall be considered in deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects. Those criteria and the City’s findings are presented below. A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (A) indicates the first factor that the City must consider is the “type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.” The City’s findings are set forth below. 1. Cover Types. The project will convert about 64 acres of cropland, woodland, wetland, and grassland to collector roadway, streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater features. After development, the project area will include about 75 acres of open space consisting of wetlands, wetland buffers, parkland, and stormwater features. Avoided wetlands will be protected by about 15 acres of buffers. 2. Shorelands and Floodplains. The project area is not within or adjacent to a wild and scenic river, critical area, agricultural preserve, or shoreland overlay district. The project area includes part of DNR public waters wetland 27-493W, which corresponds to a mapped floodplain. Chippewa Road is expected to impact less than one acre-foot of flood storage and the residential development is expected to be constructed on lands above existing flood elevations. Floodplain storage mitigation for Chippewa Road will be incorporated into the stormwater management systems of Weston Woods to minimize effects on regional flood elevations. 3. Land Use. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project is consistent with the City of Medina 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which guides the northern part of the area for Low Density Residential (LDR) use and the southern part of the site for a combination of LDR and Medium Density Residential (MDR) use. 4. Geology and Soils. Development grading is expected to affect about 68 acres of land and involve movement of about 275,000 cubic yards of soil to construct streets, residential areas, a commercial area, a park with a trail, and stormwater features. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 14 5. Water Quality. Compliance with stormwater requirements will minimize and mitigate potential adverse effects on receiving waters. Project construction will add about 19.9 acres of impervious surface to the site, consisting of streets, parking areas, buildings, and driveways. Stormwater management practices will be implemented to manage stormwater from the increased impervious surface area as required to control runoff rates, runoff volumes, and pollutants. Concentrations of agricultural pollutants, such as pesticides, fertilizers, and sediment, may decrease after development. 6. Wetlands and Surface Waters. The project has been designed to avoid and minimize effects on wetlands to the extent practicable. Up to 4.81 acres of wetlands, watercourses, and ditches may be impacted for roadways, stormwater basins and residential lot development. The project proponents will be required to demonstrate compliance with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, potentially the Minnesota Public Waters Act, and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. These may require water appropriation permits, evaluation of alternatives, avoiding and minimizing effects on wetlands, and replacing unavoidable wetland impacts at a 2:1 ratio. 7. Wastewater. The project is expected to produce normal domestic wastewater that is typical of residential and commercial developments. The City and Metropolitan Council have planned for sufficient wastewater conveyance and treatment capacity to serve the proposed development. 8. Hazardous Materials. Much of the project area has been used as cropland since at least the 1930s. The site is not known to include environmental hazards. One water well, known to previously exist on the site, has been sealed and abandoned. The agricultural land use history suggests a low potential for environmental contamination. 9. Ecological Resources. Project development will convert about 64 acres of cropland, woodland, wetland, and grassland to collector roadway, streets, homes, lawns, landscaping, and stormwater features. This habitat conversion is expected affect the number and type of wildlife species in the area, but changes in wildlife abundance are not expected to be regionally significant. The site design prioritizes preservation based on site analysis while accommodating development that efficiently uses and supports surrounding infrastructure, responds to certain growth mandates placed upon the City, and accommodates local preferences related to land use type and density limitations. 10. Historic Resources. A Phase I Archaeological Survey completed for the project area in September 2019 found no previously documented sites within the project area. A site survey consisted of a surface survey over plowed fields and shovel testing in higher probability areas like uplands next to wetland. No prehistoric cultural resources were documented during the site survey. The project is not expected to adversely affect archaeological or historic resources. The State Historic Preservation Office concluded there are no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. 11. Visual Resources. There are no scenic views or vistas on or adjacent to the project area. Substantial effects on visual resources are not anticipated in conjunction with project development. 12. Air Quality. Estimated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the project are not considered to cause potential for significant environmental effects. There are no readily available GHG emission estimates that show a comparably sized Minnesota project with potential to exceed the mandatory EAW threshold of 100,000 tons of CO2e per year (Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300, Subp. 15.B.). Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 15 13. Noise. Local noise levels are expected to increase temporarily during project construction, but noise levels are expected to be at or near existing levels after construction is complete. Noise levels are not anticipated to exceed state standards. Noise generated by construction equipment and residential building construction will be limited primarily to daylight hours when noise levels are commonly higher than at night. 14. Transportation. The traffic to be generated by the proposed project does not raise capacity or safety concerns. The Traffic Study concluded that extension of Chippewa Road will result in improved operations at the Willow Drive and Arrowhead Drive intersections with TH 55. When accompanied by extension of Chippewa Road, the proposed development will not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) at area intersections. 15. Climate Change. The project will be affected by climate change and it will also make an incremental contribution to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases. These effects are similar to comparable developments, as everything on earth either contributes to climate change, is impacted by climate change, or both. B. Cumulative Potential Effects Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (B) indicates the second factor the City must consider is “whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Projects typically combine to produce cumulative effects on municipal resources like water supply and wastewater treatment. The City of Medina has planned for growth and increased capacity to address these cumulative effects. The proposed project will be consistent with land use policies for areas served by municipal sewer and water. Cumulative effects of residential development on natural resources may include the loss of agricultural land and the loss and fragmentation of wildlife habitat. Surface water runoff from the project area will infiltrate into the soil or be treated in basins prior to discharge to wetlands and streams. Stormwater regulations and water quality BMPs are expected to minimize cumulative effects of post-development runoff on downstream waters. Climate change impacts are incremental and cumulative in nature. Land development contributes to climate change primarily through combustion of fossil fuels for space heating, electricity, and transportation. Energy efficient building materials, appliances, utility-sponsored renewable energy programs, are intended to reduce climate change impacts. C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (C) indicates the third factor the City must consider is the “extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Environmental effects on surface waters, wetlands, wastewater, and traffic are subject to additional approvals and/or mitigation through requirements of local, state, and federal regulations, ordinances, management plans, and permitting processes. The following permits and approvals are required for the Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 16 project addressed under the EAW. These processes will provide additional opportunity to require mitigation. Potential environmental effects associated with this project will be mitigated in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. The City of Medina therefore finds that potential environmental effects of the project are less than significant and “subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority.” Table 1. Permits and Approvals (updated from EAW Table 3) Unit of Government Type of Application Status City of Medina EAW Decision To be applied for City of Medina Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approved City of Medina Rezoning, PUD, and Preliminary Plat To be applied for City of Medina Final Plat and PUD To be applied for City of Medina Wetland Delineation Approval Approved City of Medina Wetland Impact and Replacement Approval To be applied for City of Medina Grading Permit To be applied for City of Medina Demolition and Building Permits To be applied for City of Medina Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Approval To be applied for City of Medina Municipal Water Connection Permit To be applied for City of Medina Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit To be applied for Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Overall Site Plan Approval To be applied for Metropolitan Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approved Metropolitan Council Sanitary Sewer Connection To be applied for Minnesota Department of Health Water Main Extension Approval To be applied for Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit To be applied for if needed Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Public Waters Work Permit To be applied for if needed Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Utility Crossing License To be applied for if needed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency NPDES/SDS General Permit To be applied for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Approval To be applied for if needed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Section 401 Water Quality Certification or Waiver To be applied for if needed U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Concurrence and Waters of the U.S. Approved D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (D) indicates the final factor the City must consider is the “extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs.” The City’s findings are set forth below. Record of Decision – Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet 17 1. The proposed project design, plans, EAW, related studies, and mitigation measures apply knowledge, approaches, standards, and best management practices gained from previous experience and projects that have, in general, successfully mitigated potential offsite environmental effects. 2. The EAW, in conjunction with this document, contains or references known studies that provide information or guidance regarding environmental effects that can be anticipated and controlled. 3. Other projects studied under environmental reviews in Minnesota have included studies and mitigation measures comparable to those included in this EAW. 4. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be addressed by project design, assessment, permitting and development processes and by ensuring conformance with regional and local plans. 5. The environmental effects of this development can be anticipated and controlled by the City’s PUD application and review process and other regulatory processes. 6. Considering the results of environmental review and permitting processes for similar projects, the City of Medina finds that the environmental effects of the project can be adequately anticipated and controlled. Based on the EAW, comments received, responses to comments, and criteria above, the City of Medina finds that the Chippewa Road Extension and Weston Woods project does not have potential for significant environmental effects and does not require the preparation of an EIS. RECORD OF DECISION Based on the EAW, the response to comments, and the Findings of Fact, the City of Medina, the RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following: 1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700; 2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained; 3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects; 4. The City makes a “Negative Declaration;” and 5. An EIS is not required. November 6, 2020 Dusty Finke AICP City Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Weston Woods of Medina; Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Development Plan for PIDs 03-118-23-42-0001, 03-118-23-41-0001, and 03-118-23-43-0005 Dear Mr. Finke: We represent Mark of Excellence Homes (“MOE”) regarding the proposed Weston Woods of Medina project (“Project”) located in the City of Medina (“City”). The Project includes development on approximately 131 gross acres of land located north of Highway 55 and East of Mohawk Drive with a mix of single-family development, twinhomes, and row townhomes. This letter is the narrative in support of the following applications by MOE: (1) rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD); (2) approval of PUD development plan; and (3) Preliminary Plat This narrative describes the Project’s compliance with requirements for approval of the applications, as well as the significant public benefit associated with the Project. Background and Project Description The Project includes four parcels (the “Properties), consisting of the “Southerly Site,” totaling approximately 52.61 acres, located east of Mohawk Drive and north of Highway 55; and the “Northerly Site” an approximately 74.74-acre parcel located east of Mohawk Drive and immediately north of and adjacent to the Southerly Site. MOE is seeking to develop the Properties with a mix of single-family homes, twinhomes, and row townhomes with an average overall density of approximately 3.08 units per acre. The Northerly Site will include approximately 47.33 acres of wetland and buffer area. The Southerly Site will include approximately 26.42 acres of wetland and buffers, and 7.17 buildable acres of open space (which includes 5.1 net acres of parkland). Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 2 Gross Area Wetlands/Buffer Parks/Open Space Net Developable Northerly Site 74.74 acres 47.33 acres 0 acres 27.41 acres Southerly Site 52.61 acres 26.42 acres 5.1 net acres 21.3 acres Project Total 127.35 acres 73.75 acres 5.1 net acres 48.71 acres The net developable acreage is based on the Metropolitan Council’s formula for calculation of net residential density calculated by the gross acres less wetlands, buffers, public parks and open space, arterial road rights-of-way, and floodplains. The resulting density of the proposed PUD Development Plan is as follows: Proposed Net Developable Dwelling Units Density Northerly Site 27.41 acres 76 proposed 2.80 units/acre Southerly Site 21.3 acres 74 proposed 3.47 units/acre Project Total 48.71 acres 150 Units 3.08 units/acre The proposed units within the Project will be allocated among single-family residences, twinhomes, and row townhomes as follows: Housing Types Acres Number Single-Family Residences 16.6 acres 42 Units Twinhomes 27.41 acres 76 Units Row Townhomes 4.7 acres 32 Units Project Total 48.71 acres 150 Units The Project will also include the improvement of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive on the west to Arrowhead Drive on the east, as well as the completion of a water loop connected to the City’s municipal water system. Land Use Applications MOE is seeking approval of the following zoning and subdivision applications: 1. Rezoning: Planned Unit Development The predominant zoning district for the Properties is Rural Residential-Urban Reserve (RR-UR), with approximately 5.25 acres of the southernmost portion of the Southerly Site zoned as Commercial-Highway (CH). MOE is seeking a rezoning of both Properties to the Planned Unit Development (PUD), along with review and approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD Development Plan. The PUD District will allow for the flexible application of the City’s Zoning Code (“City Code”) while allowing for higher standards of site and building design, along with the preservation of high-quality natural resources located on the Properties. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 3 The applications are consistent the Comp Plan amendments which were recently approved by the Met Council and subject to conditions adopted by the City Council. The Comp plan amendment moved staging of development from 2025 to 2020 on the Northerly Site. On the Southerly Site, the Comp Plan designation was changed from Business to Mixed Residential (MR) designation to accommodate the proposed mix of residential development and staging of the Properties. The overall density will be 3.08 units per acre over the entire Project, with higher density located on the Southerly Site. On the Northerly Site, the underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R2. The R2 zoning district is consistent with the Low Density Residential (LDR) land use guiding and allows clustering of smaller lots to support protection and enhancement of natural areas through the preservation of open space, wetlands, and woodlands, as well as buffering from adjacent streets and uses, or the creation of additional recreational opportunities. R2 Proposed Twinhomes Minimum Lot Size (Two-family) 5,000 s.f. per unit 3,948 to 5,500 s.f. Minimum Lot Width (two-family) 50 feet 42 feet Minimum Lot Depth 90 feet 94 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet to curb (equiv. to 13 foot to right-of-way) Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 25 feet to curb (equiv. to 13 foot to right-of-way) Side Yard Setback (two-family) 10 feet 30 feet between buildings Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 66.4% maximum, not including open space between lots On the Southerly Site, the underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R3 for the townhomes. The R3 zoning district is consistent with Medium Density Residential (MDR) land use guiding and allows for development of townhome portion of the Project. The underlying zoning requested with the PUD is R2 for the single-family homes. The R2 zoning district is consistent with Low Density Residential (LDR) land use guiding and allows for development of single- family portion of the Project Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 4 R2 Proposed Single Family Minimum Lot Size 8,000 s.f. 9,738 to 17,058 s.f. Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 70 feet Minimum Lot Depth 90 feet 130 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 30 feet Side Yard Setback (combined) 15 feet (10 & 5) 20 feet (10 & 10) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 30 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 30 feet Collector Setback 40 feet 50 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 34% maximum R3 Requirement Proposed Townhomes Minimum Net Area per Unit 7,920 s.f. not including reductions 6,472 s.f. Maximum Net Area per Unit 8,700 s.f. 6,472 s.f. Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 40 feet Local Road Setback 40 feet 40 feet Collector Road Setback (Chippewa) 50 feet 40 feet Private Road Setback 25 feet 23 to 26 feet to curb Minimum Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 30.5% for the total area 2. Consistency with PUD Criteria The Project is consistent with the standards and purpose of the City’s PUD Ordinance under Section 827.25 as follows: a. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. The Project is designed to accommodate a mix of housing types and densities while preserving and protecting wetlands, tree stands and open spaces. The Project includes a combined 73.75 acres of wetland and buffer conservation areas, as well as a combined 7.17 acres of wooded open space or parks. The 5.1-acre park and adjacent open space on the Southerly Site includes over 300 hardwood trees. The park area will become a neighborhood asset providing open space and Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 5 trail facilities for use by the residents of the development and the general public. This protects and preserves one of the City’s natural resources. b. Higher standards of site and building design. The PUD allows the Project to provide a variety of high-quality housing styles, including single family lots, twinhomes and row townhomes in a high-quality design, integrated into the open space and wetlands. The single-family homes will be located adjacent to natural areas, including wetlands, park and open space, and preserved woodlands. The townhomes have high-end features and the exteriors will use an extensive amount of glass creating an abundance of natural light on three sides. Deep garages will provide homeowners room to store trash and recycling bins indoors. To improve exteriors, the Applicant has hired a designer to create a variety of architectural features to enhance the front of the building units. The addition of the row homes in the northwest quadrant of the Southerly Site provides a housing option for newer families in proximity to the park and open space. c. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high-quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. To the north on the Northerly Site, more than two-thirds of the site will be preserved as wetlands and woodlands providing natural buffer areas within the development. All of the proposed residences on the Northerly Site are clustered on the west of the property, which provides more than a 1,300-foot buffer between the Bridgewater neighborhood and the nearest home in the development. To the south on the Southerly Site, nearly sixty percent (60%) of the site is preserved in wetlands, woodlands, park and open space. Specifically, the developer will dedicate a 5.1-acre park with adjacent open space area preserving the existing wooded area including over 300 hardwood trees. This preservation effort will become a defining feature of the development and will preserve one of the City’s finest natural resources. d. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. The Development Plan shows several ponding areas designed to manage storm water and minimize storm water impacts from the development. MOE will work with the City to incorporate low impact development and best practices throughout the development. For instance, the plan proposes construction of stormwater reservoirs to provide irrigation to landscaping on the Northerly Site. e. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 6 The Project preserves and enhances wetland and woodland areas creating large buffers to surrounding development and large portions of the Properties will be dedicated as parkland and open space. MOE will work with the City to enhance buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. For instance, heavy landscaping and tree planting along Mohawk Road will provide a buffer to roadways. f. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. The Project is the result of a creative use of land that allows the placement of a variety of home sites on the Properties in a way that preserves wetlands, woodlands, and open space while still meeting the required density contained within the City’s land use regulatory documents. The Project ranges in density with the higher density located nearest to the corner of Mohawk Drive and Chippewa Road. The overall net density in the Project is 3.2 units per acre, which is consistent with both City and Metropolitan Council guidance for new residential development. g. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. MOE has designed the PUD to maximize the use of developable land while preserving natural features such as wetlands, woodlands, and upland buffers to nearby development. On both Properties, the footprint and density of housing maximized in a manner that reduces the impervious surfaces and reduces the in the size and length of infrastructure serving the development. In addition, the Applicant has planned construction of new infrastructure, including the extension of Chippewa Road between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Road, as well as the water loop which will serve surrounding neighborhoods and reduce the City’s need for public investment in infrastructure. h. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) Met Council and the City have approved a Comp Plan amendment that allows for the concurrent development of both the Northerly and Southerly Sites as a single residential PUD offering a variety of housing types and densities, while preserving natural and opens spaces. Preserving the wetlands, buffers, open space, and tree stands is consistent with the Comp Plan, and extending Chippewa Road and the water loop will further the Comp Plan’s infrastructure goals. The Project will effectuate the objectives of the Comp Plan as proposed. i. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. The use of the PUD not only results in a more desirable and creative environment but is essential to approval of the plan as proposed and permits a mix of densities while preserving natural and opens spaces. The Project provides several public benefits, including the preservation of Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 7 woodlands, wetlands, and open spaces and a reduction in impervious surface as discussed above, along with the extension of Chippewa Road and the water loop. 3. Public Benefit In conjunction with the City Council’s review of the PUD Concept Plan on March 17, 2020, the Developer proposed significant and specific public benefit as follows: a. Park Dedication (1) The Developer will dedicate a 5.1-acre park and adjacent open space which includes the wooded knoll on the Southerly Site. (2) The Developer will construct a paved trail segment through the park which is accessible. The estimated cost for the trail is $110,000. (3) The Developer will provide an 8-foot wide bituminous trail from the park entrance to Mohawk Road, then along Mohawk Road up to Chippewa Road. The cost of the trail is $71,000, not including the value of the right- of-way. (4) The Developer will provide an 8-foot wide bituminous trail along the new Chippewa Road, from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. This cost of the trail is estimated at $150,000. With staff input, the trail may be constructed over the existing Chippewa Road right-of-way to allow for water control between the north and south basins. (5) The Developer will provide an internal 8-foot wide bituminous trail from the twin homes on the Northerly Site to the new Chippewa Road. The estimated cost of this improvement is $18,000. b. Street Dedication and Construction (1) The Developer will dedicate an 80-foot wide easement from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road for the construction of Chippewa Road. The estimated value of the right-of-way is $220,000. (Note: The Project will require reduced setbacks for the lots on either side of Chippewa Road for the dedication of right-of-way.) (2) The Developer will construct and pay for the extension of Chippewa Road from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. We will agree that it will be constructed as a rural street section, except in locations where it is beneficial to construct an urban section for mitigation of floodplain impacts. This construction includes a box culvert under the roadway to provide for stormwater flows north and south of the roadway. The estimated cost of construction of the roadway is $2,500,000. Dusty Finke AICP November 6, 2020 Page 8 (3) The Developer will construct the sweep connection between Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Road, provided the City acquires the right-of-way from OSI. The Developer will grade the right-of-way and complete that section of roadway. (4) The Developer will install a 12” watermain from Mohawk Road to Arrowhead Road. The estimated cost of this project is $460,000. (5) At the City’s election, the Developer will also contribute to wetland mitigation in exchange for an equal reduction in connection fees for the twin home project proposed on the Northerly Site. (6) The Developer will provide 3.5 to 4 acres of land needed for floodplain mitigation. The estimated value of the acreage is $395,000. In addition, the Developer will excavate the floodplain mitigation area to a depth and dimension provided by the City. (7) The Developer will oversize stormwater ponds within the Project to meet the stormwater requirements for Chippewa Road. If the City and the Developer agree that the most efficient way to manage and treat stormwater for the Chippewa Road project would be to capture and treat stormwater from Mohawk Road, then the Developer will construct and pay the cost of the oversized ponds. We look forward to working with City staff, the Park Commission, Planning Commission and the City Council on moving these applications and the Project forward. Please contact me with any questions about the above narrative or the enclosed materials. Sincerely, William C. Griffith, for Larkin Hoffman Direct Dial: 952-896-3290 Direct Fax: 952-842-1729 Email: wgriffith@larkinhoffman.com cc: Mark Smith 4852-7782-4204, v. 5 TWINHOMES Weston Woods Townhomes are spacious, bright, open, and airy with extensive use of glass in every home creating an abundance of natural light. The design is timeless but practical with expansive soaring vaults, gourmet kitchens, and a cozy 4 season porch. The exteriors will feature a variety of defining features and including a side porch entry, a kitchen garden window, and changing roof lines and bay windows that make them intriguing and inviting. The exterior facades will feature a variety of finishes, textures, and features like shake siding and cultured stone on no less than 25% of the street facing exterior. The rear of the homes will be enhanced by a gable roof that covers our 4 season porch.. Our homes look and live like single family homes. Most of these homes will have lower levels that will overlook the vast open space wetlands. These homes range in size from 2,600 to 3,300 square feet. ROW TOWNHOME Like twin homes these homes will feature interesting architecture and design featuring multiple products that will make them interesting and unique on no less than 25% of the street facing exterior. The homes will also have varied roof lines and extra roof features to make the home have their own identity and feel. These homes feature 3 and 4 bedrooms with anywhere from 1,800 to 2,300 square feet. SINGLE Family The single family homes will meet or exceed all City requirements. They will feature interesting and unique facades, roof lines, window features, and accents that will cover well over 25% of the face of the building. The features will include stone, shakes, brick, and concrete type siding. Plans will be architecturally approved prior to building. Efforts will be made to modify rear rooflines or exteriors to enhance the rear façade. NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. __________________________________________________________________ 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Medina Planning Commission FROM: Nate Sparks DATE: November 4, 2020 MEETING DATE: November 10, 2020 RE: Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat & Variances CITY FILE: LR-20-278 Review Deadline Application Received: September 11 and September 25, 2020 Variance Review Deadline: January 8, 2021 Preliminary Plat Review Deadline: January 22, 2021 BACKGROUND Donavon DesMarais has made application for a preliminary plat on unaddressed property located northeast of Pinto Drive north of Holy Name Lake. The site is three unaddressed properties. Two of the properties are owned by the Brown Lake Partnership and one is owned by Francis Scherer trust. The subject site is approximately 90 acres in size with about 25 acres being under the ordinary high water mark of Holy Name Lake. Most of the remaining site is currently farmed. The applicant proposes to subdivide the three large acreage parcels into six acreage lots. The applicant also requests a variance to extend Pinto Drive to access the site and to terminate with a cul-de-sac. Existing Pinto Drive exceeds the maximum cul-de-sac length described in the City’s subdivision ordinance, and extending it would require a variance. Each of the six proposed acreage parcels range in size from 10-23 acres. The subject parcels are zoned RR, Rural Residential. Properties to the north, south, west and north east are also zoned RR. To the east properties are zoned SR, Suburban Residential. The properties are located north of County Road 24, northwest of and along Holy Name Lake, north and to the east of Pinto Drive. The aerial of the three parcels are shown on the following page: PROPOSED DIVISION The applicant is proposing to divide the subject site into six parcels. The property is zoned Rural Residential which allows for parcels 300 feet wide and 200 feet deep with a minimum of 5 acres of contiguous suitable soils. The parcels would access off an extension of Pinto Drive. The following table summarizes the proposed RR lots compared to the requirements of the district. RR Requirement Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Minimum Lot Size 5 acres contiguous suitable soils 5.5 acre 5.1 acre 5.6 acre 5.4 acre 5.3 acre 5.0 acre Gross Area None 10 acres 10.2 acres 10.1 acres 13.1 acres 20.9 acres 23.4 acres Minimum Lot Width 300 feet 1209’ 529’ 800’ 105’ at street 440’ 142’ at street 380’ feet 1300’ Minimum Lot Depth 200 feet 560’ 640’ 690’ 730’ 601’ 548’ Front Yard Setback 50 feet Side Yard Setback 50 feet Rear Yard Setback 50 feet Max. Hardcover 40% (25% w/in 1000’ of lake) Shoreland District Standards Holy Name Lake is a “recreational development” lake. This requires 150 feet of width for each riparian lot at the ordinary high water mark, with a 75 foot setback for both septic systems and structures. All lots proposed meet these standards. The Shoreland Ordinance also limits impervious surfaces to 25% of the lot. Lot Standards The proposed six lots meet minimum lot size standards of the RR zoning district and the Shoreland Ordinance. The width of each lot in the cul-de-sac are narrower at the street and, consistent with the zoning and subdivision ordinances, and are measured at the widest point of the lot. Soils Review The minimum lot size is defined as having “at least five acres of contiguous soils suitable for a standard sewage disposal system as defined in Section 720 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems and in section 826.25 subd. 2. The lot must contain a primary and secondary site for an on-site sewage disposal system and both sites must be protected during construction.” The ordinance goes on to state that: “in the event that the owner or subdivider is of the opinion that the soils types designated by the most current Hennepin County Soils Survey are inaccurate by type or location, he or she shall include information with respect to the inaccuracies in the submittal.” The applicant has contested the Hennepin County Soils Survey in some locations based on their finding that the topography is not as steep as indicated on the county map. In the areas contested, it appears that the information is correct. PROPERTY ACCESS / STREETS The applicant is proposing an extension of Pinto Drive to the northeast to accommodate the development. The road will be reconstructed from a private street cul-de-sac north of County Road 24 to the property. The road will then be extended into the property and end in a new cul- de-sac. The road is not proposed as a private street, as it is an extension of an existing public street segment. Due to the flag lot configuration of the subject site, there are existing residences along the new portion of the roadway, as well. Therefore, it would require a cul-de-sac for City vehicles to turn around and then a second cul-de-sac at the end of the private road segment. Cul-de-sac Length Variance The Subdivision Ordinance states that “the maximum length of a street terminating in a cul-de- sac shall be 750 feet, measured from the centerline of the street of origin to the end of the right- of-way, or a maximum of 20 lots, whichever is shorter.” The proposed cul-de-sac will be approximately 3,500 feet in length, which requires a variance. The applicant proposes this configuration as it is not intended to be connected to other properties to the north or continue further. There are approximately eight houses on this portion of Pinto Drive, which would become 14 under this subdivision. TREE REMOVAL The City's tree inspector states that the applicant is proposing to remove 45 trees. Upon review of the site, it appears that the permitted 10% removal would allow for the removal of 70 trees. UTILITIES The applicant has provided soil borings for septic review. It appears that each lot will be capable of providing two Type I septic systems. This would be consistent with City regulations. DRAINAGE / EASEMENTS / WETLANDS The property is riparian to Holy Name Lake and has three lots with lake frontage. The ordinary high water mark of the lake is 993.7 feet. The highest known water elevation is 994.51. The Watershed District states that the 100 year flood elevation is 997.05 feet. The demonstrated structure elevations are proposed at elevations above these levels. There are several wetlands located on the site, especially adjacent to the lake. There are areas of wetland impacts that require permitting. An upland buffer planting plan will also be required. Drainage and utility easements are provided on the perimeter of the site and over wetland and floodplain areas. There are also drainage and utility easements over stormwater infrastructure such as ponds, drainageways, and emergency overflows. PARK DEDICATION The Subdivision Ordinance requires park dedication at the rate of 10% of the land, 8% of the value of the land, or a combination thereof. The parcels total about 90 acres in size, with approximately 52 acres buildable after subtracting the land under Holy Name lake and within wetlands. This would require a land dedication of 5.2 acres or a cash-in-lieu dedication of $24,000. The City’s decision on required park dedication is guided by its Comprehensive Park, Trail, and open space plan as well as the Master Plan. Map 6-1 from the Park, Trail, and Open Space Plan is attached for reference. These documents do not identify any need for park land in this area of the City. The City's plans do identify a north-south trail between Medina Road and County Road 24 to the west of Holy Name Lake. In addition, Three Rivers Park has identified a future regional trail corridor in the vicinity of the site. Three Rivers is currently in the process of preparing a master plan for this future regional trail and has identified a series of potential route alternatives through Medina. One of the routes would run north-south through the subject site. The Park Commission reviewed the plan and recommended 25 foot wide trail easements to be dedicated along the north property line of a portion of the site and then connecting to the roadway and then following the roadway. The total amount of easement would be 0.93 acres of land (22% of 5.2 acres). The remainder of the park dedication would be cash-in-lieu of $17,280. Staff also recommends that the applicant incorporate an area for the future trail within its grading plan for the street. Whether the easement should be located north or south of the road should be determined based on the grading plan. The Park Commission also recommended that the drainage and utility easements adjacent to property lines with trail easements shall be increased in size to include the space for drainage and utility outside of the trail easement. APPLICATION REVIEW The subdivision regulations state that the Planning Commission and City Council shall deny approval of a plat based on one or a combination of the following findings: a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the b) city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28. c) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. d) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. If the City does not make these findings, and the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, City ordinances, and other City policies, the preliminary plat should be approved. This application has two key factors that should be discussed by the Planning Commissioners: Cul-de-sac Length Variance The applicant is proposing a cul-de-sac length variance to exceed the maximum length of a cul- de-sac (750 feet). The planning commission may recommend, and the city council may grant variances from the literal provisions of this ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Any person requesting a variance may appear at planning commission and city council meetings where such application is considered and provide to the planning commission and the city council such maps, drawings, plans, records and other information necessary to make a determination on the application. It is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate that all of the following standards for variance have been met: a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result if the strict letter of this ordinance were carried out. b) The conditions upon which the application for the variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not common to other properties within the City. c) The hardship is related to the requirements of these regulations and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. d) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The applicant has stated that the reason for the variance is necessary “as there is no other way to access this property other than through Pinto Dr. The property does not border or touch any other public or private streets thus eliminating any and all alternative access-points. The applicant has exhausted any and all possible alternative pathways into the land and none of those creative options are tangible. Over half of the entire 90 acre property is landlocked whereby allowing a roadway into it then allows for all of it to be accessed and utilized. With the concentration of several wetland areas and its proximity near Holy Name Lake where this property abuts, there are only a few specific pathways that minimize any impact on the land itself and that best pathway is depicted in the preliminary plat herein. If this variance wasn’t granted the applicant/owner would not be able to use and enjoy the property to the full extent of its potential.” They go on to state that “the conditions upon which the application for variance are based are unique to the entire property as only one of the three parcels at present have access via any sort of roadway. That current access is via a gravel private-drive where Pinto Drive terminates and it currently serves two neighboring residences who have been given verbal easement rights to access their properties through/over the subject property. Because two of the three subject parcels are landlocked the only single way to gain access to the entire 90 acres is by extending Pinto Drive easterly into the parcels themselves. There likely isn’t another example in the City of Medina where you find three parcels oriented/platted in this fashion whereby two of the parcels are landlocked/inaccessible and the only way to provide two neighboring properties access to their residences is by the subject property owner granting to them an easement over his land. Also unique to the subject parcels is that there are six building rights-entitlements that presently exist and those rights-entitlements cannot be fulfilled without such an extension to Pinto Drive being approved as proposed herein.” Generally, the road is an existing condition which is proposed for extension. This is the existing access route to the property and there are no alternatives. There are no planned road connections within this area, as well. Due to these conditions, and the limited possible number of additional home sites within this area, it would appear that this variance request could be deemed acceptable. Soils Constestation The applicant is also contesting the Hennepin County soils map. This process allows for applicants to contest portions of the map. In many cases, the soils map is more broad and general than the actual conditions on a site. This is especially true related to slope between soil types. Certain soil series with slopes exceeding 12% are not considered suitable, while 12% and under are suitable. The applicant provided field-shot topography in areas of the site which the Hennepin County soils map showed as a soil series with >12% slope which were, in fact less steep. City Staff has reviewed the areas being contested and found that they do generally meet the criteria for inclusion as suitable soils. It should be noted that there is approximately an acre area along the lake which included in the Hennepin County soils map which is likely over 12%. Confirming the soils maps has not necessarily been the method utilized in the past by the City. Soils surveys allow for some inclusions within a polygon because of the scale on which they are completed. Additional, staff concluded that even if these areas were discarded, it appears that the same number of lots would be created but the configuration may require shifting. Since the net impact is the same, it appears that the method utilized by the applicant is acceptable. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed division appears to conform with the general requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and Comprehensive Plan. The variance requested is the result of an extension of Pinto Drive which lengthens an already non-conforming cul-de-sac. The City has no plan that requires this road to connect further and at the proposed density in the area (1 unit per 10 acres) it would seem that the capacity for this cul- de-sac would not be exceeded. The proposed soils contestation appears to be generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and past City practices. Therefore, Staff would recommend approval of the subdivision with variance with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall include the conditions described below as well as other requirements by City ordinance or policy. 2. Easement legal descriptions shall be provided to the City Attorney. 3. An Upland Buffer conservation easement and planting plans shall be provided around the wetlands. 4. The property owner shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to title issues and recording procedures. 5. All comments from the City Engineer shall be addressed. 6. All comments from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District shall be addressed. 7. The applicant shall submit park dedication in the amount recommended by the Parks Commission. This includes the trail easements totaling 0.93 acres and cash-in-lieu of $17, 280. 8. Drainage and utility easements adjacent to trail easements shall be increased in size to accommodate the standard drainage and utility area outside of the trail easement. 9. The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary plat and other relevant documents. 10. The application for final plat shall be submitted to the City within 180 days of preliminary approval or the preliminary plat shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: 1. List of Documents 2. Engineer’s Comments 3. Applicant’s Narrative 4. Applicant’s Variance Justification 5. Plat & Plan Set 11/6/2020 Project: LR-20-278 – Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat & Variance The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 9/11/20 9/11/20 6 Yes Yes Fee 9/11/20 Yes Check #5182, $11,000 Narrative 9/11/20 9/11/20 2 Yes Yes Plan Set 9/11/20 9/11/20 13 Yes Yes Updated Plan Set 9/25/20 9/25/20 13 Yes Yes Updated Plan Set 10/30/20 10/30/20 15 Yes Yes Soil Borings Report 9/25/20 9/25/20 80 Yes Soils Worksheet 9/25/20 9/25/20 1 Yes Variance Justification 10/7/20 10/7/20 1 Yes Tree Inventory 10/19/20 10/19/20 1 Yes SWMP 9/11/20 9/10/20 164 Yes SWMP - Revised 10/26/20 10/26/20 164 Yes Wetland Management Classification 10/12/20 10/12/20 2 Yes Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineering Comments 9/22/20 3 Yes Revised Engineering Comments Incomplete Letter 10/2/20 2 Yes Tree Inventory Memo 10/29/20 9 Yes Park Report 10/16/20 Planning Commission Report 11/6/20 11/6/2020 Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes K:\016851-000\Admin\Docs\2020_09_15 Submittal\_2020-09-22 Holy Name Est Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM September 22, 2020 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat Submittal – Engineering Review WSB Project No. 016851-000 Dear Mr. Finke: We have reviewed the Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat submittal and plans dated September 11, 2020. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into six single family parcels. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. General/Preliminary Plat (Sheets 2-3) 1. Provide a soil boring and geotechnical report. 2. Show location of future regional trail easement/connection to the north. Grading Plans (Sheets 5-6) 3. Number stormwater ponding locations and filtration basins on both the grading plans and street/storm sewer plans. 4. Show existing and proposed driveway grades. Street & Storm Sewer Plans (Sheets 7-9) 5. Provide a typical street section for the portion of Pinto Drive being reconstructed. 6. Consider use of catch basins instead of FES on upstream culvert locations. 7. Note cleanout locations within proposed ponding/infiltration areas. Upstream cleanouts should be located at the edge of the pond. Erosion Control/SWPPP (Sheets 10-13) 8. Provide confirmation of MCWD permit, NPDES permit and wetland permit coverage prior to the start of construction. 9. Extend swale stabilization methods to encompass the entire length of the proposed swales. Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat Submittal – Engineering Review September 22, 2020 Page 2 K:\016851-000\Admin\Docs\2020_09_15 Submittal\_2020-09-22 Holy Name Est Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx Stormwater Management & Modelling 10. The proposed development shall capture and retain 1.1” of runoff from new impervious. The narrative indicates 1”. 11. Is the future trail included in the site’s overall impervious amounts? 12. For the stormwater pond/filtration pond combination at P2c, clarify the intent of the western outlet pipe from the outlet control structure at elevation 996. At this elevation the filtration pond would backflow and discharge. Therefore, the WQV of that filtration basin would be from 995.5 to 996. 13. Provide a figure that clearly identifies the areas claiming enhancements to pervious areas and tree preservation areas. 14. Review City of Medina Stormwater Design Manual for volume control credit specifics and summarize how volume abstraction calculations apply to Medina requirements. Space dedicated to meet volume control credit must not include required wetland buffer areas. a. City of Medina allows a 0.75 in credit over an area that is undisturbed and preserved. Area must be placed in a permanent conservation easement and a long-term vegetation management plan shall be recorded. b. City of Medina allows for 0.5 inches credit for increasing buffer areas around streams, steep slopes, and wetlands in excess of requirements. 15. Provide sizing calculations for roadway culverts. 16. Provide HWL elevations at roadway culvert locations. Drainage easements shall encompass the area to the calculated one foot above the 100-yr HWL. 17. At least 2 feet of vertical separation is required from an area’s EOF to the lowest opening of a structure. 18. Driveway culverts are required as necessary. Wetlands 19. The project appears to propose impacts to wetlands. All wetland impacts will need to be permitted through the Wetland Conservation Act, US Army Corps of Engineers, and if applicable Department of Natural Resources. 20. Revise wetland buffers as noted on the plan sheets. Proposed buffers are not wide enough along two of the project wetlands. Holy Name Lake Estates Preliminary Plat Submittal – Engineering Review September 22, 2020 Page 3 K:\016851-000\Admin\Docs\2020_09_15 Submittal\_2020-09-22 Holy Name Est Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City’s standards. We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet. Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer Justification for Request for Variance 1. A variance for allowing a private street to exceed 750 feet in length is required as there is no other way to access this property other than through Pinto Dr. The property does not border or touch any other public or private streets thus eliminating any and all alternative access-points. The applicant has exhausted any and all possible alternative pathways into the land and none of those creative options are tangible. Over half of the entire 90 acre property is landlocked whereby allowing a roadway into it then allows for all of it to be accessed and utilized. With the concentration of several wetland areas and its proximity near Holy Name Lake where this property abuts, there are only a few specific pathways that minimize any impact on the land itself and that best pathway is depicted in the preliminary plat herein. If this variance wasn’t granted the applicant/owner would not be able to use and enjoy the property to the full extent of its potential. 2. The conditions upon which the application for variance are based are unique to the entire property as only one of the three parcels at present have access via any sort of roadway. That current access is via a gravel private-drive where Pinto Dr terminates and it currently serves two neighboring residences who have been given verbal easement rights to access their properties through/over the subject property. Because two of the three subject parcels are landlocked the only single way to gain access to the entire 90 acres is by extending Pinto Drive easterly into the parcels themselves. There likely isn’t another example in the City of Medina where you find three parcels oriented/platted in this fashion whereby two of the parcels are landlocked/inaccessible and the only way to provide two neighboring properties access to their residences is by the subject property owner granting to them an easement over his land. Also unique to the subject parcels is that there are six building rights-entitlements that presently exist and those rights- entitlements cannot be fulfilled without such an extension to Pinto Drive being approved as proposed herein. 3. The hardship stems from the requirements of the regulations whereby a public road is not intended to extend beyond 750 ft in length and end in a cul-de-sac. The current condition of limited, restricted access was not created by any person presently or formerly having an interest in the land. The three parcels were platted this way originally many, many years ago. There are many exceptions within the City of Medina that presently exist whereby public roadways exceed, often times greatly exceed, the 750 ft maximum rule provision/policy. 4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcels of land are located. In fact, granting of the variance will greatly improve the width and quality of Pinto Dr where it presently is sub-standard while also garnering to its users/residents future access to the North-South 1 Regional Trail Corridor which is implemented into the proposed plat herein. 123456BLOCK 1 PINTO DRIVEPONDPINTODRIVEPONDHOLY NAME LAKE(RD LAKE)NNVicinity MapFeet0200400SHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1519-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY PLATHOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly LicensedProfessional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Paul E. OttoLicense # 40062 Date: HOLY NAME LAKE(RD LAKE)PINTO DRIVE123456B L O C K 1PONDPOND HOLY NAME LAKE PINTO DRIVExxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1549-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY TREE PRESERVATIONHOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESNFeet0100200I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________X \ LEGEND . Contour-denotes Ex'.s/1:'g Spot Elevation -988 otes Ex,stmg t r 988.oo X den tes Electrical Me de s tol e deno hone Pe e tes Telep [I] deno Soil Boring denotes Pole 9 Power -0-denotes "duous Tree /es Dec, 0 deno niferous Tree . *denotes Co d Electric LmeOverhea denotes . C Iver/ OHE -denotes £xis/mg �el/and Buffer D>----------<J Proposeddenotes ■Sign, Typ.�--\ ....._ '-.._ �'ST"W fVtir.41_ "...---..,. SB -----·-·-·- lL47A \ \ \ \ ' I \ \ { \ \ H \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ L- --1 I V '-.... -......... " \ j I I 11;;;,;lE "'- � '- "-'--c. 111111 ill i' I ll I I ll I I I 1· n--r...:...:1rr-_1 -- I I I I I I I 0 50 - -Woods ----, . _,,,,... I I I I I / / '-..._/ --: I I I I I I I I I I ,_ --II '). / _.-//I / I/ 100 Feet I p I I A I � --- S tic Area I Possible Primary ep deno es tes Po ss , deno lie Areo "ble Alternate Sep tes Poss, deno Pad Location "ble House Welland Buffer denotes B ildable Soils denotes u / ( . .......__ ----L47B I UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE DRAINAGE AND I I SHOWN THUS: 10-···---i I L!) 00 I o ·· 0 r---1 � � I ..........I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Cf) w 1-w <( I-� tij � I- u:jCf)� w _J zw�� � 0::: -<( (/) <( �z ...J <( ClW _Jw_J� �$ <( 0:::z� _J >-w ...J � 0 I Vi c; >-c; Vi Ill Vi <.l 1 6 BLO C K 1 PINT O DRIVEPI N T O SHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1569-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY GRADINGPLAN (WEST)HOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESN Feet060120I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________ 2 5 6 BLO C K 1PI N T O DRIVE SHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1579-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY GRADINGPLAN (CENTRAL)HOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESN Feet060120I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________ 3 4 5 SHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1589-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY GRADINGPLAN (EAST)HOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESN Feet060120I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________ PINTO DRIVE (STA 0+00 TO STA 13+00)PONDPINTO DRIVESHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1599-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWERPLAN PINTO DRIVE (STA 0+00 TO STA 13+00)HOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESNFeet050100SEE SHEET 11I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________I hereb y c e r t i f y t h a t t h i s s u r ve y , pl a n , o r r e p o r t w a s p r ep a r ed b y m y or unde r my d i re c t s u p er v i s io n an d t ha t I a m a d u l y L i ce n s ed L an d Survey o r un d e r t h e l a w s o f th e St a t e o f Mi n n es o t a . ______ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ Paul E . O t to License # 40 0 62 Da t e : _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ PINTO DRIVE (STA 13+00 TO STA 26+00)25BLOCK 1PINTO DRIVESHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com1510PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWERPLAN PINTO DRIVE (STA 13+00 TO STA 26+00)NFeet0501009-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNHOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESI hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________ PINTO DRIVESHEET NO. OF SHEETSREV. NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTIONDESIGNED DRAWNCHECKEDDATE:PROJECT NO:Engineers & Land Surveyors, Inc.SSOCIATES9 West Division StreetBuffalo, MN 55313(763)682-4727Fax: (763)682-3522www.ottoassociates.com15119-11-2020-0385KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ELITEMEDINA, MNPRELIMINARY STREETIMPROVEMENT PLAN - PINTO DRIVEHOLY NAME LAKE ESTATESNFeet03060SEE SHEET 9I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by myor under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed LandSurveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.__________________________________________________Paul E. OttoLicense #40062 Date:_________________________ NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. __________________________________________________________________ 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Medina Planning Commission FROM: Nate Sparks DATE: November 5, 2020 MEETING DATE: November 10, 2020 RE: Baker Park – Outdoor Learning Center – Shower Building/Infirmary CITY FILE: LR-20-281 Review Deadline Application Received: October 9, 2020 Conditional Use Permit Review Deadline: February 7, 2021 BACKGROUND Three Rivers Park District has made an application for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to add a 1,900 square foot shower and infirmary building at the Outdoor Learning Center property located at 4001 County Road 24. The site received a CUP for the Outdoor Learning Center which included the main lodge and eight cabins in 1997. The CUP was amended in 2010 to include and administrative office building on the site. The CUP is attached for reference. PROJECT SITE The site is located south of County Road 24 and east of Baker Park Road (County Road 19). As stated above, the site includes cabins, a lodge, sanitary facilities, an administrative office, and a maintenance shed. The parcel is 291 acres in size with the vast majority of the site being part nature preservation. The property is zoned PS, Public/Semi-Public. It is guided for a Park, Recreation, and Open Space use in the Comprehensive Plan. Portions of the property also lies within the Shoreland District, as it is riparian to Lake Katrina. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is seeking to add the 1,900 square foot building to the existing campus. It is to be located south of the cabins and north of the maintenance building. The location of the building and aerial photo is shown on the attached “Site Context” map. The building is intended to be used for an “infirmary” for anyone who may become sick or injured while staying on-site, shower rooms for those using the cabins, laundry facilities, and storage. It is intended to serve the users of the facility and not intended to expand the capacity of the facility. The architecture of the building is intended to match the cabins with log siding. The roof will be metal. They intend to place a limited amount of solar panels on the roof. The facility will be linked to the cabin area via ADA accessible pathways. A retaining wall will be used to accommodate the building area and access drive. The access drive will link the site to the maintenance shed. APPLICATION REVIEW Section 826.71 of the Zoning Ordinance states that “outdoor recreational and open space uses operated by a governmental agency or conservation group” is permitted as a conditional use within the PS District. Therefore, this accessory structure would require an amendment to the existing conditional use permit to be included on the premises. Structure Setbacks The PS District requires has setback requirements of 50 feet to the front and 30 feet to the sides and rear. The Shoreland Ordinance requires a 150 foot setback to the ordinary high water mark of a natural environment lake for any structure or a septic system. The building is located central to a 291 acre parcel. It is well over 1000 feet to the front and side lot lines and over 600 feet to Lake Katrina. Lighting The lighting proposed is limited and is over 2000 feet from a property line. It is generally consistent with the City’s lighting ordinance. Exterior Finish The building is intended to have a log cabin look to match the existing structures on site. This conforms to the City’s building material ordinance for accessory buildings within the PS district. Landscaping / Tree Preservation The applicant proposes to remove 15 trees to allow for the construction of the building. The tree preservation ordinance would permit 5% of trees on the site to be removed. To remove 15 trees without replacement, a site would need to have 300 trees. In this case, there are substantially more trees on the site. The Park District indicates that the trees removed are lower quality. Disturbed areas are intended to be replaced with natural landscaping to match the area. A raingarden with appropriate plantings is proposed. Wetlands The proposed building is over 150 feet from the nearest wetland. The applicant is proposing a 75-foot buffer around the portion of the wetland downhill from the proposed construction. This area is heavily wooded, so no planting will be required. However, the buffer will be formalized. Parking The use of the building is intended for largely existing staff and the users of the site. This building is not directly anticipated to increase parking demand. Overflow parking areas are available at the maintenance shed and the primary staff parking is by the office building. Utilities The site has an existing septic systems which serve the existing structures. The applicant proposes a new septic to serve this structure. Staff recommends requiring a detailed septic plan to be provided prior to City Council action on the application. With the amount of land available, staff believes finding a location for a adequate system will not be a problem. Solar Equipment The applicant stated that they intend to add solar panels to the roof. Section 828.09 of the Zoning Ordinance has requirements for solar panels including a 70% roof coverage limitation and pitch requirements. Such panels will need to meet these code requirements. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW Conditional uses may be approved by the City, provided the use meets the review criteria found in Section 825.39 of the Zoning Ordinance: 1. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. 2. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 4. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. 5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. 6. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. 7. The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. 8. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. 9. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. 10. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. Because the proposed building is accessory and will not substantially increase the level of activity, traffic, or other factors, staff believes these findings can be made. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions. The first two conditions were included on previous approvals and are on-going requirements, while the remainder are relevant to the current project: 1. The Applicant shall maintain “No Parking” signs around the circular drive area in locations approved by the Fire Marshal. 2. The Applicant shall provide coordinated overflow parking at the Turkey Barn, located south of the office building, during larger events at lodge. 3. Construction shall generally adhere to the plans provided. 4. A more detailed parking plan shall be provided. 5. A septic plan shall be provided. 6. Roof mounted solar panels shall meet City zoning requirements at the time of permit application. 7. All comments of the City Engineer shall be addressed. 8. The applicant shall obtain required Minnehaha Creek Watershed approvals. 9. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the conditional use permit, construction plans, and other relevant documents. POSSIBLE ACTION Motion to recommend approval of the requested conditional use permit amendment with the list of conditions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. List of Documents 2. Resolution 2010-13 3. Applicant Narrative 4. Site Context Map 5. Site & Building Plan Set 11/6/2020 Project: LR-20-281– Three Rivers CUP Amendment The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant Document Received Document Date Pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 10/9/2020 10/9/2020 3 Yes Yes Deposit 10/9/2020 10/1/2020 1 Yes Yes $2000 Narrative 10/9/2020 NA 1 Yes Yes Plans 10/9/2020 10/9/2020 10 Yes Yes Plans-Updated 10/26/2020 10/26/2020 3 Yes Yes Civil Only Site Context 10/9/2020 May 2020 1 Yes Yes Wetland Map 10/9/2020 NA 1 Yes Yes GeoTech Report 10/9/2020 10/8/2020 36 Yes Yes Raingarden Plant List 10/9/2020 NA 1 Yes Yes Wetland Buffer Exhibit 10/27/2020 10/27/2020 1 Yes Yes Stormwater Report 10/26/2020 10/26/2020 169 Yes Yes Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineer Comments 10/23/2020 2 Y Engineer Comments 11/2/2020 2 Y Legal Comments 10/21/2020 1 Y Planning Commission Report 11/6/2020 4 Y Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2010-1.3 RESOLUTION G TING AN AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO THE THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT AN OFFICE BUILDING AT THE NEAR WILDE ESS AREA LOCATED AT 4001 COUNTY ROAD 24 WHEREAS, on August 5, 1997, the Medina City Council ("City") adopted Resolution No. 97-29, granting a conditional use permit to Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District for an outdoor educational facility consisting of a main lodge and eight log cabins and parking located at 4001 County Road 24 ("Subject Property"), which is legally described on Exhibit - A attached hereto and WHEREAS, Three Rivers Park District ("Applicant"), successor in interest to Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District, has requested approval of an amended conditional use permit to allow construction of an 768 square foot office building at the Subject Property, and WHEREAS, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 12, 2010 and, following public hearing as required by law, the Planning Commission recommended approval thereof, subject to certain terms and conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the application on February 3, 2010 for conformance with city ordinances, considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission and heard comments from the applicant and other interested parties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Three Rivers Park District for an amended conditional use permit at the Subject Property, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1) The Applicant shall install four "No Parking" signs 75 feet apart around the circular drive area in locations approved by the Fire Marshal. Signs and signposts shall be designed to be natural in appearance to the extent possible by relevant code requirements. 2) The Applicant shall name each existing camper cabin after an early settler of the Medina area and shall identify each with a name plate. 3) The Applicant shall provide coordinated overflow parking at the Turkey B , located south of the office building, during larger events at, lodge. 4) The Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits related to the construction of the office building. Resolution 2010-13 February 16, 2010 5) The Applicant shall obtain approval from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for construction of the office building. 6) All areas of building shall meet ADA requirements and be accessible unless the Applicant receives an exemption from the state. 7) The site shall be inspected by the Maple Plain Fire Department and city staff for approved accessibility for emergencies. 8) The proposed site must be developed in accordance with the approved building and site plans and in accordance with the building and fire codes. If the Applicant wishes to make any changes to the plans after approval which will be significant, in the opinion of the city staff, the Applicant must return to the planning commission for further review. 9) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in the amount sufficient to pay for all costs associated with the review of the application to amend the Conditional Use Permit. BE IT HEREBY FURTHER RESOLVED that resolution 97-29 is superseded by this resolution, the relevant and consistent terms and conditions of the approval having been incorporated herein. Dated: February 16, 2010. T.M. Crosby, Jr., ATTEST: Chad . Adams, City Administrator -Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Johnson and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Crosby, Smith, Johnson, Siitari, Weir And the following voted against s e: None Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution 2010-13 2 February 16, 2010 EXHIBIT — A Legal description for Three Rivers Park District Near Wilderness Settlement Area The NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of section 20, township 118, range 23, Hennepin County, MN" Resolution 2010-13 February 16, 2010 Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd. Architecture • Interiors • Planning Address 15 Grove!and Terrace Contact P 1 nneapolis, MN 55403 P, 612.377.2/37 F: 612.377-1331 [: arch(kndet.com www.kodnt.com Project Narrative RE: Three Rivers Park District Baker Park Outdoor Learning Center Shower Building and Infirmary Building Addition.. Address: 4001 County Road 24, Medina, MN 55359 (PID#2011823210004) Existing site is approximately 291 acres in size. The site is used for outdoor educational learning activities. The new 1,900sf shower and infirmary building will be used by day -,time campers and night-time campers all year round. Approximately 20 employees will be on site during the summer. The current zoning is PS Public/Semi-Public zoning district. Outdoor recreational uses operated by government agency in the current zoning district requires a conditional use permit. The proposed building addition would expand the existing conditional use for this site. The 1,9005f single story building will have the following rooms: three accessible shower rooms, one assisted use bathroom/shower room, four shower rooms, three accessible restrooms, one regular restroom, infirmary room, laundry room, mechanical room, and maintenance storage area. Building will have accessible paths leading up to the main doors into the building. Covered porch will also surround the main entries of the building. Lights will be installed on the building and will be consistent to other buildings on the site. The single story building will be approximately 22 feet tall, The exterior walls will be cladded with log siding and have exposed glulam beams to match the architecture of other cabins on the site. The building will have a metal standing seam roof. The project is being funded with State Funds and is required to meet State B3 Sustainable Guidelines. A number of sustainable design elements are being proposed to meet these guidelines. For example: solar panels on the roof, clear story windows for natural light and rain gardens around the building. The building will be constructed of Structural Insulated Panels offering a high Insolation factor. 1-1igh Efficiency HVAC Equipment and LED Lighting for MEP strategies. The building will utilize many recycled and low carbon materials in meeting these Goals. The B3 Project Page can be found on the Minnesota B3 Project Website. Existing grades on site will require retaining walls to be used to help minimize disturbed areas while meeting ADA Guidelines to the building through the site. In coordination with TRPD Forestry Staff some low quality trees, less desirable trees will need to be removed to allow for the building placement. Three Rivers Park District will provide and install landscaping at disturbed areas and will be consistent with the nature of the site. Rain gardens will also have plants that are compatible with soil conditions and sun exposure. New well and septic system will be installed. Propane tank will also be installed for heating the building. New electrical service will be required to the building. The access road from the Maintenance Building will be widened to allow for Fire Department Truck access to this end of the site, and building location. The new shower, restroom and infirmary building is required for TRPD to efficiently operate camp activities and functions. The proposed project will help the current outdoor educational learning center for many years into the future. Thank you for your consideration in expanding the existing conditional use on this p Michael Schellin, AIA. Kodet Architectural Group perry Lake Independence Lake Katrina Baker Park Reserve Baker Outdoor Learning Center WINTER WINDSSUMMER WINDSWINTER SUN PATH SUMMER SUN PATH © Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd. 2020 KODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP Shower Building & Infirmary Site Context Showing Climate Patterns May 2020 Baker Outdoor Learning Center MAINTENANCE SHED SITE AREA CABIN #1 CABIN #2 CABIN #3 CABIN #4 CABIN #5 CABIN #6 CABIN #7 CABIN #8 LODGE OFFICE HILL TOP / HIGH POINT SLOPES DOWN SLOPES DOWNSLOPES DOWN Tud 0 10' 20' R.1018.90) 1019-83 (i1019.79 (1019.67)- 1019.90 1019.58 . w.-. TS.1019T58 GRADING AT PROPOSED BUILDING AND PATIO 01020 62) 1020.41) 1019.647 1019.80 1019_76) 1019.55 x(1017.47) 1017.28� BS.1017 57; (1017.47) (1017.28 65 / LIMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCESS TO ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE j$ / 4 4 x (ME.1015.01t E.1014.04 012.94 (1018.74) 7 B5 TW.1019.60 BW.1019.60 .�� TS.1019.29 TW.1014.50 BW.1014A0 1013.03 TW.1014.12 . '- 8S.1014.60 6W.1019.30 TW.1019.34 017.03 1018 74) (1018.29 TW.1014.00 BW.1010.00 TW.1014.00 GENERAL NOTES: O .4S E.1005.58±) -_- -iS FILTRATION BASIN BOTTOM = 1002.25 4 HWL=1006.15 / EOF = 1006.20 F/ 012.98 TW 1011 00d1 BW 101000 TW.1014002 BW.1010.00 0 ACESSIBILITY NOTE 20' 40' NEW TRAIL SURFACES SHALL BE FIRM AND STABLE. 2. NEW TRAIL SEGMENTS BETWEEN ACCESSIBLE BUILDINGS SHALL HAVE A RUNNING SLOPE NO GREATER THAN 1:20. 3. CROSS SLOPES FOR TRAILS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2%. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 2018 EDITION OF MN/DOT STANDARD CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (INCLUDING SUPPLEMENTS) AND CITY ENGINEER'S ASSOCIATION OF MN STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 2013 EDITION, AS APPLICABLE. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AND MN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN THE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION, PRIOR TO BEGINNING THE WORK. 3. NEW CONSTRUCTION FEATURES SHALL MATCH IN TO EXISTING WHERE APPLICABLE (PAVEMENTS, CURBS, SIDEWALKS). PROVIDE SMOOTH TRANSITIONS AT MATCH -IN POINTS. 4. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROLS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY CONSTRUCTION PERMITS REQUIRED TO PERFORM ALL THE WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL POST ALL BONDS, PAY ALL FEES, PROVIDE PROOF OF INSURANCE, AND PROVIDE ANY NECESSARY TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR THE WORK. 7. PROTECT EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8. SUBSTITUTIONS FROM INFO. SHOWN HEREON SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. 9. VERIFY BUILDING DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND FOUNDATION PLAN. 10. OWNER/CONTRACTOR TO HOLD PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 11. PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE. 12. NO GRADED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 3:1 (HOR:VER) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 13. FINISHED TRAIL SHALL BE FLUSH WITH TRAIL ADJACENT PAVEMENT. 14. SEE ARCH. PLANS FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. LEGEND SF PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED PAVER PATIO PROPOSED SILT FENCE 0 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN NOTES: PROPOSED EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PROPOSED INLET PROTECTION ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 2. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SILT FENCE, SEDIMENTATION BASINS OR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND SERVICEABLE IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: A. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES. B. SILT FENCE. C. COMMON EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT (GRADING ) D. SEED AND MULCH OR SOD. E. BIO-ROLL BARRIERS IN FINISHED GRADED AREAS. F. INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES SUBSEQUENT TO STORM SEWER WORK. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT ANY ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTY. 3. ALL EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR DURING GRADING OPERATIONS. ANY TEMPORARY FACILITIES WHICH ARE TO BE REMOVED AS CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE GRADING CONTRACTOR WHEN DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN RESTORE THE SUBSEQUENTLY DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 4. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE THE SOILS ENGINEER SO THAT CERTIFICATION OF ALL CONTROLLED FILLS WILL BE FURNISHED TO THE OWNER DURING CONSTRUCTION AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. 5. ALL DISTURBED AREAS, EXCEPT AREAS TO BE PAVED AND/OR SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED BY A LANDSCAPE PLAN, SHALL BE COVERED WITH A MINIMUM 6" OF TOP SOIL. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED & MULCHED AT THE PRESCRIBED RATES WITHIN 72 HOURS OF FINAL GRADING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEED MIX: MNDOT NO. 25-131 220#/ACRE MULCH: TYPE 1 2 TONS/ACRE (DISK ANCHORED) FERTILIZER: 150#/ACRE RATE OF APPLICATION 20-10-10 6. ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH A CONTINUOUS POSITIVE SLOPE WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET OF ANY SURFACE WATER, MUST HAVE TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION OR PERMANENT COVER FOR THE EXPOSED SOIL AREAS YEAR ROUND, ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING TABLE OF SLOPES AND TIME FRAMES. TYPE OF SLOPE TIME STEEPER THAN 3:1 7 DAYS (Maximum time an area can remain open 10:1 TO 3:1 14 DAYS when the area is not actively being worked) FLATTER THAN 10:1 14 DAYS 7. IT IS REQUIRED THAT SOILS TRACKED FROM THE SITE BY MOTOR VEHICLES BE CLEANED DAILY FROM PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 8. ALL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND IMPLEMENTED IN THE FIELD AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER SHALL CONFORM TO THE MPCA'S "PROTECTING WATER QUALITY IN URBAN AREAS: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MINNESOTA". 9. ALL SOLID WASTE/ CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH MPCA REQUIREMENTS. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SHALL BE STORED/ DISPOSED OF IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS 10. INLET SEDIMENTATION CONTROL IS TO BE PROVIDED TO ALL STORM SEWER CATCH BASINS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. MEASURES APPLIED SHALL COMPLY WITH BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MINNESOTA AND APPLICATIONS OF NPDES PHASE II AS APPROPRIATE FOR PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT SOIL LOSS DURING CONSTRUCTION DUE TO WIND EROSION. DUST SHALL BE SUPPRESSED THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF WATER AS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR THROUGH EQUIVALENT BMP'S AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. 12 CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AT SELECTED ENTRANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. LOCATION WILL BE DETERMINED AT THE PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING. 13. CONTRACTOR TO PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN THROUGH INSTALLATION OF ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE ALONG THE DRIP LINE OF THE TREE. KEYNOTES: INSTALL SILT FENCE AT DOWNSTREAM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PER 1/CJ-501. INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND PROPOSED ISTS SITE PRIOR TO ANY OTHER CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY TO OCCURRING IN THE VICINITY OF THE ISTS SITE. NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IS TO BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE ISTS SITE EXCEPT FOR ISTS CONSTRUCTION. PROTECT EXISTING TRAIL TO REMAIN. APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WELL. (WELL DESIGN BY OTHERS). APPROXIMATE SECONDARY ISTS DRAIN FIELD LOCATION (DESIGN BY OTHERS). INSTALL CAT I I I EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PER 5/CJ-501 ON ALL SLOPES 3:1 OR STEEPER. NEW FILTRATION BASIN PER 2/CG-101. INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND PERIMETER OF NEW RAIN GARDEN UPON COMPLETION OF RAIN GARDEN GRADING. NEW RETAINING WALL (DESIGN BY OTHERS) (WALL HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 4 FT) INSTALL INLET PROTECTION PER 7/C3-501 ON NEW STORM SEWER INLETS IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. INSTALL NEW CONCRETE STAIRWAY (DESIGN BY OTHERS). PER PLAN NOTE: FINE GRAINED MATERIAL WITHIN THE MEDIA MIX SHALL CONTAIN NO MORE THAN 5% CLAY CONTENT. 85-88% SAND 8-12% FINES 3-5% MNDOT GRADE 2 COMPOST 5-8% (BY WEIGHT) IRON FILINGS 4" PERF. SDR 26 DRAINTILE DE S 13005 1st Avenue N. h700 Plymouth, MN (,544'1 ae-mn. cam P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 Anderson Engineering vF Minnesota, LLC SHOWER BUILDING AND INFIRMARY OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER 4001 CO RD 24 MEDINA, MN THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISION LOG N0. DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS 1 10/26/20 REVISED PER MCWD COMMENTS C.U.P SUBMITTAL OCTOBER 9, 2020 DESIGNED: IJW DRAWN. IJW CHECKED BY. DRAWING TITLE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN DRAWING NO. CG -101 PLOTTED: COMM. NO. 2 1 FILTRATION BASIN TYPICAL SECTION CG -10 15940 EXISTING MAINTENANCE BUILDING 0 20' 40' UTILITY PLAN CONTINUATION - ISTS LOCATION 1.1012.50 50LF12"CLIV RCP @ 10.00% EXISTING MAINTENANCE BUILDING INSTALL 5 LF 6" PVC SDR 26 @ 1.00% (MIN) /4 / 4 4 1.1012.00 -I / �- INSTALL 47 LF @ 1.00% (MIN) /-y3(//) J co 72LF12"CLIV RCP 9.58% CB 5 R. 1018.90 1.1014.90 I. 1011.90 (SUMP) INSTALL 66 LF 6" PVC SDR 26 @ 1.00% (MIN) 6 U i INSTALL 75 LF 6"PVC SDR 26 @ 1.00% (MIN) 4 R.1002.25 1.1000.75 19.75 LF SDR 26 PVC @ 0.5% FILTRATION BASIN BOTTOM = 1002.25 HWL=1006.15 R.1002.25 1.1000.65 19.75 LF SDR 26 PVC 0.5% R.1002.25 1.1000.75 FES 4 1.1008.00 INSTALL 45 LF 6" PVC SDR 26 @ 1.00% (MIN) 1.1008.00 56LF12"CLIV RCP @ 3.39% CB 7 R. 1013.90 1.1009.90 1.1006.90 (SUMP) FES 2 1.1003.00 OCS 2 PER 2/CU-101 FES 1 1.1000.00 S' EOF = 1006.20 33.00 LF SDR 26 PVC @ 0.5% 0 20' 40' TOP OF WEIR 1006.20 1006.90 TOP BERM 100 YR HWL.. 1006.15 3 LF-12" RCP Q 0.0012 1003.00 BASIN BOTTOM 1002.25 OCS 2 SCALE NTS LEGEND SF KEYNOTES: PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED GRAVEL DRIVE PROPOSED SILT FENCE PROPOSED PAVER PATIO PROPOSED CONCRETE STOOP \' / PROTECT EXISTING TRAIL TO REMAIN. ✓ INSTALL 16 LF 4" HDPE PIPE FOR FUTURE WELL CONNECTION. COORDINATE UTILITY CONNECTION WITH PLUMBING PLANS. O APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WELL. (WELL DESIGN BY OTHERS). O APPROXIMATE PRIMARY ISTS DRAIN FIELD LOCATION (DESIGN BY OTHERS). © INSTALL SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT PER 9/CJ-501 O NEW RAIN GARDEN / FILTRATION BASIN PER 2/CG-101. ® INSTALL NEW GRAVEL DRIVE PER 2/CJ-501 \"/ APPROXIMATE SECONDARY ISTS DRAIN FIELD LOCATION (DESIGN BY OTHERS). 10 DESIGN OF SANITARY SERVICE FROM ISTS TANKS TO FIELD BY OTHERS. 11 DESIGN OF ISTS TANKS BY OTHERS 12 PROPOSED CONCRETE STOOP. SEE ARCH PLANS. 13 PROPOSED PAVER PATIO. SEE ARCH PLANS. GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOIL ENGINEER UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE. 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH CARVER COUNTY'S ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND THE 2018 EDITION OF MNDOT STANDARD CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (INCLUDING SUPPLEMENTS) UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE. 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE MUNICIPAL, WATERSHED DISTRICT, COUNTY, MPCA, DEPT. OF HEALTH, AND MNDOT PERMITS. 4. THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. THE INFORMATION IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR, IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY OR MUNICIPALITY, IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. 5. PROVIDE MINIMUM 10' HORIZONTAL & 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION OF ALL WATERMAIN CROSSINGS FROM STORM OR SANITARY SEWER. 6. ALL JOINTS 8 CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE WATER TIGHT. APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATER TIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES AND CATCH BASINS. 7. ALL NEW NON-METALLIC SANITARY AND WATER SERVICE PIPE SHALL HAVE TRACER WIRE, PER MNDOT SPECIFICATIONS. 8. PROTECT EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 9. SUBSTITUTIONS FROM INFO. SHOWN HEREON SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. 10. VERIFY BUILDING DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND FOUNDATION PLAN. 11. NEW CONSTRUCTION FEATURES SHALL MATCH IN TO EXISTING WHERE APPLICABLE (PAVEMENTS, CURBS, SIDEWALKS). PROVIDE SMOOTH TRANSITIONS AT MATCH -IN POINTS. 12. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROLS. 13. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 14. 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY CONSTRUCTION PERMITS REQUIRED TO PERFORM ALL THE WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL POST ALL BONDS, PAY ALL FEES, PROVIDE PROOF OF INSURANCE, AND PROVIDE ANY NECESSARY TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR THE WORK. PLAN TURF STABILIZED OVERFLOW SEE PLAN PROFILE 9 I''BS w/TG I. 1000.00 W/ CL. IV RIP RAP NL.ET 4" S06 26 PVC 1000.55 2' SUMP 1=998.50 13605 1st Avenue N. 9700 Plymouth, MN 5544',1 ae-mn.com P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 Anderson Engineering vF Mlnnerote, 61.0 SHOWER BUILDING AND INFIRMARY OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER 4001 CO RD 24 MEDINA, MN THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS 1 10/26/20 REVISED PER MCWD COMMENTS C.U.P SUBMITTAL OCTOBER 9, 2020 DESIGNED: Iw DRAWN'. Iw CHECKED BY. DRAWING TITLE PAVING AND UTILITY PLAN DRAWING NO. CU -101 PLOTTED: COMM. NO. 15940 FINISH FLOOR100' -0"T.O. UPPER ROOF121' -8"T.O. LOWER ROOF115' -4"STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFLOG SIDINGCEMENTITIOUS BOARDTONGUE-IN-GROOVE CEDAR CEILINGSHIPLAP SIDINGCONCRETE COLUMNGLULAM BEAMCONCRETE FOUNDATION & BENCHSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFTONGUE-IN-GROOVE CEDAR CEILINGROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS NOTE: APPOX. 2,000 SF OF SOLAR PANELS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALSFINISH FLOOR100' -0"T.O. UPPER ROOF121' -8"T.O. LOWER ROOF115' -4"GLULAM BEAMSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFLOG SIDING CEMENTITIOUS BOARDLOG SIDING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELSNOTE: APPOX. 2,000 SF OF SOLAR PANELS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALSThe above drawings, specifications and ideas, design and arrangements represented are and shall remain the property of the Architect, and no part shall be copied, disclosed to others, or used in connection with any other project for which they they have been prepared and developed without the written permission of the Architect. Visual contact with these drawings or specifications shall constitute conclusive evidence of these restrictions.I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect: Michael Schellin, AIA© 2020 Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.License Number: 43591DateDate:Drawn By:Project No.:Checked By:12 345DCBA1/1/2020NOT FOR CONSTUCTIONKODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP15 Groveland Terrace | Minneapolis, MN 55403-1154612.377.2737Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.| www.kodet.com10/8/2020 4:12:08 PM C:\Users\qklett\Documents\109320_TRPD_BAKER OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER_DD2_qklett.rvt109320AuthorCheckerT.R.P.D. | SHOWER BUILDING AND INFIRMARYA3.1ExteriorElevations4001 Co. Rd. 24 MEDINA, MN 55359BAKER PARK | OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER10/09/20201/4" = 1'-0"A3.1D1WEST ELEVATION0'2'4'8'Graphic Scale1/4" = 1' -0"Material Keying Legend1/4" = 1'-0"A3.1B1SOUTH ELEVATIONRevisions FINISH FLOOR100' -0"T.O. UPPER ROOF121' -8"T.O. LOWER ROOF115' -4"STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFSHIPLAP SIDING GLULAM BEAMCONCRETE FOUNDATION & BENCHCEMENTITIOUS BOARDCONCRETE COLUMNLOG SIDINGGLULAM BEAMSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS NOTE: APPOX. 2,000 SF OF SOLAR PANELS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALSFINISH FLOOR100' -0"T.O. UPPER ROOF121' -8"T.O. LOWER ROOF115' -4"GLULAM BEAM CONCRETE FOUNDATION & BENCHSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFLOG SIDING TONGUE-IN-GROOVE CEDAR CEILINGSHIPLAP SIDINGLOG SIDING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELSROOF MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS NOTE: APPOX. 2,000 SF OF SOLAR PANELS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALSThe above drawings, specifications and ideas, design and arrangements represented are and shall remain the property of the Architect, and no part shall be copied, disclosed to others, or used in connection with any other project for which they they have been prepared and developed without the written permission of the Architect. Visual contact with these drawings or specifications shall constitute conclusive evidence of these restrictions.I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect: Michael Schellin, AIA© 2020 Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.License Number: 43591DateDate:Drawn By:Project No.:Checked By:12 345DCBA1/1/2020NOT FOR CONSTUCTIONKODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP15 Groveland Terrace | Minneapolis, MN 55403-1154612.377.2737Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.| www.kodet.com10/8/2020 4:12:18 PM C:\Users\qklett\Documents\109320_TRPD_BAKER OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER_DD2_qklett.rvt109320AuthorCheckerT.R.P.D. | SHOWER BUILDING AND INFIRMARYA3.2ExteriorElevations4001 Co. Rd. 24 MEDINA, MN 55359BAKER PARK | OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER10/09/20201/4" = 1'-0"A3.2B1NORTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"A3.2D1EAST ELEVATION0'2'4'8'Graphic Scale1/4" = 1' -0"Material Keying LegendRevisions 53 SFACC. R.R.11469 SFASSISTED-USEBATHROOM10453 SFACC. R.R.11261 SFACC. SHOWER11147 SFR.R.106116 SFMECHANICAL / DATA /IT100356 SFHALLWAY11356 SFACC. SHOWER102A3.2B1A3.1B1CHANGING BENCH 56 SFACC. SHOWER109CHANGING BENCH 30 SFSHOWER10830 SFSHOWER110BENCH D1A3.5A3.1D130 SFSHOWER107CHANGING BENCH 30 SFSHOWER1058"6' - 4"4"3' - 8"3' - 2"3' - 6"6' - 0"8"3' - 10"8"3' - 6"1' - 0"1' - 6"6' - 6 1/2"6' - 7"4' - 1 1/2"7' - 11"3' - 0"1' - 2"7' - 4"1' - 10"3' - 4"9' - 4"3' - 0"70' - 0"3' - 0"10' - 0"3' - 10"9' - 2"4"6' - 9"1' - 10"4' - 1"3' - 6"1' - 0"3' - 6"8"3' - 10"8"6' - 0"1' - 10"4' - 9"3' - 9"3' - 6"2' - 8"3' - 6"11' - 3"4' - 8"A3.2D1266 SFINFIRMARY117SINK 5' - 0"1' - 5"7"7' - 0"WORK BENCH BENCH 12' - 0"2' - 6"195 SFMAINTENACESTORAGE10153 SFACC. R.R.1181' - 10"6"12' - 9"3' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 6"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"6' - 6"23' - 0"14' - 6"3' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 0"15' - 5"20' - 0"34' - 7"7' - 3 1/2"5' - 0"7' - 6"11"23' - 0"17' - 6"7' - 9 1/2"3' - 6"19' - 1 1/2"3' - 10"4"NOTE: EXTENTS OF ROOF ABOVE General Notes1. CONCRETE BLOCK DIMENSIONS ON FLOOR PLANS ARE NOMINAL AND TAKEN FROM FACE OF BLOCK.2. AT EXISTING WALLS, DIMENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM FACE OF EXISTING WALL SURFACE.3. AT METAL STUD / GYPSUM BOARD PARTITIONS, DIMENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM CENTERLINE OF STUD.4. FOR PARTITION TYPES, SEE SHEET A8.4.5. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN FLOOR MATERIALS TO BE LOCATED AT CENTERLINE OF DOOR BETWEEN ROOMS U.N.O.6. ALL PENETRATIONS THROUGH FIRE-RATED WALLS ARE TO BE SEALED WITH FIRE RETARDANT SEALANT. ALL OTHER PENETRATIONS THROUGH OTHER WALLS TO BE SEALED COMPLETELY WITH SEALANT.7. ALL CONDUIT IN EXPOSED CONCRETE BLOCK PARTITION TO BE CONCEALED.8. COORDINATE PLUMBING WITHIN CONCRETE BLOCK, PRECAST, OR GYPSUM BOARD PARTITIONS AND FURRING.9. AT EXPOSED PRECAST PARTITIONS, ALL CONDUIT AND PIPING TO BE CONCEALED OR RUN ON BACK SIDE IN FURRING OR ABOVE CEILINGS.10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE (1) ADDITIONAL SURROUNDS 1'-4" WIDE BY 1'-0" DEEP PER FLOOR FOR MISC. PIPE/DUCT/COLUMN PENETRATIONS. UTILIZE PARTITION TYPE F4F.11. SLOPE TILE FLOORS IN RESTROOMS WITH FLOOR DRAINS TO DRAIN AT 1/4"/FT. EXCEPT AT RESTROOMS IN EXISTING BUILDING.LegendCONCRETE BLOCK WALLSSTUD WALLSSTRUCTURALLY INSULATED PANEL (S.I.P.)ROOF PERIMETER Key NotesBENCH PROVIDED & INSTALLED BY OWNER. OWNER TO COORDINATE WITH ACCESSIBILITY CODE REQUIREMENTS.TOILET PAPER DISPENSER PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER. OWNER TO COORDINATE WITH ACCESSIBILITY CODE REQUIREMENTS.SOAP DISPENSER PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER.CHANGING STATION PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER. OWNER TO COORDINATE WITH ACCESSIBILITY CODE REQUIREMENTS.MIXING STATION PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER.MOP BUCKET PROVIDED BY OWNER.KAIVAC UNIT PROVIDED BY OWNER.CLEANING CART PROVIDED BY OWNER.SHELVING PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER.CASEWORK PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER, TYP.SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL UNIT PROVIDED & INSTALLED BY OWNER, TYP.LOCKERS PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY OWNER.123456789101112The above drawings, specifications and ideas, design and arrangements represented are and shall remain the property of the Architect, and no part shall be copied, disclosed to others, or used in connection with any other project for which they they have been prepared and developed without the written permission of the Architect. Visual contact with these drawings or specifications shall constitute conclusive evidence of these restrictions.I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my directsupervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect: Michael Schellin, AIA© 2020 Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.License Number: 43591DateDate:Drawn By:Project No.:Checked By:12 345DCBA1/1/2020NOT FOR CONSTUCTIONKODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP15 Groveland Terrace | Minneapolis, MN 55403-1154612.377.2737Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd.| www.kodet.com10/8/2020 4:11:58 PM C:\Users\qklett\Documents\109320_TRPD_BAKER OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER_DD2_qklett.rvt109320QKMST.R.P.D. | SHOWER BUILDING AND INFIRMARYA2.1Floor Plan4001 Co. Rd. 24 MEDINA, MN 55359BAKER PARK | OUTDOOR LEARNING CENTER10/09/20200'2'4'8'1/4" = 1'-0"A2.1D1FLOOR PLANGraphic Scale1/4" = 1' -0"Material Keying LegendRevisions1,900 TOTAL SF 1 CITY OF MEDINA 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday September 8, 2020 4 5 1. Call to Order: Chairperson Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6 7 Present: Planning Commissioners Theresa Couri, Peter Galzki, Ron Grajczyk , Beth Nielsen, 8 Cindy Piper, Justin Popp, and Robin Reid. 9 10 Absent: None. 11 12 Also Present: City Planning Director Dusty Finke and City Planner Debra Dion. 13 14 Reid welcomed the newest member of the Commission, Justin Popp. 15 16 Popp introduced himself. 17 18 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 19 20 No comments made. 21 22 3. Update from City Council Proceedings 23 24 Albers reported that the Council recently met to consider amending the ordinance related to 25 accessory structures and reported that the Council approved the ordinance as recommended 26 by the Planning Commission. He stated that the Council also considered a Conditional Use 27 Permit for Home Occupation and the Ditter request noting that the Council approved both of 28 those items as recommended by the Commission. He also welcomed Popp to the Planning 29 Commission. 30 31 4. Planning Department Report 32 33 Finke provided an update. 34 35 5. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment – Chapters 7 and 8 of the City 36 Code Related to Individual Sewage Treatment Systems 37 38 Finke stated that there are three changes proposed to the ordinance which came forward as 39 part of the percolation requirements. He explained that Medina is the only community 40 around that requires percolation tests for every septic design. He stated that the Building 41 Official has stated that it is unnecessary for all designs to incorporate this test. He noted that 42 the proposed amendment would only require the percolation test if deemed necessary by the 43 Building Official. He reviewed the current requirement for septic tanks, noting that is above 44 the requirement of State Code. He stated that the Building Official has recommended that the 45 City revert to the State minimum for septic tanks. He stated that the final change is a 46 correction of an error of the ordinance when originally approved, noting the proposed change 47 in roman numerals. 48 49 Nielsen asked the cost of a percolation test. 50 51 2 Finke estimated between $500 to $800 for one site. 52 53 Nielsen asked if there have been any residents that have run into a problem with the size 54 requirements for tanks. 55 56 Finke confirmed that there have been a few sites where it has been difficult to fit both tanks 57 and the Building Official has allowed one single compartmentalized tank in those situations. 58 59 Reid opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. 60 61 No comments. 62 63 Reid closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. 64 65 Motion by Galzki, seconded by Couri, to recommend approval of the ordinance amending 66 individual sewage treatment system permit requirements. 67 68 A roll call vote was performed: 69 70 Nielsen aye 71 Galzki aye 72 Piper aye 73 Grajczyk aye 74 Couri aye 75 Popp aye 76 Reid aye 77 78 Motion carries unanimously. 79 80 6. Approval of the August 12, 2020 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 81 82 Motion by Grajczyk, seconded by Nielsen, to approve the August 12, 2020, Planning 83 Commission minutes with noted changes. Motion carries unanimously. 84 85 7. Council Meeting Schedule 86 87 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Finke volunteered 88 to provide the update to the Council. 89 90 8. Adjourn 91 92 Motion by Piper, seconded by Galzki, to adjourn the meeting at 7:21 p.m. Motion carried 93 unanimously. 94