Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
06-12-2012
T Y MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2012 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Approval of April 10, 2012 draft Planning Commission minutes. 6. Public Hearing — U.S. Home Corporation, Lennar, requests a PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat for 118 Single Family Home Tots to be located South of Hamel Legion Park and west of Brockton Lane. 7. Public Hearing — Henri Germain requests a Variance from the City's requirement to install an upland buffer adjacent to a wetland required for construction of new home at 790 Navajo Road. 8. Council Meeting Schedule 9. Adjourn POSTED IN CITY HALL June 8, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Mayor Crosby and Members of the City Council Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson May 30, 2012 City Council meeting Planning Department Updates June 5, 2012 City Council Meeting Ordinance Updates A) Sign Ordinance — The Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance at their October and December meetings, provided staff with direction on a number of policy questions, and finalized their review at the February Commission meeting. The Council reviewed at the March 6 meeting and requested additional changes. Staff is researching options for regulating emerging lighting technologies, which have been discussed during the process for updating the ordinance and also as a result of complaints from neighbors of a lighted sign. This may lead to additional changes to the sign ordinance, and potentially the need to make changes to the lighting ordinance. Land Use Application Reviews A) Germain Upland Buffer Variance — 790 Navajo Road — Henri Germain has requested a variance from the requirement that an upland buffer be installed adjacent to a wetland on the previously vacant lot on which he is constructing a new home. The applicant discussed the matter during the "Comments" period of a City Council meeting. The request is scheduled for a Public Hearing at the June 12 Planning Commission meeting. B) Lennar (Brockton Lane) Residential development — south of Hamel Legion Park, east of The Enclave — The applicant has applied for General Plan of Development and Preliminary Plat approval. Staff has conducted a preliminary review and requested additional information. If the applicant provides this information this week, the request may be scheduled for a Public Hearing at the June 12 Planning Commission meeting. C) Text Amendment — Assisted Living Facilities in Commercial Districts — Around the Clock Home Care — the applicant has requested that the City amend its zoning code in order to permit Assisted Living Facilities in the Commercial -Highway zoning district. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the matter at their April 10 meeting and the City Council discussed at the May 1 and May 15 meetings. The Council denied the request to amend the zoning code, and this project will now be closed. D) Marx Conservation Design Subdivision — 2700 and 2900 Parkview Drive — Wally Marx has requested review of a CD-PUD Concept Plan for a subdivision which would allow a density bonus (8 lots) and flexibility to lot size and setback requirements and place a portion of their property into Conservation Easements. The applicant has indicated that he intends to withdraw his application. Additional Projects A) Building Permit activity — building permits have been very active over the past few months, including new construction of homes in the Enclave, Bridgewater, and a few rural lots. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 June 5, 2012 City Council Meeting B) Intern Interviews — staff has conducted interviews and selected Nicolas Zurbey. Planning and Public Works intend to work together with the position and hire only one intern this summer rather than the two originally planned. Mr. Zurbey will begin employment on June 4. C) Facilities Planning — staff has been attending meetings with 292 Design Group related to conceptual planning for the property at 600 Clydesdale Trail and potential renovation of City Hall. D) Holy Name Cemetery — staff has been assisting Holy Name Church in their efforts to finalize the site work for the cemetery expansion. The Church has gone through some transition after the project was started. E) Utility Planning — Planning staff updated information about existing and future water pipes to which will be utilized by WSB to update the water modeling to determine future capital needs. F) Zoning Enforcement (tall grass) — Staff has responded to three complaints for tall grass and weeds over the past few weeks G) Zoning Enforcement (manure management inspections) — Planning Assistant Peterson has conducted a number of inspections of commercial horse facilities in regards to manure management, and intends to complete the rest in the coming weeks. H) Zoning Enforcement (Hamel Station tree removal) — The City received payment of approximately $13,000 as was required by the agreement related to mitigating the tree loss for this project. The developer will be replacing plants which did not survive next spring. Staff has scheduled an inspection for the end of June in order to check on maintenance progress. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 June 5, 2012 City Council Meeting 1 CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday, April 10, 2012 4 5 6 1. Ca11 to Order: Commissioner R. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners Robin Reid, Kent Williams, Kathleen Martin, 9 Randy Foote, John Anderson, and Victoria Reid. 10 11 Absent: Charles Nolan 12 13 Also Present: City Councilmember Elizabeth Weir, City Planner Dusty Finke and 14 Planning Assistant Debra Peterson. 15 16 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 17 18 No public comments. 19 20 3. Update from City Council proceedings 21 22 Weir updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council. 23 24 4. Planning Department Report 25 26 Finke provided an update of upcoming Planning projects. 27 28 5. Approval of the March 13, 2012 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes. 29 30 Motion by Anderson, seconded by V. Reid, to approve the March 13, 2012 minutes 31 with revisions. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Nolan) 32 33 6. Lennar Corporation — A Revised Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for 34 118 Single Family Homes on nine parcels with an overall gross area of 48.4 35 acres. The properties are located west of Brockton Lane and south of Hamel 36 Legion Park. 37 38 Finke explained the new plans before the Commission was the third set of plans 39 submitted by the applicant. He explained the PUD encompassed the same nine 40 parcels as was originally proposed. Ninety-five single family and 23 detached 41 townhome lots were being proposed. The applicant requests to allow for blending of 42 the densities of the medium and the low densities on the properties. They are also 43 requesting to have smaller lots for the detached townhomes. He said the concept on 44 the northern ten acres wouldn't meet the minimum density of 3.5 units per acre, but 45 when looking at the overall property proposed to be developed and "blended" it meets 46 the minimum required for 118 units. 1 1 Finke explained the arrangement of the detached townhomes and the common open 2 space was new since the Commission last saw the development layout. He said the 3 land area was reviewed under R1 and R2 zoning district standards. 4 5 Finke explained the objectives and process of a PUD project. He explained the 6 "blending" proposed could be allowed through the PUD process. The guiding 7 principal is the comprehensive plan. The proposed layout has 19 wider lots that are 8 90 feet in width. The predominant 76 lots are 75 feet in width and there are also 23 9 lots with detached townhome units that are 57 feet in width. 10 11 Wetland impacts were reduced from the plan shown to the Commission in February 12 of this year. Finke stated the applicant would have to complete a delineation of the 13 wetlands this spring. 14 15 Staff suggested the reduction of streets that do not intersect within the development. 16 He said the Commission should verify the plan is consistent with the comprehensive 17 plan and relevant policies. Finke said the proposal is consistent with the PUD 18 ordinance. 19 20 Anderson asked about the overall density and Finke confirmed when the properties 21 are blended it would allow for 96 single family homes and 23 detached townhomes. 22 23 R. Reid asked for clarification of the site plan showing the land on "the Enclave" 24 development along the south side of the property. Finke explained that since the road 25 is no longer being proposed on the southern portion of the Enclave it would change. 26 27 Anderson said the minimum number of units within the development is 104 units. He 28 asked if lots would still meet the minimum density if they were increased in width. 29 Finke concurred. 30 31 Martin asked for clarification on the width of the paved right-of-way and parking, 32 since the Fire Marshal raised concern. Finke said 28 feet has become the standard to 33 save on the amount of hard surface. He said signage is placed on one side of the road 34 for "no parking." 35 36 Foote asked if there are typically extra parking spaces for an attached townhome 37 setting. Finke said essentially these are detached single family homes and the City 38 doesn't have additional off -site parking required. 39 40 Anderson said Loren Kohnen said emergency vehicles couldn't get by with parking 41 allowed on the street and asked how this would be handled. Finke said fortunately 42 the development didn't have any cul-de-sacs so they would have to loop around to get 43 to the property. Finke said if vehicles are parked along the curb they could still get 44 by. He said Medina Road is 12 feet. 45 2 1 Martin said "mass grading" terms were used and she didn't notice benning with 2 excess dirt. She wondered what was proposed for a buffer along the park and if there 3 would be a berm. Finke said staff would recommend screening, as did the Council 4 during their review. 5 6 V. Reid asked how important it really is that the roads be realigned to come to a T 7 intersection. R. Reid asked about traffic control and if four-way stops could be used. 8 Finke explained he thought it would flow better if the streets were aligned. He said 9 two-way stops would also be an option. 10 11 Joe Jablonski representing Lennar thanked Planning staff for the presentation. He 12 said each concept has had modifications based on the Planning Commission and 13 Council's comments and was happy to answer any questions the Commission may 14 have on the application. 15 16 V. Reid asked the applicant what was intended for the common open space area 17 between homes throughout the development. Jablonski said it would be low 18 maintenance vegetation and utilized for stormwater. V. Reid asked if it would require 19 maintenance for the home owners association. Jablonski said it more than likely 20 would be required and access has been maintained. V. Reid said it seemed odd to put 21 the tot lot amenity next to the existing park, rather than farther down to the south in 22 the development. V. Reid suggested the tot lot be moved farther to the south. 23 24 Williams asked if they had thought about the phasing of the project and Jablonski said 25 based on sewer and water and contracts with property owners it would go from north 26 to south. 27 28 R. Reid asked when they planned to go into the second phase of the enclave. 29 Jablonski said within next 12 months. R. Reid asked when for this project and 30 Jablonski said starting this fall for the detached townhomes. 31 32 Foote asked about the existing homes and if they would be moved or saved. 33 Jablonski said all but one would be demoed. Foote asked it there would be any 34 attempt to save some of the evergreens. Jablonski said yes if it was possible to save 35 them. 36 37 V. Reid asked if Lennar would have concern with additional parking being required 38 for guest parking if the Council decided it be required. Jablonski said they would 39 look at that option if asked. 40 41 Foote said the townhome development he lives in doesn't allow for parking in the 42 driveway. He asked if that had been discussed for this development and Jablonski 43 said it hadn't been discussed yet. 44 45 46 3 1 Blended density 2 3 Martin said she was alright with blending. 4 Williams said he would like to see higher density in the northern portion and move 5 the park to the south. The blending concept is ok. 6 7 Anderson said he was alright with the blending. 8 9 Foote said he was fine with the blending and would like to see fewer 75 foot lots and 10 more 90 foot lots. He said he would like the larger in width lots be the ones backing 11 up to the conservation area. Jablonski said that Plymouth had an application for 12 smaller width lots along Brockton Lane and would be compatible. 13 14 Williams said that the core of the lots would be 75 feet in width, but recommended 15 additional lots be increased to 90 feet in width. He also suggested moving the tot lot 16 farther to the south. 17 18 R. Reid explained to the applicant that they wouldn't be allowed to encroach into the 19 conservation area. Jablonski said he understood. 20 21 The Commission reviewed the PUD requirements and found numbers 1-3 the 22 Commission felt was satisfied. 4. Finke explained stormwater and that it would be 23 done during the design phase and the concept plan showed it as the space and the 24 Commission was satisfied. Items 5-9 the Commission felt the applicant was 25 accomplishing. 26 27 Final comments by the Commission: 28 29 Martin asked to incorporate all the comments into the next phase. 30 Williams agreed with Martin, except she said she wasn't as concerned about the 31 visitor parking issue. 32 33 Anderson said he didn't have anything to add other than he sees them going in the 34 right direction. 35 36 Foote said he didn't have an issue with the T intersections and would prefer the 37 staggered roads. 38 39 V. Reid said she agreed with the staggered roads and felt additional parking should be 40 added for visitors. Jablonski said on the townhome style areas they would cluster the 41 mailboxes. V. Reid said if parking was going to be on the side with less driveway 42 access points she would have concern with people backing out of driveways. She 43 commented that the development was a huge improvement since the previous design 44 and agreed with moving the tot lot amenity to the south. 45 4 1 R. Reid said she doesn't really like the proposed type of project since they are all so 2 similar. She said using the same design team doesn't allow for variety in the homes. 3 V. Reid said she agreed with R. Reid. 4 5 No action was required. 6 7 8 7. Public Hearing — Text Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code 9 related to regulations for Nursing Homes, Assisted Living Facilities and other 10 similar uses. 11 12 Finke presented the application. He explained the text amendment was initiated by a 13 proposed redevelopment along Highway 55. He then went through the ordinance 14 explaining how nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and housing with services 15 establishments were defined. He said commercial districts were the only districts that 16 didn't allow these types of uses within the City. He said in some other communities 17 they were allowed, but it was not as common. He said the City Attorney suggested 18 definitions be added to more clearly define each type of use. 19 20 R. Reid explained that the Commission needed to consider all the commercial 21 highway properties being allowed this type of use. She said they can't just look at the 22 applicant's proposed lot. 23 24 Anderson asked for the history as to why it hadn't been allowed. Finke said it just 25 wasn't a common practice, though recently the Commission and Council decided to 26 allow them in the business and business park zoning districts. He said large-scale 27 operations could be more commercial in nature, but smaller facilities tended to feel 28 more residential. 29 30 R. Reid asked how Gramercy ended up on Hwy 55 and Finke explained that property 31 had been planned for high density residential. He noted that Gramercy is independent 32 senior living, and was not assisted living. 33 34 Martin said she had a concern for the future residents living there with things such as 35 noise and their quality of living. She suggested the use of a Conditional Use Permit 36 to require things such as open space for separation of neighboring businesses abutting 37 this type of use. 38 39 R. Reid and Williams said there was a reason why it was kept out of CH zoning 40 district. 41 42 The Commission discussed types of conditions that could be applied to a CUP for this 43 type of use; and Williams continued to raise concern with busier uses coming in next 44 to it and didn't feel it was appropriate. 45 5 1 Foote explained he's seen an assisted living facility in North Branch that doesn't 2 seem appropriate, since it is next to an implement dealership and Interstate 35. 3 4 Public Hearing opened at 8:39 p.m. 5 6 The realtor for the property explained why they chose the site. He said they selected 7 it because it is a very deep lot and far from State Hwy 55. They would like to build a 8 beautiful facility and he said they have quite a few protocols to limit people from 9 going outside and they don't allow their clients to just wander around outside. 10 11 Williams thought the lot currently would seem appropriate. He asked if they could 12 get access onto State Highway 55 and Finke explained they wouldn't have direct 13 access, but would access off Chippewa Road. Williams suggested another alternative 14 would be to rezone the property to a different district rather than adding the use to this 15 district. 16 17 The Commission discussed what conditions would apply to the use if a CUP. The 18 Commission thought similar items listed for churches would be appropriate such as 19 looking at the traffic, parking needs, setbacks, safety of residents, and traffic patterns 20 for protection of the residents. 21 22 R. Reid asked if staff could draft CUP standards. Finke stated the language will 23 almost certainly be general in nature and will be similar to the standards required to 24 limit impacts from more intensive commercial uses on neighboring property, but will 25 require the assisted living facility property protect itself from adjacent impacts. Finke 26 noted that the applicant would likely prefer to have the request forwarded to the City 27 Council, because they had a pending purchase agreement. Martin said she was 28 comfortable having the request go directly to the Council without going back to the 29 Planning Commission to review the CUP standards. 30 31 Public Hearing Closed at 8:48 p.m. 32 33 Motion by Williams, seconded by Anderson, to recommend approval of the 34 ordinance related to regulations for Nursing Homes, Assisted Living Facilities and 35 other similar uses, and to amend the ordinance to require a conditional use permit for 36 these uses in commercial and business property. 37 38 Martin suggested a friendly amendment to request staff to research definitions and 39 terminology in relation to housing with service establishments and incorporate clearer 40 language into the ordinance, if possible. The general consensus of the Commission 41 was to include this amendment in the motion. 42 43 Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: Nolan) 44 45 46 6 1 8. City Council Meeting Schedule 2 3 Finke requested a Commissioner to attend the April 17th City Council meeting. 4 5 V. Reid said she would attend, with Anderson backing her up. 6 7 9. Adjourn 8 Motion by Anderson, seconded by Foote, to adjourn at 8:51 p.m. Motion carried 9 unanimously. (Absent: Nolan) 7 G, T V o A Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: V G r1 J ty` ; C7Z-17(r- (please,�/� print) Address: ! 1 I.) ri 9 0 TA U1-40-'17-9 IP tl t -- C 6 5 j (7/V3(i t i --L. Telephone (optional): 7G 3 -- - 0 1 0 9 Representing: tO G / Z� 0_,/,) A J& % 01',/0 -01) Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: p rzc,, 5 C..N''"(' Cif --.h-7 OG„''1 2=. Approach the podium to speak v Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes 6/12/12 Planning Commission Members City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, Minnesota 55340 Re: Enclave @ Brockton Development Application Dear Officials: We wanted to take this opportunity to introduce ourselves as the City of Medina reiglents proposing to position our property for development with Lennar (US Home Corporation). In regards to Lennar purchasing our properties for the proposed development, we are in agreement as follows: 1. Lennar has been very courteous and professional thru-out the process 2. Lennar has responded to city comments from various departments and produced a viable design that incorporates much of the existing amenities on the property with a new development 3. Lennar continues to achieve success in the Twin Cites marketplace as a quality driven builder with a solid financial reputation and successful track record in the City of Medina 4. City review of this application in a timely manner is appreciated We are very excited to be given the opportunity that Lennar has provided through the careful development of this property , and would ask that careful consideration of our rights to sell our property in the appropriate timeframe be considered. We were very pleased by the City staff comments from the previous City Council meetings and continue to support this project as it goes through the process. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Enclave @ Brockton Residents Eero and Nadejda Mattson 4425 Brockton Lane Marvin and Judy Herwig Address unassigned — PID #13418-23-11-0006 Alan and Mary Johnson 4245 Brockton line j David d Linda Leurer 4225 Brockton Lane Jim and Barb Jurmu 25 Navajo Road East Scot and Robin 15 /Navajo Road Patrick and Patricia Etzel 50 N Road • •C� �� r 0 ab AGENDA ITEM : 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: June 7, 2012 MEETING: June 12, 2012 Planning Commission SUBJ: Lennar (US Home Corporation) — PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat — Enclave at Brockton - 118 -lots — W of Brockton Ln, S of Hamel Legion Park Review Deadline Complete Application Received: June 6, 2012 Review Deadline: August 5, 2012 (PUD general -60 day), October 4, 2012 (plat -120 -day) Background Lennar has requested approval of a PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat for a residential subdivision on nine lots located west of Brockton Lane and south of Hamel Legion Park. The applicant proposes to develop the 48.4 acres into 95 single-family residential and 23 detached townhome lots which would be integrated into The Enclave residential development approved in 2011. The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a concept plan of this project earlier this winter/spring. The General Plan/Preliminary Plat is almost identical with the latest version of the concept plan. The only changes appear to be that the proposed stormwater ponds along Brockton were re -oriented in order to preserve more of the trees just north of Navajo Road and that the southern access road (proposed Wild Flower Trail) was shifted to the south in the middle of the site, which increased the open space area north of the roadway. Staff suggested a number of comments at the time of concept plan, and the Planning Commission and City Council appeared to concur with most of the comments. These comments are shown below, along with a summary from staff related to whether the General Plan/Preliminary Plat meets each comment: 1. The proposed 90 -foot wide lots shall require a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet. All other standards of the R-1 zoning district shall apply unless modified by the General Plan of Development. (the applicant has now requested to reduce the setbacks even further for the southern 90 foot lots. The applicant requests the same side setbacks — 5 feet and 10 feet — for all of the single family) 2. The proposed 75 -foot wide lots shall meet the standards of the R-2 zoning district. (the General Plan of Development meets this condition) 3. The proposed 57 -foot wide lots shall require a minimum lot width of 55 -feet, minimum side yard setbacks of 7.5 feet, and a minimum front yard setback of 25 -feet. All other standards of the R-2 zoning district shall apply unless modified by the General Plan of Development. (the applicant has requested that the detached townhome lots be allowed a minimum lot size of 7, 000 sq. ft. rather than the 8,000 sq. ft. required by the R-2 district. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 1 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting " A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s t h e 7 . 5 f o o t s i d e - s e t b a c k a n d 2 5 f o o t f r o n t g a r a g e s e t b a c k a s t h e y h a d s h o w n o n t h e c o n c e p t p l a n ) 4 . T h e s i t e l a y o u t s h a l l b e u p d a t e d t o b r e a k - u p t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f h o m e s f r o m B r o c k t o n L a n e ( t h e a p p l i c a n t h a s m o v e d t h e p r o p o s e d s t o r m w a t e r p o n d i n o r d e r t o p r e s e r v e t h e e x i s t i n g c o n i f e r o u s t r e e s n o r t h o f t h e e x i s t i n g N a v a j o / B r o c k t o n i n t e r s e c t i o n . S t a f f b e l i e v e s t h i s a c c o m p l i s h e s a s i m i l a r o b j e c t i v e ) 5 . N o t w o - f a m i l y d w e l l i n g s s h a l l b e p e r m i t t e d w i t h i n t h e L o w D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l l a n d u s e . ( s t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h i s b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e G e n e r a l P l a n o f D e v e l o p m e n t a p p r o v a l ) 6 . T h e G e n e r a l P l a n o f D e v e l o p m e n t / P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t s h a l l r e d u c e w e t l a n d i m p a c t s , e s p e c i a l l y r e l a t e d t o t h e c r e a t i o n o f l o t s . ( t h e a p p l i c a n t p r o p o s e s t o i m p a c t a l l o f a s m a l l , 1 , 7 5 5 s q u a r e f o o t w e t l a n d i n t h e a r e a o f t h e d e t a c h e d t o w n h o m e s . T h e p o t e n t i a l t r a i l c o n n e c t i o n i n t h e s o u t h w e s t c o r n e r o f t h e p r o p e r t y w o u l d c a u s e a d d i t i o n a l i m p a c t s , i f t h e P a r k C o m m i s s i o n a n d C i t y C o u n c i l d e c i d e t h a t s u c h a c o n n e c t i o n s h o u l d b e r e q u i r e d ) 7 . T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l o b t a i n n e c e s s a r y f l o o d p l a i n m a p a m e n d m e n t s i n o r d e r t o v e r i f y t h a t n o d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l o c c u r w i t h i n a f l o o d p l a i n a n d t h a t n o i m p a c t s w i l l o c c u r . ( s t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t b e r e q u i r e d t o o b t a i n f o r m a l c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e f l o o d p l a i n e l e v a t i o n b e f o r e f i n a l p l a t a p p r o v a l ) 8 . N o r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t s h a l l b e p e r m i t t e d w i t h i n t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n A r e a o f T h e E n c l a v e a t M e d i n a d e v e l o p m e n t s i t e , s o t h e l o t p r o p o s e d t o b e r e l o c a t e d t o t h i s l o c a t i o n s h a l l b e m o v e d o r r e m o v e d . ( t h e p r o p o s e d r o a d c o n n e c t i o n c u t s a l o n g t h e v e r y e d g e o f o n e o f t h e O u t l o t s w h i c h w a s d e d i c a t e d t o t h e C i t y o n t h e E n c l a v e ( H u n t e r ) d e v e l o p m e n t s i t e . H o w e v e r , i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e C i t y ' s o u t l o t w i l l a c t u a l l y b e i n c r e a s e d i n s i z e a s a r e s u l t o f t h e r e a r r a n g e m e n t o f t h e l o t s i n t h i s a r e a ) 9 . T h e s o u t h e r n a c c e s s p o i n t t o B r o c k t o n L a n e s h a l l b e e v a l u a t e d f o r s i g h t l i n e s a n d r e l o c a t e d a s n e c e s s a r y f o r t r a f f i c s a f e t y . ( t h e a p p l i c a n t h a s s u b m i t t e d a s i g h t l i n e a n a l y s i s f o r r e v i e w b y t h e C i t y , w h i c h w i l l b e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s r e v i e w ) . 1 0 . T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l p r o v i d e a t r a f f i c s t u d y a l o n g w i t h t h e G e n e r a l P l a n o f D e v e l o p m e n t / P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t w h i c h a n a l y z e s t h e n e e d f o r i m p r o v e m e n t s t o B r o c k t o n L a n e f r o m H a m e l R o a d t o M e d i n a R o a d . T h i s s t u d y s h a l l i n c l u d e p l a n n e d d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e a r e a , i n c l u d i n g i n t h e C i t y o f P l y m o u t h i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e i f a n y i m p r o v e m e n t s a r e n e c e s s a r y a d j a c e n t f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t e n t r a n c e r o a d i n t e r s e c t i o n s . ( t h e a p p l i c a n t h a s c o m p l e t e d a t r a f f i c s t u d y , t h e o r i g i n a l v e r s i o n o f w h i c h w a s r e v i e w e d b y t h e C i t y E n g i n e e r . T h i s w i l l b e r e v i e w e d a s p a r t o f t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n ) 1 1 A l l c o m m e n t s o f t h e C i t y E n g i n e e r a n d F i r e M a r s h a l s h a l l b e a d d r e s s e d a t t h e t i m e o f G e n e r a l P l a n o f D e v e l o p m e n t / P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t a p p l i c a t i o n . ( t h e C i t y E n g i n e e r a n d F i r e M a r s h a l h a v e p r o v i d e d u p d a t e d c o m m e n t s w h i c h w i l l b e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s r e v i e w ) 1 2 . T h e G e n e r a l P l a n o f D e v e l o p m e n t / P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t a p p l i c a t i o n s h a l l i n c l u d e a t r e e p r e s e r v a t i o n p l a n w h i c h i n c l u d e s r e p l a c e m e n t a s r e q u i r e d b y t h e T r e e P r e s e r v a t i o n L e n n a r E n c l a v e a t B r o c k t o n P a g e 2 o f 1 2 J u n e 1 2 , 2 0 1 2 P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t / P U D G e n e r a l P l a n P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n M e e t i n g ordinance. Trees on the site shall be preserved to the greatest extent practical, especially along the perimeter of the site where they can supplement buffering. (will be reviewed as part of this application) 13. Landscaping and bufferyards shall be reviewed at the time of General Plan of Development/Preliminary Plat application and shall, at a minimum, meet City ordinance standards. (will be reviewed as part of this application) 14. The applicant shall construct the southern trail connection to The Enclave development site and the northern trial connection to Hamel Legion Park. (will be reviewed as part of this application) 15. The applicant shall obtain approval of vacation of rights -of -way and easements on the underlying property and shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney related to title issues. (will be reviewed as part of this application) 16. The applicant shall submit an application for approval of a General Plan of Development within 180 days of review of the PUD Concept Plan. (the applicant met this timeframe) 17. The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the concept plan and other relevant documents. (invoices have been paid) As discussed during the Concept Plan, the applicant has requested a PUD (rather than a following standard zoning regulations) primarily because they seek to "blend" the required density of the two distinct land use classifications of the properties (Medium Density and Low Density) and in order to accommodate the detached townhome lots which are narrower that permitted under the City's standard zoning. Looking at each of the land uses individually, the Comprehensive Plan would require 3.5 units/acre on the northern 10 acres and 2.0 units/acre on the remaining 40 acres. The proposal does not meet the required 3.5 units/acre on the northern 10 acres of the site, but does provide more than the minimum amount of units required by the City's land use plan by increasing the density in the south portion of the site. Applying the City's standard zoning regulations, the southern seven parcels would be zoned R-1, which requires a minimum 11,000 sq. ft. lot with a 90 -ft lot width. The northern two parcels could be zoned R-2 or R-3. The R-2 district allows single-family or two-family homes with a minimum 8,000 sq. ft. lot with a 60 -ft width (for single-family). The R-3 district would allow townhome or multi -family development. The existing properties are developed with large -lot residential, with the exception of the northwestern parcel, which is vacant. Vegetation is predominantly turf grass, although there are small tilled areas on two of the parcels. Surrounding land uses include Hamel Legion Park immediately to the north, rural residential properties to the south, the Enclave development site to the west, and rural property in the City of Plymouth to the east (which is planned for future residential development). An aerial of the subject properties can be found below: Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 3 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Purpose of PUD Regulations According to Section 827.25. of the City Code: "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: Subd. 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. Subd. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. Subd. 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. Subd. 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. Subd. 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. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 4 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Subd. 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. Subd. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. Subd. 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.) Subd. 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City." Comprehensive Plan Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was discussed at length during the review of the Concept Plan. For more information on this subject, the April 17 staff report to the City Council can be reviewed. The two northern parcels are guided Medium Density Residential (3.5-6.99 net density) and the remaining parcels are guided Low Density Residential (2.0-3.49 net density). Parcels Gross Acres Net Acres Minimum Density Minimum Units Proposed Units Proposed Density Medium Density Residential Herwig 5.11 4.84 3.5 16.92 12 2.48 Mattson 4.89 4.89 3.5 17.12 13 2.66 MDR Total 10 9.73 34.04 25 2.57 Low Density Residential Johnson 5.07 4.60 2 9.20 14 3.04 Leuer 5.08 5.07 2 10.14 13 2.56 Jurmu 4.48 4.48 2 8.96 9 2.01 Etzel 5.06 5.06 2 10.12 12 2.37 Oare 5 4.74 2 9.47 14 2.96 Zahhos 4.97 4.56 2 9.11 14 3.07 Echtenkanyp 6.86 5.01 2 10.03 14 2.79 Navajo Road 1.88 1.54 2 3.09 3 1.94 LDR Total 38.4 35.06 70.13 93 2.65 Total 48.40 44.79 104.17 118 2.63 As proposed, the MDR parcels would have a net density of 2.57 units/acre. This portion of the site would not fall within the required density range of the Comp Plan standing on its own. However, the overall PUD does provide more than the minimum number of units which would be required if each portion of the property were developed with the required density. The Planning Commission and City Council did not oppose this "blending" when reviewing the Concept Plan. Lennar - Enclave at Brockton Page 5 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Proposed Lots The applicant proposes 95 single family and 23 detached townhome lots, which are located on the north end of the development. As part of the PUD process, the applicant is seeking flexibility from the dimensional standards of the underlying zoning districts. Following are the standards proposed by the applicant in comparison to what would be required by regular zonings: Single Family Lots R-1 District (LDR) R-2 District (MDR) Single Family Lots (Requested) Min. Lot Size 11,000 sq. ft. 8,000 sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Width 90 feet 60 feet 75 feet Min. Lot Depth 100 feet 90 feet 120 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) 15 feet (10 & 5) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 30 feet 25 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 40% 50% 50% Detached Townhome Lots R-2 District (MDR) Detached Townhome Lots (Requested) Min. Lot Size 8,000 sq. ft. 7,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Width 60 feet 57 feet Min. Lot Depth 90 feet 125 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 25 feet Side Yard Setback -combined 15 feet (10 & 5) 15 feet (7.5 & 7.5) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 50% 50% During the concept plan review, the applicant had proposed slightly wider setback requirements for the southern -most lots (those east of the trail connection on Wild Flower). They had proposed 10 foot minimum side setbacks. The applicant now proposes that these lots be permitted the same setbacks as the remaining single-family lots (15 feet combined, one side minimum 10). Staff believes that minimum required side -yard setbacks can have a large impact on the perception of density. The R-1 zoning district, which is intended to meet the objectives of the LDR land use, requires 25 feet between homes. As such, staff recommends that larger side yard setbacks be required for some portion of the Low Density Residential property. Originally, this had included the southern -most lots (those east of the trail connection along Wild Flower Trail). Staff recommends 20 feet combined at a minimum. For the sake of comparison, many of the homes in Cherry Hill are separated by 15 feet, the homes in Bridgewater are separated by 20 feet, and the twinhomes in Medina Highlands are separated by 25 feet. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 6 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Staff recommends maximizing the privately maintained open space areas between lots, and would recommending connecting these areas to the extent possible. An exhibit showing recommended expansion of open spaces can be found to the right. The applicant has indicated that, while they are requesting preliminary plat approval for all nine properties at this time, they wish to only immediately request final plat approval for three of the properties. Staff has informed the applicant that the initial Final Plat needs to include the same land as the Preliminary Plat approval. Staff believes documentation can be arranged so that the six lots that the applicant is not going to purchase immediately can be re -platted into the same dimensions on the first Final Plat. As an alternative, the applicant could submit an updated preliminary plat which only includes the property intended to be platted immediately. The PUD General Plan of Development would still be reviewed for all nine properties. Wetlands and Floodplains Two wetlands were identified on the properties which are subject to the Wetland Conservation Act. The larger wetland in the southwest corner of the site is not proposed to be impacted by development of the lots, although a potential trail connection is shown which would cause some impacts if constructed. The Park Commission and City Council will discuss this connection. A smaller wetland of approximately 1750 square feet was identified in the area of the proposed detached townhome. The applicant propose to impact this entire wetland basin in order to construct the building pads (it appears that the grading plan shows the proposed grade approximately 8 feet higher than existing grade in this location). The wetland delineation identified seven additional small wetlands along the ditches of Navajo Road and Brockton Lane. These wetlands are considered incidental because they were caused by the installation of roads, and are not subject to Wetland Conservation Act regulations. FEMA identifies a floodplain adjacent to the large wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The floodplain location appears to extend into the area proposed to be developed, although a base flood elevation has not been established. However, a lowest lot elevation of 1000.3 was determined by FEMA on the Enclave site. The applicant does not propose to develop below this elevation, so there will likely not be impacts, but staff recommends that the applicant obtain necessary map amendments to clarify the floodplain location prior to Final Plat. Streets The applicant proposes 28 -foot wide streets within the subdivision with a right-of-way width of 50 -feet. This is consistent with The Enclave and The Fields of Medina. Two of the street names proposed are Walnut and Hickory, which are existing streets in Medina and will be changed. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 7 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting The applicant proposes a westerly street connection to The Enclave development in the north portion of the subject site. This is proposed to replace the extension of Navajo Road in the south portion of the Enclave site. The applicant does not propose improvements to Brockton Lane. The City Engineer is completing the review of the applicant's traffic study to determine if improvements are necessary along Brockton Lane. It appears that left -turn or bypass lane(s) may be recommended at the entrances to the development. Staff will provide more information on this subject at the Planning Commission meeting. Staff had recommended during the Concept Plan review that the southern access point onto Brockton Lane be evaluated in terms of sightlines. The proposed location provides 461 feet of distance to view an object 2' tall. The minimum distance recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials is 445 feet. MnDOT has more a conservative standard which would recommend 590 feet in a 40 MPH zone in order to allow 10 seconds for a vehicle taking a left to make a decision and then accelerate. The proposed location provides 527 feet of distance to view an object 4.5' tall. The City of Plymouth has requested that the southern access drive be located another 30 feet to the south to line up with a potential future street on a site in Plymouth. Staff does not recommend shifting the road further south, and believes an intersection could be lined up Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water mains from the Enclave project to serve this site. The City Engineer and Public Works have provided a number of comments related to the proposed utility plan to be addressed on submission of a final plans including: 1) increase watermain size for main loop to 12" as shown in the Comprehensive Plan; 2) connect watermain to the existing system in Hamel Legion Park; 3) dedicate property as recommended by the City Engineer for future municipal well; 4) relocate watermain proposed between two homes on the east side of the site; 5) additional right-of-way or easement may be necessary depending on final utility layout. City ordinances do not allow water from the municipal system to be used for lawn irrigation systems. Staff recommends that provisions for irrigation be submitted for review before final plat approval. City ordinances prohibit the installation of private wells within a significant portion of the site because it is located within the Drinking Water Supply Management Area. Public Works and the City Engineer recommend that the applicant and City work together to identify a location for a City well which could also be utilized to supplement the irrigation system. Stormwater/LID Review The applicant has submitted drainage calculations, which have been reviewed by the City Engineer. The applicant proposes to meet the City's stormwater management regulations through the use of water re -use (irrigation) and filtration benches located in the stormwater ponds. The City Engineer has provided a number of comments and recommended changes, which the applicant will be required to address before Final Plat. The Elm Creek Watershed is reviewing plans as well, and may have additional comments. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 8 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting The City Engineer, Public Works, and Building Official all recommended a pipe system for the homes to hook their sump pumps into. The applicant has proposed a system similar to the Enclave site, where most lots would hook into a pipe. Homes adjacent to a stormwater pond or wetland would discharge overland into the rear yard. Staff recommends that specifications for this system be submitted for review and approval by Public Works and the City Engineer prior to Final Plat. In terms of Low Impact Development principles, well grading on the site will causes most of the trees to be removed, the applicant has attempted to reorient the site to save additional trees. The applicant is proposing relatively narrow streets (28 feet). The open space areas provide breaks from total manicured, fertilized turf grass, and with some additional connections as recommended by staff, would provide a nice system of open space when established. Tree Preservation, Buffer Yards and Landscaping As mentioned previously, the applicant has updated plans in order to preserve more trees. Nonetheless, grading on the site will require the removal of over 70% of the existing trees on the site. According to the City's tree preservation ordinance, a site of this size may remove 10% of the significant trees without replacement for initial site construction, and an additional 5% for other activities. The applicant has calculated 6,287 inches of replacement trees are required (1571 4" trees) based on inches of trees removed. Staff has calculated based upon the number of trees and calculates that 6,367 inches of replacement trees are required. The applicant proposes to meet the 0.3 opacity buffer yard requirement through the installation of additional trees along the north, south, and east sides of the development. These plantings will be supplemented by many of the required replacement trees. The applicant does not propose to berm any of the exterior of the site. The east property line would likely be difficult to berm because existing pine trees are being preserved along a good stretch of the distance. However, staff believes the Planning Commission and City Council discussed the need for berming during the Concept Plan review and this hasn't been accomplished. The R-1 and R-2 zoning districts both require two trees to be planted within each lot (in addition to any replacement trees or buffer plantings). The plans identify these trees per code. Park Dedication The applicant proposes an off -road trail connection along the northeast of the site from Hamel Legion Park to the northern entrance of the development and a trail connection from the south end of the development through the conservation area to connect to the sidewalk in the Enclave. Additionally, the applicant has identified an additional trail connection to the conservation area on the west portion of the site, and a trail connection between the "outside loop" and "inside loop" of homes. The proposed site is adjacent to Hamel Legion Park and approximately 1/4 mile from Hunter Lions Park. Staff does not believe additional park property should be dedicated. The HOA amenity area shows a potential pool and pool house in one of the drawings. Because of the surrounding city park features, staff has given due consideration to this area as required by statute, but does not believe the park dedication otherwise required should be reduced. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 9 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting The City's Trail Plan identifies a Moderately -High priority trail along Brockton Lane, connecting Hamel Legion Park to Medina Road. However, the plan states: "this trail will need to be coordinated through Plymouth because it will be located on their east side of the road and used to serve Plymouth's planned high density neighborhoods just east of Hamel Legion Park." The proposed trail would create the ability to cross the trail connection from the east side of Brockton to Hamel Legion Park at an intersection. Staff recommends that the Park Commission and City Council discuss all of these trail connections and determine which should be required for the benefit of the public, and which should be private trails. Staff recommends that park dedication credit be provided for any public trail easements, but that otherwise cash be accepted in -lieu of additional land dedication. Pedestrian Circulation The applicant proposes a sidewalk on one side of the interior streets for pedestrian circulation. This sidewalk is proposed to connect to the sidewalk in the Enclave development. Review Criteria/City Discretion The City has a great deal of discretion in reviewing a PUD. The decision requires rezoning to a PUD district, a legislative act with the greatest level of discretion. According to Section 827.27 of the City Code "If the [City] determines....that the project does conform with the overall intent and purpose of this Section, it may approve a PUD." In order to approve of the PUD, the City should determine that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant policies (even if it is not consistent with some specific standards of the zoning code). The City should also determine that the PUD process is accomplishing one or more of the purposes referenced on pages 4-5. Under standard zoning, the City generally has less discretion when reviewing a preliminary plat. However, in this case the proposed plat relies on the PUD rezoning, and the plat can only be approved as presented if the PUD is approved. Staff Recommendation If the Planning Commission and City Council find that the proposed PUD is consistent with the objectives of the PUD ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends approval of the PUD General Plan of Development and Preliminary Plat with the following conditions: 1) Approval of this preliminary plat shall be contingent upon the adoption of an ordinance rezoning the property to Planned Unit Development (PUD). 2) Approval of this preliminary plat shall be contingent upon approval and recording of the Enclave of Medina 2°d Addition in order to provide utility and street connection. 3) The applicant shall enter into a development agreement satisfactory to the City which shall include the requirements described below as well as other relevant requirements of City ordinance or policy. 4) All property owners shall enter into an agreement with the City obligating the properties to develop consistent with the approved General Plan of Development. 5) The applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans received by the City on May 31, 2012 and any additional improvements required herein. The design of all improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing construction. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 10 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting 6) The applicant shall provide a letter of credit prior to any site construction in an amount recommended by the City Engineer to ensure completion of the required improvements. 7) The proposed lots in Blocks 7 and 8 shall require a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet. All other standards of the R-1 zoning district shall apply. 8) The proposed lots in Blocks 1 and 2 shall require a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet, minimum lot depth of 125 feet, minimum lot width of 55 -feet, minimum side yard setbacks of 7.5 feet, and a minimum setback for garage doors facing streets of 25 -feet. All other standards of the R-2 zoning district shall apply. 9) The proposed lots in Blocks 3-6 and 9-11 shall require a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet, minimum lot width of 75 feet, minimum lot depth of 120 feet. All other standards of the R-2 zoning district shall apply. 10) The common open spaces shall be expanded as determined by the Planning Commission and City Council. 11) The applicant shall construct improvements to Brockton Lane as recommended by the City Engineer. 12) Plans shall be updated to provide berms as determined necessary by the Planning Commission and City Council. 13) The applicant shall dedicate property to the City sufficient for a municipal well as recommended by the City Engineer. 14) The applicant shall provide formal documentation from FEMA or the otherwise relevant agency to confirm the 1000.3 floodplain elevation in order to confirm that no floodplain impacts will occur. 15) Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide detailed construction plans for review and approval by the City Engineer. 16) The tree replacement plan shall be updated to identify 6,367 inches of replacement trees. 17) No lawn or landscape irrigation systems shall be permitted to be connected to the City water system. The applicant shall provide details of alternative irrigation measures prior to final plat approval. 18) One side of streets shall be posted "No Parking" to allow adequate emergency vehicle circulation. 19) The design of the system for the discharge of sump pump water shall be approved by the Public Works Superintendent. 20) All driveways shall be allowed to be set back a minimum of five feet from one of the side property lines, provided the driveway is set back a minimum of 10 feet from the other side property line and is consistent with width regulations. 21) All comments of the City Engineer dated May 21, 2012 shall be addressed, and construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to construction. 22) All comments of the City Attorney shall be addressed, and the applicant shall abide by the City Attorney's recommendations related to title issues and recording procedures. 23) The applicant shall obtain Wetland Replacement Plan approval prior to final plat approval. 24) The applicant shall record Homeowner's Association (the "HOA") documents against all residential lots which shall be satisfactory to the City. This document shall describe responsibilities for maintenance of stormwater improvements, buffer yards, upland buffers, lawn irrigation systems. The documents shall also include covenants limiting the use of the property in the low -density residential land use to single-family residential units. Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 11 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting 25) The applicant shall obtain necessary approvals and permits form the Elm Creek Watershed, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Department of Health and other relevant agencies. 26) 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 Developer and approved by the City Council prior to such time. Such application for final plat shall include all of the property included within the approved preliminary plat. 27) 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, general plan of development, construction plans, development agreements, and other relevant documents. Attachments 1. City Engineer comments dated 5/21/2012 2. Fire Marshal comments dated 1/16/2012 3. Narrative from Applicant 4. Promotional Materials submitted by applicant 5. General Plan of Development/Preliminary Plat received by the City 5/31/2012 Lennar — Enclave at Brockton Page 12 of 12 June 12, 2012 Preliminary Plat/PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting WSB & Associates, Inc. May 21, 2012 ATTACHMENT 1 - City Engineer comments Engineering ■ Planning is Environmental ■ Construction Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: Brockton Lane Properties, L-12-078 WSB Project No. 02065-060 Dear Dusty: 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the Brockton Lane Properties Plan dated May 11, 2012. The plans don't provide a level of detail that allows for an in-depth review. We have the following general continents regarding engineering matters: 1. The City should consider what type of a roadway section Brockton Lane will utilize when it is reconstructed sometime in the future. At a minimum the City should acquire a 33 - foot half right-of-way as part of this application. If the roadway will be reconstructed to a rural section the City should acquire a minimum of 40 -feet half right-of-way. 2. The plans should include a footing drain system to serve all homes in the proposed subdivision. The system should be constructed at a depth sufficient to serve each property by gravity. The system should be similar in design to the footing drain system installed in the Keller subdivision. 3. Plans should be revised to show plan and profile views of streets and all proposed utilities. City Standard Details should be included in the plan set. 4. The City is considering a new municipal well in this area. Currently the City has developed a well field in the Hamel Legion Park north of this site. The applicant should discuss with the public works superintendent the possibility of locating a municipal well on the site. 5. The City should review these plans with the City of Plymouth to coordinate street and utility itnprovements and discuss any possible shared services. Minneapolis • St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K:IMedinaWrivate Development RevlcnslBrockton Irene Pmperlics L-12.0781Brockton Lnne Subdivision Review (3.21.12).dac Brockton Lane Properties May 21, 2012 Page 2 6. Please see the attached comments from Paul Hudalla and Chuck Rickart regarding stormwater management and traffic study reviews. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Tom Kellogg Attachments K:1MedbmlPrivnle Development Rcvicwslrockton Lone Properties L12.0'i816rocklon Lane Subdivision Review (5-21-12).doc ��/ f / - . W S B I n f r a s t r u c t u r e r E n g i n e e r i n g " P l a n n i n g �% C o n s t r u c t i o n 7 0 1 X e n i a A v e n u e S o u t h A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . S u i t e 1 1 3 0 0 M i n n e a p o l i s , M N 6 6 4 1 6 T e l : 7 6 3 6 4 1 - 4 8 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 6 4 1 - 1 7 0 0 M e m o r a n d u m T o : T o m K e l l o g g , P . E . , C i t y E n g i n e e r C i t y o f M e d i n a F r o m : P a i d M . H u d a l l a , P . E . W a t e r R e s o u r c e s E n g i n e e r W S B & A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . D a t e : M a y 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 R e : B r o c k t o n L a n e R e s i d e n t i a l S u b d i v i s i o n S t o r m w a t e r M a n a g e m e n t R e v i e w C i t y o f M e d i n a P r o j e c t N o . L - 1 2 - 0 7 8 W S B P r o j e c t N o . 2 0 6 5 - 0 0 6 W e h a v e c o m p l e t e d a s t o r m w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t r e v i e w f o r T h e E n c l a v e a t B r o c k t o n p r e l i m i n a r y p l a t s u b m i t t a l . D o c u m e n t s p r o v i d e d f o r r e v i e w i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g : " S t o r m w a t e r M a n a g e m e n t P l a n p r e p a r e d b y S a t h r e - B e r g q u i s t , d a t e d M a y 1 2 , 2 0 1 2 " P r e l i m i n a r y P l a n S e t ( 2 5 s h e e t s ) p r e p a r e d b y S a t h r e - B e r g q u i s t , d a t e d M a y 1 1 , 2 0 1 2 T h e s e p l a n s w e r e r e v i e w e d f o r c o n f o r m a n c e w i t h t h e C i t y o f M e d i n a ' s S t o r m w a t e r D e s i g n M a n u a l a n d g e n e r a l e n g i n e e r i n g p r a c t i c e s f o r s t o r m w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t . B a s e d o n t h i s r e v i e w , w e o f f e r t h e f o l l o w i n g c o m m e n t s : S t o r m w a t e r M a n a g e m e n t 1 . P l a n s d o n o t m e e t t h e C i t y ' s v o l u m e c o n t r o l s t a n d a r d . F o r t h e f i l t r a t i o n - b a s e d B M P s p r o p o s e d b y t h e a p p l i c a n t , t h e C i t y ' s s t a n d a r d r e q u i r e s a f i l t r a t i o n v o l u m e o f 1 . 5 t i m e s t h e s t a n d a r d i n f i l t r a t i o n v o l u m e ( 1 - i n c h o v e r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t ' s i m p e r v i o u s s u r f a c e s ) . S u b m i t t e d p l a n s p r o v i d e v o l u m e a c c e p t e d f o r i n f i l t r a t i o n p r a c t i c e s , b u t a r e n o t a d e q u a t e f o r f i l t r a t i o n p r a c t i c e s . P l a n s a n d c a l c u l a t i o n s m u s t b e r e v i s e d t o a d d r e s s t h e C i t y ' s v o l u m e c o n t r o l s t a n d a r d . 2 . T h e s t o r m w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n a r r a t i v e s t a t e s t h a t p o n d d r a w d o w n i s b e i n g d i s c o u r a g e d f o r t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t . I n f o r m a t i o n s h o u l d b e p r o v i d e d t o d o c u m e n t w h y d r a w d o w n / i n f i l t r a t i o n w i t h i n p o n d s i s n o t d e s i r e d . 3 . P o n d s m u s t b e d e s i g n e d t o a m a x i m u m w e t s t o r a g e d e p t h o f e i g h t f e e t d e e p . A p p l i c a n t m u s t r e v i s e p l a n s a n d c a l c u l a t i o n s a c c o r d i n g l y . Brockton Lane Subdivision Stormwater Management Review City of Medina Page 2 of 3 Drainage and Modeling Calculations 4. The applicant's modeling calculations consider Soil Group B/D as Group D soils. Using this assumption may result in overestimating existing runoff volumes and peak discharge rates occurring under existing conditions. The applicant should update calculations and model B/D soils as Group B soils unless soil borings justify a Group D classification. Soil borings must be provided for review. 5. Modeling calculations should be performed using dynamic storage -indication method to account for tailwater conditions. 6. Modeling calculations should calculate directly connected impervious separately. 7. Modeled high water elevations of wetlands and ditches should be provided on drawings. 8. Storm sewer must be designed to meet City standards and calculations must be provided for review and approval. Additional catch basins should be provided as needed to capture water prior to leaving the development. Grading and Utility Plans 9. Detail(s) for the filtration BMPs and outlet control structures must be provided for review and approval 10. Plans should indicate pond depth one foot below design depth to account for sedimentation during construction. 11. Low building opening elevations must be set at least two feet above adjacent emergency overflow elevations. Several lots on Blocks 1 and 2 do not meet this requirement. The applicant must revise plans to ensure that all proposed buildings meet the freeboard requirements. 12. Pond overflow elevations must be at least one -foot above the 100 -year high water elevation unless a controlled emergency overflow is provided. Details for controlled emergency overflows must be provided for review and pond emergency overflows must be clearly labeled on plans. 13. All emergency overflow locations and elevations must be clearly indicated on plans. 14. A drainage and utility easement must be provided over stormwater basins to at least one foot above the 100 -year high water elevation. 15. A 20 -foot wide access easement (or outlot) should be provided for maintaining stormwater basins. This route must not exceed a 6:1 slope with minimal side slopes. Brockton Lane Subdivision Stormwater Management Review City of Medina Page 3 of 3 Erosion Control 16. It appears that the "silt fence — after grading" is improperly denoted in the legend. Plans should be revised to clearly indicate timing of silt fence installation. 17. Erosion control plan should be revised to indicate inlet protection at all catch basins including beehive structures. 18. It appears that only one construction access is proposed for the development. The applicant should verify the need for additional construction access points and add proposed rock construction entrances as needed. 19. Erosion and sediment control details and storm water pollution prevention plan will need to be provided for review and approval prior to construction. This concludes stormwater management comments for the submitted documents. The applicant must provide additional information and revise plans to address the comments provided above. Additional comments may be warranted once drawings and calculations have been updated to address these comments, and once additional information outlined above is provided by the applicant. METRO WEST INSPECTION ATTACHMENT 2 - Fire Marshal comments Loren Kohnen, Pres. January 16, 2012 TO: Debra Peterson FROM: Loren Kohnen 0::71a RE: 116 Housing Units West Side of Brockton Lane South of Hamel/Medina Park PUD CONCEPT PLAN (763) 479-1720 FAX (763) 479-3090 Mtrowst76@aol. co in I have received the Concept Plans. Concerns and code requirements: 1) There are areas the hydrant spacing is not being met. 2) Narrow street widths. Parking is going to be allowed only on one side, but for some reason if this would not be followed and cars did get parked on both sides, emergency vehicles could not pass through. There is very limited parking on the street and at certain times people may have to park a block away. 3) Where are the mailboxes to be located? If they are at each lot, this would cut down street parking by about one half. 4) The cul-de-sac shown does not meet code. Ninty-six ft. (96') minimum is required. 5) In this area there is a very high water table, 12" to 18" below the surface in Spring. The foundation and basement should drain to a separate system.similar to Medina Morningside. This would take care of problems and expense that the City may have in the future with the water entering the sanitary sewer system.; We have to remember these lotsare narrow with homes not to far apart. LK:jg Box 248, Loretto, Minnesota 55357 The Enclave at Brockton City of Medina Introduction ATTACHMENT 3 - Applicant Narrative P,4AY 1 4 2012 U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar is excited for the opportunity to expand our land holdings within the City of Medina. Our proposal includes 118 homes that will integrate with the Enclave community to provide the City of Medina a cohesive neighborhood that offers a wide variety of housing opportunities that the City of Medina will be proud of. Property Description Located to the West of Brockton Lane, adjacent to the South end of Hamel Park the site consists of nine parcels varying in size to a total of approximately 50 acres. The property generally consists of land suitable for residential development with easy access to Brockton Lane. Each owner of the nine property owners has rightfully made improvements on their property including the construction of houses, sheds, driveways, and swimming pools. Because of this, the natural characteristics of the site are limited. Topography is relatively flat throughout and geologic features are non-existent. • Surrounding Land Uses and zoning within 1000 feet The areas immediately surrounding the site are made up of predominately single family detached housing with varying densities. The Enclave is immediately to the West. Immediately to the South is Rural residential land that is not currently included within the City of Medina's 2030 MUSA boundary. City Park is immediately to the North. To the East, Brockton Lane serves as the boarder between the City of Medina and the City of Plymouth. Ryland Homes has recently submitted an application to the City of Plymouth for small lot single family homes to the East of the Enclave at Brockton. City Standards • Land Use Guide Plan designation and Zoning Classification The Land Use guide plan identifies the area for two uses. Approximately ten acres immediately adjacent to the City park are identified for Medium Density Residential at 3.5 — 6.99 units per acre. The remainder is identified for Low Density Residential at 2.0 — 3.49 units per acre. We are proposing to use the PUD process designed to allow flexibility to accomplish density blending over the entire site. Based on the existing land use designations there would need to be a minimum of 34 units on the Northern most 10 acres and 70 units across the remainder. Although not in support of original site plan the Planning Commission did support the density blending concept and the use of the PUD process. Housing types We feel the housing blend offered in the Enclave at Brockton combined with the original Enclave will provide the City of Medina with a dynamic variety of housing at prices that are not readily available within the City. Single level, townhomes will offer a housing option for the empty nester that is ready to downsize or go to maintenance free, but is not ready to move into a larger facility such as the Gramercy building. As noted, the detached townhomes near the park will start with prices in the upper $200's. Architectural renderings are included with this submission. The below table demonstrates the diverse opportunities that will be available with the inclusin of this submission. Product Target Market Price Homesite size Row Townhome Lifestyle Townhome Landmark Heartland Premium First time buyer Empty Nester - Divorcee Young Family 1st Move up 2nd Move up Low $200's Upper $200's Low $400's Low $500's Mid $600's 32' X 32' 57' X 120 ' 65' X 120' 75' X 130' 90' X 135' Enclave (at Hunter) 41 0 55 16 40 Enclave (at Brockton) - 0 ,2, :. 0 76 19 'Total Homes 41 23 55 92 59 PUD Justification and Lot description City code established the PUD process to allow flexibility in site planning and development. The below section demonstrates how we feel the Enclave at Brockton meets the intention of a PUD. Subd.l. Innovation 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. This is achieved through the blending of densities from North to South. We are offering three distinct lot types that will allow for multiple house types, sizes, and price points. The higher density section along the park is designated for our Lifestyle product. The Lifestyle experience includes a single level (with basement) detached townhome that has historically been popular with empty nesters. The Enclave at Brockton is designed to fulfill the void in 75' wide lots that hits a target market for medium priced single family detached homes. When paired with the Enclave (at Hunter) Lennar will have contributed a wide range of lot sizes, house types, price points and target demographic in one location in a cohesive neighborhood. Subd.2. Higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and experience land planners, architects, landscape architects, and engineers. Lennar has drawn on the knowledge of its highly regarded consultants and experienced in-house staff to create a plan that follows the guidelines set forth in the City's Comp plan and responds to comments and suggestions made by Planning Commission members and City staff, Subd.3. More convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. The site will be served by municipal infrastructure and has been designed in a manner that will lower public investment. Pedestrian connections are included to provide residents easy access to public parks and downtown Hamel (through the Park). At the request of City Staff cul-de-sacs and center islands have been avoided eliminating concerns relating to snow storage and removal. Vehicular circulation routes on public streets will provide easy access for emergency vehicles. Subd.4. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. The 50 acre site is made up of nine parcels of land each with a separate owner. Each owner has rightfully made improvements on their property including the construction of houses, sheds, driveways, and swimming pools, Because of this, the natural characteristics of the site are limited. Topography is relatively flat throughout and geologic features are non-existent. To address this issue we have integrated a series of natural corridors to help break up walls of homes and create meaningful transition between homesite types. Wetlands impacts will be avoided where possible and open space will be preserved along the City's conservation easement area to the West. Prevention of soil erosion will be addressed by incorporating engineering design standards related to ponding and the treatment of Storm Water and with our Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted with construction drawings. Subd.5. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern. Site planning has allowed for the ability to phase the project through orderly development. A phasing plan will be submitted at the next stage with the General Plan. Subd.6. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering development costs and public investments. We have thoughtfully created networks of streets that are efficient and maintain open space without sacrificing lot areas. The site will be served by municipal infrastructure and has been designed in a manner that will lower public investment. Reduced side yard setbacks allow for more efficient use of land resulting in shorter stretches of road per home. We are also proposing 50' rights of way to match the existing Enclave neighborhood. The 50' rights of way allows for lower impervious surface and less stormwater runoff, reducing the environmental impacts of development. At the request of City Staff cul-de-sacs and center islands have been avoided eliminating concerns relating to snow storage and removal. Subd.7. A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan The Enclave at Brockton beautifully fulfills the objectives of Medina's comprehensive plan by generally following its land use designations while maximizing green space through the incorporation of density blending through the PUD process. As designated by the Land Use Plan our highest density is on the Northern -most portion of the site along the park. The plan then thoughtfully transitions into 75' wide homesites through the central portion of the site then to 90' wide homesites at the South end. Each homesite size transition is broken up by an open space corridor that will be landscaped with trees and low maintenance vegetation. Subd.8. A more desirable and creative environment that might not be possible through the strict zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. Following the PUD process allows the flexibility to include our single level lifestyle detached townhomes which do not currently have an applicable zoning standard. Flexibility through the PUD also allows the ability to preserve 20% of the land as open space while meeting the City's density requirements (based on a blended average). Timing The Planning Commission questioned the timing of this proposal and why it is pertinent now when the Enclave is just starting. Development of the Enclave 1st addition brought public infrastructure capacity within a reasonable distance to the properties included in this application. Prior to the Enclave these properties could have been considered premature as it was not financially feasible to bring sewer to the site as an assemblage, let alone as stand alone projects. With the anticipated success of the Enclave Lennar recognizes the opportunity to expand into the creation of a cohesive neighborhood with potential to market several housing types and price points simultaneously. We intend to begin developing the first phase in the fall of 2012, Homeowners Association(s) The intent is for this to be included in the Enclave Master HOA. Flexibility was allowed in the creation of the original Enclave association allowing for the expansion to include additional areas. The Master Homeowners Association was established to maintain commonly owned elements of the neighborhood. A Sub -association will be created for the lifestyle (detached townhomes) series. Exterior improvements (including the building, driveways, landscape and sod) in the Lifestyle neighborhood will be maintained by the sub -association. The use of a community irrigation system (with appropriate watering restrictions) that recycles water from stormwater ponds will be included to conserve the need for municipal water. Site lines to park We have thoughtfully addressed the concerns raised by the 'wall of homes' adjacent to the City Park. Our previous plan had eleven (11) detached townhomes that would back directly to Harnel Park. The new plan has reduced that to four (4) with additional open space and a curvilinear street. In doing so we were also able to eliminate the concern over the straight road `cut through' between Hunter Drive and Brockton Lane. The new layout will be more conducive to low traffic speeds between the two North/South roadways. The visual impact from the park will be reduced by the open space corridor. Our detached townhomes are one story in height which will help limit vertical intrusion. Side yards setbacks will maintain a minimum 15 ft separation between homes. We are still evaluating topography to determine weather or not they will be look outs or walk outs. That information will be determined in the Preliminary Plat stage. Additionally, we have reserved a large area adjacent to Hamel Park for private use through the Encalve homeowners Association. Open Space Wetlands and Tree Preservation Based on current information we believe the general plan has allowed us the ability to minimize wetland impacts. Through the delineation review a small (1,400 sf), isolated wetland was identified in the detached townhome area. We are proposing to mitigate the impact through replacement from Wetland Bank credits. There is one homesite in the Southwest corner of the site where we are proposing to use wetland buffer averaging to eliminate setback issues. Wetland delineation information was submitted in advance of this application Each owner of the nine property owners has rightfully made improvements on their property including the construction of houses, sheds, driveways, and swimming pools. In doing so, trees have been planted throughout the site to provide various forms of buffering. It is our intention to take advantage of existing trees where practical to supplement the landscape plan for the Enclave at Brockton. Based on aerial photos it appears there will be opportunity to save large stands of evergreens along Brockton Lane, the South property line, and within some of the open space areas. Where feasible, trees will be evaluated for relocation throughout the site. Additional information relating to tree preservation and landscape planning will be provided with the Preliminary Plat submission. Site topography We will continue to study the topographic arrangement of lots as we move into the preliminary plat stage. At this point, we have not collected enough information to determine the number of Walkouts, Lookouts, and Flat homesites there will be. In general, the Enclave at Brockton starts at a higher elevation then the original Enclave (Former Holasek property). There will be much less area affected by water table issues. As a result, topography will not need to be altered to the same extent, artificially pushing homes and streets up in the air as was necessary on the original Enclave. More details on topography changes will be available with the Preliminary Plat submission. Brockton Lane Traffic A traffic study has been conducted as is submitted with this application. The traffic study concludes no need to pursue improvements to Brockton Lane. There have been concerns raised with congestion on Brockton Lane, particularly during the baseball season when Hamel Park is heavily used. Please keep in mind that is an issue that already exists and is not caused by this application. Summary Lennar has a long history of building successful Communities throughout the Metro area. We are very excited for the opportunity that lends itself through the careful development of this fantastic assemblage of properties. We are optimistic Council will recognize the efforts we have made to address the concerns of the Planning Commission and City staff and look forward to favorable support. Project Team Developer: U.S. Home Corporation Builder: Lennar Corporation Primary Contact: Joe Jablonski Planner/Engineer/Surveyor: Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Architect : Lennar; in-house with outside consultation Wetland Specialist: Arrowhead Environmental Consulting Landscape Architect: Norby and Associates Traffic Engineer: Spack Consulting Legal Council: Leonard Street and Deinard, PA Association Manager: Community Development, Inc, LE re441 May 29, 2012 Attn ; Dusty Finke, City Manner City of Medina 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Modifications from Zoning standards Dear Mr. Finke; The purpose of this letter is to provide information that will help demonstrate the modifications to the existing zoning standards as our being requested with the Enclave at Brockton. We are proposing to use the PUD process designed to allow flexibility to accomplish density blending over the entire site. Part of the flexibility has permitted us the ability to create open space complexes that will function as buffer areas that are designed to be heavily planted with trees. The PUD allows us the ability to create a variety of housing opportunities through the use of different homesite sizes. Ilomesite size correlates directly to our capability to offer a wide range of house plans, styles, and price points. The table (shown below) compares the existing zoning on the site with our proposed guidelines. We are proposing to deviate from the typical minimums relating to lot width, lot area, and side yard setback. Current Zoning Proposed Current Zoning (Typical SFD) Proposed (Lifestyle Townhomes) Zoning Class R- 1 * PUD R-2 PUD ** Min Sq Ft 11,000 9,000 min*** 8,000 7,000 min*** Min Width 90 Feet 75 Feet 60 Feet 57 Feet Min Depth 100 Feet 120 Feet (at full depth) 90 Feet 125 Feet (at full depth) Min Front Setback 30 Feet 30 Feet 30 Feet 25 Feet Min Interior Setback 25 ft Combined 15', 10' min 15 Ft Combined 10', 5' min 15 Ft Combined 10', 5' min 15 Ft Combined 7.5', 7.5' min Street Setback (side) 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft Max Impervious 40 % lot area 50% lot area** 50% lot area 50% lot area Notes: * Nineteen homesites on the far South end of are shown on the pre -plat with 90' wide minimums. ** Current City code does not have a zoning standard that addresses detached townhmes as proposed. ** * City code allows a reduction to the minimum rear setback if abutting open space. In this case we are proposing a reduction to the minimum lot area and max impervious coverage for lots abutting open space. If you have questions or need additional information, please let me know. Sincerely, Joe Jablonski Land Development Area Manager US Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar 16305 36th Ave N • Suite 600 • Plymouth, MN 55446-4270 LENNAR.COIVt 1 Story12 Bedrooms 12 Baths 1 3 -Bay Garage 1,902 Sq. Ft. Total LENNAR® 16305 36th Avenue N,, Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 = 952-249-3000 1 Story 12 Bedrooms 12 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 1,902 Sq. Ft. Total First Floor Opt. Gourmet Kitchen Lower Level LENIVAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., S1te 600, Plymouth, M\ 55446 952-249-3330 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR mam 1 Story 12 Bedrooms 12 Baths 1 3 -Bay Garage 1 Story1 2 Bedrooms 1 2 Baths 1 3 -Bay Garage 2,498 Sq, Ft. Total First Floor Owner's Suite 15'-8"x 15' 4" TRAY VAULT CLG Owner's Bath W Closet 0 Closet Bedroom 2 11'-5" x 12,3" :Bath � LIN Great LL Room 19,6s "".5' 0" 1 1 ' CLG Study 10'-4'x 13'-10' DN Foyer 10'CLG Porch Nook Dining 13'-1"x 12'-0" r 71. ' 4 Kitchen r 13'-1'x v'-3'. �wdrC° REF R D Laundry Mud Room BENCH 3 Car Garage 30'-6'x21'6' lose r 1 Lower Level LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Aveenue. N. ^:i..iite 600, Plymou'.,h, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR Ire 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 13 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 2,230 Sq. Ft. Total First Floor Second Floor LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 3 Baths 13 -Bay Garage First Floor 2,469 Sq. Ft. Total 3 Car Garage Optional Gourmet Kitchen Second Floor Closet Closet Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 LINEN Laundry' D Owner's Suite I5' -d x 14,0 Closet LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., SOte 600, Plymout- , MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 o ',MENn LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 3 Baths 3 -Bay Garage 2,564 Sq, Ft, Total LENNAR• 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 • 952-249-3000 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 3 Baths 3 -Bay Garage First Floor Great Room 11 Powder Flex Room Nook 10'-5" x 15' 2" Closet Mud Room 2,564 Sq, Ft, Total PANTRY 3 Car Garage 31'-6"x20'6" Kitchen 11'-1"x 1512" Second Floor Optional Gourmet Kitchen Closet Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 1 0-4"x 10'-4" Bedroom 2 Owner's Suite 15'-4" x 14 10 Main Bath Closet OPT. SINK Laundry Owner's Bath LE N NAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 9/11 `,;4p„g;N LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 1 3 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 2,660 Sq. Ft. Total First Floor 3 Car Garage Kitchen 70'-10'x1]'3° DBL. OVENS REF J /l Optional Gourmet Kitchen Second Floor Bedroom 4 x,5'3' Bedroom 2 12'-1'r 13.-4' LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Site 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 PPowr Nm LENNAR 2 Stories 1 4 Bedrooms 13 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 2,710 Sq. Ft. Total First Floor Kitchen I '- x 12-4" REF .Nra Mud Closet Room Optional Gourmet Kitchen Second Floor Owner's Suite LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 554L'6 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 13 Baths 13 -Bay Garage First Floor 2,719 Sq, Ft. Total Second Floor Optional Study Bedroom 2 Main Bath Bedroom 3 12.10'r I1 9' v 0 V Bedroom 4 I '10'r12.4' Loft Closet Owner's Suite 14 i',14-4' 00 Optional Gourmet Kitchen LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR orPaxmum 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 3 Baths 13 -Bay Garage First Floor 2,858 Sq, Ft. Total Second Floor Opt. Gourmet Kitchen Owner's Suite LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Sulte 600, Plymouth, MO 55446 952-249-3040 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 3 Baths 13 -Bay Garage First Floor 2,806 Sq, Ft, Total 3 Car Garage 31'-6" x 21'-6" Optional Gourmet Kitchen Second Floor OPT. LW D is CAB Laundry Closet Loft 12'-10' x 10'-2" DN Bedroom 3 12'-10" x 11-3" U Closet Bedroom 2 1Y-8" x 12'-10" Bedroom 4 10'-10" x 12'-8" Main`s Bath 0 0 Owner's Suite 14,8"x x 14-4" no Closet 0 Owner's 0 Bath LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymoutn, M\ 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate u certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 ocaox.uum LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 13 Baths 13 -Bay Garage First Floor Opt. Gourmet Kitchen 3 Car Garage 3,075 Sq. Ft. Total Second Floor LENNAR.COM 16325 5 36th Avenue N., Siite 600, Plymout0 , MO 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 t;,',„,;A4 LENNAR L* ,._.v� :Ho Ave ,= " , s'L to 5CC, R, ii_ai_jtt MN 55,W-: t u52 :,, n , t,_ Kenton 2 Story 4 Bedroom 3.5 Bath 3,410 Sq. Ft. • *VI*VtNIM4'R INCLUDIM womos LE MHu1A►R.CQRA Phis eni ahmsbe !nun leebrtmp Md aariw+ (loo . 'AAA! 110 ROI 111 0.i al midi.lamerieewnsthe opo aide domes Ikt toe fber Aft, b okn WWI Wm. itilimnibmo and l a s palespeouf weiostiAmid IIIHNINIpolo et Mod dm ifie• Wait ar Win 11.00111 AO& tr. .A1wr4 air MIHNOtee .: .>�: _ : Island { t j// 14'-6" x 15-0" Dining Rd. Pantry 12'-0" x 14'-0" FIRST FLOOR PLAN Porch Study 11'-1"x 12'-10" Mud Room Family 18'-4" x 17-4" 3 CaTaxi-P-7^ 31 SECOND FLOOR PLAN Ph ant adore w ober rtrdwtige erd �mqqrr coil* *km. *OA ale owl aurdrrdanal nerli a.lamer romathe la llosolkor . ,1.1 r throws L1. avalbre WOW . puiroAWdMraabmland Judd an/ Mieldla polio et Obi dui sheerest, mad Of wens or a g "under dr a `1lr�bl mr OF Tdhlrr dlltl41.11l i1t mordlloratis do dim hrne.r;t .�irrhip�rrt. of .lei ' :. SY LLI:LNI MSRLLR /k /� ti, LENNAIM SL to P ricutl';, MN 55,446' Wakefield 2 Story 4 Bedroom 3.5 Bath 3,614 Sq. Ft. r iVORYTNIwo•s IMCLUDU MONISM LEIVNA►R-COM Plow od dead= so wits nothil nip erd WW1 OPSDnit. 0101 III H I ellludiW tsi; midi' tamer rues iM 6110 b mg* Maw tosolbor 0.111. opecikolimi ., and asorione Oleoddl000k000nd equosiWOpoupporinnibrodahoLid nokbevoiden elthehomirs mama er mil lift Ow Wawa, wed Or WO^ .,. a laded atall a *raw daataion s iallear *Om tom lisim as 01 SW ham ii•a ohori n_Iw a WW1 0011110011 FIRST FLOOR Hers His Owners .. Bath r Dining Room 11-11" x 15•-8• Open To Below Bedroom 4 12'-1"x 14'-8" Bedroom 2 15-4" x 12'-0" Closet IIIIIeI Closet Bedroom 3 13'-8" x 1T-10" SECOND FLOOR LEN T + " SL tF �1.Ai.=.' 1' 'y" -11._ 017, MN 5,514,5 9.52 L 49.. "di CC Danbury 2 Story 4 Bedroom 3.5 Bath 3,712 Sq. Ft. Plow alddmdore w aloft manna. aid Mr stab Op/Or11I, r4AldA le Id vealladbm !WI aiiir Owen Whom*" flow ail ammtbai rAthaA nolka0la0d1gnparswl/ MabtandeassosliestillahaWs Arai" or atia l W4lritei IMMIX WIIK Wail VOW WV IWIW SW tiloSSAIIISSIMISM et MINSI 'O CIF MMIt iil e *MY111. 4000 01* * AoAt ► -' b Sunroom 9'-8" x12'-3" Study 11'-4" x12.-3" Great Room 15'-10" x16'-3" Foyer 11 Porch Owners Suite 19'-0" x14'-0" Tress ng Vanity Sitting Area Closet Clow Kitchen 17-6" x9'-1 Butlers Pantry FIRST FLOOR Loft 13'-6" x17'-1" Bedroom 4 15'-1" x12'-8" SECOND FLOOR Linen 3 Car Garage 29'-6" x 24'-6" Closet Bedroom 3 15-8" x15'-7" Bedroom 2 12'-0" x17'-1" Closet �� , �� n 1 - 6 s �� f . ' . ^ ? ��_ r ��: ' ��I r ��' ��' l _ �� " ' , ����l r t �� ��+ ' , _ ��' �� ��_ ��I . ��t l ' , C ' 4 1 P �� 5 5 + 1 6 . 9 5 2 �� ���� 2 ' : C 0 Walden 2 Story 4 Bedroom 3.5 Bath 3 Car Garage 31'-6" x 29'-1" 3,785 Sq. Ft. I�. INIIMAR-COPOI Rand mat i O IM! *tee mided7wo mod mow cal* wiled& Ida* de RI le Ow Ow rperi olillhmitopr�nr gni*-fiord and .iw diono fte in. Nom 1 + Wm INN ab/had nalkibmplompesaltionetlhohemitt fit obiihia '��ii1i/�tMrl!jc�!itr+airr n.,a�•. '; • rv.4.?4, • gpyn� Great Room 2D' -0"x 17'-3" FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN Open 11 Bath . .a On Loft Bedroom 4 16'-10"x 11'-4" wi.c 11'-8" x 15'-3" 3/4 Bath V;��;•� r .'i Ave'"I'_ u Sule ^'� I' alt il�tt-, r it a5,44 ', Colegate 2 Story 4 Bedroom 3.5 Bath 3,912 Sq. Ft. Pin and aYvdme w Mite lswbdir@a dad mr wait OdldOrra, tit W% ire atd iftdd an medlailderawnionnolho _and abladano milimpdammomnigimilohormee ra111is et adrY'.ilele AID! outater vallim swift IOW dinar '"ItpbitYlIMMII�01 ��ld` W�n1 i • WF To eln ow r r — Craft It Mudroom j Bench ' a 00 00 tml r— Owner' Bath rr Garage 31'-6" X 27'-6" 1 FIRST FLOOR Bedroom 2 12'-10" X 14'-4" -Bath J&J Bath Bedroom 3 11'-8" X 13'-4" Bedroom 4 13'-1"X 11'-4" Great Room 16'-2" X 19'-2" Foyer Porch Owner's Suite 14'-10" X 19'-4" Dw ni Kitchen 11'-9" X 19'-2" L Dining Room 12'-9" X 12'-11" II I1J.DN Open To Belo Laundry --jlw I IID 1 W.I.C. SECOND FLC 2 Stories 1 4 Bedrooms 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 4 Baths 3 -Bay Garage First Floor 3,112 Sq, Ft, Total 3 Car Garage 31' . 21 Second Floor Kitchen 10 . 14' Optional Glass Tub in Master Optional Gourmet Kitchen LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N,, Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 05446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2012 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. MN Bldr. Lic NBC001413. 3/12 OPCUPiUNI IY 2 Stories First Floor 4 Bedrooms 13 Baths 3 -Bay Garage 3,270 Sq, Ft, Total Second Floor 3 Car Garage 31' x 21' Optional Gourmet Kitchen Bedroom 3 11'x 13' W.I.C. Loft 1T 10' J&J Bath 0 Bedroom 2 lrxu' 3/4 Bath ON Owner's Suite taxn' Bedroom 4 12'x 15' 0 Owner's fs O Bath Owner's Bath W.I.C. Optional Glass Panel on Tub Deck LENNAR.COM 16305 36th Avenue N,, Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright - © 2012 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. MN Bldr. Lic #BC001413. 2/12 0/ //S:'c LENNAR 2 Stories 1 4 Bedrooms First Floor Great Room 17'x '5' 3/4 Bath Study 11'x10 Foyer Porch 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 13 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 3,328 Sq. Ft. Total Second Floor Dinettte 1 1.x 15' Dining rxlr DO ow Kitchen 3 Car Garage 30.x 19' Kitchen Owner's Suite Bedroom 4 12.x 16' Optional Gourmet Kitchen Bedroom 3 12'x 14' Bedroom 2 1 1 ' LENNAR.COM 1 6 05 36th Avenue N., S..Ite 600, Plymoute, M\ 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage - size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2012 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. MN 81 dr. Lic #BC001413. 2/12 o4",, ,617a LENNAR First Floor 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 14 Baths 13 -Bay Garage 3,396 Sq, Ft, Total Second Floor Optional Gourmet Kitchen Nook 16'-0" x 12'-2` Kitchen 16-0" x 9'6" RA OVEN 0 Owner's Bair Owner's Suite Laundry -[Y SI11< Open To Below Closer oth 2 Loft 12'10'x 16•-2" B122' edrox S'om-4' 2 Optional Glass Panel on Tub Deck Closet Bo'h 3 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 n •e•= 13-•o' 0 Closet Closet LENNAR.COM 1630E 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymout MO 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate u certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 N rt; fr LENNAR 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 14 Baths 1 3 -Bay Garage 3,416 Sq. Ft. Total First Floor Opt. Gourmet Kitchen 3 Car Garage Second Floor LENNAR.COM 163'05 36th Avenue N. Suite 600, Plymoutn, M\ 55446 952-249-3000 Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2011 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. 5/11 LENNAR The Lansing 3,876 Sg. Ft. 2 Stories 5 Becrooms 5 Baths 3-3ay Garage ¢i EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED HOMES LENNAR.COM Plans and elevations are artist's renderings and may contain options, which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans, specifications, dimensions and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home's precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding "under air" or "finished area" or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Copyright © 2012 Lennar Corporation. Lennar and the Lennar logo are registered service marks /` of Lennar Corporation and/or T —T its subsidiaries. MN Bldr. Uc ■ — ■ #80001413.3/12 `OWL WONG oPPPO Kitchen 10x15' Laundry/ Craft LINEN Bath Owner's Suite Owner's Bath 18J Both Bedroom 2 12'x10' Nook OPT EGRESS,. 17'x 15' Rec. Room 20'x13'10" Basement 17'0 11" rq H `vJs%Rr 0 o,u UP Mechanical Great Room 18'x15' Bedroom 3 13' x 10' Bathes 1' R.I. 3 Car Garage 31 x 21' Bedroom 4 11'x 14' Bedroom I I'8'x1 I'8" ezz/Y\tx First Floor Second Floor Unexcavated Lower Level Min Width -90ft Min Area -11,000 sf Fysb- 25ft Liv /30 ft Gar Sysb - 5 ft/10ft Rysb - 25 ft Min Width -75ft Min Area - 8,000 sf Fysb - 25 ft Liv / 301t Gar Sysb-5ft/ 109 Rysb -25ft Min Width -57ft Min Area - 7,000 sf Fysb-25ft Sysb- 7.5 ft/7.515 Rysb -20 ft 50' Row - 28' B -B Streets LENNAR CORPORATION 16305 36th Ave North Suite 600 Plymouth, MN 55446 Attn: Joe Jablonski T-952-249-3014 SATHRE-BERGOUIST INC. 150 S. Broadway Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 Attn: Bob Mdstad -Engineer Attn: David Pemberton - Lend Surveyor T-952476-6000 F-952-476-0104 LENNAR CORPORATION 16305 36TH AVE N. SUITE 600 Land Development Manager. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 Joe Jablonski: 952-249-3014 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952)476-6000 SHEET INDEX TABLE r SHEET Description SP Preliminary Site Plan PH Preliminary Phasing Plan AERIAL Aerial Map Inxvonyl EX Existing Conditions Plan Alta Alta/Boundary Survey PP Preliminary Plat UP Preliminary Utility Plan GP Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan EC Preliminary Erosion Control Plan TS Tree Survey & Removal Plan TR Tree Replacement Plan W:\Projeds\5401-646 BASE_BROCK.DWG LENNAR? / 16305 36TH AVE N. SUITE 600 Pi/A-. 1 / 6 /1 4'. Land Development Manager. ( / PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 Joe Jablonski: 952-249-3014 ,‘,EPS1 suR, o •'' F°. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 11 13� V lI Ile 4. ZJr 0 w i0HR9 I \ e1' -n 1 _ 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952)476.6000 r P `'1♦` r � ' I' �� I NORTHEF '—SEC. 13, FND. HEI CAST IR( '�.'' fl 1 4_ ---I 9 - i0 ♦`♦ PPM. NWL • 10025 (% I j ♦ \ MWL-10065NL-100. I /1\ WA•1001.0 , ion ri \ �� �� \,o ff ., - 1 ,C1,1111111111IMMIIIMi /e r11 T Q 1. 1 ill 0 / — \ — f \ Ill NW. C.:0 \ ligili lEit �. ` � ��`` Lww..1 1 1 ' C I 1 ''``tt il 1 I E \ 1 1 '. �.1 , II �41 1I P II r N 1 r I I II 1 � I I I 1 I \ 'I �. I r� i 111 11- -..,., t,- �`�01 , i ,all I I, .1 1 i J1 t ..._ ` 5 ' it I •1 ‚Ht `� :j!;9/ : i . . . il i II■®._. �1 = 4 1 1 � �: `' I( 11 I aa ■lN 1V 17 ) it # ore i, I, �s, w ,� - -C` %�', Iiiiik ii d 4-� r 1 a.,, t y b III I ., ‘ .rte k # _. ti 1111111110, ♦ ` 4* - obi '10d__. - I�,►�-""� �► til p.• '06' .. ... x tor* 5 , ,si - 33 I L ail Revised : May 30, 2012 Ja h OF \ Tt1 I AT POCKTON NORTH 1"=80 W: \ Projects \ 5401-646 BASE_BROCK.DWG NOTES REVISIONS N ORTH 100 50 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET PUD 9ff LOT D ETA IL a Setback Width Setba ck Width DRAINA GE A ND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THU S: 21 t — Garage Setback Lin e Bu ilding Setback Lin e Drainage & U tility Line PUD 75' LOT DETAIL PUD 57 LOT DETA IL 5 5 — Garage Setba ck Lin e Bu ilding Setba ck Line D ra in age & U tility Lin e N OT TO SCA LE Being 5 fat in width and adjoining tot lines, unless otherwise in dicated, an d 10 feet in width an d adjoinin g right of way lines and rear lot line s, un less othe rwise indicated, as sho wn on the plat. �r OWNER: LENNAR CORPORATION OWNER: / LENNAR CORPORATION LIJ € N LIJ id ":LIJ wG� OWNER: j�� LENNAR 1- € CORPORATION LIJ OWN ER: F — LENNAR <C CORPORATION LIJ 0 L- IJ LIJ F- - 0.170.71 110711180.& ▪ 55 39 I • san00 125. 0 aAn q.a I I 4.1 125.0 \ 11116.1. 6 0690 \ Bus \ manor' t 219ingt s.a OWN ER: / OUGAN Of /91143 /11.733 NORTH U NE OF SEC. 13 AND SOUTH / UNE OF SEC. 12 TAP. 118, ROE 23 OWNER: CITY OF MEDINA N89°65'48" T 2,--� 711.1 \,595BHA \ ,lt g\t I 15,3 q.t. , 130.0 9. gt Z O 1288.92 033 111 , 80 1. 4189 °56'01"E 1289.64 (1289.72 NAVAJO HILLS ADDIDON) 9,1.12 11012, . • 22,130..0. usi61. 0. So h 7410,713ft f10.u11q to 150711. 71 \� NORTH UNE OF THE SOUTH 945.00 OWNER: FEET OF SEC. 13, TW P. 118, RGE 23 BITTERMAN .21580 10 . m mus I OWN ER: SCHER9ER INVESTMENT LP. OWNER: JAMES ODE OWNER: '4 JOHN RNAZZO to 33233 OWNER: NANCY FNAZZO OWNER: JOHN FNAZZO OWNER MARGARET BUSCH OWNER: BUSCH PROPERTIES COMPANY This survey do es no t purpor t to sho w all un de rgrou nd u tilities. The so urce of in forma tion from plan s and markings will be combined with observed evidence of u tilities to dev elop a v iew of those underground utilities. Ho wev er, lacking excav ation, the ex ac t lo catio n o fun dergro tmd featu res cannot be accurately, completely and reliably depicted. Where additional or more detailed in forma tion is requ ired, the client is adv ised that ex cav ation may be necessary. The con tractor shall determin e the exact location of any and a0 existing utilities before commencing work. The co ntractor shall be fully responsible for any an d all damages arising out of his failure to ex actly locate and pro tect all ex istin g u tility facilities. Co ntact GO PIIER STATE ONE CA LL at 651-454-0002 for prec ise onsite lo ca tion of u tilities prio r to any ex cavation. North A merican Title Insurance Compan y Commitment for Title Insurance was relied u po n as to matters of record. See indiv idu al parcel descriptions fo r refe rence commitmen t n umber. The su bject property appears to lie within Zon e X, (a rea of areas o utside the 1 -perc en t annu al chan ce Bo odpla io, area s of 1% annu al chan ce she et flow flo odin g where av era ge depths are le ss than 1 foot, areas of 1% annu al chance stream floo din g where the con tributin g drainage area is less than 1 square mile, or areas protected from the l% annu al chance flood by lev ees. No Base Flood Elev ations or depths are shown within this zo ne. Insuran ce purchase is not required in these zones.) and Zone A (Areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding and a 26%chance of floodin g ov er the life of a 30 -year mortgage. Because detailed analyses are n ot performed for such areas; no depths or base flood elevations are shown within these zones.), per the National Flood Insuran ce Program, Flood Insurance Rau Map Community Panel No. 27053C0167E, dated September 2, 2004 as acquired from the Federal Emergency Management Agency Web Site. Su rvey co ordinate and bearing basis : Henn epin Coun ty No modificatio ns to this su rvey or sketch may be performed by any person other than the s urveyor signing this certification or persons under his direct supervlstoo. Its reproduction and redistribution without proper consent is prohibited Wetland(a) shown here on is (are) per field location of stakes as set by Arr owhead E nviro nme nt al Co nsu ltin g. Ben chmark: GSID Station #10305 - Mn/DOT Name 2722 Y Trunk H ighway No. 55 and County Road No. 101 in Hamel Elev ation- 979.69 feet (NAVD88) CLIENT/DEVELOPER LENNAR CORPORATION 935 E ast W ayzat a B oulev ard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Attn: Joe Jablonski T-952-249-3014 LAND SUR VEYOR/CIVIL ENGINEER SATHRE-BERGOUIST INC. 150 S. Broadway Ave . Wayzata, MN 55391 Attn: B ob Molstad - Engineer Attn: David P emberton - Land Surveyor T-952-476-6000 F-952-476-0104 PUD Zoning: Min Width -90ft Min Area - 11,000 sf Fysb- 25ft Liv/ 30 ft Gar Sysb-5ft/10ft Rysb-25ft Min Width - 75 ft Min Ar ea - 8,000 sf Fysb-25HLiv/ 30 ft Gar Sysb-5ft/ 10ft Ryab-25ft Min Width - 57 ft Min Ar ea - 7,000 sr Fysb - 25 ft Sysb-7 .5 ft/ 7 .5ft Rysb-20ft 50' Row - 28' B -B Streets I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct s upervisio n and that I am a d uly Licensed Land S urvryor under the laws of the State of Minnesot a Dated this 7th\\ day of May, 2012. S ATH RE-BER(.3QUIST, David B. Pemberton, Professional L and S ur vey or Mi nnes ot a Lice nse No. 40344 1 Rev ision Per City Memo 05-30-12 DBP 1 U Z VJ 5 a 0 cc ct 0 0.5 J m 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 '4512. \6 6 d \ ti .2 0413 OE S 1 J r DRA WN DBP CHECKED DBP D ATE 05/07/12 SC'.Gt F AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-646AA FILE: PRE-PLAT.DWG TOWNSHIP . RANGE - SECTION S HEET 1 `OF 1 SHEET JOE J ABLO NSKI .:-`_,2-?''S-3;' EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHO WN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY O NLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE COMMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FO R ANY AND A LL DAMA GES ARISING OU T OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY A ND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PL AN OR SPE CIFI CATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSI ONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OTA • 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 14-4 DATE sir r/ r o- REG. NO Lr9r8o REVISIONS BY Plan ReN don a City Me mo 05-24-12 RSM 05-30-12 J U Z 1- (1) 0 0 ce W m (1) • 0 8 10 3- 1h Z a >- >- 0 0 cn THE ENCLAVE AT BROCKTON MEDINA, MINNESOTA CC z z W -J 1 es DRAWN 1 CAW CHECKED RSM DATE 05-11-12 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB N O. 5401-646 FILE: BASE_BROCK.DWG S HEET GP -2 OF SHEETS NOR TH. a 1002.1 EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIMAT E WA Y ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOC ATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERV E AN Y AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 110/11111. 50 25 0 25 50 100 SC ALE IN FEET 71r3 99 35 IE In. -=997. 72 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE - 7(1/ 1 REG. NO "1" o C REVISIONS BY, Plan Re4a lom Coy Memo 05-24-12 RSM 05-30-12 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZAT A, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 40151 Sd, N,„ j}} +/%3 DES\ 02 r Z 0 U O m w w z Q z_ w 2 Q z J0 IA Z 2 w w 2 1 z z w J DR AWN CAW CHECKED RSM DATE 05-11-12 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-646 FILE: BASE_BROCKDW G SHEET GP -3 OF SHEET!, Re ar Pa d Llrx C. MH 1 TC 10232 INV 997.3 EXISTING U TILITIES SHOWN ARE SHO WN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY O NLY. THE CON TR ACTOR SHA LL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EX ISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WOR K HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAG ES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING U TILITIES. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE TATE OF MINNESOTA. REVISIONS BY1 Pla n Revision s CIty Mama 05-24-12 RSM 05-30-12 1 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 Ht co p 12 OES l THE ENCLAVE AT BROCKTON MEDINA, MINNESOTA r DRAWN 1 CAW CHECKED RSM DATE 05-11-12 SC ALE AS SHOWN J OB NO. 5401-646 FILE: BASE_BROCK.DW G SHEET UP -2 1/40F S HEETS, EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CO NTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXA CT LOCA TION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE CO MMENCING WORK HE A GREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAM AGES ARISING OU T OF HIS FAILURE TO EXAC TLY LO CATE AND PRE SE RVE ANY AND ALL EXIST ING U TILITIES. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER T HE L AWS OF THE TATE OF MINNESOTA. r REVISIONS BY Plan Rav eb n City Meng 0524-12 RCM 05-30-12 U Z H co 5 0 w m w 2 Q U) 150 SOUTH BROADWA Y WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 J r Z 0 U O m w w z Q z w� > a Q z E o w Z 2 w w H CC z z w -J e DRAWN CAW CHECKED RS M DATE 05-11-12 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO . 5401-646 FILE' BASE_BR OCK.DWG SHEET UP -3 OF SHEETS Norby & Associates Landscape Architects, Inc. 100 Esst Second Street Chaska, MN 55318 (952)361-0644 AGENDA ITEM : 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: June 6, 2012 MEETING: June 12, 2012 Planning Commission SUBJ: Henri Germain — 790 Navajo Road — Variance from requirement to install upland buffer — Public Hearing Background Henri Germain and Kristin Carlson -Germain have requested a variance from the requirement that they install a vegetative upland buffer adjacent to a small wetland in the southwest corner of their property at 790 Navajo Road. City Code section 828.43 requires upland buffers to be installed on the property because a new principal structure is being constructed on a previously vacant lot. A larger wetland is located on the north end of the property, and the property owner intends to maintain an upland buffer in this location as required by City Code. The wetland in question is partially located on the subject property, and a larger portion of the wetland is located on the property to the west. It appears that the portion of the wetland on 790 Navajo Road has historically been mowed along with the adjacent upland. The property owner seeks to continue maintaining this corner of the parcel as turf grass. Below is an aerial of the property from 2008, on which one can see the area on the corner of the subject property was being mowed. Henri Germain Upland Buffer Variance Page 1 of 4 June 12, 2012 Planning Commission Meeting Regulatory Requirements Section 828.43 Subd. 5 states that "if a new development activity....is proposed, the following Upland Buffer Zone and Buffer Setbacks shall be required for each Wetland, or portion of Wetland, within the subject property." The Code explictly includes "construction of a principal structure on an existing vacant lot" within the defintion of "new development activity." The Upland Buffer is an area where vegetation is planted to improve the quality of the water which runs into the wetland, creates opportunities for animal habitat, and helps maintain plant diverstiy. The width of the required Upland Buffer is based on the functional classification of the wetland. In this case, classification of the small wetland in the southwest corner of the property was not established, but staff would classify the wetland as either a Manage 2 or Manage 3. Staff recommends that the Manage 2 buffer width be required, and if the property owner wishes to conduct a MnRAM assessment to determine if the wetland is a Manage 3, they would have the ability to do so. A Manage 2 wetland requires a 25 -foot wide buffer. During the discussion of the upland buffer ordinance, the Planning Commission and City Council discussed situations very similar to this case. The Commission and Council discussed whether new homes built on previously vacant lots should trigger the buffer requirements, and the decision was that they should. The Commission and Council also discussed the potential impact of the buffer requirements adjacent to a relatively small wetland. In this case, the portion of the wetland on the subject property is approximate 2000 square feet in area. The required Upland Buffer would be approximately 3150 square feet. The Code does includes a clause which limits the required area of the Upland Buffer to 200% of the area of the adjacent wetland. In this case, the required buffer is approximately 158% of the area of the portion of the wetland on the subject property. Analysis Minnesota State Statutes Chapter 462.357, Subd 6 (2) describes the situations in which a City may grant a variance. The applicant is required to establish that there are "practical difficulties" in complying with the zoning ordinance. The applicant describes the reasons why they believe practical difficulties exist in their narrative. The Commission and Council should analyze the narrative, but staff has summarized as follows: 1. The portion of the wetland on the subject property is relatively small compared to the area of required Upland Buffer. 2. The portion of the wetland on the subject property is dry for most of the year. 3. Most of the wetland is located on adjacent property, where no Upland Buffer is currently required. Therefore, the animal habitat benefits of a buffer around the smaller, dryer portion of the wetland are reduced. 4. Surrounding properties do not have similar small Upland Buffers and have well - manicured front yards. The statute establishes the specific factors to consider when determining if "practical difficulties" exist, and if the City can approve a variance. Staff has provided potential findings behind each factor: Henri Germain Page 2 of 4 June 12, 2012 Upland Buffer Variance Planning Commission Meeting 1. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Staff does not believe the proposed variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The applicability section of the Wetland Preservation ordinance was written in a way so that buffers would be "phased - in" when new development or redevelopment occurs. Therefore, it may be common that a property triggers the buffer requirement for only a portion of a wetland, but future construction on a neighboring property may someday trigger the buffer requirement for the rest of the wetland. 2. Variances shall only be permitted when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. The protection of wetlands and other natural resources is a significantly important objective of the comprehensive plan. Additionally, the Surface Water Management Plan establishes the following policy specifically related to buffers: "The City requires through its new wetland ordinance that future development proposals include natural buffer zones around wetlands and streams. Buffer areas should not be mowed or fertilized, except that harvesting of vegetation may be performed to reduce nutrient inputs." 3. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance [statute defines "practical difficulties" through the following three-part test] a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. The property owner proposes a single-family residential home, which is a reasonable use in the rural residential district. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Staff does not believe the circumstances are unique to the property. Many wetlands will cross over property lines, and there are more vacant properties which will trigger the buffer requirement in the future. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff does not believe the variance would alter the essential character of the locality. The required upland buffer does not have any impacts on the construction that the property owner wishes to conduct on the property. Instead, the primary concern appears to be related to the aesthetic appearance of taller grasses within the buffer around a small portion of a wetland when surrounding vegetation is manicured turf grass. The height of vegetation within a buffer can vary and be fairly tall (over 3 feet), but the City's wetland specialist has suggested there are lower profile seed mixes that, properly maintained, would be closer to eighteen inches in height. Henri Germain Page 3 of 4 June 12, 2012 Upland Buffer Variance Planning Commission Meeting If the Commission and City Council are supportive of the variance request, staff would suggest a number of conditions that may meet the water quality and wildlife habitat objectives of the ordinance in place of an upland buffer being installed. For example, the applicant could expand on the upland buffer adjacent to the larger northern wetland. Additionally, hardcover could be prohibited in an area adjacent to the southwest wetland to mitigate the fact that a buffer is not being installed. Potential Findings and Conditions The Planning Commission and Council should review the requested variance within the context of the statutory regulations noted above. Staff has suggested potential findings within the text of the staff report. The variance should be denied if the Commission and Council do not believe the requested variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance or is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, or if the Commission and Council do not believe the applicant has established a practical difficulty in complying with the zoning ordinance. The City may approve a variance if the Commission and Council believe that the requested variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, and also that the applicant has established a practical difficulty in complying with the zoning ordinance. If the City approves a variance, it is permitted to apply conditions to the variance approval, which must be directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. If the Commission and Council decide that a variance should be granted in this case, staff would suggest the following conditions for discussion: 1. The applicant shall install vegetation as recommended by the City Engineer to replace the turf grass within the boundary of the delineated wetland in the southwest corner of the property and shall maintain this area in more of a natural state. 2. The applicant shall install an Upland Buffer 50 feet in width adjacent to the wetland on the north end of the property. 3. The applicant shall grant to the City a drainage easement over the wetland in the southwest corner of the property. 4. All hardcover and structures shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the wetland in the southwest corner of the property. 5. The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the variance request. Attachments 1. Narrative from Applicant 2. Comments from City wetland specialist 3. Comments from Elm Creek Watershed 4. Site Plan showing location of wetland, required buffer, and construction occurring on site Henri Germain Page 4 of 4 June 12, 2012 Upland Buffer Variance Planning Commission Meeting Henri Germain & Kristin Carlson -Germain 790 Navajo Rd W. Medina, MN 55340 April 22, 2012 City of Medina Planning and Zoning 2052 Cty Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 ATTACHMENT 1 - Applicant Narrative MAY - 3 2012 Below is a request for variance to the wetland buffer surrounding the wetland on the South West corner of our property hereafter referred to as Wetland B. This is not a variance request to remove the Wetland B from the ordinance. Our request is to remove the buffer zone from the ordinance obligation. Our property is located in Tuckborough Farm Third Addition Lot 3, Block1, at 790 Navajo Rd West. We have owned this property for 1 year and 2 months. Wetland B is approximately 2,300sf with a wetland buffer surrounding it of approximately 3,100sf. This wetland crosses the property line between 790 and 800 Navajo Rd W, therefore the portion of the wetland on 800 Navajo is not part of the description above. Wetland B is a low point for the surrounding area. The collection basin is approximately 3.5 acres. There are at least 7 other wetlands within 1,000 feet of the property, most are larger and some are many time the size. We are building on the last lot available within 1,000 feet of our lot and all of the houses within 1000 feet of our lot were built in the early to mid -1990's, prior to the current wetland rules and regulation. Since we have owned this property, we have never seen open water on Wetland B, therefore it does not support water fowl. I am mentioning this in case the buffer zone is created as a way to save the birds from being afraid when someone conies too close. Furthermore the very small size of Wetland B and the proximity of larger open water ponds in the immediate area provide better places for water fowl. I wish to attempt answering the question of whether the lack of a buffer will reduce the water quality of Wetland B. During the course of a very heavy or extended rain, the soil in the Wetland B area becomes soft but without surface ponding. But if we experience a period of 1 week or more without rain, the Wetland B soil dries out and feels the same underfoot as the surrounding area. I don't see how the buffer will improve the water quality because the water is held in the soil. We do not intend on changing the appearance of the buffer zone from the appearance it has had during the past 20 years. Sincerely,,, 5/3;41,: 5(3111, Henri Germain & Kristin Carlson -Germain WSB ATTACHMENT 2 - Comments from City Wetland Specialist Engineering • Planning • Environmental • Construction & Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Dusty Finke, City of Medina From: Jed Chestnut CC: Tom Kellogg, WSB & Associates Date: May 17, 2012 Re: 790 Navajo Road — Wetland Buffer Review City Project No. L-12-081 WSB Project No. 2065-140 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the wetland buffer requirements at 790 Navajo Road, Medina, for a small wetland along Navajo Road in the southwest corner of the property. Below are observations and recommendations: • There is currently no buffer around the wetland and based on aerial photo review and interpretation it appears the adjacent land is maintained (mowed); • Requiring the establishment of a buffer would not likely result in a change in the vegetation currently present within the wetland, although water quality inputs to the wetland and downstream waters may be improved if the buffer was established around the entire wetland; • As per the City zoning ordinance (828.43, Sub. 8), native vegetation must comprise 75% or more of the buffer species. A standard mixed height native prairie seed mix would be appropriate in this instance. Seed mix examples include State Seed Mixes 35-241 or 35- 641. These seed mixes can range in height from eighteen inches to six feet for the tall grasses. Please call me at 763-231-4854 with any questions. Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K:102005-1409Admio\Doc#MgMO DFIuke - 790 N v,do Road plan rcvlew 051712.doc Debra Peterson ATTACHMENT 3 - Comments from Elm Creek Watershed From: James.Kujawa@co.hennepin.mn.us Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:45 PM To: Debra Peterson Cc: judie@jass.biz; AILDurgunoglu@co.hennepin.mn.us Subject: 790 Navajo Road West Buffer Elm Creek Watershed Commission comments. Hi Debra, Last week we received the request for comments on a variance to remove the buffer obligation around wetland 2 on Lot 3, Block 1 Tuckborough Farm Third Addition (790 Navajo Rd. West). The Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission does not have a specific standard that would prohibit mowing or maintaining a buffer in a situation like this, but our standards do recommend a minimum buffer of 20 feet around all wetlands within our watershed. (See Standards of the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Appendix F, Sections B. 19, C 4, and G.9). Based on this, their variance request would be more of a City of Medina issue as it relates to its ordinance and regulation framework than an Elm Creek Watershed Commission issue, From a water quality, quantity and wildlife perspective, a buffer area vs, mowed area would be more beneficial for this wetland and its downstream receiving waters because of the filtering effect a buffer would have on the water flowing through it. The filtering would be increased from a buffer by creating more roughness on the soil surface causing any runoff water flowing through it to slow down which helps the soil and vegetation absorption of water, sediment and nutrients. Unmowed area also create additional vegetation surface area that break up raindrop impacts on the soil surface. From my review of Hennepin County aerial photos from 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2009, this wetland and buffer were mowed in every photo. The problem that I see is that this wetland and buffer are monotypic with no diversity. Encouraging aquatic and upland native grasses, flowers, forbs, trees and shrubs to be planted in this wetland and buffer area would make for a more diverse and interesting landscape which would attract more wildlife and create a better ecosystem which might in turn be more appealing to the landowners. Thank you for allowing our comments on this project. Jim Please Note New Address Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services 701 Fourth Ave. South, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 554154600 James.Kujawa@ co.hennepin.mn.us Phone 612-348-7338 Fax 612-348-8532 Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney -client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, 1 copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. 2 NORTH 40 20 0 20 40 80 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND CP Deno te s Surv ey Con trol Statio n/Benchmark TB Deno te s Tele/Comm. Bo x/Ped CUP Denotes Corru gated Metal Pipe/Size EB Denote s Electric Bo x IRAN De notes Electric Transfo rmer SCO D enotes Sanitary Cleanout SMH Denotes Sanitary Manhole SV De note s Septic V en t UGC De notes Un derground Commu nication Line UGE - Den otes U odergoun d Electric Lin e UGG Denote s U nderground Goo Lin e FFE D enotes First Floo r Eleva tion LLE Denotes Lo west Lev el Elev atio n GFE D enotes Garage Floor Elevation LOE Den otes Loo kou t Elev ation WET A-1 D en otes We tlan d Delineatio n/Flag Iden tifier C Denotes Proposed Rot Wall --980- -Denotes Existing Contou r -(CD-Denotea Proposed Contour • D enotes Fou nd Monument - As Denoted D en lo es Fou nd Cast - Iron - Monument O Den ote 1/1" by 14" Iron Pipe Set and Marked by License No. 40344 Wetland Bu ffer Monument TREE LEGEND ASH COT MPL SPR W1L Deno tes Ash Tree - Size Denotes Cotto nwoo d T ree - Size Denotes Maple Tree - Size Denotes Spruce Tree - Size Denotes Willow Tree - Siz e O FFSET IRONS ELEVATIONS ARE TO THE TOP OF PIPE OS 61 . 1017.70 OS 52 1019.16 OS63• 1021.30 OS 64. 1020.06 OS55=1011.63 0S 68. 1018.00 OS 67. 1017. 04 OS 68=1015.46 OS 69. 1013. 44 OS970=7010. 58 OS 611=1008. 83 05 512 . 1008. 50 05 913 . 1011. 35 05 514=1013. 60 PRO POSED ELEVATIONS PRO POSED GARA GE FLOOR ELEVATION • 1020.34 , PROPO SED TO P OF FOU ND ATIO N ELEV ATION • 1020. 61 \ PRO POSED BASEM ENT FLOOR ELEVATION .1012.00 PROPO SED LOOKOUT OPENING ELEVATION • 101560 PRO PO SED FIRS T FLO OR ELEVATION • 1021.54 -'4L )\ \ • --cot 201 � f 10 '"4,, •\ �$`L,. f� t• �� J� 1 _) 0 CC 0 C13 _3 1-- Mow 8 vS{'e C L o cotl0(\ OP fetutred �7(ll' F�ef . A freQuesh 11' o be c.Jo.-Jeri. r 1 +ooa7 \•�I ,/ 1000.3\ ``t+ �1 T tor" \"ET I I I 1 II 11 ;p 1 L -t F S89°53'32• E, ' 175. 00 r. 101\ rI h1% -1- i� < 1 0� 1l QP, T 1929.6 a / 1000.8 '. ' r 4,4 ' 1 M2-,� 1 ; . Ty ' 1 / \ � ' tit 1. . ii, -1., \ 1i 11 OPEN I PROPO SED SPORT COURT FLOO R ELEVA TION • 1005.00 ••.,„ I L 32 - • 0q, 1:,11R.21 I hereby certify that this sunny, plan or specificatio n wasprcparo d by 61 -- )e0 un der my direct superv is ion a nd that I am a duly licen sed la nd su rv eyo r unde r the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 18th day of April, 2011. SATHRE- RGQUISTrjNC. --- 1003. 1 As i,D David B. Pemberton, Professio nal Land Surveyor Minneso ta License N umber 40344 '0 AEJ to02 5 UGG 10024 1003. E NL ..•4015 7 � ``\.•\- 600.2 ^}0.i I "-�J. L•] \ s. \. \• WF72-51 1 // ��x, ' -. gta.yf �1 999.1-e II �. ,\ III • Tit -,1 D7?���\7[,\� 1t 6161 '1tET 4Z `1 1 11 1I 1. ELK+ -31 1 I ; �1 ;'`__ '\ `` 1 17 I `�t-7 IJ O I \\::``` ``1 ` .G0\p 1;I:119?" --,0: 44 �C'1 1 4♦ I tilt' I [� `s \ \\aa� OLD E 018.9 1 ```1 \` � : 102° 2 �1y I I LLLt Wild I 0226 , ;0 21 53?_ •66N.1 5PR11 k.. 1 . 1022. 7 1 1020. 7. MAP ,0 )1 �• 1022 -r 1 ___________ I I I I 1 . -+ I r\ • ••• 4'r LOT ,003.1 `1I'WA II ? „ i1 \ `` < \° °\ \ .02,4, .10 16,3 `` ` �`1 \1 \t \ tO�Dp sa�1�'pE°mT 9 _6019: ` `'1 1 1 `1 1 \ 600. 13 'MET 1 I2 `17004.7 ° � t/gP, ti Ie__ 9 11 1 ' 0 1 , II 2 -06111 I VI I cn I 1 N 4602 \.\ `s>, II\ l 15S 88' 31t-W '119.03 B 480 4 1004.7 B7V INNcUS SU RFACE 1 --- ?- MA V4 »-- 1003. 4 I 1004.0r [• 14/'1004.9 10014 f 00A ] AOV• . / id 1003 006.2 10115 .0 1006 .2 snort. _ , SI I R=470 .00 G=7°19' • 100 13 10071 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPER TY Lot 3, Block I, T UCKBOR OUG II FA RM THIR D A DDITION , according to the recorded plat the reo f, Hen nepin Coun ty, Minnesota. 517E ADDRESS 790 Navajo Road, Medina, MN , 55340 NOTES This survey doe s not purport to show all undo ou d and were located cr Gopher State One Call loc ate request ticket p rep gr o utilities. The ex isting utilities shown me shown in an approximate way only ❑ p p q Dumber 111012808. The contractor shah deem -Line the exa ct location of an y a nd all existing utilities before commenc in g work The con trac tor shall be fu lly responsible for any and all damages arising ou t of his failure to exactly loc ate an d prote ct all existin g utility facilities. Contact G OPHER STA TE ONE CALL of 6514 54-0002 for precise onsite location of utilities prior to an y excavation. A title opinion was n ot furnished to the surveyo r. The subject pro perty appears to lie within Zone X, (Areas ou tside the 1 -percen t annual chance floodplain , areas of 1% ann ual chance sheet !lo w flooding where average depths are less than l foot, areas of 1% annual chan ce scream flooding where the contributing drain age area is less than I square mile, or areas protected from the I% an nual chance flood by levees. No Base Floo d Elevations or depths re shown within this zon e. Insura nce pu rcha se is not required in these zone s. ). per the National Floo d Insu ranc e Progra m, Floo d In surance Ra te Map Community Pane l No. 27053C0168E, da ted September 2, 2004 as acquired from the Fe dera l Emergen cy Management Agency Web Site. Lo t A rca :156,572 Sq. Ft. - 3. 594 A ctc s Zon in g and setba ck in forma tion oo provided by the Planning Depa rtment of the City of Medina: Zoning: RR (Rural Residential) Buildin g Setbacks: 50 feet - Front Yard 40 feet - Rear Yard 20 feet - Side Yard Bu ildin g H eight: 30 foot Maximum Impervio us: 50% Surv ey coordinate an d bearing basis : Henn epin Cou nty, Minnesota HARDCOV ER CALCULA TION S Existing - None Pro pose d- Ho use/Garage/Stoo ps Driveway To tal 4,438 sq. 9. 9,351 so. Il. 13,789 sq. 6J156,572 sq . ft= 9% GRADIN G DISTURBANCE CALCULA TIONS House/Garage/Stoops - 650 cu. yd. Driveway - 519 cu . vd. Total 1,169 eu.yd. W etlan d(s) shown hereon is (are) per field lo catio n of stakes as set by Arrowhead En viro nment C Onsu tting, A pr il 13, 2011. No modifications to this surv ey or sketch may be performed by any person other than the surveyor signing this certification or persons under his direct s upervision . Benchmark: Minnesota Department of Transpo rtation Ge odetic Statio n 910305 (MNDo t Name 27229) Located at the Junction of State Highway 55 an d Cou nty Road No. 101 (By Ho liday Station Store) Elevation: 979.69 feet (NA VD8S) HOUSE DETAIL 1 I NC H = 20 FEET I 11 1toms 6 0S#4 0242)• 1020 r- I • 1019.3 i-____L_ . 1 \ x \ •\- ( '\ \ \ \\ 0105.7 r•- \ 1�\ •\ \\ \ '"c 12 �'i` \ I} \ .r -. ...tons '- \ \ \• \• \ ..... \ >�R 6 \y \ Slt\T FEN E\ \• CI S 15 L_ \\ \\ \\ • \ \ \\ c1 0 557 \ 1 n/xI. I e � n_ 1 as A\ \\ Lj L - v ,<.\,\ \\ 0t01o' 0S 5% 30S#10 0 \\ C \ \ to \ c \ b Iv ,6, \8I \ 12 .2 .' 's to S s\\ I,a \I41 . •s (6E.1DID.34) 29 .5 I fi fi OS fit Os,4'0• Tae-,�2r�r \ o I US ,/ 0.7\ q eN 21 .3 . 15.0 • 100j4.8 .•, SEPTIC . • SILT Ff\I II \ NI' \ 1008 .'1' If 00 ST OW F1S IV= Min o namr 1 101 SE IC 13.0 REVISIONS Septic Location - D im. D BP u4n_ua1 Certificate of Survey DBP Staking Co mps 09/20/11 Rev ised Prop. Con t per city DBP Buffer Mon - Cu lvert 10/06/11 Revised Site Plan DBP 04/11/12 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR HENRI GERMAIN DRAWN DBP CHECKED DSP D ATE 04/18/2011 SCALE AS SHOWN JO B NO . 29872 -001 FILE: CERTIFIC ATE OF SURVEY.DWG T OWNSHIP - RANGE - SECTION 118-23-13 HENNEPIN COU NTY BOOK:195 PAGE:28 SHEET 1 OF 1