Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout07-13-2010MEDINA 1. Call to Order PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2010 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Approval of June 8, 2010 Planning Commission minutes 6. Public Hearing — Lennar "The Enclave of Medina" at 3212 Hunter Drive (PIDs 12-118-23-43-0002 & 13-118-23-12-0001) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance to reduce the width of the right-of-way within the development. 134 single family homes and 41 townhomes are proposed on approximately 109 gross acres (68.59 total net acres). 7. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 8, Section 826.25.1-826.25.5 of Medina City Code related to the Rural Residential - Urban Reserve (RR-UR) zoning district. 8. Discussion of additional Planning Commission meetings. 9. City Council Meeting Schedule 10.Adjoum 4. v Agenda Item: 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: July 9, 2010 MEETING: July 13, 2010 Planning Commission SUBJ: Discussion of Additional Planning Commission Meeting Background Staff believes that the City is nearly complete making changes to the Zoning Ordinance that were necessary to make the zoning regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Update. The final action the City needs to take is to rezone a large number of properties into the newly amended zoning districts that have been worked on over the past few years. Staff desires to make this process convenient for all interested property owners to be involved. As a result, staff did not want to place these rezonings on the July Planning Commission meeting agenda following the Lennar project, which is a large project which will likely take a lot of time to review. Depending on the action the Planning Commission takes on the Lennar project, staff may recommend that the Commission call a Special Meeting to discuss the rezonings. If the Commission tables the Lennar project and it appears likely to be reviewed at the regular August meeting, staff would again not recommend putting the rezonings on the same agenda. Potential Dates for Special Meeting The following dates appear to not conflict with other City meetings, and staff could be available. Staff requests that Commissioners check your calendars to be able to select a date if the Commission believes it is necessary. • Wednesday, August 11 — 6:00 p.m. Special Meeting (and shift regular Commission meeting back to 8:00 p.m.) ■ Monday, August 16 ■ Tuesday, August 24 ■ Wednesday, August 25 ■ Tuesday, August 31 • Wednesday, September 1 Additional Commission Meeting Scheduling Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 1 July 13, 2010 Medina Planning Commission Draft June 8, 2010 Meeting Minutes 1 CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION 2 Draft Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday, June 8, 2010 4 5 6 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Charles Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners, Victoria Reid, Robin Reid, John Anderson, Kathleen 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Martin, Kent Williams, and Beth Nielsen. Absent;,pone ) Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke 16 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 17 18 No public comments. 19 20 21 3. Update from City Council proceedings 22 23 R. Reid presented City Council update. 24 25 26 4. Planning Department Report 27 28 Finke explained the upcoming rezoning of properties and the Lennar project in July. 29 30 31 5. Approval of Mav 11, 2010 Concurrent Planning Commission and Park Commission 32 meeting minutes 33 34 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Anderson to approve the May 11, 2010 minutes with 35 recommended changes. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 36 37 38 6. Approval of May 11, 2010 Planning Commission minutes 39 40 Motion by Anderson, seconded by R. Reid to approve the May 11, 2010 minutes with 41 recommended changes. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 42 43 44 7. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment — Chapter 8 of the City Code of Ordinance — 45 Pertaining to the timing of growth and development to be served by city utilities 46 1 Medina Planning Commission Draft June 8, 2010 Meeting Minutes 1 Finke reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment. He explained it requires a property 2 owner to apply for a PUD to request flexibility of the standards. Finke said to request 3 flexibility from standards is typical of a PUD. He said the ordinance has criteria with three 4 stages to qualify. Properties would have to meet certain benchmarks in order to move 5 forward and it could be very subjective. He said there is a lot of discretion by the Planning 6 Commission and City Council when reviewing the criteria. 7 8 Finke said the ordinance is a public hearing and he received one call. The caller suggested 9 the City look at tax base rather than jobs and employment, or possibly all of them when 10 looking at properties to qualify. The caller also stressed the importance of allowing property 11 owners to go before the Planning Commission and City Council to be informed of what they 12 think the cost would be to go through the process to get a yes/no answer. 13 14 R. Reid asked for clarification of the tax base point made. Nolan said if a property is 15 increasing its value by developing, it is creating additional tax dollars for the City. Williams 16 said the process allows the increased tax base to come sooner. Martin said tax value increase 17 wouldn't really take effect for two years. Nolan said he thinks the City assumes the sites will 18 be developed at some point. He doesn't think it is an objective of the City's to build as fast 19 as possible to increase tax base. Williams provided an example of a Target coming into the 20 City, rather than it being a vacant lot. 21 22 Public Hearing opened at 7:24 p.m. 23 24 No public comment. 25 26 Public Hearing closed at 7:25 p.m. 27 28 Williams said he liked the d5 comment on page two of the ordinance. It suggested, instead 29 of assigning points, to require all crucial factors be achieved and a majority of the relevant 30 primary factors be achieved. He expressed his concern with using the point value system 31 since it allows for too much debate with an applicant. 32 33 Finke said requiring applicants to meet certain crucial factors was how the ordinance was 34 written originally, rather than the point system. He suggested strengthening the language and 35 setting some sort of benchmark. 36 37 R. Reid said since the decision will be subjective, she likes the point system. Williams said 38 his preference is not the point system. Nolan explained with the point system if a project 39 couldn't quite make the amount of points needed to jump ahead, the developer/land owner 40 could donate land or money to the City's park system to meet a different objective and then 41 qualify if the City wanted the project to move forward. Martin said she is opposed to the 42 point system for all the points Williams had noted. She said Maple Grove has a third 43 category called "bonus points." 44 2 Medina Planning Commission V�Y raft June 8, 2010 Meeting Minutes 1 2 3 4 Martin said the point system is worth a try, but should incorporate the "bonus points" system. R. Reid said it could be incorporated, but maybe not given the same amount of points/value. Nielsen said, since the point system is subjective, couldn't the City give more points. 5 Williams and Martin raised concern that litigators can get real creative. Williams said the 6 more specific the point system regulations are, the more ammunition they could have to 7 argue. He likes the point system and feels the more general the regulations are kept, the 8 better it is for the City. Nolan said the point system helps channel a project. Williams said 9 his understanding of the point system is "of how much the concept fulfills the point system." 10 11 Nolan asked what kind of bonus could be gained by the bonus point system. The 12 Commission discussed the number of points and then Anderson suggested not providing a set 13 number of points for a bonus. The Commission concluded an applicant could receive "up to" 14 five bonus points. 15 16 The Commission discussed how to prioritize architectural quality as a result of text within the 17 Comprehensive Plan. 18 19 Finke said he added factors from the Comprehensive Plan such as affordability and jobs. 20 21 Motion by Williams, Seconded by R. Reid to amend the ordinance by giving high quality 22 architecture and design ten points, and making it a primary factor. Motion failed 1-6. 23 (Against: Nolan, V. Reid, R. Reid, Anderson, Martin and Nielsen). 24 25 Motion by Martin, Seconded by Anderson to move up sustainability as a primary factor, 26 due to the stated objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Motion failed 2-5 (Against: Nolan, 27 V. Reid, R. Reid, Williams and Nielsen). 28 29 Motion Anderson, Seconded by Martin to adopt the ordinance as written, except add 30 language allowing up to five bonus points, revising language under Subd.4.(a) as 31 recommended, and revising language under Subd.4.(b).(4) utilize "may" rather than "would" 32 within each sentence. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 33 34 R. Reid stated every decision/motion of the Commission doesn't have to be unanimous. 35 36 37 8. City Council Meeting Schedule: Discussion of representation at Council meeting. 38 39 40 9. Adiourn: Motion by Anderson, seconded by Williams to adjourn at 8:43 p.m. Motion 41 carried unanimously. (Absent: none) 42 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: July 7, 2010 MEETING: July 13, 2010 Planning Commission SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment — Rural Residential -Urban Reserve (RR-UR) zoning district text — Public Hearing Summary The Rural Residential -Urban Reserve (RR-UR) district is an existing zoning district in the City Code. A number of properties are currently zoned RR-UR, consistent with the City's "old" 2000 Comprehensive Plan update. The purpose of the RR-UR district is to regulate property which has been identified for future sewered residential development according to the Comp Plan. With the recent update to the Comprehensive Plan, the City further specified the Phasing Plan into 5 -year increments. Additionally, the Mixed Use land use was identified. The purpose of the attached ordinance amendment is to address these two changes. The attached ordinance does not amend the lot or development standards of the RR-UR district. These were amended back in 2007 when the City began updating the zoning districts. If Commissioners wish to review the remaining RR-UR regulations, please review pages 11-15 of Section 826 of the City Code. The intention of the proposed ordinance amendment is as follows: 1) To expand the purpose and applicability of the RR-UR district to apply to future Mixed Use properties is addition to future sewered residential. 2) To expand the purpose and applicability of the RR-UR district to clarify that the district will be applied to properties which have been identified for future sewered development, but are not currently served by urban services, regardless of which Staging timeframe the property is within (the existing wording suggests it will only apply to property which will develop post -2030). Attachments 1. DRAFT ordinance 2. Map 5-2 — Future Land Use (identifying parcels guided for future residential and mixed use development) 3. Map 5-3 — Staging and Growth (identifying the timing of future development) Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 1 July 13, 2010 Rural Residential -Urban Reserve (RR-UR) Planning Commission Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. NW AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS OF THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL -URBAN RESERVE (RR-UR) ZONING DISTRICT AMENDING SECTION 826.25.1. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 835 of the Medina code of ordinances is amended to add the underlined language and delete the t-nfek-thtett-blt language as follows: RURAL RESIDENTIAL URBAN RESERVE ZONING DISTRICT (RR-UR) Section 826.25.1. Rural Residential -Urban Reserve (RR UR) Purpose. The purpose of this district is to provide a zoning district which is consistent with the area guided for future residential or mixed -use development u eser'. a in the city's comprehensive plan. The wba+ reset' e district includes areas which are not currently served by e of -;`he municipal urban services but are planned to be at some time in the future. fifea Development within the RR-UR district shall be limited as which will not be developed at even rural residential densitiq, until at least 2030. except under specified in this section of the ordinance in order to accommodate efficient future development. SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2010. T.M. Crosby, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Chad M. Adams, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the South Crow River News this day of , 2010. Ordinance No. ### 1 DRAFT DATE To Be Presented 07-13-2010PC Comment [di]: Text will mad after amendment: 'The purpose of this district is to provide a zoning district which is consistent with the area guided for future residential or mixed -use development in the city's comprehensive plan. The district includes areas which are not currently served by municipal urban services but are planned to be at some time in the future. Development within the RR-UR district shall be limited as specified in this section of the ordinance in order to accommodate efficient future development." Map 5-2 MEDINA Future Land Use Plan Guide Plan Rural Residential - Agriculture Developing -Post 2030 Low Density Res 2 .0 - 3 .49 U/A Medium D ensity Res 3 .5 - 6 .99 U/A ® High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A 1111 Mixed Us e 3 .5 - 6 .99 U/A - Mixed Us e - Business 7 - 45 U/A - Comm ercial General Business Industrial Business Private R ecreation (PREC) - Parks and Recreation - P -R - State or Region al Open Space 11111 Public Semi -Public 0 U/A Cl osed Sanitary Landfill Right -of -Way *This map is not perfectly precise . Actual bound aries may vary, and should be field verified . Adopted: November 17, 2009 Parcel data current as of October 2006 UTM, Zone 15N, NAD 83 Scal e: 1:30,000 Map 5-3 L 00 MEDINA Staging and Growth Urba n Servi ce s Phasi ng Pla n Developed 2008 2001-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 2021-2025 2026-2030 D eveloping Post -2030 No Urban Services Planned Met C ouncil LTSSA There are se ve ral critical infrastr ucture mileston es that will control growth including: - The existing water infrastructure has capacity of approximately 160 units available until 2009 . - The sewer constraints shall limit development to 2,000 units without improvements. Generally, the Phasing Plan demonstrates that development shall pr oceed in a east to west pattem. This phasi ng plan allows fle xibility between adjacent phases to allow for proper infrastr ucture planning and development. The Grey area reflects the area identified by the City to be developed Post 2030. The Met C ouncil has identified the LTSSA for potential future access to urba n services. No services ar e plann ed duri ng the timeframe covered by this Plan. Adopted: Novemb er 17, 2009 Parcel current as of October 2006 UTM, Zone 15N, NAD 83 Sc ale: 1:30,000 Agenda Item: 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crosby and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Adams DATE: June 30, 2010 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates for July 6, 2010 City Council Meeting Ordinance Updates A) Private Recreation Zoning District — staff believes that this ordinance is not essential for the City's zoning ordinances to be consistent with the new Comp Plan. As a result, staff is recommending that this ordinance be placed lower in the priority list. B) Open Space Development/Conservation Design Regulations — Barr Engineering is updating the ordinance as directed by the City Council and plans to present the ordinance again at the July 6 City Council meeting. C) Staging Point System — the City Council and Planning Commission discussed the "point system" related to the Staging Plan at their March 16 and March 9 meetings. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on June 8 and recommended approval with a number of changes. Staff will present the ordinance to the City Council on July 6. D) Re -zonings — as a result of the new zoning ordinances created by the City and because of changes to the future use of a number of properties in the Comprehensive Plan, the City needs to rezone a number of properties. Depending on current projects being reviewed by the Planning Commission, staff is recommending that either Public Hearings for these rezonings be held at the August Planning Commission meeting, or potentially a special Planning Commission meeting to be scheduled. Land Use Application Reviews A) Bradley Leawood 3.d Addn Plat — 3415 Leawood Drive — the applicant has applied to split the existing lot into two parcels. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on May 11 and recommended approval. The City Council reviewed on June 15 and directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval. This resolution will be on the July 6 consent agenda. B) Enclave of Medina Subdivision — 3212 Hunter Drive — Lennar has submitted for preliminary plat and Comp Plan Amendment for the Holasek property. The plat currently identifies 135 single family homes and 41 townhomes. The applicant has requested to shift the MUSA to the south to include an additional 6.5 net acres and is excluding 6.5 net acres of the wooded area from development. The applicant has also requested review of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the project. Staff is reviewing the application and has scheduled a Public Hearing for the July 13 Planning Commission meeting. C) Appeal of Administrative Decision — 2590 Keller Road — The City Council heard the property owner's and contractor's appeal of the denial of a permit to construct a pair of 4'x4' monuments within the City right-of-way adjacent to 2590 Keller at the January 5 meeting and adopted a resolution ordering the removal of the improvements on February 3. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 July 6, 2010 City Council Meeting The improvements have not been removed as ordered by the City Council. Staff has sent a notice to the property owners and builder to comply by July 14, 2010. D) Holy Name Cemetery — The City Council approved resolutions for the lot combination, CUP/Site Plan, Interim Use Permit and easement vacation. Staff is working with the applicant to get all necessary documents recorded correctly. E) Wrangler's Restaurant — 32 Hamel Road — the Council approved resolutions at the July 21 meeting. Staff has been in contact with the applicant regarding recording of the plat and requirements for submitting building permits. The City Council granted until September 11, 2010 for the applicant to final the plat. Additional Projects A) Zoning Enforcement (Hamel Station tree removal) — the consultant hired by Elm Creek Watershed has completed the plan and has recommended twenty overstory trees to be planted along the Creek in this location. The plan includes a great deal of shrubs and ground cover plugs in order to supplement the vegetation. Staff plans to present an agreement for City Council approval regarding implementation of the plan, and also how the remaining required tree replacement will be addressed. B) Zoning Enforcement (Manure Management) — staff has conducted inspections of manure management consistent with procedures set forth in the City's Manure Management Policy (80.10). Generally, manure practices to protect water quality are being implemented fairly well. Please see the attached memo from Planning Assistant Deb Peterson -Dufresne. C) Zoning Enforcement (General) — staff continues to follow-up with various zoning enforcement actions, including any unlicensed vehicles and tall grasses/weeds. Compliance was achieved on over 15 lots with regards to tall grasses/weeds over the past few weeks. D) Minnehaha Creek Watershed Rules Update — staff has been reviewing Minnehaha Creek's proposed rules update for wetland buffers and shoreline projects. The District will hold a Public Hearing on the rules on July 8. Staff intends to provide comments on the proposed rules. The primary change proposed increase the required width for wetland buffer for Preserve and Manage 1 wetlands. The proposed buffers for these wetlands significantly exceed those in the City's wetland protection ordinance. One of the City's objectives in the wetland protection ordinance was to establish consistent regulations for property owners in all of the watersheds. The proposed Minnehaha rules would result in stricter requirements for property owners in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 July 6, 2010 City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Dusty Finke, City Planner FROM: Debra Peterson -Dufresne, Planning Asst. DATE: June 30, 2010 MEETING: July 6, 2010 City Council Meeting SUBJ: Commercial Horse Facilities — Manure Management/CUP Inspections The following horse facilities were inspected: Turnquists Property 2000 Chestnut Road — Animal -Assisted Therapy Facility The Interim Use Permit expired November 20, 2009 and facility was relocated out of Medina. Alpine Farms, Inc. (a 2182 Homestead Trail An inspection was completed on April 9, 2010 to review all CUP conditions and the property was found to be in compliance. Manure storage was in corn rows and being rotated at the time of inspection. Skvrock ar, 2825 Willow Drive An inspection was completed on April 9, 2010 to review all CUP conditions and the property was found to be in compliance. The site has a very large concrete bunker for manure storage which was being utilized. J -B Farms (a, 4650 Maple Street An inspection was completed on April 9, 2010 to review all CUP conditions and the property was found to be in compliance. The site has a large concrete bunker for manure storage which was being utilized. G. V. Kirt and P.J. Rvskamp 4550 Pioneer Trail An inspection was completed on April 29, 2010 to review all conditions and the property was found to be in compliance. The farm continues to bag manure. 1 Hasselquist (i 2705 Willow Drive An inspection was completed on April 29, 2010 to review all CUP conditions and was found to be in compliance. The site has a concrete bunker for manure storage which was being utilized. Greenwood Stables/Hogan (&, 1982 Hamel Road An inspection was completed on April 29, 2010 to review all CUP conditions and was found to be in compliance. The site has two concrete bunkers for manure storage which was being utilized. Schleeter (i 1585 Medina Road An inspection was completed on May 21, 2010 to review CUP conditions and manure management and found the property to be compliance. Manure was not present at time of inspection. Property owner stated that manure is spread on field during the spring, summer and fall and during the winter months manure is hauled to Gregor Farm Greenhouse. Fortuna Farm (a 1425 Tamarack Drive — Commercial Horse Facility An inspection was completed on May 21, 2010 to review manure management and found manure being stored along the approved slope area, but also at the bottom of the slope which is not preferable. In 2009 Betsy Wieland, Agriculture Extension Educator for Hennepin County recommended all manure storage be placed on the slope rather than such concentration at the bottom. A letter was sent to the farm manager May 26th requesting the relocation of the manure from the bottom of slope to the top of the slope or be removed from the property within 14 days. Overall, the manure appeared to be rotated and was composting well. On June 15, 2010 a re -inspection was completed and all manure was removed from the property. The property is in compliance. Leatherdale Farm a, 2075 Cottonwood Trail An inspection was completed June 17, 2010. The property has two manure bunkers, both of which were being utilized. The manure is being picked up weekly which helps with the reduction of flies. The manure is being picked up by Neaton Bio-Waste Management out of New Germany, Mn. The company then composts the manure at their business location. 2 G , T Y Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA A,, Name of Speaker: k A/ G.,Na�L b n (please pr.t) 1 /i4 _e_. c Address: S it:, Telephone (optional): 7 6 3 (` 7 ,=----L 5--0 Representing: c -f -1J -eD `AA5" 9,5( 43/ al Agenda Item (list number and letter): '..t.._3 G 1WJP p yr M -Q-14‘'` 4 Comments: RS t .-71 v L' / & s ,, 7F i' D0,, roach the podium to spec 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 G% T Y o m Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: ,r14(:(/ A c_,_ j/f" r„, c Public Forum Agenda Item (pl a e print) Address: ‘C `) .- Telephone (optional): Representing: Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: t)(01 rfr,/ I 14)4, J, Approach the podium to speak 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 T Y o c Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: p p R t V) \ S i go 1-1 Public Forum Agenda Item g t 2<' (please print) Address: `46 S \ ln1 C Sk 'D -,-,: wk Telephone (optional): Representing: ‘N7, CLeK-C- . Agenda Item (list number and letter): 1— c Comments: Approach the podium to speak 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 G , T V Comment Card ( \y. , MEDINA N / WName of Speaker: �, ` o /F- Public Forum Agenda Item lease print) Address: 3 U ! /p Ci - b4 - Telephone (optional): Representing: S 1 Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: Approach the podium to speak 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 G/� T V Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: Q 4_ �� (please print) Address: EC)c —E- .�c N (" '--i 0 -- Telephone (optional): �` Representing: CJ ��` Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: Approach the podium to speak 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 G ., T V O F Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: C 1, O .11 _._ --"- c v (please print) Address: 2� , ) v c>--k-o-, ‘ ,"--- Telephone (optional): Representing: ..).c\ Agenda Item (list number and letter): ((, )_-� , ,-, Comments: 'u3 r, - >S 't - ••c'-zs, -� s , � i-,\ \ rn --); i-,� h - lJ ' <-� 1 c , . . ‘-`k 9-L (0 1"71C: ' Z f 5 -e 1 IN t r" S? 1 C - Approach the podium to speak 1. '-'")11-ii (1z 0 c:;, --\ tx\-) z c. --l- c A `1v 4)2 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 PLANT HEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC. Katharine D. Widin, Ph.D. Plant Pathologist, Forestry Consultant 13457 6th St. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 651-436-8811 To: Terry Pernsteiner Pernsteiner & Associates 11022 Tanglewood Lane North Maple Grove, MN 55316 Carole Toohey Land Dev. Mgr., Lennar 935 East Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 4/7/10 Re:Tree Inventory - Holasek Property - 3212 Hunter Dr., Hamel In the summer of 2007, I completed an inventory of the trees on a parcel in the Medina area owned by the Holasek family. The inventory consisted of determining identity, size (trunk diameter in inches) and condition of approximately 1585 trees on this property. The majority of the woodland could be considered a maple -basswood type with the tree species on the site consisting of: ash, boxelder, elm, sugar maple, silver maple, oak (bur, red and pin), walnut, butternut, basswood, aspen, cottonwood, hickory, black cherry, ironwood and, in some wetter sites, willow. In the farmstead area there are also: white, Norway and Colorado spruce, white cedar, red cedar, red pine, and mulberry. For the most part, the trees on the site were in fair condition in 2007. The woodland was somewhat degraded with European buckthorn and some other invasive plants in the understory. In some areas there was good regeneration of overstory trees, particularly sugar maple. Many of the largest trees on the site (silver maple, sugar maple, basswood and red or pin oak), however, were in very poor condition, with extensive internal decay, defects, and storm damage (broken branches and tops). In most areas, I would conclude that this is a woodland of only moderate quality in terms of native overstory trees, native shrub understory, and ground layer plants. There are large areas of the site populated by elms, many of which are dying of Dutch elm disease. There was little evidence of oak wilt disease on the site and no currently active infection centers were noted in 2007. Approximately 290 (18 %) of the trees on the site are ash, which will be susceptible to the emerald ash borer, an invasive insect which kills ash trees and was found in St. Paul in 2009. At this point, I do not think the condition ratings of the trees will need to be updated. There will probably be a few more dead trees due to poor condition and Dutch elm disease, but most of these would be trees which were in poor condition in 2007 or in the same vicinity as trees identified as having Dutch elm disease at that time. Please contact me if you have any other questions regarding the condition of trees on this parcel or the relative quality of the woodland. ATTACHMENT 10 - Public Comment Received N O LAN C O M P A N '1 July 8, 2010 RE: The Enclave Project Dear Members of the Medina City Council and Planning Commission, I am writing this letter on behalf of my family regarding the proposed Lennar project, known as The Enclave, and the potential impact of a proposed future northern "through -road" on the 5 -acre parcel to the north, which is owned by my family. One potential option (which my family opposes for the reasons to be discussed) for the Lennar project is for a cul de sac to be stubbed to the north for future connection to my parcel. When our parcel is developed, that future public road would extend from the Lennar cul de sac through our parcel to Hunter Drive. The primary purpose of this future road is to provide traffic flow for the approximately 180 -unit development to Hunter Drive. The following summarizes our position regarding the impact of this option on our property. I sincerely appreciate the fact that I know that you will consider these arguments carefully and hopefully you will support them in your decision. We strongly oppose any plan for a future "through -road" from the Enclave project to Hunter Drive through our property. Our parcel is very small; only about 2.5 buildable acres, as nearly half of the site consists of wetlands. It is guided for mid -density residential, which can be challenging on such a small parcel of buildable land. Despite this, we have laid out a basic concept plan that shows how the parcel can accommodate up to 9 single-family lots, which is sufficient to meet the projected mid -density zoning requirement. Requiring a through -road would place a significant burden on the parcel making density conformance significantly more challenging, if not impossible. We also believe that this road extension option places a large and inequitable burden on our property for which there is no benefit to us or Lennar and very little benefit, if any, to the City. It is clear that once we develop our parcel, this access point will become the PRIMARY entrance to the Enclave project, as traffic will naturally flow north to access Highway 55. We do not believe it is fair to ask us, as a family which owns the property, to bear the heavy burden of another (substantially larger) project's traffic flow. I understand the City's overall desire to eliminate cul de sacs. We believe in this instance, the small benefit to the City is dramatically outweighed by the significant impact you are asking us (and the neighbors who live directly across the street from such an access) to bear. In addition to the substantial impact of the traffic, the City would be tying the future opportunity of our property to the success or failure of the Lennar project; a significant potential impact over which we have no influence or control. My family's property sitting at the primary entrance and exit to the Lennar project obviously makes it impossible to differentiate our project from theirs. In essence you are inadvertently allowing them to control our property without compensation. Clearly no other buyer would have interest. Therefore, we ask you to support the alternative that we believe is a good, yet fair, solution for all parties. In this proposed option, Lennar would build, as part of their Phase 1, a public road accessing Hunter Drive directly adjacent to our property. This public road will serve as their northernmost access point and will also allow access to/from our property at some point in the future. 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 • Wayzata, MN 55391 • (952) 767 7500 NOLAN C O M P A N Y There are several reasons why this proposed solution is a better alternative: a. Indefinite cul de sac. If the through -road is required on the Nolan property- an indefinite cul de sac will be created from the Lennar project in their Phase 1 (as the Nolan property has no timeline for being developed). So the very scenario you would be attempting to avoid will actually be created on a larger scale. b. Eliminates 1 access point from Hunter: With the through -road option there are 3 proposed access points onto Hunter Drive (2 from the Enclave project, 1 proposed through the Nolan parcel). A realigned road without access through the Nolan property, will eliminate 1 unnecessary access point onto Hunter. c. Limit impact on existing residents: The optional access point through the Nolan parcel will have a significant direct and negative impact on 3 existing single-family homes across Hunter Drive from the proposed through -road. The alternative locates the access point across from an existing wetland eliminating any potential negative impacts on current residents. d. Other cul de sacs: The City has consistently allowed other cul de sacs throughout its history with far less compelling reasons. In fact the current Lennar plan (although admittedly not approved) shows an identical cul de sac within the project. e. Road re -alignment: There is no compelling reason for the exit to be aligned across from Elm Creek Drive. The majority of the traffic exiting this neighborhood will do so through the north exit. Additionally, the City recently approved a similar alignment of an intersection with less compelling reasons. f. Certainty: By requiring the north exit within the Lennar plan the City has certainty regarding the local circulation rather than the uncertainty of some unknown project for our property at some unknown point in the future that would then provide access. g. Concept Plan for 5 -acre parcel: By reviewing the Enclave's impact on my family's property and the through -road option, we have done some preliminary planning for our parcel. This preferred solution shows a cohesive plan for the area, without tying my family's parcel so directly to a project that we am not party to. This way my family can proceed in the future without relying on the success or timing of a project that we cannot control. Thank you for considering my family's concerns and we hope that you support the no future through -road alternative for the reasons stated above. Sine s D. o an, r. On Behalf of Nolan Brothers, In Nolan Company 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 Wayzata, MN 55391 Office: 952.767.7500 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 • Wayzata, MN 55391 • (952) 767 7500 7 --hr ENCLAVE NOL/N P/PC I- O7 -O -10 1,�` 1 { t c _ - JO I_ — 1 - 1 --- f -- _ N� \/ - A.�..,C '9�4-. •� '4 __ _'''1,4 1 - '. \- k ,1. _ \---`----- I (j � t/ zip ( Jv � vn • -t a. ,�. _ _ _��--- fir.— \ j — — I � \ CI TA C`� F A _ � r ' N. I \ `ik / l ', ) Ay.r P dr / / % r L I 7—'4. OIL I, L_) .,., - � -- P f t I r 1 a I \ I REVISIONS Bv1 L E N N A IZ vYtvaNE Exn1011 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 0 0=10 IS'1SOUTH BROADWAY WAVZ070 M.Y. 51391 (953)a)66000 LENNAR CORPORATION 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Land Development Manager. 952-24 Carole Toohe Wayzata, Mlnnesola 55391 y. 33012 W1Projecls\5401-634 THE ENCLAVE -PRELIMINARY 't 1" = 100' Agenda Item: 6 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231 .2555 Facsimile: 763.231 _2561 planners@nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: FROM: Medina Mayor and City Council Medina Planning Commission Laurie Smith / Steve Grittman RE: Medina — LENNAR/Enclave; Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat NAC FILE: 306.02 — 10.03 CITY FILE: L-10-055 BACKGROUND LENNAR is requesting approval for a preliminary plat to allow for 175 residential units on a 109 acre site located east of Hunter Drive, north of Medina Road and south of Hamel Road and Uptown Hamel. The property currently consists of farmland with one homestead located in the northern half of the site. The subdivision is to be known as The Enclave and is proposed include 134 single family dwelling units and 41 townhome units. To complete the processing of this request, LENNAR has requested approval of the following applications: a comprehensive plan amendment, a rezoning of the subject site, a preliminary plat and a variance for reduced right-of-way (ROW) width. The first decision to be made is that on the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. A decision on the comprehensive plan amendment is a policy decision. An applicant is not entitled to a change in future land use guiding or MUSA location. If the Planning Commission and City Council do not feel that the comprehensive plan amendment is in line with the City's land use goals and policies, then the other applications must be denied as well since they are directly dependent upon the approval of the comprehensive plan amendment. The report is divided into three sub -sections, the first outlining policy decisions related to consistency with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, followed by a review of compliance with the three proposed residential zoning districts and the City's general preliminary plat requirements. The review outlines the planning and zoning issues related to the request and summarizes key issues that the Planning Commission and City Council should discuss prior to making a decision on the submitted applications. s Exhibits: 1. Draft Findings of Fact 2. City Engineer's Report(s) 3. City Forester's Report 4. City Attorney's Plat Opinion 5. EAW 6. Project Narrative (booklet) 7. Proposed Land Use and Zoning Information a. MUSA Amendment Exhibit b. Future Land Use Plan Exhibit c. Proposed Rezoning 8. Preliminary Plat and Development Plans 9. Additional Details from Lennar a. Monument Sign b. Garage Detail c. Townhome Turning Radius Exhibit d. Townhome Landscaping Plan e. Developer's Tree Health Narrative 10. Public Comment Received ANALYSIS SECTION 1- COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING Concept Plan Review. A concept plan for The Enclave was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council earlier this spring. The concept plan proposed 195 single family lots. During the concept plan review process, the Planning Commission, City Council and general public offered comments regarding proposed densities, site design and other general comments. The majority of the comments made by City staff, officials and the general public encouraged the developer to propose a subdivision that closely mirrored the future land use guiding set forth by the Comprehensive Plan. There were several comments made in opposition to extension of the MUSA line. It was noted that during the comprehensive plan update process, there were many discussions on the future land use guiding of this property and it was decided that the density should be phased from medium residential densities in the northern portion of the site to rural residential densities in the south. Several of the City officials indicated that higher density housing and a greater variety of housing types would be preferable. LENNAR revised the preliminary plat to reflect several of the comments made during the concept plan review including, offering additional future access points to adjacent properties, including higher density/more diverse housing, and keeping the overall density of the subdivision on the lower end of the acceptable range. Comprehensive Plan. The subject site is guided for medium density residential (3.5 to 6.99 units/acre), low density residential (2.0 to 3.49 units/acre) and rural residential uses 2 in a graduated fashion from the north to the south. The northern portion of the site is guided for medium density residential uses contains 24.02 net acres and would support a residential development of 84 to 168 units. The middle portion of the site, guided for low density residential uses, contains 29.16 net acres and could be developed with a low density residential development containing 58 to 102 units. The southern portion of the site contains 41.16 acres and is guided for rural residential uses. Areas designated as rural residential are not planned to be serviced with municipal utilities and are to develop at a density of no more than one unit per five acres of contiguous soils suitable for a septic system. Overall, the subject site contains 53.18 net acres within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and would be allowed to develop within the range of 142 units to 270 units to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has proposed 41 townhome units, 121 R-2 single family lots and 13 R-1 single family lots. Issue #1 — Is the proposal of 175 units adequately low to meet the City's previous direction to "be on the low end" of the allowed density range for this property? Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant is proposing a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6.4 acres of property from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential (as shown in the attached "MUSA Amendment Plan"). The amendment would allow for the area to be developed with 20 new single family residential homes. The resulting net density of the proposed development within the amendment area will be three units per acre. The applicant is also requesting to extend the MUSA line approximately 300 feet to the south to encompass the amendment area. In exchange for extending the MUSA line, the applicant is proposing to preserve a 7.82 acre wooded area (6.4 net acres) along the eastern edge of proposed development. The preserved area would be placed in a conservation easement or otherwise deeded to the City to prohibit any future development of that area. This proposal would maintain the current amount of developable acres available in the MUSA. In consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment, The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss the proposed amendment's consistency with City's future land use and development goals as well as its potential impacts on the existing infrastructure, environmental features and general public health, safety and welfare. Additionally, the comprehensive plan amendment must be evaluated in terms of its consistency with regional systems under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council. The proposed amendment would result in essentially a density swap, which means that no additional residential units would be added to the MUSA. As such, the proposed amendment does not appear to have an effect on existing infrastructure in terms of public utilities, sewer capacity and transportation needs. The comprehensive plan amendment may have negative impacts on existing environmental features due to the further encroachment of the development on the existing wetland to the south and the removal of additional trees to accommodate the homes. However, allowing extension of 3 the MUSA and therefore permanently preserving a large number of trees would likely be considered a benefit to the City. The City's forestry consultant has advised that remnants of a maple -basswood forest exist within the southeast portion of the proposed MUSA amendment area and has recommended that this area be preserved. If the Planning Commission and Council are amenable to extending the MUSA to the south, but preserving this significant environmental feature, the applicant should be given the direction to submit a new plan that is reflective of this recommendation. Final approval of the comprehensive plan amendment is given by the Metropolitan Council following a decision by the City Council. Preliminary discussions with Metropolitan Council staff indicated that the proposed amendment would not have a negative impact on regional systems. Issue #2 — Has the applicant provided adequate evidence that the potential environmental, traffic, and other impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment are consistent with the City's overall land use goals and objectives? Zoning. The site is currently zoned PUD2, Planned Unit Development 2. This zoning was adopted prior to the most recent update of the Comprehensive Plan and is no longer consistent with the City's Future Land Use plan. As such, the site must be rezoned to accommodate medium and low density residential uses. As noted above, the subject site is guided for medium density residential on north half, low density residential in the mid -portion of the site and rural residential on the far southern portion of the site. The applicant is requesting rezoning to Residential -Mid Density District (R-3) for townhomes, Two Family Residential District (R-2) for the majority of the proposed single family lots and Single Family Residential District (R-1) for the single family lots proposed along south property line, within the MUSA extension area. When considering rezoning of a property, the Planning Commission and City Council should consider the proposed action's effect on the area in which it is planned. The Zoning Ordinance does not contain specific criteria for the evaluation of a zoning map amendment, however, general planning criteria should be evaluated against the proposal to ensure that the requested rezoning is warranted including: • consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; • the proposed action's compatibility with existing and future land uses in the area; • and the proposed action's impacts to the City's infrastructure including utilities, transportation as well as community facilities such as parks and schools. The following table illustrates land uses surrounding the subject site. The primary compatibility issue with this subdivision is the transition between the proposed single family lots and the larger rural residential properties to the west, south and east. 4 Direction Land Use Plan Zoning Map Existing Use North Medium Density Residential; Mixed Use - Business UR — Urban Residential; UH — Uptown Hamel Urban single family lots Undeveloped East Parks and Recreation; Medium Density Residential; Low Density Residential PS — Public/Semi Public; RR-UR — Urban Reserve; RR- Rural Residential Parks and Recreation; Large Lot Single Family; Undeveloped South Rural Residential RR — Rural Residential Agriculture West Rural Residential; Parks and Recreation RR -1 — Rural Residential 1; PS — Public/Semi Public; RR — Rural Residential Rural Residential, Large Lot Single Family; Parks and Recreation The transition between neighborhoods occurs along rear lot lines and across Hunter Drive, which lessens the potential for negative impacts the proposed R-2 District property may have on the adjacent rural residential areas. The Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of the R-1 District is to implement the low density residential land use guiding set forth by the Comprehensive Plan. The R-2 District is designed to implement the objectives of the medium density residential land use in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed rezoning to the R-2 district within the low density residential area is in conflict with the City's Zoning Ordinance requirements. The applicant has stated that in order to obtain the required density, R-2 District standards must be applied. The applicant is proposing 87 single family units at a density of 2.98 units per acre. To be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, a net density of at least 2.0 units per acre is required. Based on a preliminary estimate conducted by staff, it appears as though the portion of the site guided for low -density residential could be designed with lots meeting the R-1 standards and still be consistent with the net density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. The number of lots would need to be reduced slightly, but would still appear to easily exceed 2.0 units/net acre requirement. It is important to point out that the R-2 District also allows two-family homes as a permitted use. Lot area and lot width requirements are slightly larger for accommodation of two-family homes, however, it appears as though several of the proposed R-2 lots would be large enough to accommodate two-family homes. Once the property is zoned R-2, there is nothing to prohibit a property owner from constructing a two-family home on their lot if lot area and setback standards can be met. The Planning Commission and Council should comment on the proposed R-2 District zoning for the single family lots located in the portion of the site guided for low density residential uses. If feasible, it may be more appropriate to zone that portion R-1 and require lots to meet those standards. While it would result in fewer units, R-1 District lots would allow for more yard space for each lot and more building separation due to the slightly larger lot area and setback requirements. Rezoning this area to R-1 would also eliminate the potential for two-family dwellings. 5 ( a Issue #3 — The proposed rezoning to R-2 District within the area guided for low density residential uses is in conflict with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Issue #4 — How does the Planning Commission and Council feel about the potential for two-family homes in this subdivision? ANALYSIS SECTION 11- R-1, R-2 AND R-3 DISTRICT STANDARDS Townhomes. Within the northeast corner of the site, 41 townhome units are proposed. The units are designed as attached single family units with three to five units per building. The proposed townhome development is a unit/base lot arrangement with Outlot A serving as the commonly -owned base lot. Unit/base lot arrangements consist of each townhome unit resting on a "unit lot" which is a few feet larger on all sides than the footprint of the townhome unit. Buildings have a shared "zero lot line" with the attached units on all sides. Each unit lot is then surrounded by the common base lot (Outlot A, as noted above). R-3 District zoning is proposed for the area which allows for multiple family structures (up to 16 units per building) as a permitted use. Net Area Per Unit. Section 841.1.05, Subd. 2 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum net area per unit of 8,750 square feet within the R-3 District. The applicant is proposing 41 units within an area containing 7.87 net acres for a net area per unit of 8,361 square feet. The applicant is requesting a density bonus of 0.25 units per acre for construction of the community building and swimming pool. The community building and swimming pool are proposed to be located within the single family area, which is proposed to be within a different zoning classification. However, a trail has been provided Section 841.1.05, Subd. 4(g) allows for a maximum density bonus of 0.25 units per acre for inclusion of common open space and shared recreational facilities. The density bonus allows the applicant to construct two additional dwelling units based on the maximum bonus allowed. Upon application of the density bonus, the net area per unit increases to approximately 8,790 square feet which is consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Issue #5 — Should the density bonus apply to this design? If not, the applicant must be required to either relocate the amenity or reduce townhome units to 39. Setbacks. The required setback from a private street for buildings within the R-3 District is 25 feet. The applicant is proposing a street setback of 25 feet which allows for a face-to-face building separation of 70 to 74 feet in this area. Issue #6 — Is this building separation too close? It compares to typical face-to- face dimensions of 110-120 feet in urban single family subdivisions. A setback of 30 feet between buildings is shown on the submitted plans as required. Because the proposed townhome development abuts less intensive zoning districts on 6 all sides, a 40 -foot setback from the site perimeter is required. The submitted plans have shown that the proposed development is compliant with this requirement. Single Access Cul-de-sac. The applicant is proposing 41 townhome units off of a single access cul-de-sac. Section 820.29, Subd. 2(g) of the Subdivision Ordinance limits the length of all streets terminating in a cul-de-sac to 750 feet or a maximum of 20 lots, whichever is shorter. The proposed cul-de-sac within the townhome development is less than 750 feet in length, however, it provides access to 41 residential units. Issue #7 — The proposed single access cul-de-sac for 41 units is in conflict with Section 820.29, Subd. 2(g) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Private Streets. All streets serving the townhome development are proposed to be private streets. The main street extending north into the townhome development is proposed to be 24 -feet wide. Eight townhome units will access directly off of this main private street. A network of four other private streets which are 20 -feet wide serving the remaining 33 units extending to the east, west and north. Issue #8 — While the Zoning Ordinance includes language referring to private street use and allows townhome developments in the R-3 District, there has been no establishment of a formal process for approving such development apart from PUD zoning. In discussions with the City Attorney and staff, it is the opinion of staff that the intent of the ordinance is to allow townhome developments on private streets as the customary development pattern within the R-3 District without the need for additional PUD processing. Guest Parking. Six guest parking stalls are proposed to serve the development. The stalls are located within the middle of the development and, as such, are not necessarily convenient to all units. The Zoning Ordinance requires at least two parking spaces per dwelling unit. Attached two -car garage stalls are proposed for each townhome unit and two additional parking spaces per unit would be available by utilizing each unit's driveway. However, due to the proposed width of 20 feet on the private roads and the need for at least 20 feet of unobstructed area for passage of emergency vehicles, no on -street parking will be allowed in this area. Visitors to the townhome units may end up parking along the public streets in the single family area where parking would be allowed on one side of the street. This may lead to traffic congestion and unnecessary crowding of the public street. Issue #9 - The Planning Commission and Council should comment on the need for additional guest parking stalls within the townhome area. Traffic Circulation. When standard turning radii templates for delivery trucks (18 to 35 feet in length) and semi tractor trailer trucks (50 to 55 feet in length) are applied to the townhome area's proposed private streets, it is evident that these vehicles will have difficulty maneuvering in and out of the area. It should be noted that a garbage truck, or any other delivery or service -type vehicle will have to back out of each private road 7 extending off of the main private street entrance. Staff recommends that an additional ingress/egress access to the public street to the south be considered. Not only would this additional access allow for easier maneuverability within the development, but it would provide a second access for emergency vehicles in the event that one entrance is blocked or if there is a need for multiple responders. Issue #10 — Staff recommends that at least one additional access point to a public street be required. Landscaping. Section 841.4.03 of the Zoning Ordinance The applicant has not submitted a detailed landscaping plan for the townhome development, however, the developer has provided information on the typical landscaping package that is included with their construction of this type of development. The landscaping example provided appears to be generally consistent with the extent and quality of landscaping that the City would require. Landscaping details must be provided at the time of final platting for the townhome units and as a part of the site and building plan review. The applicant has demonstrated the location of one tree per 60 feet around the perimeter of the site as required by Section 841.4.03, Subd. 4. Section 841.4.03, Subd. 5 and Subd. 6 require the addition of ornamental trees (one tree per 120 feet) and understory shrubs (one per 40 feet) around the perimeter of the site. The submitted plans do not demonstrate compliance with these provisions. As a condition of preliminary plat approval, the applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements prior to consideration of a final plat for the townhome development. Issue #11 — The proposed landscape plan for the townhome development is inconsistent with zoning ordinance requirements. Building Design. Buildings in the R-3 District are limited to 32 feet in height. The proposed townhome buildings are shown to be 26 feet in height. The applicant is proposing to construct the townhome units using primarily vinyl lap siding and vinyl shakes. Accent materials include stone and brick. Section 841.4.02, Subd.1(b) requires no less than 20 percent of the facade facing a public or private street to consist of accent materials. It appears as though the proposed townhome exterior meets this requirement, however, this must be verified during the required site and building plan review prior to construction. The proposed townhome building design appears to meet the building modulation and articulation requirements, however, this would be more thoroughly reviewed during the site and building plan review. Each townhome unit is proposed to include an attached two -car garage consisting of 368 square feet. Section 828.51, Subd. 2 of the Zoning Ordinance, which outlines the City's general parking provisions, requires all parking spaces to be at least nine (9) feet wide and twenty (20) feet long. The proposed two -car garages are narrower than the 8 Ordinance requirements for two parking spaces. It may prove to be difficult to contain a household's vehicles, recreational equipment, trash receptacles and other domestic supplies in a 368 square foot space. Certain vehicle types may not be able to fit in the garage, for example, a 2010 Chevrolet Silverado Extended Cab is 20.7 feet in length. Issues that result from undersized garages usually include nuisance complaints due to trash receptacles being stored outside and multiple vehicles and other household equipment in the driveway. Issue #12 — A typical two -car garage size is 440 square feet in area or greater in order to accommodate vehicle length, interior door swing and additional domestic storage. Site and Building Plan Review. Prior to construction of the townhome units, the applicant would be required to submit an application for site and building plan review as outlined in Section 825.55 of the Zoning Ordinance. Single Family Lot Requirements. Section 840.1.05 and Section 840.2.05 of the Zoning Ordinance outline the lot requirements for the R-1 and R-2 Districts. Additionally, Section 820.29, Subd. 4 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that all lots must contain buildable area at least equal to the minimum lot area requirements of the zoning district exclusive of flood plains, wetlands, areas of excessive high water table, steep slopes and public rights -of -way. The applicant has provided the net lot areas for all proposed lots consistent with those requirements assuming that the area is rezoned to R-1 and R-2 as proposed. The following tables outline the mandatory lot and setbacks requirements for single family lots in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. Zoning District Lot Area Lot Width Lot Depth R-1 11,000 sq. ft. 90 feet 100 ft. R-2 8,000 sq. ft. 60 feet 90 ft. Zoning District Setbacks Front Side Side Corner Rear Wetland Buffer Setback Collector Street Local Street R-1 35 ft. 30 ft. 10/15 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 15 ft. R-2 35 ft. 30 ft. 5/10 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 15 ft. The proposed R-1 and R-2 Tots generally appear to meet each district's lot area requirements. The majority of the proposed lots are consistent with setback requirements. However, there are two lots that do not demonstrate compliance with 9 rear yard setbacks when shown with an attached deck. Decks are attached to the principal structure and are required to meet principal structure setbacks. Issue #13 - Lot 8, Block 2 and Lot 9, Block 11 do not meet rear yard setbacks as shown and must be revised to be consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. It should be noted that several lots within the proposed subdivision are located exceptionally close to the wetland buffer setback and, as such, those particular properties would not be allowed to construct a deck off of the rear of their home and would have limited useable space in the rear yard. While it has been demonstrated that most of the proposed homes meet the required rear yard and buffer setback requirements, many homes are left with very little useable rear yard area due to the restrictions placed on what is allowed to occur within the wetland buffers. City staff points this out because oftentimes property owners will request approval of variances to allow for decks or other rear yard structures. Encroachments into this buffer area with manicured lawns or other landscaping can also be an issue. This can be even more of a problem in the future as the properties turnover and the new buyers are not informed of these restrictions. Issue #14 - Several lots within the proposed subdivision are located exceptionally close to the wetland buffer setback resulting in limited rear yard usability and the potential for variance requests and other code violations in the future. Driveways. Section 400.11(d) of the City Code requires driveways to be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from the side property line. The majority of the driveways are shown to be located less than ten (10) feet from the property line. These driveways must be shown to demonstrate compliance with Section 400.11(d) of the City Code as a condition of preliminary plat approval unless otherwise waived by the City Council. The R-2 District allows for five (5) foot side yard setbacks along one side of an interior yard. Oftentimes, the five foot side yard setback is shown on the garage side within the proposed plat. Staff recommends that in this instance the ten foot driveway setback requirement be waived for lots proposed within the R-2 District. The Planning Commission and Council should discuss the ten foot driveway setback requirement versus the five foot side yard setback requirement. Issue #15 — The ordinance requires a ten foot setback for driveways but allows for five foot interior side yard building setbacks within the R-2 District. ANALYSIS : SECTION 111- GENERAL PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW Access. Hunter Drive extends along the west side of proposed development. Hunter Drive is designated as a minor collector road by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is proposing two access points to the subdivision off of Hunter Drive. Hunter 10 Drive has been designated in the City's Capital Improvement Plan as in -need of reconstruction for quite some time. It is unclear how much of the roadway the applicant is proposing to reconstruct with the development of this subdivision. It has been the City's policy that an applicant be required to complete the public improvement to the edge of plat, and sometimes beyond, depending upon the nature of the proposed project. The City Council will need to determine to what extent the developer should be required to reconstruct Hunter Drive and how the timing of the City's public improvement project for the remainder of Hunter Drive can mirror that of the applicant's plans for build -out of the subdivision. Issue #16 — The reconstruction of Hunter Drive including the potential for individual property assessments as is done on other road reconstruction projects in the City. The Comprehensive Plan sets forth certain goals and policies for the City's existing and future transportation networks. This plans states that neighborhoods existing neighborhoods should be connected with infill neighborhoods to ensure safety through increased access. Future secondary connections are shown at Navajo Road and to the north at the northwest corner of the proposed plat. The applicant has shown extension of utilities to the terminus of the cul-de-sacs in those areas so that they may be extended if and when the adjacent properties develop. A person with interest in the property to the north (identified on the plat as an exception parcel) has submitted some information related to a proposed realignment and rearrangement of the cul-de-sac and future road connection to the north that is being proposed by the applicant. Staff has not conducted a detailed analysis on the potential merits of this proposal. The proposal consolidates access to Hunter Drive at the boundary of the Lennar's proposed development and the neighboring property (exception parcel). Any proposed realignment of streets and access points would have to be formally submitted by the applicant as a revised preliminary plat, subject to review and approval of City staff. See comments related to the "Exception Parcel" below. Issue #17 — Any proposed realignment or rearrangement to the street layout within the proposed subdivision must be submitted as a revised preliminary plat and reviewed by City staff prior to consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Traffic Study. The applicant has submitted a traffic study evaluating impacts the proposed development may have on Hunter Drive and its intersection with Elm Creek Drive, Navajo Road and the park driveway. The study concludes that the proposed project's impact on these intersections will not require any additional traffic control devices, including additional turn lanes, to operate at an acceptable level. The City Engineer's office has reviewed the traffic study and the requested additional information and concurs with the assessment that no additional traffic control devices are required to handle additional traffic proposed by this development. 11 Streets. The applicant is proposing 24 -foot private streets within the townhome portion of the development and 28 -foot wide public streets throughout the remaining development. Section 820.29, Subd. 2 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that local streets be at least 24 feet wide with a 60 -foot right-of-way. The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow for a 50 -foot right-of-way along all public local streets in the single family area. No public right-of-way is proposed within the townhome development. The applicant claims that the reduction in right-of-way will allow for a reduced amount of impervious surfaces. While a reduced right-of-way would result in shorter driveway lengths (presumably five feet shorter on each side of the street) it does also have the effect of placing the homes closer together and narrowing street thoroughfare through the neighborhood. Furthermore, reduction of the public right-of- way allows for condensed area for placement of public utilities, sidewalks, etc. Consideration of a variance shall include evaluation of the review criteria set forth in Section 825.45 of the Zoning Ordinance. Variance Review Criteria. Section 820.59, Subd. 1 of the Subdivision Ordinance outlines the criteria for consideration of a variance from subdivision ordinance provisions. The applicant is seeking a variance from the ROW requirements. A variance may only be granted in the event that all of the following circumstances exist: (a) Because of particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result if the strict letter of this ordinance were carried out. (b) The conditions upon which the application for the variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not common to other properties in the City. (c) The hardship is related to the requirements of these regulations and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (d) That granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The applicant is seeking approval of the variance to reduce impervious surface impacts of the proposed development. It does not appear that the variance is being requested to alleviate a hardship, however, the City has approved flexibility in ROW width in the past in order to reduce impervious surface impacts. Issue #18 — Consideration of a variance to allow reduced ROW width to decrease impervious surfaces within the proposed plat. Sidewalks. The applicant is proposing to install sidewalks along one side of all public streets within the single family area. The proposed layout of the sidewalks appears to 12 minimize street crossings. Most existing sidewalks in the City are 5 -feet in width, and the applicant will be required to install similar sidewalk subject to City review. Blocks. Section 820.29, Subd. 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that blocks be arranged to provide for the most convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street design. Block length shall be 300 feet to 1,300 feet unless a special exception is granted by the City Council. Proposed block lengths fall within the range of 300 feet to 1,300 feet and are therefore consistent with ordinance requirements. Outlots. Five outlots are proposed within this development ranging in size from 0.49 acres to 32.57 acres. Outlot A is proposed as the common lot for the townhome development. Outlot B contains 7.83 acres and is designated as the conservation area. Oulot D, the largest outlot, is located within the rural residential area outside of the MUSA and is proposed to remain undeveloped at this time. The remaining outlots in the subdivision primarily encompass wetlands and stormwater ponding areas. Landscaping. Section 840.3.04 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines landscaping requirements for single family lots in the R-1 and R-2 District. All areas of a lot except for buildings, driveways, walks, patios, recreational areas, wetlands and wetland buffers are to be landscaped with trees, shrubs, plantings or turf grass. Section 840.3.04, Subd. 2(b) of the Zoning Ordinance encourages the use of low maintenance and water conserving alternatives to traditional Kentucky bluegrass. The applicant is proposing to use a special low moisture fescue grass, which does not require as much watering or mowing as traditional lawns according to the applicant. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of two (2) overstory trees to be planted per lot within fifteen (15) feet of the front lot line. The applicant is proposing two overstory trees per lot which are 2.5 caliper inches and include a mix of Linden, Hackberry, HoneyLocust, Princeton and Valley Forge Elm, Red and Sugar Maple and Red Oak trees. Bufferyards. Section 828.31 of the Zoning Ordinance describes the City's buffer yard requirements. Bufferyards are required along Hunter Drive as well as between zoning districts with differing intensity of uses. The applicant has proposed a bufferyard along Hunter Drive with an opacity of 0.3 as required. Another bufferyard is shown between the proposed townhome development and the proposed single family lots. This bufferyard is shown as a 0.1 opacity, however, the required bufferyard opacity between a proposed R-3 development and an adjacent R-2 development is 0.2. Additionally, the ordinance requires a bufferyard of at least 0.2 opacity where the proposed R-2 District lots would abut the UR District to the north as well as a bufferyard of at least 0.3 opacity where the proposed R-2 District lots abut Rural Residential properties to the east. The bufferyard planting schedule shall be revised to be consistent with ordinance requirements as a condition of preliminary plat approval. Issue #19 — Additional bufferyards must be added adjacent to the UR District to the north and the RR District to the east consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. 13 Tree Preservation / Tree Removal. The applicant is proposing to mass grade the site as each phase is developed. The City's tree preservation ordinance allows for up to 15 percent of the significant trees located on the site to be removed for such site development activities without requiring replacement. The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 35 percent of the existing significant trees to allow for development of the site. Section 828.41, Subd. 9(c)(i) requires a tree replacement ratio of a diameter of one (1) caliper inch per one (1) caliper inch of removed significant trees. The applicant is proposing to remove 8,585.8 caliper inches of the existing significant trees on the site (34.8 percent of the total significant trees). As required by the Ordinance, 4,889 caliper inches of trees must be replaced. The applicant is proposing to plant four inch caliper trees for a total required replacement of 1,222 trees. The existing significant trees within the proposed conservation area are counted towards the percentage of trees saved on the site. The Planning Commission and Council should discuss whether or not these trees should be counted towards the percentage saved since this portion of the site is proposed to be used as an exchange for extension of the MUSA. If the significant trees existing in the conservation area are not counted towards the overall percentage of trees saved, the applicant would have to plant additional replacement trees on the site consistent with Section 828.41 of the Zoning Ordinance. The City's forestry consultant has prepared a report reviewing the applicant's proposed tree preservation and tree removal plans. The forestry consultant notes that the proposed four inch caliper replacement trees are less likely to survive than newly planted two and a half inch caliper trees. The forester's report also points out that there is a unique maple -basswood forest remnant located within the southeast corner of the site which is proposed to be removed to accommodate the new development. It appears as though the majority of this feature is located within the proposed MUSA extension area. It is his opinion that this feature is unique and significant and should be preserved. Any recommendations made by the forestry consultant shall be included as a condition of preliminary plat approval. Issue #20 - The Planning Commission and Council should discuss whether or not these trees should be counted towards the percentage saved since this portion of the site is proposed to be used as an exchange for extension of the MUSA. Issue #21 — Recommendations of the City's forestry consultant related to tree removal and tree preservation must be adequately addressed prior to preliminary plat approval. Park and Trail Dedication. The addition of 175 residential units requires a park dedication fee for each unit minus any credit for trail or park land dedications. The applicant is proposing 5,095 linear feet of eight foot wide trails to be constructed with 14 this subdivision. Section 820.31 of the Subdivision Ordinance outlines the City's park dedication requirements. In every subdivision, a reasonable portion of the buildable land, no to exceed 10 percent, shall be dedicated by the applicant for public parks, open spaces, recreational facilities or trails. The City may also require a combination of land dedication and a cash contribution equal to the 10 percent requirement. The subject site contains 53.18 net acres of land and, as such, a land dedication of 5.32 acres or its cash equivalent is required. The applicant has designated a 7.83 acre area as a conservation area and is proposing to preserve this area from development by placing it within a conservation easement or by dedicating it to the City for a public park. This conservation area is being used as an exchange for extension of the MUSA, and as such, the Planning Commission and City Council should discuss whether or not park dedication credit will be given for this parcel. It is staff's expectation that this area would not be eligible for park dedication credit if used as an exchange for extension of the MUSA. Prior to consideration of the preliminary plat by the City Council, the Park Commission should review the proposed plat and make recommendations on the amount of land, if any, that should be dedicated for park purposes as well as the proposed trail layout. Issue #22 — Should park dedication credit be given for the "conservation area"? Community Building and Swimming Pool. A community swimming pool and building is proposed within the northern portion of the development. Parks and open space are permitted uses and private swimming pools are a permitted accessory use within the R- 2 District. This building and pool will be owned and maintained by the homeowner's association and will be available for use by both the townhome and single family residents. Staff has questioned the need for a community building in this development when the Hamel Community Building is very close by. Entrance Monuments. The applicant is proposing to install large monument signs near the entrances of the proposed development. Such signs must be consistent with the City's sign ordinance and shall be subject to review and approval by City staff prior to erection on the site. Wetlands. Several wetlands located on the site are proposed to be impacted by this development. Review by a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) as required by the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) occurred on June 8, 2010. The TEP recommended several changes to the proposed wetland impacts, mainly to the proposed filling of the 2.02 acre wetland within the north central portion of the site (Wetland #4). The applicant has made revisions consistent with the recommendations made by the TEP, however, additional details on wetland restoration and wetland protection must be provided as required by the Section 828.43 of the Zoning Ordinance and the WCA. The TEP will again review the proposal once the required information is submitted. Any recommendations by the City Engineer and the TEP with regards to wetland 15 " replacement, restoration and protection shall be made a condition of preliminary plat approval. Easements. Drainage and utility easements are shown at the perimeter of all lots as well as over all outlots, wetlands and stormwater ponds. It should be noted that easements within side yards located between single family homes can pose problems when homeowners landscape or fence the area. Public Works vehicles need at least a 20 -foot wide clear space to maintain the ponds and oftentimes homeowners are unaware of this easement and place things in the easement that can cause issues when maintenance of stormwater ponds and wetlands is necessary. Furthermore, several of the proposed single family lots extend into the boundaries of existing wetlands. City staff strongly discourages against extension of lot lines into these wetlands as it tends to lead to property owners encroaching into the wetland areas. Staff recommends revising the plan to all existing and proposed wetlands and stormwater ponds within a designated outlot and enclosed with a drainage and utility easement. Issue #23  Should the plat be redesigned to eliminate lot lines extending into the wetlands, and by creating an outlot and conservation easement over the wetland area? Grading, drainage and utilities. The existing topography of the site is generally flat and does not contain significant slopes (slopes of 12 percent or higher). The proposed grading of the site will change dramatically in some areas. For example, the grade surrounding the proposed cul-de-sac in the southern half of the site will be raised approximately 10 to 15 feet from where it is now. The applicant is proposing to mass grade the site as each phase develops. The majority of the single family homes being proposed have walk -out or look -out basements. The applicant is proposing to add four inch caliper trees, as opposed to the two and a half inch caliper trees required by Ordinance, which will aid in the screening of the proposed changes in grade and the view of the new homes from the right-of-way and adjacent properties. Issues related to grading, stormwater, erosion control, irrigation, water and sewer, sump pumps and other utilities shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and shall be made a condition of preliminary plat approval. Issue #24  Recommendations of the City Engineer related to grading, drainage and utility issues must be adequately addressed prior to preliminary plat approval. LID and Sustainability. The applicant proposes to install a number of decentralized bio-filtration basins in order to achieve the City's water quality standards, which is consistent with low -impact development practices. Lennar also proposes to implement 16 its "powersmart" construction practices which increase energy efficiency beyond general code requirements. The developer has also discussed utilizing alternative ground cover as opposed to Kentucky -Bluegrass sod, which could reduce lawn irrigation needs. However, the plan otherwise generally follows "standard" development practices, including mass grading of the site and removing almost every tree within the proposed area where construction is proposed. A portion of wetland is also proposed to be filled in order to accommodate the private park and a few of the home sites. Staff believes there may be an opportunity to provide a better pedestrian connection between the proposed development and Uptown Hamel. This could help support additional development in Uptown Hamel. The developer may need to work with property owners to the north in order to provide this connection. EAW. LENNAR has submitted an Environmental Site Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed development. An EAW is a screening tool used to evaluate any potential environmental impacts the proposed development may have on the area. An EAW is required for this project since the applicant's are proposing a comprehensive plan amendment. The EAW is currently in the public review process. The public comment period ends July 28, 2010. The City and the applicant will evaluate and respond to any public comments. The comments and the response to any comments will then be evaluated by the City Council and the Council will made a finding on the EAW. The finding will either be negative, meaning that the proposed project will have no significant negative environmental impacts, or position meaning it will pose significant threats to existing environmental resources and the applicant will be required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Approval of the proposed preliminary plat shall be subject to a negative declaration on the EAW. Phasing Plan. The applicant is proposing three phases of construction. The first phase will include 18 single family homes in the northwest corner of the site as well as the community building and swimming pool. The second phase will include 62 single family homes and the third and final phase will include the remaining 54 single family lots as well as the 41 townhome units. It is assumed that future phases will be platted as outlots concurrent with the final platting of the first phase of the development. As future phases receive final plat approval, consistency with the approved preliminary plat shall be strictly adhered to. Full build -out of the proposed development as presented in the preliminary plat is required in order to maintain consistency with the density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Affordable Housing. Staff has discussed with the developer the City's affordable housing needs. The applicant has not proposed to provide affordable housing units as part of the proposed development. Development Contract. Following approval of a preliminary plat, the applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City to be executed prior to consideration of a final plat by the City Council. The development contract, which 17 specifies all conditions of approval, applicable fees and securities to be provided for required improvements, is subject to review and approval of the City Attorney. Exception Parcel. The City Attorney's plat opinion states that the identified exception parcel within the northwest corner of the site is not a separate parcel and must be included in the preliminary plat, or an application for a subdivision to legally split off that parcel must be approved by the City prior to consideration of a final plat for The Enclave. Issue #25 — The applicant has not proposed a solution for dealing with the exception parcel that meets ordinance requirements. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED The City received one written comment prior to the packet being prepared for the Commission meeting. This letter is attached to back of the staff report. The Commission will accept additional Public Comment during the Public Hearing. SUMMARY OF ISSUES Based on staffs review of the submitted comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, variance and preliminary plat applications for The Enclave development, the following items are considered to be outstanding issues that need resolution prior to granting approval of the applications. Some of these issues are policy decisions that need comment from the Planning Commission and City Council. Several of the issues present inconsistencies with the zoning and subdivision ordinance requirements. Direction should be given to the applicant as to how these issues can be resolved so that the application can move forward through the review process. 1) Is the proposal of 175 units adequately low to meet the City's previous direction to "be on the low end" of the allowed density range for this property? 2) Has the applicant provided adequate evidence that the potential environmental, traffic, and other impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment are consistent with the City's overall land use goals and objectives? 3) The proposed rezoning to R-2 District within the area guided for low density residential uses is in conflict with the purpose statement for the R-2 zoning district. 4) How does the Planning Commission and Council feel about the potential for two-family homes within areas zoned R-2? 5) Should the density bonus apply to townhome development when the recreational amenity is located in a different zoning district? 6) Is the proposed townhome building separation too close? 18 7) The proposed single access cul-de-sac for 41 units is in conflict with Section 820.29, Subd. 2(g) of the Subdivision Ordinance. 8) While the Zoning Ordinance includes language referring to private street use and allows townhome developments in the R-3 District, there has been no establishment of a formal process for approving such development apart from PUD zoning. In discussions with the City Attorney and staff, it is the opinion of City staff that the intent of the ordinance is to allow townhome developments on private streets as the customary development pattern within the R-3 District without the need for additional PUD processing. 9) The Planning Commission and Council should comment on the need for additional guest parking stalls within the townhome area. 10) Staff recommends that at least one additional access point to a public street be required. 11) The proposed landscape plan for the townhome development is inconsistent with zoning ordinance requirements. 12) A typical two -car garage size is 440 square feet in area or greater in order to accommodate vehicle length, interior door swing and additional domestic storage. 13) Lot 8, Block 2 and Lot 9, Block 11 do not meet rear yard setbacks as shown and must be revised to be consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. 14) Several Tots within the proposed subdivision are located exceptionally close to the wetland buffer setback resulting in limited rear yard usability and the potential for variance requests and other code violations in the future. 15) The ordinance requires a ten foot setback for driveways but allows for five foot interior side yard setbacks. 16) The reconstruction of Hunter Drive including the potential for individual property assessments as is done on other road reconstruction projects in the City. 17) Any proposed realignment or rearrangement to the street layout within the proposed subdivision must be submitted as a revised preliminary plat and reviewed by City staff prior to consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. 18) Consideration of a variance to allow reduced ROW width to decrease impervious surfaces within the proposed plat. 19) Additional bufferyards must be added adjacent to the UR District to the north and the RR District to the east consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. 19 20) The Planning Commission and Council should discuss whether or not these trees should be counted towards the percentage saved since this portion of the site is proposed to be used as an exchange for extension of the MUSA. 21) Recommendations of the City's forestry consultant related to tree removal and tree preservation must be adequately addressed prior to preliminary plat approval. 22) Should park dedication credit be given for the "conservation area"? 23) Should the plat be redesigned to eliminate lot lines extending into the wetlands, and by creating an outlot and conservation easement over the wetland area? 24) Recommendations of the City Engineer related to grading, drainage and utility issues must be adequately addressed prior to preliminary plat and/or final plat approval. 25) The applicant has not proposed a solution for dealing with the exception parcel that meets ordinance requirements. RECOMMENDATION Prior to making a determination on the general acceptability of the proposed development, the Planning Commission and Council will need to make a series of decisions related to the outstanding issues as set forth above. Due to the number of outstanding issues and inconsistencies with zoning and subdivision ordinance requirements, staff recommends denial of the proposed applications as outlined in Exhibit 5. If the Planning Commission feels that the applicant should be given the opportunity to submit a revised preliminary plat that addresses the outstanding issues, staff recommends that the applications be tabled until the next Planning Commission meeting or until such a time that the applicant can submit revised plans and waive review deadlines to allow reasonable processing of the request through the Planning Commission and City Council. POSSIBLE ACTIONS A. Motion to recommend approval of the requested comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, variance and preliminary plat for The Enclave provided that the applicant resolves the issues set forth in the planning report and those discussed at the public hearing. B. Motion to deny the comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, variance and preliminary plat for The Enclave as outlined in the Findings of Fact. (Exhibit 5) C. Motion to table. (If made, this motion should be supported with direction to the applicant on the issues identified above, and any others raised at the hearing, so the applicant can revise the development proposal documents for submission to the City prior to the next Planning Commission meeting.) 20 ATTACHMENT 1 - Findings of Fact CITY OF MEDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA DRAFT FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING, VARIANCE AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE ENCLAVE (3212 HUNTER DRIVE) AS PROPOSED BY LENNAR/US HOME CORP 1. The applicant's proposal of 175 units exceeds the City's intended unit count and density for the subject property by 20 percent or more. 2. The applicant has not provided adequate evidence that the potential environmental and other impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment are consistent with the City's overall land use goals and objectives. 3. The proposed rezoning to R-2 District within the area guided for low density residential uses is in conflict with Section 840.2.01 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The proposed R-2 District allows for two-family homes which are inconsistent with the uses intended for areas guided for Low Density Residential by the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The applicant's proposal for a density bonus using a recreational amenity constructed in a different zoning district does not meet the intent of Section 841.1.05, Subd. 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. The proposed private street width of 20 feet within the townhome development results in massing of buildings and does not provide for adequate passage of air, light and would create congestion in the traffic circulation patterns resulting in threats to public health, safety and welfare. 7. The proposed single access cul-de-sac for 41 units is in conflict with Section 820.29, Subd. 2(g) of the Subdivision Ordinance. 8. The proposed townhome development has inadequate guest parking to serve the project, and which will result in traffic congestion and conflicts with street parking and circulation. 9. At least one additional access point to a public street for the townhome development is necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare for a development area of this size and density. 10. The proposed landscape plan for the townhome development does not meet the requirements of Section 841.4.03, Subd. 5 of the Zoning Ordinance. 11. The proposed garages for the townhome units do not provide adequate space for two vehicles as required by Section 841.4.02, Subd. 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. 12. Several lots within the proposed subdivision, including Lot 6 and 8 of Block 1, Lots 1-3 of Block 5, Lot 1, Lots 4-7, Lot 12, 18, 19, 22 and 38 of Block 7, Lot 8 of Block 6 and Lots 14-16 and Lot 22 of Block 9 are located exceptionally close to the wetland buffer setback resulting in limited rear yard usability and the potential for variance requests and other code violations in the future. 13. The request for a variance for reduced ROW width on the public streets within the proposed plat does not meet the requirements of Section 820.59 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 14. The proposed plat has not complied with bufferyard requirements as outlined in Section 828.31 of the Zoning Ordinance. 15. The tree preservation plan preserves too few trees as required by the Zoning Ordinance, as it is dependent upon saving trees in the conservation area which is intended to be a swap of land for new MUSA that would otherwise be undevelopable. 16. The proposed development would remove an existing maple -basswood forest which is a unique and significant environmental feature. 17. The plat is designed to extend lot lines into the wetlands, rather than utilize an outlot for protection of the wetland areas. 18. The plat excludes a five -acre portion of property that is, according to County records, a part of the legal description subject to the application. 19. Due to the findings above, the request does not meet the requirements of Section 820.21, Subd. 10 of the Subdivision Ordinance as follows: (a) The proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city. (b) The physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. (c) The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. (d) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (0 The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. ATTACHMENT 2 - City Engineer Comments (5 pages) Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com July 2, 2010 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: The Enclave of Medina File No. 000190-10000-1 Plat No. L-10-055 Dear Dusty, Bonestroo We have reviewed the plans for The Enclave of Medina development. The plan set is dated 6-16-10 and we have not received update storm water calculations for review. Many of our comments from previous detailed reviews do still apply to this plan and have been attached to this letter. Our following comments are general in nature due to many on -going changing aspects of the plan: • The water supply and distribution plan shows a looped 12 -inch watermain connection from Hunter Drive to Brockton Lane. The current future land use plan guides rural residential south of the Enclave development. We would recommend that 12 -inch watermain be installed along the south development roads for a future Brockton Lane connection via Navajo Road East. The existing south 12 -inch watermain stub to Hunter Drive may be eliminated, however we recommend keeping the 10 foot wide easement in place for potential future system expansion. • Although this comment is provided in previous letters, we want to stress the importance of not extending lot line into wetlands and wetland buffers. • The plans show an irrigation system supplied by wells only. The irrigation system design should use stormwater ponds as its primary water source. Wells should only be used as a supplemental source. • There are lingering storm water quality issues that need to be addressed as outlined in the attached memo dated 6-2-10. • Please see the memo from John Smyth dated 7-2-10 for comments on the latest wetland revisions. City of Medina Page 2 The Enclave of Medina 7/2/2010 If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (651) 604-4894 or by email at darren.amundsen(c�bonestroo.com. Sincerely, BONESTROO Darren Amundsen Cc: Tom Kellogg John Smyth Laurie Smith Dan Edgerton Memorandum #Bonestroo To: Darren Amundsen cc. Dan Edgerton From: John Smyth Project: The Enclave Client: Medina Date: July 2, 2010 Re: Review 6-16-10 Plan Set File No.: 19010000 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com Overall there are improvements in the development which include a reduction in wetland impacts to Wetland #4, no encroachment into the buffer and setback of Wetland 10 and more design details for the replacement sites. This memo focuses on concerns and issues related to maintaining hydrology to existing wetlands and wetland replacement design. We will wait to comment on other Wetland Conservation Act issues until there is feedback from the WCA TEP. Wetland #2: We recommend the outlet elevation for this wetland be raised from 992.37 to 994 The hydrology modeling completed by the developer should reflect this revised outflow elevation. We recommend that this work be coordinated with the Hunter Drive improvements in that the outflow elevation of 992.37 will be maintained at its current elevation until road work is complete. Wetland #4: It appears that the proposed outflow elevation is 1009.5 however this will need to be confirmed. This outflow elevation will restore the hydrology to this basin if surface water can be maintained to the basin. As designed the drainage area and discharge to this wetland has been significantly reduced. Additional drainage area will need to be restored to this basin in order for the wetland not to be impacted. In addition, as designed the wetlands proposed water elevation is higher then the road to the southwest and house to the west. Berming and emergency overflow routes that do not allow flooding of the home will need to be provided. Proposed outflow elevations and high water elevation should be shown on the grading plan. Wetland Mitigation A: The spillway elevation of the mitigation site appears to be 1007 however this will need to be confirmed. Outflow elevations and high water elevations should be provided on future plan submittals. The site has proposed contours at 1007 with three interior low spots that appear to be 1006.5 (elevations should be labeled on proposed contour). The outflow elevation appears to be sufficient to restore the area proposed for wetland mitigation. The proposed berm is at a 1008 elevation. It is recommended that the berm is at least one foot higher then the proposed high water level which will likely raise the proposed elevation of the berm. At its existing elevation saturation of the berm may occur and depending on flows may result in it being breached. Consideration should be given to not routing clean water through storm water pond due to it limiting the treatment effectiveness of the pond. I:\190\190GEN\Plats\Plats L -10 -053 -\Plat L-10-055 The Enclave of Medina\Review Comments\JS_Amundsent^Prelim Review7-2-10.docx [TNS 06-2010] Page 1 of 1 Memorandum Bonestroo To: Darren Amundsen Project: The Enclave Date: 6/2/10 From: Dan Edgerton Client: City of Medina Re: Drainage Review File No: Plat L-10-055 Developer: Lennar Corp. Engineer: Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Submittal: Stormwater Quality and Quantity Management Plan for The Enclave Date of Plans: 5/24/10 Date Received: 5/25/10 Comments/ Recommendations Rate Control: 1. The HydroCAD modeling indicates that proposed peak flow rates are less than existing rates for the 1-, 2-, 10-, and 100 -year rainfall events. 2. In the HydroCAD modeling, it is unclear what Reach E7 represents. This does not, however, appear to have an impact on the results. 3. In the HydroCAD modeling, Ponds A and B are modeled as a single pond (P18). The stated reason in the notes is to avoid backwater calculations. For the ponds to act as a single pond, as modeled, the connecting pipe needs to be sufficiently large to pass the 100 -year outflow of 23 cfs with minimal headloss. Otherwise, the high water level at Pond B will be higher than predicted. Calculations should be provided confirming the adequacy of the connecting pipe. 4. Drain tile is the primary outlet for ponds provided with a biofiltration bench. The HydroCAD modeling indicates the peak flow through the drain tile is generally in the range of 1-1.3 cfs. To achieve this peak flow, there needs to be sufficient permeability and surface area in the bench to infiltrate this rate of flow. Calculations should be provided indicating that the infiltration will be sufficient to reach the modeled peak flow rates in the drain tile. Water Quality: 1. The PondNET modeling for Ponds E and F neglects the undeveloped portion of the drainage area that is routed through the ponds. Instead, only the developed area is included in the modeling. However, if the undeveloped portion actually gets routed through the ponds, as indicated in the Proposed Drainage Areas map, then this additional volume of relatively clean water will reduce the ponds' removal efficiency. The PondNET model will then be overestimating the total phosphorus removal of the ponds. The modeling should be corrected to account for the undeveloped area. 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com } 2. The source of or reasoning behind using the total phosphorus export coefficient of 1.00 Ib/ac/yr for cropland should be provided. We typically use 0.5 lb/ac/yr. Use of the higher export coefficient will overestimate existing phosphorus loadings. The PondNET modeling may need to be corrected to reflect the lower phosphorus export coefficient. Volume Control: 1. The volume control meets the City's requirements. Page2of2 ATTACHMENT 3 - City Forester's Report (2 pages) Forester's Report Project Name: The Enclave Developer: Lennar Corporation Location: Holasek Property, 3212 Hunter Drive, Hamel Revision Date of Reviewed Documents: 6/16/10 The reviewed documents include an existing tree survey, tree removal plan, tree replacement calculations, buffer yard planting plan, tree replacement plan and grading plans. Existing Conditions The date of the original tree survey is not evident, but the tree data was field verified during a tree inventory performed by Dr. Kathy Widin of Plant Health Associates, Inc. during the summer of 2007. The site was revisited by Dr. Widin in the spring of 2010 to assess the extent of diseased, dying and declining trees. The tree inventory describes 1585 trees over 8" in diameter, and includes trees that are dead, declining or not on the property. It is not unusual for off -site trees to be part of a pre - development inventory as property boundaries may not be marked until after the inventory or may have been staked at one time but markings are no longer visible. The inventory includes some non-native trees such as Colorado blue spruce. These trees are associated, for the most part, with the home and immediate surroundings. The inventory and a summary letter by contractor Widin following her April 2010 visit both indicate the presence of disease and decaying trees. Dutch elm disease is quite common across this site and accounts for many of the dead standing trees of all sizes. The large number and high concentration of elms, and absence of sanitation or disease tree management program all contribute to the elevated level of Dutch elm disease. Also noted is presence of decay and storm damage, particularly in large trees. Many of the trees in the naturally wooded area are quite old and large and may be categorized as over -mature. Over -mature stands of trees often contain such problems, as these veteran trees lose the vigor that helps to combat insects, disease and wounding. At the same time, their many years of survival allow them a long time to accumulate and visibly bear the scars of numerous problems. The April 2010 report states, "There was little evidence of oak wilt disease on the site and no currently active infection centers were noted in 2007". If there is little evidence of oak wilt, it begs the question "Is there some evidence of oak wilt and how much?" If oak wilt is present at this time, the City should be informed of its location and extent. As noted, European buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) is common but not uniformly so. It degrades some areas of the woods yet in others, such as the east -central portion (just north of wetland #14) where many sugar maples are found, conditions are very close to those found in natural and uncompromised site. In fact, the inventory notes this grove of sugar maples in the vicinity surrounding trees numbered 1042 & 1043 as a site to "save if possible". I walked through this area and concur. It is evidence that this forest remnant is a maple -basswood stand; a Page 1 7/9/2010 forest type common in the now rare "Big Woods" that once covered much of this part of the state before settlement. The current Tree Removal Plan, Sheet 8 shows a road (Navajo East) and house pads encroaching on this area with the planned removal of about 200 trees over 8" in diameter. Replacement Plan The species selection found in the Tree Replacement Plan is generally acceptable. The submitted Tree Removal Calculations (Sheet TS -12) calls for 4,889 caliper inches of replacement trees. However, the Replacement Plan (Sheet TRP-1) indicates 3,702 diameter inches removed and 1,246 replacement trees contains an inconsistency. The developer has chosen to meet this replacement requirement using 4" caliper trees. This is a very large size tree and it may be very difficult to find the required 1,222 trees necessary. A check of available tree stock at a local wholesale supplier to the landscape industry indicated less than one hundred, 4" oak and maple trees combined. Yet the Tree Replacement Plan (Sheet TRP-1) calls for 51 blue beech (Carpinus caroliniana) and 91 ironwood (Ostrya virginiana). These two trees are not typically carried by suppliers in large numbers and trees over 2.5" diameter are rare. In fact, it is rare to find a fully grown blue beech 4" in diameter. Newly planted trees of this size are less likely to survive than smaller (2 -2.5" diameter) trees. While 4" trees can survive past the warrantee period, it may be difficult for the developer to find a contractor willing to risk warranting that many trees for the required two year period. Submitted plans do not call out or diagram proper planting techniques and I believe this is not required though it is common to do so. Heavy soils common to this site and throughout this area of Hennepin County will exacerbate survival of newly planted trees. This makes proper planting techniques, the selection of skilled landscape contractors and oversight of the planting process very important. Recommendations The portion of maple -basswood forest found on this site may not be unique in Medina, but as a dwindling representative of the former Big Woods of Minnesota, its value is significant. Preserving this area of the natural woodland on the Holasek site should carry more weight, in my opinion, than preserving other portions of this woodland. The Tree Replacement Plan should be reworked to include a diverse size of replacement trees, avoiding trees larger than 3" in diameter. The species indicated on the Plan are acceptable so no changes need to be made. If substitutions become necessary, species and size of substituted trees should be approved by the City prior to planting. Dutch elm disease will be an ongoing concern here, long after development is complete. New residents will bear the burden of removing dead and dying elms. If there is any evidence of oak wilt the City should be made aware of this information including its location regardless of whether it is suspect or confirmed. Submitted, Stephen Nicholson CF Page 2 7/9/2010 Kennedy c H A R T E R D Offices in Minneapolis Saint Paul St. Cloud 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www.kennedy-graven.com Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer ATTACHMENT 4 - City Plat Opinion (3 pages) CORRINE A. HEINE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9217 Email: cheine@kennedy-graven.com MSBA Board Certified Real Property Specialist June 25, 2010 Mr. Dusty Finke City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Plat Opinion for The Enclave Our File No. ME230-506 Dear Mr. Finke: At your request, I have reviewed a title commitment issued by North American Title Company as agent for First American Title Insurance Company, File No. 40852-09-04313 with an effective date of September 23, 2009 (the "Conunitment"). I have also reviewed a preliminary plat drawing prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. dated June 17, 2010 (the "Plat"). The Commitment purports to cover the following legal description: Parcel 1 Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision 241 EXCEPT that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No. 241, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of Lot 14 of said Auditor's Subdivision No. 241; thence South along the most Easterly line of said Lot 13 distant 2.3 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said Lot 13 distant 656.35 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said Lot 14 distant 414.8 feet to the most Northerly line of said Lot 13; thence East along said Northerly line 524.35 feet to the West line of said Lot 14; thence South along said West line 412.5 feet to the Southwest corner of said Lot 14; thence East along the South line of said Lot 14 to the point of beginning, and ALSO EXCEPT that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No. 241, Hennepin County Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at a point on the North line of Lot 13, distant 524.35 feet West from the point of intersection of said North line with the West line of Lot 14 as measured along said North line; thence South parallel with the West line of Lot 14 a distance of 328.18 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of Lot 370516v2 NKE ME230-506 Mr. Dusty Finke June 25, 2010 Page 2 13 a distance of 663.65 feet, more or less, to a point on the West line of Lot 13; thence North along the West line of said Lot 13, a distance of 328.18 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 13; thence East along the North line of Lot 13 to the point of beginning. Parcel 2 The West Half of the Northeast Quarter, Section 13, Township 118, Range 23, according to the Government Survey thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Property). Based upon my review of the Commitment and Plat, I have the following continents relative to the proposed Plat of The Enclave: 1. The Plat must be signed by: a. Holasek Family Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (fee owners); b. TCF Bank Minnesota (mortgagee); c. Farmers State Bank of Hamel (mortgagee). (NOTE: A copy of the final Plat must be submitted which includes and numbers each individual lot and block. We reserve the right to make further requirements upon receipt of the final Plat.) In lieu of signing the plat, the mortgagee may provide any of the following instruments, to be recorded prior to or at the time of recording the plat: satisfaction or release of mortgage or consent to plat. 2. The Conunitment and the Plat's legal description excepts out an approximate 5 acre parcel outside the northwest corner of the Plat. The current fee owner will need to apply to the city of Medina for approval of a lot split of this 5 acre parcel OR said 5 acre parcel will need to be included in the proposed Plat. In either case, title evidence must be submitted regarding the 5 acre parcel. We reserve the right to make further requirements upon receipt of that title evidence. 3. Right -of -Way Easement in favor of Wright -Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association. The surveyor needs to determine the exact location of said easement on the Plat and the city will need to determine if the Right -of -Way Easement interferes with the city's easement. We reserve the right to make further requirements after review of said location. 4. The Property is subject to the rights of the public in Hunter Drive. 5. The surveyor will need to correct the symbol on the Plat that describes the North direction of the Property. 370516v2 NKE ME230-506 Mr. Dusty Finke June 25, 2010 Page 3 6. The Plat will need to show dedication to the city of Medina of all easements and right-of- ways. 7. A special assessment search will need to be obtained. 8. Taxes for 2010 in the amount of $3,019.94 (Parcel 1) and $3,828.96 (Parcel 2) are half paid. The real estate taxes for the current year will need to be paid in full prior to recording the Plat. The PID Nos. are: 12-118-23-43-0002 (Parcel 1) and 13-118-23-12-0001 (Parcel 2). 9. The Property is currently classified as "Green Acres" property. This subdivision will require payment of deferred taxes under the Green Acres law. This letter does not purport to set forth every matter relevant to a determination of whether title to this property is marketable, and no one should rely upon it for that purpose. The sole purpose of this letter is to identify required signatories to the Plat and related issues of interest to the City in connection with platting, as evidenced by the Corrunitment. This opinion is conditioned upon the issuance of a title policy in favor of the city of Medina, insuring the City's interests as they appear in the plat of The Enclave. Sincerely, d. Corrine A. Heine CAH:nke Enclosure cc: Ronald H. Batty, w/out enclosure Lennar, Carole Toohey, 935 East Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, MN 55391 w/enclosure Holasek Family Limited Partnership, 3212 Hunter Drive, Medina, MN 55340 w/enclosure Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., 150 South Broadway, Wayzata, MN 55391 w/enclosure 370516v2 NKE ME230-506 4 ATTACHMENT 5 - Environmental Assessment Worksheet (19 pages) June 17, 201 O ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: This form is available at www.mnplan.state.mn.us. EAW Guidelines will be available in Spring 1999 at the web site. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for — but should not complete — the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30 -day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title The Enclave 2. Proposer Lennar Corp. Contact person Carole Toohey Title Project Manager Address 935 East Wayzata Blvd City, state, ZIP Wayzata, MN 55391 Phone (952) 249-3012 Fax (952) 473-7401 E-mail Carole.Toohev(d 1ennar.com 3. RGU City of Medina Contact person Dusty Finke Title City Planner Address 2052 County Road 24 City, state, ZIP Medina, MN 55340 4. Reason for EAW preparation (check one) EIS scoping [X] Mandatory EAW Citizen petition Proposer volunteered Phone (763) 473-4643 Fax (763) 473-9359 E-mail: dusty. finke@ci.medina.mn.us RGU discretion If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number 4410.4300 - 19 name Residential Development 5. Project location County Hennepin City/Township Medina Address: 3212 FIunter Drive, Medina Minnesota (Holasek Property) SW % NE % Section 13 NW % NE '/ Section 13 SW'/ SE % Section 12 Township 118 Township 118 Township 118 and subpart Range 23 Range 23 Range 23 Attach each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); • Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 1 " 6. Description a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. A proposed Residential Development (THE ENCLAVE) located on a 109 acre site in Medina, Minnesota, The proposed development consists of 140 single-family detached homes, 42 attached townhomes, and an association owned Community Park with a pool and pool house. Site construction is proposed to begin during the 2010 construction season, with construction completion to occur over the next 3-6 years. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the tuning and duration of construction activities. The proposed residential subdivision, THE ENCLAVE, consisting of 140 single-family detached homes and 42 attached townhome units, is located in Medina, Minnesota. The site is adjacent to and east of Hunter Drive. Adjacent to the west, at the main entry off of Hunter Drive, is Hamel Legion Park, to the east/northeast is Hamel Community Park. The other surrounding land uses are varying densities of residential developments. (see attached site plan and development exhibits) Site Characteristics --- The property is located in Medina, Minnesota, Hennepin County (3212 Hunter Drive) in Sections 12 and 13 of Township 118, Range 23, and consists of a farmstead with various buildings located along the west side, closer to the north end. The site is approximately 109 acres, of which an estimated 7 acres contain the existing homestead and out buildings, 47 acres have been used for agricultural purposes, about 31.5 acres are wetland areas (with a larger complex on the south end of the site), and about 22.3 acres of tree cover exist on the eastern side of the site. The topography of the site slopes mainly from the north (1012-1014) to the south (995-1000). There are smaller drainage areas in the northwest corner that drain to the west and a small drainage area in the northeast corner that drains to the east. Most of the site runoff eventually drains to the west to Elm Creek. Soil boring have been completed on the site by Braun Intertec (March 2007  Project No. BL - 07 -0186). The soils encountered generally consist of1.5 to 4 feet of clayey topsoil, above glacial till soils consisting of silty sand, clayey sand, sandy lean clay, and lean clay. Based on the Hennepin County Soils Survey the site consists mostly of Group B/D soils and A/D soils. The A soils group represents the sandy well -drained soils with the D soils representing the clayey sails that have a very slow infiltration rate. The depth to bedrock in this area is estimated at 151 feet to 250 feet below the ground surface. The groundwater elevation for this area is estimated at 980. The soil borings showed the water elevations ranging from 990 to 1000. This may be due to perched water conditions. Braun Intertec also did water level monitoring during the summer and fall of 2008, verifying the water elevations of 990 to 1000. The existing site has fourteen (14) jurisdictional wetland basins, based on the report prepared by Svoboda Ecological Resources in August of 2006 (Project No. 2006-80-03). Several of the wetlands are located in the wooded area directly to the east of the farmstead. The wetlands include a complex of several Palustrine (P) Forested (FO) Type 7 wetland (PFOI A) interspersed with upland islands. Deciduous (1) trees, herbs, and shrubs inhabit these temporarily flooded (A) wetlands. Other wetlands on the site are Type 3 PEMC/PEMCd (P=Palustrine; EM=Emergent Vegetation; C=Seasonally Flooded; d=drained or ditched) wetlands, and a single Type 3 PUBF (UB=unconsolidated bottom; THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN  EAW 2 F=semi permanently flooded) wetland. The project will be a traditional residential subdivision with City owned streets and utilities for the single-family residences and the attached townhome residences will have public utilities and private streets. Municipal trunk sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer will be available to this project. As platting and construction occur, the private underground utilities: gas, electric, cable TV and telephone services will be installed to each platted lot. Amenities of note to this project are tree preservation areas, wetlands, proposed ponds, proposed enhanced wetlands and wetland mitigation areas, an on -site community park with a pool house and pool, and the sidewalks and trail systems. The trail system will eormect the development to the community association park, the Hamel Lions Park and the Hamel Community Park. The site grading is proposed to begin during the fall construction season of 2010, The project will take several years to complete, it is estimated that 18 home sites will be developed in 2010/2011, with an additional 67 home sites in 2011, and the remaining 97 home sites over the next two years (2012- 2013). The actual tinting and phase size will be a function of market demand, construction season, and availability of infrastructure. The grading, utility, private utility, and builders will be required to perform their work in conformance with the required specifications, city approvals, and permits required by State and local construction codes. c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The residential subdivision is proposed to be completed by a private developer (Lennar Corp.). The project will have several different housing products meeting different price points. This project is being proposed to meet some of the current and future housing needs in the City of Medina. d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? X Yes No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. There is a proposed outlot (26.7 acres) on the very southern portion of the site, to the south of the large wetland complex (wetland #14). This outlot is approximately 26.7 acres with 5.4 acres of upland that is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for rural residential densities. e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? _Yes _X_No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Project magnitude data Total project acreage 1.09.04 acres Number of residential units: unattached 140 single-family attached 42 attached townhomes maximum units per building 5 units/building Commercial, industrial or institutional building area (gross floor space): total square feet N/A Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet): Office N/A Retail N/A Manufacturing N/A Other industrial N/A THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 3 r Warehouse N/A Institutional N/A Light industrial N/A Agricultural N/A Other commercial (specify) N/A Building height N/A If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearby buildings 8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure, Unit of government City of Medina Watershed District Permit MnDNR MN Pollution Control Agency MN Dept. of Health U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Federal Emergence Management Agency Metropolitan Council Hennepin County Type of application Preliminary Plat Zoning Map Amendment Comp Plan Amendment Wetland Alteration Permit Grading Permit Final Plat Building Permits Stormwater Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Sanitary Sewer Extension NPDES Stormwater Permit Water Supply Connection To Seal Private Wells Section 404 Clean Water Act Wetland Alteration Permit Letter of Map Revision Permit to Connect to Sewer Abandon of Septic Systems THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 4 Status Pending Pending Pending Pending To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted To be submitted 9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. This site has been primarily used for agricultural purposes, except for portions of the wetlands and the heavily wooded areas. Some of the wooded areas have been used for storage areas, and dirt bike trails. Currently, some of the open land is used for farming purposes. Based on aerial photos the farming of this land began prior to 1937. Since farming has been occurring on this site for the past 70 plus years we must assume the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers have been used on all the cropland. Residential developments of varying density and lot types have occurred on all sides of the project. Parks and athletic fields are located to the east and west of the property. The density of the proposed development would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. A Phase 1 Environment Site Assessment (ESA) was performed to determine if there are potential land use conflicts that involve environmental manners. — According to the Phase 1 ESA (Section 1.1 Findings) — • Two above ground fuel storage tanks and associated dispensers are currently present. • Stains on the concrete floor within the shop area Stains on the wood floors in the two sheds and the dirt floors of the Quonset and pole shed. • Noted farm equipment, tires, drums, containers, automobile parts, metal, tin, cables, wire, wood, plastic tanks, concrete blocks, bricks, lead acid batteries and other items are located in the onsite structures and throughout the site. • A floor drain is present in the former milk house, oil products are reportedly stored in this area. • A well is present on the site, not considered an environmental condition, also there is an on -site septic system for the southern house, there may be a system associated with the north house. (Section 1.3 Conclusions) -- Recognized environmental conditions - • Fuel AST (above ground storage tanks) at the property. • Stained wood and dirt floors in the out structures. • Drums and containers, equipment, tanks, lead acid batteries present • Former milk house drain (Section 5.0 Records) — The Phase 1 ESA made note of 4 registered leaking storage tanks within a half mile of the site. According to the MPCA there is no underground contamination associated with these 4 sites and the files pertaining to these tanks have been closed. One voluntary investigation and clean up program site and two brown field program sites were identified within one-half mile of the site. There were no underground petroleum pipelines in the vicinity of the property. THE ENCLAVE.. MEDINA, MN — EAW 5 (Section 63 Hazardous/Unidentified Substance & Petroleum Product Containers) — Containers Various sized containers of lubricants, petroleum products, vehicle maintenance products, fuel conditioner, antifreeze, and unidentifiable projects were observed within many of the buildings and in the wooded area east of the pole shed. We consider the presence of containers of lubricants, petroleum products, vehicle maintenance/service products, fuel conditioner, antifreeze, and unidentifiable products in the buildings and the lead acid batteries within the shed a suspect environmental condition. No herbicide/pesticide containers were noted at the site. However, normal crop production often includes the use of numerous chemicals. These chemicals can only be confirmed to be present or absent through soils and groundwater analysis. Storage Tanks We observed two above ground fuel storage tanks along the east side of the steel bins that are located south of the west end of the pole shed. One of the tanks is about 300 gallons in size and used to store diesel fuel. The other tank is about 1000 gallons in size and used to store gasoline. Both tanks are connected to fuel dispensing pumps. We observed four above ground tanks east of the pole shed. These tanks are 1000 to 2000 gallons in size and are used to store liquid fertilizer. At least two of the tanks contained product. The presence of the above ground fuel storage tanks and fertilizer tanks at the property is considered a suspect environmental condition. Various drums and containers (labeled and un-labeled) are present on the site. A Phase I Envirommental Site Assessment has been completed by American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET Project No. 03-03574) and the report is attached as Attachment 11. The site assessment was completed in conformance with the scope of limitations of ASTM Practice E1527-97. A Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment Report was prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation (Project BL -10-06413) on June 1, 2010. The report is attached as Attachment 11 — Phase 11. The report outlines many of the items listed above. In addition fourteen new soil borings and a test pit were completed as part of the Phase II. No groundwater was encountered during the Phase II investigation. Section E.2. Field Screening Results — Elevated PID (photo ionization detector) readings ranging from 10 ppm to 1,665 ppm (parts per million) were observed in 2.5 feet and 8.0 feet depths in ST -2. ST -2 was a deep soil boring located adjacent to the two fuel tanks (AST, above ground storage tanks) and related pump. No other elevated PID readings, above background concentrations, odors or staining were observed in the soil borings or test pit. Debris consisting of asphalt, concrete, brick and trace amounts of plastic arid wood were observed in the test pit completed. A small mound of ash, estimated at 5 to 10 cubic yards, was observed behind a horse trailer in the surface storage area. Soil sampling was not conducted as part of this Phase II, however, prior to redevelopment the ash should be sampled to determine the appropriate management of the material. Soil samples taken were tested and are summarized in Table 1 of the Phase II Report. THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 6 Section F. Summary and Conclusions - Results from the assessment indicate that: Topsoil was encountered to approximately 2.5 feet bgs, followed by alluvium to generally 7.5 feet bgs. The alluvium was underlain by glacial till to the termination depth of the soil borings. Groundwater was not encountered within 40 feet of the ground surface during the investigation. Based on the analytical testing results, soil contamination is associated with the area near the AST and associated pump and in the soil berm located northeast of the pole barn in the motocross area. Elevated concentrations of petroleum related VOCs, DRO, and/or GRO were detected in these areas. A clean soil sample [S'1'-2 (12.5')] was obtained below the impacts in the area of the ASTs and pump. A mound of ash was observed behind a brown horse trailer in the storage area. Based on the results of the Phase II ESA, petroleum impacted soil is present at the Site. According to Minnesota Statute 115.061, the property owners and/or responsible parties associated with this release may have a duty to notify the MPCA via the Minnesota Departtnent of Public Safety, Division of Emergency Management (DEM) Duty Officer. This will be conducted by the property owner or developer prior to ground disturbing activities. It is recommended that the ash mound be sampled prior to redevelopment to determine appropriate management options. In addition, prior to demolition, we recommend that oil stained floors in the garage and sheds be tested to identify proper disposal option for this material. It is also recommend that prior to redevelopment, the Site be enrolled in the MPCA Petroleum Brownfields Program to obtain applicable approvals regarding management, onsite-re-use and/or offsite disposal of impacted soil from the MPCA. To obtain approvals, a Response Action Plan and Construction Contingency Plan (RAP/CCP) will need to be prepared and approved by the MPCA for future redevelopment plans at the Site. The RAP/CCP will describe how soils at the Site will be screened during construction activities for the presence of contamination and outline the provisions for the proper management, onsite reuse and/or offsite disposal of contaminated soil, or other materials that might be encountered during the construction activities. The MPCA PBP typically allows onsite reuse of petroleum impacted soil that is generally free of debris and has a PID reading less than 100 ppm. Using these criteria, the impacts soil identified in the soil berm is not acceptable for onsite reuse because of the concrete and other debris mixed into the soil. In addition, the impacted soil near the ASTs is not acceptable for onsite reuse because PID readings greater than 100 ppm are present. The MPCA established recommendations for offsite use of till soil specify that in order to be acceptable for offsite re -use, fill soil should be free of debris and field indications of contamination, should not have contaminant concentrations greater than the Residential SRVs and SLVs, and if petroleum impacts are present, should not have detectable concentrations of DRO or GRO. Following the MPCA recommendations, the identified impacted soil from this parcel (soil benn and near the ASTs and associated pump) could not be re -used onsite or offsite. Therefore, excess contaminated soil, which was identified by the Phase II ESA, will need to be disposed of offsite at a permitted landfill. THE ENCLAVE- MEIMNA, MN — EAW 7 10. Cover types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Types 1-8 wetlands Wooded/forest Brush/Grassland Cropland Before After Before (31.5) (32.4) Lawn/landscaping (2.5) (22.3) (11.2) Impervious surfaces (2.2) (3.5) (1.2) Other (Stormwater basins) None (47.0) (4.4) Open Space (Park) None TOTAL (109.0) If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why: N/A After (34.9) (22.1) (2.8) None (109.0) 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. Since the site has mainly been used for agricultural proposes, except for the existing wetlands and wooded areas, the wildlife consists mainly of typical hardwood forest mammals, birds and wetland fauna populations as well as small mammals typically found in agricultural areas. No large open water areas (lakes or ponds) are located on this site or in the near vicinity so there are no fish within the project. The site includes 31.5 acres of wetland and 22.3 acres of wooded upland and after the project is completed will have approximately 32.4 acres of wetland, 2.8 acres of ponds and 11.2 acres of wooded upland. Some temporary relocation of the existing wildlife can be expected during the construction of this site. Once the site and homes have been established the wildlife typical to wooded and wetland areas may return to the site or may be permanently displaced. The wooded upland area of the site will be reduced by the proposed development; however, the planting of more diverse native tree species, together with landscaping, will help recreate an urban forest environment. b. Are any state -listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? xYes _No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: ERDB 20100638 . Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts According the DNR Report ERDB 20100638, the Blandings Turtle may be present on this site. In an effort to minimize or avoid impacts to the Blandings Turtle, the developer plans to do the following, per the recommended methods from the DNR: • Install surmountable curb in all the single-family areas of the site to allow the turtles to cross the roads. ♦ Provide a flyer on Blandings Turtle to the residents of this development. a A note shall be placed on the utility plans instructing the contractors to inspect utility trenches prior to backfilling. ♦ Graded areas shall be vegetated with native grasses and forbs. ♦ Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas shall be done mechanically instead of with chemicals. THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 8 " Buffers will be provided around the wetlands. " Silt fencing will be installed around wetlands to keep turtles out of the constriction areas and will be removed after the completion of the construction and vegetation establishment. Silt fence will be installed as part of the development. The silt fence will be installed around all wetlands prior to construction activities and will be removed after the vegetation has been established. The development will require the installation of biodegradable erosion control blankets to minimize the impacts to the small animals of this area. 12. Physical impacts on water resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration  dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment  of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland% stream or drainage ditch? _X_Yes No If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI: . Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. There are 14 wetland basins that exist within the property that total 32.36 acres. The wetlands within the project site are subject to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit, Wetland Conservation Act and Section 828.43 (Wetland Conservation) of the City Code. There are no DNR protected water waterbodies located within the property. The Wetland Conservation section of the City Code requires upland buffers around all wetlands based on the Wetland Management Classification as documented in the 2007 Functional Assessment Report. The table below provides a summary of the wetlands that exist on -site and their associated Wetland Management Classification, required upland buffer width, acres and proposed fill acres. Wetland ID Develop ment Plan Wetland ID City Inventory Cowardin Classification (field verified) City Wetland Management Classification City Ordinance Buffer Width Require- ment Wetland Size (Approx. acres) Proposed Fill (acres) 1 12-024 PEMA Manage 2 25 0.21 0 2 12-036 PEM1A Manage 1 30 0.60 0.03 3 12-030 PEMB Manage 1 30 1.00 0 4 12-029 PEMCd Manage 2 25 2.02 2.02 5 Not Inventoried PFO I A To be classified To be determined 0.05 0 6 13-012 PF01 A To be classified To be determined 0.13 0 7 13-012 PFO 1 A To be classified To be determined 0.28 0 8 13-013 PFOIA Preserve 35 0.23 0 THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN  EAW 9 9 13-012 PFO1A Preserve 35 0.58 0 10 PFO1A Manage 1 30 0.19 0 11 13-012 PEMC, PFO1A Preserve 35 3.60 0 12 Not PEMB Manage 2 25 0.54 0 Inventoried 13 13-12 PEMCd Preserve 35 0.12 0 14 13-012 PEMC Preserve 35 22.78 0 Given the site layout, number of wetlands, and minimum unit requirements, some wetland impact may be necessary. The original plan proposed considerably more wetland impact. However, by adding a number of townhomes and reducing the number of buildable single-family lots the wetland impacts were reduced. The applicant for the development proposes to impact 89,332 ft2 (2.05 acres) of Type 1/2, Fresh Wet Meadow wetland, dominated by reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). Based on Feedback at a Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel (WCA TEP) meeting held on June 8, 2010 it is anticipated the wetland impact will be further reduced as part of the permitting process. Under the. current proposal the applicant is responsible for 178,664 ft2 (4.10 acres) of wetland mitigation at a 2:1 ratio. To satisfy the Wetland Conservation Act requirements 2.15 acres of wetland replacement are proposed on -site and the remaining 1.95 acres of mitigation will come from purchase of wetland bank credits from within Medina. Wetlands will be created on -site by expanding existing wetland by excavation into adjacent upland areas. Based on the initial WCA TEP meeting feedback, restoration opportunities will be further explored for wetlands that are partially drained. 13. Water use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? X_Yes _No If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain methodology used to determine. During the construction process some dewatering will be required to install the public utility system. It is not anticipated that the project will require a Minnesota DNR Water Appropriations Permit to conduct the construction dewatering. If it is determined the dewatering will exceed the design threshold of 10,000 gallons / day or 1,000,000 gallons / year, the developer or contractor will apply for the necessary construction permits. The existing farmstead well will be abandoned when development occurs in that area of the site. The project will connect to a municipal water supply, the City of Medina (PWS# 1270023). Each home will have an individual 1" water service off the public watermain line. The watermain will be looped throughout the project. The estimated water usage would be 182 sf x 2.7 people per unit 492 people x 85 gallons per person per day = 41,820 gallons per day. THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 10 " C Homes within the development are not allowed to use city water for irrigation. The proposed irrigation system will utilize storm water ponds as its primary water source. The storm water ponds will be supplemented by agricultural wells on an as -needed basis, The irrigation water usage information is detailed below. Single -Family = 139 units Average Zone Flow = 15 gpm Average System Runtime = 2.5 hrs (ave 6 zones at 25 minutes per zone) Flow for one Single -Family Unit pre cycle = 15 gprn x 60 minutes x 2.5 hr = 2,250 gal Average 3 cycles per week = 3 x 2,250 gal = 6,750 gallons per week Average 4 weeks per month = 4 x 6,750 = 27,000 gallons per month Total Single Family Flow per Month = 139 x 27,000 = 3,753,000 gallons per month Assume 5 wells at 420 gpm at 75 to 80 psi (w/vfd pumps and a pressure tank) Townhome Site  9 buildings Assume 3 zones per building= 27 zones Average Zone Flow = 40 gpm Average Zone Runtime = 13.5 hrs (30 minutes per zone) Flow for the month ( 3 cycles per week 4 weeks per month) = 27 zones x 30 minutes/zone x 40 gprn x 3 x 4 = 388,800 gallons per month Total Estimated Irrigation Flow per Month = 3,753,000 + 388,800 = 4,141,800 gallons for the entire development. 14. Water -related land use management district. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100 -year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? _X_Yes _ No If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. There is no shoreland zoning or state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use on the property. MFRA (engineering and surveying company) has recently completed a Letter of Map Amendment for the property (attachment 9 of the EAW). The report establishes a 100 year flood plain elevation of 1000.3 for the large wetland complex on the south end of the property. Portions of Lots 13 through 17, Block 9 in the Third Phase encroach into the 100 year flood plain. We plan to prepare Certified Letters of Map Revisions Fill (CLOMR_F) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR-F) as part of the third phase of The Enclave. 15. Water surface use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? Yes X No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN  EAW 11 16. Erosion and sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres 60; cubic yards 150,000. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. As can be seen from the existing condition plan, the site is relatively flat, ranging in elevation above sea level from 995 feet in the wetland area on the south end of the site to a high point of the site of 1014 feet, on the north end of the site. The project site is susceptible to erosion due to the soil composition. The topsoil averages 1 iz feet and is a lean clay and/or a sandy lean clay with a lean clay and sandy lean clay underneath. Due to the larger scale of this project care will be taken to ensure erosion and sediment control measures are maintained during the entire construction process. The developer has submitted a Preliminary Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan and will be working with the City of Medina to design a final grading, drainage and erosion control plan that incorporates (BMP's) Best Management Practices (i.e. Silt fence, Sediment basins, timely re -vegetation, and other erosion control measures) for protecting water quality in urban areas. The project developer will prepare a Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and apply for and obtain an NPDES permit prior to beginning any site grading work. All appropriate BMP's will be installed in the open areas prior to any grading operations. The silt fence in the treed areas will be installed once the trees are removed and there is access to this area of the site. The site grading will then commence with the construction of the stormwater ponds and the sediment basins. Within 72 hours of the completion of site grading or as noted on the final construction plans the restoration work will begin. 17. Water quality: surface water runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any stormwater pollution prevention plans. Storm water runoff quality and quantity will be designed to meet the requirements for the City of Medina and the Elm Creek Watershed District. This requires quantity control to existing peak rates of discharge for the 1-, 2-, 10-, and 100 -year storm events. It also requires NURP ponding, a 20% reduction in Total Phosphorus loading over existing conditions, and an Extended Detention Storage Time to meet quality specifications. Soil Classification for on -site soil is primarily Type -D. This yields a very low infiltration rate. In order to meet quantity and quality requirements, storm water ponds have been designed to outlet in series, so water landing near the middle of the site will flow through 3 storm water ponds and a wetland prior to leaving the site. Since infiltration rates are low, a filtration shelf will be constructed in most of the ponds to slowly draw the pond down below the outlet elevation of the outlet structure. The filtration shelves will primarily he constructed using either sand or compost media and a draintile outlet. Outlet structures with submerged inlets will prevent any floatables from leaving the site. Notched weir walls within the outlet structures will be used for rate control when necessary. Other infiltration/filtration areas will be constructed throughout the site to provide treatment and promote infiltration, prior to runoff leaving the site. Other on -site stone water Best Management Practices (BMPs) include but are not limited to: narrower streets and sidewalk on one side of the street to reduce impervious surface, bio-rolls as sediment control along swales, silt fence as down -gradient perimeter control, rock entrance berm to prevent off -site vehicle tracking, inlet protection devices to prevent sediment from entering the storm sewer system, wood -fiber THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 12 , itt 44 4 blanket to prevent erosion along slopes, proper restoration in accordance with the MPCA, phosphorus - free fertilizer, and a seed mix as directed by the City to promote vegetation. A complete list of BMPs will be described in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. Proposed drainage routes are designed to mimic existing drainage routes. Runoff is discharged either east or west from the site. The vast majority of runoff discharges to the west through a series of wetlands, ditches and culverts that lead to Elm Creek. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has Elm Creek listed as an impaired water. Because the site's discharge point is within one mile of Elm Creek. additional Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activity. Necessary BMPs will be used on site to meet all MPCA requirements to ensure all storm water runoff is clean. Wetland buffers and setbacks will also be provided in accordance with the City of Medina's wetland ordinance. 18. Water quality: wastewaters a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. The estimated sanitary sewer flow from this proposed residential development is 260 gallons per day per unit, which equals 182 single-family x 260 gal/day/unit = 47,320 gallons per day. No on -site treatment is proposed. b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on - site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. As stated above, no on -site treatment is proposed. c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. There will be no pre-treatment of the waste water; it will be conveyed by a gravity sanitary sewer system to the Elm Creek Interceptor, then to the Metro Wastewater Treatment Plant. d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Not applicable. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions a. Approximate depth (in feet) to — to ground water: 4 feet (perched) minimum 15 feet average to bedrock: 150 feet minimum 200 feet average Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW I3 " map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. Geological site hazards, sinkholes, or other conditions are not known to exist on this property. c. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. The main soil types evident on the site are Cordova Loam (39%). Houghton and Muskeg() soils (19.4%), Hamel-Glencoe(10.5%) and Glencoe Loam(10.0%). These soils belong to the Hydric Soils Group D. The Type D soils have a very slow infiltration rate and high runoff potential. They are typically clay. These soils can act as a barrier so that contaminants do not reach the groundwater.Potential for surface water runoff contamination will be addressed in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) 20. Solid wastes, hazardous wastes, storage tanks a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. The proposed project is a residential subdivision and should only generate municipal solid wastes and household hazardous wastes. The Seven -County Waste Coordinating Board approximates municipal solid waste generation at approximately 1.8 pound per person per day. Therefore the fully developed project would result in roughly 182 units x 3 people per unit x 1.8 lbs/person = 982.8 lbs/day = 179.4 tons per year. The City of Medina participates in recycling programs and encourages waste reduction efforts in the community. Residents and businesses contract individually for recycling and solid waste management services. The details of the City of Medina's recycling plan can be found at http://www.ci.medina.mn.us/recycle/recycle:htm. The proposed project will not create any impacts on the current system. b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. Only the generation of household hazardous materials should result from the proposed development. The City of Medina participates in countywide programs regarding household hazardous waste management and education. c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. N/A THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN  EAW 14 21. Traffic. Parking spaces added Parking is proposed on one side of the public streets and 15 additional parking stalls are proposed near the attached townhome sites. Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) 0 Estimated total average daily traffic generated 1584 trips. Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence 29 inbound trips and 94 outbound trips (a.m. hours); 104 inbound trips and 59 outbound trips (p.m. hours). Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. The proposed development THE ENCLAVE will have 140 single-family detached and 42 townhome dwelling units. The number of trips generated by these homes can be estimated using "Trip Generation", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 8th Addition. Using the trip rates for single-family residential development, the estimated traffic volumes for THE ENCLAVE are provided above. The Medina Map Exhibit depicts the roadways in the vicinity of the site. The proposed roads within the development are shown on the Preliminary Site Plan Exhibit. The increased traffic volumes that will be generated from this site have been incorporated into the overall City of Medina Transportation Plan. The City of Medina is considering improvements to Hunter Drive which serves as the project's access road. Detailed information on the traffic issues can be found in the attached Traffic Impact Study prepared by Spack Consulting. 22. Vehicle -related air emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. The proposed project will generate an increase in carbon monoxide levels associated with a typical increase in passenger vehicle trips. The project does not require an indirect source permit. No baseline air quality monitoring or modeling is proposed and no measures to mitigate for the increase in vehicle related emissions are being considered. 23. Stationary source air emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone -depleting chemicals (chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. The proposed residential subdivision will not create any stationary air source emissions. 24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? _X_Yes No If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 15 Dust and noise will be generated during the construction process on the site. The contractors will he required to control dust by using watering trucks. The contractors will work only during the allowable working hours established by the City of Medina. The nearest receptors of the dust and noise will be.the scattered residents on the adjacent residential parcels to the north, east, and west of the proposed project. The residential house construction is not anticipated to cause any noticeable noise or dust impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. 25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? _Yes _X_No Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? _Yes _X_No Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? _X_Yes _No Scenic views and vistas? _Yes _X_No Other unique resources? _Yes _X_No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project -related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) database was quarried for the subject property and no resources were identified. Hamel Legion Park is adjacent to this property and is almost 40 acres in size. It is the largest park in the City's system and is located south of Uptown Hamel on the east boundary of the City. Hamel Legion Park continues to be developed. Hamel Legion Park has several baseball fields, softball fields, tennis courts, soccer fields and other recreational facilities. Access to this park will be provided by a bituminous trail, Hamel Lions Park is 6.8 acres in size and is on the west side of Hamel Road. It has a small ball diamond, a tennis court, and a basketball court. Hunter Drive provides a buffer from the development, while still providing access to the park. 26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? _Yes _X_No If yes, explain. 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? _X_Yes No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The project site is located inside the City limits of Medina. The proposed residential development is generally consistent with the City of Medina's Comprehensive Plan. Re -zoning is required because the current zoning of PUD2 does not match the recently adopted comprehensive plan. The proposed development is requesting re -zoning to R3, R2, & RI to meet the density goals of the City and provide transitional zoning of the property. The proposed residential uses would be consistent with this proposed zoning. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required due to a small expansion of the MUSA (metropolitan urban service area). A proposed MUSA line adjustment would extend the line south to add 6.5 net acres to include the proposed homes just north of the wetland complex and to reguide this 6.5 acre portion to Low Density Residential from Rural Residential. The proposed RI zoning within this 6.5 THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAU 16 �% acres of the development will then be consistent with the low density land use guidance. This 6.5 acre MUSA line adjustment extends an area planned for urban services within the 2001-2010 time periods. In return for adding the 6.5 net acres into the MUSA and reguiding to Low Density Residential, the developer is proposing to protect 6.5 net acres of wooded and wetland area along the eastern edge of the site. This land is currently guided as Low Density and will be reguided to Public thus an equal trade of net buildable land and related units will be removed from the MUSA as is being included with this expansion. Thus, due to this swap in land, no buildable area is being added to the MUSA and a significant number of trees and wetlands are being protected and preserved in their natural state. The proposed residential use is compatible with the future land use described in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development is compatible with the City of Medina's overall sewer and water plans. The proposed project will also be consistent with the City's goals for storm water management. Storm water runoff from the development will be routed through a series of basins prior to discharging to the Wetlands and then to Elm Creek. The stormwater basins will be designed to meet the NURP standards with outlet structures limiting the developed runoff rate to below the existing rate of runoff. The quality of storm water runoff from the site after development is not anticipated to have a negative impact on Elm Creek. 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? X Yes _No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) The reconstruction of Hunter Drive from Hamel Road to Medina Road will be triggered by this project. The reconstructed road will generally have the same alignment and width as the existing roadway. The internal residential roads will be constructed as a part of this project to provide access to and from the development and are addressed as part of the project within this EAW. City sewer and water facilities will he extended south from Hamel Road along Hunter Drive. A 12 - inch watermain will replace and extend an existing 8 -inch main along the west side of Hunter Drive. Deeper 8 -inch sanitary sewer will replace and extend the existing 8 -inch line along the east side of Hunter Drive. Fire department and police service will be required for the development area. This development alone is not expected to significantly tax the existing systems. A development of this type will bring more children into the City who will attend schools. This development is expected to have approximately 200 to 300 children of various ages after all 182 units are constructed. The property is located in the Wayzata School District #284. The existing school systems should be able to accommodate this increase. Potential impacts from the irrigation wells on the city's adjacent well field have been examined. Worst -case groundwater modeling shows no significant impacts to the current or future wells located in Hamel Legion Park. The modeling scenario is based on no usage of stormwater for irrigation and extended city and irrigation well run times. 29. Cumulative impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410,1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN  EAW 17 4 cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form). Cumulative impacts of this project include the reconstruction of Hunter Drive within the same general alignment and width. Improvements will also be made to water and sewer utility services to support new development. A relatively small area will be added to the MUSA boundary, however, the City recently completed a Comprehensive Plan that addresses the cumulative impacts of development on a city wide basis. The addition of MUSA land was reviewed and determined not to cause impacts beyond what was planned in the Comprehensive plan. An equal amount of the extended MUSA area (6.5 acres) is being reguided to Public thus there is no additional net acreage of development that will occur beyond what was planned for in the Comprehensive Plan and utility planning. There are no other future known projects that may interact with this proposed project to cause cumulative impacts. As the adjoining undeveloped parcels develop there will be connections to the trunk utilities and the proposed public streets. This development will install the utilities and provide connection points for the existing neighborhoods and the undeveloped parcels. 30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. Environmental impacts, other than those previously addressed in this EAW, are not anticipated. 31. Summary of issues. Do not complete this section if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EAW List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. This residential development project (THE ENCLAVE) is proposing an amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan for the City of Medina. The request by the private developer is to extend the MUSA line south to add 6.5 acres of upland to the proposed R-1 zoning area, in conjunction with the preliminary plat and re -zoning application. In return for adding the proposed 6.5 acres of upland into the MUSA, the developer is proposing to protect 6.5 net acres of wooded and wetland area (currently within the MUSA and guided Low Density) along the eastern edge of the proposed development. This land will be reguided Public. Because of this swap, no buildable acreage is proposed to be added to what was guided and designated for sewered residential development in the Comprehensive Plan . The Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments recognized the environmental conditions of the property, including the fuel AST, the stains on the wood and concrete floors and the dirt floor of the Quonset and pole sheds, the storage of farm equipment, tires, drums, containers and other items currently present on the site, and soil contamination near the AST and associated pumps and the mound of ash on the site. Due to the results of the Phase II and findings of petroleum impacted soil on the site mitigation efforts will be required to be conducted prior to any ground disturbing activities. This will include the developer or other responsible party to address the situation in accordance with MPCA rules. This includes working with the MPCA to remove impacted soil. This will require that the site be enrolled in the MPCA Petroleum Brownfields Program to obtain applicable approval. A Response Action Plan (RAP) and Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) will need to be prepared and approved by the MPCA prior to any activities. If additional contamination (beyond what is identified in the Phase II) is found it shall be reported to the State Duty Officer and follow-up work must be THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 18 coordinated with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Stormwater rates, quality, and volume will be managed to the City of Medina and Elm Creek Watershed standards. As a large portion of the site contains soils with very low infiltration rates, most ponds will be provided with a biofiltration bench to slowly draw down and treat the stormwater. The applicant for the development proposes to impact 89,332 ft' (2.05 acres) of Type 1/2, Fresh Wet Meadow wetland, dominated by reed canary grass (Phalaris arenulinacea). Based on Feedback at aWetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel (WCA TEP) meeting held on June 8, 2010 it is anticipated the wetland impact will be further reduced as part of the permitting process. RGU CERTIFICATION. The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: • The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. • The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively. • Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature thhevs,✓ Date 4 -1? -?6/0 Chad M. Adams Title City Administrator Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EAW Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155, 651-296-8253. www.mnplan.state.mn.us THE ENCLAVE- MEDINA, MN — EAW 19 Colonial Manor Garace 2etail Bike x1� 80 1013.1 1012.7 x -3 STA: 1+65.31 1011.82 1011.85 x 101 �fl x101. GENERAL NOTES: MULCH & MAI EDGER( JEFFERSON ROC. OLY EDGER (TYP. ) PRIVACY FENCE 8Y OTHERS (TYP.) NOTE: ALIGN EDG::R W/ED GE OF C ONC. PATI O (TYP .) M ADISO N (PLANT LIST - JEFFERSON END I OVFRSTORY TREES: UNIT O NLY r an C om mon None a s sae Con 0.1n, 11tl Gran Tike x Mwecen' Glanlee n. 2. 5 u1 fit. OR M4 tP epe , Nano Pe er x heemmi'My md 2. 5 ca l. BB O RNAM ENTAL TREES: _- _ --- ReyCity. .me .< xl•nhx Nam. sae Cont. 1 Cnbeonb, Hemel Go ld .15 Herpoz em 1.5 u1. BB OR SC 1 Crebtpoie, Spring Snow M Mus 'Spring two. AP cal. BB 'CONIFER TREES: Y atr'Co mmon u. me s n.ntiti< xa.. sz e Cont. iM CS1 Spruce C olorado Pc ea pt�ere BB :DECIDUOUS S HRUBS: r r. 4 m< S clera , Ms. Sae Cont. SN Y renebark Summer Wo e Phwccu904 ..pee, le ad ' w5 pm NS ♦ Soiree Neon Been l SpveteYp. ri4. ca w ean Finn a5 pal INS 7 Soiree Mingo Carpel SPYneitpoieca'Mpk Carper eB pal EVERGREEN SHRUBS: arm. Sue Cont. KAr 10 54440e , p Mee cc0NWla'Hce04(* BB GC 1 N bmde, Teehrly G abe 005055 Twee ccNXWla T ech, Gcbe' N1 pd TY t Ye w Teuto n SpreMYq Tara mete T win' NS pa l PERENNIA L FLOWERS: O eY'f non Name 1<wme Name Cont. SOY OPAP, SN k De Oro Hen ercale*IMP ono M Dal H J H oek, Frances N Nvne H osts 'emcee Mimi 4Y poi AC 4 Cdanbve, A.m. eye ,. iquleyla Tt(n4 a1 pot ET 4C 0144 w it, B4 S1YTw4yrt Ecfvlces x BIB Sky T weghr 41 pal MA DISON ROCK MULCH& POLY EDGER (TYP.) MADISON RS K MULCH& PLANT LIST - MADISON INTERIOR UNIT ONLY ORNAM ENTAL TREES: ea mmm x.m e . erns... Name Siz e Cont. .11. . 1Le., Sao Tre e CP SYTgSOleBo401.5'u1. la BB JS 1 ServkeberrY,Au hmn BMWK B Mn elenchlor x9rerkAbe'fut umn Brillianc e' 5'51 BB DECIDUOUS SHRUBS: IY weer. me Sae C ont. 405 45090, Neo nFleshmm Speen japonica 'Neon Flash' 00 pot i EVERGREEN SHRUBS. - - - r silo Co mm on xane Sa c Cont. 1 Jung.,,, See Cr en Jnipe rue 0Nrlene. 'Bee Greene /5 pat :)5 1 Spru ce, D warf Gobs Blue Spruce Pk e6 pu g en s 'Glan cy Onto.' a5 p at I' ERENNI _ _. ... . . . . .. AL FLO WERS: Q ty. Comm on Noma rze sa1 Cont. Heil 4 Hoek, From Floats 'Fran ces Wigan * IN p ot SP 5 Sedan , Purple Emperor Sedu m Puple Empe ror. 45 p at JEFFERSON ROCK MULCH & POLY EDGER (T YP.) t. Landsca pe Co ntractor Mm wit the sae pri or to s ubmitti ng bid to b ec ome f amili ar with sit e co nditi on.. 2. It is Me remen seveity of 110 cp.... to &dan gly or undergrou nd cod es, con duit s. wir es, etc. an Me 0 No plov Ong rat . ..t olled a nte p q a nd c onstmcto n has been completed in 4,0 ,4 0te area. s� a.n ., t . v art Ion. m. name« pant. Mo 'non t . a a+ •al raw. w.<.d.n<.. ""4. 5. All aim . shall he of spec.a n [ polity Pl an. M oll ha ve norm al, well -a .... 19911. e astern, a vigormrs ws root eget., May shall be sound . s pla nts fr. from defects. 0i 5pn.� 0, plant y. re , ,.... .s« eggs, wars, and di inns of nf est ati on5 ud part s sh all be n ursery gr ow n. 64 ta Pr oPertr from Wont ., op erutI ons ot no cost to owner wy t t m a444 O ng ... n a .t oQA uwq t .ma404 tar 0 504 004 or 4, atw mmtn s Tana q srmata n. n. 0lI P r .dq« Moll be cmra a nts .0q q or Iw o 404117 ..804,,I/,, .,d pl onting aroma., re3a.s o (linkman or an 0' 0 40 err pmt q 0t (t- -I) ace. ohm , m . copra v a 10 12/1 Yard rmo ad ana'rt5/4. P°P« mmata< wrnd tar t t ""°- 14. 04 amt location,, species. qu antities and exec subject to 01..054.44.., w4. ond o vaiM1ity . I 4 14.4514 .Hier P M w0 *4uree of Ow nw a SWJPP (Storm w at er PdlWion P rrventxn mJ. 18. Ali shrubs to be Instolled milli/roa n distance of 24' Ir ony th e forn dotio n of coy b uiding . MmpaniliSk 1141lot ':J 1410 vest SI.taP«.9r 45055 R.nMaroa prem bnneer*wsmp.bm Maaurwrar.q.w .. Dem 4/13,07 Dy er s By VjR Re rbi ons 090.1 Hanes PrOje dLouti al 9.1 Tid e COLONIAL ROW HOME PLA NTING PLAN g rale 1'-0 " L1 PLANT HEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC. Katharine D. Widin, Ph.D. Plant Pathologist, Forestry Consultant 13457 6th St. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 651-436-8811 To: Terry Pernsteiner Pernsteiner & Associates 11022 Tanglewood Lane Ndrth Maple Grove, MN 55316 Carole Toohey Land Dev. Mgr., Lennar 935 East Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 4/7/10 Re:Tree Inventory - Holasek Property - 3212 Hunter Dr., Hamel In the summer of 2007, I completed an inventory of the trees on a parcel in the Medina area owned by the Holasek family. The inventory consisted of determining identity, size (trunk diameter in inches) and condition of approximately 1585 trees on this property. The majority of the woodland could be considered a maple -basswood type with the tree species on the site consisting of: ash, boxelder, elm, sugar maple, silver maple, oak (bur, red and pin), walnut, butternut, basswood, aspen, cottonwood, hickory, black cherry, ironwood and, in some wetter sites, willow. In the farmstead area there are also: white, Norway and Colorado spruce, white cedar, red cedar, red pine, and mulberry. For the most part, the trees on the site were in fair condition in 2007. The woodland was somewhat degraded with European buckthorn and some other invasive plants in the understory. In some areas there was good regeneration of overstory trees, particularly sugar maple. Many of the largest trees on the site (silver maple, sugar maple, basswood and red or pin oak), however, were in very poor condition, with extensive internal decay, defects, and storm damage (broken branches and tops). In most areas, I would conclude that this is a woodland of only moderate quality in terms of native overstory trees, native shrub understory, and ground layer plants. There are large areas of the site populated by elms, many of which are dying of Dutch elm disease. There was little evidence of oak wilt disease on the site and no currently active infection centers were noted in 2007. Approximately 290 (18 %) of the trees on the site are ash, which will be susceptible to the emerald ash borer, an invasive insect which kills ash trees and was found in St. Paul in 2009. At this point, I do not think the condition ratings of the trees will need to be updated. There will probably be a few more dead trees due to poor condition and Dutch elm disease, but most of these would be trees which were in poor condition in 2007 or in the same vicinity as trees identified as having Dutch elm disease at that time. Please contact me if you have any other questions regarding the condition of trees on this parcel or the relative quality of the woodland. l ATTACHMENT 10 - Public Comment Received O M P A N Y July 8, 2010 RE: The Enclave Project Dear Members of the Medina City Council and Planning Commission, I am writing this letter on behalf of my family regarding the proposed Lennar project, known as The Enclave, and the potential impact of a proposed fixture northern "through -road" on the 5 -acre parcel to the north, which is owned by my family. One potential option (which my family opposes for the reasons to be discussed) for the Lennar project is for a cul de sac to be stubbed to the north for future connection to my parcel. When our parcel is developed, that future public road would extend from the Lennar cul de sac through our parcel to Hunter Drive. The primary purpose of this future road is to provide traffic flow for the approximately 180 -unit development to Hunter Drive. The following summarizes our position regarding the impact of this option on our property. I sincerely appreciate the fact that 1 know that you will consider these arguments carefully and hopefully you will support them in your decision. We strongly oppose any plan for a future "through -road" from the Enclave project to Hunter Drive through our property. Our parcel is very small; only about 2.5 buildable acres, as nearly half of the site consists of wetlands. It is guided for mid -density residential, which can be challenging on such a small parcel of buildable land. Despite this, we have laid out a basic concept plan that shows how the parcel can accommodate up to 9 single-family lots, which is sufficient to meet the projected mid -density zoning requirement. Requiring a through -road would place a significant burden on the parcel making density conformance significantly more challenging, if not impossible. We also believe that this road extension option places a large and inequitable burden on our property for which there is no benefit to us or Lennar and very little benefit, if any, to the City. It is clear that once we develop our parcel, this access point will become the PRIMARY entrance to the Enclave project, as traffic will naturally flow north to access Highway 55. We do not believe it is fair to ask us, as a family which owns the property, to bear the heavy burden of another (substantially larger) project's traffic flow. 1 understand the City's overall desire to eliminate cul de sacs. We believe in this instance, the small benefit to the City is dramatically outweighed by the significant impact you are asking us (and the neighbors who live directly across the street from such an access) to bear. In addition to the substantial impact of the traffic, the City would be tying the future opportunity of our property to the success or failure of the Lennar project; a significant potential impact over which we have no influence or control. My family's property sitting at the primary entrance and exit to the Lennar project obviously makes it impossible to differentiate our project from theirs. In essence you are inadvertently allowing them to control our property without compensation. Clearly no other buyer would have interest. Therefore, we ask you to support the alternative that we believe is a good, yet fair, solution for all parties. In this proposed option, Lennar would build, as part of their Phase 1, a public road accessing Hunter Drive directly adjacent to our property. This public road will serve as their northernmost access point and will also allow access to/from our property at some point in the future. 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 • Wayzata, MN 55391 • (952) 767 7500 NOLAN C O M P A N Y There are several reasons why this proposed solution is a better alternative: a. Indefinite cul de sac. If the through -road is required on the Nolan property- an indefinite cul de sac will be created from the Lennar project in their Phase 1 (as the Nolan property has no timeline for being developed). So the very scenario you would be attempting to avoid will actually be created on a larger scale. b. Eliminates 1 access point from Hunter: With the through -road option there are 3 proposed access points onto Hunter Drive (2 from the Enclave project, I proposed through the Nolan parcel). A realigned road without access through the Nolan property, will eliminate 1 unnecessary access point onto Hunter. c. Limit impact on existing residents: The optional access point through the Nolan parcel will have a significant direct and negative impact on 3 existing single-family homes across Hunter Drive from the proposed through -road. The alternative locates the access point across from an existing wetland eliminating any potential negative impacts on current residents. d. Other cul de sacs: The City has consistently allowed other cul de sacs throughout its history with far less compelling reasons. In fact the current Lennar plan (although admittedly not approved) shows an identical cul de sac within the project. e. Road re -alignment: There is no compelling reason for the exit to be aligned across from Elm Creek Drive. The majority of the traffic exiting this neighborhood will do so through the north exit. Additionally, the City recently approved a similar alignment of an intersection with less compelling reasons. f. Certainty: By requiring the north exit within the Lennar plan the City has certainty regarding the local circulation rather than the uncertainty of some unknown project for our property at some unknown point in the fixture that would then provide access. g• Concept Plan for 5 -acre parcel: By reviewing the Enclave's impact on my family's property and the through -road option, we have done some preliminary planning for our parcel. This preferred solution shows a cohesive plan for the area, without tying my family's parcel so directly to a project that we am not party to. This way my family can proceed in the future without relying on the success or timing of a project that we cannot control. Thank you for considering my family's concerns and we hope that you support the no future through -road alternative for the reasons stated above. Sinc sD.I`oan, r. On Behalf of Nolan Brothers, In Nolan Company 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 Wayzata, MN 55391 Office: 952.767.7500 315 Manitoba Avenue, Suite 300 • Wayzata, MN 55391 • (952) 767 7500 RE VISE PL AN TO MOORPORATE 1NEE1t R OS€NT OFMERNW 10 NR11 05 .12.10 REVISE L OT SIB NM Daum REVISE PER CT YOSIMENIS NRN 050410 /�_�{�, LENNARJfTU l/%' MNV LENNAR CORPORATION Land Development Manager.l,�`� FUT./ 935 East Wayzata Bwlevard Carole Toohey:S52-249-3012 - - - Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 �!/ .. PL/V\I y �EEFs I s, MEDINA W SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. ' ., m V�eHs 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952)478.6000 w 0e P�4j toa`t It \ `�� �! 'r 1-`k �t 54iwIlk AE! r ri SI MS es III ii — 2r k4 rr Ey •I :.� • E! CIF 1ti "9 � 11 A6 •r - - r: 01•11=111•11111II 11 t Li 11 lll.��1 I/ '• ue1�'7 lit ' HI rr ': art ►R1 l f 1� ' •a • • . II '"�' ii pie fri • f t• v r * Medium Density Residential (3.5.6.99 U/A) a ❑ Gross 28.89 ac Conservation Area 0.11 ac _ Wetland 2.98 ac �'��.—�: �'y(s} Wetland Buffer 1.78 ac .4L Net 24.02 ac ��y I . o .� fi ` n i 't ' ''W� 1�- iJ+ % � ♦♦ Guided: 84-168 Units ' `�'^' `��r�.i+,,�(��. ♦ ♦ Proposed: 88 Units '� j I Net Density: 88 Units/24.02 ac = 3.68 U/A • . i .. .... — .." eill.,„,� 1( / Low Density Residential (2.0-3.49 U/A) j . — —. ��-* t I_ '�_,_ �(( i 1 , ♦ % i Gross 45.35 ac ` / � 7 Y 1 ♦ Conservation (uplene) 8.30 ac .\ i �, Wetland 5.89 ac i Wetland Buffer 2.32 ac p — ♦\........„.„---r I Wetland Mitigation 1.68 ac -Eft Net �U1 � --1— ' 1 -- - \ � --- -/ice" 1+ 1 ill — Lila ItD 29.18 ac Guided 58-102 Units Proposed: 87 Units — Net Density: 87 UnILR/29.18 ac = 2.98 U/A 1 t1 ------ I 1 ; 1 —fir Overall: . -_ „< / 1 Guided: 142-270 Units / - Proposed: 175 Units E 4 -- 7 � erL 1 Iar II I I M (/ ; 11 r G� - ��... t 1 qrc 111 �GI � \ 0 \ ---- r, 1.2,______._. ) 1._______ _.... I -1 / r. .. 1 3 , Ir , , 1 /-.- 1 (I �I; ta ,- -. iv r "r I / I NORTH 1" = 1201 22)64 PIEPAREPLAR D N1111;,)ELO F ANDARESS NM OS]S10 REVISE LOTLIES AsmAREAS N1S1 000410 REVISE PMTS a CRYW*1p(a NM 0-15-10 REVISE PUN NRN WYlatpetsZ4t1804 TIE ENQAVE-PREaIMMAFPnets NE0rr INID_USE_R.NI.WO Zone -R2 Gross 53. 23 ac Wetland 6.29 ac Wet. Buffe r 3.19 ac Wetland Mitigation 1.68 ac Ne t 42.07 ac RURAL RESIDENTIAL: Areas: Gro ss 34.8 We tland 23. 1 Wet. Buffer 2.6 Net 9. 0 LENNAR LENNA R CORPORATION 935 East Wayzata Boule vard Wayzat a, Min nesota 55391 C onservation Area Gross Are a: 7 .83 ac Net Area: 6.41 ac Land Development Man age r Carole Toohey: 952-249-3012 150 S OUTH B ROADW AY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952)416-6000 Z one -R3 Gross 9 .03 ac W etland 1.16 ac Wet. Buff er 0 .74 ac Net 7.13 ac Conser vation Ar ea: Gross 7.83 ac Wetland 1.42 ac Net 6.41 ac Zoning District- R3 Gross Are a: 9.03 ac Net Are a: 7 .13 ac Zoning District- R2 Gross A rea : 53.22 ac Net Area: 42.07 ac Zo ning District- RI G ress Area: 4 .15 ac Nct Arca: 3.98 ac Ru ral Residential Gross Area: 34. 80 ac Net A rea: 9.00 se PLAN T • r: .. .■■ i• ■ ■.l or'N L1LbIU.., ,. ELM CREEK DRIVE NAVAJO R OAD LENNAR® LENNAR CORPOR ATION 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Min nesota 55391 rl: 0 Land Dev elopment Manager: Carole Toohey: 952-249-3012 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZ ATA, MN. 55391 (952)476-6000 19.91414. NO RTH 1" = 120' REVISIONS BY1 PREP ARE PRELI MINA RY PLANS 9811 040610 MISC . CITY REVISI ONS R5 M 051310 REVISE PLANS DURING 85 0 STORMW ATE R ROUTIN G 051 5-10 ADDED WETLA ND 615 JAW REVISED WETLAND 614 0 527-10 BASE MAP REVISI ONS RS41 MF WETLAN DS 0 60 410 !EPP . CI, C OMMENT NRR REVISIONS 061 610 Zoning: Pr oposed Zoning - Ri Min Width - 90 ft Min Area -11,000 sf Fysb - 30 ft Sysb-25 ft Total- 10 ft Min Rysb - 30 ft 50' Row - 28 B -B Streets Pr op os ed Zoning - R2 Min Width - 60 ft Min Are a - 8,000 sf Fysb - 33 ft Sy sb- 15 ft T ot al - 5 f Min Rysb - 25 ft 50' Row - 28' B -B Stre ets Prop osed Zoning - R3 Min Area - 8,750 sf Fysb - 25 ft Privat e Street Fysb - 40 ft fr om R oadway Sysb -30 ft between Bido Rysb - 20/40 ft 24' B -B Private Streets 50' R ow - 28' B -B Streets CLIENT/DEVELOPER LENNA R C ORPORATION 935 E ast W ay zat a Bo ulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Attn: Carol e Tooh ey T-952-249-3012 LAND SU RVEYO R/CIVIL E NGINEER S ATHRE-BERG OUIST I NC. 150 5. Br oadway Ave. Wayzat a, MN 55391 Attn: B ob Molstad - Engin eer Att n: David P embert on - Land Survey or T-952-476-6000 F-952-476-0104 SHEET INDEX TABLE SHEET SP PH AERIAL EX Alt a PP UP GP EC TS TR BF Description Preliminary Site Plan Preliminary Ph asing Plan A erial Map 01%17.. Existi ng Conditions Plan Alta/B oundary Survey Pr elimi nary Plat Preliminary Utility Pl an Preliminary Gr adi ng and Drainag e Plan Pr elimin ary Erosion Contr ol Plan Tree Survey & Removal Pla n Tree Replacem ent Pl an Buffer Yard Plan W:\Projts\5401-634 THE ENCLAVE-PRELIMINARY\dwg\BASE_H OLASEK.DWG Alf PHASE 2 (Area 2): Areas: Gross 16.40 ac Row (Hunter) 0. 44 ac Wetland 3.64 ac Wet. M it 0.53 ac Net 11.79 ac • T PREPA RE PHASING PLAN NRH 04-01-10 REVISE PHASING PLAN NRH 05-20-10 REVISE LOT LINES NRH AND AREAS 05-25-10 REVISE L OT LINE S NRH AND AREAS 06-04-10 June 17, 2010 LENNAR C ORPORATION 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minn esota 55391 Land Devel opment Manager. Carole Toohey: 952-249-3012 SA;-HRE-BERGQUi; t- INC . 150 SO U'TI1 BROAOWAV WAYZA-A . MN 5539' (9 521 476-6000 W3Projects\5401-634 THE ENCLAVE-PRELIMINARY\dwg\ Medina_Aenal.DWG BY NOR TH r J L l9 i -1 — 111 ;n r ill! t ! !1!1t Iii !'ii t'11 1r' 1e: I'{� MI 11111 1111 Ili LUTZ ELM CREEK ADDN. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHO WN IN AN APPROXIMATE WA Y O NLY. THE CO NTRA CTO R SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LO CATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 111;i di Ilse; 1 LEG1C. PARK1 SEC �! HUNTER flit 1, 110 FARMS it ptJPL.ATTED ADDDITICN NI 11,1! 1111 . NF `J) HlLUi # ! D I 9 L L7_ Pe, I =•1i1 I 110 UNPLAITED 1 utJPLATTED r 'z — II 1'a PI' REGIt • l ` CKBCRCUGti ESTATES S � 1 rr 1 Jai FARMS 141 ito I HEREBY CERTIF Y THAT T HIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY RE GISTERED PR OFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Ao-eDATE OLlI1(1 to REG o' -I -+-a REVISI ONS R evised Wetland 14 end Added W etl and 15 JAIL 05-27 -10 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP e DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-11-10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-634 FIL E MEDINA_TOPOoEX.DWG SHE ET EX COND t OF SHEETS., r --- DET AIL T- SO1°29'39"W 86.79 1 tD 0 zz cck 0 1- I S1 °239"W 931 .94 — — • -`� 1 /• J ,fr rMR oWV MOO00C. 101 1012202 re .v4" ort T Y3 ,i,511TOR RA W. 1, 7 -L--�- — — /--- nu 8% — — T T_�-..---- Hll ER QRrtYE _ __11 SO°51'21 W I > F1013.77 �+ Iof 1 ICI )N 1 N OR TH 150 75 0 75 150 300 SCALE IN FEET 1 1 LEG END CB TB CHH CONC EB GYW HYD OHU SMH UP TNH WET A-1 • 0 0 D enotes Catch Basin D en otes Tele/Comm. Box/Ped D en otes Communicatio n Han dhole D eno tes Co ncrete Surfa ce Den ote s E lectric Box Denotes Guy Wire D enotes Fire H ydran t D eno tes Overhead U tility Lin e D en otes San ita ry Manho le D en otes U tility Pole D en otes To p Nu t of Hydra nt D en otes Wetlan d Delin eation /Flag Iden tifie r Denotes Existing Co ntou r Den otes Found Monumen t - As Den oted D entoes Foun d Cast - Iro n - Mon umen t D enotes 1/2" by 14" Iron Pipe Set and Marked by License No. 40344 NO SCA LE D ETAIL SEE A BOV E N OTES i 1330.45 .r -'/ 1 41 I I Irg�I I I N1 °2147I'W 65$,57-` 1 Cs \t 0 16 S89 °55'48'E 1 t This survey does not purport to show all undergro un d utilities. The existin g utilities show n are shown in an approximate way only. The contractor shall determin e the exact loca tion of an y and all existing utilities be fore commencin g work. The con tractor shall be fully respon sible for any and all damages arisi ng out of his fa ilure to ex actly locate and protect a ll existing utility facilities. Con tact GOPH ER STA TE ON E CALL at 651-454-0002 fo r precise on site loca tion of utilities prior to any excav ation . N orth A merican Title Company as agent for First American title Insuran ce Company Commitmen t for Title In surance File N o. 40852-09-04313, effectiv e date September 23, 2009, was relied upon as to matte rs of record The subject property appears to lie within Zones X and A, (A rea s o utside the I -percen t annual chan ce floodplam, areas of 1°k ann ual chance she et flow flooding where average depths are le es than 1 foot, are as of I% annual c hance stream flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than 1 square mile, or areas protected from the I% ann ual chance flood by levees. No Base Flood Elevations or depths are shown widen this zo ne. In suran ce purchase is not required in these zon es. AN D A reas with a I% annual chance of flooding and a 26% chance of flooding ov er the lift of a 30 -year mortga ge. Because deta iled an alyses are not performed for such areas; no depths or base flood elevatio ns are shown within these zones. ) , per the N ational Flood In su ra nc e Program, Flo od Insuran ce Rate Map Community Panel N o.27053C0166E, 27053C0167E, 27053C0168E, 27053C0169, dated September 2, 2004 as acquired from the Federa l Emergen cy Man agement A gency Web Site. Areas: Parcel 1 - 3,403,500 Sq. Ft. - 78. 134 A cres Net 87, 810 Sq. Ft. . 2.016 A cres Right of Way 3,491,310 Sq. Ft. - 80.150 A cres Gross Parcel 2 - 1,224,964 Sq. Ft. - 28.121 Ac res N et 33,457 Sq. Ft. - 0. 768 Acres Right of Way 1,258,421 Sq. Ft. - 28.889 Acres Gross Current Zon in g: P.U.D. 2 Per the City of Medina website. Su rvey c oordin ate and bearin g basis : Hennepin County W etland(s) shown hereon is (are) per field loca tion of stakes as set by Sv oboda Ecological Resources, Au gust 7, 2006. No mo dification s to th4 su rve y or sketch may be perfo rmed by any perso n o ther than the surveyor signing this certification or pe rson s u nder his dire ct su pervision . 1329.33 �._ \\ L -- 1330 4s --- -- 1330.49 SO°19'59"EI ` 2660 .98 \ : _\\ \ \ E XISTING HARDCOVE R C ALC ULATIO NS Buildings: 11,827 sq. ft . - 0 .272 acres Bituminous: 52,896 sq . ft . - 1 .214 acres Grovel: 40,692 sq. ft . - 0 .934 acres Total: 105,415 sq. ft. - 2.420 acr es 1 Gross Area: 4,749,731 sq . ft. - 109.043 acres/2.420 acres — 2 .22% \ I� 14 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 00 M P ARCEL 1 Lot 13, A UDITOR'S SUBDI VISIO N NO. 241, EXCEPT that p art of L ot 13, A UDITOR'S SUB DIVISION NO. 241, He nnepin Co unty, Mi nnesot a d escribed as f ollows: Begi nni ng at the Southeast comer of L ot 14 of said AUDITO R'S SUB DIVISION NO. 241; thence south al ong the most easterly line of said Lot 13 dista nt 2.3 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said L ot 13 distant 656.35 feet; thence North par allel with the west li ne of said Lot 14 dista nt 414 .80 feet to the m ost northerly line of said Lot 13; thence east alo ng said northerly line 524 .35 to the west line of said Lot 14; thence south along said west line 412.50 feet to the southwest comer of said Lot 14; thence east along the south line of said Lot 14 to the poi nt of begi nni ng. And ALSO EXCEPT that part of Lot 13, AUDITOR'S S UBDI VISION NO . 241, Hennepin C ounty, Min nesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the north line of Lot 13, distant 524.35 feet west from the poi nt of intersectio n of said north line with the west line of Lot 14 as meas ured along said north line; thence south parallel with the west line of L ot 14 , a dista nce of 328.18 feet; thence west p arallel with the north line of Lot 13 , a dist ance of 663 .65 fat, more or less, to a point on the west li ne of Lot 13; th ence north along the west li ne of said Lot 13, a dista nce of 328.18 feet to the northwest comer of Lot 13; th ence east along the north line of L ot 13 to the poi nt of begin ni ng. P ARCEL 2 The West Half of the Northe ast Q uarter, Secti on 13, T ownship 118, R ange 23, acc ording to the Governme nt S urv ey there of, Hennepi n C ounty, Minnesota This is to certify th at this m ap or plat a nd th e survey on which it is based were m ade in acc ordance with the " Mi nim um Sta ndard Detail R equir em ents for ALTAJ ACSM L and Title S urveys," j oi ntly est ablished a nd adopted by ALT A a nd NSPS in 2005, a nd incl udes Items of Table A thereof. P urs uant to the Accuracy St andards as ad opted by ALTA and NSPS e nd in effect on the d ate of this c ertifi catio n, undersigned further c ertifies that in my professio nal opi nio n, as a la nd survey or registered in the State of Minnesota, the Relative P ositi on al Accuracy of this survey does not e xceed th at which is spe cified therein . Da vid B. Pemberton, Professio nal La nd Surveyor Minnesota License No. 40344 *Certifi cati on applies to all sheets L REVISIONS ORIGINAL FIELD W ORK C OMPLETED 10/22/2009 DBP REV. - ALTA SURVEY 04/02/2010 DBP r 0 o R N rn 0) th z FF-- Q 0 0 ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED FOR 0 0 Z z w J >- z a 2 0 0 w J 1- 1- z 0 w 0 z DRAWN DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/01/2010 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO . 5401-634 FILE: ALTA SURVEY.DWG T OWNSHIP - RAN GE - SECTION 118-23-13 HENNEPIN COUNTY BOOK 165 PA GE XX 1 SHEET 1 OF 4 \ \ — — - 3 I —_-- 00 7", I i O 0 k 5 n t� 1 ig !)S ON UM SX1fANY WI .I ..n t/107,v na� — �?AIlIQ' '7I3.LNR H b Z61 ZSLI, 'ON ' 300 i 3d 1N3MaSV 9 AVM 40 JIM* -<ti6'l£6 M„ 6£,6 ZW tars 4dr W7 7 A tl 107 aO 3X17 3 vILD / 6L 99 4 M„6£,6Z 0IOS Z co <O 0 1 n T L. V L Y r I I I I I I _L_ __[J_ -------/—/ T 1 -mi O A 0 0 75 D ski 0 3 x 0 0, 0 z 0m 06 go om 0 2 - m 0 0 Z ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED FOR LENNAR CORP. NORTH AMERICAN TITLE COM PA NY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SITE: 3212 Hunter Drive M edina , MN 55340 ,44 0 N 0ti FR S1/R p SATHRE—BERGQUIST, INC . N 150 SOUTH BR OADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 PO' O 0, SNOISIA2 ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED FOR LENNAR CORP. NO RTH A MERICAN TITLE COMPANY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE CO MPANY SITE: 3212 Hunter Driv e Medina, MN 55340 r W , SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. m 0, 150 SOUTH BR OADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 N 4, cN a? FRs P\ -t r m 0, 0) 0 T 0 , T. n D Cm 0 om N z 0 �m 0 om 0 0 vz z f r O 00 v SNOISIA32i LE GEND REVISI ONS NOR TH 100 50 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET 7 \ \ \ \ \ /\ / \ N / N / /1. \ / T // / / / Y. ,, / / ,_ / / J> Al / / (1)) // / / CB Denotes Catch Basin TB Denotes Tel e/C omm. Box/Ped CHH De notes Comm unication Handhole CONC Denotes Co ncrete Surf EB De notes Electric Box GYW Denotes Guy Wire HYD Denotes Fire Hydra nt OHU Denotes Overhead Utility Line SMH D en otes Sanit ary Ma nhole UP Denotes Utility Pole TNH Denote s Top Nut of Hydra nt WET A-1 Denotes Wetland Delineation/Flag Ide ntifier De notes E xisti ng C ont our • Denotes Fo und Mo nument - As Den oted O Dentoes Found Cast - Iron - Mo nument O De notes l/2 " by 14" Ir on Pipe Set a nd Marked by License No. 40344 rl -1 rl1 (n --1 c_ 0 r1) 0 c'_ / T -I 1 OF GE7LA AD N!-rsA o 1 .° N78°5?35 "E MATCHLIN E (SEE SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS) \ M ATCHLI NE (SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS) EDGE OF IE7L4A 0 -L N87°35'47'E 339.90 \ I IN 1L-.) 1 A TTr—n \V1 N1 Lr\1 1 L_Ll • • R. Se 1y J9� . -x 1303.69 .. • 6 • EDGE O< xEn uV 689°56'19"E S CEIE CrGl 1/2 OF ME VI Cr S EG 14 DIP 114 AG E L7 EDG E Or 11E71 AND -EDG E Or N w Z \0 N 0) N v 1 _ LIJ L1_ 7 N89°56'19"E 1336.69 - - T REV . - ALTA SURVEY 04/02/2010 DBP 1 1 r. ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED FOR } z d z2 z0 a • U 2w UZ O UC1 Lu Q a J O • 1- - z CL Z ZUI- Z F_ - 2 zz Q U �• w • w O < zQ 1 J DRAWN DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/01/2010 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO . 5401-634 FILE: ALT A SURVEY.DWG T OWNSHIP - RANGE - SECTION 118-23-13 BOO K 165 PAGE:XX SHEET 4 OF 4 1 4 tIA 11H A nIVILA M E I - 412.50 \ \ K L IE LF La? 2 N NB74PT ABA M4 A to j M Sw MAYER 4' Lor 14 -- eO V7 S01° 29'39"W 86.79 S 414Lb F - C~1 4 ("F1414`FIE // DR. - hi t$ ■ LJ L I I IT-/ L -V I L_ ELM T T •T r !1 rI'�CA n A I iyl. nv�ilr. (SQ. FT.) A reas in parenthesis denote upland area. x O z 150 75 0 75 150 300 SCALE IN FEET LEG LEGEND CB T8 CHH CONC EB GYW HYD OHU SMH UP TNH WET A-1 4r/(/.... • • • PARK r1nA lr 1 LV VIYV ---S1°25'39" W 931.94 SO°51'21"W HUNTER D enotes Catch Basin D enotes Tele/Comm. Box /Ped D enotes Communication H andho le D enotes Con crete Surfa ce D en otes Ele ctric Bo x D eno tes Gu y Wire Den otes Fire H ydrant D enotes Ov erhea d Utility Lin e Deno tes San ita ry Manho le D enotes Utility Pole D enotes Top Nu t of H ydrant Denotes Wetlan d Delin eation/Fla g Iden tifier Denotes Ex isting Con tour D en otes Foun d Mon umen t - As Denote d Den to es Fo un d Cast - Iron - Monu ment Denotes 1/2" by 14" Iron Pipe Set and Marked by License No. 40344 NO SCA LE DETA IL SEE AB OV E S LK & LOT I4 N4 A4 A4 288-1 47. 050 s CLOW Cr LOT 14 4t4 SM Na SW S1°29'39"W 931.94 --- - " -Msr,tr LI E ?LOr 4 N4 . Y4 A4 211 -tiIL Peett4 IM AE N LIE O" LOT is At4 *4 ma NI SW CO MM or LOT ra N4 Sea A4 A r11TIna1 841,11.11 I I\III 33.00 0,. 1013.77 p FARMS + N OTES 11.1 DI A rr ' VI YI LJ"11 ILL./ A r1r 11T1n I.1 nUVl 11v19 11 1330.49 This su rvey does not pu rport to show all u ndergrou nd utilities. The e xisting utilities shown are shown in an approx imate way only. The contractor shall determine the exact location of any and all e xisting utilities before commencing work. The con tractor shall be fully responsible for a ny a nd all damages arising o ut of his failu re to exactly lo cate and protect all ex isting utility facilities. Contact GOPHER STATE ONE CA LL a1651-454-0002 for precise onsite location of utilities prior to any excav ation. N orth A merican Title Company as agen t for First American title Insu ran ce Company Commitme nt for Title In suran ce File No. 40852-09-04313, effective da te September 23, 2009, was relied upon as to matters of reco rd. The subject pro perty appears to lie within Zones X and A, (Area s outside the I -percent ann ual chance floodplai n, areas of I% annua l chan ce sheet flow flooding where av erage depths are less than I foo t, areas of 1% annual chance strea m flo odin g where the con tributing drain age a rea u less than 1 squ are mile, or are as protected from the 1% ann ual chan ce flood by lev ees. No Base Floo d Elevations or depths are shown within this zo ne. Insurance purchase is not required in these zo nes. AND Areas with a1%ann ual than. of flooding an d a26% chance of flooding ov er the life of 30 -year mortgage. Becau se deta iled an alyses are not per fo rmed fo r su ch areas; no depths or base flood elevations are sho wn within thes e zo nes. ) , per the National Floo d Insu ran ce Progra m, Flood In suran ce Ra te Map Community Panel No.27053C0166E, 27053C01670, 27053C0168E , 27053C0169, dated September 2, 2004 as acqu ired from the Federal Emergency Management A gency Web Site. A reas: Parcel 1 - 3,403,500 Sq. Ft. 87,810 Sq. FL 3,491,310 Sq. FL Parcel 2 - 1,224,964 Sq. Ft. 33,457 Sq. Ft. 1,258,421 Sq. FL - 78.134 A cres - 2.016 A cres - 80.150 Acres - 28.121 A cres - 0.768 A cres - 28. 889 Acres Cu rrent Zonin g: P.U .D 1 - 55,826 sq. R P.U.D. 2 - 4,693,905 sq. R ( Per the City of Medina Zon in g Ma p.) Survey coordinate and bearing basis : Hennepin Cou nty Net Right of Way Gross Ne t Right of Way Gross Wetlan d(s) shown hereon is (are) per field location of sta kes as set by Svoboda Ecological Resou rces, August 7, 2006. No mo dification s to this su rvey or sketch may be pe rfo rmed by any person o ther than the surveyo r signing this certification or persons u nder his direct su perv ision. AI A11A In 1 Yn08UV 0 11/,I'sDI //,,TTCr1 VIr, LJ711 ILV fl 1l.l.. 1 +I i q I p( I C 1 l 1 t I I b I N1°21'47E'W 65:.63 . 1. 10 I E — SO °19 59"�a I \ 2660.98 - TYPIC AL LOT SETBACK R-2 66 -Garage Setback Li ne -Buildi ng Setback Li ne tl 111 TYPIC AL LOT SETB AC K R-1 a/_„, lo— / LOT I / I /C DR AI NAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN T HUS: 5 2!4f +I 5 NOT TO SC ALE Being 5 feet in width an d adjoining lot lines, unless otherwise indicated, an d 10 feet in width and adjoining right of way rm. and rear IM lines, u nless o therwise indicated, as sh own on the plat 5 --Garage Setb ack Line --Buildi ng Setback Line 1J111,10LA' TTrr, NP 11 LV Ar1r 'sITI0L1 nv V11 lvlr tT tD M M N89°56'19"E 1 4 R 1330.49 r R R _ T Ij s Ij FARMS 11 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PR OPERT Y PARCEL I Lot 13, A UDITOR'S S UBDI VISION NO. 241, E XCEPT th at part of Lot 13, AUDIT OR'S S UBDIVISION NO . 241, He nnepi n C ounty, Mi nnes ot a described as f oll ows: Begin ning at the Southeast comer of Lot 14 of said AUDIT OR'S SUB DI VISION N O. 241; the nce s outh alo ng the most easterly line of said Lot 13 distant 2.3 feet; thenc e West par allel with the N orth line of said Lot 13 distant 656.35 feet; thence North parallel with the west li ne of said Lot 14 distant 414.80 feet to the most northerly line of said Lot 13; thence east alo ng said northerly line 524.35 to the west line of said Lot 14; the nce so uth alo ng said west line 412.50 feet to the southwest comer of said Lot 14; thence east along the so uth li ne of said Lot 14 to the poi nt of begi nni ng. And ALSO EXCEPT that part of Lot 13, A UDITOR'S SUB DI VISI ON NO .241, He nnepi n County, Minnesot a, described as foll ows: Commencing at a poi nt on the north li ne of Lot 13, distant 524.35 feet west fr om the poi nt of i ntersectio n of said north line with the west line of Lot 14 as meas ured along said north li ne; the nce so uth par allel with the west li ne of Lot 14, a distance of 328.18 feet; the nce west parallel with the north line of Lot 13, a distance of 663.65 feet, more or less, to a point on the west line of Lot 13; thence north along the west line of said Lot 13, a distance of 328.18 feet to the northwest c omer of L ot 13; th ence east al ong the north line of Lot 13 to the point of begi nni ng . PARCEL 2 The West Half of the Northeast Quarter, Section 13, Township 118, Range 23, accordi ng to the G overnment Survey there of, He nnepin Co unty, Min nesota. This is to certify that this map or plat and the s ur vey on which it is based were made in accordance with the "Mi nimum Standard Detail Req uirements for ALTA/ ACSM L and Title Surveys, " joindy established a nd adopted by ALT A and NSPS in 2005 , and incl udes Items of Table A thereof. Pursua nt to the Accuracy Standards as adopted by ALT A and NSPS and in effect on the dat e of this certificatio n, undersigned further certifies that in my pr ofessi onal opinion, as a land surveyor registered in the State of Min nesot a, the Relati ve Positional Acc uracy of this su rvey does not exceed that which is specified therei n. Date Da vid B. Pemberto n, Pr ofessi onal La nd Survey or Minnesota License No. 40344 ',Certificatio n applies to all sheets REVISIONS Misc. City R evisions 05-13-10 R.S .M. Misc. City Revisions 06-17-10 D.B.P. Misc . Upland Cates. 06-24-10 D .B .P. J U cn (0 V m Nw L.L 1- vJ 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 r PRELIMINARY PLAT LL 0 SITE: MEDIN A, MINNESOT A J DRAWN l DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/09/2010 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-634 FILE' PRELI MINARY PLAT .DWG TOWNSHIP - RANGE - SECTION 118-23-13 HENNEPIN COU NTY BOOK: 165 PAGE:XX SHEET 1 OF 5 C) Cif LJ 0 LJ nV F� r to 53 O ELM CR EEK D LIJ n T L. V I B, -L1 I i 9,836 sq. ft. I 0.22 acres 1 (9 ,836 sq ft.) \ w 160 B1 -L2 11,611 sq. ft . 0.26 acr es (11,606 sq . ft.) '_., 200 B1 -L3 14,356 sq. ft. 0.32 acres (12 ,913 sq. ft .) 1 I 3 643.95 146 1- 1 92-11 1 10,916 sq . ft. 0.25 acres \ (10,916 sq. ft.) B1 -L5 I 17,241 sq. ft . I 0.39 acres (11,899 aq. 6.), _ y I / B1 -L6 16,875 sq. ft lI 0.38 acres ' 1 (9,261 sq 9.) - ( 4 B1 -L7 18,496 sq. ft. ' I 0. 37 acres I (11,483 sq. ft.) I B1 -L8 ) 11,620 sq. ft. 0.26 acres / (11,553 sq ft.)/ / B1 -L9 15,210 sq. ft. / 0.34 acres / (15,189 sq. ft. ) / 81-L10 / 16,601 sq. ft. / 0. 38 acres / (18,601 sq. ft.) 1 �o El/' 2 Cree k B10 -L1 11,070 sq. ft. 0.25 acres (11,070 sq. ft.) B2 -L2 \ 10,955 sq. ft . 0.25 acr es \ (10,955 sq. ft.) B3 -L1 27,660 sq. ft. 0.63 acres (27, 660 sq. ft.) B3 -L9 9,494 sq. ft. \ 0.21 acres \ (9,494 sq. ft.) 153 \ B2 -L3 9,084 sq . ft. \\ 0 .20 acres (9,084 sq. ft .) 130 B2 -L4 1 8,154 sq. ft . 1 0.18 acr es 1 (8,154 sq. ft.) B2 -L5 8,005 sq . ft. 0 .18 acres (8,005 sq. 9 .) B2 -L6 9,210 sq. ft. 0.21 acr es (9,210 sq. 6 .) B2 -L7 12,051 sq. ft . 0.27 acres (12,051 sq. ft) Oak Pock] B3 -L2 44, 10,469 sq. ft. 0.24 acres (10,489 sq. 6 ) / B3 -L3 / 13,055 sq. ft. % / 0. 29 acres / / (13,055 sq. ft.) / 03-L4 In I 8,781 sq. 5. j0.20 a cres / m (8,781 sq. 11) / --422._` J I B3 -L6 1 1 10, I o \` 0.04823 acressq.9. 1 210,048 sq 0) I i 60 B11 -L1 6 2,520 sq . ft. 6 0.05 acres B11 -L2 1,919 sq. ft. (( 0.04 acres 011-L3 ( 1,919 sq. ft. 1 0.04 acres B11 -L4 N / 1,919 sq. ft . 0 .04 acres B11 -L5 6 2,520 sq. ft. 6 0.0dcres B15 -L1 2,519 sq. ft . 0.05 acres 42 32 B15 -L2 ,919 sq. H. 0.04 acres B15 -L3 1,920 sq. 0.04 acres 32 L. 656.35 499 60 60 B13 -L1 sq'ft. N A 2,519 sq . ft. 6 ro 2,519 0 .05 0.05 acres acres 1312-L2 1 1,920 sq. ft. (( 0 .04 acres B12-13 M 1,920 sq. ft. N 0 .04 acr es B12 -L4 ra 1,919 sq. ft. N 0.04 acres B12 -L5 `6 2,520 sq . ft . 6 0.05 acres 60 B15 -L4 12,520 sq. ft. 0.05 acres B13 -L2 1 1,919 sq. ft . /( B13 -L3 N 1,919 sq . ft 0.04 acres B13 -L4 H 1,919 sq. ft . N 0 .04 acr es B13 -L5 6 2,520 sq. ft. 6 0 .05 acr es 60 42 32 32 816-13 42 1 sq. ft . 8 B16 -L1 B16 -L2 0,920 acre 6 816-14 c 2,519 sq. ft . 1,919 sq. .04 t. 2,520 sq. ft . 0.05 acr es 0.04 acre 6 0.05 acres 42 32 32 42 134-L4 1-- �, .,___ .-- I 11,270 sq. ft. 1 �L . I / 0.25 acres I m I 1 (11,270 sq. R) 1 I B4 -L5 / I 12,338 sq. ft . / 131 ( 0.28 a cr es m I 6,687 sq. ft. I I (12,338 sq . ft .) 0.19 acres I m I I (8,657 sq. R.) 1 L ` I _ _ I B4 -L2 9,655 sq. ft. 0. 22 acre s (9,655 sq. 16) 64-L1 10,326 sq. ft. 0.23 acres nn ma en e) B4 -L17 12,215 sq. ft. 0.28 acres (12,215 sq. ft.) 84-L6 11,235 sq. ft . 0.25 acr es 11,235 sq. ft) r B4 -L16 / 11,759 sq. ft. 60 B14 -L1 6 2,519 sq. ft. 6 0.05 acres B14 -L2 1,919sq.ft . "' 0.04 acres ro B14 -L3 1,919 sq.ft. 1 0.04 acres Inl B14 -L4 a 1,919 sq. ft . N �) 0.04 acres B14 -L5 6 2,520 sq . ft. $ 0.05 acres 60 OL-A 359,468 sq. ft . 8.25 acres (274,031 sq. ft.) ( ( B4 -L7 12,209 sq. ft . 0.28 acr es I (12,209 sq. ft .) 60 617-11 6 2,519 sq. ft. 6 0 .05 acres 817-L2 w 1,920 sq . ft. N ro 0 .04 acres / / B4-18 f 12,372 sq. ft. 4r 0 .28 acres / (12 ,372 sq. ft .) NO RTH 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 1-- 0 J �I y9� / B5 -L1 / 14,788 sq. ft . 0.33 acres (12,390 sq. ft.) B4 -L9 \ 11,696 sq. ft. ,\ Q 0.26 acr es / (11,696 sq. ft .)/ B4 -L10 12,625 sq. ft. 0.28 acres (12,625 sq . ft.) 85-12 22,619 sq. ft. 0 .51 acres \ (11,257 sq_ft.)/ B5 -L3 16,112 sq. ft. 0 .36 acres \ (12,195 sq ft.) \ i \ \ 85-L4 c \ \ 10,246 sq. \ 0 .24 acr es $, \ (10,806 sq. ft.) 1 co W - 0 LIJ (i LIJ J REVISIONS Misc. City Re visi ons 05-13-10 R.S.M. Misc. City Revisions 06-17-10 D .B.P . Misc. Upland Calcs. 06-24-10 D.B.P . l J 0 0 to 0) o) O) to Z 2 QQ O 03 m O CO Sb d '5 4;12 . a E- i4 E O z C4 THE ENCLAV E SITE: MEDINA, MINNESOTA e DRAWN DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/09/2010 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO . 5401.634 FILE: PRELIMINARY PLAT.DWG TOWNSHIP - RANGE . SECTION 118-23-13 BOOK: 165 PAGE XX SHEET 2 OF 5 B10 -L2 \ 13,065 sq. ft. \ 0.29 acres \ (13,065 sq. ft .) B10 -L3 13,148 sq. ft. 0.30 a cres (13,148 sq. ft.) tee - B10 -L4 11,440 sq . ft. 0.26 acres (10,327 sq. ft.) B10 -L5 10,863 sq. ft . 0.24 acres (10,734 sq. ft.) -460- 610-L13 11,307 sq. ft. 0. 25 acres (11,307 sq. 9. ) B10 -L7 12,743 sq. ft. 0. 29 ac res (12,743 sq. ft.) B10 -L8 13,698 sq. ft. 0.31 acres (13,698 sq. ft.) 210 B10 -L9 13,038 sq. ft. 0. 29 acre s (13,036 s q. ft.) eo \� B10 -L10 / 15,502 sq. ft. • �\ 0.35 acre s E \ (' )`5,502 sq. ft.) MONUMENT \ 75 \.163 122wk Page \ I \ 1 B9 -L1 1 16,712 sq. ft. 0.38 a cres (16,712 sq. ft.) \ y l 12 7 e B9 -L2 I 14,147 sq. ft. 0. 32 acres (14,147 sq. ft.) I J I B9 -L3 13,855 sq. ft. 0. 31 acres (13,855 sqft. ) 1 B3 -L8 I ( \ 11,097 sq . ft. 1 ( B3 -L7 \ ▪ 0.25 acres ( 4 13,191 sq. ft . \ 141,097 sq. ft.) I 4 0.30 acres \ ( ( (13,191 sq . ft .) I B7 -L9 13,408 sq. ft. 0.30 acres (13,408 sq . 5.) �vI / B7 -L8 / 10,705 sq . ft. 0.24 acres (10,705 sq. ft) B7 -L10 24,772 sq. ft . 0 .56 acres (16,242 sq . ft.) B7 -L11 87-L12 n (� 31,252 sq. ft . / 0.71 acres / (11,782 sq. ft .) 87-L13 / , 24,410 sq. ft. 0. 56 a cre s _(11,676 sq ft. ) B7 -L14 22,564 sq. ft. 0.51 a cres (13,644 sq. ft.) I 1 \ B7 -L15 27,185 sq. ft. 0.62 acres (13,897 sq. ft.) B7 -L16 26,765 sq. ft. 0.61 acres (12,091 sq. ft.) B7 -L17 27,492 sq. ft. 0. 63 acres (11,416 sq. ft. ) B7 -L18 28,754 sq. ft. 0.66 acre s (10,272 5q. 6. ) B7 -L19 29,823 sq. ft. 0. 68 acres 1 / \\ 87-L6 12,871 sq. ft . \ 0.29 acres 87-L7 12,178 sq. ft. \ (10,081 sq. ft.) 0.27 acres `rd 1 (11,099 sq. ft.) _-' 1 / B4 -L17 / I 1 12,215 sq . ft. / 0.28 acres gt 1 (12,215 sq . ft.) r 64-L16 t / 11,759 sq. ft. 1 / 0 .26 acr es / (11,759 sq. ft .) 61 B4 -L14 10,538 sq . ft. 0.24 acres (10,538 sq. ft .) B7 -L3 17,182 sq. ft. 0.39 acres / (11,607 sq .ft .) / OUTL O▪ T-C 143,496 sq. ft . 3.29 acres (61,151) sq. ft \ B7 -L2 16,208 sq. ft. 0.37 acres (11,885 sq. ft.) 1 .1 .� B7 -L1 28,407 sq. ft. :I 0.60 acres (13,816 sq. ft.) B4 -L10 12,625 sq . ft. 0 .28 acres (12,625 sq 5 ) B4 -L11 11,980 sq. ft. 0.27 acres (11,980 sq. ft .) / / 1V 64-L12 10,547 sq. ft . 0.24 acr es (10,547 sq. ft.) // az I r 1 B6 -L1 I °' 11,981 sq. ft. O 0 .27 acre s (11,981 sq . ft .) I 1 1 122 / I n 1 B6 -L2 / 1 9,061 sq. ft. / 0.20 acres m ' (9,061 sq. ft .) r ----11a-- / B6 -L3 / / 9,288 sq . ft. / / 0.21 acres 1 (9,288 sq . ft.) / / 1 12a '-J / B8 -L4 / 8,923 sq. ft. 1 / 0.20 acres ( n / (9,923 sq. ft.) / I / B6 -L6 9,170 sq. ft. 0.21 acres (9,170 sq . ft.) 128 B6 -L7 9,490 sq. ft. I I 0.21 acres 1 n / / (9 ,490 sq . ft .) / O • L OT -B 34 ,916 sq. ft . 82 acre s (2 ,993 sq . ft.) REVISIONS Misc. City R evisons 05-13-10 R.S .M . Mac. City Revisions 06-17-10 D.B.P . Misc. Upland Calcs, 06-24-10 D.B.P . di 150 SOUTH BROADWA Y WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 • PRELIMINAR Y PLAT • 1/ 0 SITE: MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/09110 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB N O. 5401-634 FILE ' PRELIMINARY PLAT.DWG TOWNSHIP - RANGE . SECTI ON 118-23-13 BOOK: 165 P AGEXX \ SHEET 3 OF 5 yGRAVEL J,fIVEWAY 5 K JI i 6 8 • 69-L4 13,515 sq . ft. 0.31 acres __L3,515 sg . ft .) ._ _ _ 180 B9 -L5 13,907 sq. ft. 0.31 acres (13,907 sq. ft.) 14,245 sq. ft . 0.32 acr es (14,245 sq. ft.) B9 -L7 / 12,839 sq. ft. / 0.29 acres / _(12,839 sq_ftl_ _ _. J 1 1 1 1 1 1 139-L10 1 1 11,429 sq. ft. 1 0.26 ac res (11,429 sqft. � i ,\ B7 -L19 29,823 sq. ft. criI I 0.68 acres (20,096 sq. ft.) 1 B7 -L20 (11,659 sq. ft . 0.26 acre s (11,659 sq . ft ) 1 B7 -L29 1 , 13,095 sq. ft. I0 .30 acres (13,095 sq . 9 .) \ ` B7 -L30 \'. 11,493 sq. ft. \. 0.26 acres \(11,493 sq. 8.) 0 \ \ B9 -L11 \\ \ 11,558 s q. ft. \ 0. 28 acres (1,1.556 sq. ft. ) / / / / / 1- -4 B9 -L12 / 11,851 sq. ft. / / _ \\ 0. 27 acres / / "-1-- `14,851 sq. ft. ) / ^? / / X24 " / / B9 -L13 \r\ // 11,596 sq. fl. ��` 0.26 acres -(11,596 sq, ft) 123 1, 1 B7 -L22 4 12,735 sq. ft. 0.29 acr es (12,429 sqft .) r-_ of -Y� I 37 1 B7 -L27 1 ( 10,627 sq. ft. 1 0 .24 acres •1 (10,627 sq . ft.) 1 B7 -L26 10,601 sq . R. 1 0.24 acr es I (10,601 sq . ft.) B7 -L31 11,922 sq . 8. 0 .27 acres (11,922 sq. ft.) \ B7 -L32 ) 9,872 sq . ft. 0.22 acres ((9,872 sq. 9 .) B7 -L23 20,586 sq. ft. 0.47 acres (20,588 sq . ft.) B7 -L33 9,993 sq. ft . 0.22 acres (9,993 sq. ft.) -- T 1 �10Op ZONE UNE \\ \I 1 B9 -L sw 1� \ � 11,087 sq. R.. B9 -L14 / \ N \\ 0.25 acres 1 11,651 sq. ft. 1 \(11,099 sq. 9.) ,i O-sc re s ) l-- . (11,651 sq. ft.) ....1-\ • 166�__ Jo /B7 -L38 12,435 sq . ft. I B7 -L37 11,533 sq . ft. 0.26 acres (11,533sq 9) B7 -L36 / ^ 10,352 sq. ft. .7 0.23 acr es / (10,352 sq. ft .) / / m� 7 B7 -L35 B7 -L34 11,720 sq. 81 0.26 acr es / (11,720sq ft.).// 99-L16 1 11,039 sq. fl. 1 0.25 acres 1 \ (11,039 sq. ft) 1 -1- --L 581 °46.14'[ - 1 B9 -L17 1 13,147 sq. ft. 1 0.30 acres 1 (13,147 sq ft .) 1 115 / / 138-L3 / 12,711 sq . ft. ` 0.29 acres (12,711 sq . ft.) 89-L18 11,126 sq. ft. 0 .25 acres L _ (11,126 sq. ft .) B8 -L5 1 13,132 sq. ft. 1 0 .30 acr es \ (13,132 sq. ft.) 1 88-L4 9,777 sq. ft . 0.22 acr es (9,777 sg..R.)� - B9 -L20 11,127 sq. fl. 1 0.25 acres (11,127 sq. L - 15 / / 1 I� B9-1,21 11,088 sq . ft . 0.25 acres 11 (11,068sq .R .) Y' / a. B8 -L8 10,846 sq. ft. 0.24 acres (10,846 sq . 9.) 538'13.77 143.14 NORTH co J 1 1 SCALE IN FEET B8 -L1 11,427 sq . ft. 0.26 acres (11,427 sq_ ft.) 89-L19 11,146 sq . ft. 0.25 acr es (11,146 sq. ft.) J. REVISIONS Misc. City Revisions 05-13-10 R .S.M. Misc. City R evisi ons 06-17-10 D .B.P. Misc. Upland Calcs . 06-24-10 D.B .P. 8' a. -IORS 150 S OUTH BR OADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 Sbd \ 6 _ ON3 / h �2 D`cf' 1 c DRAWN ` DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/09/2010 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO . 5401-634 FILE' PRELI MINARY PLAT.DWG TOWNSHIP - RANGE - SE CTION 118-23-13 B OOK: 165 PAG EXX l SHEET 4 OF 5 / REVISIONS Misc . City R evisi ons 05-13-10 R.S. M. Misc. Coy Revisions 06-17-10 D.B .P . Misc. Upland Calcs. 06-24-10 D.B .P . I U Z H U (9 fY W W 10µS 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 Sad - 6 a PRELIMINARY PLAT LL 0 W 0-4 W SITE: MEDINA , MINNESOTA DRAWN DBP CHECKED DBP DATE 4/09/2010 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO. 5401-634 FILE: PRELIMINARY PL AT.DW G TO WNSHIP - RANGE - SECTION 118-23-13 BOOK:165 PAGEXX SHEET 5 OF 5 i 4 NOT TO SCALE Dt_ 103 riff flyHA WI IA '4 • T 195 EI LV fiB"i� MO;m WU >md ?>m .153 9 ten Moi.- ti Sio a°'m '�c m Er;ild a WM -Z E!: 4txa x1iu nH sog13 1-• %°E, 07, 2 2 n aS /. mg j x a� 400 .01 -41 09z 1 1 4 _-_- � I i % 97 B OS 0 DNA .9 4'1000 m Lg 1 l I a 4, 3AHta x�iun t 2 Final Alignment to be Determined HUNTER DRIVE 1° =50' PROPOSED IM PROVEMENTS EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ON LY . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERM INE THE EXACT LO CATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FA ILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE A NY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. % 0>'0 97905 OAd .0 # 10EZ LIJ m�mR C� M 8Aoo a Ion a 11113101111 o. C)rvob boa_ NT" - HUNTER DRIVE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS > O N 9 WM 6t _. L1J k= ^1' OM 1 rmbtde II I I 1 --j 191 - 9,4C I i. I .I. -$m AV,NOVCS Inv H- 99900. 5 Field Ve rify P -A1 320 LF - 18. R CP SOUTH ENTRANCE (ACROSS FRO M PARK) MH LPark TC 1005.0 INV 990.6 BLD-14 • P-CBMH2 170LF-1B'RCP P-CBMH2 STORM SEWER OUTLET INTO PARK PROPERTY (Final Alignment to be Determined) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISI ON AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PR OFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OTA. /v /= DATE 01/07//0 REG. NO 1R-8 J i REVISIONS BY 1 PREPARE PRELIMINAR Y PLANS NRH 04-09-10 MI5C. CITY REVISI ONS RSM 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURING RSM ST ORMWATER RO UTIN G 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND#15 JML REVISED WETLAND#14 05-27-10 B ASE MAP REVISIONS RS M MF, WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP & CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISI ONS 06-16-10 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 J i PRELI MINARY UTILITY PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04/09110 SCALE AS SHOWN J 09 NO 5401-634 FILE: BASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET UP -1 ` OF SHEETS, NORTH IH 4 999 s / 982.8 0-167 80 :BM H9 'R CP 113 RCP 87 /+8 Ra 30 LF-15 ' RCP H-CB M116 8 Dr/ 'P 50 - INN 986 915-17, 5 +43.9 9515-21RCP 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 EN GINEER UNDER THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CA TION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FO R ANY AND A LL DA MA GES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE A NY AND A LL EXISTING UTILITIES. '(1 BMH7 y� 151 LF - 18' RCP 8 L -1q RCP_ _..- 5' R� 1 i, QI 8LF-12'RCP1*,, B-CBMH12 STA,2438.1 1995.25 BL6MH11 I MH91 10 2 .5 4 1 5T 10 1011 .4 x 0 .F - X' R CP ST k 5408.12 N 99s R 48" BLD-14T BL815 / ao �1-® M CH1010 3• T�17B LF-15' Rru f - i 3-CBMH19 ® C-CBM194 50 25 1011 .8 5 25 50 STA 9.2 06 IY6 d! 100 SCA LE IN FEET 28 LF-15'RCP 701, e 1 136'-. .'9984 BLO- 4 .6 4 651H x 'RC D-CBM/N ,.§ IA TC1101118 IN 999 BL -1 I 60• STA: 3476.77o 61'4 ..5, D ATE O 110 1/f 0 REG. NO 4—P-ri-8 REVISIONS BY, PREPARE PRELIMINARY PLANS NRH 04-09 -10 MISC . CITY REVISI ONS 958 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURING RSM STOR MWATER RO UTING 05-19-10 AD DED WETLAND#15 J ML R EVISE D WET LA ND #14 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISI ONS RSM MF, WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP S CITY COM MENT NRH 665191ONS 06-16-10 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 PRELI MINARY UTILITY PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENN AR CORP . 1 DR AWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOWN J OB NO . 5401-634 FILE BASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET UP -2 OF SHEETS , 4H6 1006.6 IV 9852 LD-21 !:'J*, %L- 24' SE: 13N NORTH 15' RCP CBMH18 I5' RCP 15.9CP I!/ RURAL- 24' SECTION • AG8 M015 3.31 400641. 13 J O ,1 8-C E6.. - . LI IC 1., N 9890 LD-21 ENTRANC M ONUMENT ~� ^21 C -0007 33LFI 12" RCP 7'n 1 227 L . 8' PV MH 1 TC 10125 INV 989 7 '8110-22. 8' 1 Arl l ,� 1014. 983. 9 I /BL0.;. 5.6 EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROX IM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CA TION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND A LL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 3'J LF-b4 oibmH9 LF - 21 ' RC P -.9114957MHS STA 3 Et -. STA38CZ 7.10142 BF 1008.0 -------- E, o . ` OIX 50 BLD-14.0 130315 MH 32. .. TC 1010 ,5 057 9980 SID 123. H2 C 1015 IN V 9962. 8141, 7, 01 525 5E 5818 .0 11�,nJ SO R 35 4, *. BF 10,0.5 d-CBMH19 TC1, / INV0950 BLD-1 751 *5„,01:7° 08 34 1608.24 MH 26- TC 10165 INV 1001 8 BLD -14r1 f I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS P REP ARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DUL Y RE GISTE RED P ROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE L AWS OF THE ST ATE OF MINNESOTA. 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 1 .101 2 NV 1:05 ` T MH 35 10165 V 996 L12-20 .00 -1 '5" BCOMH i.AH 34 10154 100'.3 9 614.1' 28 LF-12 " RCP BCB26 '010.58 '070.19 1010. '010.30 9 '011.23 Field Fit Trail '010 .98 '1010.8, Field Fd Trail Fi eld Fit ARE ARE R-64.4 S.M1'4 DATE °WO9/!o REG . NO 1—I1'ZB C REVISIONS BY" PREPARE PRELI MINARY PLANS NRH 04-0910 MISC. CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURING RS M STOR MWATER ROUTING 05-1910 ADDED WETLAND#15 AC REVISED WETLAND #14 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RS M MF. WETLANDS 06-0410 TEP 8 CITY C OMMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 U Z co 5 0 w 2 V/ PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA 1 LENNAR CORP. DR AWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOWN J OB NO 5401-634 FILE BASE_HOLASEK .DW G SHEET UP -3 !1/4.0F SHEETS/ NORTI 0 5 J I M ONUMENT vl LCDI] I . _ .�a r -gym 33LF 12 " RCP of ar o(- 1 MH 11 TC 1012 5 INV 98 07 ... .-911D-22 8 MH 13 TC 10140 -4443 9917 993' 1 DLD -167 EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN AR E SHOWN IN AN APPR OXIMATE WAY ONLY . THE CO NTRA CTOR SHA LL DETER MINE THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF A NY AND ALL EXIST ING UTILITIES BEFORE COMM ENCING WORK. HE A GREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LO CATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT T HIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DI RECT SUPERVISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSION AL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OT A. :1LF-?'I"RCP' ' 1l �- o� '.•. iii' 7� 1007.25 7206 .99 103779 1 { 1 ;' 101] GFj0i74' 1 BL, 1..O. I BF 1010. 0 1 __ �1 1 1 6� I I \ 1 --.._ 0. 5 1 1 Z 7 BF 101 1 . F'C 1 1 ., )G-C,BMHS 102 LEiT RCp G-CBMH6 I 7 1 �' 9 F- 16. RCr 28 LF - 12' .CP FCB OF 10120 1038 .24 TC 1016 5 INV 1001 .8 BLD-14 T MH 27 TC 10146 I NV 1002 6 BLD 1 20 1007.92 E-LBMH11 29 LF - 15" R CP luQ �i i ib09.96 f Om: 1009, -1 6B ,1� 7969 ECBMHI2 EC81� 691E -1'Y RCF rY �� 1009-'% 6'Can Wall. MP) 7008.07 F-CBMH8 1 w 52 LF-15 "RCP I F-CB MH -3 iN 50 25 0 25 50 FCBMH9 100 SCALE IN FEET Field Fil Tr ail FCLB11 '010.30 ,010.20 7009.43 Field Fil Troll Fi eld Flt Trail 1010.09 1 7 L_ � III Of I 28 LF BF 10022 F -E, 1007.95 1 ® 1 I 1 I--Zia0091 8 1 L= ".7Or ... and 4e aW 4A 91A 1 5 L 1_ I FCB14 MH 19 1010060 INV 997 .7 8108.7 FCBMHI3 8-144 D ATE °Le/07/ / 0 REG. NO —8 i REVISI ONS BY‘ PREP ARE PRELI MINA RY PL ANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC . CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-13.10 REVISE PLANS DURING RSM STORMWATER ROUTIN G 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND#15 JML REVISED WETLAND NI4 0627-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF, WETL ANDS 06-04-10 TEP 8 CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISI ONS 06-16-10 U Z 1-7 V I 0 CND co W 2 F- 0) 0 CD 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 47 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN • THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04/09/10 SC ALE AS SH OWN JOB NO. 5401-634 ILE BASE_HOLASEK.DW G SHEET UP -4 SHEETS/ k.OF 'S53 NORTH J' 0 t \g F BV4n6 .�'.- 4FN 991.7 L e2. 999. 97 0 I HE REBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS P REPARED BY ME OR UN DER MY DI RECT SUPER VISION AND THAT I AM A DUL Y REGISTERED PROFESSI ONAL ENGINEER UNDE R THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 999, 75 EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHO WN IN AN APPRO XIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERM INE THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 099.82 57 10100 9LF-18 'RC, . G-C BMH4 I1 H 15 he 10015 993 9 J I RI r,-I:i s' I F-CBA11.2 515 22+4 C 1u 58 ',CJ3 r /$C 1 i GF 101 20 9LF- 15 ' RCP u •'N .Je+r 5A1 /00$07 FC0 11110 FCB MHB BF 1004 .0 50 25 0 25 50 F.CBMH9 100 SCALE IN FEET 7,010 Fil Tr ail 1 i 8 I 11 1 7 8E1002.0 1 1 BF 10022 FB - - FBA — f37 101AQ L— BF 101bA L. +# 28 LF 15'n‘.4,P F -Al2 Fdl, -D *901 DATE °Le/09/10 100/ .95 F-5814 MH 19 TC 1008 .0 INV 907.7 BID -8 F- CB MH13 REG . NO 1-1 °11-8 / REVISIONS BY PREP ARE PRELI MINARY PLANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC. CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-1310 REVISE PL ANS DURING RSM STORMWATER ROUTING 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND #15 JML REVISED WETLAND Y14 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF, WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP & CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 ./ U Z 5 0 CND L .L MW W 2 VJ 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN THE ENCL AVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN 1 NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOW N JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: BASE_H OLASEK.DWG SHEET UP -5 t_OF SHEETS/ / 1 e I6� 814 I IA C1 i I _/ \IONl PARK rinl L-LVIv1v nnA1 V VIV. 17) n.. t--[Ylnn 1T T Lv Li! vL) nITC-) 1111 1" r1VIV 1 Lh IIOq ;dQe i e- Q r)L 1^ 1 /'A Ih CO NSTRUCTIO N NOTES 1. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS SHOWN ON PLAN, AS REQ UIRED BY THE CITY OF PLYMO UTH OR DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. 2. THE WA TER D UALITY POND M UST BE EXCAV ATED AT THE BEG INNING OF GRADING OPERATIONS TO PRO VIDE TEMPORA RY STORM WATER DETENTIO N DURING CONSTRUCTION. SAND AND SILT MUST BE REM OVED FROM THE PO ND AS NECESSARY DURING CO NSTRUCTION AND AT THE COM PLETION OF THE PROJECT. ilea 11.14)1 ATt'rn vlV, L.l,l I LA../ A n nlTlll kl nV VI 11VIV 3. BEGIN GRADING, INSTALL PERFO RATED RISER PIPE IN PONDS WHEN POND GRADING IS COM PLETE. TEM PORARY DRAINAGE PIPE SHA LL BE USED FOR INTERM EDIATE DRAINAGE DURING THE CONSTRUCTIO N PERIOD AS NECESSARY AND DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND EXCAVATED PONDS. 4. INSPECT PO ND. SILT FENCE, AND ROCK ENTRANCE BERM AFTER ALL RAINFALL EVENTS AS REQUIRED BV THE NPDES PERMIT. 5. LINE ALL PONDS WITH A M INIM UM 3" O RGANIC SO ILS P. SEED SLOPES BETWEEN NWL AND 100 18 WE WITHA WATER TOLERANT MIX. (O R AS NO TED) 6. REMOV E PERFORA TED RISER PIPE WHEN STO RM SEWER A ND OU TLET STRUCTURE FOR PONDS A RE INSTALLED. 7. POND - 10:1 BENC H (1 FOOT) THEN 4. 1 M AX 8. LO 8 WO PADS 3:1 MAX. ALL O THER SLOPES 4:1 MAX (UNLESS NO TED) 9. RESTORATION -XX.XX ACRES A. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH 4" TO 6" OF TOPSOIL OR EXISTING ON -SITE ORGANIC MTRL. B. SEED AL L DISTURBED AREA S WITH MNDOT MIX TURE #250 AND BWSR SEED MIX FOR WETLA NDS AT A RATE OF 100 LBS./ACRE AND FERTILIZE WITH 20-0-10 AT 100 LBS /A CRE (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) C. ONLY PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER IS TO BE USED ON SITE. D MULCH WITH TYPE 1 AT A RATE OF 2 TONS/ACRE AND DISC ANCHOR IM MEDIATELY AFTER PLACEMENT. USE WOODFIBER BLANKET ON ALL SLOPES 3:1 (FT) OR G REATER. E. PLACE APPROVED STORM SEWER INLET PROTECTION IN OR AROUND ALL STORM SEWER INLETS AND MAINTAIN UN TIL STREET CONSTRUCTION 15 COM PLETED. F. M AINTAIN ALL SET FENCE UNTIL TURF HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. G. RESTORATION WO RK WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 72 HO URS OF GRADING COMPLETION. 10. SILT FENCE, BEFORE GRADING- XX% LF AFTER G RADING - XXX LF 11. TREE FENCE, BEFO RE GRADING - XXX LF 12. WO ODFIBER BLANKET- XXX SY 13. 6" BI0R0LL • )00 ( LF EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN AR E SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CATION OF ANY AN D ALL E XISTIN G UTILITIES BEFOR E CO MM ENCING WOR K. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FO R ANY A ND ALL DA MAG ES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCA TE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 17 ;1 610104 in Vn V nLJv t i6l Ji A' 3-rn ON -SITE BM PS 1. REDUCE IMPERVIOUS AREA- REDUCTION IN STREET WIDTH FROM 32 TO 28 '. 2. NUR P POND - NURP PO ND WILL BE U TILIZED TO MEET 08 EXCEED QUALITY AND R ATE CONT ROL REQUIREMENTS. 3. SKIMMERS • THE POND OUTLET STRUCTURE INCLUD ES A SUBM ERGED INLET PIPE TO ALLOW SKIM MIN G. 4. RIP RAP - R IP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT A LL APRO NS FOR ENERG Y DISSIPATION AND PR OVIDE SEDIM ENT CONTRO L. 5. INLET PROTECTION - INLET PRO TECTION WILL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ALL CATCH BASIN S 8 REAR YAR D STR UCTURES. 6. SLOPE STABILIZATION - SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG DOWN GRADIENT GRADING UMITS AND WOODFIBER BLANKET WILL BE UTILIZED ON ALL SLOPES 3:1 OR GREATER TO PROVIDE AD EQUATE SLOPE STABILIZATION. 7. BIOROLLS - BIO RO LLS WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG REA R YA RD SWALES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM REACHING THE NURP POND AND ULTIMATELY DOWNSTREAM WETLANDS. 8. INFILTRATIO N AREAS - INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE UTILIZED TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF RUNOFF FRO M THE INCREASED HARD SURFA CE. 9. STREET SWEEPING - STREET SWEEPING WILL BE DONE A MINIM UM OF ONCE PER WEEK OR AS NEEDED TO M INIM IZE DUST CONTROL AND VEHICLE TRACKING. 10. PHOSPH OR OUS FREE FER TILIZER - PHO SPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER WILL ALSO BE USED ON SITE. Iz 1 I!1 FILLSIII I ^ I LL-.) [)IY A nnl NI nVVI ILJIN kRE C;1 51 A LvI vn IAIjL A Trr0' LJIVI LA` ILL) TI 1/ 'V' ''' )( ll I/ \1 1 I Vv!\L�v VV\7x1 GENERAL NOTES: 1. THE GRA DING CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL STORM WATER INSPECTIONS ACC ORDING TO THE MPCA STORM WATER PER MIT. THIS INCLUDES B OTH WEEKLY INSPECTI ONS AND INSPECTIONS DONE AFTER A 0.5 " RAIN EVENT. A COPY OF THE INSPECTION REP ORT MUST BE EMAILED TO THE ENGINEER AND DEVELOPER ON A WEEKLY BASIS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PL ACE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH DETAIL ST -22 F OR ALL STOR M SEWER INLETS AND MAINTAIN THEM AS AN EFFECTIVE SILT CONTROL DEVICE. INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN RESTORATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 3. ALL RETAINING WALLS WILL REQUIRE A STRUCTURAL DESIGN, A BUILDING PERMIT 6 A FINAL INSPECTION REPORT. 4. A 1 "-2 " CRUSHED R OCK ENTRANCE BER M SHALL BE PLACED AT THE SITE ENTRANCE, TO REPLACE SILT FENCE, AND MINIMIZE EROSION ON TO THE STREETS . THE ROCK BERMS SHALL BE THE WIDTH OF THE ENTR ANCE AND 2 FEET HIGH WITH 4:1 SLOPES. (SEE DETAIL) 5. THE C ONTRACTOR S HALL MAINT AIN POSI TIVE D RAIN AGE AW AY FROM THE BUILDING P AD AND STREET AREAS THROU GH OUT CONSTR UCTI ON 8. THE C ONTRACT OR SHALL ATTEMPT TO PREVENT SOIL MATERIALS FR OM LE AVING THE SITE BY EROSI ON AND VEHICLE WHEEL TRACKIN G. HE SHALL BE RESP ONSIBLE FOR CLEANIN G OF STREET . BOULEV ARD AND UTILITY FACILITIES THAT RECEI VE ANY ERODED OR TR ACKED SOIL MATERI AL OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS OR MATERIAL 7. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY . THE CONTRACTOR SH ALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTIN G UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMEN CING WORK . HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESP ONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL E XISTING UTILITIES. / S 5 R M B 0 N L W T w1510 l CURB TOPSOIL FLO OR 60' PA D (UNLESS OTHER WISE NOTED, WA LKOUT (WO) FINISHED GRADE PER GRADING PLAN G ARAGE FLOO R 2.5' BELOW GARAGE FLOOR 2.1 O M O N W T I I ALKOUT ELEVATION CURB 6.0 TOPSOIL 60' PAD ryry ESS OTHER WUE rvoTEo l LOOKOUT (LO) HOLDDOWN DETAILS FINISHED G RADE PER GRA DING PLAN GARAGE FLOOR ' BELOW G ARAGE FLOOR LOOK OU T ELEVA TION 5 5 R M B 0 N L W�1_0�1 �1�5_�1 w'l I 1 CURB 6.0 TOPSO IL 60 PAD ,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) FULL BASEMENT (FB) NOTES: 1. GRADE (999.0) BEHIND EACH HOMCSITE 15 PROPOSED TOP OF TOPSOIL, SUBGRADC SHALL BE DOWN 0. 50 FEET 2. ESTABLISH FINISH G RA DE AT ALL 10' FRONT YARD UTI1f5 EASEM ENT LO CATIONS. FINISHED GRADE PER GR ADING PL AN GARAGE FL OOR 3.0' BELOW GARA GE FL OOR / 3:1 FARrA )L 15' I I VI.) NOT TO SCALE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON W AS PREPAR ED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISI ON AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MIN NESO TA . /vir( DA TE OL'/09/I0 REG. NO 1-7°Ln-8 r REVISIONS BY PREPARE PRELIMINARY PLANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC . CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURI NG RSM ST ORMW ATER ROUTIN G 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND#15 JML RE VISED WETLAND414 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF, WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP 8 CITY COMMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 U Z f- 5 0 0 W m ce 2 Q U) 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 / PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP . DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: BASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET GP -1 tOF SHEETS./ \ NORTH 850 LF SILT FENCE LO 1011 .0 2,150S 5+ 97 -1 2._ - 4--- , i i `\ w� u 1 ' 6MG __I o9 _�__ \___ __i_-A_ A_V __. __. M,\ 1 l \\ \ 0 _1 2.000 SF I EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CO NTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATIO N OF ANY AND A LL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMM ENCING WOR K. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY R ESPON SIBLE FOR ANY AND A LL DA MA GES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND P RESER VE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. v 100.2 - 700 SF 1025 + �-x1013.0 L-OLOl?---' I -1 x1011.5 �t 1012.0 xi 12.5 (-- +1013 0 (— x10139 .\ * 1 9 +i ek; jr zs �\ , y+ \ 0- Ir' 7Y WETLAND IMPACT 2, 1\\ AREA 1: ()MAC 504+520612 MEL (1010.$) 4 - WETL AND IMPACT AREA 2: 031 AC 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCA LE IN FEET h .0-0 STA:3+76 .77 101384 1013 .81 • •1DA 275 .19 LT FE ( aft 42(1 I F I -r I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PR EPARE D BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISI ON AND THAT I AM A DULY RE GISTER ED P ROFESSIO NAL ENGINEER UNDE R THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 01".-'11 S, /v(✓C DATE oWO/ I0 REG. NO i--0E(%8 r REVISIONS BY PREP ARE PRELI MINARY PLANS 5944 04-09-10 MISC. CITY REVISIONS RS M 051310 REVISE PUNS DURIN G RSM STORMWATER ROUTING 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND 415 J ML REVISED WETL AND 414 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF, WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP 8 CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 / 1' 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZ ATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 / 1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP . DRAWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: B ASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET GP -2 i...OF SHEETS' NORTJ { LIUf f' 1 -F SILT FNCE,® I 9° I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION W AS PREPA RED 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 . lak-5� ---- `i f-- 256 -SILT F (after) 1 Gig F--1 } .0114T It I ." I EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN A RE SHOWN IN AN A PPROX IMA TE WAY ONLY. THE CON TRACTOR SHA LL DETERM INE THE EXACT LOCA TION OF A NY A ND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AN D ALL DAMA GES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXA CTLY LOCA TE AND PRESERV E ANY AND A LL EX ISTING UTILITIES. • ( 4 5 185 LF -SILT FE (after) 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCA LE IN FEET r' 4 5 '011.12 '010.58 '010.19 /0/0.30 Flew FII Trail AREA 1 AREA 2 DATE °L/01/to RE G. NO x°111-8 4 REVISIONS BY, PREPARE PRELIMINARY PLANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC . CITY REVISIONS RSM 051310 REVISE PLANS DURIN G RSM STORMW ATER R OUTING 0 519-10 ADDED WETLAND #15 J ML REVISED WETLAND 914 05-21-10 BASE MAP REVISI ONS RSM MF. WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEPB CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-1610 r U Z U) D 0 1 co W H (U) PRELI MINARY GRADING PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNES OTA LENNAR CORP . DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04/09/10 SC ALE AS SH OWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: BASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET GP -3 /1/4 4, OF SHEE1 , NORTf31 ^'' Sl e. 3r4171a Y'!� 1013 .261 RURAL- 24' SECTION N ME 4o v 1036.0 EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTO R SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LO CATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 2.5 LF LTF er) ST, \: 31+101 IA ,... I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PL AN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPA RED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEE R UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OTA. e _ -1007 .25 I 7 '007 .08 t I _13Q7S8 J -- - 1 _ I I' - 1 y1 F 1010. 10070 (mg 2016 .0 1007 .92 v. Field Fit Trail 10/0.30 1010 .04 1 /17: ..... 1 Field Fit Trell 1. / 49.58 1010'20 1009 .43 100943 1010.05 3.144 Fit Trail 1 — / / I!131? /___ _-.- T -I I /- I I I .. -;*-9-t . .- _ L.._ JI / i l 1L fioo99 P. b.i d 0009.1.� 1006.0 ,• 2 jq �I iY BF 10020 / BF 1002. ,2_,..:... ...T / F ''',-1 0 o FB FB 1010.09 / / I / emit GF1011.0). A- 50 25 0 25 50 100 OrI D0098 SC ALE IN FEET �} S DATE O Li /09/ / O REG . N O-L�L/'2-8 r REVISIONS BY, PREPARE PRELIMINARY PL ANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC. CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURING RSM STORMWATER R OUTING 05-1410 ADDED WETLAND#15 J ML REVISED WETLAND#14 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF. WETL ANDS 06-04-10 TEP 8 CITY CO MMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 i 5, PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN THE ENCL AVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP . 1 DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM G ATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE BASE_HOL ASEK DWG SHEET GP -4 /1/4. .OF SHEET S./ NORTH) O• 5 1 1 0 ,1 II 11 1: z ,1 100 F �P5 -SIL F ( afte ) 1 .aA 2.0_0_,851 \ . 8 I� 1✓ , T��� r III 1t0.�.y1, :_ `.. G1oiQn cA . /\,<\: ... .y , (loo ss) BF1o04� 1 \1 . 4,�0 , ' �. / ✓' 0FE 10020 1 FB 1 FB f 1 ,0140A� r- 1 L F g012�0'+ I 1 I GF 1010.0 \\\ ��' •/ k' �� �\ ~ o �.` . � II111 i _ ', I G:01.2.0 o' _vVS� I/.1 1:tOQ4� _ 1GF 1012-'� / L i003 5 N 1------, ,00e ,t 1GF 10, .s 1 , J /\II/ ,. \1 * (10,r/ V� % I"l oF,3 j ��G lotoal , ...40.L.....,-.6_ )i- t✓110 D1 ' g0 / \S 10 i ! VVV 1. y 11 1100401 1 �/ 11001trt,D\j I BF 10024 a, 1 *�� . � yy ti N\ 7_ * 901 Z` L 11001 5 1 1 °e I 1 { �I EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EX ISTING UTILITIES. 1003 5.1 / r/i Y3 11 � /,t-3 f /- `\-I-1 010 .0 •tbc9.b ><1ooeo k<N'-J : • 5.- ,t --,.....,,r079,, , A. •/..'-�1�3)-- , \ 0009.5) 1 ...1-- ��F10020 . ..9710Z-- :',4,\ een30 v Ili r FB . _ FB 6-8 J GE 1010 .0 L . GF 10100 I I I , RI- 10000 I 35,bLF 1 • 100055. .% 3RLTTE' \� 21) 1 ,�' �,-I*90' 90 ` _- . *90� ;& fEf) 1- ' , } 50 25 0 25 50 100 SC ALE IN FEET ,. 5,6 1,58. mss. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DI RECT SUPER VISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSI ONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. S DATE 0Le/09/ 0 REG. NO -1-4Lf-L8 REVISIONS BY.' PREPARE PRELIMI NARY PL ANS MISC. CITY REVISIONS NRH 04-09-10 RS M 05-13-10 REVISE PLANS DURING STOR MWATER ROWING RSM 05 -19-10 ADDED WETLAND#15 REVISED WETLAND#14 J ML OS -2]-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS MF, WETLANDS RSM 06-04-10 TEP 8 CITY C OMMENT REVISIONS NRH 06-16-10 l U Z 1-7 yJ 5 0 I..L� 1- 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 f PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN THE ENCL AVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOW N J OB NO 5401-634 FILE: BASE_H OLASEK.DWG SHEET GP -5 OF SHEET 1 EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN AR E SH OWN IN AN APPR OXIMA TE WAY O NLY . THE CON TRA CTOR SHALL D ETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMM ENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXA CTLY LO CATE AND PRESERV E ANY A ND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. I HEREBY CE RTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREP ARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL EN GINEER UND ER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OTA . 100 50 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET 61 . -S ' /v/1.5'-' DATE 011/07/ (0 RE G. NO '44Z8 r REVISIONS BY PREP ARE PRELIMINARY PLANS NRH 04-09-10 MISC. CITY REVISIONS RSM 05-13-10 REVISE PL ANS DURING RSM STORMWATER ROUTING 05-19-10 ADDED WETLAND#15 JML REVISED WETLAND #14 05-27-10 BASE MAP REVISIONS RSM MF , WETLANDS 06-04-10 TEP & CITY COMMENT NRH REVISIONS 06-16-10 1 PRELI MINARY EROSION Z w a J U Z cr z 0 U H MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. J DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04/09/10 SC ALE AS SH OW N JOB NO 5401-634 FILE BASE_HOLASEK.DWG SHEET EC OF SHEETS 1 HEREB Y CERTIFY TH AT THIS PLA N OR SPECIFICATION W AS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND T HAT I AM A DULY REGISTE RED PROFESSION AL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF TH E STATE OF MINNESOTA. EXISTING UT ILITIES SH OWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY O NLY. THE CONTRA CTOR SHALL DETERM IN E THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE CO MMENCING WORK. HE A GR EES TO BE FULLY RE SPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAM AGES A RISING OUT OF HIS FA ILURE TO EX ACTLY LOCAT E AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. PRELIMINA RY COPY 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 714 -1 9" ---'DATE CO/ 01 / I 0 REG . NO 1-4111-8 REVISIONS BY Revise ®Ice to155 all owed r emoval 6 repl ace wl 4' Imes NRH 05-06-10 Bas e Map R evisi ons Wetl and 814 B 15 RSM 06-0-10 TEP 8 City C omm ent NRH Rovisl ons 06-16-10 1 U Z 5 0 W m ce 2 J r EXISTING TREE SURVEY THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR C ORP. J DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: HOLASEK-TREE SU RVEY.DWG SHEET TS -1 OF TS -12 SHEETS./ h I l \h !!1£LpOR14E wAY -"---- i V 46 cp43 V 43.0 3W 0 .19 EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WAY ONLY. TH E CO NTRA CTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE CO MMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FO R ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILUR E TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. • V 5 33 502 171 S00 467 0 o� 431 0 56 09 0 )0,e J9 2002 Ci7 027 -82 4 9 0 076 0 99 4 163 Om 0 135 009 Ill 0 0 0 063 b 032 09 J$2 \(Jl iA Q Oel /' 1 °P In 01 0100 ,: 120 46 010 03 0 1 Vv 0 (• //�� ■24 TW'e13 .3 .3 / • 0 36 027 (5 e3 59 19 6 4'7.4' 06 I 0 '66 115 1720 131 132 177 0 111 X° U 96 1 69 a71 0106 /H V 121 9% Cr' 197 0 081 a% O 148 163 0 200 014 V 126 // .0, 129 116 0 0 149 (W A 110 0 0 2016 191 0226 02A 1960 1 166 19tP 1990 eo 1 Cr2° 69 }@6 �f 2°S 019 5 23222 0 2 206 3110 2 93 0 227 2 35 017 1 27 115 0 119 0 71677 I IP$ 9 16 1(33777 U 0123 0- 053 Oro 47 7, 0 0130 67 89 0 z5 V V 210 2 ' 0 0 0 262 231 21 2 -01 CO O 2. 0 ® O 2A 261 Qooe o al) 276 v 269CO 2,28 O7 2490 266 26. 2420 2lJ 226 o We,NW : d4 366 /W� 271 300 Yn29 ;:7:15 OEM O 3Y 318 3L N . 1 2l0 9.3? 336 ® 3500 9o36 321 O SlO 0 0 361 0 0 3)I O �� J)) 31S 313f/ 0 337 3155 Z 0 26ti 6 R"6 aCr v 28. 0 261 0206 O 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 294 316 ' 0 V .3 0 B3o an 6 0 0 P]7 311 5 0 612 PB9 0 735 $V(1 76'5 799 0 76 826 0619 6270 0 0624 19 613 06 8 50 299 766 317 076 2 74) (19 2. 06 211 0236 250 0274 8 11 24 7 00 02 51 267 1°B 792 1071 763 TN 1°13107C 8232 10]l l32 0 1063 154 106 A _103. 107 1072 1069 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISI ON AND THAT I AM A DULY RE GISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE ST ATE OF MINNESOT A. S M '44')—' DATE oil/ 0/ / 1 O REG . NO —1"4-1-8 NORTH r— REVISIONS BY Revise c alcs to15% albwed r emo val & repla ce w/ 4" tr ees NRH 05-0610 Base M ap Revisions Wetland 414 & 15 RSM 06-07-10 TER E. City Comment NRH R evisions 06-16-10 1 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 • EXISTING TREE SURVEY THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. 5) DRAWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SH OWN J OB NO 5401-634 FILE. HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY .DWG SHEET TS -2 ,1/4.0F TS -12 SHEETS , 1 r GRA Pa. 26V1 WAY S •= ;'m K. 7 EXISTING UTI ITIES SHO WN ARE SHO WN IN AN APPROXIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXA CT LOCATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMM ENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAM AGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE A ND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 3M® 7381 398 409 ORD 0397 465 406 077 39 3— ��39a4 36'oak 0 5 e5) .9 2- BI2 0 O 796 lJ 76 37 799 70 W5q1c) 99 793 833 002 CP 7819 912 0 014 808 604 /x/806 0 & 839 837 839 73, /y2T ,1, ) vi 6 V �\ �3 0612 716 0 a6 '.,e 1 11 3 61 61) 7 831 73�u�j31 l•631. 1-671 (��7 P1) �0 5 079147 v6 74 85, 016 0 O 972 01] 016 0�3 v64/ ^ 0 72! yg/3 ���3�J 999 ` 94 666 ] 749 6 O x014 O D5. (X4 •• O 0' 68 3® (i l ^ A 969 10,7 Q 104 130 726 7 633 679 0000 0 993 J y� Taro 1 'OVB(�)O 07k.5 0 ]21 /6 �) �B \�_ 99f O1Q17 V ��IIJS 40 5 3p! c: ( 1011(V�y1+00j'x 1 A7/4� A99 09 90 9• 0116] 4 �t 0 0 � 06" 6 6B) 384 77 • 10 7 9)) !Pt 4 56 '7 03 7 rot 0 O Il I il IIM �2 1198 0 (• 5' l ll) ° 64t. /.1 6 0q�6 164 100 11§6 ®7192 K10 V �,a�6/. 7 IIB !S V 11�119I 3 Vim' 6� 03 ,2„9',. 1 �VV 629 0 / ��666666000 O � 7v/ '% 690 �6A ^ Of)9 1 1997119!7 O aOa — —136'97- 197 v __]v/j✓1 1 6970 I1 0,255 ic111892�/�J IBB y[�/�� 2'�34�]a 9 IPO Is+ 4 VVgIP 6� �:J \/1 `B � 't' 7J� �y'� 014 5 6SE 13 BIB V 757 7 — ne 11 09 �O 766 1' 077 1077 I 0 1063 0 1061C 1068 1072 109 1069 Gam 62 57 0 1w9 BS6 6 __ =970 118 rjl �(`•/1 (�./� V 8, �1 •• (5- "0 O 90 ^9 1039 5 e 7m VS 9 {{{1 ttt8 O 1"01026c 030 1028^ 913 co)47 6' /•5 10 2b IO( e`$ . 9 v V C 6. V . e3B CI lOP1 Q0 cr .4 0. B,6 O 877 903 ore c 0916 0 967 �r D 665 899 87�YW ";11910 e‘ 883 84 8" 654601 021 @^}1 896 0 911 91tif IJ(55 B7 /'\ 87WO O•�' 927 � (�t�027 1038 1 0 d O O' °' 7 0 9Vd 4 B6��J'J 887 0 937 031 I4 O 971 916 0 999 680 74955 940 %0 15 77 -97 7 %2 716 / 953 101 OO ]3 /1 V M\011 p31 t 93 69 477 �� • 40 636 6470 64 4` 5 0654 % 69 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 58 76 61 630 !S1 5750 0 0632 573 V 00? 0 5690 1133 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DUL Y REGISTERED PR OFESSI ONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE oill oJ(0 ._ REG. NO 8 J Cs REVISIONS BY R evise ®ks to 15% all owed NRH removal 8 replace w/ 4' bees 05-0610 Ba se Map Revisions RSM Wetland 814 8 15 06-07-10 TEPB City C omment NRH ReviS one 06-16-10 r EXISTING TREE SURVEY THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENN AR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SHOWN J OB NO 5401-634 FILE: HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY DWG SHEET TS -3 l OF TS -12 SHEETS <j5g 2"V5 1 526 O O E86 1212 0 1289 0287 0 122 6 r .. . .9920 EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CATIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COM MENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FO R ANY AND ALL DAM AG ES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXA CTLY LO CATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 559 569 0 1268 I 239..91 !28 -iYB4 �12e11/ SS1`46'49 "E 285 .11 1278 1251 0 b :63' 62 V JJJ(j{�.j�� 0581 5.10 010 589 03 ga V 1507 x} 156 679 57 <J y �l lJ 1�rlB, 167 322 3 V 1 36 4157 B 1 248 121$ ." O ,44 I Q 21] V1 V 245 261 7 17 19 5 528 1553 , .• f SW ,15 cc1575 1 376 O 0. SIB 1234W.) } I o 1 69 X67 0 336 0 1569 oi Q555 $3 15100 1 329 0 16 311 (�/y��36 1 ]J(J.y 1,3117‘.#,A53° V 3)I 332 13 335 77 50 25 0 25 50 396 910 3 37 4,;?7 100 SCALE IN FEET 372 0 1513 1545 0 1135 0 1138 11610 8121 11 7. 1506 0 133 131 11 1,6 3813" 1 14314 1201 63 01137 1136 A 0 1 9 {116 0162 -3,5i�\ �x 0If 59 1y} 10 20 V 51] zi j](�lye IV 6 l�l 1• 1V 1508 0335 1345 0 116 1110' �I •• Ile 16 ($jl 1378 0 1 342 1389 0 1385 0 1379 1350 134 1360 13 23 t; 1390 1 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPER VISION AND THAT I AM A DULY RE GISTERED PROFESSIO NAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE ST ATE OF MINNESOTA. Jlr1 .S, /445--, DATE °WO/ / I ° REG. NO 1— PLn—B 366 134 4 339 NORTH n355 i REVISIONS BY 1 R evis ecalm t o15 %allo wed NRH rem ov al 8 repla ce wl 4' tre es 05-06-10 Bas e Map R evisions RSM Wetl and 614 B 15 06-07-10 TEP 6 City C omm ent NRH Rensb ns 06-16-10 t EXISTING TREE SURVEY THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: H OL ASEK-TREE SURVEY .DWG SHEET TS -4 ,1/4.0F TS -12 SHEETS/ f& EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN AR E SHOWN IN AN APPROXIM ATE WAY ONLY . THE CO NTRAC TOR SHALL DETERM INE THE EXACT LO CATION OF ANY A ND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE COMM ENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FO R ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY A ND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. I HEREB Y CE RTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATIO N WAS P REPA RED BY ME OR UN DER MY DI RECT SUPER VISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY REGISTERED P ROFESSIO NAL ENGINEER UNDE R THE LAWS OF THE ST ATE OF MINNESOTA. 50 25 0 25 50 100 SC ALE IN FEET "C --* /v4'-1 5.---' DATE 0 Li/09 , I o REG . NO 1 f^ ^8 REVISIONS BY Revise rake 1015% allo wed removal & replace wl 4' trees NRH 05-06-10 Ba se Map Re vi sio ns Wetland 614815 RSM 06-07-10 TEP 8 City Comm ent Reasons N RH 06-16-10 l r EXISTING TREE SURVEY THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: H OLASEK-TREE SURVEY.DW G S HEET TS -5 `OF TS -12 SHEET EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN A RE SHOWN IN AN APPRO XIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CON TRA CTOR SHA LL DETER MINE THE EXACT LO CATION OF ANY AND A LL EXIST ING UTILITIES BEFO RE CO MMENCING WORK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FO R ANY A ND ALL DAMA GES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. I HEREBY CERTIF Y TH AT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFIC ATION W AS PREPARE D BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSION AL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 165 LP r' -SILT FE I WETLAND IMPA CT AREA t 0.66 AC 10 1011.0 O TREE SA VED O TREE REMOVED 0 TREE EXEM PTED O TREE DEAD 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET n��323,179524 4 - \p' 'L) 525 k 19�A , �R .\ 0482 1 I 0759 \ I I 8531 513 �, I �I1 L 489 1( 0 ""6. —C% "37.4 DATE o -?J07/10 REG. NO 4 —9 i REVISIONS BY ' R evis e ®os to 15% allow ed NRH remov al 8 r epl ace wl 4' tr ees 05-06-10 Base Map Revisi ons RSM Wetland 914 & 15 06-07-10 TEP & C17 C omment NRH Revisions 06-16-10 J r TREE REMOVAL PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENN AR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: H OLASEK-TREE SURVEY DWG SHEET TS -6 OF TS -12 SHEETS r IOLFSILT F 1 RURAL- 24' SEC TION ry�RANCE NUMEM 165 Ff SIL'rr a ` _ mho* 185 LF -SILT FE (after) EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROX IM ATE WA Y O NLY. TH E CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE TH E EXA CT LOCA TIO N OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFOR E COM MENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AN D A LL DAMA GES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE A ND PR ESER VE A NY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. la 3fji v. TREE SAVED O TREE REMO VED O TREE EXEMPTED O TREE DEAD GF 1011 .0 50 25 0 25 50 i 301 tk i, ' .....� , o -J O0tj 930 759 ,0311 0 Y It 277 B00 _35 l 912 0 '951 0 7% 7650 79900 76 0 790 766 lPF 8E0 793 O C \ ^O 792 763 570 764 ®772 8832 752 1109 0 4 63 Field Fit Trail AREA 1 AREA 2 \1071.W, 107\ •V,_I) 0060 0 1063 072 1,69 NORTH I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFIC ATI ON WAS PRE PARED BY ME OR UND ER MY DIRECT SUPERVISI ON AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGI NEER UN DER 100 THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. SCALE IN FEET R-44 S. _ 714-1- o DATE °LI/ 09 `(° REG. NO Ln-8 i REVISIONS 1 BY R evi se cake to15 %allowed NRH el & repl ace w/ 4- tr ees 05-06-10 Base Map Revisions RSM Wetland 014 B 15 06-07-10 TEP & City Comment NRH Revisions 06-16-10 r 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA , MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 r TREE REMOVAL PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR C ORP. J DRAWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SH OWN J OB NO 5401-634 FILE' HOLASEK-T REE SURVEY .DW G SHEET TS -7 OF TS -12 SHEETS, J /6 J (. h 143 .14 r�. EXISTING UTILITIES SHO WN ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXIMATE WA Y ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCAT ON OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COM MENCING WOR K. HE A GR EES TO BE FULLY RE SPONSIB LE FO R A NY AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF H IS FAILURE TO EXACT LY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. )w anci ifigatioon �f'! of o+z5 o- 9 ` r - AIL O+ TREE SAVED O TREE REMOVED O TREE EXEMPTED O TREE DEAD V 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 912 O )6J� O 1990 01% 1 V 793 B P)O O0 33 6919 91 3 819 766 mn�v1\ 0.-75e 2 1063 6P79,3 LIDLI 101E 1069 O 1041 BF 1002-2 %. J .. ( 39 116 , . �'. . /y •� � - 1201 — ` 2 11 \/1163 ` I ff'e4 / / 1131 q P3 or ,,,,./. �,, ,��J 2� j 3�/,� 26 35 ./20 _ / Y' \ 1J I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREP ARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRE CT SUPERVISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY RE GISTERE D P ROFESSIONAL EN GINEER UNDER THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. "1".-4 ' '. DATE 0'1/(39 / I0 REG . NO 8 D44 / H J i REVISIONS BY 1 Revise cake to 15 % allowed NRH remo val 8 replace vrt 4' trees 05-06-10 B ase Map R e0ei ons RSM W etl and 414 8 15 06-07-10 TEP 8 Clty Comment NRH Revlsons 06-16-10 1 1 J TREE REMO VAL PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA 1 LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RS M DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SHOWN J OB NO 5401-634 FILE' HOL ASEK-TREE S URVEY.DWG SHEET TS -8 `G6- TS -12 SHEETS 1 3 00 279 I I 6 I Ig 1 1_ P zl 289 1212 a- • 0.7 01. O. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN A RE SHOWN IN AN APPR OXIM ATE WAY ONLY. THE CO NTRA CTOR SHA LL DETERM INE THE EXACT LOCATION OF A NY A ND A LL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE CO MM ENCING WO RK. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPO NSIBLE FO R ANY AND ALL DAM AGES ARISING O UT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXA CTLY LO CA TE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. 545LF--- -SILT FE /4 1278 5,581 . 0) 154 1553 8.7.;11 550 v 516 6TH- ----101,' ",,,, --- ,,,,,,),0,0 - -- - 3 (V� (( l'J1 L%9 5P 2 ' 55 055, 0555 str '5e5' 0 15 o —0:$3- ' ,9 Sap O TREE SAVED O TREE REMOVED O TREE EXEMPTED 0 TREE DEAD Iso 1501 0 15O 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 151 5 15.5 0 143 14 204 } / 61,31 / 1136 ' 1 0 026 9 N. 1330 \y V •'6 c$2 O jj1B 1B r9 T5 31 1506 0 V 1�'i7 z5 5 25 15 J0 1511 0 163 1345 0 1145 1378 0 l385 ,1e1 134 2 1389 0 Na R1 m 3 86 1 314 NORTH 339 I HEREBY CE RTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREP ARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPER VISION AND TH AT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNES OT A. DATE OL%/O9/(0 REG. NO -1-4(11-2 J REVISIONS BY R evise ®lab 15 % allo wed r emo val 6 replace WI 4. tree s NRH 05-05-10 Base Map 500602 s Wetl and 014 & 15 RSM 06-07-10 TEP &City Comm ent NRH Re visi ons 06-16-10 1 0 0 0 62 co 1 rn rn cn Z 0 0 F- 0 TREE RE MOVAL PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP. DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO 5401-634 FILE: HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY.DWG SHEET TS -9 ` OF TS -12 SHEETS ' 3� 0 =-1004 53 Irt v=10 00. 7-3 tA 15. C14 S .,.v-, v.,. . F6 EXISTIN G UTILITIES SHOWN AR E SHOWN IN AN A PPRO XIMATE WAY ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHA LL DETERMINE THE EXACT LO CA TION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFO RE COM MENCING WOR K. HE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAM AGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXA CTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND A LL EXISTING UTILITIES. 'NIT)I Amcor r1 1 vl L \ 1 1 L_v 066 ^'0 O TREE SAVED O TREE REMOVED O TREE EXEMPTED O TREE DEAD 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET I HEREB Y CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATI ON WAS PREPA RED BY ME OR UNDER MY DI RECT SUPE RVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL EN GINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 1' "C. DATE 0y/o71 (0 RE G. NO 1-4 8 RTH l REVISIONS BY Revise cake to 15% allowed NRH rem oval 6 r epla ce wl 4' tre es 05-06-10 B ase Map R ewtime RSM W etla nd 814 & 15 06-07 -10 TEP & Cily C omme nt NRH R evi si ons 06-16-10 0' TREE REMOVAL PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CORP . J DRAWN NRH CHECKED RSM DATE 04-09-10 SCALE AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-634 FILE, HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY .DWG SHEET TS -1 0 DF TS -12 SHEET) f /: P.m8ma. oPK«e_e e.8t88_ w',;88, XN v,oa;.-Pu.F. r:8m&oRSPR2P8"""5 °' semma"" ""''wU""oema"2" "" PP ,38ta.a„_ona.aae88V. eW.o ma".. sMo o_ m��tistosKvsavv:,�'_ MEHUtm cooao-88_8'48 PIE �s �ova�a�rasNsao�evsasz vaysa�Nax,,ao��a„_„naxswo>>o�oasxe�a,m��x�xtisaoox�s�x�. m�oazrscmv �sz ��azs��xK�n� �on:,a mven� o,;.ae�-seen�am: ,nv�a �,Na�noa:m�Nsann�a��,vsnvaoManao ffi 1 1 1 dm L mr 6Ssmm 1d3444tr 9 i. '$+s .c 8# 111 He��so emu>WGw 00000 :WN���m�a�:wv=�s03m�P00_om00 �e�a�gmmmm': "�0mm�au:Wu�20 0x0'0 Xo;womm0 v:Wv0"samem�e�v_oem�mue�v "o mm�mv>wvvomm�m�2ww=oB000000 88�88ev� 008888e�vm8mm7 a�nY� uu a88N8 c �x�e�ea m._ c8E. '8. 88ffioem-2'd u8eggo a etlmvv�o��;tiuv„--ae22 oU n� a e8noaa8N8V88mnKmN8 888 m&88&omoo'8N, '8.MYo:Y88YvBnotlnv28ovd;Auv,18888N888 8 e,P8.U82d8 d3,8888888 KmSro=:v8 ,'N8 uu YS d Na YG n Ynon: dv a�mHmvUU o Noon nae- _� � cr eMP-,aa.,. .. ,_anPSRopovo8�RP�&eemve$.'o8m8U�Nm8ePw.::w, ",-ovaO188:°:um 8e�«wG:«. �'4 S 1 �sWmm��m������n��mP"sUm�pawW�N �nwww�nWmxx EMW pa�aoa_ „ 1 e 888 8Sm8a'novatim,- oo.8P . omo2.1[[18N. 87'o8mRiv 8,'8- 218N 8o:YNm8Pao,«a8888..8 8 821KN8 8,;axn m8nmm1'mx88 ,—, 8 W[3888 8N. 8,B: oo8,n .oaoo8 888.8 so.,no>;.mm8 8'88,1. 88888888' 83: m 00 000 d#8 em aa3aas 84 8 6 f 68 • it t*4 k-/{;RMA 3842 e4m88 "t8.'x mA 4r8 .mm -sad m 8 88.8 888 m a.F,EPAEMEHEHamPA eWv o§EMHEF. EMRPAH§ema:=:Nmom§ini'M§M§uaMR27„=W"c7,o§§g§$Hsamm§§H:§ ME EiHoemoemxx§ § FAH,I NMgM "erF,MU LMHM,:wg -08 o Ol a ,W Pp -,>>aos-ne.u-ooa-,., �Gomm�Nn,',a ��,�»=e'e ��5,-�Y� oh m atii5i5�o7 moss:�nav,,. o�.,. ,na-o,�..�a�n, ,,.,aonoxnomnaa��o 3' ^�,' �o,' .� BBnm�a>;:.e 15vWol5 b�J� q a.�aK a.,vNR: �nSa S, .,no,.,a„naK,:,oMab ��,ov�oa,'.�oaooe a,omN �oStlUonBom'•�2 .�. ,_o,a�aa_�. ,_oDa�§U:e��oma�§ue���o�mmm�:�vmo§mo§o�§s"s§$mmav:�Nnaem�av�W�msmm�sa:�v�o§s�mr:evaomm�s"x:WNr�a9�mu:"ce^oem�P�wU���mem��wN�oem�aa:W:,_onas�Uvee'ss§m§§ 0 0 0 m O 828.6 moal..88 �mmmamaammau ammomma�somaenmanm nonsenaaa�oaaaa�uaes,�ovxaan�nx�nasxam�zonseE�n.:�o >>-noonno„ „o82,A828 88308 m 888888_ amm Umenmm;,a8.886.88 68 886 o§#§#§§ mh,,,,,IMEM§m§EEC§sxea"au2W�Zo§xMI §§M,,I §gins: §IMmsHTFJ ,^agee§ritTIV § M,26N 03�su2wamo§§g§s§,W§§m aUE gig§0FU:P.§eama r,ME IEFAEI e. if r3 a"d axo„ea238a�oaNp=:=umG�,unm a,',Wmao nGoanoB.�'o,'.Ya=nNBa' .�'ov.'�mmnoon'o'o'o mon�oannGn'o o�o�oa=onn�2'=,' ., 'o 00'80088.ono-a-n-. �-anoon-o.--oonvoam5n8m,`,�'o �� Pg aX .,m:,A um u,8mmeeeemom76 BNYm-mtllda �8" 88 a88.8 . 8me 88 6“88wm8 8886060.88.028888.1.88.88888 88.8.488 88.8.6 86 I SHEET TS -11 Lof TS -12 SHEETS ILE: HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY.DWG JOB NO 5401-634 SCALE AS SHO WN o D CHECKED RSM DRAWNNRH TREE REM OV AL CALCULATIONS THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA LENNAR CO RP. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC . 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 J r TEP 8 City m Coment IBWetlase Mandap #14 8 15 ReNaione o -P g6 V. >m a ( REVISIONS m4h9J 4 I 1 8'18 8 m .�����mn.3 8.rv_ m�. �voaa=la aEWv�oom�oo S'L'U'1o6mmu'>W:, 2oma�a: 2. 329.3 RRmRRffiSR�m� „o wRRnRR000000000RRm�RRRaRo m�'�d e�vdoom'mY����oeo wUk` .� ", oem�mUs0000sm�m�:W � ' PP PpPP 91* . o Ntiuom-,Um&� mdNvmaG mfSUvKmv;,mNe�;avo�;no�UKo�CdauoS�dYmmvY�;ffiv.;Y mRkYu e75mb�amN?Ib.;�muvmeNu::mevo��o��;ome�e�:3ueoao ��;aoB�Y'.;o„ �e�de��e,.�Uv�Kmmm d�K'�eo�:.dmooe�m��muee� .N�e� o��a 4444 vi ZOA4282284 3 S R-. • 8 8 Et Y S 11 44 .3.8.35528 .,u o .32528.3 i 0 81 ow S 8i$268.8000. o Y.28 .8im000.c,o."damsma.o,oaam a 8S D 0 0 0 2) O N 5 " 85$MOMO mSSNM% 0,! � =F 000moo822228=ummo- ... 8828.2=884 ., 22 8588 8. 4 223284222.228 222 J 'Nd 'm m�muswr.+-oSB9S§8W.14888.388.388.3888,188.38.9=.3 .38vv:Wv=58898&ES. ',=SkS" 9$&.38.3.3 8bb9Bd228988k�6'aYS�� �ffimtl28.328-"8 m.�m�.�v-58288 omvH HH5 Fm__ 352.38,$.5 852282222555 '-.a 'm'.m 8.om., .. .mm.»m.00a.Nmm.oWg toott . 44ot8N4814 �aoo. 8t 8812 #aY 0 0 N $ e sewl * MS.* 11401 a 3 a a im s ooati.xa:s s;�2 ,1,128:8» 8-4 a ff K Gs. 8 2 m m s? v88 mvau,1gWmesmmF .ms111Eoem11mu:�„_=111111x1111 111 wv-ommrmmW1 111 .U.. .1111 m.m� .3818.38; S =SSSr.o�< gay S g�a aSB'.; ou mv.m„mUau. „m.i5w.:.�m3�u:m �'�BimNo,w�:d�maS�m .wm8.mom..>.m'o m55YN:Nv'a::N�;: vW�5em5NU23u:o.ym i1 s 4 SHEET TS -12 ` OF TS -12 SHEETS ILE HOLASEK-TREE SURVEY.DWG bE9-LOb9 ON SO f SCALE AS SHOWN o o DRA WNN NRH 4m W m c2 x o m O TREE REMOVA L CALCULATIONS 1 THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, M INNESOTA LENNAR CORP. 1 1 SATHRE—BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN . 55391 (952) 476-6000 1 Bas e Map Revisions W etland P14 E. 15 R evis e calcs to 15% allowed rem ov al 8 repl ace wl4' tr ees REVISIONS 12 m 3 1 v'z oy h {) a+►aa SFAIN flH 200 100 0 100 200 400 SCALE IN FEET BOTA NICAL NAME SIZE QTY. NOTES KEY COMMON NAME B OTANICAL NAME SIZE QTY. NOTES Buffer Yard Plantings Front Yard Tree Ex. Tree Tree Replacment Requirements 3,702 Ca liper inches removed Re placement=1246 Trees a 4" Caliper Front Yard Tre es are not Include d in Calculatio n Tree Replacement Planting Schedule KEY COMMON NA ME Trees AL Re dmo nd Linde n AS BB BO HA HL Ito PE PO RB RM RO SM WB WO VE BF BH WP Qua king Aspen Blue Beech Bur Oak Ha ckbe rry Skyline HoneyLocust Ironwood Princeton Elm Northern Pln Oak Rive r Birc h Re d Maple Red Oak Sugar M aple Bla de Willo w White O ak Valley Forge Elm Evergreen Trees Belem Fir Black Hills Spruce White Pre Tdia ame rican a Redmond' Popu lus tre muloides Carpinus caro lin iana Quercus macro carpa cell's occ iden tal's Gleetsls idacenthos var harm's • Skyco/e' Ostrye Nrglniana Ulmus ame rican s Princeton' Quarto s elllpso ldals Betide m grs Acer rubrum Quemu s rubra Acer saccharum Safe mica Quartos aiba Ulmua emerican Valley Forya' Ables be'samee P icea gla nce den seta anus Sno bus 4"BB 4" BB 4"85 4"09 4" BB 4" BB 4"BB 4"BB 4" BB 12 BB 4"8B 4"90 4" BB 4"013 4" 89 4" BB 64 115 51 46 127 88 91 42 52 32 76 92 107 58 48 27 stra ight single leader straight single lea der s tra ight single le ade r s tra ight single le ade r stra ight single leader stra ight single leader stra ight single leader straight single leader stra ight single lea der multi -ste m straight single leader straight single leader straight single leader stra ight single leader straight single leader stra ight single leader 12'BB 1288 12 BB Total 33 29 44 1222 Front Yard Tree Planting Schedule AL HA HL PE RM RO SM VE Trees Redmond Linden Hackberry Skyline HoneyLocust Princ et on Elm Red Maple Red Oak Sugar Mapl e Valley Forge Bi n Tilia americ ana 'Redmond' Celtic occefentsss G/e 45,8 ld acanthos var irem,. 'Skyc de Ulmus ameri cen e'a eceb'' Acer rWwn Quom us ma a Acer sscchenn a Ulmus am erican Valley Forge' 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "BB 2.5 "88 T otal 35 25 39 47 15 46 56 268 straight single leader straight si ngl e le ader straight single leader straight si ngle l eader straight si ngl e leader straight si ngle l eader straight single leader straight singl e leader I h ereby enlmB this ne nWlcal bort nw repw as on*peed by rd my died supervision end met I em a d uly rep hi re L andscape Aidiit ee under the IN late nt Mlnnesoda . agree: REVISIONS 5/3/10: rev'd sizes & quantiti es, bas e info 5/13/10: r ev'd base info & moved trees 6/7/10: rev'd base info & tW moved trees 6/16/10: rev'd base info & tW mo ved trees BY tw U O cd TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN 00 East S econd Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN TOW CHECKED TDW DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB NO. 5401-634 LENNAR CORP. FILE: TREE_REPLACEMENT_PLAN SHEET Dale 4410 Reglatraton n 20144 TRP-1 OF SHEE15 (-5071-1S i0 Z-dbl e>1.oz x ue4e444:49 m -6-r aYq .03d NI 31VOS OOL M SZ 0 SZ 00 133HS N213d IN3W30213d30 3301 :3113 ' d2100 2IVNN31 100 East Second Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 4E9-2049 ON OOf NMO HS SV 31V OS o 2/60/00 31210 MCI 03)103H0 MCI NMV00 VIOS3NNIW VNIa3W AV -19N3 3H1 Nb ld 1N3W30d1d32I 332j1 A'' 0 CD � cr CD 0 0 • CD saa} pan ow o ;u1aseq P/'4 O2/9 149 saal Pas au aseq pAa :0L/U9 seal Panow o;u1 aseq ppa :0 L/E L/S o;u 1 aseq 'say;u enb V sai ls Pia, :ONE/S SNO I SIA3?J ..s a!LPAI 4N w 244 to pueun p 0ady p w5 Auer v 1Ba 55paS 14 4 Pue um/v .4ns p ale Aa pa to 44 pae dad Ypdab ug lesIP 4 44• ue 4141 41 NIYw Apa q 1 1 A RURAL- 24' SLY:Ti'71v PROPOSEDRET0NG WALL 05 002 to 50 25 0 25 50 100 NOLUO3S ni: -iv ana NOLLDJS .00 l vdn tl I n ere4Y mrlllym this en, ep c0callon or report was preps and Dy me Of nd my di mtl s uper visi on a nd Mat I am a duly repia re landscape Amhilmi under the 1 teteot MInn eecta . Signed: REVISIONS 5/3/10: rev'd sizes & q uantities, base info 5/13/10: reVd base info & moved trees 6/7/10: rev'd base info & moved trees 6/16/10: re s d base info & moved trees TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DR AWN TDW CHECKED TDW DATE 04/09/10 SC ALE AS SHOWN JOB NO. 5401-634 BYE tw tw tw 100 East Sec ond Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 LENNAR CORP . FILE: TREE_REPL ACE MENT_PLAN SHEET SCALE IN FEET D ale: 4-9 -10 Reglah aeon 0 20144 TRP-3 1 �OF SHEETS" " 8 cn m m 2 m 1 \ ( 202 3 TREE REPLACEM ENT PLA N THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA rTh Hemel Comm unity Park City of Medi na 3200 Mill Drive PID 121-18-2344-0017 37.65 ac (1,639,911 sry vu ),> \ �� 2 ���� o.! , x +,I We Q1)/ Fi eld Flt Lal \, N. Norby & Associates Landscape Architects, Inc. 100 East Se cond Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 MK &J A Hemig Address Unassigned PID 131-18-23-11-0006 5.11 ac (222,408 sf) 7 \1 I A C Johnson & 4245 Br ockto PID 131-18-23 8 m 0 z cn w 50 25 0 25 50 100 3 0 I hereby molly the this an, apecelcallm or r aped was prepared by me or nd my direct cupen1elon and lhel I am a duly rapi s m L andscape Arthnatl und erth e lel e of Minnemm. spned: 7 REVISIONS 5/3/10: re v'd sizes & qua ntities, base info 5/13/10: r esod b as e i nfo & mo ved tr ees 6/7/10: reo 4 bas e info & mo ved tre es 6/16/10: r edd base info & tw m ov ed tre es BY tw tw tw a) .rUr ., 0 023 4_0 cd 0 4 Z 100 East S econd Stre et, Ch ask a, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA Th LENNAR CORP . DRAWN \ TDW C HECKED TDW DATE _ 04/09/10 _. -.. . SCALE AS SHOWN J08 NO . 5401-634 FILE: TREE REPLACEMENT_PL AN SHEET SCALE IN FEET Data: 4910 Roglatreon 1Y. 20144 TRP-5 SHEETS/ REVISIONS 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 1 ndeby certify th MI6 . speclficetbn or report wee pr epared by me or tnd mcM upesbn and Mel l am a duty regis re Land sc ape ape Artlilbtl under the tats of Minnesota . Stoned: 5/9/10: r ev d sizes & quantities, base info 5/13/10: rev'd base info & tw moved trees 6/7/10: reVd base info & tw moved trees 6/16/10: re wd base info & mo ved trees O Z cid TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN TDW CHECKED TDW DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB N O, 5401-634 100 East Second Str eet, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 BY tw LENNAR CORP. FILE: TREE_REPLACEMENT_PLAN SHEET Date: 4310 Registration it: 20144 TRP-6 SHEETS, 200 100 0 100 200 400 P ARK SCALE IN FEET Existing Tree NAVAJO HH LS I her eby c edity Ma this an, speclllcellor or repel was pr epared bymen nd myth re d supam son and th at I am a duty rag is re L andscape AMit ect under to la tole of Minnesota Signed: 1- REVISI ONS BYE 5/3/10: rewd b uffer tw pl anti ngg uantity,b ase i nf o 5/13/10: re Vd base into tw 6/07/10: re Vd base info tw adjusted trees 6/16/10: reed base info tw aJusted tr ees_.._ 1. O 03 BUFFER YARD PLANTING PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN TDW CHECKED TOW DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SH OWN JOB N O. 5401 -034 FILE 100 East Sec ond Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 PL ANTING_PLAN_100410 SHEET LENNAR CORP . Date: 4-8-10 Regialrall on #.20144 \ OF BP -1 pi Hunter Buffer Planting 2 fScale:1"=50' 50 25 0 25 50 SCALE IN FEET 7� NOLL340 0Z -mina P21 Hunter Buffer Planting \_2 /'Scale:V=50' 100 (05,1705 S'1L% NO1103S.9Z-1VBf1N 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET Planting Point Requirement .3 Opacity 276 points per 100' 25 foot Buffer Width 2480 Total Feet of Buffer Po int Requirment = 6845 Points Type Point Value Qty Points Ov0 rsto ry Tree 50 55 2(50 Tall Evergree n ---- 50 63 3' 50 Ur cerslory Tw ee 15 4l /65 TaI Shruh 5 � 135 I E7S Total 7280 T c 505.050.08 -1811 5 01103S 08-15008 rt r Hunter R oad Buffer Planting Schedule KEY COMM ON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE QTY. NOTES Tr ees AL Redmond Linde n Tee anemo ne Redmond' 2.5. BB 5 straight single le ad er AS Quaking Aspen P opulu s fmm ubid e5 2.5" BB 9 straight single l eader BO B ur Oak O uemus macr ocarpa 2.5" BB 5 straight single l eader HA H adrbarry cm acc en ers 2.5" BB 8 str aight si ngle leader HL Skylin e HoneyLoaatl 0 0145,04 race., wimmv 5k ool e' 2 .5. BB 5 s traight si ngle leader - PE Pnn cst on Elm ters er em encene Princeton' 2 .5 " BB 2 str aight single l eader IRS River River Birch B eec h Mem 13 BB 9 r548 -stern 12M Red Mapl e searwri.m 2 .5" BE 3 straight si ngle le ad er RO Red Oak °ea r... raem 2.5. BB 4 straight si ngle le ader SM S ug ar M aple note seeenwm 2.5. BB 5 55 0.90± single lead er Evergreen Trees Eel Black Hills Spru ce Me e Qleum de nsete 8'BB 22 BF B elem Fir A de s nel semen 8' BB 13 NP NonB ay Plne Area r osi ness 8918 7 WP White Pine Flme &M ee 8'15 21 Underst ory Trees JL Japanese Lilac Tree ay nr05 mervret e 2 188 10 str aight si ngle lead er PC ProfuWon Crab Rohm 'pm"iro n' 2" BB 10 straight single leader RC Red Splendor Crab Re'us'ned Sei sed"' 2 "B8 9 straight single leader SB Sarviceberry' Autumn Brillence' nrnelencn brx grarnnor a'A 4errn B Nlenc0' 8'BB 11 multi -stem SC Spring Snow Crab Melee Sprin g Snow 2'BB 7 svalght single /seder Shrubs BC Black Chokeberry Ar onla melanocarpa area 36 ' ht 28 Rant 6' 0C. FM Me adowla rk Forsythia Forsythia x'M eadowl ark' 35" ht 24 R ant 7' O .C. LP Donald Wyman Lilac Sydngi a pr esloniae'Do nald Wyman' 38 . ht 21 Rent T O.C. MV Mohican Vibu rnum Viburnum l anta na 'M ohic an' 36" lit 25 Rant 7' O .C. RT Red Twigged Do gwood Comes se 0cea 'Bailey? 36" ht 28 Rant 6' O.C. W H Witch Haze l Hamameli5 virginan 8 36" ht 11 Plant 8' O.C . I her eby redly M at thi p spe cification or repel ea& pr epared by mewundtr n direct'legends. and that I am a duly regiat eredJs1 sc ape Roch .u nderly e l aws of e S of Minnes ota.. 7 REVISIONS BYE 5/3/10: redd buffer tw ___p nting guentity,hase info 5/13/10: reJd base i nfo 1, 4 6/07/10: red(' base info tw adju$te. trees 6/16/10: retied base info tw adjust ed trees 1-4 O c BUFFER YARD PLANTING PLAN THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN TDW CHECKED TDW DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SHOWN J06 N O. 5401-634 FILE ' 100 East Sec ond Street, Chaska, MN 55318 / (952)361-0644 PLANTING_PLA N_100410 SHEET LENNAR CORP. Signed: D ate: 4-&10 R egistration lk 20144 BP -2 S-IEETS) 0 2N'� 76 d 'ON ' 08/75 5,301/ O/JV 30£11 07 _03N/7 3 'P1 � Multi -Family Buffer Planting 3 ,'Scale:1" =50' Scale:1"=50' 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET Multi-Family/Single Family Buffer Planting Schedule KEY COMMON NAME BOT ANICAL NAME SIZE QTY . NOTES Trees BO Bur Oak Q uemus macr ocarp a 2.5" BB 1 straight single le ader HA Hackberry Cells 00,1 89ntatis 2.5" BB 1 straight single leader HL Skyline HoneyLocust Greditsia tnecanthos varinermis 5kycole' 2.5" BB 1 straight single leader PE Princeton Elm Ulmus americana Princeto n' 2.5" BB 1 str aight single le ader RB Riv er Birch B et u/ a ogre 10' BB 3 multi -stem Understory Trees JL Japanese Lilac Tree Swingle reticulate 2"BB 3 str aight single leader PC Profusion Crab Maus Prolusi on' 2" BB 7 str aight single le ader RC Red Splendor Crab Malus' Red Spl end or' 2 "BB 4 straight sin gle leader SB Serviceberry' Autumn Brillance' Amelanchierxgrandi/kola 'Autumnerillance' 8' BB 5 multi -stem SC Spring Snow Cr ab Malta 'Spring Snow ' 2" BB 2 str aight single leader Shrubs BC Black Ch ok ebeny Am ni a m elanocarpa elate 36' ht 16 Plant 6' O.C . FM Meadowlark Forsythia F orsythia x M ead owlark' 36" ht 10 Plant 7' O.C . MV Mohican Viburnum Vibum um l antana'Mohica n' 36" ht 9 Plant 7' O.C. RT Red Twigged D ogwood C omu s sen cea Baileyi' 36 " ht 9 Plant 6' O.C. WH Witch Hazel Hamam elis virgi nan a 36" ht 9 Plant 8' O.C. Planting Point Requirement .1 Opacity 65 points per 100' 30 f oot Buffer Width 1240 Total Feet of Buff er Point Requirment = 819 Points Type Cverstory Tre e Tall Evergreen Understory Tre e Tall Shrub Point Value 50 50 15 Qty Points 7 350 0 ; 0 15 225_ .. 53 265 Total 840 I hereby mddy Net this Rcetbn or rep ort was prepared by me m und er y rad supenosl on a nd that I am a dory registered d ape Architect underthe laws oft, t ats tMi nnesota. REVISIONS 5/3/10: r ecd buff er _planting quantity, base info 5/13/10: re0d base info 6/07/10: rev'd base info __,- Justedpees 6/16/10: reed base info __-a hosted trees BY tw tw iw tw W O BUFFER YARD PLANTING PLAN FILE: THE ENCLAVE MEDINA, MINNESOTA DRAWN TDW CHECKED TDW __ . DATE 04/09/10 SCALE AS SH OWN Joe /40 5401-634 PLA NTING PLAN 100410 SHEET LENNAR CORP. Signed: Dat e: 4810 Registrati on fl: 20144 BP -3 SHEETS , " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " S " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " A visi on becomes reality . For many years, the Hol asek pr operty has been c ontemplated f or devel opment . N one of the pr oposed plans seemed to fit right f or the c ommunity of Medina. Today, we are excited to propose a plan that would pr ovide new h ousing types for the City, with a plan th at follows the intent of the newly adopted Comprehensiv e Plan. The Enclave will pr ovide aff ordable t ownh omes and a variety of single family h omes am ongst natural wetl ands, existing city parks, trail c orrid ors and a w ooded c onservati on area. Thoughtfully designed and crafted f or Medina by the Twin Cities' largest h omebuilder. Lennar Corporation, founded in 1954, is one of the nati on's leading h omebuilders and pr ovider of fin anci al s ervices f or quality h omes f or all generations and is currently building neighb orho ods and h omes in 17 states. In 2009, Lennar delivered more than 15,000 quality new h omes to families across America. Lennar's Minnesota divisio n offers a wide v ariety of single-family h omes, townho mes, a nd twinho mes that provide the m ost desirabl e l oc ations, o utstanding v alue, reno wned quality and best amenities in 23 communities loca ted in the Twin Cities metr op olitan area. LEN NAR We listened to bring yo u a better neighborhood Out Preliminary Plat submittal is a respo nse to all of the feedback we receiv ed on our Concept Plan at the neighb orh ood meeting (1/28/10), Planning Commissio n (2/9/10) and City Co uncil (2/16/10). We heard that there needed to be m ore density on the north end of the pr operty. Our plan now sho ws 41 to wnhomes in the northeast co rner. This adds a third and different pr oduct providing diversity. We w ere als o asked to have transitional density thro ugh the pro perty. Our Co ncept Plan starts with the t ownh omes (R3) in the n orth, m oving ont o our smaller single family h omesites (R2), then o ur medium ho mesites (R2) and then we end with a larger 90' wide single family homesite (R1). We are no t propo sing la rger homes fo r these, so there will be mo re space between the ho mes. During the Co ncept Plan review, we were asked to increase the amount of trees we were sav ing. We increased the woo ded conse rva tion area from 3.38 gross acres (2. 53 net) to 7.83 gross a cres (6. 41 net). This Preliminary Plat also impacts two less wetlands than our o rigina l Co ncept Pla n. At the previo us meetings, we were a lso requested to reduce the number of varia nce s. All of our products meet the de signated zo ning sta ndards. O ur o nly varia nce request is to reduce the public right of way fro m 60' to 50' wide. As part of o ur Prelimina ry Plat a pplication, we are also applying for rezo ning a nd a Co mprehensive Plan amendment. We a re applying fo r rezo ning because the current zo ning on the pro perty of PUD2 do es no t ma tch the newly a dopted Co mprehensive Pla n. Our propo sal of R3, R2 & R1 meets the different density requirements fo r the pro perty a nd the de sired transitio nal zo ning for the pro perty. We are a lso propo sing a slight amendment to the Co mprehensive Plan. We are requesting to extend the MUSA line south to add 6. 4 net acres to the R1 zo ning area. The MUSA line follo ws the old floo dplain designatio n per FEMA. Pernste iner and Asso ciates LLC & MFRA conducted a study to find o ut what the true floo dline sho uld be. Their research disco vered that the floodpla in area is actually less than o riginally indicated, thus creating mo re buildable upland. This rev ised floo dplain has been revie we d and appro ved by FEMA. In return fo r adding 6. 4 net a cres to the MUSA, we are pro tecting 6. 41 net acres of the wooded and wetland area a lo ng the ea stern edge of the pro perty. Beca use of this swap, no additio nal units are being added, a nd a significant number of trees and wetla nds a re being pro tected. YO�� E V IT DTOMEETM D \A'S \EWEST E IGH 30 RS. The Enclave Community Summary Site Size: 109.08 acres T otal number of h ousing units: 175 Housing styles (# of units): Single-family (134) Townh omes (41) Natural wetland area: 34 acres C onversati on area: 7 .83 acres Water: City Waste Treatment: City sewer Natural Features: Mature trees and wetlands Neighb orh ood Added Features: Sidewalks, trails, p ool and community center, and professional landscaping LENNAR� PFEs= \T S TH MEDINA PAGE 2 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " LENNAR rn Se.O � 1--1 O 1 ] \ r m Z Z H ,i NO NT TH CLAVE PLAN EXISTING MU SA LIN E AMEND MENT AR EA: • Lan d Use: Ex isting - Rural Farmland Pro po sed - Residential Zone RI &R2 • Units; 20 Dwelling Units MUSA Amen dmen t Areas• . Gross Area 6. 40 ac Wetland 0.00 ac Lo ts cup..) 6.40 ae LENNAR CORPORATION 935 East Wayzat a Boulevard Wayzata, Minnes ota 55391 Land Dev elopm ent Manager. Carol e Toohey:952-249.3012 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC . 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZAT A, MN. 66391 (952)476-6000 EXISTING MUSA LINE P ROPOSED MUS A LINE NORTH 1"=120' Q 22x34 PREPARE P L. NRH 0 40a1 RE V6EPl.w TO 5CORPOMIE THE EN LARGEME NT Of WETL AND 10 01111 051210 R EVISE 101S NE5 NRH 05 2510 000//0000 CI TYC4WENT S NR H 080 410 5E P0 0 TEP aa1Y COMAE/4S N1U1 0 6-16 t n C CD 0 -0 -0 0._ 0 CD (/) D CD • W:Wos.1R15101 -0 34 THE E NCL AVEfNELM1 NAR YV AWA EOI NA_MUSA_PL AN.OW G " < PrZONINS Pi -AN 0 rn / FYI rn u / rn UJ 0 (. r m Z Z H 1-n Zone -R2 Gross 53.23 ac ROW (Hunter) 1.75 ac ROW (Add. Hunter) 0.02 ac Wetland 6.17 ac Wetland M itigation 1. 68 ac Net 43. 61 ac Zone -R1 Gross 4. 15 ac ROW (Hunter) 0. 00 ac ROW (A da H unter) 0.00 ac Wetland 0. 00 ac Net 4. 15 ac RURA L RESIDENTIAL: Areas: Gross 34.80 ac RO W (Humeri 1. 04 ac ROW (Add. Hun te r) 1. 20 ac Wetland 23.14 ac Net 9. 42 ac TH MED I NA - Zoni ng District- R3 - Gross Area: 9.03 ac Net Ar ea: 7 .87 ac Zon in g D istrict- R2 Gross Area: 53.22 ac Net Area: 43.61 ac Zoning Distri ct- RI Gross Area: 4.15 ac Net Area: 4.15 ac Ru ral Residential G ro ss Ar ca : 34.80 ac Net Area: 9. 42 ac LENNAIR° LENN AR CORPORATI ON 935 East Wayzata Bo ulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 �R fL SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC . Land Development Manager: Carole Toohey: 952-249-3012 Conservation Area Gross Area: 7 .83 ac Net Area: 6 .41 ac 150 SOUTH B ROADWA Y WA YZATA, MN. 55391 (952)47 66000 Zone -R3 Gross 9.03 ac W etla nd 1 .16 ac Net 7 .87 ac Co nservation Area: Gross 7.83 ac Wetland 1.42 ac N et 6.41 ac N ORTH 1 "=120' @ 22x34 PRE PAREPLAN 911/1 0630.1 R EVISE MAX TO INCORPORATE IIl E NLAROEMENI OF WETLANOI0 NRN 05-12-10 REVISE LOT LINES NRN ANO AREAS 05-25-10 REVSE10T ONES NMI MO AREAS 06-04-10 Fxls NRH 0.161 -10 O 0 N CD 0 rn-5 Y N 0 CO Q W:11 ,01444.6401 634114E ENCL AVE PRELIMWN1 YW ,U4EDI NA_RE20N M4 G-- PLAN DWG " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " A wide v ariety of homesites f or a wider variety of h omeowners . The mixture of single-f amily homes with m any h omesite size options and townhomes provides ho mebuyers with a multitude of h ousing and aff ordability ch oices . Homesites specifications: Single-family homesites  90' wide 30 feet - Garage to R.O.W. setb ack 10/15 feet  Side yard setback 30 feet  Rear yard setback 1 1,000sf  Minimum homesite area 40%  Maximum impervious c overage Single-family ho mesites  75' wide 30 feet - Ga ra ge to R.O.W. setb ack 10/15 feet  Side yard setback 25 feet  Rear yard setback 8,000sf  Minimum ho mesite area 50%  Maximum impervio us co verage Single-family homesites  65' wide 30 feet - Garage to R.O. W. setback 5/10 feet  Side yard setback 25 feet  Rea r yard setback 8,000sf  Minimum ho mesite area 50%  Maximum impervious coverage To wnho me ho mesites 25 feet - Garage to private street 40 feet  Garage to R. O. W. setback 30 feet  Minimum setback between buildings 8,750 sf  Minimum area per unit 50%  Maximum impervious co vera ge Easy access. Easy living. The Enclave is lo cated in the heart of Medina, MN along Hunter Drive so uth of Hamel Road and north of Medina Ro ad. Surrounding la nd uses include re sidential develo pment of varying densities. Adjacent to the east is the Ha mel Co mmunity Pa rk and to the west is the Hamel Lio ns Park. The Enclave's ho meowners associatio n  clean, green and pristine. A master ho meo wners asso cia tio n for The Enclave will be esta blished to ma intain the o pen space and co mmunity mo numents. A sub -associa tio n will be created to manage the maintenance of the common elements within the to wnho me area . The single family asso ciatio n will include professional management, gra ss mowing, a nd po ol maintena nce. The to wnho me asso ciatio n will include pro fessio nal management, grass mo wing, sno w plowing, and exterio r upkeep of the buildings. Ho meo wners a sso ciatio n do cuments will be submitted with Final Planned Develo pment Application ma terials. O wners of deta ched single- fa mily ho mes will be responsible fo r their own upkeep and maintenance subject to city o rdinance and architectural co ntro ls established within the master association. YO ' R E I \VIT D TO MEET MED \A'S \EWEST \ EIG 3ORS. C ontinuing a tradition of fine education . The Enclave is l oc ated within Independent Scho ol District #284 that serv es Wayzata, Medina, C orc oran, Medicine L ake, Minnet onk a, Oron o, Plym outh and M aple Gr ove . Children in the public sch ool system from The Enclave will attend Greenw ood Elementary Sch ool, Way zata West Middle Sch ool, and Wayzata High Sch ool. LENNAR RES TS o0 C30 a s. E:3 MED 1 NA �AG E 5 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " VNIC3W �� { 1 / I J 1 I I , � �_tl Ir n 1 \ n'l /./ fr> �s_r L__ L—� . r 1 ii 4 111 • • • • " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " The Enclave's features. While most of the sit e will be r estored with ecological functi on in mind, a reas of formal landscaping and a menities will c omplement the natural a esthetic beauty of The Enclave. The Enclave residents will embrace an extensive sidewalk and trail plan of dedicated walkways that co nnect to Hamel Community Pa rk a nd Hamel Lion's Park. A community center and swimming poo l will prov ide plenty of summe rtime fun for all fa milies. Attractive themed co mmunity monuments a nd signa ge will co mpliment the architectural fea tures within the ne ighborhood. With ove r 40 acres of natural wetla nds, ponds, and mature tree areas, residents will enjo y the undisturbed natural bea uty and wildlife features that a lready ex ist. Heav ily landscaped berms will be used to buffer areas a long Hunte r Drive. -,, rof enha nced Ian  t, :fe6ii.tre . "Slang berms 15Rda taro :_ot T1 un. at ties mming. pool and community cent er . Theme d entry monuments and co mplimentary streetsca pe fea tures througho ut The Enclave. Muitiple area design ati ons will provide a venue f or resid ents to enjoy n atur al am eniti es . Over 30 acres of natural wetland area. Sign age, lighting and mailbo xes compliment streetscape features throughout The Enclave . The enclave features many natural preservati on areas . MEDINA PAGE " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " The Enclave's Everything's Included �Homes . An attractive streetscape will be maint ained thr ough the incorporation of a variety of elevations, materials, c olor packages and architectur al c ovenants . Each home plan pro vides multiple elevati ons, different accent materials and c oordin ated e xteri or co lo r package choices f or h ome owners to elimina te the chances of a home exteri or duplicatio n. Every Lennar ho me at The Enclave will include the "Everything's IncIuded"� H omes amenity p ackage. Lenna r includes the most desired amenities in the price of the ho me tha t may typically be c onsidered "upgrades" by o ther homebuilders . THA T'S THE sM OF LENNAR The power to save money, to save energy, to save the environment. Introducing the Po werSmart Home by Lennar. Le nnar is also pro ud to intro duce PowerSmart to The Encl ave. The Lennar PowerSm art ho me is a green home with a impressive Department of Energy "EnergySmart Hom e Scale" Rating to sho w ho meo wners ho w efficient their home really is . It means that while the industry sta ndard is to meet a code minimum, the Lennar PowerSmart home exceeds it with all of these energy efficient features: " ENERGY STAR� Q ualified " Eco va lua tio nsM Pla n Review " Tight Co nstructio n " Improved Thermal Systems " Sealed Ducts " Low -E Windows " Right -Sized HVAC " Internal Mo isture Ma nage ment " Fresh Air Ventila tio n No w it's easy to see why Po werSmart will be included in the homes at The Enclave that will save mo ney, energy and the enviro nment. powers m art by LENNAR' YO U'RE INVITED TO MEET MED \ A' S \ EVVEST \ G BOS. L " 144, i( Dlning Kitchen !U" 5 _.1 P Garage Powder/" S� Great R oom R FIRST FLO OR PLAN ESENTS SEC OND FLOOR PLAN MEDI NA PAGE 8 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Classic Heartland Series C olonial Patriot T ownh omes Perf ect f or first-time h omebuyers, Lennar's C olonial Patriot Townhomes offer c onvenience and outstanding v alue in a quality built maintenance -free home . These h om es fe ature gourmet kitchen, large great r oom, fireplace, sec ond level laundry and open loft are a. This thoughtfully designed arr ay of r ow -style t ownhomes f eature wind ows and access in the front and back of the each home . Hom e S ummary: Style: Tw o-story row -style t ownhomes Hom esit e width: n/ a F eatur es: 3 BR, 3 BA, 2 -Car Garage Size: 1,700-1,900 finished squ are feet Bas e pric e estimat e: Mid $200's Typical homeown er: First-time homebuyers YOU'RE INVTED Landmark Series Single -Family Ho mes Le nna r's La ndmark Series single-family homes are creatively designed to m aximi ze space and functionali while offering an incredible va lue for ho meowners. A wide variety of houseplans and ele vati ons will pro vide fantastic curb a ppea l while preserving the open space and natural amenities that The enclave offers. Ho mesites will offer an asso rtment of walk -o ut, loo k -out and flat homesites with opportunities f or homeowners to finish the lo wer level a nd max imize the living area of the Landmark Series . Home Summary: Style: Two -story single-family homes with basement Homesite width: 65 feet Features: 4 BR, 3 BA, 3 -Ca r Ga ra ge Size : 2,200-2,800 finished square feet Base price estimate : Mid $400's Typical homeowner: Young families 0 MEET M =D \A'S \ EW EST \ HG 3O RS. LENNAR P Single -Family H omes Lennar's popul ar American Heartland Series offers a wide variety of house plans f or today's gr owing families. These h omes include large open living space are as on the m ain le vel, master suit e, craft ro om, and three car garage. H ome owners c an finish the lower level to incre ase th eir living area to accommodate larger families. L arge homesites will provide ample area for landscaping and preserve open space viewing of the natural surr oundings The enclave offers . Home Summary: Style: Two-story singl e-family h omes with basement Hom esit e width: 90 feet and 75 fe et F eatur es: 5 BR, 4 BA, 3 -Car Garage Size: 2,600-3,300 finish ed square feet Base pric e estim at e: Mid $500's Typical hom eow ner: Move -up gr owing f amilies RESE\TS TH ME DINA PA GE 9 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Wetlands impact . " " On 2/1/2007 a TEP panel and The City of Medina appr oved the w etland delineati ons c onducted by Sv ob oda Ec ol ogical Services (SER) . On 5/25/10 there was a site walk with J ohn Smyth to update the delineati on. Lennar has submitted a wetland " application which is reviewed by the TEP. Our plan is pr oposing .97 acr e (42,169 square feet) of wetl and impacts with 1.26 " a cres (54,975 square feet) of mitigati on are a and .65 acre (22,085 square feet) of buffer and wetland rest orati on . In " a ddition, we will als o be impr oving the upper buffer are as per the city c ode. " Tree preservation impact . " " Site planning with co nsiderati on of the e xisting fe atures h as all owed The Encl ave to have as little impact on trees as fe asible, while still meeting the required density. City of Medina's ordinance all ows f or the rem oval of trees of up to 15% bef ore " mitigation is required. Development of the site will requir e 34 .82% tree remov al while Lenn ar adheres to the devel opment " plan of 1,222 4 -caliper inches planted trees. This is in additi on to the buffer trees and fr ont yard tre es. Lennar will be planting " trees in a manner typical fo r residential d evel opment highlighted by upgraded buffering along Hunter Drive. " Water quality impact. " " Water quality will be managed thro ugh the incorp or ati on of on- site ponding and other appr opriate er osi on contr ol measures. Lennar is co mmitted to fo llo wing stormwater policies en acted by the city and the Minnesot a P olluti on C ontrol Ass ociati on (MPCA). " " " A grand entrance. " Monuments identifying The Enclave will be lo cated at the neighb orh ood entrance along Hunter Drive . The m onuments and the " surrounding area will be enhanced with shrubs, perennial plantings and tree plantings to c ompliment the natur al amenities th at The Enclave offers. All streets will fea ture coo rdina ted deco rative street lights, mailb oxes and str eet signs unique to th e neighb orh ood. " " Construction process, phasing and timing. " " Like all new co mmunities of this siz e, The Enclave will take multiple yea rs before all of the h omes are s old and built. Tentative ly, construction phase o ne will sta rt at the intersection of Hunter Drive and Red F ox Trail . " Estimated constructio n schedule : 2010 (Fall)  Phase One: 18 ho mesite s 2011  Phase Two: 62 homesites " 2012  Phase Three: 95 ho mesites " Due to the vo latility of to day's eco nomy and ho using ma rket it is very difficult to predict accurate c onstruction phasing. Critical " timing and phase siz es will ultimately be dictated by market conditio ns a nd Lennar's a bility to sell thr ough finished h omesites . " The Enclave is " ready for Medina. " " " " " " " " " " " Lennar has a lo ng histo ry of building successful communities in the City of Medina under the previous homebuilder names of O rrin Tho mpso n Ho me s and Lundgren Bros. Constructio n. The tra ditio n of success will co ntinue with The Enclave and the many benefits this neighbo rhoo d o ffers including: Unique Housing Diversity  Afforda bility, ho me styles, architecture, and fa mily types. Preserved Natural Ame nities  Wetlands, po nds, trees and open spaces. Enhanced Enviro nment  Through o pen space preservatio n and Po werSmart building practices. Adding New Residents  To co mpliment the neighbo rs of Medina and further gro wth of the Upto wn redevelo pment area. Stability  Lennar is o ne of America's finest ho mebuilders. Lennar is genuinely ex cited a nd is loo king forward to working with Medina to bring a new neighbo rhoo d to their co mmunity. YOv'RE \v TED TO MEET MEDI\A'S \EWEST \EIGH 3ORS. Entry Monumentati on Model Home Sales Center & Phase One Construction Area LENNAR� RESE\TS TH MEDINA PAGE 10 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " View of SE co rner fro m neighbo ring property .. View of NW c orner from Hunters Drive YO J R \V ED _TM ED A' S NEWEST N HG 3O RS. LENNAR� RESENTS ME DINA PAGE 11 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO U' R E 1 \VITED TO MEET MED I The homes of The Enclave. \A'S \EWEST \ EIG 3ORS. LENNAR � F R E S E N ME DI NA PA GE 12 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Plan Name: Th e Addison " " Finished Sq. Ft.: 2710 " " Bedrooms & Baths: 4/3 " " " " " " " " YO " " \V T DTOM ET M ED \A'S NEWEST \ Classic Heartland Series =I- G BORS. Great Room 17'-6 " X 15'-0" Di ning Room 12'-6" X 10'-6" Study 10'-0 " X 10-6 " Clst Owner's Suite 15'-6" X 17'-0" Bedroom 13'-0 " X 13'-0" LENNAR� Foyer P orch 1 U Ow ner' Bath o Laundry'= Kitchen 13'-0" X 12'-0" r 1 Owner"s Closet Bedroom 11' -66 " X 11'-6" Bedroom 15'-0"x 11'-0" Garage 31'-6" X 21'-6" r 1. Clst =SE\TS MEDIN A L. DA " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO U'RE " " Classic Heartland Series Plan Name: The Auburn Finished Sq. Ft.: 2858 Bedro oms & Baths: 4/3 N Laundry VITED TO MEET MEDI\A'S \EWEST NE G 3ORS. Clst Mast er Bath Main Level Upper Level Master Bedr oom r -Tx rsv Bath r Ij Clst  LENNAR F Bedroom 2 " e " x ros Clst Bedr oom 4 Bedroom 3 Clst RESENTS THE CLAVE MEDINA PAGE 1L " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Classic Heartland " Plan Name: The Lansing " Finished Sq. Ft.: 2956 " Bedrooms & Baths: 4/3 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YOI.'ZE \VT -D TO M --T M -D \A'S \EWEST \ " " EIG 3085. S " eries Retreat 5-9' X 9V ' Bedroom 2 13'-5'X11'-5- Bedroom 3 13'-5 ' X 17-5 ' Clst LENNAR� Master Bedroom 17-5 '715,3 " Great R oom 15'-r X 15-1' Garage 3a -rx21-r Master Bath Bedroom 4 11'9 ' X 14'- r RESE\TS TES " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " . ... .. " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Classic Heartland Series Plan Name: The Monticello Finished Sq. Ft.: 3075 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/4 YO"'RE I\VIT D TO MEET MEDI\A'S \EW EST \ =1G 3ORS. Main Level St udy 11,5" X X 11'-4" Great Room wr x uv Foyer Porch n vxaa �� Dining Room m+" x,a.4. Gar age a.r xzr-r Upper Level LENNAR� PkEs ENTS TN . 1 MEDI NA PAGE io " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO , Classic Heartland Series Plan Name: The Springdale Finished Sq. Ft.: 3340 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/4 'RE I\VITED TO M EET MEDI\A'S \EWEST \EIGH3ORS. Kitchen 1 4 f 1,'8 ' Li vi ng R oom 11.1 k12, UP Foyer P orch Main Level Gr eat Ro om Study Bath Mud Ro om Cht Dining Room Garage 31,X 2r -Pe r 1 Upper Level LENNAI � PRESE\TS -rH r MEDI NA PAGE " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Classic Heartland Series Plan Name: The Sterling Finished Sq. Ft.: 3416 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/4 I\V TED TO MEET MED \A'S \EW EST \ GH3ORS. Owner's Suite 17'-0" x 14'-0 " Main Leve Study 13'-0" x 1 1 '-6" Upper Leve Great Room 15'-6" x 19'-0" P orch Bedroom 13'-0" x 13'-0" Bedroom 13'-0" x 13 '-0" LENNAR P Dining Are a 12'-0" x 15'-0" Garage Kitchen 11'13 " x 15' -0" Bedroom 14'-0" x 12'-6" loft 1 1 ' b" x 21'-6" RESE\TS TH J ME DI NA PAGE 18 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO R " " Plan Name: Fitzgerald Finished Sq. Ft.: 1958 Bedrooms & Baths: 3/3 \I\ T- D TO MEET MEDI\A'S \EW L andmark Series EST N GHBO ?S. Main Level Upper Level LENNAI' PRESEVS TN ME DI NA PAGE 19 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Yo Plan Name: Pillsbury Finished Sq. Ft.: 2190 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/3 NV T _D TO EE -T /V\ E D  C Landmark Series Main Level Fa mily Room 15,0' x 15'6 ' Flex R oom 1'-0" x 12,15 . Porch Owner's Suite 15'-0 " x 15'-0" LENNAR � P Kitchen Dinette x 10'b' x 15,0 " Garage Foyer Upper Level Owner's Bath 1 Ctst Bedroom 10'-0" x 12'-0" RESE\TS TH �% Rxdr Rm Mud R oom Bedroom 1 1 '-0" x 13'1i " Main B ath Bedroom 1 1 '-0" x 12'-0 " 1 PAGE 20 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Plan Name: Sinclair Finished Sq. Ft.: 2405 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/3 ,\L1\_H Landmark Series NIA'S E `V'\.%CS T If\ E CL BO Family R oom 15'-4' x 15'-6" Study 10'4 " x 1 I'-3" Foy er 1 Opti onal 3rd Stall Garage Main Level Dinette 10'-6 " x 14,10" P owder R oom Porch CIst 1 Cist Kitchen 9'-O' x Mud 1 Room Pantry L Upper Level Bedroom 3 1 1 '- 4 "x l 1 '- 2" Bedr oom 2 1 1 '- 8"x11'- 3/4" Bedroom 4 10'- 4"x 1 1 '- 4" LENNAR� P Goroge Owner's Suite 15'- 4"x14'-10" Linen Main Both Loundry/Cr aft R oom RESE\TS T Owner's Bath Own er's Closet MEDIN A PAGE 21 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO U' Plan Name: St. Croix Finished Sq. Ft.: 2719 Bedrooms & Baths: 4/3 L!`\'x/111 L V1 if Landmark Series EWE=S \EIG1--BORS. Main Level Family R oom 14'-6 " x 17'-6" Dining Room 12'-0" x 11 '-0" living Roo m 1 1'-0" x 1 1'-0 " Upper Level launry Garage Bedr oom 0 L oft Owner's Suit e 10'-0" x 11'-0" ' 1 1'-0" x 14'-6" 14'-0" x 14'-0" Moin Both Bedro om 12'-6" x 1 1'$ " :loset Closet LENNAR F RESE\TS TH MEDIN A PAGE 22 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Colonial Manor Patri ot Series Plan Name: Jefferson Finished Sq. Ft.: 191 1 Bedrooms & Baths: 3/3 YOJ E \V TED TO MEET MED \A'S \ EWEST NEIGHBORS. Main Level LENNAR� P ES Upper Level MEDINA PAGE 23 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YOU' " " RE Colonial Manor Patriot Series Plan Name: Madison Finished Sq. Ft.: 1778 Bedroo ms & Baths: 3/3 \VITED TO MEET MEDI\A'S NEWEST \EIG 3ORS. Main Level DINING ROOM F1-0 1S-0 PORCH GREAT ROOM 15-0 Y 15 ,0 GAR AGE LENNAR F Upper Level BEDR OOM 12 -0 N9'0 LOFT 13'-0x13'-0 BEDROO M 18-0 Y 11'-0 tOYM� WS 5-0�� RESE\TS THE CLAYS ME DI NA PAGE 24 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YOU'RE " " \M Colonial Manor Patriot Series TED TO MEET M DI\A'S \ EW =ST NEIGHBORS. LENNAR P RES Building Height 26' E\TS TN E.r i 'CLAYE ME DI NA PAGE 25 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " YO " " Building Materials Classic Heartland Series " LP SmartSide Hard Siding fall 4 sides) " LP SmartSide Hard Sh akes (per elevati on) " Batten Board (per elevation) " Sto ne/Brick Accents (p er elevation) " Architectural Shingles " Stylized Garage Doors Colonial Mano r Patriot Series " Vinyl Lap Siding " Vinyl Shakes " Architectural Shingles " Stylized Garage Doors " Stone/Brick Accents R E \V ITED TO MEET MEDI\A'S \EWEST NE GHBO RS. Landmark Series " LP SmartSide Hard Siding (front) " LP SmartSide Hard Shakes (per elevation) " Batten Board (per elevati on) " Vinyl Siding Sides And Rear " Stone/Brick Accents (per " Architectural Shingles LENNAR F elevation) ESENTS THFi CLA'L ME DIN A PAGE 26 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "