The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-07-15 PACKET 08.D.RECIUEST OF CITY CC7UNCiL ACTION CC1UiVClL AGEhddA n�E�ro�G i�Enn � DA7E 7l15/98 • �, F'REPARED BY: Cammunity bevelopment Kim Lindquist pRIGINATIfilG DEPARTMEIdT STAFF P,UTHOR ��a.�.�.»��*.�..�..��a�4«.a��«tr.��.*.��..4.� COUiVGI. ACTION REQUEST 1. Adopt a resolution approving the preliminary and finai plat for a 78-lot residential subdivision named Hidden Vailey 7`" Addition. 2. Adopt a resolution granting variances for a 50-faot right-of-way and for three doubie- fironted lots. 3. Adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 28, Section 28-6, Zoning Map rezoning certain properties from "F2-2.5" Residential District to "R-5" Medium Density Residentiai. 4. Adopt a resolution ordering the public improvements and preparation of plans and specifications. BUDGET IMPLICATION N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ADVISORY COPNMISSION ACTION �. � ' ' ' � `: ►1 • " , . . �� . : • . ►� • �' •' � ' , •' ■ • • ■ • + � � •' ■ ..�. �� IJ/A ACTUALAMOUNT APPROVED � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � DENIEO ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ REVIEWED ❑ � � � ❑ ❑ � ►� • - . . .. ,_ -. ..; ►� • s • . � . •.- ..-.._. .._ . .- . �� -�. � , � •��. - . ■ ' ' �' ,:, + ■ . . + .. � ►� s . .... �' s - • . . + : * . « . � _ . i � � � ., � � r. `� M1 � � i / , � ,J /c� f�.. �„ �ity Administrator Dafe � i� . ,.,..� � � . F:'�GRpl1PS�PLANNINGU998\CITYGOUId�FP-PP hiV/th caver.doc MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator FROM: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director DATE: July 13, 1998 RE: Hidden Valley 7"' Addition BACKGROUND The Nidden Valley 7�' Addition concept plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in the spring of 1998. Since that time, Staff has met with the applicant on several occasions 4o address the final details of the project. DISCUSSION On June 22, 1998, the Pianning Commission heid a public hearing regarding the proposal. During the public hearing, one resident spoke. His questions related to the proposed upgrade for Harkness Road and the location of a smail holding pond within the NSP easement. He also asked whether it would be possible to lower the hill central to the site. Mr. Rygh explained that it would be cost prohibitive to lower the hill since a new NSP tower would have to be paid for. City staff also explained the timing for construction of the Harkness/Hardwood Road improvement. The Commission discussed several aspects of the project and the recommended conditions of approval. The primary discussion point was the variance request for the two southern cui-de-sac right-of-ways. The appiicant is requesting 50-foot right-of-way instead of the ordinance required 60 feet. The reason for the variance request is to allow the houses to be located closer to the street, thereby reducing grading and tree removal. Some members of the Commission requested that the right-of-way remain at the ordinance requirement with the possibility for variances to be granted on a case by case basis, depending upon tree preservation issues. This case by case approach will be used when evaluating if side yard setback variances may be warranted to permit additional tree preservation. Ultimately, the Commission approved the variance request 5-2, recognizing that tree preservation is an important development goaB and that the adjoining Hidden Valiey developments currently have 50-foot right-of-ways for cul-de- sacs. The majority of the Commissioners felt that this project, in part, represented a continuation of the eastern neighborhood's development pattern. They stated that granting of this variance does not indicate that varia�ces of this nature would be granted elsewhere within the �IVest Draar. The applicant also requested several changes to the recommended conditions of approval. For the most part, these requests were minor and the attached resolution reflects the appropriate modifications. Because the applicant is interested in building within the subdivision this year, to expedite the process, he requested both preliminary and final plat approval. Staff has found the submitted final piat to be in substantiai compiiance with the preliminary piat submittal. The attached plat has the easements and land dedication areas consistent with staff requests. However, the one cha�ge is to Outlot C. The plat illustrates a 25 foot outlot when 20 feet is requesfed. A 5 foot drainage and utility easement wili also be dedicated along the eastern edge of the outlot. This change will be made to the final piay mylar. To assure that there is no financial risk to the city in initiafing engineering work prior to approval of a development agreement and assessment waiver, the applicant will escrow funds to cover the estimated engineering costs. - • �• �. Approve the draft resolutions approving the preliminary and final plat, granting variances for the 50-foot right-of-way and double-fronted lots, and authorizing the City Engineer to prepare plans and specs for Hidden Vailey 7"' Addition. Adopt the draft ordinance rezoning a portion of the property from R2.5 to R5, consistent with the zoning of the adjoining singie family residential neighborhood. :q a7� ,� �,�� Z C� F-= Ll � _ / ` W a 0 � _ � �� "�� '.� ° �i � ;" $i � �, � 'a , � `; �� r � F t � , � � O �ai " '� ��4 -� '�, �, ��Y a `?'�. h �'y' ' � �� `� � w n � � ° m i9 .�?�� y .I�p. O �°' '.'�� m�'L "F .fi , ,s+' Y �` � � o�,� � 4 � NLS ` �� / Y+'�� SP`�L ` l. � 4R� A R"� �� _ Z p�� _?�J PKS'__' a +9"� �, � � r � �� S � 5 �� 4 4 ��7IY_. Y��GC�73.��"`��a�n .,9'Yl,� I - � O � vai _ �O ) � �7 � o I J .�,....��. � � r � ' � � _ o s � � f � 2� � y' � 5 ] !� t�i i1 !� g'�s.aq � 4i�W" � dF _ y ��-� � s nes� ��' � � �� ,°?' I � 1 � i s� j ; I ?a �� $ J g 1 j �: ' �'� P� � � I f`s �'. RESOLUTION NO. 98-XXX RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT KNOWN AS HIDDEN VALLEY 7 ADDITION WHEREAS, Secure Properties, Inc. has filed a preliminary and a final plat application for the purpose of developing a residential subdivision known as Hidden Vailey 7th Addition. This plat consists of 78 lots for unattached single family homes located on property legally described as: That part of the West half of the Northeast Quarter, the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, ai{ in Section 8, Township 27, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota, lying east of Harkness Avenue South, and lying south of Washington County Right of Way Plat No. 31, according to the recorded piat thereof. Except the foliowing eight parcels: Parcel 1. Hidden Valley Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 2. Hidden Valley 2'� Addition, according to the recorded piat thereof. Parcel 3. Hidden Valley 3 Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 4. Hidden Valley 4"' Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 5. Hidden Valley 5"' Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 6. Hidden Valley 6"' Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 7. Registered Land Survey No. 50. Parcei 8. The North 463 feet of the East 513.89 feet of said West half of Northeast Quarter of Section 8. WHEREAS, the applicant filed a Zoning amendment to rezone 12 lots of the above described parcel of land from R2.5, Residential District to R5, Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, pubiic hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development site and a public hearing notice published in the South Washington County Bulietin; and WNEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cottage Grove held a public hearing and reviewed the preliminary plat application on June 22, 1998; and WHEREAS, testimony from the applicant and general public was received and entered into the public record; and Resolution No. 98-XXX Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the rezoning to R-5 and the preliminary piat for Hidden Valley 7`" Addition, subject to certain conditions; and WHEREAS, the applicant has since made appiication to the City for final plat approval consistent with the proposed preliminary piat; and WHEREAS, staff notes that the finai piat addresses several of the proposed conditions of preliminary plat approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council for the City of Cottage Grove, Washinqton County, Minnesota hereby approves the preliminary plat and final plat known as Hidden Vailey 7 Addition as requested by Secure Properties, Inc. Said approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. ApprovaF of the preliminary plat is valid for one year after City Council action. The City Gouncil may extend the period by agreement with the subdivider in the case of developing the project in phases; or the Council may require submission of a new appiication. 2. The developer shaii enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Cottage Grove for the installation of and payment for all public improvements in the subdivision, pursuant to Section 28- 18 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The appiicant dedicate certain lands for park dedication purposes. The total land dedication equates to 4 acres with the applicant submitting a cash payment for the remaining portion of the dedication fee. The fee will be $209 per lot. 4. All area charge fees shall be paid in full in accordance with the terms specified in the subdivision agreement. The totai caiculated area charges for the entire subdivision equate to $482,197.65 ($126,511.44 for water works, $67,643.41 for sanitary sewer, and $288,042.80 for storm sewer). A credit for installation of the regional ponding system will result in an adjustment to the storm sewer area charge. This wili be defined in the subdivision agreement. 5. The required dedication of real-estate property to the City for public park shall be described on the final piat as Outlots. The developer shail be responsible for all costs (e.g. property taxes, recording fees, etc.) in conveying said property to the City. 6. The payment for recreation fees for the subdivision shali be in the amount specified by City ordinance at the time of payment. Said fees can be paid in phases with the relevant finai plats, and shall be paid prior to release of the plats for recording. The current ordinance amount per lot is $150.00. 7. Aii easements and pubiic rights-of-way as recommended by the City staff and engineer be shown on the final plat. - • • � • • : 'i'� •..- 8. Prior to the grading permit being issued by the City, the Developer must obtain a MPCA General Storm Water Permit and conduct a pre-construction meeting with City staff, developer and the developePs consultants. The contractor shall provide the City with a project schedule for various phases of construction. A financial guarantee for erosion control and street sweeping must be accepted by the City and before a grading permit is issued. 9. The developer shail pay for the construction of a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk located along the roadway that connects to the Hardwood Avenue corridor. The applicant is required to post a financial guarantee in the amount of 10 percent of the estimated cost to construct these sidewalks. 10. A"STOP" sign shall be instai�ed by the City at each intersection designated by the public safety Department. The developer shall be responsible for the City's costs of these "STOP" signs. 11. A barricade shall be installed at the end of all streets that are dead-ended. Mounted on the barricade shall be a sign providing notice that these streets are planned to be extended in the future. 12. The developer shall disclose to homebuyers of the surrounding vacant property land uses. 13. The applicant receive and appropriate permits or approvals from other regulatory agencies including, but not limited to, the Army Corps of Engineers, So�th Washington Watershed District, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 14. The developer shall submit a finai grading, drainage, and utility plans for staffs review and approval prior to issuing a grading permit. The pian shouid address a�l issues raised in the staff report. Tne submittal shall include a final construction management plan which details erosion control measures, project phasing for grading work, areas designated for preservation, designated haul routes and a commitment to keep the streets ciean and in good repair, a crushed-rock construction entrance and construction-related vehicle parking. 15. Snow fencing around preservation areas and erosion control installed prior to commencement of any grading activity. 16. Site grading activity shall be limited to public right-of-way, public easements and outlot areas. Individuai lot grading shall be reviewed, approved and completed on a case by case basis prior to commencement of construction activity to ensure compiiance with the City's tree preservation ordinance. 17. Ali emergency overflow swales must be identified on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The drainage swale elevations shall be staked and sodded. A financiai guarantee covering the estimated cost of staking and sodding this area must be inciuded in the subdivision agreement. 18. Erosion control shall be performed in accordance with the recommended praetices of the "Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook" and the conditions stipulated in Section 23-36, Erosion Controi during Gonstruction of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Resolution No. 98-XXX Page 4 19. The developer must grade pubiic park property in accordance with the final grading plan. Grading the park property must be within a grade tolerance of plus or minus four inches. The topsoil shall be restored to a depth of at least four inches. The applicant shall grade the parking lot for the planned fishing area in the subdivision in accordance with the approved grading plan. 20. All landscape center isiand outlots and other private outlots in the subdivision shall be in the ownership and control of a Homeowners' Association. Maintenance for all landscape islands and any other private outlots shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association. The applicant wili dedicate an easement restricting removai of in-place landscaping along Hardwood Road and 70` Street in order to maintain landscaping pianted in association with this development. 21. The applicant submit a final landscape plan for lot review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit and a bona fide cost estimate of the landscaping improvements. A letter of credit in the amount of 150% of the landscaping estimate, street repair, street sweeping, paving and curbing, and irrigation systems, shouid be submitted to and approved by the City. Upon completion of the landscaping improvements, the owner shail, in writing, inform the City tnat said improvements have been compieted. The City shail retain the financial guarantee covering the landscape improvements for a period of one year from the date of notice, to ensure survival of the piants. No buiiding permit shaii be issued until the required financial guarantee has been received and accepted by the city. 22.As detailed in the Staff report, a roadway improvement fee of $39,000 for the subdivision's contribution to the Hardwood Avenue corridor improvement project shail be paid by the Applicant. 23.The access control on all lots with frontage on CSAH 22 (70th Street) shall be dedicated to Washington County. 24. Signage for the subdivision shall be consistent with the city sign ordinance. A sign permit must be obtained prior to installation. 25. Review of the traffic generation associated with the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat approval. Preliminary plat approvai encompasses the entire Hidden Valiey project; however, final plat approvai is limited to 401ots if found consistent with the APFO. Should the traffic analysis show that development of 40 lots does not comply with the APFO, adjustments in phasing and deve{opment may need to be made by the developer. 26. An easement or restrictive covenant shall be created which requires that natural vegetation to be established and maintained on all slopes greater than 3 to 1. 27. The off-road trail from the southern portion of the plat to the NSP easement shail be cleared and signed as a part of the final plat for the area. Resolution No. 98-XXX Page 5 28. The applicant dedicate to the City the NSP easement east of the plat, commonly known as Outlot F, as required by previous Council approvals. The City wiii permit ponding within the Outlot provided there is ample space and topography permits instailation of a trail. The applicant will ensure the dedicated area is contiguous to western platted road without additionai compensation. 29. No retaining walis can be instailed on public right-of-way or land to be dedicated to the City. Passed this 15"' day of July, 1998. John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk • • • • : 'i'i'1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 23-31 WHICH REQUIRES R1GHT-OF-WAY WIDTH OF 60 FEET TO THE PROPOSED WIDTH OF 50 FEET FOR THE TWO SOUTHERN CUL DE SACS AND VARIANCES FROM SECTION 23-29 WHICH PROHIBITS DOUBLE-FRONTAGE LOTS TO PERMIT THREE DOUBLE-FRONTED LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION HIDDEN VALLEY 7 ADDITION WHEREAS, Secure Properties, Inc. has filed for a variance from the required right-of- way width of 60 feet to 50 feet for two southern cul de sacs and a variance from the standard that prohibits double-fronted lots unless abutting a minor or principal arterial to permit three double-fronted lots in the proposed subdivision named Hidden Vailey 7� Addition. The property is legally described as follows: That part of the West half of the Northeast Quarter, the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, ail in Section 8, Township 27, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota, lying east of Harkness Avenue South, and lying south of Washington County Right Of Way Plat No. 31, according to the recorded piat thereof. Except the #ollowing eight parcels: Parcei 1. Hidden Vailey Addition, according to the recorded piat thereof. Parcel 2. Hidden Vailey 2nd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 3. Hidden Valley 3rd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcei 4. Hidden Valley 4th Addition, according ta the recorded plat thereof. Parcel 5. Hidden Valley 5th Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcel6. Hidden Val(ey 6th Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. Parcei 7. Registered Land Survey No. 50. Parcel 8. The North 463 feet of the East 513.89 feet of said West half of Northeast Quarter of Section 8. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted the public hearing on June 22, 1998; and WHEREAS, no public testimony was received in opposition to the variances; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the criteria and findings established by the Zoning Ordinance for granting a variance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that variance from the required right-of-way width on a 5-2 vote be granted and the variance for the three- doubled fronted lots for Hidden Valley 7�' Addition on a 7-0 vote shall be granted based upon the following findings of fact: 1. The intent of the ordinance, to provide reasonable sized lots to provide ample building area, has been met. 2. The existing topography of the site is a hardship which leads to the granting of the requested variances. 3. City development goais also promote tree preservation and the granting of the variances will improve tree preservation opportunities. 4. The adjoining eastern development, of which the Hidden Valley 7�' Addition is an extension, contains right-of-way widths of 50 feet. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Councii of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota concurs with the Planning Commission's findings that the variance application is hereby granted to Section 23-31 (c), a provision setting the required right-of-way width as 60 feet, subject to the following provision: The applicant dedicate an additional five-foot drainage and utility easement along the front of the adjoining cul de sac lots. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota concurs with the Planning Commission's findings that the variance application is hereby granted to Section 23-29 (g), prohibiting double-fronted lots except on minor or principal arterials for three double-fronted lots. John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk , _i__� �� ' � � . AN ORDINANCE FOR THE CTTY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CHAPTER 28; SECTION 28-6, ZONING MAP VIA REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM "R-2.5", RFSIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "R-5", MEDIUM DEI�'SITY RESIDENfiIAL The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, dces ordain as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. The City of Cottage Grove's Official Zoning Map as referenced in Chapter 28, Article I; Section 28-6 of the "Code of the City of Cottage Grove"; County of Washington, State of Minnesota shall be amended by rezoning several properties from "R-2.5°, Residential District to "R-5", Medium Density Residential. SECTION 2. REZONING. The Official Zoning Map shall be amended by changing the zoning classification of the properties depicied in the circlecl area on the attached Exhibit A from "R-2.5", Residential District to "R-5", Medium Density Residential. The °R-5" rezoning is subject to the following condition: The appiicant shall maintain the proposed lot sizes and configuration presented to the City in Case 98-14/15. This preciudes any re-platting of the property to lots more consistent with the minimum RS zoning ordinance standards. SECTION 3. EFF'ECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shail be in full force and effect from and after its adoption and publication according to law. Passed this 15th day of July, 1998. John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk :��Ci]�11�[t`11>>�[y;�lL�1►_l . 'E (EXISTING) 71a7,' � SZ. L)JK�'S ) ---:` � . ,; i 71d3 � � �UTt-tERAN : � �`�0�� 7i39 � 1)749� CHURC4a \; , , _i- '- � 7000' � � 5� ' �__ j 7737 f 17161 1 '� ,� 7729 � ---� � 7163 � i ��ag 27 !7136 ; __ _, � - `� t �� _� J�,�S ; � � /� '1 �,� � - / ^' i i .t � � ��p�✓. �, o I \,�-�.�� ' c� ro d `� �1 �. � JP � , ,�l l >�. _: 0 , ,. ,� � , P) ..� N; r�l. i ; o�l� �.1'� � 1 ---.; ��'�. .,ij � �� ^ lb._,�.. - '��L �" ,�o,'`j . r 530 ; � 1 '� � �r� G�� ,'�9�� " � .- --� �� 1 � ; NO;�`I�,= �� _ � _ _ �_ �. � p'\_',�g2�� \j \ � `L^ \� : . �. 7 • lP i � ,, `D j \ ' 7� \� � ' " � � � ,- � � � 7212 � �-:--- "`' , m� c°, `D ) - . ._ '� f � t� i r Z _ .� �"'"',JC;�� }� ��,.� r �.�c� ��,, `.�.. '" _ ,c'�'.r �" ' � O i ; - - - . �7320�}. 7244 ; 1 m ^ ; 7305. ' 73341, , �_.:..1�,`:_.,r� '..,\7?64/�Q�-., .`�7319 ; 7346 i, �' �.,� . .. , - ( ; < - .., v �734T7349, 7335 ' �°� m� / ��7359 . � � - ��;�^�j�,=�''�;��722`(��za, : � �7371 ' �, . i m ! � �7388 .��, ��7778�; `�.,�.7728i ;' � ; '� "'' --i � i rr y' � �; 1',<�7386 i-,": " pJ �`_' , m �� ta .� � � � � :,� � N � 7 �7 cv .'�. r. 1. .� i. 1� �; _ � '* �-r c� !�: � � 773$ , � '�.'��' 7479r} 7481. �a�� . `_ o� 512 �� %��, � / 6151�J � �` \ �,�&3^ `�525� � ✓ �� a �\` ^°� a�r�i ° Y_�\. �� 'd'id� . `° / ' :: .. '." � 7740' _�--: � �; �i r \� �' ,�_" _: 4r .�� ,� . / ._ `_-:�•�� . �4 g � m �)'� � i l��mT�. �-�- 77.39 3 � \/ r��w��"' /.__.1 I /�; � m , . � /�sss ;U? ��33.-�;� . Y� � � /rn�7� -r.-%' ^� . i�� Q � .. %�� i� i �"�' 1_. �-� 1�`L-`` � s 9ze : ;6938 . (. _ ._ � b 0 e i ,- � .. 6 Q p ', 1 7061 � ! __. �JENOYA' �wi�n�Es � 715i 72ND , �• 780 ; 7302 : + ---- 7320 ;3 t �_ '� 7338 ` � 7356 . ;�<� �3�� m ., � �o: ' � i � � : � � M1 i__.._L = � �:�n1i u�}mir .�i��r � � ' T - � - r :....,:.:. � � �' �, � � ....... , : .•... .. . � • � � � ♦ � t � 0 ; � � • � . , s a �� 7��g A s926 . ';693II � l._.._ .7: : d0 . ; �9 . i ,- h � 6 � � _,� � '� ,7i43 !7 i47, j " "ST , L11K�'S % J , J � t :LllTf�{ERAN �; i� � ` �iJ.%' 1 1 7139 ( 57149� CHURCN : ' .1�,'� _�-- -1, >--- i 7�00 ; � ��6, ; 7737 � /�� 7128 •-- - - j -- i i �_-- -� , 7163 � '� 7. 7136 � �___ 1 __ , �_^�. .- i i_- � _ .�� 1�155 ' ^ � �� JEHO�lA' S� y ' � %' � . � �, ( � , t � +� ��0�� ' o � + w3�NEs -�:� \ m �, 1� ��r� u � I a �r' �`�"�, �- 1'�� r� �. ; JP .'\l�,O A\ r� r•,� ^" •q ��- .�O >. _ � �_^ � l� 7_161. ' -� , �.- N -/ �.%o �!� ��'1 . � �7772; •. ` �' � , �i �b.,�., • �,� ��~ � ' 72ND F .'�• b5 - � ' M ^ ;� 1�� .-- 30,Y-��. / ^�m /'C�- `'��. .� �\ 1 .,, . .�_ ... .1.� N ��,'I��' �� _-' a,\ .m' � � ; . . -•. i ,y9 ,^, i ..._. r` ; �.�' �1 � � ^ �\,� �� { � I'1h � m, �n � �n ' i � � u� �� ;� `• -� � �.'" �4 ' "i W i � ' d \ 7212 � ' —^' f ' � q � r. ��. � N ._...'_"''!T.�._^ �i� c`^� r . ^m..``3 w�� k. ... .- � .. ..W..d � ,��_ -� , i . � , , , � m t i� � �, 'a � � , � { � m \. in .� rv c�. ; n l. �; . �� r u' . ' ' T. Sp � 2 ��j�_""-�,; 1� :�� ,�oL < � i �1� ;_.r_. �732Q 7244 /� � w ' p %7305. i !—� ' ' 7334 � � I„` �` _ _ i 780 - 7284/� �� . --i � ,.� � �'� . 1 7302 ; � � i - 7318 , _. 7346 . ,-.. � , , ,'. '` �; ry , �� ; i7320� p ;. � % �t'% - � `�. , i— -- � ,'`�^�/;^� � %'' 7338 : \� . � i. ; —'a ��v=/7871 , � � �—� 738B . �,�, �77.18';-` .:' I ; 7356 , Qi . 7728� ' 7�Y �Q � � _ _ \_ - 748 - �� 3 75 Exhibit A \ 7479 � / � _ —� �49 '1�.'\, �, ,�op y� I � � . \�I.., _ �.._., � ',,,- . i ��Z',=�7386 i�-,.. -, � j . ; �737< , , �; '7732'i ;�'r-o� � �� 736 .i '��h � 761 � ' ``� " `�,� ' � J740 �- _) �----µ_, - r � ' _: , __ -�_�.�. _�_ � - ' i- I f � f �n l i �^�?�-. - = � �ip ¢�It m?� 7739 :�.��!P � 7699 � N � � i /� ( ^ i�� m J w �cn � m � � 1 �773�. � ,�.,, i_ t � f ., �. -; �1 l �. . � —�--, �„� ? cn: � ? _ . . _ RESOLt1TiON NO. 98-XXX RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIDDEN VALLEY 7 T " ADDITION WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution passed by the council on the 15th day of July, 1998, the city engineer was authorized to prepare plans and specifications for the improvements of Hidden Valley 7th Addition Utility and Street Improvement project; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVEO, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF C077AGE GROVE, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF MINNESOTA; 1. Such improvements are necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 2. Such improvements are hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution adopted the 15th day of July, 1998. 3. The engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, & Associates is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Passed this 15th day of July, 1998. John D. Denzer, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk �., ,,. T; � � � � � � Q � � W J � � � Z ;e � � �; li � Z , #, � � � '� � r a ¢ i s e � l �'.1~�\ E � i �S � � �� -r .• p �� ) { ii 0 ��v�.� .13� '�� .n �\ m g i,} Pw e o n 3t� �'3. . _..r ! . Ff � � W �� s 8 m ~ �r O J � ~ �✓ � O _ � � � � � W F O J F � � , � g � � �! ` 1e �& i1t �� i� ` ' .� ti , r `�`" �k �'iS � yiy�� °� o 1 y `� � � � A �� }„ � ` � � � {� \q � . °_�. ..�`gm�4q M A"'_` _ _ �:-:_ � ., _ � � �' �;,� � ''.�. �. � W 'C?G>+ Y O ! Y 7 � �� .; ry 3w y � � r�� \ � a � ; ��,, �� . . �. r� �� I � $ � _� ~ � I � -Y 3 �_ �. Z �, �� ; F �'1: i� � Q �� 'z i ��: _ � � A i " a I� W f8 � �f I g � J I � a �� i� � % 9�Le g }' � ��i s = �`a ..� t l ,� � � �� A � �� I �� '\ �� a � \ �'�� .�'' „'�,-w .�.� '� � v ��'�'?. ;� i��¢. N py i � w �m' y 94 �y� 1 r p 6 �a��g�i ��"'F; � .r.� , . `, �. : "';� I �E i Q . r m J �`� �� _° ° ,.Y� n ,��:� - � ) 1 �O � vw bNCY 4'4i e `�. �o � z � >�� ; �� o � i �.. ° �� 4� g,. �� , o � � � �,,.� � �; I� _ �,� " ; � � � � �,� < �a 1 ��"� ( �<� ' � � °.,� . ° u.:.,.K"��'" t � . a d ' A �� i )� �.KW '° �iV — _�� _ _ r, — _ _ _ _ _ _ ' _ __ 'r e'�,c k a s•A �� -- � � Y O � Y 7 0 �� `°` I Sl I p I e i � � � i � �Y i ° > �o � ---..,. � � � E� �� t 6� S� t� a t 3, p � <;$ ji � � 111 ]l fi � 1 1 a ' �� I i � i ! � I `� � 5i J K2 � �� # � � t "'' �� , lai�� 1 � t 3 b O , � 3H O � Excerpt from tlnapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting CASE PP98-14 and ZA98-15 Mike Rygh for Secure Properties inc. has filed a preliminary plat application with variance for a proposed subdivision named Hidden Vailey and for rezoning from R2.5 to R5 for a portion of the development The proposed pro�ect, which consists of 781ots for unattached single-family homes, is located south of 70 Street, east of Harkness Avenue and west of Hidden Valiey Trail. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approvai subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. A revised recommendation with conditions was submitted to the Commission. Kieven asked if the only difference in the new information was the area charges. Lindquist stated that the traii along 70�' Street is being deleted. Auge summarized that changes were made to conditions #4 and #30. Kleven asked if 25 percent was the right number in condition #10. He also referenced condition #27 and asked if this was a concept that was dealt with in the Centex proposal and if were they restricted. Lindquist responded that Centex had a similar condition; they were restricted to the first two phases. Kleven asked about requiring ail retaining walls to be located outside of right-of-ways or city property. Lindquist answered that couid be made a condition. Kleven asked about the 25-foot wide traiiway. Lindquist responded that it is referenced in condition #29, though it is not very clear. Kleven discussed the variance request for reduced right-of-way. Kleven stated that the 50- foot right-of-way plus an additional 5 feet of easement is hard to understand and that there wouid be no difference if there were a 60-foot right-of-way; there would stiii be tree removal. Lindquist responded that the change would move the buildings five feet closer to the front property line. Kleven suggested that tree preservation shouid be looked at on a lot-by-lot basis as the houses are being built. Podoll asked if the City would still be able to put trees on the boulevards with the extra five- foat easeme�ts. He stateci that the Pavement Manageme�# Task Force wanted trees as far away as possible and wanted to know if this would still happen. Lindquist answered that it wouid. Podoll inquired about the fishing pond and wanted to know if it would aerated to keep the fish alive and who was liable for it. Lindquist responded that there is no intention to aerate. She also stated that the DNR would restock the pond if the fish died. Podoll questioned if the pand under the NSP lines makes sense based on information from engineer's letter. Also addressing the engineers memo, he stated that du2 to the 50-foot drop in rear yards in the north, the buyer should be aware. He asked, with the proposed grading, if there shouid be a condition to protect the ci4y in case of flooding. He mentioned that people in Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 2 the 9300 block of Jeffery had had problems due to steep slopes. Auge asked that Rygh address this issue. Auge opened the public hearing. Mike Rygh, Secure Properties Inc., stated that he understood most of the staff report. He stated that under condition #25 regarding decorative lighting that he imagines that it would be the same as the lights in Hidden Valiey and asked what other options are availabie. lindquist responded that the City would make the 80 Street lighting available if desired. Rygh stated that he wanted to keep the lighting consistent. Rygh responded to condition #21 that the landscaped property would be maintained by a homeowners association. He indicated that along 70 Street and Harkness Avenue the landscaping wouid be maintained by the property owner. Rygh addressed severai points relating to conditions #10 and #29. He has worked with staff and that 50-foot wide should be okay. He also stated that with the steeper siopes, it should be seeded right away, and he aiso would like to plant trees. Sawyer asked what the pond depths would be. Rygh respontled that they would be 15 feet to 25 feet deep. He also stated that the DMR didn't care if the pond froze out and that they wili restock it. Japs asked if there was a reason why the city wants to switch the lighting for this development. Lindquist responded that the city is asking the developer to consider other options so the West Draw could have a different appearance than the other areas of the city. Japs stated that the development should be consistent, especialiy with lighting, to the other adjoining subdivisions. Sawyer asked what the homes wouid cost. Rygh answered $150,000 to $300,000. Sawyer then inquired when the development would start. Rygh responded that he would like to begin as soon as possible with roads and utilities installed by fall. Podoli asked about the phasing of the development. Rygh tesponded that they wouid connect the main road to Harkness and install a cul de sac with other cul de sacs added in the future. Japs asked what the impact to home sales wouid be due to the Wakota Bridge and Highway 61 upgrades. Rygh responded that it would be positive when road improvements are completed. Kleven questioned the 50-foot right-of-way versus the 60-foot right-of-way and what Public Safety and engineering had suggested. He stated that he has a problem with the 50-foot right-of-way because it is inconsistent with the city ordinances. He appreciates efforts on tree preservation, but wants to know if it could be platted with the 60-foot right-of-way and reviewed later during siting of the houses and looking at tree locations. Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 Rygh responded that it was a timing issue. He stated that clearing oniy 50 feet would not affeet every house. It would be a challenge for the lots on the east side of the southwest c�a9 ci� �ac� a7�a� t4 the pond. He does not want to clear a 60-foot right-of-way. Kleven stated that the city should look at preserving significant trees and questioned if the city requires clearing the entire 60-foot right-of-way. He further stated that preserving trees within the right-of-way could achieve the same goal. He suggested that staff be ailowed the ability to make the call. Rygh responded that this would be a problem due to the front yard setback requirements. Podoll stated that this is not a tree preservation requirement but a slope issue. Rick Benson, 7529 — 72" Street, asked about the access off Harkness and Hardwood Avenues. Rygh responded that it wouid be to the south. Lindquist responded that Hardwood Avenue would not be constructed for several years; it wiii be constructed when West Draw development warrants the need for a new road. Benson then asked about the pond located within the NSP easement. Rygh answered that the pond would be a buffer to handle rain runoff prior to going to other ponds at the bottom of the hill. Benson inquired if lowering the hill was a dead issue. Rygh stated NSP poles are custom-made poles and cost $75,000 to $100,000 per pole. Benson aiso asked if there would be room around the fishing ponds for a picnic area. Lindquist stated that there was a small parking area with some land available. Rygh responded that there would be room for 4 picnic tables and to park 10 cars. Benson would like to see a larger picnic area. Lindquist stated that there are a variety of picnic areas within the West Draw. Benson wanted to know if the two large ponds are connected. Lindquist stated that there would be a culvert undemeath the road. Benson then asked about saving the trees by the cui de sacs along the NSP easement as there are no trees in the easement. Auge closed !he public hearing. Kleven made a motion !o approve fhe rezoning per the staff reporf. Rice seconded. 1. The applicant shall mainfain the proposed lot sizes and configuration presenfed to fhe City in Case 98 -14/15. This precludes any re-platting of the property to lots more consistent with the minimum R5 zoning ordinance standards. Japs expressed his concern that this may establish a precedent but that this situation is unique due to the development in the east. Mofion was passed unanimously. Podoll moved to approve the variance for the 50-foot right-of-way based on consistency with the staff report recommendations. Japs seconded. Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 1. The applicant dedicate an additiona/ five-foot drainage and utility easement a/ong the front of the adjoining cul de sac lots. Motion passed 5 to 2 wifh Foster and Kleven voting against. The Commission discussed the preliminary piat application and clarified the changes to the conditions of approval. Lindquist stated that there is concern about the homeowner maintaining the landscaping along 70� Street. The city doesn't want the homeowner to remove the plantings put in as part of the project. Rygh believes if they put the tree in, the owner will keep it there. The cul de sac islands would be maintained by the homeowners association. The land along Harkness/Hardwood is owned by the city. Lindquist recommended that an easement be recorded to protect landscaping along 70�' Street similar to the Centex project. Kleven stated that it should be left as private property and the city gets the easement. Kieven asked if language was needed to protect retaining wall. Condition #30 will contain language that the retaining wall not be built in public right-of-way or on public land. Kleven made a motion to approve the preliminary plat subject to the listed conditions. Japs seconded. 1. Approval of the preliminary plat is valid for one year after City Counci! acfion. The City Council may extend the period by agreement wifh the subdivider in the case of developing the project in phases; or the Council may require submission of a new application. 2. The developer shall entei into a subdivision agreement with fhe City of Coftage Grove for the installation of and payment for al! public improvements in the subdivision, pursuant to Section 28-18 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The applicant dedicate certain lands for park dedication purposes. lf under 10 percent of tota! acreage, cash paymenfs sha!l be required proportionafely. This will be defined in the subdivision agreement. 4. Al! area charge fees shal! be paid in full in accordance with the terms specified in the subdivision agreement. The tota! calculafed area charges for the entire subdivision equate fo $482,197.65 ($126,511.44 for water works, $67,643.41 for sanitary sewer, and $288,042.80 for sform sewer). A credit for instaliation of the regional ponding system will result in an adjustment to the storm sewer area charge. This will be defined in the subdivision agreement. 5. The required dedicafion of rea/-estate property to the Cify for public park shall be described on the final plat as Outlots. The developer shal! be responsibie for all Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 costs (e.g. property taxes, recording fees, etc.) in conveying said property fo the City. 6. The pay►raent for recreafion fees for the �ubdl�risiort shall be in the amount specified by City ordinance at the time of paymenf. Said fees can be paid in phases with the re%vant final plats, and shall be paid prior to re/ease of the plats for recording. The current ordinance amount per /ot is $150.00. 7. The dimensions of each lot shall be verified on the final piat and a /ist containing the square footage for each lot shall be provided to the City. 8. All drainage and utility easements and all public right-of-ways as recommended by the City's consulting engineer and city staff shall be shown on the fina/ plat and dedicated to ffie City for public purposes. 9. Prior to the grading permit being issued by fhe City, the Developer must obtain a MPCA General Storm Water Permit and conduct a pre-construction meeting with City staff, developer and !he developer's consuitanfs. The contractor shall provide the Cify wifh a project schedule for various phases of construction. A financial guarantee for erosion conf�o/ and street sweeping musf be accepted by the City and before a grading permit is issued. 10. The devetoper shall pay for !he construction of a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk located along the roadway that connects to the Hardwood Avenue corridor. The applicant is required to post a financia! guarantee in fhe amount of 25 percent of the estimated cost to construct these sidewalks. 11. A"STOP" sign shal! be insta!!ed by the City af each inte�secfion designafed by the public safefy Depariment. The deve/oper sha!/ be responsible for the City's costs of fhese "STOP" signs. 12. A barricade shall be installed at the end of all streets fhat are dead-ended. Mounted on the barricade shall be a sign providing notice that these streets are planned to 6e e�ended in the future. 13. The deve%per shall disclose to homebuyers of the surrounding vacant property land uses. 14. The applicant receive and appropriate permits or approvals from other regulatory agencies including, but not limifed fo, the Army Corps of Engineers, South Washington Watershed Disfrict, and the Minnesota PolluEion ConfroB Agency. ?5. The developershalt submit a finalgrading, drainage, and utility plans forstaft's review and approval prior to issuing a grading permif. The plan should address a// issues raised in f6e statf report. The submittal shall include a final Excerpt from Unapproved Minuies of the June 22, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 6 construcfion management plan which details erosion control measures, project phasing forgrading work, areas designated for preservation, designated haul roufes and a commitmen! to keep the streefs c/ean and in good repair, a csushed-rock construction entranc� and consfruction-relat�d m�hicle parking. 16. Snow fencing around preservafion areas and erosion control insfalled prior to commencement of any grading activity. 17. Site grading activity sha!l be limited to public right-of-way and outlot areas. Individual lot grading shall be reviewed, approved and completed on a case by case basis prior to commencement of construcfion activify fo ensure compliance with the City's tree preservation ordinance. 18. All emergency overflow swa/es musf be idenfified on the Grading and Erosion Confrot Pian. The drainage swa/e e/evafions shali be staked and sodded. A financial guarantee covering the estimated cost of staking and sodding this area must be included in the subdivision agreement. 19. Erosion control shall be perfo�med in accordance with the recommended pracfices of fhe "Minnesota Consfruction Sife Erosion and Sediment Confrol Planning Handbook" and the condifions stipulated in Section 23-36, Erosion Contsol dur)ng Construction of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 20. The deve%per must grade public park property in accordance with the final grading plan. Grading the park property must be within a grade tolerance of plus or minus four inches. The topsoi/ shall be restored to a depth of at /east four inches. The applicant shal! grade fhe parking lot for the planned fishing area in the subdivision in accordance wifh the approved grading plan. 21. All /andscape cenfer island ouf/ofs and other private outlots in the subdivision sha/! be in fhe ownership and control of a Homeowners' Association. Maintenance for all landscape Jslands and other private outlots sha// be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association. The applicant will dedicate an easement alo»g 70�' Street and Hardwood Avenue restricting removal of landscaping. 22. The applicant submif a fina! /andscape p/an for lot review and approva/ prior to issuance of a grading permit and a bona fide cosf estimate of the landscaping improvements. A/efter of credif in the amount of 150% of the landscaping estimaPe, street repair, street sweeping, paving and curbing, and irrigation systems, shoutd be submitted to and approved by the Cify. Upon complefion of the landscapfng improvements, the owner shall, in writing, inform the City that said improvemenfs have been complefed. The City shall retain the financial guarantee covering the landscape improvements ior a period of one year fiom the date of notice, to ensuse survival of the plants. No building permit shal/ be Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the June 22, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 issued until Ehe required financial guarantee has been received and accepted by the city. 23. As defaiied en !he �taff report, a soadway improvement fee of $33,J00 fos the subdivision's contribution to the Hardwood Avenue corridor improvement project shall be paid by the Applicant. 24. The access confrol on all lots wifh frontage on CSAH 22 (70fh Sfreet) shal! be dedicated fo Washington County. 25. Signage for the subdivision shall be consistent with !he city sign ordinance. A sign permit musf be obfained prior to insfa!lation. 26. Review of the tratfic generation associated with the subdivision shall be complefed prior to final plat approval. Preliminary plat approval encompasses the entire Hidden Valley project; however, final plat approval is limifed to 40 /ofs if found consistent wifh fhe APFO. Shoutd the traffic ana/ysis show fhat developmenf of 40 /ots does nof comply with the APFO, adjustments in phasing and developmenf may need to be made by the developer. 27. An easement or restrictive covenant sha// be created which requires that nafura! vegetation fo be estab/ished and mainfained on all s/opes greafer than 3 fo 1. 28. Tbe 20-foot otf-road trail from the southern portion of the plat to the NSP easement shall be cleared and signed as a part of the final piat for the area. 29. The applicant dedicate to the C)ty the NSP easement east of the plat, commonly known as Ouflo! F, as required by previous Council approvals. The City will perenit ponding wifhin fhe Outlot provided there is ample space and topography permits instatiation of a t�aiL The applicant wiU ensure the dedicated area is contiguous to western plafted road wifhout additional compensation. 30. No retaining wal(s sha!/ be installed on fhe public right-of-way or land to be dedicated to the City. Motion was passed unanimously. t � . � . � � • . � . . • � , • . . PUBLIC MEETING DATE: 6/22198 TENTATIVE COUNCIL REVIEW DATE: 7/15/98 ♦.. . � APPLICANT: Mike Rygh REQUEST: Preliminary plat with variance for the 1998 Hidden Valley addition and a rezoning of 121ots from R-2.5, Residential to R-5, Medium Density Residentiai. SITE DATA �OCATION: ZONING: CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: West of the existing Nidden Vailey subdivisions in the West Draw R-2.5, Residential NQRTH: Vacant Residential EAST: Residential SOUTH: Residential WEST: Vacant Residential/Rural Residential SIZE: 60.94 acres DENSITY: 1.27 units per acre . � �. � Approvai, based on conditions stipulated in this staff report. 1 � � / � � � � f:\GROUPSIPLANNING\t998\PCREPORT�98-14&15 covecdoc . ?�_ _' va+: isxo xm — 945 >.ao - eo�o-wn wn�J'::: %�, - �„ i .� .aew � a � ..a-.� c � � �� '_`_' ¢ � _ � ��/ n�c f �' � .�M�n »� � W A ^ "o� m vm�me :�z5 �--� ��i S',� y M1`/)T> � ' SITE - 4 �� .SQ _ -� . = x =,� �� ` r.�?S', !' ' /e _ _ _ � � _.. . .. � 'e � c c�. _ . ._. � " i . ' _ _'.__ �>a.. �4 + ^ L� � )� li6 . �'.\\ Tj c 4 T ` K F.rae� /�,[. rt' .-.��. . ;��t I. � v:�oa-o ,�\ J 5 ....re \ � F ' v.za>nm �:�. � �seo r� ��. -� y --- a g� r h z' ^ ^" `O#Y.SyJG�OtI :,� � • = m .s _: _ii �'� a �' '�`? �^ �'i � _'_'"__'—_ �_ � �RK j—xm '�. %_n � ' :aa_ � �' � ,. g k J Z - a '. � .a.Ea+ �'a��rwg'�, �n rya _ 8 HINFON HEIOtlTS. �'K'.�z n°� ^ � : - ; PENiAL^IiOMES " '.n �.>' �'�� -.-��' �' �. g �.� +gv � s »o� i, 3 � i. g S 8$ �, ��g� i ��_ � � r ') e .� !' . _ . y �' � �' � .. " .�"E:: _..__ _ � . iF,o � � � S IIST.-�.wxA mw�vo PARK 3 . . _ .._� ^� `. f � ' _ �; - n`+ +�..; — GROVE $ ss 4 ° : �� an�e -- '_ _ .i� . . � >e�e _ � _' ' ..w'•io ' ESTATES � . . � � ' . "nmsv � -_ - - . . .i . � _ i951 k �' -. - . B _ — E s ___ . _.. . ^P,: � — . sa o\+!c� ` reei r . �azc e �� nm — CRESfViEW . � � = �` � anRK°a�ot�� . ms3 �na �re� � ELEMENTAflY ecm � \�\ -:- � , . � _ � SCH�Ot .. � --�U �_.{ ^ g ,.�___'` n7n �---, `-' � � >azo ,vaso� vsoc H� >sea >aoa !re>s noa � � "' __— -. .-�......�....�.�..».....�...�......_�-.,......y._.�.°B@fiFf.3•F•5 . �' " /�-'.,_''—.. � � � � ^ '.:� � R _ '��8 R , � . F/ � . . . . � � m ° �PPSFCi f.' . . �., _ �.�. �.. .. . . _.� . . ��/-�iM% - %/- ` 'Y _ :OITAGE OROVE' NI< a�` miry'; •�.�� :� • - -•- . :.. - .... . . . . ... . INTRODUCTION Secure Properties inc. is requesting approvals for a low density residential development in the Hidden Vailey neighborhood. The applications being requested include a rezoning to R-5, Medium Density Residential for a portion of the plat, preliminary piat approval, and variances for double fronted lots and right-of-way width. The 60.94 acre plat creates 78 unattached singie family lots; dedicates right-of-way for Hardwood Avenue and County Road 22; and sets aside land for ponding, parks, or open space purposes. The applicant indicates that approximately 46.2 acres are designated for park and open space purposes. This amount may vary based on the final recommendation by the Parks staff regarding parkland dedication. The proposed single family lot sizes vary from a minimum of 11,002 square feet to the largest of 39,646 square feet. The average lot area for all of the proposed development is 15,517 square feet. Seventy-one of the proposed lots are in compliance and meet or exceed the R2.5 zoning district lot size minimum standards. The standards for this district are 11,000 square feet in area and 85 feet in width. The remaining 7 lots meet the lot area criteria for the R2.5 zoning district lot size standards for area, but do not comply with the lot width criteria. These, along with five adjoining, are the lots that are proposed to be rezoned to R5. The proposed lots meet all R-5 ordinance criteria. It is the developers intent that the project appear to be a continuation of the existing Hidden Vailey subdivisions. A copy of the proposed p�eliminary piat schematic is attached as Exhibit A. -�- � The character of the site is distinctive and the topography varies greatly from south to north. An NSP easement bisects the site and the southern haif of the property has rolling topography and is heavily wooded. Several specimen and many significant trees are located in the wooded canopy areas. As per the tree preservation ordinance, these trees have been identified on the grading plan. The northern half of the parcel is relatively barren and has been disturbed by a previousiy permitted mining operation. [:T_[�3��:ZilIP►T7 The property received preliminary plat approval in 1986. This plat is no langer applicable due to changes in city deveiopment standards and the real estate market. The area was master rezoned to R2.5 in late 1996. The following information is a history of the Hidden Valley subdivision. • On 2-5-86 Hidden Valley Preliminary Plat was approved by the City Council. • On 4-02-86 Hidden Valley 1�` Addition was approved by the City Council. Pianning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 2 • On 7-17-87 = On 7-11-90 • On 6-2-93 • On 3-16-94 • On 3-16-94 Hidden Valley 2 Addition was approved by the City Council. Hidden !/alley 3'" Rddition v�as �pp�ove� by the City Council. Hidden Valley 4"' Addition was approved by the City Councii Hidden Valley 5"' Addition was approved by the City Counci� Hidden Valley 6"' Addition was approved by the City Councii On February 9, 1998, the applicant met with the Planning Commission at their workshop session to discuss the proposed concept plan. initially, the applicant felt that rezoning to PUD might be more appropriate to permit relaxation of some of the standards of the R2.5 zoning district. At that time, there were several portions of the project that varied from the applicable regulations. Fifteen of the lots did not meet the lot width requirement; there was use of one private drive and therefore the lot did not have any right-of-way frontage; the proposed dedicated right-of-way for the southern streets was 50 feet instead of 60 feet; and the applicant was looking to reduce the side yard setbacks for each lot in the south to permit greater tree preservation. The Planning Commission reviewed the request and while no formal position was taken, many of the members expressed concern with the number of lots which did not meet the ordinance dimensional standards. They also questioned whether ail the southern lots needed reduced side yard setbacks and that this issue should be addressed more on a case by case basis. On March 4, 1998, the applicant went before the City Councii to discuss the concept plan. At that time, the Council acknowledged an interest in promoting tree preservation. in general, they felt the standards of the R2.5 zoning district should be upheld but variances, on a case by case basis, wouid be looked at if its granting resulted in more tree preservation or a better building site on the lot. The applicant has since modified the request which was reviewed by the Commission and Council. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS REZON/NG TO R5 Because of the irregular shape of the property and the existing configuration of the adjacent Hidden Vailey developments there are severai lots which appear to belong to the existing neighborhood. The appiicant is requesting a rezoning of twelve lots to R-5. This zoning district is consistent with the zoning of the adjoining property. The rezoning allows for narrower lots, and the side yard setbacks are 7.5 and 5 feet instead of 10 feet under the R2.5 zoning. As detailed earlier, all 12 of the lots exceed the R-5 lot area requirement of 7,500 square feet and exceed the 11,000 square foot lot area requirement of the R2.5 zoning district. Five of the 12 lots also meet or exceed the 85-foot lot width requirement for the R2.5 Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 8 PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 3 zoning district and all lots exceed the 60-foot lot width requirement of the R-5 district. Exhibit B is the existing zoning and Exhibit C is the proposed zoning configuration. The applicant is requesting that a small portion of the site be rezoned to R5, consistenf with the adjacent Hidden Valley development. Typically, staff would not support a rezoning simply to avoid more stringent ordinance regulations. However, the boundary line between the R5 and ±he recently rezoned R2.5 zoning district is somewhat arbitrary and does not relate to neignborhood boundaries. When the City created the R2.5 zoning district, all properties within the West Draw area which were guided for low density residential were rezoned to the new zoning category. However, when looking at the existing development pattern, the R2.5 District cuts through the middle of a neighborhood currentiy existing along Hidden Valley Lane. The appiicant through this application is requesting the lots that would front on this road extension to be under the same regulations as the adjoining lots. Although the R5 zoning district permits smaller lots than is desirabie in the West Draw area, the applicant is proposing lots which are generally similar to those required by the R2.5 standards. All lots that would be rezoned meet or exceed the 11,000 square foot lot area requirement. Seven of the 12 lots have a lot width of slightly under the 85-foot R2.5 standard at 80 feet. Although side yard setbacks are reduced, these reduced setbacks are in existence on the developed lots to the east. If the applicant had been proposing small lots, meeting the minimum standards of the R5 District, staff would not support the request. However, because the applicant is proposing lots similar in size to the R2.5 zoning and because the area to be rezoned is a continuation of an existing contiguous R5 neighborhood, staff is supporting the request. A condition of approval wouid be that the applicant maintain the proposed sizes and configuration presented to the City. This would preclude re-piatting of the property to lots more consistent with the minimum R5 zoning ordinance standards. PRELIMINARY PLAT As indicated earlier, the lots ali meet the minimum dimensional standards for the existing and proposed zoning districts. The design of the plat is similar to the layout of the previous Hidden Val{ey Devefopments. This similarity can be seen with the extensive use of cul-de- sacs. in this proposal, five cul-de-sacs are arranged off of two internal local collector roads that act as a gateway to the subdivision. Three of the lots in the proposed plat have double frontages. This arrangement is only allowed by ordinance for properties that abut a major roadway. These lots do not abut a major roadway and a variance is required. The three lots are south of the cul de sac adjacent to the NSP easement. All of tne lots are of adequate size to provide for sufficient buffering. Due to existing site topography, these lots can only be accessed by this cul de sac. Although the lots are double fronted in the south, with one lot having triple frontage, the southern cul de sac is weli below the building area of these lots. It appears that a retaining wall will be needed to install the more southern cul de sac. The retaining wall would be located on the private lots and would be maintained by the individual homeowners. In conciusion, the site topography and desire to minimize site grading for infrastructure installation prompts the need for these variances. Another issue that was discussed during concept plan review is the granting of variances to reduce right-of-way width. The ordinance requires right-of-way dedication of 60 feet and the Planning Siaff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 4 applicant proposes 50 feet on two of the three cul de sacs in the south. The rationale for the request is the decreased right-of-way permits the homes to be set closer to the street, thereby reducing site grading and ultimately tree removal. Although staff supports tree preservation techniques, it is diffic�lt to support sither rlecr�eased right-af-way or granting of frant yard setback variances, both of which would achieve the same result. A 60-foot right-of-way is requested to permit installation of a 34-foot wide road and allow two 13-foot bou�evards on either side for utility instaliation and snow storage purposes. To reduce the right-of-way without reducing the street width is to compromise the boulevard area, which is undesirable. Pianning staff is aiso uncomfortable supporting front yard setback variances for approximately 17 lots because they are located in wooded areas. Presently, the applicant does not have definite house plans or lot grading plans for each of these 17 lots. It is difficult to assess, without this information, whether additiona� tree preservation could occur. Additionally, it is difficult to find that there are "unique circumstances" relating to these lots which set them apart from other wooded lots in the City. As the Commission and Council are aware, the West Draw area contains many heavily wooded sites and those property owners will expect similar treatment to what occurs with this plat. At this time, with the preliminary plat and proposed grading plan, it is difficult to assess the amount of trees which can be preserved by granting of the requested variances. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to change the setback requirements in the R-2.5 district. However, during concept review, there was some support for granting of variances to facilitate tree preservation. If the Commission and Council wouid like to meet the applicanYs request, planning staff would recommend reducing the right-of-way to 50 feet and obtaining an additional 5-foot drainage and utility easement along the lot frontages to increase the boulevard area. Other plat issues relate to dedication of additional right-of-way and easements. Additionai pubiic right-of-way will be required to be platted along the Hardwood Corridor to the east. The total width related to this additional right-of-way is 60 feet. Drainage and utility easements are shown on the preliminary piat. The proposed easements on the finai plats should accurately reflect required utility or drainage easements that match the final designs. High water easements could affect future deck construction on some lots, so patio door egress should be pianned accordingly. The city engineer is currently working on the site plan utility design. Storm water ponding areas and public versus private open space shali be platted as separate lots. These modifications are required prior to City Council review. Deve%pment Standards Because this project review represents the first development within the West Draw under the new R2.5 ordinance, the development standards for that district have been included. The standards are: • Lot area —11,000 square feet • Lot width — 85 feet Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 5 • Front yard setback — 30 feet . Rear yard setback-30 feet • Side yard setback house —10 feet • Side yard setback garage side —10 feet • Maximum Principal Structure height-35 feet • Maximum lot coverage — 50% • Minimum cul-de-sacs lot width at right-of-way — 65 feet . Minimum cul-de-sacs lot width at setback — 90 feet Archifecture The applicant has indicated that the housing styles will continue the custom character of the other Hidden Valiey developments. The estimated housing values will range from $170,000 to $300,000. Some housing with tuck under or lower level garages wilf be incorporated into the deve�opment where the terrain dictates. Vehicular Access The roadway layout continues the existing residential collector, Hidden Valiey Lane South. This road plus a new easUwest connection to the new Hardwood Avenue are the primary access points into the site. There is no direct access onto 70`" Street. Washington County has requested that access control be dedicated on ail lots with frontage on CSAFi 22 (70th Street). A copy of the County's letter is attached. To facilitate West Draw development, the City will initiate the Hardwood Avenue corridor improvement project. This project will eventually entail construction of Hardwood Avenue as part of the City's collector road system, upgrading the north portion of existing Harkness to complement Hardwood Avenue, and mill and overlay of existing Harkness Road. This plat accesses the northern portion of the Corridor by a new'street; hence vehicles from the subdivision wifl be utilizing Hardwood Avenue. As a resuit of the subdivision design, the western portion of the plat will be piatted as parks and ponding, which will limit future assessment potential for the future roadway improvements. Since the subdivision wiii be utilizing the corridor, it was determined that a policy needed to be established to capture some of the development benefit of the proposed road upgrades. This policy would avoid the general public having to carry a disproportionate share of financing the roadway improvement adjacent to the plat. After a lengthy discussion, staff is recommending that the current assessment policy for residentiai streets in pavement overlay districts could be modified. Based on that policy, it was determined that the proposed project would be responsible for a $39,000 contribution to the Harkness Avenue upgrade. This is calculated by taking 1,150 feet of frontage and dividing by 85 feet (minimum lot width), then multiplying by $3,000, which is 2 percent of the consenrative estimated average market value of $150,000. Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 6 Pedestrian Traffic Due to terrain constraints in the existing NSP easement, a sidewalk is being proposed along the easUwest roadway in the northern por;ion of th� plat. The r�ght-of-way is being alatted wider to accommodate this connection. A six-foot sidewalk will complete another link in the linear trailway corridor that now bisects the City from County Road 19 to the new Hardwood Avenue corridor. Additionai segments of the trail corridor were recentiy obtained as part of the West Draw Meadows piat to the west. An 8-foot bituminous pathway wili be compieted along the western edge of the plat in the future with the Hardwood Avenue installation project. The appiicant shall be required to install an 8-foot bituminous pathway along the northern property line adjacent to 70th Street. A 25-foot outlot is being created along the western edge of tne southern half of the plat. A similar parcel was obtained with the piatting of the subdivision to the south. This trailway corridor continues the planned link from Oakwood Park to the NSP trailway corridor. The existing terrain is steep in some places and is suited for more adventuresome walkers. The applicant has indicated his concern over this portion of trail installation. His concerns deal with site topography and potential grading impacts as well as the intrusiveness of the trail in this location. Staff and the Parks Commission feel that it is important to obtain this property, as it wiil compiete another continuous link in the public open space system. Additional property could be added to the outlot shouid the properties to tne west ever subdivide further, which may provide better grading opportunities. The actual trailway should be cleared and appropriately signed as a future traii. Traffic A detailed traffic analysis in conformance with and completed as required by the City's Adequate Facilities Ordinance (APFO) was not submitted with the Preliminary plat application. Using daily and peak hour traffic rates from the Institute of Traffic Engineers, the development is projected to create 745 average daily trips at fuli development. However, peak hour trips are projected at 85.8 trips. As the Commission is aware, the City is limited by the number of peak hour trips which can be ailocated to new development by the APFO. Previous developments have been allocated trips based upon their acreage of total City MUSA land. The applicanYs property is 8.2 percent of the t�t�i land avaiiable for develapment. Therefore, this project would be allocated 8.2 percent of the total trip allotment or 44 trips. This allotment permits development of 40 single-family homes. A condition of approval addresses this restriction and is worded similar to the Centex project. Staff is currently in the process of reevaluating this APFO requirement and has been working with the Metropolitan Council regarding the regional implications. Recent state highway project funding p�anning for the Wakota Bridge and Highway 61 improvement projects allow the City to begin renegotiation of the current APFO criteria. It is anticipated that the projected traffic volumes are typical for levels for single family residential development and that no roadway operational or capacity probiems would be anticipated with these volumes. Staff agrees that the traffic volumes projected should not create any capacity or operational probiems along the major roadways abutting the property. The final plat applications shail include a detailed traffic analysis in conformance with the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 7 Utilities The site will be serveci by the new West Draw trunk utilities. Sanitary sewer flows are alsa regulated by the City's APFO. The current accepted standard is that each single-family residential unit will utilize 210 gallons of capacity per day. Based on this assumption, the total projected flows from the entire proposed development, at buiid-out, would be 16,380 gallons per day. This figure is within the acceptable range for an increase of flows based upon the Met Council approval of the MUSA expansion. Grading The applicant has worked closely with staff in developing a grading plan that meets the current developrnent standards and practices. Exhibit D is the grading plan for the northern portion of the proposed plat. Exhibit E would be for the southern portion. The northern portion of the site has been previously disturbed and will be reworked further in preparation of proper road grades, slopes, and house pads. The northern portion of the property has some slopes that are 3 to 1 or greater. Maintenance of these areas could be problematic if not left in a natural state. The appiicant has indicated that the areas will be designated as naturai areas. In an attempt to maximize tree preservation in the north, the applicant has committed to only mass grading the roadway right-of-ways and then to work with staff on the individual lot grading plans as building occurs. This will allow the applicant to get a better understanding of which trees can be best protected or require speciaf landscaping work. The installation and maintenance of erosion control measures will be enforced during the plat development. In order to engineer a road cut in the center of the plat near the NSP easement, the applicant proposes the use of a two-tiered retaining wall. This proposed wall wouid have to be designed and stamped by an engineer licensed with the State of Minnesota. The long-term liability of this wall is a concern of the Parks Commission as well as the Planning Staff. For this reason staff is recommending that the wall be located off of public right-of-way or pubiic property. The wail may not be necessary if the appiicant is successful in negotiating an agreement with NSP regarding the height adjustment of the adjacent high-energy transmission tower. An increase in the pole height would allow the removal of the majority of the giant knob that the pole currently rests on. It appears this may be cost prohibitive. Drainage The proposed drainage patterns on the site tends to mirror existing drainage routes so mass grading of the entire site is not necessary. The final drainage pattern for the entire subdivision wili be roughed in with the initial site/roadway grading and wi!! be refined when the houses are built. The individual lot grading reviews wiil ensure that each house wili have positive drainage after completion of the final grade. Staff is requesting that the applicant formalize the emergency overflows within the system and depict these areas on the final grading plan. Two °'bowis" or low spots on the site require that the areas be served by an over sized pipe to accommodate for the lack of an over land drainage route or emergency overflow route. The final plan must also depict all structure openings at least 2 feet above the emergency overflow and high water elevations. Pianning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 8 The management and retention of the drainage site is addressed by using existing depressions to create new or larger ponding areas. This proposed development plan develops a system consistent with the 1984 Surface Water Management Plan and the new draft Surface Water Manageme�t P�a�. The systerr addresses both wster quantity and rate of run-off. �ost development storm water flows will be in accordance with the City's Storm Water Management Plan. The installation of the pond areas aiso assists in the water quality issue by permitting some pretreatment and settling of the storm water before draining it down stream. In regard to specific standards for water quality, the City Engineer has reviewed the plans to assess the water quality component of the proposal. Additionally, the plans must be reviewed and approved by the Watershed district and the MPCA who will also review the proposed storm water system. The proposed development has one large regional pond and two smaller local ponds. The regional pond has a normai water elevation of 805 feet MSL and a high water elevation of 815 feet MSL and is located along Harkness Avenue. The pond will be equalized by a culvert under the new road. The Surface Water Management Plan links these holding areas to a depression north of 70` Street. The ponds in this proposed development were also enlarged in volume by the applicant in order reduce the amount of developable area lost to ponding on the north side of 70` Street. The total storage required for the two linked ponds is 97.3 acre feet. This amount is 75.87 acre feet above the 21.43 acre feet actually triggered by the development. Staff is working with the applicant to reach a suitable agreement for the compensation or credit for the additionai ponding volume requirements. The applicant and the Director of Parks and recreation have been working with the DNR to transform the large pond on the site into a fishing pond. A successful program wouid include a parking lot, a picnic area, a fishing pier and an annual pan fish stocking schedule. Cities are usually required to provide the land and all parking/access support. The DNR has preliminarily committed to stocking the pond. Overall, staff is comfortabie with the drainage plan as submitted. While severai areas have been identified that need adjustment, these can be easily accommodated with minor fine- tuning. Staff is confident that the applicant can address the stated concerns within the framework af the existing gr�ding p�rrr�it process and that significant alterations to the proposed design will not occur. The City engineer's review is attached. A revised plan refiecting those concerns should be submitted prior to Council review. Weflands There are no designated wetiands on the property. Tree Preservation The tree preservation plan for the development identifies 621 significant trees and 5 specimen trees on the property. Fourteen different tree species contribute to the total with burr oak being the most predominant. The majority of the remaining species in the site canopy that did not qualify as being eligible as a significant or specimen tree are box eiders. In preparing the Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 8 PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 9 grading plan, the applicant worked with staff in identifying the most appropriate and sensitive way to proceed with development. The applicant chose t� only ma�� gr�de the right-of-way and utility areas in the wooded part of the plat and to grade and remove trees on individual lots on a case by case basis. The amount of significant trees that wouid be lost during the first phase of grading has been identified at 139 trees. This equates to 22 percent of the total significant trees. The actual amount may fluctuate up or down a percent or two based on the actual field protectio� operation. The developer pians to waik the right-of-way once the center line is staked and identify additional significant or general canopy trees that can be saved. He has also committed to try to save the healthy specimen trees. The ordinance allows removal of up to 25 percent of the identified trees based on the two-phase development approach. The allowable figure for the individual lot development phase is 20 percent. A formal tree replacement process and financial guarantee will be identified in the subdivision agreement for amounts removed above the ailowable margin on the individuai lots. The final grading pian shall be modified in accordance with the ordinance criteria in order to have the tree protection instructions on the actual sheets. A copy of the Tree preservation p�an is attached as Exhibit G. Landscaping The applicant is proposing that the lots in the northern portion of the plat will have three coniferous trees in addition to the required boulevard tree. These groupings are proposed to be relocated from the western side of the plat and will be calculated into the required tree repiacement calculations. The southern portion of the proposed plat, which has an existing canopy cover, will be handled on a lot-by-lot basis under the tree preservation ordinance. The applicant has indicated that a case-by-case review method of tree preservation has worked well in the past and can in the future. The proposed cul-de-sac and entrance isiands are to be landscaped with a mix of approved materials. All island plantings and remaining open space not under public ownership will be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. The applicant is also proposing to do some suppiemental landscaping along 70` street in the right-of-way. Permission has been obtained from Washington County to complete this endeavor. Park Dedication The applicant is proposing approximately amount of 22.45 acres of land be dedicated as public open space, ponds, recreational areas, orcorridor easement. Due to terrain constraints, high water calculations, retaining wall liabilities, and general use practicality, City staff is recommending acceptance of 3.74 acres of land for park land purposes. To satisfy the park dedication requirements, casn payments shall be required proportionately. Typically the city has oniy given 50 percent credit for areas in the NSP high-energy transmission easement corridor. This policy was followed here. The remainder of the property shall be included as outlots in control of a private homeowners association. Maintenance of the private outiots and associated structures shall be the responsibility of the homeowners essociation. Pianning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP9&14 June 22, 1998 Page 10 Area Charges The ar�a eharges for th€ project w�r� based on the r��w West Qraw rates, whict� �r$ highsr than the standard rates in other districts. This rate increase is due to area charge policies estabiished during the pianning process for the West Draw. Based on the 60.94 acres of the project, the area charges equate to $126,511.44 for water works, $67,643.41 for sanitary, and $29,969.83 for storm sewer. Based on the additional storm water ponding storage volume needs for the regional pond WD-P32.1, the storm water area charges will be credited proportionately in the subdivision agreement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested rezoning of the 12 proposed lots from R2.5, "Residential" to R• 5, " Medium Density Residentiai," subject to the foliowing conditions: 1. The appiicant shall maintain the proposed lot sizes and configuration presented to the City in Case 98 -14t15. This precludes any re-platting of the property to lots more consistent with the minimum R5 zoning ordinance standards. Staff recommends approval of the variance from the standard right-of-way width of 60 feet to the proposed width of 50 feet for the two southem cui-de-sacs subject to the following: The applicant dedicate an additional five-foot drainage and utility easement along the front of the adjoining cul de sac lots. Staff recommends approval of the 1998 Hidden Valiey preliminary plat with variances for three doubie-fronted lots subject to the following conditions: Approval of the preliminary piat is vafid for one year affer City Council action. The Cify Councii may extend the period by agreement with the subdivider in the case of developing the project in phases; or the Council may require submission of a new application. The developer shal� enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Cottage Grove for the installation of and payment for all public improvements in the subdivision, pursuant to Section 28-18 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The appiicant dedicate certain lands for park dedication purposes. If under 10 percent of totai acreage, cash payments shall be required proportionately. This wiil be defined in the subdivision agreement. 4. All area charge fees shall be paid in fuil in accordance with the terms specified in the subdivision agre2ment. The total calculated area charges for the entire subdivision equate Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 11 to $224,124.68 ($126,511.44 for water works, $67,643.41 for sanitary sewer, and $29,969.83 for storm sewer). A credit for installation of the regional ponding system will result in an adjustment to the storm sewer area charge. This will be defined in the subdivision agreement. 5. The required dedication of real-estate property to the City for public park shall be described on the final plat as Outlots. The developer shall be responsibie for all costs (e.g. property taxes, recording fees, etc.) in conveying said property to the City. 6. The payment for recreation fees for the subdivision shall be in the amount speci�ed by City ordinance at the time of payment. Said fees can be paid in phases with the relevant finai plats, and shall be paid prior to release of the plats for recording. The current ordinance amount per lot is $150.00. 7. The dimensions of each lot shall be verified on the finai plat and a list containing the square footage for each lot shail be provided to the City. 8. All drainage and utility easements and all public right-of-ways as recommended by the City's consuiting engineer and city staff shail be shown on the final plat and dedicated to the City for pubiic purposes. 9. Prior to the grading permit being issued by the City, the Developer must obtain a MPCA General Storm Water Permit and conduct a pre-construction meeting with City staff, developer and the developer's consultants. The contractor shall provide the City with a project schedule for various phases of construction. A financial guarantee for erosion controi and street sweeping must be accepted by the City and before a grading permit is issued. 10. The developer shall pay for the construction of a six-foot wide concrete sidewalk located along the roadway that connects to the Hardwood Avenue corridor. The applicant is required to post a financial guarantee in the amount of 25 percent of the estimated cost to construct these sidewaiks. 11.A "STOP" sign shall be installed by the City at each intersection designated by the public safety Department. The developer shall be responsibie for the City's costs of these "STOP" signs. 12. A barricade shali be installed at the end of all streets that are dead-ended. Mounted on the barricade shail be a sign providing notice that these streets are planned to be extended in the future. 13. The developer shail disciose to homebuyers of the surrounding vacant property land uses. 14. The applicant receive and appropriate permits or approvais from other regulatory agencies inciuding, but not limited to, the Army Corps of Engineers, South Washington Watershed District, and the Minnesota Poll�tion Control Agency. Planning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 12 15. The developer shall submit a final grading, drainage, and utility plans for staff's review and approval prior to issuing a grading permit. The plan should address ail issues raised in the staff report. The submittal shall inciude a final construetion management pian which detaiis erosion control measures, project phasing for grading work, areas designated for preservation, designated haui routes and a commitment to keep the streets clean and in good repair, a crushed-rock construction entrance and construction-related vehicle parking. 16. Snow fencing around preservation areas and erosion controi instailed prior to commencement of any grading activity. 17. Site grading activity shail be limited to public right-of-way and outlot areas. Individual lot grading shail be reviewed, approved and compieted on a case by case basis prior to commencement of construction activity to ensure compliance with the City's tree preservation ordinance. 18. All emergency overflow swales must be identified on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The drainage swale elevations shall be staked and sodded. A financial guarantee covering the estimated cost of staking and sodding this area must be included in the subdivision agreement. 19. Erosion control shall be performed in accordance with the recommended practices of the "Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Pianning Handbook" and the conditions stipulated in Section 23-36, Erosion Controi during Construction of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 20. The developer must grade public park property in accordance with the finai grading plan. Grading the park property must be within a grade tolerance of plus or minus four inches. The topsoii shall be restored to a depth of at least four inches. The appiicant shall grade the parking lot for the pianned fishing area in the subdivision in accordance with the approved grading pian. 21. All landscape center island outlots and other private outlots in the subdivision shali be in the ownership and control of a Homeowners' Association. Maintenance for ali landscape islands and landscaping along 70th Street and Hardwood Avenue and other private outiots shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association. 22.The applicant submit a final landscape plan for lot review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit and a bona fide cost estimate of the landscaping improvements. A letter of credit in the amount of 150% of the landscaping estimate, street repair, street sweeping, paving and curbing, and irrigation systems, should be submitted to and approved by the City. Upon completion of the landscaping improvements, the owner shall, in writing, inform the City that said improvements have been completed. The City shall retain the financial guarantee covering the landscape improvements for a period of one year from the date of notice, to ensure survival of the plants. No building permit shall be issued untii the required financial guarantee has been received and accepted by the city. Pianning Staff Report Cases ZA98-15 & PP98-14 June 22, 1998 Page 13 23.As detailed in the Staff report, a roadway improvement fee of $39,000 for the subdivision's contribution to the Hardwood Avenue corridor improvement project shall be paid by the Appiicant. 24. The access controi on all lots with frontage on CSAH 22 (70th Street) shall be dedicated to Washington County. 25. The applicant should consider requesting the installation of decorative street lighting consistent with the lighting proposed for the West Draw Meadows plat. 26. Signage for the subdivision shall be consistent with the city sign ordinance. A sign permit must be obtained prior to installation. 27. Review of the traffic generation associated with the subdivision shail be compieted prior to fina� plat approval. Preliminary plat approvai encompasses the entire Hidden Valley project; however, final plat approval is limited to 40 lots if found consistent with the APFO. Should the traffic analysis show that development of 40 lots does not comply with the APFO, adjustments in phasing and development may need to be made by the developer. 28.An easement or restrictive covenant shall be created which requires that natural vegetation to be estabiished and maintained on all slopes greater than 3 to 1. 29. The off-road trail from the southern portion of the plat to the NSP easement shall be cleared and signed as a part of the final plat for the area. Prepared by : John M. Burbank, Associate Planner Exhibits: A— Preliminary Plat Schematic B — Existing Zoning Map C - Proposed Zoning Map D— North Site Grading Plan E— South Site Grading Pian F— Park Land Credit Area Detail Map G — Tree Preservation Plan AYtachments: Washington County Correspondence dated May 12, 1998 Memorandum of Parks Commission Comments, May 12, 1998 Pubiic Safety Memorandum, May 14, 1998 Engineering Memorandum, June 17, 1998 � �-== a � I, 1 - I:' F � 0 N W � N F- O n �) y �i Jy� �� 0 6 y"' y 7 'v> 'L �� f p� `�9 i �b 5 � 2� � ^ i "S' ° -0-;' � ��'S � �� ' �:� � �'a, �� •� / I i �01.. Y h•e : � �� . � � � � ..a .. . / I � . � � i"" g '\\ ` F � /' �.. / G ,y \ / � � l . :. � � / �' p9. �. � a� � : > l .y�' S .-0 'v � ';� �) ./ �„'a.".:i� .., r� i � , . � �n: "g .,� � V y / . \ .. � w_h. � � ;: � ,, i , .. . . � _.__. M - ' .i � . • � —�.. . _. ' P �l � $� �� j tl :�_. I u . ,... ... _:_ .�..-:'.-�:-� �- t � � I' . � . . . ... .. 3AV SS3NN21VH ti -r�,��o� 7 �b 2� �� O ( �� .'�lln`.1 . _ . �\\ ' I \ � o i. �G Y �� / t`, J� / "i O `n �'po d ��. -. /y _ � � Q 2 1 � 1 a�-� � >� - z _, P p� � � c. z ; \ . �� I t i � e � t � ^ �{ \ � ' Py � (O/� k. Oj .. ��J > O � � 1 - � � �' :��[�j�ll�[e�\»�[y;��[�]► i __ a ; -_... � (EXISTING) e n 69z8 ; ;6938 . ; _ ._ : b � . ,. ' Q 9 , 1 ,- �2 6 � . _ _._.._. ' _ - IJ_.._....__..__ .._.__........ ---- 7147,' � --` ST LUKF'S .: � ,% i .7143 � i �Ufi�tERAN ' . ,7q ,� �� / � 1 7139 ! s, 7749� CNURCH j 1 . \ .,��9 � _ _-� 7--- 700Q .. � I 7067 1 6� ��' 713 7 � /'7161 � j � i 7729 ---- -- I �,�� ,_____..�_; 7136 + �. 7153 � i i � 27 � � " ' t , _. f �'--�. _ �1� . \�N " -, _-' 1�155 � f � �� JEHOVA' ,: � �^.' � ;� y��p�✓, �; o � �wi7NEs P �y �, � � �, "' � �� `�!vL' ,�.�� . I � . � �� J S r3 ^�� '"` ' o'Y� �� '� � 7712, �---.! t_?761 a; /,.i � �� .'�.-! �\ : ' . �,` , u� r � �; ,�0.,,�...: 6`� \- , �1/ 72ND. r 530 j � �-. % � � 0 G�(� ��•�`�\1 � ....'1 -,_ : i . ( ' - � t�1Np; �,��.` 1�yi � � m\ .m�� ° ; � hry9`.. �_ i . ..h ��1g2�� \ ��\� \� ; � . ' � � ; r'� � ,, A �!7212�, '� "�\_�---•- `�_-; . i �nl. cn � � � . . . � � . . . � ^ ^� � r .,� •._-"'�..�� . :; �> s . ��, . . ..� � - �`, , . ' ..' -� ' �' F'�? 3 '_""" e . ..... . ...... .°`....... ....�� :.�' :�. .. ., . f...:. . ..( � ..�''cil .� :. �.:1 20 4 �� , � � o N �' T 67 748V 74 , ��j�/'i - - � _ - ��\ �' ^ 747 � 9 CJ j 748 1 ; . � � , �o. 7 4751�n� . :a^�, ' � \�. �� m ; in ►`, v ,� m•��.1 N.':h }, .. �\�- �\ t0 �� I`, \i �D ��; 7334 �, , �'`-.:.. 1 "`�- .�` -''.` i_ � 780 -. . Y ,'= - -`7284/��--....� . s J302 '> � �� . }, . 7318 ; 7346 � v �734T7349. 7335 � r 7320 '�� <' ��°�' ��`ti j�Q � `� t � � _ 1 �^ :_,��` , 7722� 7724 j'; 7338 �? ,� . ; . - -a � �w�7371 � 7388 ; 7778 .-`�, ' � � 7356 7728 � �, w �i 1'�<�7386 � -,,: :, � , "._" � ;"\ 737� ^ , � -' � 7732 j j � � ,: ---: --C �; �_� i ? 7738 ! ,n ; ° � o , �' / ':�..__. i � '; (� 7 ~ �76j� ' . i �...._"'^ / n .. � J � � 77$� . �� ... ; / . . � \. ' '" '/' �1 . �; �')�� `_�`-��.�'._. � ; ��!�i � � wtm�r �� /o %a�1 7739 ': IP.�r�1t , m � c� �a� � � � � � ^ t.� r � �� m � � �699 ; cn / .�--,�<, � � /rn � - j �� . � -/ .- � �� 773�-• � .. �ti :.;" �'7 � / v�.� 7703 i � .. . . t :, �� z ;_. � � � � ,,� � `� � �� — -- I+ VlOS3NNIW'3�Okf0�°JVll00 's � �b ' ' z i� �.� J.��1 N�aQIH o J� ��4 � I I{ I I I j��' I�� !I �� ; 3I ,I iI t C.J . �nw C7am s ��3�.�� I�� I�i I k � �� e �, 1' i.: H � t �tv�t FS � j 1 f�i3�i # �� f � �'i��! � � �' {f,,s�� }:}� a. _. ^ , ;�' � ' F � ^ � tsF�e { P 3 d 1 t{i ; 1 t �;: j,l t EE a � � �fR � ,t� �s ' t � � � ! �.� � ( � i ;i �.{i •ii��t ;�i;fi � ' � �t., s � 1 ��1�,;€ � � �� _ € t� 5 ' i .� { �e! ) E9t � ��p � �i{ v>> >/.��0 � E`f -� O f i�; tat t i , r �3' O t` 2 � : � +=; o � : {i ��t ti � : 33 �!f � i � -_ �� j �� , % ,,i�� , �� .,,� �, ;� ��,, ,� / pk� x �� 1� �/ % t��_�` . � Ill��\\� j ��.'�'. \ ! f 1 } � � E f; s i { � t � �? � ,� �'i! i� i � ,� ( ;ii� ;� 3 {} � ttif (� '. �it= i� �� ( f st [ 4i !� [ � � J �t ! �� f� f i 5� �� I ;iiEi }E{ �� ';' � \`\ ,,. �� 1 )' �`` � �� j - � ' �� 1 �9`�\�' � �,�, ,� . � ,� ��_„ r:, - _ �__ - , , _ � �� ;: /� �\ � �\.��` o � �,i�, r ��\\ „_ � _ :�\� \ I f S ;E F i� {� � FS ( E ;, , �� j � i�� i( ( 6j f <:f � � t € �f ! ' ff ifE �� 1� ,. . f � s° � !1. t ° t � ; � ii ,� � f '/ � \. �� \ �;i1�. :�: : i�} � i��E ; , 6 �3 � i;f! g ; I � : S i ��" �; i t i �� : f �j� j �if; t� i �j1 ( �°fi $' i ;f j f iz �� : r ��, ��. ! t.� ;t K ii-j 3 i� $ tj' �� °.Fj� fj� t t:�f � i�e; �; i 1�� ' ��t �# f i�) 1� � � s� F ltl� f' j`';{ ($# ! � u�1� � �� , ; %; �1-,� . � , j , ., �, �,,,, , . , � ��—�%%%%� � � ' Exhibit E i C:� \ `\� j I �\� J \ � � , , , e�� A �. / y � �'_ ��4 � �� F, ��; m. = Pa .cz�ct�s ►�tra uz�o �-cz.�.4. �; ; �� -�� ' iN; SIK��I' �0 ' ` \\�_,�� _ �_<-_ _:._ �-- s- � �,�,�:� J -------_�_ � . � ��- :.: -_ � � � -_�,�� r.,�-,�-� _�__ _ , �� -� ��--= � - ,. . ��„_ �, , � � - ��_�� _ , � —. —�. �� . ��. � � ! �z . � � /` �� = ;. /� /� !�� e � � � . ,�� /�"" y � -L � ,� � <';/ E,p \ ��,-,. `'\ � \ �/ I ' � J I ' p " ' � : , � I _v .,; s, � .;' � o, .� I � . 1 - ,. 'o� �� ( - < — � � ''�.� �� < _ ' _ ' � � � �� _ � ., � "" � °f , �� I I I: � I � � s �, _ . - I � __ .'1 - - � i '� . , \: ' ' _ . ``< . . ,° �a �\ �. \ \ � � � /�� . � � � . � A � °� - ' .�„ \, �� \ � �" � , - �\', \\ - ^.\ � . � �\ �'��V � ' -� �� l /:. \e�� I � ' � . �� i \�,� � '��. I � . �'� . ' \\`' � i -' ', . '_ :�. `_�\� � � � .. _` ' / . , � �aa 1 � `� � � \ � � � _ o i � _ ' � .. `\ \ . ' � I , '� ,�_, � � I J . �5� . \�_ '' ' ~ —_ J \ __' 3 0 . �` ~ ��/ / `� � ` ' - - - �� .� , _� / - '.� `-- �^ ' _-7 � �'��-:_ � � - :;��j '- �.� 3 s � %� i' \ F ', � , � \ � Z .. � � X� . _ c'°Z , \�\\ � \ _" _ , . \ � . `L ` ' _ ./ _' '° ' � ° � � ' ' ^ \ \a,� , � I — ° � �� „ � � \ ; i/ ,.� \ � .. 1 < � _ �.' �. � ' \�, � ,., ��_\ i! % �� . < - ' . = -- ,��•. � : � � •. / �. :� > : S �, '� � - -� .. ` " � �-- r �� v:.-. . � i� �r \ ,w � � � � � '�'' � /� '' /, ///.^�• > i � v � ��. , � � /� a � �.. �� ,., �°�- � � .`✓ / �� ) s . � __ _ � —� � � `, i /ii5'.. l �� \� � �ec .: \ , �� ` "i � y % Y > '}i i i r��' \ ��%� . � - , � , i � ��: ; . - � 9 /� . � < q � -' � �. �V� �.,, : � � � � . .. s - /� �' � '.,� ,. v�� / �. � � _ 1 � � ��. ��i% .i /� ._ - � ,: ' ��j, !'.� , '� ��ti _ . .� , � �, ., � � ,,,___.___\ �-- � _ � �---_ 3 ' , o �� I � �� >ro ,� '"� / �*J/��ci��/�/�\��`\t ��\ � ( I . ' , e �b �i/j/ � �� . � 1 I . _ � .� 1 '.��.�Ci i �:!!� . �,, , �� \,,;\\\ / J � /: f lii �r ,� ;-e � � � i. r ' i - ' -.� '-_.-°_�—�.__ � _ �� °\�\._//-''� t : 1\��\� � „ ; .� " _ _ Y : � �' � '- \ � � . . ' \�/ � - .'�--=--� `.-�='��' . 7'« i t � � \ \ � . -� � �� _�� I . _ : m 4 � � i i' �� . ' / _ �r. r_: +• � I � �� s..f� �i"'�Y' �.�.�° :�� A�'�'� � � � /�` � / ^� •�, —_� � \�\ �-i' Y , . � ' ( � / �/./�/�i — '�\�_� , � . .. / � .f .��x � Tree Preservation Plan for Hidden Vattey, Cottage Grove Minnesota . General Site Descriotion. The Hidden Va11ey site encompasses approximately 20 acres of hilly ground bordered on the north by 70` Street and on th'e west by Harkness Avenue. The site slopes generally from south to north with but crests several Times throughout the area. Elevation changes over 100 feet throughout the area from a high point of nearly 89P to a low point of about 785'. Fourteen different tree species contribute to the 621 significant we found. Forest Descriptioa More than one type of forest exists on the proposed development site, which is strongly delineated by high-tension lines running east-west across the property spiitting it approximately in half. The northern half supports scattered areas of trees. The topography of this area has been markedly altered. Most notable is the prominent cone of earth acting as a base for a utility pole supporting the high-tension lines. On the west side of the northern half of the proposed development is a row of red pines planted as a windrow or tree farm. These trees will remain on site and should be protected with tree preservation fencing. Adjacent to Yhis row are two smaller plantings of pines classified as significant woodlands. Both plantings are dominated by red pine. The more northerly of the two groups occupies about 11,800 sq. ft. while the other occupies about 17,500 sq. ft. Many of these are too short to be considered significant trees under the ordinance. However, we recommend utilizing these trees as transplants to landscaped azeas and lots throughout the development. Several sma(ler trees run near the right of way along 70`�' Street and a smail group of cottonwoods occupy an area in the northwest comer. The southern halfofthe proposed development site is markedly different in character; the landform has not been significantly altered while the forest appears to have been extensively cut at one time. This is evidenced by a large number of poor quatity bur oaks generated from stump sprouts. The quality of these was often too poor to allow them to be considered significant trees. Boxeider dominates this southern forest, however most ofthese were too smal( (< 12" dbh) to be considered significant. A low-lying area less than an acre in size can be found in the west-central part of this forest. Average condition of trees on this proposed development site is 58.4%, similar to other wooded sites in the Metro area. This figure is deceiving since many of the trees on this site were too poor in quality or health to be included as significant so were not included in this inventory. An oak wilt infection center can be found in the southwestern part oF the more densely forested half of the site, very near homes built during a previous addition of Hidden Valley. Red oaks make up this infection center and few of these are present in the azea. Therefore, only a handful of oaks are at irnmediate risk and these only if they are not removed during the construction process. Still, this center should be monitored if these trees are not removed during the 1998 calendar year. � Kunde Co., Inc. — Consutling Foreuers We found some elms kiiled by Dutch eim disease on the site. Elms over 6" in diameter immediately adjacept to the disease were not counted due to the high possibility of disease spread through root grafts and insects. Four specimen trees can be found on this site, all oaks accept�for the largest, a cottonwood 40.0" in diameter. These are tag numbers 33 (red oak), 284 (red oak), 614 (cottonwood) and 623 (bur oak). Tree number 623 is of refatively poor condition (30%) when compared to the rest of the trees on the site. It can be considered a specimen only under the language of the ordinance and not by populaz terminology. Tree Reolacement. We recommend planting green ash, red maple, basswood (or linden), red and bur oak, white spruce, birch and hackberry on this site after development. Existing soil and moisture conditions appear to favor these species though others may survive. Sugar maples could be used in well-drained areas but are not recommended for low, poorly drained sites. Other species may work but we recommend consulting a forester before making other selections. Colorado Blue spruce should be avoided, particulaziy in low areas where humidity wii] be higher and conditions perfect for needlecast disease, a common problem in Minnesota. We encourage the use of native species over non-native whenever possible. As mentioned earlier, many of the smaller conifers already on site could be used as transplants, perhaps in lieu of purchasing replacement trees. Kunde Co., Ina — Consulting Foresters � . �« � . � � c�C, tx,r 2 �o��-�'/ i� Om, Arrerican 9% 0 '19 %0 Rne, red I� � O CXierry, biack i i�� ; � hiad�betry 45% '�C:01fOfMOOd �� lash, green � i o Basswoo� I i' ;� Boxelder � Birch, paper ; � Aspen quaking !' � Q�k, rzorthem pin �' �lCl�fc,white ii Kunde Co., Inc. — Coasutting Foresters 3 ; - CONDITION COUNT 20 1 30 10 � �� 50 99 60 225 65 6 70 92 75 1 80 78 9 AVERAGE CONDITION = 58.4 250 270 �� 900 � 0 I i � CAUNT i Kunde Co., Inc. _ Consuliing Foresters CONDITION CAUtd'f � � 30 40 S� 60 65 70 75 80 Significant Trees at Hidden Vailey, Cottage Grove SPECIES Oak, bur Oak. bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Ash, green Basswood Oak, bur Ash, green Oak, bur Ash, green Oak, bur Ash, green Oak, bur Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, black Oak, white Oak, bur Elm, American Elm, American Cherry, biack Cherry, black Oak, red Eim, American Boxeider Cherry, black Eim, American Oak, red Oak, red Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Hackberry Cherry, black Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Hackberty Oak, bur Cherry, black DBH 10.0 11.0 7.0 8.0 'I�.O 8.0 14.0 'I 2.0 6.0 9.0 6.0 15.0 7.0 8.0 6.0 11.0 13.0 12.0 13.0 10.0 12.0 10.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 23.0 12.0 12.5 9.0 13.0 37.0 28.0 10.0 10.0 13.0 12.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 10.0 13.0 12.0 20.0 7.0 12.0 14.0 TAG # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 TYPE HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD CONDITION 6� 60 40 40 8� 50 50 80 80 6� 80 60 60 60 80 60 60 60 60 60 40 60 60 70 �a 60 60 40 60 50 80 60 30 30 40 60 60 70 50 50 80 60 6� 40 40 80 4� 40 SPEClMEN HE4GNT Oak, bur Eim, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Eim, America� Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Eim, American Eim, American Oak, bur Eim, American Eim, American 'clm, American Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Oak, bur Eim, American Cherty, biack Elm, American Oak, bur 9.0 11.0 16.0 i1.G 17.0 9.0 12.0 14.0 17.0 16.0 9.0 12.0 10.0 17.0 2�.0 1�.0 11.0 9.0 16.0 9.0 10.0 7.0 13.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 15.0 7.0 12.0 10.0 11.0 10.0 18.0 6.0 14.0 15.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 17.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 12.0 13.0 7.0 10.0 9.0 13.0 49 50 5� 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD tiARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAR�WOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD NARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAftDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 60 60 60 so 40 40 70 50 30 40 40 60 40 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 50 40 60 40 60 40 70 60 60 60 70 40 60 50 60 60 60 60 70 8Q 70 70 60 60 60 Oak, bur Aspen, quaking Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Eim, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Boxeider Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, biack Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Hackberry Oak, bur Elm, American Eim, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Hackberry Elm, American Cherry, black Elm, American Cherry, black Eim, American Cherty, black Cherry, biack 10.0 14.0 8.0 18.0 9.0 9.0 12.0 13.0 10.0 13.0 7.Q 9.0 15.0 8.0 � 2.0 13.0 15.Q 11.0 11.� 15.0 � 9.0 9.0 10.0 15.0 11.0 '11.0 14.0 14.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 13.0 11.0 12.0 7.0 25.0 10.0 7.0 16.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 13.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 10.0 7.0 100 101 102 103 104 105 'I 06 107 109 110 108 111 112 113 114 '115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 '137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARD WOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD NARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAftDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 60 80 50 60 50 50 60 50 50 60 40 40 50 30 40 50 80 40 30 60 60 40 80 70 40 40 50 40 50 40 60 50 50 40 50 50 50 60 60 60 60 60 50 80 8� 60 60 70 60 50 80 Cherry, black Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Efm, American Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, biack Eim, American Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Boxelder Cherry, biack Elm, American Cherry, biack Oak, bur Elm, American Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, Bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur 8.0 18.0 � 0.0 '15.0 �z.o 10.0 14.0 13.0 11.0 16.0 10.0 20.0 12.0 12.0 13.0 2'I.0 15.0 11.0 8.0 11.0 14.0 8.0 9.0 6.0 13.0 8.0 8.0 '12.0 14.0 15.0 12.0 11.0 11.0 15.0 10.0 13.0 16.0 13.0 � Z.o 10.Q 12.0 12.0 12.0 18.0 8.0 13.0 12.0 16.0 13.0 1 S.0 13.0 151 'I 52 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 i63 164 165 166 'f67 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 194 193 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWdOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD FiARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARdWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD �aRDw000 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD 50 80 40 50 sc 50 60 6Q 60 70 50 80 20 40 40 70 50 40 40 40 60 SD 5Q 40 50 40 60 50 40 50 50 50 30 40 40 60 so 60 50 40 60 40 40 60 50 50 40 40 40 70 50 � Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Hackberry Elm, American Eim, American Cherty, biack Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Eim, American Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, America� Oak, bur Cherry, biack Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Eim, American EIm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur � 4.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 15.0 7.0 11.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 19.0 12.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 12.0 9.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 12.0 9.0 15.0 11.0 12.0 16.0 18.0 12.0 24.0 11.0 7.0 13.0 12.0 14.0 17.0 9.0 19.0 16.0 16.0 202 203, 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 ?28 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 245 246 247 244 241 242 243 248 249 250 251 252 HARDWOQD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD FlARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWO00 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 50 40 60 40 60 60 60 60 60 60 40 60 40 40 70 6� 70 60 60 40 40 40 60 50 SO 50 60 60 60 50 60 60 60 60 50 50 50 60 60 60 80 70 40 50 50 60 40 60 60 50 30 R Oak, bur Cherry, black Oak, red Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, bur Elm, Amencan Elm, American Cherry, black Eim, American Eim, American Eim, American Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Cherry, biack Cherry, black Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Eim, American Cherty, black Elm, American Basswood Elm, American Oak, red Oak, red Eim, American Oak, red Elm, American Cherry, biack Oak, red Oak, red Oak, bur Eim, American Cherry, biack Oak, red Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Eim, American Basswood Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, bur 18.0 6.0 12.0 7.0 9.0 18.0 12.0 14.0 9.0 16.0 11.0 12.0 6.0 24.0 16.� 8.0 6.0 7.0 9.0 7.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 11.0 10.0 7.0 9.0 14.0 11.0 10.0 7.0 36.Q 20.0 21.0 10.0 7.0 7.Q 24.0 6.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 91.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 14.0 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 29Q 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HHRDYJOOG HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWO00 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 40 50 50 60 50 60 50 50 50 70 40 60 40 70 7� 5� 40 30 60 30 70 50 60 60 40 70 70 70 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 5� 80 40 80 60 50 80 60 60 60 60 50 60 40 70 30 YES Cherry, biack Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, bur Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, red Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Birch, paper Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, bur Hackberry Cherry, black Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur 6.0 16.0 19.0 1 a.Q 17.0 9.0 9.0 � o.a 14.0 13.0 16.0 14.0 7.0 18.0 14.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 23.0 10.0 12.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 15.0 12.0 13.0 9.0 14.� 8.0 12.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 10.0 6.0 9.0 15.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 11.0 14.0 10.0 304 305 306 3Q7 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD liARDWOOq HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARD WOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 60 60 40 50 80 80 40 70 40 50 60 60 50 60 60 60 60 80 60 70 60 40 80 80 60 40 60 50 70 60 60 60 40 60 40 40 50 50 60 50 60 50 40 40 50 50 60 60 60 40 60 e Eim, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Basswood Elm, American Oak, bur Ash,gree� Oak, bur Hackberry Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Ash,green Oak, bur Elm, American Cherry, black Cheny, biack Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, 6ur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Ash,green Oak, bur Eim, American Ash, green Cherry, biack Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Hackberry Oak, red Ash,green Oak, bur Cherry, biack Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur 8.5 7.5 9.0 9.0 9 2.0 16.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 10.0 12.0 18.0 13.5 17.0 7.� 6.0 17.0 7.5 7.5 9.0 12.0 22.0 10.0 12.0 22.0 12.0 17.0 11.0 10.0 6.0 12.0 10.0 7.0 12.0 9.0 22.0 9.0 11.5 12.0 �z.o 14.0 8.0 24.0 7.0 20.0 7.5 14.Q 6.0 6.0 11.0 9.5 355 356 35? 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 40 50 60 60 5Q 40 70 60 60 40 60 60 60 60 40 50 60 50 40 40 50 70 40 40 70 50 70 50 50 40 40 80 70 40 60 60 40 40 40 SO 40 50 40 6a 50 50 50 60 60 50 60 Oak, bur Oak, red Hackberry Elm, Amencar Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Elm, American Hackberry Oak, bur Cherry, black Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Boxelder Elm, American Elm, American Elm, American Elm, American Eim, American Cherry, black Cherry, biack Oak, bur Eim, American Oak, red Oak, bur Basswood Elm, American Hackberry Elm, American Eim, American Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red 12.0 16.0 � 6.0 12.0 15.0 13.0 9.0 8.0 9.0 12.0 10.0 13.0 14.0 8.0 9.5 12.0 1 �.0 8.0 14.0 1 Z.0 7.5 16.0 8.0 9.0 15.0 6.0 11.0 8.0 9.0 11.Q 1 �.5 13.0 12.0 7.5 9.5 10.0 1 �.0 9.5 9.0 10.0 8.0 28.0 14.0 6.0 12.0 12.0 8.0 10.� 26.0 11.5 20.0 406 4Q7 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD NARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWO00 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOQ HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARD WOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWO00 HAROWOOD 60 4� 80 60 50 50 6� 40 40 60 60 60 60 40 40 60 40 40 50 60 40 60 70 40 60 60 50 50 40 50 60 80 40 60 60 50 50 60 50 40 70 40 40 60 40 60 60 70 40 40 40 � Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur 8irch, paper Birch, paper Hackberry Elm, American Oak, red Boxeider Eim, American Elm, American Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Basswood Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, Amencan Cherry, black Eim, American CheRy, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Boxelder Elm, American Elm, American Elm, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Elm, American Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Eim, American Elm, American Elm, American Oak, red Oak, red Cherry, black Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, red Oak, bur 12.0 16.0 12.0 '13.0 7.G 10.0 9.0 8.Q 6.5 14.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 11.0 6.0 7.0 11.0 6.0 11.0 6.0 12.0 6.0 10.0 i1.0 8.0 11.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 11.0 14.0 14.0 20.0 23.0 9.� 9.0 8.0 12.0 7.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 9.0 20.0 22.0 8.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 14.0 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 40 50 60 60 40 60 60 60 60 50 60 60 60 60 70 80 60 60 60 70 70 80 70 80 60 60 60 70 60 70 70 70 60 60 70 60 80 70 60 65 75 80 80 70 80 70 70 70 70 70 70 Eim, American Elm, American Oak, bur Efm Ame�can Cherry, black Aspen, quaking Hackberty Elm, American Cherry, black Cherry, black Eim, American Birch, paper Hackberry Hackberry Hackberry Cherry, black Oak, bur Elm, American Eim, American Cherry, biack Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Oak, bur Hackberry Elm, American Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Elm, American Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pi�e, red Pine, red Elm, American Eim, American Elm, American Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red 8.0 10.0 'I 1.0 6.0 12.0 12.0 6.0 7.0 14.0 14.0 8.0 13.0 6.0 8.0 7.0 10.0 16.0 10.0 6.0 8.0 14.0 11.0 7.0 14.0 7.0 7.0 '11.0 7.0 9.0 8.0 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARD1f�100� HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HAROWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER HARDWOOD CON�FER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER 60 70 70 70 70 70 80 70 70 70 70 80 70 70 70 65 60 60 60 60 70 60 6Q 70 60 60 80 60 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 70 70 60 60 80 70 70 70 70 70 70 60 80 80 30 30 25 25 25 28 25 35 35 28 35 18 35 38 30 30 38 40 40 28 35 Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Pine, red Oak, northem pi Basswood Pine, red Elm, American Cottonwood Gottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwood 9.0 10.0 12.0 19.0 15.0 17.0 14.0 20.0 20.0 16.0 14.0 18.0 16.0 40.0 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONlFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER CONIFER HARDWOOD HARDWOOD CONIFER HARDWOOD SOFf WOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWO00 SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD 70 80 80 80 80 80 70 80 70 80 80 70 80 80 60 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 60 70 60 80 70 80 80 80 70 70 60 80 70 60 60 65 60 70 70 70 70 60 60 80 8� 60 70 37 37 35 27 30 32 30 30 30 32 32 28 34 34 36 38 38 38 36 36 36 32 38 34 32 32 32 36 32 36 36 38 36 32 30 34 30 Cottonwood Cottonwood Cottonwoad Co�tonwood Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur Eim, American Oak, bur Oak, bur Oak, bur 22.0 16.0 � 7.0 2Q.0 16.0 19.0 16.0 24.0 15.0 30.0 13.0 13.0 615 616 6f7 818 619 620 621 622 624 623 625 626 SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTWOOD SOFTNJOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD HARDWOOD 80 65 70 60 60 60 65 65 60 70 60 50 CONDITION COUNT 20 1 30 10 40 1p9 5Q 99 60 225 AVERAGE CONDITION = 58.4% 65 6 70 92 75 1 80 7g CONDITION COUNT 25b 200 150 700 50 0 � COUNT 20 30 40 50 60 65 70 75 80 � � o 0 � 0 A � 0 N 0 o\' � � � � � C1 N N n O C _ M '�■■oo�■oeo■o❑ O O D o7 m Ca D C� 2 p C� � T T. 'O (� �X N ? O N N �' � !� T N N � � ? ? L2 4 c � � � � _G � �- o � m o�� a m � m -, �' � c -a Q m o ,� � °. � o v � °' �o a � � � x- �� D � m � m � 0 O N � � c � May 12, 1998 WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUB�IC WORKS PARKS • HIGHWAYS • FACILITIES 71860 MVERON ROA� NORTH • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 5 5082-9 5 7 3 612-430-4300 FacsimiieMachine672-430-4350 Mr. John McCool Senior Pianner City of Cottage Grove 7516 80`" Street South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 PREIINARY PLAY REVIEWS: HIDDEN VALIEY AND GALANT OAKS Dear Mr. McCooi: oo�aio c. w�s��,„sk��, a.e. Dtrecioe Pobiic works/COUnry Enqmee� JoM1n P. Perkovlc�, Oepury Dir¢c�o� Operations DWlsion Oonaltl d Tbeisen, P,E.. DeOUiy Direcmr iechNcal & Atlminisflative Division Santlra K. Culien. P.E. TralficRranspona�lon Enqlneer Marvin E Erickson. Faciliiies Manager We have reviewed the plats that you sent us of Galant Oaks and Hidden Valley and have the following comments: Galant Oaks: ♦ The spacing of Isleton Avenue South east of Irvin Avenue South does not meet the County`s access spacing guidelines for access to a minor arterial highway. I have discussed this with Mr. Thone. We recognize that the property does have a legal right of access to CSAH 22 170`" Street South�, and are satisfied that the location shown for access to CSAH 22 is the best available location for access to the parcel. If an alternaiive to direct access to CSAH 22 is feasibie, we would prefer that to the construction of Isleton Avenue South. ♦ An access permit is required for isleton Avenue South. Since this wiil become a Cottage Grove city street, the City should be the permit holder. This may either be applied for by the developer, on behalf of the City, or by the City. Permit appiication forms are available through me. ♦ A right tum lane and a bypass lane will be required to be constructed with Isleton Avenue South. These are shown on Sheet 5, the preliminary grading plan with the notation "by others". These must conform to t�e prr�visions of the A�Ilnneso?a Depar*msr.t of Trar.sportatien Dzsigr Manual and their design must be approved by us as part of the permit application review. Hidden Valley: ♦ We request that access control be dedicated on all lots with frontage on CSAH 22 (70`" Street Southl. I'm sorry that these comments are arriving somewhat late; I didn't receive them until after the May 8"' deadline. Piease call me at 430-4312 if you have comments or questions. Sincerely, ,* �/ oseph Lux U; � 44'� • ' � � TO: KIM UNDQUIST FROM: JOHN FREDRICKSON SUBJECT: HIdDEN VA�LEY AND GA�ANT OAKS PRELIMINARY PLATS DATE: MAY 12, 1998 At the May 11, 1998 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed the Hidden Vailey and Ga�ant Oaks Preliminary Plats. Below is a summary of their comments. Hidden Valiev Preliminarv Piat North Retention Pond - The pond to the north appears to be relatively shallow and likely to be dry on occasion. The Commission felt that consideration shouid be given to deepening the pond to provide an attractive water amenity. They indicated that often times storm water retention ponds, when empty, become very unsightly. They aiso suggested that an island, similar to the one located in Arbor Meadows Park be designed into the plan to provide nesting and resting areas for waterfowl. If the depth of the pond is deepened, consideration shouid be given in the design process to assure that severe drop off are avoided near the water edge. South Retention Pond - This pond has a proposed normal water elevation of 805 and a high water elevation of 815. The elevation at the bottom of the pond is 786 which wrould indicate a normal water depth of 19 feet over a large portion of the pond. The Commission indicated that with a pond depth of 19 feet, the possibility exists tnat the Department of Natural Resources may be interested in stocking the pond. The Commission noted that if an agreement could be worked out with the D.N.R., a fishing pier with off street parking could be developed in the south west corner of the piat with access coming off of Harkness Avenue. In addition to fishing, the Commission feit that the possibility existed for picnicking, sun bathing and other forms of passive recreation. Staff agreed to research this issue with the D.N.R. N.S.P. Easement Property - The Commission examined the grade elevations of the property (ocated in the N.S.P. Corridor and feit that construction of a traii system through most of the area would be difficult to construct and would Iikeiy experience iimited use. As an aiternative the Commission suppnrted the idea c�f installing an off road sidewalk along the collector streef from Harkness Avenue to the T intersection at the easterly edge of the plat. At this T intersection, trail users would then access the N.S.P. Easement trail corridor to continue in an easterly direction. A smaii parcei of land within the N.S.P. Easement should be acquired to provide access from the intersecting trail from the south, easterly to the proposed cuidesac. Harkness Avenue Trail - The Commission questioned how the proposed Hardwood Road aiignment wiil affect the new entry road off of Narkness Road. The Commission felt that consideration shouid be given to providing an off road pathway along Harkness Avenue to 70` Street to provide a safe alternative to accessing the path along 70` Street. Twenty Foot Easement Section - The Gommission discussed the proposed 20 foot trail corridor along the western edge of the property located just south of the power line property. The Commission felt that fhe City should acquire the property to compiete the link from Oakwood Park and the Business District to the South, to the N.S.P. Corridor on the north. As mentioned earlier, the Commission expressed concern over the steep grades found in the N.S.P. Easement, and therefore are recommending that the City oniy acquire a 15 - 20 foot traii easement within the N.S.P. Easement, from the point where the north and south trail intersects the N.S.P Easement easterly to the proposed cuidesac. GALANT OAKS PRELIMINARY PLAT The Commission expressed concern with regard to vehicular traffic exiting and entering the plat due to high speed traffic and eievations from the plat to the roadway. 1 informed the Commission that the County would be invoived in reviewing access onto 70` Street. They also expressed concern about the amount of deer that cross in this area from the Shepard's Woods area to the area to be developed. The Commission reviewed the plat and felt that Outlot A should be relocated to the easterly property boundary due to improved visibility of the trail access and sign along the main road versus in the cuidesac. They were also concemed about variation in grades of Outiot A in the proposed location. • � To: Director of Community Development � From: Acting Director of Public Safety James E. Kinsey Date: May 14, 1998 �' Re: VARIANCE TO HIDDEN VALLEY SUBDIVISION — EASEMENT WIDTH Per your request, the matter of a variance for the Hidden Valley Subdivision Planning Commission May 18 1998 agenda item 6.2 was discussed at the May 12, 1998 Public Safety, Health a�d Welfare Commission. The Public Safety, Health and Weifare Commission members had some reservatio�s with regards to allowing for a street width narrower than per ordinance. The Commission directed Staff to research past Public Safety meeting minutes to determine what stance fhey had faken for fhe Pine Glen 5 Addition and so as to remain consistent, forward to you a similar response for the request at hand. Subsequentiy, the Commission's position is that: 1) Ail roads within the development be built to a width of 34 feet as required by ordinance, and 2) That if roadways are to be buiit at a width of 28 feet, then no parking be ailowed on either side of the street. JEK/cce �- •: �: • Page 1 ��!,v I 1 iss� MEMO TO: John Burbank FROM: Angela Popenhagen RE: FILE NO: DATE: Nid�Len Valley Grading & F.rosion Cnntrol Plan Review #12 48407 Jwie 17. 199t� r ,� v ,,. j! i ' �; �V j _ � x1VTR0AIICTION This men�o sutiurrazi�;es our review of the Hidden Valley gradu�g plan submittal. This review is bssed upon documents submitted by Sunde Engineering inc dated June 4, 1998 (teceivecl luna 15, 1998). The purpose of chis review is to provide informauon conceroing the drainage and erosion control necessary to protect e�cisting and future devclopment. Commeests are provided to assist wi[h the implementa[ion of the improvements. SUNTMARY OR RINDINGS • Hardwood Avenue will require the dedication of 60-feet of right-of-way measured from the section lir�e. + All cul-de-sacs shall have 60-feet of right-of-way dedicated. • The street grades within the plat appear to be within the ucceptable standard (Q.S'�o min; 8% tnax). • An emergency overflow swale must be idenUfied between the two large ponds. It. appesrs that it could be Ie�cated at the SB comer of the north pond and between L.ots 5& 6. BIk. 4 Narth. • The two l:�rge ponds contain 3:1 slopes from HWL to NWf.. 3:1 slopet are dangerous and could pose concerns regarding pond safety (people/animals fulling in) and maintenance, • The slop�, along the reaz lots lines of Block 3 Nonh azo 3:1 slopes, 3;1 slopes are dangerous und difficult to maintain and tends to foster drainage and erosion problems. Wc would recommend 4:1 slopcs. • A ponding arca has been created in the NSP zasemeni on the east side of Hidden Valley Z.ane. We will include a storm sewer pipe in our design as an oudet for cku� pond, • Drainagc from the 3 Addifion is entering the plat at Lc>ts I, 2, 3& 4, Blk. 2 South. Defined swaics around these houses should be shown and constructed. • An emergency overflow swale must be identified to draui the low azua on Hiciden Valley I.�ne. A 2Q' permanent utility and drainage easernent witt be necessary between Lots 5 and 6, Bla:k 1 Sou[h. • The ponding that is created between lots of IIlock 1 South must have an outlet, Because an overland route is not actucvablc, a storm sewer pipe will be designed to handle a 100-yeaz storm event. This ponding area should also have a ponding easement up to the high wuter level of 836.6. • A permanent drsinage and utiiity easement may be needed for dr�inuge leaving the plat and entering adjacent properties. • An c�sting storm sewer located between Hidden Vsilley 2"'� Addatzon and Hidden Va(ley 3`� Addition enters the plat along the south side of I.ot 5, Block 2 Sou[h. A 20' permanent utility and drainage easement will be necessary along the south plat line of Lot S and between I.ots 4 and S, $lock 2 South. • A 25' permanent utility and drainage easement will be necessary between L.ots 8 und 9, Block 1 Sout�n and along the north plat line of Lot 17, Blk 1 South nnd the reur lot Iinec of I�ots 3�& 4, BIcxk 3 South. • An exisking storm sewer from Hidden Valley 6`�` Addition enters the plat 6etweEn I.ots 2 and 3, B3ock 1 North. A 2�' permanent utility and dtainage easement will be necessary between these lots. • A 15' permxnent ucility and drainage eusement wili be necessau�y sslong the north side of i,ot 7. Block 2 North and continuing along the reaz lots lines of Lots 8 and 9, Block 3 North. • The pathway nlong 72 5treet should be at least 6' in width. 'y'�: , �; . ,. '"� 0 � (.i� � � O � .,:. � o �� , vob 2� y��: o, \ � N � � `� � . ,' � \ �Ss ,� � .^. , �- � � �,: +8� � � i � -� �--� f o S �� /S ., r� � � � t � �� .\ � i � �C1 ;C4� t �� y ,,� S � � � � "� �,.� , ��'� , '�` ^ °°u ecsc � r i � �. --T � ,' '% J � . . +£ ' ----.__ e � �� Q� —..�.._.�..�, � I�i / /�� l �� ' y `'� `_ __ _ �..', r. �� / � °� � /. '� � \� �� yf ,� 1 �� Y e ' e0 ! / �� / � / ��O ! ' 4D'�D? /30'6B'7 O� /� (� � \ \ � , `• , / �i'1 / 1�/� 1 f7r l / � i \ \ � ��\ � 7 � � / � _ `�,� i i �� i �\ � 1 1 �,J f � � i� � � �� i t � � r. <_� �� p i�^� 1 ^' i (� � �,` , r ^• ' f N r_ C��,' / i / � ,' ^r � 117�. � \ � Q � � ' 1 � � � n � � ` ' ^ -. \ +� `� ,� 'Y i �a l � � _ � � / � � 1 / � . I / / w ro � 7 � / � 'q y� I l � I (� w I � ,� � /\ {y � ( I � _p \� / � � � � b ( � P � ' / N � \. \ J l j � r, \ �'t<�i 1 � ,.., J � � �. � / o � r ' ` _' / I ' ' � / / . / ' / ' �^ ` � � � n ! �'� / �� i / ✓r \ � �� i � �r� \`-�..� _.�,_ ` � �� /��„ � // % n ° '� '-,-.,. � i ) ' � ' ` ' / � w /. / �� ♦ � i� �`�� i�G, � /' ' � � �y �� ^� 1 � W I ��'� _� � � � � � . p 1 �tAN � � �^�+' �� % �b \ � �' i i � � V 1( � 1 1 n I I.V f � / � l.� < ___'�a__-' t__:� `�` r �e �i k�C6 r � � � / ,�, _ `3- _ J � � � �` f �'� '� rr^^ � `-' �n J � � gi �,�Y4 �m ` f r "'" V '_ � l r �y., � � ✓^ �"/ � '� � �S r� i � r 1'-�I. .. � \ � � �� / � r �`\� ` � � i I b � '^ \ ` _\ \ ry � 'P°'p° I ��/ i � O ; ` !n � T �:, . ° � �" ^�'�a�. ^� / �� '� � � ,� • bo� -��e , � i S r $ � � � r i �� 8 � "" � �-� % � ^ � " I N � { .,�.� � ........�.._.�„�„� „' � 1?� � i 1 �'/ es ...../ � � 8 .� ' � 9� " `� -_' �'" ti y � ; ,` ze �. � i N � r r �� , I �, �„ � Rt , « — oa�c� ��yy i i c� u L s 1 �� I r � � n ��`$��J � �� J ! ' / I � I 1�+ a J `� ,+� C. _ _ o .� L .�J ` . � L .- N ! $ � I ' '' e�fi� 'S �, �1 ,� � �� 1 _,��` ��, �'tr / ; � �� / ( // / � e . I } d / I �l � �t . ,� � _ _ � � � � � _ � � _ ' ' _ � . . C .w - l \ Q � � � � �.�` \..J � � N �\`` . '� 1 h � �� A . � 1.'��\�� A � ��' ° `/ � . . + H . ' _ T � � � �� '�'\ \ i �� '�r' ` � ,�� /O� Q ` 'GS' / 1 t, `. `$o� 4 ' � � , ,-�'�'� � ��8 �� J'�,,�� O ��°°`=.�� = � d . . L �=--'�<�� p ` � � � r �' � �o'�� c� � y N W \ ^O f�. , `C r q r'^� � r � . , . � at � �, � � ~ aa�R _ �l _ a � � � /\ ` �. r � _ � � � � - ry � -�- . o �. �. � . 1 Q �\ ..�{' � • \ \ ` a I� ` — - 9a,� f 'aoZe ,>., � � `'a i \ �f � � W � �t i �a4` � � —\"� �� 1 � ( � oi � � 4 � • �" � ��.w.� O 1 � e� 1 � / v"i.l1� �``. , �f � 1 , ,' � H �Yr h ' � H ` / / °�,,, _ r� � "„�,, g i .� �' I '� � �'+i i '�n i� ` ' ` ' t� � si l �V A / ( � / b � l ✓ / _� O i � � �� i ),-> � c � i r � � a w � � � .G :, � i � �a�� > �� be , ...._ �, .�,• � tQi i 1 Cf � ir � —^-- � /. v �. \ � � ..�� \ �r'� � � °ay i�� > � � &� _\ , - _ , a� /'�\' � nl �♦ �\ . `° ..i � ~ + ��1 \� ,� � � �� N 1 . .�% , � �'c�,- , ��., 1-fl j ' ' � �,�a ,�Y, i � '� '�c� '�--- , " Q i � r� i � � i �n i 1 , � � 'uADe � .�� i � � v� S7� � � � d` � � ` O f r I �� \� I' � o+ �! � 1 � H I 1 °3o�s' `,� '�' ..-7.� �. � '�� _J L_m� i_'_1 l._=''� ,�, �i..__� J � �� r