HomeMy Public PortalAbout11-14-2023 Planning Commission Packet POSTED AT CITY HALL: November 9, 2023
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2023
7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24)
1. Call to Order
2. Changes to Agenda
3. Update from City Council proceedings
4. Representative at next City Council meeting
5. Planning Department Report
6. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 8 pertaining to
nonconforming uses and structures
7. Land Acquisition – PIDs 0411823110002 and 0411823140004
8. Approval October 10, 2023 Planning Commission Minutes
9. Adjourn
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 November 8, 2023
City Council Meeting
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: November 2, 2023
MEETING: November 8, 2023 City Council
SUBJECT: Planning Department Updates
Land Use Application Review
A) Meander Park and Boardwalk – Meander Rd, east of Arrowhead Dr – Medina Ventures had
requested PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat approval for a development to include four
residential units north of Meander Rd, and commercial uses south of Meander Rd including a
venue, restaurant, daycare, and speculative retail space. The City Council granted amended
PUD and Final Plat approval at the April 18 meeting. The applicant has submitted an
amendment to the plat and plans which would add a strip of property along the east of the
property, increase the size of the daycare, add parking, and proposes solar panel “carports” over
much of the parking lot. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 10 and
unanimously recommended approval, but recommended improvements to landscaping and
design of the solar panel structure. Staff intends to present to City Council on October 17.
B) 500 Hamel Road Apartment Site Plan Review – Medina Apartments LLC has requested review
of a site plan review for development of an 89-unit apartment building at 500 Hamel Rd. The
application is currently incomplete for review. Staff will present for public hearing at the
Planning Commission when complete, potentially at the November 14 meeting, but more likely
the December 12 meeting.
C) 1225 Maplewood Concept Plan – John and Lisa James have requested review of a concept plan
for a three-lot subdivision. Staff is conducting preliminary review and will schedule a public
hearing when complete.
D) School Lake Nature Preserve 3rd Addition and PUD Amendment – School Lake Nature
Preserve LLC has requested to separate the area of the formal garden from one of the lots within
the development. The garden area is proposed as a stand alone outlot. The City Council granted
approval at the September 19 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to finalize documents
necessary to meet the conditions of approval.
E) Preserve of Medina (fka Blooming Meadows) – east of Holy Name Dr, north of CR24 – Tim
Boser has requested PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat approval for a 5-lot rural
subdivision. The applicant proposes to restore a large area of wetlands and create a wetland
bank in addition to the lots. The City Council granted general plan of development and
preliminary plat approval on August 2. Staff will await final plat application.
F) BAPS Site Plan Review – 1400 Hamel Road – BAPS Minneapolis Medina has requested an
amendment to their approved site plan review. The Council approved the amended Site Plan
Review at the December 6, 2022 meeting. The applicant has submitted site/civil construction
plans for review and has indicated that they may move forward with site work in the fall of 2023
or spring of 2024. The applicant has indicated that building construction likely would not begin
until the spring of 2024.
G) Hamel Townhomes Final Plat – 342 Hamel Rd – Hamel Townhomes, LLC has requested final
plat approval for a 30-unit townhome development. The Council granted final plat approval on
MEMORANDUM
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 November 8, 2023
City Council Meeting
August 16. Staff will work with the applicant to finalize documents prior to beginning of
construction.
H) Ditter Heating and Cooling Site Plan Review – 820 Tower Drive – Ditter Heating and Cooling
has requested a Site Plan Review for an approximately 5,000 square foot addition to its building.
The application is incomplete for review and will be scheduled for a hearing when complete.
I) Pioneer Trail Preserve – This project has been preliminarily approved and the City is awaiting
final plat application.
Other Projects
A) Maplewood/Morningside Stormwater Project – WSB has completed a draft Feasibility report
for ravine stabilization and construction of a stormwater pond within the Morningside/Keller
neighborhood. The City has received approximately $240,000 toward this project, and the
engineer’s estimate is approximately $410,000. Staff is scheduled to meet with the property
owners where the improvements would occur.
B) Tree Preservation Ordinance – staff presented the Tree Preservation Ordinance to the Planning
Commission for preliminary discussion. The Planning Commission provided recommendations
at their September 12 meeting, Council discussed on September 19 and October 3 and requested
more information. Staff intends to present to City Council at the November 7 meeting.
C) Hennepin County Hazard Mitigation – planning staff assisted Public Safety and Public Works
departments with review and information of the 2023 Hazard Mitigation plan update for
Medina.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jason Nelson, Director of Public Safety
DATE: November 2, 2023
RE: Department Updates
Sergeant Hall is working with the Plymouth Police Department, Department of Homeland Security,
and security personnel at Holy Name to conduct a security assessment at the school/church as well as
updating their emergency response plans.
I met last week with Reserve Sergeant Chorley and Officer Gregory to discuss our Reserve program.
The Reserve role has changed in the past twenty plus years, and I wanted to take a new look at this
from a different approach so we can focus our recruitment efforts moving into 2024. There will be
more to come on this in the goals setting session with council.
Sergeant’s Hall and Boecker continue to work on backgrounds. The Community Service background
has been completed and a recommendation to hire will be in this council packet. They are both
working on the out of state police officer candidate background and hope to have that finished up in
the next couple of weeks.
Sergeant Hall and Administrative Assistant Groth have been working on preparing new recruiting
documents that we can utilize at college job fairs throughout the state going into 2024. Prior to last
year, our agency had never attended the college job fairs but due to the difficulty in recruiting new
candidates, we attended Alexandria, Hennepin Tech, and Mankato’s last year. We will continue to
investigate different ways to recruit new officers and evaluate if this method is working for us.
It is the time of year when we start taking more vehicle versus deer accidents. This past week, one of
our squads hit a deer causing $4300 in damage to the front grill and bumper areas. We also took a
report of a West Suburban Rescue truck that had struck a deer at 3:30 am while responding to a
medical call. I should say the deer struck the rescue vehicle as it ran right into the passenger side door.
Minor damage to the rescue and no one was injured other than the deer in both accidents.
Patrol:
The following are updates of Patrol Officers between October 12th, 2023 and October 31st, 2023:
Citations –18 Warnings – 50 PD Accidents – 5
PI Accidents – 0 Medicals – 16 Falls – 7
Suspicious Calls – 12 Traffic Complaints – 4 Other Agency Assists – 10
Business/Resid Alarm - 15 Welfare Checks - 3 Disturbance Calls - 2
On 10/13/2023 at 0859 hours officers were dispatched to an unconscious male in the 4100 block of
Fairway Drive. Family reported the patient had recently got a COVID shot but unknown if related to
the current medical situation. Patient was transported to the hospital by North Ambulance. Assisted
by West Suburban Fire Department.
On 10/14/2023 at 0011 hours an officer was dispatched to a vehicle fire in the 4900 block of
Highway 55. Upon arrival the officer found a vehicle fully engulfed in flames on the property. West
Suburban Fire responded and extinguished the fire.
On 10/14/2023 at 0225 hours an officer was dispatched to a damage to property report at Inn
Kahoots. Reports were received that a male slashed the tires on several vehicles before leaving on
foot. The officer was able to locate the suspect a short distance away and he was taken into custody.
The suspect began to show signs of having medical issues and North Ambulance was called to the
scene. The suspect was ultimately transported to the hospital. A total of six vehicles had tires
slashed. The case was forwarded to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office for charging.
On 10/16/2023 at 0941 hours officers were dispatched to a person slumped over in a vehicle at the
storage facility off Rolling Hills Road. Upon arrival officers made contact and were able to wake the
subject who stated he was having vehicle troubles and his cell phone had gone dead, so he was unable
to contact anyone. Officer let the subject make a call to a friend to come to assist him.
On 10/21/2023 at 1011 hours officer was dispatched to a fraud report in the 3000 block of Butternut
Drive. Reporting party’s 12-year-old son had sent an inappropriate photo of himself to someone on
Snapchat and was now being extorted for money. The officer provided advice to the parent not to
pay the money requested as this was a common online extortion scam. The victim did not pay any
money and has not been contacted any further by the suspect.
On 10/22/2023 at 1027 hours an officer was dispatched to an ATL (attempt to locate) at Norgren
Automotive. Wayzata PD had been contacted by Minneapolis PD that a vehicle registered to a
Wayzata resident had been involved in multiple attempted theft from autos in their city. The Wayzata
resident reported his vehicle had been left at Norgren Automotive for service and he was supposed to
pick it up and they had left the key under the floor mat. Officer confirmed the vehicle was missing
from Norgren Automotive and was believed to have been stolen. Wayzata was to enter the vehicle as
stolen.
On 10/24/2023 at 1001 officers were dispatched to a traffic complaint on westbound Highway 55
from Plymouth. It was reported an SUV was running red lights and driving recklessly. Officer
located the vehicle and attempted to stop it and the vehicle fled. The vehicle was determined to be a
fresh stolen from the city of Crystal. Officers pursued the vehicle east into Plymouth. The vehicle
turned around and came back west towards Medina before turning around once again near Hamel
Road to go back eastbound. Officer performed a PIT maneuver which sent the vehicle into the ditch,
and it was disabled. Several juvenile females exited the vehicle and were taken into custody. The
driver later exited after several commands and was also taken into custody. The driver was charged
with fleeing and possession of the stolen motor vehicle.
On 10/25/2023 at 2215 hours an officer was dispatched to a vehicle in the ditch near County Road 24
and Mohawk Drive. Reporting party also reported the female driver was believed to be intoxicated.
While en route the reporting party advised a male had arrived, believed to be the female’s husband,
and picked up the female. Upon arrival by the officer the officer spoke to the witnesses to obtain
information. The vehicle left in the ditch was found to be registered to a Plymouth address and
officers were requested to respond to the address to make contact. The female driver was later found
at the address, found to be very intoxicated, and placed under arrest for DWI. She later submitted to a
DMT breath test which showed a BAC of .20.
On 10/28/2023 at 2142 hours officers were dispatched to a loud party involving suspected underage
drinking on Shawnee Woods Road. Upon arrival officers made contact with the homeowners who
were allowing a party for their juvenile daughter who had numerous friends over. No one was found
to be drinking and it was believed a person who was kicked out earlier had called in the report of
underage drinking.
On 10/30/2023 at approximately 0035 hours an officer on patrol struck a deer with his squad car
causing damage to the squad. An accident report was made by a neighboring agency.
On 10/31/2023 officers responded to multiple vehicles in the ditch due to the first snowfall of the
season. No injuries were reported from the incidents.
Investigations:
Sent MAARC report to Hennepin County Attorney for financial related charges.
Worked with several agencies to develop suspects in a fraud ring, sent in the charges to Hennepin
County Attorney for review.
Wrote subpoenas for fraud case.
Obtained video with suspect information for check fraud case and issued a crime alert.
Sent OFP violation in for charging.
Received and closed a child protection report.
Located vehicle in traffic complaint, vehicle was confirmed stolen, pursued vehicle and apprehended
adult suspect and several juveniles.
Investigations currently have 4 open/active cases.
1
TO: Medina Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: November 02, 2023
MEETING: November 08, 2023
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
Streets
• The striping and shouldering are now complete on the Town Line Road project and
the street looks great.
• Public Works finalized patch work and is now prepping manholes and valves so they
do not become a hazard to the snowplows.
• Staff is working with Mark Smith at Weston Woods to resolve infrastructure issues
prior to winter setting in.
• All trucks are in the process of being DOT certified for the upcoming winter season.
• Public Works has been shouldering on several streets where the excessive rain has
washed the shoulder material away.
Water/Sewer/Stormwater
• The Willow Drive lift station start-up went very smooth with some punch list items to
follow up on. The project is close to completion.
• Public Works repaired several valve boxes in our water system. Most of the valve
boxes had broken tops from snowplows.
• Greg Leuer has been working on Hamel Legion Park and several HOA groups to turn
off their irrigation water systems for the season.
• Fall hydrant flushing has been completed throughout the City.
• Public Works addressed two different drainage issues in the past week along Mohawk
Drive.
Parks/Trails
• The parks are still being mowed and will require a fall cleanup in the next week or so
after most of the leaves are off the trees.
• Information presented to the Park Commission at their October 18th meeting and their
recommendations to Council regarding pickleball are in your packet.
• The dock has been removed at Lakeshore Park and we are still hoping to install the
benches on the hillside decks this fall.
• The field house has been winterized for the season.
MEMORANDUM
Nonconforming Uses and Structures Page 1 of 4 November 14, 2023
Regulations Planning Commission Meeting
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: November 8, 2023
MEETING: November 14, 2023, Planning Commission
SUBJECT: Public Hearing – Nonconforming Uses and Structures
Background
Subd. 1e. of Minnesota Statute 462.357 establishes certain protections for legal nonconformities,
commonly referred to as “grandfathered rights.” Nonconformities are uses or conditions (such as
building setbacks) which met relevant requirements when originally began, but no longer
conform because the community subsequently made changes to the zoning requirement in
question.
For example, if the City rezones a residential property to commercial, the residential use of the
property would become nonconforming. Similarly, if the City increases minimum required yard
setbacks, an existing building that was right at the previous setback would become
nonconforming.
Historically, nonconformities were allowed to be continued so long as they were not
discontinued for a year. Regular maintenance and repair could be made, but generally
expansions would not be permitted. The policy was that by limiting expansion and
improvement, the use would phase out over time. However, the statute was updated around 2004
to allow “replacement, restoration, or improvement.”
Paragraphs (a)-(c) provide regulations for general nonconformities and is copied below for
reference. The subdivision also includes paragraphs (d)-(j), which apply only to shoreland lots
and will be discussed later in this report.
“Subd. 1e.Nonconformities.
(a) Except as otherwise provided by law, any nonconformity, including the
lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption
of an additional control under this chapter, may be continued, including through
repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not
including expansion, unless:
(1) the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more
than one year; or
(2) any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent
of greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the
records of the county assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has
been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In this case,
MEMORANDUM
Nonconforming Uses and Structures Page 2 of 4 November 14, 2023
Regulations Planning Commission Meeting
a municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building
permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or
water body. When a nonconforming structure in the shoreland district with less
than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or
other peril to greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated
in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback
may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a
zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent property
or water body.
(b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a
conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by ordinance, permit an
expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable regulations to prevent
and abate nuisances and to protect the public health, welfare, or safety. This
subdivision does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance that
applies to adults-only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only
businesses, as defined by ordinance.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a municipality shall regulate the repair,
replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses
and structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility
in the National Flood Insurance Program and not increase flood damage
potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood flows in the
floodway….”
Optional Provisions
Cities have relatively limited discretion in how nonconformities can be regulated. The
subdivision includes a few provisions which cities “may” consider:
• Prevent or abate nuisances – “A municipality may….impose upon nonconformities
reasonable regulation to prevent or abate nuisances or to protect the public health,
welfare, or safety.”
• Exclude adult uses from nonconformity protection – “This subdivision does not prohibit a
municipality from enforcing an ordinance that applies to adults-only bookstores, adult-
only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses…”
• Allowing expansions – “A municipality may…permit an expansion [of a nonconformity]
Staff has included these optional provisions in the attached ordinance. The first two provisions
are fairly straight forward. The allowance to expand nonconformities in some instances can be
more complicated and is described below.
Expansion of Nonconformity
Staff has identified the following situations in which it may be reasonable to consider expansions
of existing nonconformities. These situations could also be considered as a variance but would
need to meet the “practical difficultly” test and be the minimum variance.
Nonconforming Uses and Structures Page 3 of 4 November 14, 2023
Regulations Planning Commission Meeting
Lot Line Rearrangement Resulting in Improvement
An example of this may be two adjacent lots which are smaller than currently required. If the
owners request to shift land from the larger to the smaller of the two lots, there is an argument that
the overall situation may be better, even if the nonconformity of the larger lot is increasing. Staff
has included this language in the attached ordinance.
Allow expansion if net result is improved conformity
Another example may be allowing a smaller structure that is very close to a property line to be
replaced with a larger structure further from the property line, which may still not meet the
minimum setback. Staff believes this language may be worth considering, providing the City is
afforded discretion to determine whether the situation is improved.
Allow expansion which “match” existing nonconformity
An example of this would be if allowing a 2nd story to be built on a portion of a home which doesn’t
meet setbacks, or allowing a deck to be converted into a screen porch even though it may not meet
setbacks.
More permissive allowance for expansion
The City has the option to more permissive when allowing expansions of nonconformities. One
example may be to allow an addition on the rear of a home which does not meet the side setback.
For example, if a 10’ minimum setback is required, and a structure is currently 8’ from the property
line. The City could allow an addition “in line” with the existing nonconforming setback. This
would increase the footprint of the structure which does not meet code.
Shoreland Lots
State statue includes fairly specific standards related to regulated lots within the shoreland
overlay district that existed prior to the City’s adoption of shoreland regulations. The statute
does not provide discretion with regard to these regulations, so staff has effectively
recommended that the standards be formalized in the ordinance:
(c) Nonconforming Lots in Shoreland Overlay District
(1) Nonconforming shoreland lots of record may be allowed as a building site without
variances from lot size requirements, subject to the following provisions consistent with
Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 1(e) as it may be amended from time to time:
(i) All structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met;
(ii) A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can
be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and
(iii) The impervious surface coverage does not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the
lot.
(2) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an
individual lot must be considered a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or
development, if it meets the following requirements consistent with Minn. Stat. § 462.357,
subd. 1(e) as it may be amended from time to time:
(i) The lot must be at least 66% of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for
the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120;
Nonconforming Uses and Structures Page 4 of 4 November 14, 2023
Regulations Planning Commission Meeting
(ii) The lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the
installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules,
chapter 7080;
(iii) Impervious surface coverage must not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of each lot;
and
(iv) Development of the lot is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
(3) A lot unable to meet the requirements of paragraph (2) must be combined with the one or
more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible.
(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland areas
under a common ownership must be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot
contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under common
ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent
with the requirements of Minn. Stat. §115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or
connected to a public sewer.
(5) In evaluating all variances, conditional use permits, building permits, and other land use
applications for a nonconforming lot of record, the property owner shall be required, when
appropriate, to address storm water runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces,
increasing setback, restoration of wetlands of wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage
treatment and water supply capabilities, and other conservation-designed actions.
(6) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the
remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of
the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an
adjacent parcel.
Potential Action
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance before taking
action. As noted, most of the regulations in the ordinance mirror statutory requirements, so there
is not much discretion.
Staff seeks feedback on the optional provisions, especially related to allowing more situations
where nonconformities could be expanded.
After completing review, the following action can be considered:
Move to recommend adoption of the ordinance pertaining to nonconformity uses
and structures.
Attachment
Ordinance
Ordinance No. ### 1
DATE
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. ###
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES
The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I. Section 825.15 of the code of ordinances of the City of Medina is amended by
deleting existing language and replacing with the new underlined language as follows:
Section 825.15. Non-Conforming Uses and Structures.
Subd. 1. It is recognized that there are uses of land and structures which were lawful when
established but which are no longer permitted under this ordinance. While such uses will
not be summarily terminated, it is the purpose and intent of this ordinance to discourage the
continuation of Types A and B nonconforming uses. Types A and B nonconforming uses
are hereby declared to be incompatible with this ordinance and with the comprehensive
plan. It is also the purpose and intent of this ordinance to discourage the enlargement,
expansion or extension of Types A or B nonconforming uses or any increase in the impact
of such uses on neighboring property.
It is further recognized that there are nonconforming uses in which the uses continue to be
permissible but which are operated on sites or in structures which do not fully meet the
development standards of this ordinance. It is the intent of this ordinance to distinguish
between uses which are not permitted and those in which development standards or other
incidents of development are not in full compliance with this ordinance. Types A and B
nonconforming uses will be discouraged and not allowed to expand while Type C
nonconforming uses will be allowed to continue in existence and expand under carefully
regulated conditions.
Subd. 2. Types of nonconforming uses. This ordinance recognizes the following three types
of nonconforming uses:
(a) Type A nonconforming uses include land which is undeveloped or which contains
improvements valued by the city assessor at less than $10,000 and which is devoted
to a use not permitted by this ordinance.
(b) Type B nonconforming uses include land with improvements valued by the city assessor
at $10,000 or more and which is devoted to a use not permitted by this ordinance.
(c) Type C nonconforming uses include developed property which is devoted to a use
permitted by this ordinance but in which the site or structure is not in compliance
with one or more development standard applicable within the zoning district.
Ordinance No. ### 2
DATE
Subd. 3. Regulation of Type A Nonconforming Uses. Type A nonconforming uses shall be
regulated in accordance with the following:
(a) No such use shall be expanded or enlarged to use a greater land area;
(b) No such use shall be moved to a different area or portion of the lot;
(c) No such use shall be reestablished if the use has been discontinued for more than 30
days;
(d) No structure or improvement shall be enlarged, repaired or replaced; and
(e) For the purposes of this subdivision, time shall be calculated as beginning on the day
following the last day in which the nonconforming use was in full operation and
shall run continuously thereafter.
Subd. 4. Regulation of Type B Nonconforming Uses. Type B nonconforming uses shall be
regulated in accordance with the following:
(a) There shall be no expansion, enlargement, intensification, replacement, structural
change or relocation of any nonconforming use or any site element of any such use
except to make it a permitted use. Normal building maintenance and non-structural
repairs are excepted from this prohibition;
(b) No nonconforming use shall be resumed if normal operation of the use has been
discontinued for a period of more than one year. Following the expiration of one
year, only uses which are permitted by this ordinance shall be allowed to be
established;
(c) Full utilization of the nonconforming use shall not be resumed if the amount of land or
floor area dedicated to the use is lessened or if the intensity of the use is in any
manner diminished for a period of more than one year. Following the expiration of
one year, the nonconforming use may be used only in the manner or to the extent
used during the preceding year. For the purposes of this subdivision, intensity of use
shall be measured by factors including, but not be limited to, hours of operation,
traffic, noise, exterior storage, signs, exterior lighting, types of goods or services
offered, odors and number of employees;
(d) Removal or destruction of a nonconforming use to the extent of more than 50 percent of
its market value, excluding land, as determined by the city assessor, shall terminate
the right to continue the nonconforming use;
(e) If a nonconforming use is superseded or replaced by a permitted use, the nonconforming
status of the property and any rights related thereto which arise under this ordinance
shall terminate;
(f) For the purposes of this subdivision, time shall be calculated as beginning on the day
Ordinance No. ### 3
DATE
following the last day in which the nonconforming use was in full operation and
shall run continuously thereafter; and
(g) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this subdivision, a nonconforming use may
be changed to another nonconforming use of lesser intensity. The planning
commission shall hold a public hearing to consider a request to change
nonconforming uses. The hearing shall be held following such notice as is required
under this ordinance for an amendment to the zoning ordinance. The planning
commission shall consider the relative intensities of the nonconforming uses based
on the factors listed in this subdivision and other relevant matters and shall make a
recommendation regarding the application to the city council. The planning
commission may condition its approval if it deems such necessary to ensure
compliance with this ordinance. The city council shall consider the matter after
receipt of the recommendation of the planning commission or 60 days after
completion of the application if the planning commission fails to make a
recommendation. In all instances the applicant has the burden of proof regarding the
relative intensities of uses.
Subd. 5. Regulation of Type C Nonconforming Uses. Type C nonconforming uses shall be
regulated in accordance with the following:
(a) A Type C nonconforming use which is destroyed to the extent of more than 60 percent
of its market value, excluding land, as determined by the city assessor, shall be
replaced only in compliance with the development standards of the zoning district.
A Type C nonconforming use destroyed to the extent of less than 60 percent of its
market value, excluding land, as determined by the city assessor, may be rebuilt to
previously existing dimensions.
(b) Expansion of an existing structure, construction of a new structure or other
intensification of a Type C nonconforming use may be permitted upon a finding by
the city council of the following:
(1) the number and extent of nonconformities will be reduced in conjunction with
the proposed construction; and
(2) the impact of nonconformities upon neighboring property will be reduced in
conjunction with the proposed construction.
(c) The planning commission shall consider a request to expand or intensify a Type C
nonconforming use following such hearing as it deems appropriate. The planning
commission may condition its approval if it deems such necessary to ensure
compliance with this ordinance. The city council shall consider the matter after
receipt of the recommendation of the planning commission or 60 days after
completion of the application if the planning commission fails to make a
recommendation.
Ordinance No. ### 4
DATE
Subd. 6. Nonconformity; Eminent Domain. When the taking under eminent domain of a
portion of the land upon which there existed a lawful use prior to such taking results in such
use becoming unlawful under this ordinance, such use is a nonconforming use and may be
continued only under the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 825.15. Nonconforming Uses and Structures.
Subd. 1. Continuation of Nonconformities.
(a) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 1e(a), any use, structure, or lot that
existed lawfully as of the adoption of any City land use controls, and any use, structure, or
lot that has been made nonconforming because of the terms of such land use controls or
their subsequent amendments, may continue, including through repair, replacement,
restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless:
(1) the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or
(2) any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than
50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county
assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180
days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a municipality may impose
reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building permit in order to mitigate any newly
created impact on adjacent property or water body. When a nonconforming structure
in the shoreland district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the
water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of its estimated
market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage,
the structure setback may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are
placed upon a zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent
property or water body.
(b) The nonconformities authorized herein may only continue if they remain otherwise lawful.
Any structure or use that was unlawful at the time of the adoption of City land use controls
remains unlawful if it does not conform with all state and local laws.
(c) Nonconformities may not be expanded except as described in this section.
(d) Burden to Establish Legality. In all cases, the burden of establishing the legality of a
nonconformity under the provisions of this section is on the respective property owner.
(e) Safety Regulations. The City may impose upon nonconformities reasonable regulations to
prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the public health, welfare, and safety. This
includes, without limitation, all police power regulations enacted to promote public health,
welfare, and safety including, but not limited to, all building, fire, and health codes, as
amended from time to time.
Subd. 2. Expansion or Movement of Nonconforming Uses and Structures.
(a) A nonconforming use of land or structure may not be expanded, enlarged, or intensified.
An expansion of a nonconforming use to any land area or structure not currently occupied
by such nonconforming use or to any portion of the floor area that was not occupied by
such nonconforming use is prohibited.
(b) Structures that are nonconforming only by reason of yard setback or height, or structures
located on lots which are only nonconforming by reason of lot size, width, or depth, may
be expanded, provided, however, that such expansion does not intensify any existing and
Ordinance No. ### 5
DATE
lawfully nonconforming setback or height, complies with all existing land use controls,
and the use is presently permitted in the respective district. For example, a structure with
a nonconforming side setback may be expanded to the rear provided that the expansion
complies with applicable rear setbacks and all other building siting and height regulations.
On the other hand, additions on the side of said building may not increase or extend the
nonconforming side setback.
(c) A lawfully nonconforming structure may be moved to another location on the lot only if
the movement or relocation eliminates or reduces the extent of any nonconformity.
(d) A lot line rearrangement between two lots that are lawfully nonconforming due to their
size may be allowed notwithstanding a proposed reduction in size in one of said lots,
provided, however, that the City determines, in its sole discretion, that such reduction is
outweighed by the elimination or reduction of the other lot’s nonconforming status.
Subd. 3. Construction on Nonconforming Lots
(a) Unsewered Lots. Construction on an unsewered residential lot shall be regulated by section
825.13.
(b) Sewered Lots. A parcel of land which was of record as a separate lot or parcel in the Office
of the Hennepin County Recorder on or before the date of adoption of the Medina Zoning
Code shall be deemed a buildable lot, provided that all conditions are satisfied:
(1) The parcel has frontage on a public or private right-of-way;
(2) The parcel has access to municipal sewer and water; and
(3) All setback and yard requirements that apply to the parcel’s respective zoning
district are met.
(c) Nonconforming Lots in Shoreland Overlay District
(1) Nonconforming shoreland lots of record may be allowed as a building site without
variances from lot size requirements, subject to the following requirements, as provided in
Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 1e(e):
(i) All structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met;
(ii) A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can
be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and
(iii)The impervious surface coverage does not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the lot.
(2) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an
individual lot must be considered a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or
development, if it meets the following requirements consistent with Minn. Stat. § 462.357,
subd. 1(e) as it may be amended from time to time:
(i) The lot must be at least 66% of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for
the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120;
(ii) The lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the
installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules,
chapter 7080;
(iii) Impervious surface coverage must not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of each lot;
and
(iv) Development of the lot is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
(3) A lot subject to paragraph (2) of this subdivision that fails to satisfy all requirements
contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 1e(f) must be combined with the
one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible.
Ordinance No. ### 6
DATE
(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of this subdivision, contiguous nonconforming lots of
record in shoreland areas under a common ownership may be sold or purchased
individually if each lot contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came
under common ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment
system consistent with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 115.55 and
Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or connected to a public sewer.
(5) In evaluating all variances, conditional use permits, building permits, and other land use
applications for a nonconforming lot of record, the property owner shall be required, when
appropriate, to address storm water runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces,
increasing setback, restoration of wetlands of wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage
treatment and water supply capabilities, and other conservation-designed actions.
(6) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the
remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of
the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an adjacent
parcel.
Subd. 4. Exceptions to Nonconformity Regulations. Notwithstanding anything herein to the
contrary, nonconformities in the following circumstances shall be regulated as described
below:
(a) The City shall regulate the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or
expansion of nonconforming uses, buildings, and structures in floodplain areas to the
extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and
not increase flood damage potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood
flows in the floodway.
(b) The nonconformity provisions of this subsection do not prohibit the City from
enforcing any land use control that applies to adult uses (adult bookstores, adult
theaters, or similar adult use businesses). The City may enact, amend, or enforce any
land use control providing for the elimination or termination of such uses even if
lawful at the time of inception.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina city council this _____ day of _______, 2023.
_____________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
_________________________
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News on the ______ day of _____________, 2023.
Land Acquisition Page 1 of 2 November 14, 2023
0411823110002 and 0411823140004 Planning Commission Meeting
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: November 9, 2022
MEETING: November 14, 2022, Planning Commission
SUBJECT: Land Acquisition – PIDs 0411823110002 and 0411823140004
Background
At the November 8 meeting, the City Council met in closed session to consider potential
acquisition of land located east of Willow Drive, north of Chippewa Road. The parcels have
been advertised on a land auction ending at the end of November. The properties are identified
on the City’s future land use map below. The green circle indicates a “Future Active Park
Search Area” identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council previously acquired property at 2120 Chippewa Road (located within the green
circle). However, the City Council has discussed the potential that, based upon the final auction
price, one or both parcels of land may provide opportunity for the City. Opportunities include an
MEMORANDUM
Sites
Land Acquisition Page 2 of 2 November 14, 2023
0411823110002 and 0411823140004 Planning Commission Meeting
option for parkland, City facilities, wetland restoration, or for more active economic
development.
The subject sites are currently designated at “Future Development Area”, which means that they
may be considered for development in future Comprehensive Plan Updates considered by the
City. The southern parcel was subject to the Cates Industrial Park development, and the City
Council did previously conditionally approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to designate
that land for Business development in the current staging period.
Planning Commission Review
Minnesota Statutes, section 462.356, subd. 2, requires that before the City may acquire an
interest in any real property, the planning commission must report to the city council, in writing,
its findings regarding the proposed acquisition’s compliance with the municipal comprehensive
plan. The findings do not need to address desirability of the acquisition or price, but is limited
to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff has identified potential uses of the land which are identified in the Comprehensive Plan,
including but not limited to potential active park or wetland restoration/water quality
improvement. It is quite possible that only portions of land acquired may be put to use by the
City and the remainder sold for future uses. Staff did not identify any concerns or
inconsistencies that an acquisition of either of the parcels would have with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Potential Planning Commission Action
If the Planning Commission finds that the proposed acquisition is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, staff has prepared the attached letter to report such finding to the City
Council. Staff recommends the following action:
Move to direct the Chair to report to the City Council that the Planning Commission finds the
acquisition of 0411823110002 and 0411823140004 to be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Attachment
Draft Letter
November 14, 2023
Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
Dear Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council,
The Medina Planning Commission reviewed the potential acquisition of PIDs 0411823110002
and/or 0411823140004 at its November 14, 2023 meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
section 462.356, subd. 2.
Following review, the Planning Commission found that the acquisition of 0411823110002 and/or
0411823140004 could be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at braden.rhem@medinamn.gov
Sincerely,
Braden Rhem
Planning Commission Chair
1
CITY OF MEDINA 1
PLANNING COMMISSION 2
DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3
Tuesday October 10, 2023 4
5
1. Call to Order: Chairperson Rhem called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6
7
Present: Planning Commissioners Adeel Ahmed, John Jacob, Beth Nielsen, Cindy Piper, 8
Justin Popp, and Braden Rhem. 9
10
Absent: Planning Commissioner Matt Plec. 11
12
Also Present: City Planning Director Dusty Finke and City Planner Deb Dion 13
14
2. Changes to Agenda 15
16
No comments made. 17
18
3. Update from City Council Proceedings 19
20
Albers provided a brief update on recent actions of the City Council related to planning cases. 21
22
4. Representative at Next City Council Meeting 23
24
Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Ahmed 25
volunteered to attend in representation of the Commission. 26
27
5. Planning Department Report 28
29
Finke provided an update. He also provided an update for the updated plans for 500 Hamel 30
Road. 31
32
Piper commented that she struggles with the parking proposed. 33
34
Finke replied that the proposed parking would meet the standard at one stall underground per 35
unit. 36
37
Rhem reminded the Commission that the updated plan has not yet come before the 38
Commission for review. He asked when staff would anticipate the plans would come 39
forward. 40
41
Finke was unsure noting that he had not yet seen the resubmission. 42
43
6. Public Hearing – Meander Park and Boardwalk – Medina Ventures – 1472 44
Highway 55 – Amendment to Planned Unit Development and Plat 45
46
Finke stated that approvals were granted earlier this year for the project for both the plat and 47
PUD. He stated that the applicant is requesting a series of changes to the approved plan 48
which are summarized in the report. He commented that the uses remain the same and the 49
applicant is looking to add some property to the east to increase the footprint of the daycare 50
building, add ground mounted solar above the parking area, among other changes. He 51
2
compared the approved PUD to the proposed changes. He noted that while the daycare 52
building would be larger, the setback would also be larger because of the additional land 53
along with 20 additional commercial parking spaces. He stated that there is a proposal to 54
increase the space in the basement for a data center use and staff recommends that a condition 55
be added to limit that use to a data center type use that would have low demand on parking. 56
He stated that if the ground mounted carport solar were allowed the trees that were planned 57
within the parking area would be shifted to other locations on the site. He stated that ground 58
mounted solar is not allowed in the commercial highway district typically, but the request 59
would be to allow it under the PUD. He noted that ground mounted solar is allowed in 60
different zoning districts along the Highway 55 corridor and reviewed some of those 61
standards. He noted that the proposed solar arrays would meet the setback standard of the 62
other districts as well as the structure setback for commercial highway. He noted that the 63
solar would also meet the standards related to height and maximum footprint. 64
65
Jacob noted a statement referencing a potential easement for the Diamond Lake Regional 66
Trail (DLRT) and asked for more information. 67
68
Finke replied that during the initial review there was discussion, before this additional land 69
was added to the project, where a strip of property east of the site was identified as a potential 70
easement for the trail. He noted that now that the applicant has purchased that property, staff 71
has continued those discussions. He explained that the applicant would be occupying a 72
portion of the strip, but there would still be land remaining that could be used for trail 73
purposes that could be dedicated for trail. He noted that would likely be the recommendation 74
to the Park Commission, to secure the dedication of the trail easement. 75
76
Popp asked why the business district was chosen for comparison of solar standards. 77
78
Finke replied that was the best comparison they had. He noted that by and large it is not a 79
bad comparison as many of the other standards are also similar between the two districts and 80
there is some crossover in allowed uses. He stated that from what he could recall, the 81
decision to not allow ground mounted solar in the commercial highway was to not occupy 82
limited commercial space with solar. He noted that the thought during that time was more 83
related to solar farms. 84
85
Popp referenced the additional space proposed to be added to the data center and asked how 86
that space was previously proposed to be used. 87
88
Finke replied that the previous plan only had basement under a portion of the building. 89
90
Jacob asked how the design of the solar panels would fall in line with the rural character. 91
92
Finke commented that there are often quite a few ground mounted solar units in rural areas, 93
where a commercial setting within a rural area might be seen differently. 94
95
Rhem invited the applicant to speak to the Commission. 96
97
Chris Pederson, applicant, commented that they are trying to use the space in the most 98
effective manner to create a sustainable development. 99
100
Piper asked if the basement was always planned to be a data center and whether it would be 101
owned and operated by a separate company. 102
103
3
Pederson replied that space was always planned to be used for a data center and explained 104
that the event center company would own and operate the data center. 105
106
Ahmed asked if the height of the venue increased. 107
108
Pederson replied that the venue height is below the maximum height and noted that height 109
was not added in this revision. 110
111
Ahmed asked the number of hotel rooms. 112
113
Pederson replied that they proposed 14 rooms but may look to reduce that to 13 rooms based 114
on input from structural engineering. 115
116
Nielson asked why the proposed to the east is being acquired. 117
118
Pederson commented that he has been trying to acquire that parcel since the beginning of this 119
process as it is otherwise a dead piece of land. He stated that they do have interest from a 120
childcare center that has a desire for more space. He noted that the additional space would 121
allow for that expanded size as well as additional parking stalls. 122
123
Jacob referenced the solar structure and asked how ice and snow would be kept off in the 124
winter if it is a flat surface. 125
126
Pederson noted that the panels do generate a bit of heat and therefore will shed some of that 127
on their own. He stated that they will also attempt to clear the panels. He noted that the same 128
carport design has been used in other recent developments. 129
130
Nielson asked if there would be more standing water freezing in the parking lot from the solar 131
panels. 132
133
Pederson commented that would still be plowed and pushed off the lot. 134
135
Nielson commented that if the snow melts, that would be water running off that could then 136
freeze on the parking lot. 137
138
Pederson commented that with the grading they should not have any issues with runoff and 139
would handle ice in the same manner they would in other areas of the lot. He stated that if 140
the water were to run off, that would most likely occur on the edges, and they would handle 141
that to ensure safe use of the area for their guests. 142
143
Piper asked whether the buildings would be owned or leased by tenants and who would be in 144
charge of site maintenance. 145
146
Pederson replied that the site pads would most likely be sold to a third-party developer and 147
they could choose to sell or rent the spaces, with the exception of the event center. He 148
commented that there will be an HOA for the other businesses involved and to address 149
maintenance. 150
151
Ahmed asked if there will be reflection issues from the panels. 152
153
Pederson commented that is a common misconception as the panels absorb the sun and 154
therefore there are no issues of glare. 155
156
4
Piper referenced the site plan for the northern portion of the property and asked if those 157
homes would have garages. 158
159
Rhem clarified that those are the floorplans, and all the buildings would be the same. 160
161
Jacob asked the intent of the data center. 162
163
Pederson commented that the data center was included in the original plan. He noted that a 164
data center puts out heat and with proper planning they will be able to use the excess heat to 165
heat portions of the building and potentially other things on the site. He confirmed that it 166
would also generate income for the venue. 167
168
Piper asked if there are standards for the design of a data center. 169
170
Pederson commented that they are working with an experienced company and there are 171
specified requirements under fire code and related to security. He explained that there would 172
be a maximum of six to seven staff regardless of the size of the data center, with two to three 173
employees on site at any time. He explained that increasing the size of the data center would 174
not increase the need for more employees and provided more explanation of what a data 175
center is. 176
177
Nielson asked if other alternatives were considered for the solar panels, such as placing them 178
on the roof. 179
180
Pederson confirmed that they did review those options, noting that while it would be less 181
expensive to place the panels on the roof, that would not be an option because of a lack of 182
space because of the design. He stated that placing the panels on a carport also provides a 183
sheltered space for people to park under. 184
185
Nielson commented that she does not love the look and asked if there are other carport solar 186
panels that are more aesthetic. 187
188
Pederson recognized that is very subjective. He noted that as they move forward, solar panels 189
will become more common place, and this will not look out of place. He commented that 190
they are spending resources to create a beautiful venue and therefore they would ensure the 191
carport looks good too. He provided input on the thought they have put into the design. He 192
noted that while they are incorporating some unique elements into their projects, he 193
commented that they are just a bit ahead of the curve and these things will continue to come 194
forward in other developments. He also provided details on lighting and security. 195
196
Rhem asked the thought that was put towards screening. 197
198
Pederson commented that they will have a venue where people get married next to a highway 199
with a lot of truck traffic. He noted that they would be planting a lot of trees along Highway 200
55 to screen the property, while still providing some visibility to the businesses. He noted 201
that many people driving by would not even notice the solar. He described the changes to the 202
parking lot that would occur, noting that the trees would be moved to another area, and they 203
would still provide landscaping in those areas. 204
205
Rhem asked if there could be increased buffering/landscaping from the side view. 206
207
Schroeder commented that they did try to move the landscaping from the parking area to the 208
side. 209
5
210
Rhem confirmed that was his intent. 211
212
Jacob asked how the solar panel generation would compare to the consumption. 213
214
Pederson provided details on the kilowatts that would be generated annually and the amount 215
of energy the venue and hotel could potentially use. He noted that the venue, data center and 216
hotel would use the energy generated by the panels. He stated that if there were excess 217
energy being produced, they could approach others in the development but did not anticipate 218
that would be the case. 219
220
Rhem opened the public hearing. 221
222
No comments made. 223
224
Rhem closed the public hearing. 225
226
Nielson commented that she loves the idea of the venue although she is not thrilled with the 227
carport concept. 228
229
Popp commented that he would hope there is a plan to manage the drainage from the carport. 230
He commented that aesthetically he does not think the carport is less attractive than the 231
blacktop. He commented that the solar also generates energy and therefore he supports this 232
proposal. 233
234
Piper commented that they have to be realistic with energy issues in the future and there will 235
be a lot more of these requests. She commented that she supports the changes. 236
237
Ahmed commented that it looks like a great project. 238
239
Jacob commented that he generally supports the project. He stated that if something could be 240
done to increase the aesthetics of the carport, that would be great. 241
242
Pederson commented that they want the site to look as beautiful as possible as they are 243
investing money into the site. 244
245
Nielson asked the life expectancy of the panels. 246
247
Pederson replied that the manufacturer warranty is 20 to 25 years. He commented that the 248
lifespan is far longer than that as panels from the 1980s are still operating. He explained that 249
solar panels are most often replaced in order to have updated panels that are more efficient as 250
technology evolves. 251
252
Rhem commented that his main concern was around aesthetics and he would like to see more 253
architectural design to the carport. 254
255
Pederson commented that panels are panels, and the design is about as cutting edge as it 256
comes with the butterfly wing. He agreed that they could do something to improve the look 257
of the posts. 258
259
Schroeder commented that they did talk about screening around the edges as well. 260
261
6
Motion by Piper, seconded by Nielson, to recommend approval of the amendments to the 262
PUD and plat for Meander Park and Boardwalk as discussed. Motion carries unanimously. 263
(Absent: Plec) 264
265
7. Approval of the September 12, 2023 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 266
267 Motion by Nielson, seconded by Jacob, to approve the September 12, 2023, Planning 268
Commission minutes with the noted corrections. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Plec) 269
270
8. Adjourn 271
272
Motion by Piper, seconded by Jacob, to adjourn the meeting at 8:18 p.m. Motion carried 273
unanimously. 274