Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout04.04.2017 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7:00 P.M. Medina City Hall 2052 County Road 24 I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of the March 21, 2017 B. Minutes of the March 21, 2017 C. Minutes of the March 21, 2017 D. Minutes of the March 21, 2017 V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution Accepting Donation from Long Lake Glass B. Resolution of Support for the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office #NOverdose Drug Abuse Awareness and Prevention Public Awareness Campaign C. Approve Job Description and Authorize Recruitment and Hiring for a GIS & Planning Intern D. Resolution Adopting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Woodridge Church at 1542 County Road 24 E. Resolution Granting Extension of Time to File the Loram First Addition Plat; Amending Resolution No. 2016-102 Meeting Rules of Conduct: • Fill out and turn in white comment card • Give name and address • Indicate if representing a group • Limit remarks to 3-5 minutes 8 AM Special Meeting 9:15 AM Special Meeting 6 PM Special Meeting 7 PM Regular Council Meeting VI. COMMENTS A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda B. Park Commission C. Planning Commission VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Three Rivers Park District Public Safety Facility — Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow "We Can Ride" Program VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. LJP Development LLC — 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning 1. Resolution Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning for LJP Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road. IX. X. XI. XII. or 1. Resolution Approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for LJP Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road 2. Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map to Rezone 1432 Baker Park Road to R4- Limited High Density Residential 3. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Rezoning Ordinance by Title and Summary B. Medina Mini -Storage — Setback Violation/Covenant 1. Declaration Regarding Screening Landscaping C. 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan Update — Housing Allocation Update CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS ADJOURN Posted 3/31/2017 Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Medina City Council FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator DATE OF REPORT: March 30, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: April 4, 2017 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution Accepting Donation from Long Lake Glass —Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting the glass work donation from Long Lake Glass. See attached memo and resolution. B. Resolution of Support for the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office #NOverdose Drug Abuse Awareness and Prevention Public Awareness Campaign — Staff recommends approval of the resolution supporting Hennepin County Sheriffs Offices public awareness campaign to help reduce the amount of opioid deaths in the County. See attached memo and resolution. C. Approve Job Description and Authorize Recruitment and Hiring for a GIS & Planning Intern — Staff recommends approval of the job description, authorization to recruit and hire a GIS and Planning Intern. This part-time temporary position is in the budget for 2017 to help provide support to the planning department and implement GIS data management processes. See attached job description. D. Resolution Adopting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Woodridge Church at 1542 County Road 24 — The City Council reviewed and approved the request for a comprehensive plan amendment at their February 7, 2017 meeting subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. On March 16, 2017, the Metropolitan Council approved the amendment and authorized the City to place it into effect. Staff recommends approval. See attached resolution. E. Resolution Granting Extension of Time to File the Loram First Addition Plat; Amending Resolution No. 2016-102 — Staff recommends approval of the resolution granting extension of time to file the Loram First Addition Plat. See attached resolution. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Three Rivers Park District Public Safety Facility — Conditional Use Permit to Allow "We Can Ride" Program — Three Rivers Park District is requesting to amend their Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Public Safety Facility to allow for the construction of a 7,800 square foot Clearspan Fabric Structure and board 16-20 horses on -site. Three Rivers has partnered with We Can Ride", a 501© (3) nonprofit organization that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs through equine assisted activities. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their March 20th meeting and recommended approval subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. See attached report. Potential Motion: Move to direct staff to prepare documents approving the CUP Amendment subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. LJP Development LLC — 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning — LJP Development, LLC has requested a Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning for property located at 1432 Baker Park Road (County Road 29). The applicant requests a change of the future land use in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan from Commercial to High Density Residential and a Rezoning from Commercial - Highway to R-4, Limited High Density Residential. The applicant desires to develop a phased 42-unit memory care facility on an approximately 2.12 acres property. The City Council has directed staff to prepare documents to either approve or deny the request for their consideration. Potential Motion for Option #1: Move to adopt the Resolution Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning for LJP Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road. Potential Motions for Option #2: Move to adopt the Resolution Approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 1432 Baker Park Road. Move to adopt the Ordinance Rezoning 1432 Baker Park Road to the Limited High Density Residential zoning district. Move to adopt the Resolution authorizing publication of the Rezoning ordinance by title and summary See attached report. B. Medina Mini -Storage — Setback Violation/Covenant — Building 3 of the project was constructed by the contractor 69 feet from the north property line and in violation of the approved site plan. The City's zoning ordinance requires that buildings on land zoned and guided like the mini -storage project must be set back from adjacent residential properties at least 75 feet. The owner agrees to install landscaping north of Building 3 in order to screen the building from the adjacent residential property. 2 See attached memo and covenant. Recommended Motion: Move to adopt the covenant regarding screening landscaping for Medina Mini -Storage C. 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan Update — Housing Allocation Update — As a result of discussions surrounding the pending Comp Plan amendment, it came to staffs attention that the City's affordable housing allocation shifted slightly from a minimum of 253 units down to 244. The attached Housing chapter of the Plan has been updated to reflect this change. Staff will also add language noting that the City expects some higher density housing to be developed in the Uptown Hamel area as well, even though a minimum number is difficult to forecast because of the flexibility provided in the land use. See attached memo and chapter 4. Recommended Motion: Move to direct staff to update Chapter 4 of the DRAFT Comprehensive Plan update as shown on the attached document. M. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 004082E-004099E for $61,548.11, order check numbers 045681-045726 for $146,246.89, and payroll EFT 507798-507823 for $47, 034.77. INFORMATION PACKET • Planning Department Update • Police Department Update • Public Works Department Update • Claims List 3 DRAFT 2 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2017 4 5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on March 21, 2017, at 6 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided. 7 8 I. ROLL CALL 9 10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, and Mitchell. 11 12 Members absent: Martin and Pederson. 13 14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer 15 Jim Stremel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief 16 of Police Ed Belland. 17 18 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 19 20 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 21 The agenda was approved as presented. 22 23 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.) 24 25 A. Approval of the March 7, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 26 Johnson noted that Martin has submitted edits that will be completed by staff. He noted 27 that Batty also submitted changes to page nine, which will be incorporated. On page 28 two, line 19, it should state, "...benefit effectiveness..." On page two, line 20, it should 29 state, "...evaluation policy..." On page two, line 21, it should state, "...working and er 30 not working..." On page four, line 20, it should state, "...review, contains an agrc blc 31 zoning to the request proposed actually required this subject site similar to what is being 32 requested by the applicant." On page eight, line 35, it should state, "...therefore if the 33 Steering Committee ultimately needs to designate additional land needs to be 34 reconvened, he would be okay with that." 35 36 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the March 7, 2017 regular City 37 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 38 39 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:02 p.m.) 40 41 A. Accept 2017 Road Material and Equipment Bids 42 B. Approve 2016 Annual Report 43 C. Approve Dugout Cover Fencing Upgrades at Hamel Legion Park 44 D. Approve Display Contract Agreement with RES Specialty Pyrotechnics 45 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 46 passed unanimously. 47 48 VI. PRESENTATIONS 49 50 A. Resolution No. 2017-17 Recognizing Linda Lane for 10 Years of Service to 51 the City of Medina (7:03 p.m.) Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 March 21, 2017 1 Mitchell read aloud the resolution recognizing Linda Lane for her ten years of service to 2 the City of Medina. 3 4 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adopt Resolution No. 2017-17 5 Recognizing Linda Lane for 10 Years of Service to the City of Medina. Motion passed 6 unanimously. 7 8 Scherer stated that Linda has been a great help over the past ten years and it has been 9 nice to have that experience. 10 11 Finke echoed the comments and stated that organization and staying on task are not 12 strong skills for he and Scherer and therefore it is helpful to have Linda on the team to 13 assist them. 14 15 Mitchell suggested inviting Linda to the next meeting to provide her with the recognition 16 she is entitled to, as she was not feeling well tonight. 17 18 VII. COMMENTS (7:07 p.m.) 19 20 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 21 There were none. 22 23 B. Park Commission 24 Scherer reported that the Park Commission met the previous week to discuss the dugout 25 covers that were on the Consent Agenda tonight. He stated that it has been a safety 26 issue for many years and therefore the Commission would move forward with the safety 27 element and the baseball association can always add to the project. He stated that the 28 Commission discussed trails and voted to remove a non -practical loop of turf trails. He 29 stated that while some items may look great on paper, it is helpful for budgeting 30 purposes to remove items that are not practical. 31 32 C. Planning Commission 33 Planning Commissioner White reported that the Planning Commission met the previous 34 night to consider a Conditional Use Permit amendment to allow the Three Rivers Park 35 District and We Can Ride, Inc. to conduct a therapeutic horse program at the Baker Park 36 Safety Facility. She stated that there were many people in attendance and received 37 helpful input and ultimately recommended to amend the CUP with a vote of 3-1. She 38 noted that there was a lot of discussion regarding the maximum number of horses and 39 the Commission supporting increasing that number to 20. She noted that there was also 40 discussion regarding the manure bunker and the Commission ultimately supported the 41 use of a dumpster, as the organization currently uses that method successfully. She 42 provided additional details on the horses and how they rotate them in and out of the 43 program. 44 45 VIII. OLD BUSINESS 46 47 A. LJP Development LLC — 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — Comprehensive 48 Plan Amendment and Rezoning (7:14 p.m.) 49 Johnson noted that the Council previously discussed this item and asked for additional 50 information. He stated that he received an email from Martin this afternoon, who 51 provided some input as she was not able to attend the meeting. He stated that his Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 March 21, 2017 1 concern is that not all Councilmembers are present for the policy discussion and 2 therefore it would make more sense to have the entire Council present for that policy 3 discussion. 4 5 Finke stated that a formal response was not received from the Metropolitan Council but 6 the response from the Metropolitan Council staff member was provided. He explained 7 that the general comments were that the Metropolitan Council responds to the 8 amendment that is in front of them but it is the City's duty to comply with the system 9 statements. He stated that clarification was given that the high -density numbers are 10 projected between 2020-2030. He stated that in effect the City would not receive "credit" 11 for the development which occurs prior to 2020, although they would not be penalized. 12 He stated that the other question the Council had was whether the City would be 13 penalized for allowing memory care/nursing homes within the high -density land use. He 14 stated that it was determined that it would be the purview of the City to determine 15 whether those units would be consistent with the land use, but the units would not 16 officially count towards the number of high density units. He stated that once the Plan is 17 approved the only impact that development would have is on future forecasts. He 18 explained that the City is required to plan for certain acreages of certain types of 19 development and once the Plan is approved the regulations have been met. 20 21 Cousineau stated that it seems that consequently this will not count as high density and 22 the requirement could be higher in the next round of forecasts. 23 24 Finke stated that high density housing is only one element of the forecasts and therefore 25 would not result in unit for unit measurement. 26 27 Anderson stated that it would seem safe to assume that if this project moves forward 28 prior to the adoption of the next Comprehensive Plan, the City would be forced to find 29 additional acreage that could be added to the high -density zoning district. 30 31 Finke stated that there is a certain amount of flexibility in the Plan, noting that there were 32 already a few extra units planned. He stated that as staff was putting together some 33 final charts, there were differences in the projects for the sewered versus unsewered 34 population and therefore the Metropolitan Council over projected in the number of 35 sewered units the City has which has an effect on the projections for the City which also 36 lowered the need for high density. He stated that the City would not be forced to amend 37 the draft Plan but would lose the flexibility to consider any additional applications in this 38 nature before the draft Plan is adopted. 39 40 Mitchell asked the number of memory care/nursing home units projected by the 41 Metropolitan Council. 42 43 Finke replied that type of use is not required. 44 45 Mitchell stated that it seems that the Metropolitan Council has identified an error in their 46 system as there is an aging population and a need for this type of development. He 47 stated that the Metropolitan Council should be forecasting an aging population as there 48 is a need for these high -density facilities. He stated that he is mindful that Martin and 49 Pederson are not present tonight. He stated that he is satisfied with the effort that staff 50 has made in terms of trying to obtain an answer from the Metropolitan Council. He 51 stated that it seems that the Metropolitan Council has said that they would allow the Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 March 21, 2017 1 use/activity but would not count the units towards high density. He encouraged staff to 2 continue to encourage the Metropolitan Council to allow the City to count those units as 3 the needed high density housing units that they are. He asked if the City has met the 4 minimum requirement for high density housing required for the 2010-2020 Plan. 5 6 Finke stated that the City has not come close to the 2010-2020 allocation, as the number 7 was very high and there was very little high density development during that time. 8 9 Mitchell asked if that is counted against the City. 10 11 Finke noted that it is one element of the model the Metropolitan Council uses for 12 forecasting. 13 14 Mitchell asked what would happen to the City if this amendment is approved. 15 16 Finke stated that the Metropolitan Council would be reviewing the draft Plan, when 17 submitted to ensure that the minimum requirements are planned for between 2020 and 18 2030. He explained that if a property is developed in 2017, it then should not be counted 19 in the 2020-2030 calculations. 20 21 Mitchell asked that staff continue to talk to the Metropolitan Council regarding the need 22 for nursing home/memory care units and the demand of the market. He stated that the 23 City is filling a real need and should be given credit for those units as high density. 24 25 Finke stated that they can continue the discussion. He stated that the other question 26 would relate to the timing, as the Metropolitan Council looks only within the timeframe of 27 the Plan and therefore this application would still be outside of that timeframe. 28 29 Cousineau stated that it would not be bad to wait until the draft Plan is adopted then as 30 that would ensure that the City would not get ahead of itself with the jump ahead 31 requests. She noted that the requests are asking the City to amend the Comprehensive 32 Plan in order to move ahead in developing prior to adoption of the draft Plan. 33 34 Mitchell stated that it is unfair that the City is not getting credit for the high -density 35 housing that is being provided through the nursing homes and memory care facilities 36 that are needed and are being built. He stated that because two members of the 37 Council are not present and Martin has some policy concerns with the Comprehensive 38 Plan he would suggest delaying action on this request tonight. 39 40 1. Resolution Approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for LJP 41 Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road 42 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to table Resolution Approving a 43 Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Ordinance Rezoning 1432 Baker Park Road to 44 the Limited High Density Residential Zoning District. Motion passed unanimously. 45 46 The applicant stated that while he understands the intention of the Council, there is a 47 need for this type of housing. He stated that memory care facilities provide service to 48 people with diseases that are qualified as developmental disabilities. He stated that he 49 is embarrassed to listen to this conversation on whether or not housing units count when 50 he is attempting to build a housing facility for people who are considered to have 51 disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4 March 21, 2017 1 2 Batty stated that it would be appropriate for the Council to direct staff to prepare 3 documents both approving and denying the request to avoid having unnecessary 4 meetings in the future on the topic. 5 6 Mitchell noted that staff has prepared documents approving the request and should also 7 prepare documents denying the request so that an answer can be provided on April 4tn 8 9 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:44 p.m.) 10 Johnson stated that the annual park tour will take place on April 19th at 5:00 p.m. and 11 asked the members of the Council that plan to attend to ensure the meeting is properly 12 noticed. 13 14 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to call for a special meeting on April 19th 15 at 5:00 p.m. for the annual park tour. Motion passed unanimously. 16 17 X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:44 p.m.) 18 Mitchell stated that there was a good discussion with Hamel business owners this 19 morning, noting that the Council met with three businesses in the Hamel area. 20 21 Cousineau stated that she attended the mayors meeting the previous week and received 22 a presentation from MnDOT regarding traffic improvements. 23 24 Xl. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:46 p.m.) 25 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the bills, EFT 004064E- 26 004081E for $51,070.05, order check numbers 045614-045680 for $153,342.37, and 27 payroll EFT 507767-507797 for $50,484.36. Motion passed unanimously. 28 29 XII. ADJOURN 30 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 p.m. 31 Motion passed unanimously. 32 33 34 35 36 Bob Mitchell, Mayor 37 Attest: 38 39 40 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5 March 21, 2017 SPECIAL MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2017 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on March 21, 2017 at 8:00 a.m. to conduct the annual business forum. I. ROLL CALL Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, and Mitchell Members absent: Martin and Pederson Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, City Planner Dusty Finke, and Public Safety Director Ed Belland. II. ANNUAL BUSINESS FORUM Staff provided an update on recent and upcoming projects in Medina. An update was provided on the Comprehensive Plan process. Finally, an update was provided regarding the Highway 55/CR 116 intersection reconstruction project that will take place between May and October of 2017. Mayor Mitchell reminded the businesses that Medina is working hard to keep the budget fiscally responsible and encourages businesses to contact him and the City Council members to discuss their issues and ideas. III. ADJOURN Adjourned the Business Forum at 8:45 a.m. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1 March 21, 2017 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2017 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on March 21, 2017 at 9:15 a.m. at the locations noted below in Medina, MN. I. Call to Order Members present: Cousineau, Mitchell (could not attend C-Axis tour), and Anderson Members absent: Martin and Pederson Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, City Planner Dusty Finke, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, and Public Safety Director Ed Belland. II. 2017 Spring Business Tours Sunrise Painting — Wallcovering — 805 Tower Drive — City Council and staff met with Co-owner Kim Larson at the site. She provided a tour and information on the business to the City Council. Ms. Larson informed the City Council that they are happy with the move to Medina from Plymouth and continue to grow. Ditter Heating and Cooling — 820 Tower Drive — City Council and staff met with Chuck Winkler. Mr. Winkler provided a tour and information on the business. The business continues to grow and they are looking at a possible future expansion of the facility. C-Axis — 800 Tower Drive — City Council and staff met with General Manager Wade Edwards at the site. Mr. Edwards provided a tour and information on the business. C- Axis has outgrown their current facility and is looking into building a 25,000 to 30,000 sf facility in 2017. III. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1 March 21, 2017 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2 March 21, 2017 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2017 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on March 21, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. at the Medina City Hall, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN. I. Call to Order Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, and Mitchell Members absent: Martin and Pederson Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Public Safety Director Ed Belland, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and City Planner Dusty Finke II. 2017 Mediacom Buildout City Planner Dusty Finke provided backgroul proposed buildout in Medina. ormation on current buildout and Council discussed and directed staff to utilize the DEED Broadband Grant for additional buildout in Medina with a goal of 100% access for residents. Kevin O'Connor, 3712 Hamel Road, informed Council Members about the need for service to work from home or for his children to complete homework assignments. He highly encouraged providing 100% access to all Medina Residents. Kris Renier, 3392 Hamel Road, discussed the loss of real estate value due to the lack of broadband in the area. She also highly encouraged the City to work with a provider to bring 100% access to all Medina Residents. III. BNSF Railway Bridge at Highway 12 and Baker Park Public Safety Director Ed Belland provided background information on the proposed project and the need for access by public safety personnel. Council directed staff to provide funds for the preliminary engineering work to determine the cost of installing a culvert in place of the railway bridge that will be removed. Council was also supportive of working with other jurisdictions to find grant funding for the project. Adjournment Mitchell closed the meeting at 6:46 p.m. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1 March 21, 2017 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2 March 21, 2017 1 DRAFT 2 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2017 4 5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on March 21, 2017, at 6 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided. 7 8 I. ROLL CALL 9 10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, and Mitchell. 11 12 Members absent: Martin and Pederson. 13 14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer 15 Jim Stremel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief 16 of Police Ed Belland. 17 18 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 19 20 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 21 The agenda was approved as presented. 22 23 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.) 24 25 A. Approval of the March 7, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 26 Johnson noted that Martin has submitted edits that will be completed by staff. He noted 27 that Batty also submitted changes to page nine, which will be incorporated. On page 28 two, line 19, it should state, "...benefit effectiveness..." On page two, line 20, it should 29 state, "...evaluation policy..." On page two, line 21, it should state, "...working and 6F 30 not working..." On page four, line 20, it should state, "...review, contains an agrc blc 31 zoning to the request proposed actually required this subject site similar to what is being 32 requested by the applicant." On page eight, line 35, it should state, "...therefore if the 33 Steering Committee ultimately needs to designate additional land needs to be 34 reconvened, he would be okay with that." 35 36 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the March 7, 2017 regular City 37 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 38 39 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:02 p.m.) 40 41 A. Accept 2017 Road Material and Equipment Bids 42 B. Approve 2016 Annual Report 43 C. Approve Dugout Cover Fencing Upgrades at Hamel Legion Park 44 D. Approve Display Contract Agreement with RES Specialty Pyrotechnics 45 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 46 passed unanimously. 47 48 VI. PRESENTATIONS 49 50 A. Resolution No. 2017-17 Recognizing Linda Lane for 10 Years of Service to 51 the City of Medina (7:03 p.m.) Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 March 21, 2017 1 Mitchell read aloud the resolution recognizing Linda Lane for her ten years of service to 2 the City of Medina. 3 4 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adopt Resolution No. 2017-17 5 Recognizing Linda Lane for 10 Years of Service to the City of Medina. Motion passed 6 unanimously. 7 8 Scherer stated that Linda has been a great help over the past ten years and it has been 9 nice to have that experience. 10 11 Finke echoed the comments and stated that organization and staying on task are not 12 strong skills for he and Scherer and therefore it is helpful to have Linda on the team to 13 assist them. 14 15 Mitchell suggested inviting Linda to the next meeting to provide her with the recognition 16 she is entitled to, as she was not feeling well tonight. 17 18 VII. COMMENTS (7:07 p.m.) 19 20 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 21 There were none. 22 23 B. Park Commission 24 Scherer reported that the Park Commission met the previous week to discuss the dugout 25 covers that were on the Consent Agenda tonight. He stated that it has been a safety 26 issue for many years and therefore the Commission would move forward with the safety 27 element and the baseball association can always add to the project. He stated that the 28 Commission discussed trails and voted to remove a non -practical loop of turf trails. He 29 stated that while some items may look great on paper, it is helpful for budgeting 30 purposes to remove items that are not practical. 31 32 C. Planning Commission 33 Planning Commissioner White reported that the Planning Commission met the previous 34 night to consider a Conditional Use Permit amendment to allow the Three Rivers Park 35 District and We Can Ride, Inc. to conduct a therapeutic horse program at the Baker Park 36 Safety Facility. She stated that there were many people in attendance and received 37 helpful input and ultimately recommended to amend the CUP with a vote of 3-1. She 38 noted that there was a lot of discussion regarding the maximum number of horses and 39 the Commission supporting increasing that number to 20. She noted that there was also 40 discussion regarding the manure bunker and the Commission ultimately supported the 41 use of a dumpster, as the organization currently uses that method successfully. She 42 provided additional details on the horses and how they rotate them in and out of the 43 program. 44 45 VIII. OLD BUSINESS 46 47 A. LJP Development LLC — 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — Comprehensive 48 Plan Amendment and Rezoning (7:14 p.m.) 49 Johnson noted that the Council previously discussed this item and asked for additional 50 information. He stated that he received an email from Martin this afternoon, who 51 provided some input as she was not able to attend the meeting. He stated that his Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 March 21, 2017 1 concern is that not all Councilmembers are present for the policy discussion and 2 therefore it would make more sense to have the entire Council present for that policy 3 discussion. 4 5 Finke stated that a formal response was not received from the Metropolitan Council but 6 the response from the Metropolitan Council staff member was provided. He explained 7 that the general comments were that the Metropolitan Council responds to the 8 amendment that is in front of them but it is the City's duty to comply with the system 9 statements. He stated that clarification was given that the high -density numbers are 10 projected between 2020-2030. He stated that in effect the City would not receive "credit" 11 for the development which occurs prior to 2020, although they would not be penalized. 12 He stated that the other question the Council had was whether the City would be 13 penalized for allowing memory care/nursing homes within the high -density land use. He 14 stated that it was determined that it would be the purview of the City to determine 15 whether those units would be consistent with the land use, but the units would not 16 officially count towards the number of high density units. He stated that once the Plan is 17 approved the only impact that development would have is on future forecasts. He 18 explained that the City is required to plan for certain acreages of certain types of 19 development and once the Plan is approved the regulations have been met. 20 21 Cousineau stated that it seems that consequently this will not count as high density and 22 the requirement could be higher in the next round of forecasts. 23 24 Finke stated that high density housing is only one element of the forecasts and therefore 25 would not result in unit for unit measurement. 26 27 Anderson stated that it would seem safe to assume that if this project moves forward 28 prior to the adoption of the next Comprehensive Plan, the City would be forced to find 29 additional acreage that could be added to the high -density zoning district. 30 31 Finke stated that there is a certain amount of flexibility in the Plan, noting that there were 32 already a few extra units planned. He stated that as staff was putting together some 33 final charts, there were differences in the projects for the sewered versus unsewered 34 population and therefore the Metropolitan Council over projected in the number of 35 sewered units the City has which has an effect on the projections for the City which also 36 lowered the need for high density. He stated that the City would not be forced to amend 37 the draft Plan but would lose the flexibility to consider any additional applications in this 38 nature before the draft Plan is adopted. 39 40 Mitchell asked the number of memory care/nursing home units projected by the 41 Metropolitan Council. 42 43 Finke replied that type of use is not required. 44 45 Mitchell stated that it seems that the Metropolitan Council has identified an error in their 46 system as there is an aging population and a need for this type of development. He 47 stated that the Metropolitan Council should be forecasting an aging population as there 48 is a need for these high -density facilities. He stated that he is mindful that Martin and 49 Pederson are not present tonight. He stated that he is satisfied with the effort that staff 50 has made in terms of trying to obtain an answer from the Metropolitan Council. He 51 stated that it seems that the Metropolitan Council has said that they would allow the Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 March 21, 2017 1 use/activity but would not count the units towards high density. He encouraged staff to 2 continue to encourage the Metropolitan Council to allow the City to count those units as 3 the needed high density housing units that they are. He asked if the City has met the 4 minimum requirement for high density housing required for the 2010-2020 Plan. 5 6 Finke stated that the City has not come close to the 2010-2020 allocation, as the number 7 was very high and there was very little high density development during that time. 8 9 Mitchell asked if that is counted against the City. 10 11 Finke noted that it is one element of the model the Metropolitan Council uses for 12 forecasting. 13 14 Mitchell asked what would happen to the City if this amendment is approved. 15 16 Finke stated that the Metropolitan Council would be reviewing the draft Plan, when 17 submitted to ensure that the minimum requirements are planned for between 2020 and 18 2030. He explained that if a property is developed in 2017, it then should not be counted 19 in the 2020-2030 calculations. 20 21 Mitchell asked that staff continue to talk to the Metropolitan Council regarding the need 22 for nursing home/memory care units and the demand of the market. He stated that the 23 City is filling a real need and should be given credit for those units as high density. 24 25 Finke stated that they can continue the discussion. He stated that the other question 26 would relate to the timing, as the Metropolitan Council looks only within the timeframe of 27 the Plan and therefore this application would still be outside of that timeframe. 28 29 Cousineau stated that it would not be bad to wait until the draft Plan is adopted then as 30 that would ensure that the City would not get ahead of itself with the jump ahead 31 requests. She noted that the requests are asking the City to amend the Comprehensive 32 Plan in order to move ahead in developing prior to adoption of the draft Plan. 33 34 Mitchell stated that it is unfair that the City is not getting credit for the high -density 35 housing that is being provided through the nursing homes and memory care facilities 36 that are needed and are being built. He stated that because two members of the 37 Council are not present and Martin has some policy concerns with the Comprehensive 38 Plan he would suggest delaying action on this request tonight. 39 40 1. Resolution Approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for LJP 41 Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road 42 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to table Resolution Approving a 43 Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Ordinance Rezoning 1432 Baker Park Road to 44 the Limited High Density Residential Zoning District. Motion passed unanimously. 45 46 The applicant stated that while he understands the intention of the Council, there is a 47 need for this type of housing. He stated that memory care facilities provide service to 48 people with diseases that are qualified as developmental disabilities. He stated that he 49 is embarrassed to listen to this conversation on whether or not housing units count when 50 he is attempting to build a housing facility for people who are considered to have 51 disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4 March 21, 2017 1 2 Batty stated that it would be appropriate for the Council to direct staff to prepare 3 documents both approving and denying the request to avoid having unnecessary 4 meetings in the future on the topic. 5 6 Mitchell noted that staff has prepared documents approving the request and should also 7 prepare documents denying the request so that an answer can be provided on April 4t" 8 9 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:44 p.m.) 10 Johnson stated that the annual park tour will take place on April 19th at 5:00 p.m. and 11 asked the members of the Council that plan to attend to ensure the meeting is properly 12 noticed. 13 14 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to call for a special meeting on April 19rn 15 at 5:00 p.m. for the annual park tour. Motion passed unanimously. 16 17 X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:44 p.m.) 18 Mitchell stated that there was a good discussion with Hamel business owners this 19 morning, noting that the Council met with three businesses in the Hamel area. 20 21 Cousineau stated that she attended the mayors meeting the previous week and received 22 a presentation from MnDOT regarding traffic improvements. 23 24 XI. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:46 p.m.) 25 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the bills, EFT 004064E- 26 004081E for $51,070.05, order check numbers 045614-045680 for $153,342.37, and 27 payroll EFT 507767-507797 for $50,484.36. Motion passed unanimously. 28 29 XII. ADJOURN 30 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 p.m. 31 Motion passed unanimously. 32 33 34 35 36 Bob Mitchell, Mayor 37 Attest: 38 39 40 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5 March 21, 2017 MEDINA POLICE DEPAgenda Item #SA MEMORANDUM 6 .. Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763-473-9209 f: 763.473.8858 non-emergencys 763.525-62I0 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: March 31, 2017 RE: Long Lake Glass Donation On March 2, 2017, Long Lake Glass installed laminated safety glass for the new door into the Police Department. When the bill for $60 was received, Long Lake Glass asked to donate the repair. I would ask the City Council to accept the donation and direct me to formally thank the owners of the Long Lake Glass Company for their donation. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM LONG LAKE GLASS WHEREAS, Long Lake Glass has generously offered to donate the installation of laminated safety glass for a new door at 600 Clydesdale Trail in the amount of $60 (the "Donation") to the city of Medina (the "City"); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to building maintenance at 600 Clydesdale Trail; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to Long Lake Glass for their generosity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks Long Lake Glass. Dated: April 4, 2017. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017- April 4, 2017 MEDINA POLICE DEPI MEMORANDUM Agenda Item # 5B 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763-473-9209 f: 763.473.8858 non -emergency: 763.525-62I0 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Public Safety Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: March 31, 2017 RE: No Overdose Resolution The Hennepin County Sheriff's Department has asked the City of Medina to pass a resolution supporting their efforts in the reduction of opioid related deaths. The sheriff's department has initiated a year -long public awareness campaign called "No Overdose" related to opioid deaths. In Medina over the last two years we have had two opioid related deaths. We support the sheriff's effort in making this epidemic of opioid related deaths a priority and to do what we can to prevent any further overdose deaths. At our Clean -Up Day, the City of Medina will be holding a drug take -back program in conjunction with the sheriff's department and the DEA. We also belong to the West Metro Drug Task Force that fights the illegal drugs on a regular basis throughout western Hennepin County. I would ask for the City Council's support by passing the attached resolution. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE #NOVERDOSE DRUG ABUSE AWARENESS & PREVENTION PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN WHEREAS, Hennepin County experienced 153 opioid-related deaths in 2016, which is a 39% increase over the number of opioid-related deaths in Hennepin County during 2015; WHEREAS, The Hennepin County Sheriff's Office made the reduction of opioid-related deaths priority #1 in their 2017 Strategic Plan; WHEREAS, The Hennepin County Sheriff's Office has initiated a year -long public awareness campaign called, "#NOverdose," which focuses on four key messages: (1) Opioid- related deaths have reached crisis levels; (2) Every opioid-related death in Hennepin County is tragic and every one is preventable; (3) Public awareness can reduce abuse and save lives; and (4) Strong partnerships will help to reduce the number of opioid-related deaths in 2017; WHEREAS, Local medicine collection and disposal efforts are a powerful tool for getting unwanted and unused prescription medication out of the general supply to reduce the potential for prescription medication diversion and abuse, which can help reduce the number of opioid-related deaths; WHEREAS, The use of opioid antagonists (like naloxone) by First Responders, whether it be by law enforcement, fire fighters, or emergency medical responders, provides crucial extra minutes for medical professionals during a drug overdose situation, which can help reduce the number of opioid-related deaths; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Medina does hereby support the #NOverdose awareness campaign and commits to furthering drug abuse prevention awareness, furthering medicine collection location education and awareness, and the use of opioid antagonists by First Responders in our city. Dated: April 4, 2017. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Resolution No. 2017- April 4, 2017 ATTEST: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017- 2 April 4, 2017 City of Medina Position Description GIS & Planning Intern Position Title: GIS & Planning Intern Department: Planning Supervisor's Title: City Planner Agenda Item # 5C Pay Grade: $15.00/hour FLSA Status: NON-EXEMPT Work Status: Part-time; Temporary PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF POSITION Performs supervised and unsupervised work in the Planning Department. The position will assist the Department with organizing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data and implementing processes and procedures related to management of such data. The position will also assist with various projects in community development and planning and perform other general duties as assigned. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF POSITION ■ Assist Planning Department with implementation of GIS data management processes. ■ Assist Planning Department in ordinance research and analysis and other planning and zoning projects as assigned. ■ Assist Planning Department with administrative tasks as necessary, including but not limited to document preparation, scanning, filing, and similar activities. ■ Provide quality service to residents, contractors, and other customers. ■ Represent the City of Medina in a professional, tactful manner that commands respect of the public, contractors, developers and others. OTHER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ■ Receives telephone calls and either personally responds or refers to appropriate person. ■ Assist with Planning Department website improvements. ■ Potentially attend periodic evening Planning Commission and City Council meetings. ■ Provides good working habits and a willingness to cooperate with others and contribute in a positive way to a pleasant working climate. ■ Performs other duties as delegated by supervisor or apparent. HIRING AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING KNOWLEDGE, SHILLS, AND ABILITIES ■ Knowledge of and competency with ArcGIS software and GIS data management practices. ■ Ability to perform administrative tasks such as typing, data entry, filing, etc. ■ Ability to organize assignments, prioritize tasks and independently complete work in a timely and accurate manner ■ Ability to communicate professionally with a variety of individuals and provide quality customer service. Machines, tools, and equipment used: Computer, copier, scanner, telephone, and calculator. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ■ Enrollment in post -secondary program for GIS or enrollment in Master's Degree program for community development, planning, public administration/policy/urban studies, or a related field. ■ Knowledge of and competency with ArcGIS software. ■ Working knowledge of personal computers, Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft Office programs. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS ■ Previous administrative experience in a municipal planning or GIS department or comparable public agency. ■ Ability to provide training to City staff members on basic ArcGIS usage. ■ Competency with WordPress or similar website management software. City Council Approved: City of Medina Position Description GIS & Planning Intern WORKING CONDITIONS Most work is performed indoor at city hall. The exception is some field data collection and trips to meetings and training. Generally, the position requires light lifting, usually less than 10 pounds, with up to 50 pounds on occasion. Aside from cleansers for cleaning office workspace, no hazardous materials or chemicals are used on this job. City Council Approved: Agenda Item # 5D Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION 2017-11# RESOLUTION ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOODRIDGE CHURCH AT 1542 COUNTY ROAD 24 WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Woodridge Church (the "Applicant"), is the fee owner of land within the City which is located at 1542 County Road 24 ("the Property") and is legally described as: That part of the South 1320 feet of the West Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 118, Range 23, lying East of the West 396 feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Property is guided for a Rural Residential land use in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Applicant is seeking to combine the Property with a parcel of land to the east which is guided for a Public -Semi Public land use in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is intended to provide the combined properties with a consistent land use designation of Public -Semi Public; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution 2017-08, which approved of the comprehensive plan amendment subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council and subsequent adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2017, the Metropolitan Council approved of the amendment and authorized the City to place it into effect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Medina, Minnesota that the comprehensive plan amendment described and approved through Resolution 2017-08 is hereby adopted and in effect. Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 Dated: April 4, 2017. By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 Agenda Item # 5E Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO.2017-### RESOLUTION GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE LORAM FIRST ADDITION PLAT; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.2016-102 WHEREAS, on December 20, 2016, the city council of the City of Medina adopted Resolution 2016-102, granting preliminary and final plat approval to Medina MotorPlex, LLC (the "Applicant") to subdivide property which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, under the terms of said resolution, the plat was required to be recorded within 120 days or the approval was to be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City Council, and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested an additional extension to meet the terms and conditions of plat approval in order to record the plat. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The plat shall be recorded by June 19, 2017 or the approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City Council. 2. Except as explicitly stated above, all terms and conditions of Resolution 2016-102 are hereby reaffirmed. Dated: April 4, 2017. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Resolution No. 201744 April 4, 2017 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017-#44 2 April 4, 2017 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 118, Range 23, lying West of the West line of the East 602 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, which lies South of a line drawn Easterly parallel with the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, from a paint an the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 528 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter_ Together with: That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 118, Range 23, described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter, thence Southerly along the West line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 388.41 feet; thence Easterly parallel with the North line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 368 feet, thence Southerly parallel with said Vest line to the center line of Hamel Road; thence Easterly along said center lime to the intersection with the West line of the East 602 feet of said West Half of the Southwest Quarter;. thence Northerly along said West line of the East 602 feet to said North line of the Southwest Quarter; thence Westerly along said North line to the paint of beginning. Together with: That part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 118 North, Lange 23 West of the 6th Principal hileridian, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the West line of said Southwest 1/4 distant 386.41 feet South of the Northwest comer thereof, which point is the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence East, parallel to the North line of said Southwest 1/4, a distance of 368 feet; thence South, parallel to the West line of said Southwest 114, to the center fine of the County Road Na. cf .::Hamel Road); thence Southwesterly, along the center line of said County goad, to a point on the West line of said Section 11 distant 434.66 feet South from the point of beginning: thence North, a distance of 434.66 feet, to the paint of beginning, except the Southerly 33 feet and the'I+esteriy 33 feet thereof, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Resolution No. 2017-#44 3 April 4, 2017 Agenda Item # 7A MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council Debra Peterson, Associate Planner; through City Planner Dusty Finke Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Three Rivers Park District Public Safety Facility - Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow "We Can Ride" program Application Date/Complete Date: January 13, 2017 Review Deadline Date: May 8, 2017 (120 days) Ext. Letter sent BACKGROUND Three Rivers Park District is requesting to amend their Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Public Safety Facility to allow for the construction of a 7,800 square foot Clearspan Fabric Structure and board 16-20 horses on -site. Three Rivers has partnered with "We Can Ride", a 501© (3) nonprofit organization that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs through equine assisted activities. The mounted patrol no longer operates out of the facility and no longer has horse stalls, fencing or amenities for stabling horses. "We Can Ride" proposes boarding 16-20 horses and would reinstall 13 horse stalls within the existing building and construct additional shelters/lean-to's and fencing as part of their proposal. The original CUP for this location was granted in 1993 for a Ranger Public Safety Center and the mounted patrol with a maximum of 16 horses allowed on -site which is attached for reference. Horses are no longer on -site or used for patrolling, but the police department does operate out of the facility to date. The existing CUP, Resolution 93-65, would be amended and modified to eliminate many of the conditions that are no longer applicable. "We Can Ride" is currently located on Hennepin County property (Hennepin County Homes School) and has been serving the public at that location for 34 years by providing equine assisted activities and therapies. Their lease with Hennepin County expires May 31, 2017 and effective June 1, 2017, We Can Ride will partner with Three Rivers Park District to continue their services in Medina, if approved. The property and surrounding properties are in the Public/Semi-Public (PS) zoning district. The zoning ordinance requires a conditional use permit for any construction, which controls expansion or increased use of the property which will be discussed further in the report. An aerial of the property is at the top of the following page. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 1 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 DEVELOPABLE AREA The Three Rivers Park District has established a policy that a maximum of 20% of the land area within the park may be developed. The "Composite Master Plan" for the Public Safety Facility illustrates the entire area under the 20% Development Area which has been attached. Since the Public Safety Facility is already considered a "developed area," the Clearspan Fabric Structure does not appear to impact this development percentage. PROJECT DETAILS The Public Safety building currently houses Police Officers and support staff that includes an attached stable (stalls removed) with an indoor arena. The Interior layout is proposed to have modifications to allow "We Can Ride office" staff and the Officers and support staff to all operate within the existing building with some division. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 2 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 A secondary entrance is proposed to be installed on the side of the building to provide accessibility for "We Can Ride". The restrooms and breakroom will be shared by the Police and We Can Ride. The proposed project suggests a 7,800 clearspan fabric structure for use as a riding arena for lessons. Paddocks are proposed to be installed with shelters/lean-tos which will be moved in from their current Hennepin County location. Fencing would be installed to allow for horses to graze and stretch their legs. Additional improvements are also proposed as described in the applicant's project description narrative and the general improvements list below. GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS The list below identifies only a portion of the proposed interior and exterior improvements: • A 7,800 square foot clearspan fabric building. • Interior doorway to separate the Public Safety Officers and "We Can Ride". • Exterior/interior improvements for new public access entrance. • Concrete walk to new public access entrance. • A paved fire access lane from existing parking lot to the rear of existing barn and Clearspan fabric building. • Five shelters/lean-to's with paddocks (Pl-P5) and one hay storage building. • A concrete bunker or 40 yard dumpster for manure. The applicant prefers the dumpster. • Fencing separated into three pastures for turnout. • Wetland buffers created around all wetlands near pastures. • Wetland signage will be required as part of the permitting process. An Upland Buffer Agreement will also be required to be recorded with Hennepin County prior to issuance of any permits. • A Raingarden is proposed on the south side of the clearspan building. PS/PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS The Purpose Statement of the PS district states: "This district shall serve areas of public ownership or related semi-public uses or open space, conservation, or recreation." The City Zoning Ordinance allows under a CUP the following: 1. Outdoor recreational and open space uses operated by a governmental agency or conservation group, homeowners or private association and facilities for making same useful to public or association. Public lands, schools, parks and municipal buildings. 2. Conservation uses including drainage control, forestry, wildlife sanctuaries, and facilities for making same available and useful to public. 3. Agricultural uses. 4. Nature study areas and arboretums. 5. Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities. The PS, Public/Semi-Public zoning district specifically does not mention the use of horses, nor does it provide guidelines for how horses should be regulated. The applicant believes they fall Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 3 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 under #5 above that allows Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities. Staff agrees with the applicant's opinion. MINNESOTA EXTENSION SERVICE Staff contacted the Extension Service and they responded with the following: "The average stocking rate for horse pastures in MN is 1 horse per 2 acres. This stocking rate assumes that the horse receives most (or all) of their calories from the pasture (and no hay supplementation is needed). Given this, the 5 acres could support 2-3 horses during the grazing season. If the horses will only graze for a few hours a day, than the area would maybe support 4- 6 (up to a max of 10 depending on management). In my opinion, 16-20 horses is excessive for the 5 acres (it will become overgrazed quickly). We have a lot of information on pasture management on our website: http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/horse/pasture/" Staff has attached an article related to pasture site planning. In summary it suggests that two acres per horse is average if the grass is the main source of food. This is not the situation for the applicant since they intend to support all of their horses by hay and grain, and not grass. However the proposed volume of horses out on a small pasture area will be trampled down quickly if not managed well. The article also recommends that paddocks should be 400 square feet in area per horse, which the applicant is providing. The applicant proposes 20 horses on 5.3 grazable acres. The paddocks aren't large by any means but do meet the minimum of 400 square feet per horse recommendation by the Extension Service. DISTRICTS THAT REGULATE HORSES Since the PS District doesn't have regulations established for horses, we've provided a couple of the districts with regulations to provide as a guide to making a decision on the allowance of horses and the number to be allowed. The RR, Rural Residential zoning district regulates the number of horses allowed on residential properties by grazable acres. The RR, Rural Residential district requires two grazable acres for the first horse and then one grazable acre per horse thereafter. To determine grazable acres all hardcover is subtracted along with areas with trees. The RR-2, Rural Residential 2 zoning district allows for commercial riding stables, subject to conditions The RR-2 district is the closest related district that the City has to use as a guide for review of the subject proposal. This district requires a minimum of .5 acres per horse kept on the property and the City Council is to determine the maximum number allowed via the CUP. NUMBER OF HORSES The applicant is requesting they be allowed up to 20 horses. The original CUP in 1993 allowed for 16 horses for a "Ranger Public Safety Center", however patrol on horseback no longer exists. The applicant requests up to 20 horses so that they can provide lessons to their clients and still have a little room to allow for horses that might be lame, in rehabilitation from an injury or in training for their program. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 4 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 Thirteen horses are proposed to be inside the barn in stalls and the balance would be in the proposed outside shelters/paddock areas. The applicant proposes three pasture areas with the following sizes: 2.48 Grazable Acres 2.04 Grazable Acres .78 Grazable Acres 5.3 Grazable Acres Total The overall Park is 2000 acres. The Public Safety/We Can Ride Building, parking lot, stable, and pasture areas are around 13 acres in size with 5.3 grazable. The actual parcel that it sits on with the Maintenance Facility to the southwest is over 68 acres. If the number of horses were based on the grazable acres which are proposed to be utilized and the maximum of .5 acre per horse was applied, the applicant would be allowed 10 horses. If we looked at the overall park area the number would be higher. The number of horses should be discussed by the Council in determining a recommended maximum. Staff has concerns with the number of horses proposed and their ability to keep the pasture areas viable for grazing with only 5.3 acres of grazable pasture. The applicant has stated that not all horses will be turned out to pasture. A pasture management plan has been provided by the applicant. Staff recommends the pastures be maintained so as to have continuous grass growth. This would require horses not to be turned out to the pasture areas during wet times of the year as to not damage the stabilization of the grass. This would be a condition of approval. Since the use of horses is not mentioned in the PS zoning district, staff reviewed the application with the commercial riding stable guidelines in mind BARN MODIFICATIONS Minor barn modifications will be needed along with re -adding 13 horses inside the barn. PADDOCKS/SHELTER/HAY STORAGE Five paddocks with metal/wood shelters are labeled as P1-P5 on the site plan. The shelters are proposed to be moved in from their existing Hennepin County location (pictures attached). A small metal hay storage building is also proposed to be placed between two of the proposed paddock areas. Staff does not have a picture of the hay storage building. Staff has verbally discussed with the applicant how impractical the current layout of the paddocks are being proposed. Staff recommends the applicant work with staff to figure out a more efficient layout of the paddocks and shelters be arranged. The requirement to have a ten foot separation between paddocks doesn't allow for waterers to be shared and is very impractical. The current layout also doesn't allow for easy accessibility into the paddocks. The ten foot separation between each paddock is a condition under the commercial horse facility regulations, but staff asks to eliminate that condition. The grass separation appear to be established to slow run-off but based on the layout of the paddocks it isn't useful. Staff recommends working with the applicant to create a buffer from the paddocks and possibly reduce the number of paddocks to make larger which would help for efficiency of electrical Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 5 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 usage during the winter months to heat the stock tanks and cost of equipment and fencing. This would be a condition of approval giving staff the ability to modify the paddock layouts prior to permits being issued. MANURE STORAGE & REMOVAL The applicant has shown a manure bunker on their site plan based on staff s recommendation. The applicant would prefer to only have a 40 yard dumpster for removal of manure. Manure storage is proposed on the east side of the existing barn and accessible from the paved turnaround area near the barn. Staff suggests the Council discuss whether a dumpster is sufficient or comparable to the use of a bunker. Initially manure will be transported to farms that have contracted with their vendor NBW, LLC Horse Farm Services out of Lester Prairie, MN. The manure is then allowed to either compost or spread on farm fields. In the future, the applicant will be investigating the possibility of transporting manure to Three Rivers Park District's Gale Wood Farm and/or Nursery, where all the plants for the parks are propagated. The applicant has provided a manure management plan which is attached. The plan lists the frequency of picking up manure from the pastures and paddocks. Staff feels the plan is sufficient for purposes of controlling the volume of manure on -site. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS A Clearspan Truss Arch Building is being proposed which has an exterior material of fabric, with a helical anchor foundation. Pictures and construction specifications have been attached. The fabric and color are not consistent with the existing building which is constructed of James Hardie siding. The City does not have exterior building material requirements in the PS zoning district and therefore doesn't prohibit this type of building constructed with a durable fabric exterior so the Council should discuss the aesthetic appearance of the structure and its location. The clearspan building would not be temporary and would be up year round and is not visible from any roadways. PARKING The existing parking lot provides 29 parking spaces, two of which are accessible spaces. The office space within the Public Safety Facility office area is 3,254 square feet (excluding the barn). The Zoning Ordinance requires 13 parking spaces for the office use in the building (1 space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area). The site currently provides for two accessible spaces. Breakdown of parking needs: Daily Police Parking - 6 Office Staff - 3 Full-time 6-7 Part-time Riding Instructors - 5 Total - 10-12 for We Can Ride Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 6 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 During lesson times and during volunteer training they will not need more than 20 parking spaces. The police would utilize six spaces maximum which leaves a balance of three spaces. Special events would be more of an open house type event that would allow for people to come and go during the event which would reduce the need for a mass amount of parking at one time. Fire lanes and circulation areas will be required to be signed "no parking" as recommended by the Fire Marshal. RIDING THERAPY/LESSONS Riding lessons are scheduled pending participant needs. Lessons are scheduled every day but not on Fridays. The times vary but approximate hours are as follows: Monday 4pm-8:45pm Tuesday 9:30am-2pm, 5pm-8:45pm Wednesday 9:30am-2pm, 5pm-8:45pm Thursday 10:30am-2pm, 5pm-8:45pm Saturday 9:30am-1:15pm Sunday 10am-2:45pm We Can Ride" Office Hours — Office hours are usually 9am-5pm Monday — Friday. Additional office hours are sometimes added for training volunteers that are outside of the 9am-5pm M-F. SPECIAL EVENTS The applicant will have on -site special events which mainly consist of volunteer training. At other times they may have an Open House type event that people will come and go from their facility but never a situation where parking would be an issue. During special events, the Police Officer vehicles would be relocated nearby at their maintenance building to create space for additional vehicles for the event. LANDSCAPING The applicant does not propose to install landscaping as part of this project but if funds become available or a volunteer organization offers, they would be open to adding landscaping around the building. One tree is proposed to be removed. The applicant is not required to install additional trees as part of the proposed project. The location of the site is not visible from the road and staff does not feel landscaping or screening is necessary. UPLAND BUFFER AREA Upland buffer areas have been created around the wetlands near the fenced in pasture areas, paddocks, and clearspan building. The upland buffer area will provide separation and act as a filtration area. Signage would also be a condition of approval which displays it's a "no mow zone" and protected. TRASH The applicant has stated that they will handle all trash internally. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 7 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 EXISTING RESOLUTION 93-65 A CUP was approved in 1993 for the Ranger Public Safety Center allowing a maximum of 16 horses. The proposed application for We Can Ride will be amending the original CUP and removing many of the conditions that are no longer applicable. A copy of the original CUP has been attached. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS The proposed project requires the City's stormwater treatment standards to be implemented since the project is greater than 5,000 square feet in increased hard cover. A rain garden is proposed on the south side of the clearspan building, just outside the fenced in area to satisfy the volume control requirements in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual. BUILDING & FIRE CONSIDERATIONS The Building Official has reviewed the proposed improvements for both building and fire code concerns and they have all been satisfied up to this point. Additional review will be completed at time of building permit. POLICE CONSIDERATIONS The Police Chief has reviewed the proposed improvements and does not have any issues with the application. PUBLIC WORKS CONSIDERATIONS The Public Works Director has reviewed the proposed improvements and has not commented with issues. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff has reviewed the proposed application and recommends that the Council discuss the use and number of horses to be allowed on 5.3 grazable acres. Staff does not think the number of horses should be increased beyond the existing CUP allowing 16 horses. CITY DISCRETION The City has a relatively low level of discretion when it comes to reviewing Conditional Use Permits. If the application meets City ordinances, the CUP should be approved. However, this assumes the Council feels the use fits with "Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities". If the City feels the use fits the Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities then the City may impose conditions on the approval that protect the best interests of the surrounding community and the city as a whole. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE While reviewing Conditional Use Permits, City ordinances (Section 825.39) state that the City should consider the following: Subd. 1. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 8 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 The property is surrounded by Three Rivers Park District property and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity or to others. Subd. 2. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. The surrounding vacant property is largely Park Reserve land. Subd. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The City s engineer has reviewed the plans and does not bring forward any issues other than erosion control. Erosion from the pastures and paddocks are a concern and will need to be managed on an ongoing basis. Sewer is metered by the City and water is private. Storm water improvements are proposed with a rain garden. Subd. 4. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. Additional parking is not needed or required. Subd. 5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. The City will require regular removal of manure to regulate odor. The applicant has submitted a manure management program for removal of their manure on -site. The applicant does not propose additional exterior lighting. Subd. 6. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The proposed use is different than the original CUP, other than the use of horses. The proposed use is for therapeutic riding lessons run by a nonprofit organization on Three Rivers Park District property. Subd. 7. The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The proposed use is not specifically listed, but staff believes the use is consistent with the purposes of the Public/Semi-public zoning district. Subd. 8. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 9 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 Staff believes the use is consistent with the "public/semi-public" guiding. Subd. 9. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. Staff believes that the proposed use will not generate significantly additional vehicle traffic. The site will be accessed off of County Road 24, an arterial roadway. Subd. 10. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. Staff believes that the distance that the facility is set back mitigates these concerns. Subd. 11. The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project. The applicant has stated that they would like to start construction immediately after City Approvals. Subd. 12. The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Zoning Officer. The property is owned by the Three River Park District. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the matter at their March 20th meeting. Five people spoke at the hearing, two expressed concern with the number of horses and the remaining supported the program coming to Medina. Following the public hearing, the Commission discussed and recommended approval with a 3/1 vote. DesLauriers felt they were proposing too many horses for the amount of grazable acres available. The project was approved subject to the following conditions: 1) The number of horses shall not exceed 20; 2) The applicant shall work with staff to modify the paddock layout to improve potential run-off issues; 3) The pasture areas shall be managed by the applicant so as to maintain ground vegetation to prevent erosion and sediment; 4) There shall be no renting of horses to the public and no commercial us of the premises or horses allowed; 5) Fire lanes and circulation areas will be required to be signed "no parking" as recommended by the Fire Marshal; 6) The applicant shall install all improvements as shown on preliminary site plans date stamped received by the City on February 28, 2017; 7) A dumpster may be utilized for storage of manure; 8) Manure shall be removed as per the manure management plan submitted and dates stamped 1/13/17; Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 10 of 1 1 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 9) Upland wetland buffer signs shall be installed every 250 around the perimeter of each wetland; 10) An upland wetland buffer easement agreement shall be prepared by City staff and signed by the Three Rivers Park District and recorded prior to the issuance of building permits; 11) A rain garden shall be installed and inspected by the City Engineer once completed; 12) The applicant will be required to apply for all necessary building permits prior to start of any work; 13) Erosion control will be required on -site prior to the start of any excavation work; 14) The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in the amount sufficient to pay for all costs associated with the review of the application to amend the Conditional Use Permit. Potential Motion If the City Council finds the proposed CUP Amendment acceptable, the following motion would be in order: Move to direct staff to prepare documents approving the CUP Amendment subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1) Document List 2) Excerpt from DRAFT 3/20/2017 Planning Commission meeting 3) Three Rivers Park Location Map 4) Three Rivers Narratives 5) We Can Ride Brochure (4) date stamped 1/13/17 6) We Can Ride Project Descriptions (4) 7) Hennepin County Support Letter 8) University of Mn Extension Service — Pasture Site Planning Article 9) Original CUP Resolution #93-65 10) PS, Public/Semi-Public Zoning District Regulations 11) RR2 Zoning District Regulations (allows commercial horse facilities) 12) Office Layout (dates stamped 2/28/17) 13) Modifications to Office Space explanation 14) Aerial Photos of Hennepin County Location 15) Pictures of Shelter/Lean-to's to be moved to Medina (3) 16) Clearspan Building 17) Existing Conditions and Removals Plan (Date Stamped 2/28/17) 18) Construction Plan (Date Stamped 2/28/17) 19) Grading/Turf Establishment/Erosion Control Plan (Date Stamped 2/28/17) 20) Details Plan (Date Stamped 2/28/17) Three Rivers Park District CUP Amendment Page 11 of 11 City Council Meeting 04-04-17 Project: LR-16-192 — Three Rivers — "We Can Ride" Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Resolution #93-65 The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 11/10/16 11/10/16 5 Yes Yes Fee 11/10/16 yes Yes $2000.00 Mailing Labels Narrative/data 11/10/16 11/10/16 4 Yes yes Narrative plus 2 pgs data provided Plan Set 11/10/16 11/10/16 3 yes yes Aerials only Park Map 1/13/17 2 Yes yes Response to questions 11/28/17 11/28/17 1 Yes Yes Lighting Plan 11/28/17 11/28/17 Yes YES Office Plan 2/28/17 2/8/17 1 Yes yes Site Plan 1/6/17 1/6/17 1 yes Yes Written notes on site plan Site Plan 1/13/17 1/13/17 1 Yes Yes Current Henn Co. Loc. Aerial 1/13/17 1 yes Yes We Can Ride Brochure 1/13/17 4 Yes Yes Clear Span Specifications 1/13/17 7/21/11 32 Yes yes Lean-to shelters 1/13/17 4 Yes Yes Manure mgmt./Sched/Modifications 1/13/17 3 Yes Yes Modifications to office space 1/13/17 1 Yes Yes Plan Set 2/28/17 2/24/17 4 Yes yes Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document # of Electronic Notes Date pages Transmittal to DRC members 11/15/16 1 Yes Lists who reviewed application Kennedy -Graven email review comments 11/21/16 1 Yes WSB Review memo 11/23/16 1 Yes WSB, Wetland Specialist 11/28/16 4 yes WSB, Review Memo 2/17/17 2 yes WSB, Review Memo 2/21/17 2 yes WSB, Review Memo 3/7/17 2 Yes Incomplete letter 11/28/16 3 Yes Email sent to applicant by Deb 11/30/16 1 Ye Email explaining incomplete Itr sent 11/28/16 WSB Review memo 12/2/16 1 yes Police review No date 1 Yes No comments Additional items needed Itr to applicant 1/27/17 5 Yes Staff review comments attached 60 Day Ext Itr to applicant 1/30/17 1 Yes Metro West Review Itr 2/23/17 1 Yes PH Mailing & Notary 3/10/17 6 Yes Includes plans Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document/ Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Support Letter from Henn Co 1/12/17 1 Yes Resolution 93-65 yes Univ. of MN Ext Article 2/28/17 2 yes Composite Master Plan Yes Staff pulled from Campground CUP 1 CITY OF MEDINA 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 4 Monday, March 20, 2017 5 6 1. Call to Order: Chairperson V. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners Chris Barry, Dino DesLauriers, Robin Reid, and Janet 9 White. 10 11 Absent: Commissioners Todd Albers, Kim Murrin, and Laurie Rengel. 12 13 Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke. 14 15 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 16 17 No comments made. 18 19 3. Update from City Council Proceedings 20 21 Anderson reported that the Council last met to discuss the proposed amendment to the current 22 Comprehensive Plan for a memory care facility. He stated that the Council had a lengthy 23 discussion and ultimately directed staff to prepare the item for approval. He stated that the 24 Council will formally approve the item under the Old Business section of the Council agenda 25 the following night. He noted that the zoning requirement for the property is consistent with 26 how the Steering Committee had planned to zone the property under the draft Comprehensive 27 Plan. 28 29 4. Planning Department Report 30 31 Finke provided an update. 32 33 5. Approval of the February 13, 2017 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 34 35 Motion by Reid, seconded by Barry, to approve the February 13, 2017, Planning 36 Commission minutes with changes as noted. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Albers, 37 Murrin and Rengel) 38 39 6. Public Hearing — Three Rivers Park District — Conditional Use Permit 40 Amendment to Allow "We Can Ride, Inc." to Provide Horse Therapeutic 41 Services to Needs of Individuals with Disabilities and Special Needs at Baker 42 Park Public Safety Facility Location at 4301 County Road 24 43 44 Finke presented a request from the Three Rivers Park District to amend the existing 45 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow "We Can Ride, Inc." to provide therapeutic horse 46 services to needs of individuals with disabilities and special needs at Baker Park Public 47 Safety Facility. He stated that the applicant is requesting a maximum of 20 horses on site. 48 He stated that the stable is currently used for storage and not as a stable, as the Three Rivers 49 Park District has ended their mounted patrol of the park. He provided an aerial photograph of 50 the property, noting that the site is in the middle of the Baker Park Preserve property. He 51 stated that the property is zoned for public/semi-public and the original use of the property 52 included patrol and mounted patrol activity. He noted that the original condition of the CUP 1 53 allowed up to 16 horses at the facility. He noted that the storage currently occurring at the 54 stables would be moved to another indoor site on the property, as outdoor storage is not 55 allowed. He stated that equine assisted therapy is not listed as a use within the zoning 56 district, but advised that is a relatively unique use. He stated that staff looked at some of the 57 other uses peimitted in the zoning district and determined that the use is similar in nature and 58 could be properly regulated through the conditions of a CUP. He displayed the proposed site 59 plan and identified the grazable acres available. He noted that upland buffers would be 60 required to protect the wetlands located in the middle of the grazing area. He reviewed the 61 other proposed improvements that are a part of this request, including improvements to the 62 access and the addition of a fire lane. He reviewed the animal density regulations of the rural 63 residential zoning district but noted that those regulations would be different, as those are 64 typically hobby farms rather than a commercial operation. He noted that staff recommends 65 that specific conditions be added to the CUP regarding manure management and grazing. He 66 noted that the applicant is requesting up to 20 horses. He explained that the stable holds 13 67 horses and the additional horses would be housed in another area, such as injured horses. He 68 noted that although the applicant may not have 20 horses on the site, they are requesting that 69 additional flexibility. He stated that staff recommends leaving the maximum number of 70 horses at 16, as currently specified in the CUP. He reviewed the proposed building materials 71 and noted that staff believes that there would be sufficient parking available. He stated that 72 staff recommends approval of the request. 73 74 DesLauriers asked the original intent of the 16 horses allowed under the current CUP. 75 76 Finke stated that it would be typical in the early 1990's that the City would allow what the 77 applicant was requesting, as long as it was reasonable and allowable; and therefore, the 78 applicant most likely requested up to 16 horses. He described the path the improved access 79 road would take as it looped around the area. 80 81 Chair White referenced the animal density and asked how that was determined. 82 83 Finke stated that in 1993 there were no limitations on animals in any zoning district and 84 therefore he believes that 16 is the number that was requested by the Three Rivers Park 85 District. He provided additional details on the proposed conditions that would be imposed 86 regarding grazing to prevent erosion and sediment damage. 87 88 Bo Carlson, representing the applicant, stated that Baker Park is one of the jewels of the 89 Three Rivers Park District. He noted that the We Can Ride program began three years ago, 90 but noted that the organization has had a longer relationship with Hennepin County. He 91 stated that due to some changes in land use, Hennepin County asked We Can Ride to find 92 another location to provide their services. He stated that the County suggested that We Can 93 Ride sit down with Three Rivers Park District to determine if there would be a possibility to 94 partner to provide this service. He stated that the mounted patrol operation was discontinued 95 in 2013 or 2014 and the horses and equipment were sold to the City of Duluth. He stated that 96 this left the Park District with vacant stables and park land and provided an opportunity for 97 the Park District to partner with We Can Ride. He stated that the Park District is not the 98 experts in all areas of programming they provide, but do have the land base and therefore 99 often partner with another organization to provide the programming. He provided examples 100 of other partnerships the Park District has within the park land they own, such as rowing. He 101 stated that the partnership opportunities allow the Park District to provide unique 102 programming options and also expose people to the parks. He stated that this programming 103 would provide service to a very unique niche. He stated that the proposed area for this use is 104 in the middle of Baker Park Reserve and provides an opportunity to utilize the horse trails. 105 He stated that there is not a high pressure on the existing horse trails and therefore this would 2 106 be an opportunity to utilize the existing trails. He stated that this would serve the users and 107 park customers well and would be another element to the services that could be provided to 108 the users of the Three Rivers Park District, noting that the Park District Board is very 109 supportive of this project. 110 111 Mary Mitten, Executive Director of We Can Ride, stated that We Can Ride is 35 years old 112 and has had a successful relationship with Hennepin County throughout that term. She stated 113 that they have a premier accredited status through PATH, which is an organization that sets 114 up regulations and safety measures. She noted that there are two sites that the organization 115 uses and has a total of 21 horses between the two sites with ten staff members and 250 116 volunteers. She estimated that they have helped 3,000 to 5,000 individuals with special needs 117 or disabilities during that 35 years. She provided examples of how We Can Ride has helped 118 their clients. She stated that they are proud to bring these benefits to the community and 119 hoped that the community would be excited as well, noting that there are a lot of volunteer 120 opportunities. 121 122 Janet Hegland, Board Chair for We Can Ride, referenced some of the recommendations that 123 were suggested by staff, noting that staff did a great job of addressing the challenges of fitting 124 within the zoning code. She stated that the current working herd of horses is 17 and therefore 125 they are asking for a limit of 20 horses. She stated that when the horses can no longer serve 126 the purpose of the program they commit to finding those horses a forever home where they 127 can live their lives out. She noted that new horses also come in on a trial basis and therefore 128 they can exceed 17. She stated that they have not exceeded 19 horses, but simply request 20 129 to allow the transient movement. She stated that the horses are not put out to pasture to eat 130 and are more for recreation, as they feed the horses in the stable. She noted that a quarter of 131 the horses are not allowed to pasture because of their dietary restrictions. She noted that they 132 also recognize the need to avoid pasture during certain times of the year, such as wet times, in 133 order to reduce the impact on the pasture. She noted that the pasture impact would be lower 134 than traditional home or commercial use. She advised that the horses are also receiving 135 exercise during the trail rides and receive other exercise outside of pasture. She noted that 136 one horse serves seven clients, and therefore limiting the horses to 16 would impact the 137 number of people served. She referenced the condition requiring a manure bunker. She 138 stated that there are wetlands on the Hennepin County site and therefore they recognize the 139 importance of wetland protection and use a dumpster which is hauled away by a certified 140 hauler. She stated that the dumpster system works well for them and the bunker is not a use 141 they would like to have. She asked for the definition of an event. She stated that they do not 142 get the opportunity to have an event at the current center and therefore their events are limited 143 to training and open house nights. She estimated 15 to 30 people at the "events". 144 145 Barry noted that there are currently 17 horses at the Hennepin County location and another 146 four horses at the other location and asked if they are ever combined. 147 148 Mitten stated that the horses are kept separate at the different sites. 149 150 Carlson stated that the second location is further away and therefore they are independent 151 locations and the horses are not swapped between locations. 152 153 Chair White referenced the fabric structure and asked if the applicant has used that material 154 previously. 155 156 Mitten stated that the structure is new to We Can Ride, but noted that the material has been 157 used at other facilities. She stated that the material is very sturdy and easily maintained 158 3 159 Chair White asked if the building would be heated. 160 Mitten replied that the facility is not insulated and therefore would not be heated. She 161 explained that the current facility has a small indoor heated arena and therefore that could be 162 used for the small number of winter riders. 163 164 Chair White asked if the entire staff and volunteer team would travel with the transition. 165 166 Mitten replied that as far as she knows the current staff members are transitioning as well, 167 noting that the location will actually be closer than the current location for some staff 168 members. She noted that the organization may lose some volunteers in the transition. 169 170 DesLauriers asked the impact to the organization if the horses are limited to 16. 171 172 Hegland replied that they would lower the number of people that they currently serve. She 173 noted that the organization underwent strategic planning recently and has plans to expand to 174 additional locations in the future, but that would be years out and therefore the number of 175 clients would be limited if the horses were limited to 16. 176 177 DesLauriers stated that he had the chance to tour the facility and asked where the vehicles 178 currently being stored on the site would go. 179 180 Carlson stated that there are a lot of options for the Park District. He stated that there are 181 several opportunities to move the seasonal equipment on the Baker Park site and on other 182 sites throughout the Park District. He stated that the hours of operation for the public safety 183 department are outside of the programming hours for We Can Ride. He stated that Three 184 Rivers Park District would provide the land and We Can Ride would fund the necessary 185 improvements. 186 187 Chair White referenced the acres identified for grazable acres and asked how that is 188 determined, noting that there would perhaps be additional acres available within the park. 189 190 Carlson replied that the fence line identified in the site plan pretty accurately matches the 191 historic fencing, with the exception of the changes due to the wetland protection. He stated 192 that they are somewhat constrained in the area because of the protection of the wetlands and 193 the desire to avoid tree removal to simply add pasture land. He stated that the footprint 194 would be gained by utilizing the existing horse trails. 195 196 Finke asked for information on the maximum number of horses on the site with the horse 197 patrol historically. 198 199 Carlson stated that the mounted horse patrols pre -date his time with the Park District noting 200 that when he joined the organization there were maybe four horses on site. He was unsure 201 that 16 horses were ever housed on the property during the mounted patrols. 202 203 DesLauriers asked if it is typical to not put horses out to pasture, as it was mentioned that 204 about half the horses would not be pastured. 205 206 Mitten replied that certain breeds of horses have dietary restrictions and therefore are not 207 pastured. 208 209 Chair White opened the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. 210 4 211 Mark Skau, 2575 Morningside Road, stated that it appears that they are trying to squeeze too 212 many horses into a small space. He noted that they will be putting another structure in which 213 will also reduce the available pasture. 214 215 Chair White noted that the grazable acres were determined with the new building included. 216 217 Skau stated that it appears that will be a lot of horses for that small space. He stated that 218 residential properties that want to have horses are required to have a lot more land. He asked 219 if the horse trails cross any walking paths. 220 221 Chair White stated that some of the horse trails may parallel the walking trails but do not 222 cross. 223 224 Skau stated that he would be concerned that elderly walkers could run into the horses. He 225 also asked how this would be paid for. 226 227 Chair White stated that the Three Rivers Park District would lease the facility and the City 228 would not have a financial burden. 229 230 Brent Webush, 2605 Morningside Road, stated that he works for the Department of Public 231 Safety for Three Rivers Park District. He stated that seven horses is the maximum number of 232 horses that the Park District had at the facility. He stated that there was a time when the Park 233 District asked to have more horses and the City of Medina denied that request. He stated that 234 he thinks this is a great program, noting that his daughter rides in the program. He stated that 235 he does not think this is the best location for this programing, as he does not believe there is 236 sufficient space. He asked if the program would be open to the general public. He stated that 237 there is not tax benefit to the residents of Medina and asked how much money Hennepin 238 County has provided to the program throughout the years and whether there is in -kind 239 maintenance provided from the County. He asked if there was a water quality issue at the 240 current property owned by Hennepin County and if that is why the program was directed to 241 move from the Metropolitan Council. 242 243 Nicole Spader, 2132 Grandview in Minnetrista, stated that she used to run a therapeutic 244 riding center in Colorado. She stated that these are typically older horses and therefore it is 245 not the same type of horse that you would see at Medina homes or commercial operations. 246 She stated that these are slow, old horses that are different than the majority of horse owners 247 and therefore is different in terms of grazable acres. She stated that she had many horses at 248 her facility that were never put to pasture, and that is okay because of their dietary needs. 249 250 Julie Benson, 5705 Deville Drive in Edina, stated that she currently lives about three minutes 251 from We Can Ride noting that her daughter takes lessons through the program. She stated 252 that she was sad that the program was going to move, but excited when they mentioned the 253 possibility of moving the facility to Baker Park. She stated that this would be a very 254 welcoming place for the clients with special needs. She stated that she cannot even express 255 the difference that this program creates and the relationships that are fostered through the 256 program. She stated that it is not just the riding lessons, but the program also works with 257 clients to establish goals. She stated that she is always amazed at how clean the We Can Ride 258 facilities are, noting that people take such pride in how the facility is maintained and how the 259 horses are treated. She stated that this is proven therapy that makes a difference. She stated 260 that she is a proud parent and is proud to speak about We Can Ride because it does work. 261 She noted that she personally knows people in the area that would volunteer at the facility. 262 5 263 Linda Tedfor, 1617 Drew Avenue South, stated that she is a proud parent of a We Can Ride 264 client, noting that her son has been riding for 19 years. She stated that if the number of 265 horses are limited that is true. She explained that when people begin riding they are doing the 266 program and do not want to stop. She stated that when you limit the number of horses, that 267 will then limit the number of kids that can begin in the program. She stated that when you 268 locate a program like this in the community, you are creating an opportunity for members of 269 the community to volunteer and learn empathy which is an amazing opportunity. 270 271 Chair White closed the public hearing at 8:13 p.m. 272 273 R. Reid stated that this is a lovely program, but noted that she is not an expert in the number 274 of horses. She stated that this makes sense for the location and this would be a positive 275 program, but simply believes the Commission should discuss the number of horses. 276 277 DesLauriers stated that he too supports the program, but noted that after walking the facility 278 this is not a large location. 279 280 Barry asked if the horses would all be full sized. 281 282 Mitten replied that there are a few smaller ponies. 283 284 Barry stated that he looked at the animal density requirements within the rural residential 285 zoning district. He noted that half of the horses do not go to pasture and therefore that would 286 reduce the amount of space needed for pasture. He stated that he does not have an issue with 287 raising the number of horses from 16 to 20. He stated that based on what he has heard, there 288 will not always be the full number of horses on the land and not all the horses will be outside 289 for pasture. 290 291 Chair White asked if a condition should be added allowing the 20 horses with the condition 292 that a certain number of the horses will not be grazed. 293 294 Finke commented that would be hard to manage. 295 296 R. Reid asked the number of grazable acres at the current site. It was determined that there is 297 a similar amount of grazable acres at the current facility. 298 299 Barry stated that he would support 20 horses as requested by the applicant. 300 301 DesLauriers asked if they could start at 16 horses and then review the request in six months to 302 determine if additional four horses could be added. 303 304 Barry stated that you could reverse that and allow 20 horses and you could review that in six 305 months to determine if a lesser number would be needed. He noted that the applicant already 306 has 17 horses at their currently facility. 307 308 Chair White stated that it appears that this organization is a good steward of the land and if 309 the applicant is not, the Three Rivers Park District would be overseeing the activity on their 310 site. She stated that therefore she could support 20 horses. 311 312 R. Reid asked if anyone has a problem with the horse manure dumpster. 313 314 Barry stated that it appears that the applicant uses the dumpster method currently and would 315 simply change the address for pickup and delivery with the same company. He stated that if 6 316 the dumpster works today for the organization, he would not see a reason to change that 317 method to build the bunker. He stated that he would support the use of the dumpster rather 318 than the bunker and confirmed the consensus of the Commission. 319 320 Chair White asked for the definition of event. 321 322 Finke stated that an event is typically a couple hundred people or something that has an 323 impact on public safety, such as parking on streets nearby the facility. 324 325 Chair White confirmed the consensus of the Commission to remove condition eight and 326 increase the number of allowed horses in condition one from 16 to 20 horses. She stated that 327 the Planning Commission is a recommending body and therefore this item will go before the 328 City Council at a later date. 329 330 Finke stated that most likely the Council will review this item on April4tn 331 332 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Barry, to recommend approval of the CUP Amendment 333 subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, removing condition eight and increasing the 334 maximum number of horses in condition one to 20. Motion carries 3-1 (Opposed: 335 DesLauriers). (Absent: Albers, Murrin, and Rengel) 336 337 Chair White expressed appreciation for the people in attendance and their encouraging 338 stories. She noted that while the Commission appreciates those stories, the job of the 339 Commission is simply to review the land use. 340 341 7. Council Meeting Schedule 342 343 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following night on March 21st 344 345 Chair White volunteered to represent the Planning Commission at the Council meeting the 346 following night. 347 348 8. Adiourn 349 350 Motion by DesLauriers, seconded by Barry, to adjourn the meeting at 8:39 p.m. Motion 351 carried unanimously. 7 To Loretto To Lake Independence Regional Trail G Y ct a a ce w Y a m Lake Independence P I NORTH 0.5 55 Half Moon RECREATION —ENTRANCE _ ' • Oak Knoll Miles A R Lake Katrina To Katrina 1 & 2 ®� 0 BAKER PARK RESERVE Executive ] 9 Hole T❑ GOLF ENTRANCE aker Championship 18 Hole TRAIL ThreeRivers PARK DISTRICT threeriversparks.org r►f B Q�Q • • • Miles 23.9 12.5 12.5 9.0 LEGEND : Updated: 2/23/2016 gboat carry -in access Elboat launch A sm dr P �t To Luce Line Regional Trail (3 miles) campground campground office camping - group reservation clubhouse concessions drinking water fishing pier golfing/driving range horse trailhead near -wilderness settlement - reservations only parking picnic area play area rest area/bench restroom swimming toilet trails at your pace paved trail unpaved trail road service road Golf Course bunker fairway/tee box green park boundary private property — water body BAKER PARK RESERVE GENERAL RECREATION AREA To Maple Plain 12 NORTH ThreeRivers PARK DISTRICT threeriversparks.org Lake Independence 500 I I TRAIL Ell B CIO pig Driftw Cottonwood Butternut Ei GB Aspen Feet e • • Miles 8.2 5.1 3.i 2.9 I LEGEND: Egboat launch MIcamper cabins b campground campground office camping - group reservation drinking water entry station EM in an m 53 El El 53 7� R 313 fishing pier play area picnic area picnic area - reservable picnic area - reservable shelter rentals restroom -A- Boat Trailer Parking 53 ea 1-1 1-1 k 55 To Loretto 4� 0 3 01 1 /Operations / Center / • I J ../t Oak Knoll _1 swimming trails at your pace volleyball tunnel paved trail unpaved trail road Updated: 3/4/2016 parking lot park boundary water body Three Rivers Park District Board of Commissioners Penny Steele District 1 Jennifer De)ournett District 2 Daniel Freeman Vice Chair District 3 John Gunyou Chair District 4 John Gibbs District 5 Steven Antolak Appointed At Large Gene Kay Appointed At Large Boe Carlson Superintendent -f� ThreeRivers PARK DISTRICT November 10, 2016 City of Medina City Hall 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dear Mr. Finke, Three Rivers Park District is seeking an amendment to its Conditional Use Permit with the City of Medina for the Public Safety facility at Baker Park Reserve. Three Rivers Park District is partnering with We Can Ride, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs though equine assisted activities. This program will utilize existing horse facilities at Baker Park Reserve that were previously used for Public Safety services. The Park District utilized a mounted patrol for Public Safety at park facilities in Baker Park Reserve. Utilizing the mounted patrol was no longer the best way to provide Public Safety services for the District and the mounted patrol program was discontinued. The Park District is no longer using the horse facilities at Baker's Public Safety building. The Park District is pursuing a partnership relationship with We Can Ride (www.wecanride.org) to utilize these facilities as a therapeutic riding venue. We Can Ride currently operates on Hennepin County property (Hennepin County Home School) and has been serving the public at that location for 34 years by providing equine assisted activities and therapies. Their lease with Hennepin County expires May 31, 2017. Effective June 1, 2017, We Can Ride will partner with the Park District to continue these services at the Baker Park facility in order to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities and special needs from this same local community. These activities and therapies have been shown to improve their participant's physical, emotional and cognitive limitations. This partnership will not require a significant change to the existing Conditional Use Permit and will expand the public safety focus of the facility to include public good. Specifically, we are requesting permission to increase the number of horses kept on the property from 16 to 20, and to Administrative Center, 3000 Xenium Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55441-1299 Information 763.559.9000 • TTY 763.559.6719 • Fax 763.559.3287 • www.ThreeRiversParks.org City of Medina Page 2 November 10, 2016 erect up to a 9000 square foot Clearspan fabric structure alongside the existing horse barn in order to expand the available arena area for program use. We Can Ride will program from the site in cooperation with Park District to meet the needs of Twin City area children and adults seeking therapeutic riding services and to encourage and expand accessibility to the Park to people with disabilities. The Park District is in support of this change in use and hopes the City will see this as an asset for the community. Yours truly, Boe R. Carlson, Superintendent Three Rivers Park District BRC/Iz WP\Letters-Memos-Notes-Emails-Scans\2016\11-07-16 Ltr. to Medina - Conditional Use Permit Public Safety at Baker Three Rivers Park District Board of Commissioners Penny Steele District 1 Jennifer DeJournett District 2 Daniel Freeman Vice Chair District 3 John Gunyou Chair District 4 John Gibbs District 5 Steven Antolak Appointed At Large Gene Kay Appointed At Large Boe Carlson Superintendent ThreeRivers PARK DISTRICT January 12, 2017 City of Medina City Hall 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dear Ms. Peterson, ECEOVE JAN 1 3 2017 Three Rivers Park District is seeking an amendment to its Conditional Use Permit with the City of Medina for the Public Safety Mounted Patrol facility at Baker Park Reserve (City of Medina Resolution No 93-65). Maintaining a mounted patrol was no longer the best way to provide Public Safety services for the District and the mounted patrol program was discontinued. The Park District is no longer using the horse facilities at Baker's Public Safety building. The purpose of the amendment is to redefine utilization of the existing facilities, constructed to house the horses and staff of the Mounted Patrol at Baker Park Reserve Baker to house the horses and staff of We Can Ride, Inc. (www.wecanride.orq), a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs though equine assisted activities. Three Rivers Park District was introduced to We Can Ride, Inc. by Hennepin County Administration because the current site of their operation in Minnetonka, at the Hennepin County Home School, will be repurposed by the County. Their lease with Hennepin County expires May 31, 2017. We Can Ride has operated successfully on that site since 1982 (34 years), maintaining a herd of horses averaging around 16 and numbering up to 20, on slightly less grazeable acreage than is available on the Baker Park Reserve mounted patrol site. The Park District has established a partnership with We Can Ride to expand our adaptive programming capabilities, to provide greater access to the Park to people with special needs and/or limited mobility and to provide a site for this valuable and respected program to continue to operate in the Western Twin Cities. There are several areas of overlap in our missions that support this partnership, therefore, effective June 1, 2017; We Can Ride will continue their services at the Baker Park facility in order to meet Administrative Center, 3000 Xenium Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55441-1299 Information 763.559.9000 • TTY 763.559.6719 • Fax 763.559.3287 • www.ThreeRiversParks.org the needs of individuals with disabilities and special needs from this same local community. These activities and therapies have been demonstrated and reported on in peer reviewed medical and scientific literature to improve their participant's physical, emotional and cognitive limitations. We recognize that Baker Park Reserve, as regional park land may exist outside of current zoning districts in the city of Medina, and therefore is not comparable to other zoned districts. Further, we recognize that our request does not align with current ordinances in force for the number of allowable horses per grazeable acre defined for urban/commercial or residential zoned properties in Medina. Reducing the number of horses from 20 would negatively impact the number of clients We Can Ride can serve. We therefore request a deviation from these ordinances and consideration of this amendment based on: • We Can Ride's long term, successful operating history in Minnetonka, on slightly less acreage than would be available at the former Public Safety facilities at Baker Park (see letter of support from Hennepin County); • the plan to utilize not only the former Public Safety facilities but also the horse trails at Baker, expanding the acreage that will be impacted by the horse (see attachment "Hours of Operation, client volume and traffic patterns"; and • the roughly 2000 acres of Park land that surround that facility, which buffers the public from any sights, smells or sounds that may be deemed undesirable by close neighbors. This partnership will not require significant changes to the existing Conditional Use Permit and will expand the facility to include public benefit. Specifically, we are requesting permission to increase the number of horses kept on the property from 16 to a maximum of 20, and to erect a 7800 square foot Clearspan fabric structure alongside the existing horse barn in order to expand the available arena area for program use to meet the volume of our currently served clientele. The existing office building will be reorganized to accommodate the additional We Can Ride staff and clients, and if necessary, officer and their vehicles will be relocated elsewhere in the Park to accommodate the additional We Can Ride staff (see attachment for more detail). We Can Ride will program from the site in cooperation with Park District to meet the needs of Twin City area children and adults seeking equine assisted activities and to encourage and expand accessibility to the Park to people with disabilities. The following attachments are provided to supplement the information contained in the application and this letter: • Checklist • Conditional Use Permit Application and copy of receipt for the conditional use permit fee • Program description -We Can Ride at Baker Park Reserve • Letter of Support from Hennepin County • Aerial pictures of current Minnetonka site to show pasture, paddocks, stable, arena • Response to WSB letter dated 11/23/16 • Response to questions posted in City of Medina memo from Debra Peterson, Associate Planner • Copies of site plan and survey showing wetlands • Architectural drawings of Clearspan structure • Lighting plan " Hours of operation, client volume and traffic patterns " Additional Information related to We Can Ride relocation " Mailing labels and map " Manure Management Plan The Park District is in support of this change in use and hopes the City will see this as a valuable asset for the community. Yours truly, Boe R. Carlson, Superintendent Three Rivers Park District WP\Letters-Memos-Notes-Emails-Scans\2017\1.12.17 Ltr. to Medina - Conditional Use Permit Public Safety at Baker We Can Ride (WCR) at Baker Park Reserve Therapeutic Horseback Riding Hippotherapy Equine Assisted Activities Equine Facilitate Psychotherapy It is the mission of We Can Ride, Inc. to improve the lives of individuals with disabilities or special needs through equine assisted activities. Client Testimonials ■ "My daughter, diagnosed with anxiety disorder and au- tism was able to go off all her anxiety medicines because of the social skills she learned at We Can Ride! ■ A mother tells us that her daughter, who never tolerat- ed physical touch, now walks out of the barn holding her mother's hand. ■ ""Jack (the pony) is my legs so I can run" Abby, a 5 year old with arthrogryposis and spinal challenges, speaks vol- umes with her love for Jack. Her doctor was amazed that she could sit independently and swing her legs at her ap- pointment after only 8 weeks of hippotherapy. Horses Helping People Discover Their Abilifies How do Horses Provide Therapy? IT We Can Ride, Inc. is a 501 (c) (3) non- profit, volunteer -based organiza- tion. We Can Ride, Inc. Operates with the talents of: A volunteer Board of Direc- tors A committed staff of 3 full time, and 5 regular part-time employees 3 Credentialed physical and occupational therapists 7 PATH International certified therapeutic riding instructors Specially trained horses 250 trained and dedicated volunteers Equine assisted therapeutic rid- ing is for individuals from 6 years to 70 years young. Early child- hood classes are for children 2 through 5 years of age with vary- ing disabilities. ass ize er esson Therapeutic Riding • 1-4 clients • 1-4 horses • 3-15 volunteers Hippotherapy • 1-2 clients • 1-2horses • 3-6 volunteers Equine Assisted Learning (EAL) • 3-10 clients • 1-4 horses • 1-4 volunteers Equine Facilitated Psychotherapy (EFP) WE CAN RIDE, INC. HORSES HELPING PEOPLE DISCOVER THEIR ABILITIES We Can Ride PO Box 1102 Minnetonka, MN 55345-0102 Ph: 952-934-02057 Additional Information Related to We Can Ride Relocation to Baker Park Reserve Outdoor Horse Shelters We Can Ride will be moving in 5 shelters for horse paddocks/pastures/runs and purchasing up to two more within the sizes of the shelters below. All shelters are on skids and do not have a floor. Please see attached photos. Dimensions are: 1 shelter at 12 x 24 feet (shelter 1 of photos) 2 shelters at 8 x 24 feet (Shelter 2 and 3 of photos) 1 shelter at 8 x 16 feet (shelter 4 of photo) 1 shelter at 10 x 14 feet (shelter 5 of photo) Hay storage We Can Ride will be purchasing a movable hay storage shelter, similar in design to the outdoor horse shelters. Current size estimate is 12'x24'. Building will be on skids and be movable. Location of hay storage is indicated on site map. Barn Modifications Twelve stalls will be re -added to existing stable (the stalls were removed). Holes will be drilled into the concrete floor to mount the stalls, since prior holes were filled. This will house 12 of the herd; other horses will be kept outdoors in paddocks with shelters. The area across from the wash stall will be enclosed and modified so that it will be used as an observation room. This will include the addition of a safety glass window, 2 doors, and other finishes to help with noise reduction and comfort. Details of this renovation will be included in required building permit, which will be pulled prior to construction. Restrooms: The restroom in the existing office/arena/stable building is handicap accessible and will be utilized for We Can Ride staff and clientele. If programming or events significantly increase the number of people on site, temporary, portable, handicap accessible toilets (e.g., Satellite) will be brought in for the necessary duration of the increase. Facility Entrance: The current entrance of the existing facility is handicap accessible and will be utilized initially. If additional entrances are deemed necessary we will submit the details in required building permit application. Horse Rotation # hours in designated area Number of hours per horse per week Percentage of day spent in designated area Paddocks/stalls 102 (spring/summer); 126 (fall/winter) 61% (spring/summer); 75% (fall/winter) Pasture 42 (spring/summer); 19 (fall/winter) 25% (spring/summer); 11% (fall/winter) Arena for lessons 17 10% Trail for lessons 5 3% Barn for farrier, vet, chiropractor, etc. 2 1% Note: Percentages calculations based on a total of 168 hours in a week (24 hours X 7 days). Approximate y 3 horses will not go out to pasture at all due to weight, age, health reasons. They live in paddocks/stalls. Pastures will be cross fenced to manage turn out rotation and give pastures rest Hours and Schedule of We Can Ride Operations Schedule and Traffic Currently there are sessions held March through October, however because there is an existing small heated arena at Baker Park Reserve, we will be expanding our lesson schedule to 12 months a year. The number of participants in the winter is expected to be approximately % to %2 that in the Spring/Summer/Fall months. Therefore we expect to hold lessons 32 weeks of the 52 weeks of the year. For the breaks between sessions, training, session preparation, and other unmounted lessons such as equine assisted learning or equine assisted psychotherapy will be held. Lessons are held Sunday through Thursday and Saturday (no lessons on Friday). Times can vary but these are the approximate hours: Mon 4pm — 8:45pm Tues 9:30am — 2pm, 5pm — 8:45pm Wed 9:30am — 2pm, 5pm — 8:45pm Thurs 10:30am — 2pm, 5pm — 8:45pm Sat 9:30am — 1:15pm Sun 10am — 2:45pm We Can Ride office hours are 9 to 5pm Mon — Fri. There are currently three full time staff and 11-12 part time (10-34 hours) staff and instructors. Hours for the part time staff vary widely. There is usually only one of the five Instructors on site at a time. The maximum number of employees on -site on the busiest days/work shift is 10, but this is not frequent. There are also various times when we have staff and volunteer trainings outside these hours, but these are infrequent as most are held during normal hours of operation. Mounting Wheelchair Bound Clients We Can Ride owns two wheelchair lifts that will be kept in the arena to lift clients in wheelchairs to the mounting platforms. Traffic Traffic will follow existing paved roadways through the park to reach the facility. During lesson times, there are usually approximately 10 —12 cars in the parking lot, with 2-4 of them needing handicap accessibility. There are adequate handicap accessible parking spaces in the current lot and room to expand if necessary. Horses will reside on the property so there will not be regular trailering in of horses. When a new horse is delivered or if one is being relocated, the horse trailer and truck will pull into the paved parking lot and load or unload near the existing facility and the horse will be walked on lead to the stable/arena or paddocks. We Can Ride, Inc. Manure Management Plan We Can Ride's lease with Hennepin County requires a manure management plan. Included below is a description of the program currently in use by We Can Ride at the Hennepin County Home Schools site and proposed to be used at Baker Park Reserve. Licensed Contracted Vendor: NBW, LLC Horse Farm Services (http://horsefarmservices.com/) Phone: (320) 395-2891 Email: sales@horsefarmservices.com 5151 Highway 7 Lester Prairie, MN 55354 Dumpster Size: 40 yards. Dumpster Dimensions: 23 feet long, 7 feet tall Note: If City requires a concrete bunker to be constructed we will add that to the manure management plan. The vendor's standard manure bunker size is 16 feet by 16 feet with 5 feet high side walls and a rock bottom, three sided with opening in front for easy filling and removing. A ramp has been constructed to facilitate transporting and dumping the manure when done by hand. Frequency of Pickup: Once every 4 weeks or more frequently as needed. Destination of Manure that is Removed: Manure is transported to farms that have contracted with the Vendor for composting and to be spread on farm fields. In the future we will be investigating the possibility of transporting manure to Three River Park District's Gale Wood Farm and/or Nursery, where all of the plants for the parks are propagated. We have ensured this vendor can provide their services at the Baker Park Reserve site and we plan to maintain our contract with them there. The routine for manure management is provided below. It is our intention to follow a similar schedule at Baker Park Reserve. Barn, Arena and Stalls All manure in the barn area, including arena, stalls, and walkways is picked up by volunteers or staff on a daily basis and is put into a dumpster that gets hauled away and replaced as needed. Paddocks and Pastures Our mare's paddock and shelter is cleaned out by volunteers daily, during morning and afternoon feeding. All the manure is collected and brought to the dumpster. The current gelding paddocks are significantly bigger, so we bring in groups of volunteers to clean the paddocks and shelters and we bring in machinery as needed. The manure is transported to the dumpster. This is completed at minimum every two months. However, the gelding paddocks at Baker Park will be similar in size to the current mare paddock so we will be also cleaning the gelding paddocks at Baker Park Reserve on a daily basis as described for the mare paddocks above. Manure in pastures is picked up by volunteers once or twice a summer and the manure is brought to the dumpster. However, the pastures are also dragged periodically, as needed, to break up the manure piles in the pasture, which allows for nature composting and enhanced growth of the pasture plants. We Can Ride Offices 3 full time, 6-7 part time (20-34 hours), and 5 instructors, hours vary throughout the year. Expansion and or modifications of current facilities at Three Rivers Horses We Can Ride would like to increase the number of horses on the property from 16 to 20. This would allow us to have horses in the program to serve our clients and still have a little room to allow for horses that might be lame, in rehabilitation from an injury or in training for the program. Office area changes Restroom Existing restrooms will be used to meet the needs of program participants. Barn modifications Stalls will be re -added to the barn. This may entail some concrete drilling since holes were filled in with concrete. Portable stalls will then be added to house approximately 13 horses. Other horses will be kept outdoors in paddocks with shelters Arena A clearspan type arena will be added to the property. These buildings are temporary and agricultural in nature. They do not have permanent footings, rather use a helical anchor foundation. Options for this arena are — 65x120ft, modified quonset (roundish) 73 x 120 —140ft, gable shape 85 x 120 —140ft, gable shape Outdoor shelters We Can Ride will be moving in 5 shelters for horse paddocks/pastures/runs. Hay storage We Can Ride will be purchasing a movable hay storage building. Current estimate is 12x24. Building will be on skids and be movable. Hennepin County Administration Mark S. Thompson, Assistant Count) Administrator for Public Safety A23 Government Center 300 South ,Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0233 January 12 2017 61 ?- 48-9w;ii VAX: 612-34s-8.1. www.liciuhmin.us I am writing this letter in support of Three River's Park District application to amend the existing conditional use permit for the Ranger Public Safety Center at Baker Park Reserve (City of Medina Resolution 93-65). The purpose of the amendment is to redefine utilization of the existing facilities, constructed to house the horses and staff of the Mounted Patrol at Baker Park Reserve, and staff of We Can Ride, Inc. (www.wecanride.org), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs through equine assisted activities. It is my understanding the City of Medina would find it helpful to have documentation that We Can Ride has successfully managed a herd of up to 20 horses on Hennepin County's property since 1982, while providing services to handicapped. individuals. We Can Ride conducts its operations on 5.7 acres of grazeable pasture at the Hennepin County Home School facility located at 14300 County Road 62, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345. There have been no problems that the County is aware of related to the care and management of the horses or the management and disposal of the manure. This is significant since there are nearby wetlands that mandate an active manure management plan (dumpster receptacle to store the manure and a vendor who hauls it away to a compost site). I am happy to provide furtherformation if required and can be reached at the contact information, on this letterhe Sincerely, Mark Thompson Assistant County r /r f dm inistrator Pasture site planning : University of Minnesota Extension Page 1 of 2 JUL UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA I EXTENSION Horse Extension Pasture site planning University of Minnesota Extension www.extension.umn.edu 612-624-1222 Krishona Martinson, PhD, University of Minnesota Establishing a horse pasture takes time, patience, and resources. When establishing a horse pasture, site planning is very important (along with soil fertility, seedbed preparation, species selection, weed control, and grazing management). Planning ahead is an important step to take to ensure your pasture is successful and productive for years to come. Topography and Geography of Your Pasture. Individual pastures should not include steeply sloping hillsides, wet lands, soil types that vary greatly; or paddocks that are oriented up and down hillsides. Environmental Concerns Keep horses out of rivers, creeks, swamps, or wetlands. Horses can cause environmental damage, and wet areas are usually home to insects (biting flies and mosquitoes) and poisonous plants. Pasture Size Pastures should be large enough to handle your stocking rate, acreage layout, and grazing system. Rectangular shaped pastures tend to better suit horses as they encourage exercise. The stocking rate (how many horses your pasture can handle) averages 2 acres per horse, however, soils type, grazing management, and weather conditions can influence the stocking rate. Sacrifice Paddock Dry lots, or sacrifice paddocks, provide an opportunity to move horses off the pasture during wet, dry, or times of needed pasture rest. Sacrifice paddocks can vary in size but should provide a minimum of 400 square feet per horse. The size should be increased proportionally as the number of horses increase. Sacrifice paddocks usually include a shelter/shed, water source, and ample area to feed hay free choice. Gate Placement and Fencing Gates should be placed in corners closest to the direction of travel. Gates should be large enough to get equipment and several horses through at once. Avoid placing gates in low areas where water may pool. When selecting a fencing system(s), consider the BASIC rules; budget, appearance, safety, installation and containment. Water Clean, fresh water is a requirement for horses. Place waterers in areas where filling and cleaning is convenient, and if possible, where multiple pastures have access Safety and Common Sense http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/horse/pasture/pasture-site-planning/ 2/28/2017 Pasture site planning : University of Minnesota Extension Page 2 of 2 Design pastures that are safe, work with your pasture size and shape, and make sense for you, your horses, and your farm. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA EXTENSION 8 2017 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/horse/pasture/pasture-site-planning/ 2/28/2017 Member John Ferris introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 93-65 RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO SUBURBAN HENNEPIN REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT FOR RANGER PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER AT BAKER PARK RESERVE WHEREAS, Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District {Applicant} has requested permission to construct a facility containing 3,254 square feet of office space plus 6,863 square feet in a horse barn as a ranger public safety center at Baker Park Reserve; and WHEREAS, the purposed use requires a conditional use permit under the city's zoning ordinance; and WHEREAS, the planning commission reviewed the request on August 10, 1993 and the city council on September 7, 1993 and determined that the purposed use would not interfere with the development of adjacent property. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota that a conditional use permit be granted to the Applicant for the stated purpose, subject to the following conditions; 1. All exterior lighting shall be designed and installed so that the globe is recessed and enclosed on all sides except the bottom and no light is case directly on any other property; 2. The drainage, driveway, parking areas and sewer shall be constructed as approved by the city engineer; 3. The Applicant shall be charged two SAC units for this facility; 4 . The hours of operation shall be 24 hours per day, seven days per week; 5. The number of horses shall not exceed 16; 6. The number of regular staff members shall not exceed 25; MD358659 ME230-191 7. There shall be no renting of horses to the public and no commercial use of the premises or horses allowed; 8. The building shall meet all building and fire code requirements including smoke and heat detectors wired to a central station; 9. Plans for the building must be reviewed and approved by the Maple Plain fire department; 10. A driveway permit must be obtained from Hennepin County; 11. A stop sign must be placed at the intersection of the driveway and County Road 24; 12. There shall be no outside bells, speakers or telephones allowed; 13. The city public works director must be notified before any sewer work is done and advised of the work schedule; 14. Any signs on the property must meet city code requirements; 15. Manure must be removed from the property according to the requirements of the Minnesota pollution control agency; 16. Adequate fencing around the facility must be constructed and maintained in good condition; 17. All exterior trash containers must be screened from view with a material compatible with the building; 18. All mechanical equipment must be screened from view with a material compatible with the building; 19. Parking must be constructed in accordance with the plans submitted and approved by the city; 20. The, metal building in the location of the proposed structure must be removed and the block building may be retained for storage following construction of the proposed structure; 21. The Applicant must respond to the letter from Elizabeth Tillotson, dated August 12, 1993; and 22. The Applicant must pay to the city for administrative expenses the amount determined by the city staff to represent the actual cost to the city for reviewing this conditional use permit. Dated: September 21 , 1993. Anne E. Theis, Mayor RHH58659 ME230-191 ATTEST: The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mayor Anne Theis and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Councilmembers Ferris, Ann Thies, Philip Zietlow and Mayor Theis. and the following voted against same: None Absent: Councilmember James Johnson Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RR858659 ME230-191 Medina City Code 826. Zoning — District Provisions PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC ZONING DISTRICT (PS) Section 826.69. Public/Semi-Public - Purpose. This district shall serve areas of public ownership or related semi-public uses or open space, conservation, or recreation. Section 826.71. (PS) Conditional Uses. Within any Public/Semi-Public District, no structure or land shall be used except by conditional use permit for the following uses: Subd.1. Outdoor recreational and open space uses operated by a governmental agency or conservation group, homeowners or private association and facilities for making same useful to public or association. Public lands, schools, parks and municipal buildings. Subd. 2. Conservation uses including drainage control, forestry, wildlife sanctuaries, and facilities for making same available and useful to public. Subd. 3. Agricultural uses. Subd. 4. Nature study areas and arboretums. Subd. 5. Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities. Section 826.73. (PS) Lot Area, Height, Lot Width, and Yard Requirements. Subd.1. Front Yard Setbacks - 50 feet. Subd. 2. Side and Rear Yard Setbacks - 30 feet. Subd. 3. Height Limitation - 30 feet. 826. Zoning — District Provisions Page 46 of 84 Medina City Code 826. Zoning — District Provisions RURAL RESIDENTIAL 2 ZONING DISTRICT (RR 2) Section 826.26.1. Rural Residential - 2 (RR-2). Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the RR-2 district is to provide a zoning district which is the same as the Rural Residential (RR) district but which also permits commercial riding stables, subject to the conditions in subdivision 2. Subd. 2. In addition to the requirements of Section 825.39 or Sections 827.24 et seq., no commercial riding stable may be established in the RR-2 district except in compliance with the following: (a) minimum lot size is 15 acres including roads and 12 acres excluding roads; (b) minimum lot area is .5 acres per horse kept on the property excluding roads; (c) hard surface coverage may not exceed 40 percent of the lot area, excluding roads. For the purposes of this section, hard surface include structures, paved areas, septic and drainfield areas, driveways and parking areas, outdoor arenas, and paddocks. Hard surface coverage of structures, paved areas, driveways and parking areas may not exceed 10 percent of the lot area excluding roads; (d) there shall be a primary residential structure located on the property; (e) there shall be identified and acceptable primary and alternate septic sites on the property which are sized for the maximum anticipated usage of a commercial stable based on the stable capacity of horses and which follows section 720 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems; (f) all animal feed and bedding shall be stored within an enclosed building; (g) the subject site shall incorporate various Low Impact Design (LID) features and/or Best Management Practices (BMPs) that provide for the most effective means of manure management, such that no net increase in runoff occurs from the site, as determined by the City Engineer. (h) the subject site shall construct a concrete manure containment or composting area, the design of which shall be consistent with the recommendations of the University of Minnesota Extension Service. Owners of a feed lot shall provide a schedule for removal of manure or compost from affected sites, subject to the approval by the City. (i) a grading plan shall be submitted and approved by the City in accordance with the recommendations of the University of Minnesota Extension Service and approved by the City Engineer. Said plan shall clearly demonstrate that storm water runoff from the hard surfaces on the property is directed away from the feed lot area and 826. Zoning — District Provisions Page 20 of 84 Medina City Code 826. Zoning — District Provisions manure containment area, and surrounding wetlands, streams or lakes (if any) and the site must maintain these drainage patterns to the satisfaction of the City; and (j) the site shall install runoff retention and vegetative infiltration systems, consistent with the recommendations of the University of Minnesota Extension Service and as approved by the City, down slope from the feed lot and manure containment area. The vegetation adjacent to any wetlands shall be subject to the city's wetland protection ordinance. (k) diligent effort shall be made to maintain grass in the pastures by limiting use thereof as appropriate and by providing supplemental feed to prevent over grazing, and sites shall institute a pasture management program shall be instituted in accordance with the recommendation of the University of Minnesota Extension Service and as approved by the City. (1) paddocks shall be separated by a minimum distance of 10 feet and planted with grass; (m) all parking shall occur on -site but may not occur on the primary or alternate septic sites or on any green area; (n) the number of shows or other events permitted at the stable will be subject to the requirements of the city's special event ordinance; (o) no outdoor speakers may be used except as permitted by the city council in connection with a special event; (p) all stables shall have indoor sanitary facilities for persons residing or working on the property and must provide supplemental temporary facilities during events and other appropriate times; (q) exterior lighting shall be designed and installed so that the light source is recessed and enclosed on all sides except the bottom so that no light is cast directly or indirectly on any other property and so that the light source cannot be seen from adjacent property; (r) all requirements of the fire code and fire marshal shall be met; (s) trash containers shall be located inside or screened in an acceptable manner; (t) hours of operation and the number of permitted employees will be determined by the city council after consideration of the impact on adjacent properties; (u) food consumed on site at permitted events or shows shall be prepared in accordance with all applicable state and county health codes and regulations; 826. Zoning — District Provisions Page 21 of 84 Medina City Code 826. Zoning — District Provisions (v) there may not be living quarters in a barn unless there is an approved and operational septic system; (w) stable operators are responsible for preventing trespassing on adjacent properties by patrons and horses; (x) the maximum number of horses allowed for the commercial riding stable shall be determined by the city council; and (y) the commercial riding stable site shall have primary access or frontage off a major collector road system or higher classification roadway, as determined by the adopted Functional Classification of Roadways map in the city's comprehensive plan. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. The uses permitted in the RR-2 district are the same as those set forth in Section 826.19 for the RR district. Subd. 4. Conditional Uses. The uses permitted by conditional use permit in the RR-2 district are the same as those set forth in Section 826.21 for the RR district and commercial riding stables. Subd. 5. Permitted Accessory Uses. The accessory uses permitted within the RR-2 district are the same as those set forth in Section 826.23 for the RR district. Subd. 6. Lot Area and Dimensions; Setbacks and Building Heights. The lot area and dimension, setback and building height standards for the RR-2 district are the same as those set forth in Section 826.25 for the RR district, except as Section 826.26.1, Subd. 2, may specify otherwise. In addition, paddocks must be set back a minimum of 10 feet from all property lines except those adjacent to public roads. 826. Zoning — District Provisions Page 22 of 84 J:\PROJECTS\Baker\HorseArena\Baker Public Safety Headquarters.dwg Printed: 2/24/2017 11:24 AM EXISTING INTERIOR ARENA/STABLES (PUBLIC ACCESS) PROPOSED DOOR v Oe 34'-6" ARENA AREA (PUBLIC ACCESS) X EXISTING ENTRANCE - ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE 2 (PUBLIC ACCESS) PROPOSED CONC. WALK EXISTING CONC. WALK EXISTING ENTRANCE - ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE 1 (NO PUBLIC ACCESS) 53'-2" I PUBLIC SAFETY AREA (NO PUBLIC I ACCESS) I ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PROPOSED RIDING ARENA TO ACCESSIBLE PARKING NOTE: OFFICE SPACES SHOWN HATCHED. TOTAL OFFICE AREA (PUBLIC AND NON-PUBLIC ACCESS) = 1,806 SQ. FT. PROPOSED OFFICE/BARN FLOOR PLAN 1/16" = 0' 4' 8' 16' 32' ThreeRivers PARK DISTRICT Public Safety Building Access Modification Baker Park Reserve, Medina, MN Scale: 1" = 16' Date: Feb. 8, 2017 (Rev. 2/28/17) Drawn by: J. Zemke Modifications to Current Office Space Currently the Baker Public Safety building houses our public safety staff and administration. Roughly three years ago we eliminated our mounted patrol. The barn, riding arena and pasture have been vacant since then. A second entrance will be added on the side of the building for access for We Can Ride and participants. An internal door will spate the police functions with the We Can Ride program. Public Safety staff spends most if not all of their shift time in the field patrolling. If additional space is needed, staff can report to different buildings throughout the district to check in and out of work. Aerial photos of current We Can Ride Facility located at 14300 County Road 62, Minnetonka, MN 55345. Area north of the barn is 5.75 acres of pasture used for turn out. Areas east of barns are dry lot paddocks. For the ability to zoom in for more detail, please go to the following website at: http://www.hennepin.us/residents/environment/natural-resources-map-data-reports. You can enter the address and locate a variety of map types including an aerial view, and zoom in or out as you prefer. 2015 2012 Clear span or synthetic arena for Three Rivers Typical size: 65x120 (to compare, our arena is aprox 70x 110). They do offer larger arenas. Cost of building and construction: $70-80k. Does not include utilities, fans, heater, or footing '4.‘„rt. r, • Building can be built at any temperature by an anchoring system — no cement footings needed. Timeframe is 90 day turn around. Other: • They offer in house 0% financing • Frame has 50 year warranty • Cover has 20 year warranty • Cover replacement is about 10% of cost of building • They do offer tear down and rebuild services • Arena is about 15-20 degrees warmer/cooler than outdoor temperature • You can add heaters — infra -red is highly recommended Plotted: 2/28/2017 9:14 AM J:\DESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We can ride FINAL.dwg 0 80 160 Feet -00 F \ j i -- v UTILITY NOTE: THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THE PLAN IS UTILITY LEVEL QUALITY "C", UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF Cl/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY! THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT DOES NOT WARRANT THIS INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANY IS , RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. WARNING CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE DIGGING. 1-800-252-1 166 REQUIRED BY LAW kvj / I — 999 1000 O 0 O z W\ I I WETLAND ACREAGE 0.58 AC WATERBODY ACREAGE 0.39 AC HORSE TRAIL ORIGINAL HORSE TRAIL ALIGNMENT WATERBODY ACREAGE 0.27 AC REMOVE EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVE 10,402 $F LIFT STATION WETLAND ACREAGE 0.18 AC 3 REMOVE EXISTING FENCE J WETLAND ACREAGS 0.02 AC I 0• 0, i z W O RELOCATE ELECTRICAL RECEPTACLES i 7 z REMOVE EXISTING GRAV-Et- PARKING'AREA. 6,809 SF O I REMOVE TREE c0 0 0 .a CMP /\ i I i o� I L r c o / O 1004 " -1005 ,r\ 99� - ------ 9 cY`')) -997-1 998 -999 - Il 000 1002 \•• S 4 L REVISIONS c O +� a L U v 0 N (a L CO I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY • JLU Q Z -o =�0 ~U� a 0 J Zo-u o ujI- F) C 5• HLU o Lu z a.cD �u� U) CC LLI W U J Z 111• oZ E Q w STATE OF MINNESOTA. u a z REG. NO.43560 DATE 2/24/2017 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN 763-559-9000 PHONE 3000 XENIUM LANE NORTH 763-557-5248 FAX PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441 Z 0 H V H Z 0 V ce 0 LL H 0 Z a z L We Can Ride Site Improvements Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed By N S Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Existing Conditions Removals C601 Sheet 01 of 04 Plotted: 2/28/2017 9:14 AM J:\DESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We can ride FINAL.dwg PLAN SYMBOLS LEGEND PARK BOUNDARY COUNTY BOUNDARY CITY/MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PRIVATE BOUNDARY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE RESOURCE PROTECTION EASEMENT TRANSPORTATION EASEMENT UTILITY EASEMENT PROPERTY SETBACK LINE RAILROAD TRACKS TRANSPORTATION CENTERLINE UNKNOWN LINEAR FEATURE (SEE LABEL) GATE, UNSPECIFIED AUTOMATIC VEHICLE ACCESS MANUAL VEHICLE ACCESS BICYCLE ACCESS DOG OFF -LEASH ACCESS FENCE, UNSPECIFIED FENCE, SPECIFIED TYPE BW = BARBED WIRE CL = CHAIN LINK PS = POST AND SPINDLE SR = SPLIT RAIL WW = WOVEN WIRE ELEC = ELECTRIC POLE, W/ GUY ANCHOR POST OR BOLLARD, GRILL GUARDRAIL HANDRAIL SIGN W/ SINGLE, DOUBLE POST ID = SIGN CODE TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR (MAJOR) TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR (MINOR) DITCH OR SWALE BOTTOM (FLOW LINE) DRAINAGE ARROW (FLOW DIRECTION) EDGE OF NORMAL WATER LEVEL FLOODPLAIN LINE WETLAND EDGE, UNSPECIFIED WETLAND EDGE, DELINEATED CONIFEROUS TREELINE DECIDUOUS TREELINE TREE, CONIFEROUS AND DECIDUOUS IRON MONUMENT, CONTROL POINT BENCHMARK," IRON MONUMENT TEST PIT ROW X X X X BW CL PS SR WW X ELEC �0® IM1 O ID ID —0— -0-0- FP D O UTILITY SYMBOLS LEGEND ELECTRIC, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) E UNDERGROUND CABLE E(UG) OVERHEAD CABLE E(OH) MANHOLE, METER, PEDESTAL LIGHT, POLE LIGHT, MARKER POST FUEL, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) GASOLINE/REFINED PETROLEUM GEOTHERMAL HVAC/CONDENSATE NATURAL GAS OIL/UNREFINED PETROLEUM MANHOLE, METER, PEDESTAL F GAS GEOT HVAC NGAS OIL OF F e UNDERGROUND TANK, MARKER POST VALVE (ANY), VENT FUEL F D4 F F F T TELECOM, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) COM UNDERGROUND CABLE—COM(UG) OVERHEAD CABLE—COM(OH) UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC F� (UO) OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC —F 0(OH) MANHOLE, METER PEDESTAL, MARKER POST WATER, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) MANHOLE, METER, PEDESTAL MARKER POST, CLEANOUT VALVE (ANY), CHECK, CONTROL CURB BOX, HYDRANT, WELL DRINKING FOUNTAIN IRRIGATION, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) MANHOLE, METER, PEDESTAL MARKER POST, CLEANOUT VALVE (ANY), CISTERN SPRINKLER HEAD, WELL SANITARY SEWER, UNSPECIFIED GRAVITY PIPING FORCEMAIN PIPING MANHOLE, MARKER, CLEANOUT O W • W W D4 ►4 vf I W e W W W ►4 W O I I I e • D4 F SS SS• SS LIFT STATION, SEPTIC TANK, VENT SS VALVE (ANY), CHECK, CONTROL D4 STORM SEWER, UNSPECIFIED DRAIN TILE SEP SS MANHOLE, MARKER, CLEANOUT 0 4> CATCH BASIN (SQUARE, ROUND) 1=1 • APRON, W/ GRATE, VALVE (ANY) • UTILITY NOTE: THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THE PLAN IS UTILI OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED GUIDELINES OF Cl/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDE AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHOWN ON GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY! THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRIC INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANY IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND GENERAL NOTES 1.) Survey coordinate and bearing basis: Hennepin County Coordinates 2.) No indication of wetland delineation by a qualified wetland specialist has been located or observed on site. Wetland shown is current extents of cattails. 3.) At the time field work was performed for this survey, there was a significant amount of snow on the ground. Physical features were located to the best of our ability, but there may be additional features that were not visible and, therefore, not shown hereon. 0 BENCH MARKS (BM) (NAVD 88 datum) Top of well, in Front of Main entrance to Baker Public Safety Building. Elev = 1005.58 80 160 Feet O a N TY LEVEL QUALITY "C", UNLESS ACCORDING TO THE LINES FOR THE COLLECTION THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR T DOES NOT WARRANT THIS CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE DIGGING. 1-800-252-1166 REQUIRED BY LAW WETLAND BUFFER - NO MOW 1. )V/ c)( ) ( P6)0118 i2e # i 0 7 )( )( )( )( SIGNA7, EVERY 250' WATERBODY ACREAGE 0.39 AC WETLAND ACREAGE 0.58 AC HORSE TRAIL ORIGINAL HORSE TRAIL ALIGNMENT WATERBODY ACREAGE 0.27 AC WETLAND ACREAGE 0.18 AC WETLAND ACREAG 0.02 AC MAILBOX 1004 998 irAai gaol 0 EXISTING PARKING FLAG/POLE LOT, CURBING AND STRIPING PROPOSED SIDEWALK ACCESS EXISTING OFFICE/BARN PROPOSED PADDOCK HORSE SHELTERS, TYP. PROPOSED CONCRETE APRON PROPOSED MANURE BUNKER FIRE ACCESS TURN -AROUND PAVED FIRE ACCESS LANE 9-TON DESIGN 20' LANE, NO CURBING PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK ACCESS PROPOSED ARENA EXISTING MAINTENANCE ROAD PROPOSED RAINGARDEN PROPOSED PASTURE FENCING REVISIONS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY STATE OF MINNESOTA. REG. NO.43560 DATE 2/24/2017 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN 763-559-9000 PHONE 3000 XENIUM LANE NORTH 763-557-5248 FAX PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441 We Can Ride Site Improvements Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed By NS Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Construction Plan Sheet 02 of 04 Plotted: 2/28/2017 9:15 AM J:\DESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We can ride FINAL.dwg UTILITY NOTE: THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THE PLAN IS UTILITY LEVEL QUALITY "C", UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF Cl/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY! THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT DOES NOT WARRANT THIS INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANY IS , RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. WARNING CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE DIGGING. 1-800-252-1 166 REQUIRED BY LAW a a J 00 ((( CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SOIL MIN. ORE WITH SEED MIX 35-241 REMOVE EXISTING GRAVEL SCARIFY TO 12" DEPTH MIN TYPE I MULCH, DISC ANCHORED @ 2 TONS/AC 3 RAIL FENCE AROUND PADDOCK AREA, TYP. SEE DETAIL, SHEET C801 PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN AREA AT BOTTOM = 506.75 SF 6" DRAINTILE PER DETAIL ON SHEET C801. DRAINTILE TO BE CAPPED AT UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS. REVISIONS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY STATE OF MINNESOTA. REG. NO.43560 DATE 2/24/2017 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN 763-559-9000 PHONE 3000 XENIUM LANE NORTH 763-557-5248 FAX PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441 We Can Ride Site Improvements is Safety Site Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed By NS Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Grading Turf Establishment Erosion Control Sheet 03 of 04 Plotted: 2/28/2017 9:15 AM J:\DESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We can ride FINAL.dwg FACE POST NOTCHES AWAY FROM FABRIC. DIRECTION OF RUNOFF C SUPPORT POST WITH IN -SITU SOIL, COMPACT ALL DISTURBED OR LOOSE SOIL TO PROVIDE STABILITY. STEEL FENCE POST, 5' MIN. POST LENGTH, 6' MAX. SPACING BETWEEN POSTS. PLASTIC ZIP TIES 30" HIGH MIN. MS, HI WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, AS PER MnDOT SPEC TABLE 3886-1. FABRIC ANCHORAGE TRENCH, BACKFILL TRENCH WITH TAMPED NATURAL SOIL. Z W z 0 ;:r w N Q NOTES: 1. CONFORM TO MnDOT SPECS 2573 AND 3886. 2. ATTACH FABRIC TO POSTS WITH PLASTIC ZIP TIES (50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH, MIN). PROVIDE A MIN. (3) TIES WITHIN THE TOP 8" OF FABRIC. 3. OVERLAP GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 6", MIN. AND FASTEN AT 2' INTERVALS, MAX. MACHINE SLICED SILT FENCE NTS DISTURBED AREA SHALL. BE SEEDED, FERTILIZED AND COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT. 00. 311 W LAWN EDGING - 5" BLACK POLYETHYLENE LAWN EDGING, USE ONLY NON-METALLIC STAKES TO SECURE EDGING. INSTALL PER MANUFACTURERS DIRECTIONS. DESIGN NOTES: 1. THE PLANTING MEDIA SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET IN DEPTH TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE MATERIAL, AND SOIL AMENDMENTS TO ENSURE THE RAIN GARDEN FUNCTIONS PROPERLY. THE BOTTOM OF THE FEATURE SHOULD BE RIPPED TO A DEPTH OF 15 INCHES. 2. THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.5 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. 3. A DRAWDOWN TEST WILL BE REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF A DRAINTILE WILL BE NECESSARY. THE DRAWDOWN TEST WILL INCLUDE EXCAVATING A TEST HOLE THAT IS 1.5 FEET DEEP AND A MINIMUM 2 FEET IN DIME tR, FILLING IT WITH WATER, AND TIMING THE DRAWDOWN TO VERIFY THAT IT OCCURS WITHIN 98 HOURS OR LESS. 4. DRAINTILE WILL NEED TO OUTLET TO STORM SEWER OR AN OVERLAND DRAINAGE SWALE. 5. THE EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 1.5 FEET ABOVE THE BOTTOM OF THE PROPOSED RAINGARDEN. a F- W N Z 6' MIN. G Go NOTES: 4" CONCRETE PAVEMENT (NO REBAR) 6" CRUSHED CLASS 5 i D 6" MIN. NCRETE PAVEMENT (NO REBAR) 8" CRUSHED CLASS 5 12" MIN. SLOPES VARY BASED ON SOIL TYPE EDGING PLACEMENT VARIES AT EACH FEATURE LOCATION. THIS MEANS THAT TOPSOIL COVERAGE VERSUS MULCH COVERAGE ALSO VARIES AT EACH FEATURE LOCATION 2' - 3' 1,1'Will ,111 1.16,i1'I.I1i,ri,1Pi,1i'i,lil +1,11 I t1 Lill PEA ROCK PLANTING MEDIA THIS MEDIA SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS BASED ON VOLUME: 70°/0 CLEAN SAND, FREE OF DELETERIOUS MATERIAL MN/DOT 3127.2E FA-1 30% ORGANIC LEAF COMPOST MN/DOT 3890.E GRADE 2 EXISTING TURF MULCH GRADING GRADE 3' MINIMUM - MULCH DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF MN/DOT 3882.2 TYPE 6 PREMIUM TOPSOIL BORROW MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF MN/DOT 3877.2C TYPICAL RAIN GARDEN SECTION USES: 1. CONCRETE WALK, PICNIC SLAB, PARK BENCH SLAB OR ACCESS TO COMMON OPEN SPACE. 2. LOCATION ANTICIPATED TO RECEIVE INFREQUENT USE BY LIGHT MACHINERY AND/OR LIGHT VEHICLES. EXISTING TURF 411 8" CONCRETE PAVEMENT (REBAR REQUIRED) 12" CRUSHED CLASS 5 REBAR OR WELDED WIRE MESH (SEE NOTE 5). 1. AGGREGATE BASE SHALL CONFORM TO MnDOT SPEC 2211. 2. CONCRETE SHALL CONFORM TO MnDOT SPECS 2521 AND 2531. 3. CONCRETE SHALL BE FIBER -REINFORCED WHERE SPECIFIED OR INDICATED ON THE PLANS. ADD DISPERSIBLE, ALKALI -RESISTANT FIBERS AT A RATE OF 1.0 LB/ CY TO CONCRETE MIX OR PER FIBER SUPPLIERS RECOMMENDATIONS. AT LOCATIONS WHERE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IS EXPECTED, OPEN SLAB SURFACES SHALL BE STRUCK OFF W/ VIBRATING SCREED OR EQUAL, SUCH THAT FIBERS ARE NOT EXPOSED TO THE SURFACE. 4. ANY LOCATION ANTICIPATED TO RECEIVE MODERATE USE BY HEAVY MACHINERY AND/OR HEAVY VEHICLES IS TO BE DESIGNED SEPARATELY AND SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 5. REBAR OR WELDED WIRE MESH IS TO BE PLACED 4" ABOVE BOTTOM OF CONCRETE AND 3" FROM EDGE OF CONCRETE, (SEE PLANS) FOR REBAR OR WELDED WIRE MESH INFORMATION. 6. SEE PLANS FOR ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF CONCRETE PAVEMENTS. S: PRIVATE DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS, PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS AND DRINKING FOUNTAIN SLAB. ERATE USE BY LIGHT MACHINERY AND/OR LIG'-CILES. - EXISTING TURF USES: MMERCIAL DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS OR MAINTENANCE YARDS. ANTICIPATED TO RECEIVE FREQUENT USE BY LIGHT MACHINERY AND/OR VEHICLES. ANTICIPATED TO RECEIVE INFREQUENT USE BY VY MACHINERY AND/OR HEAVY VEHICLES. CONCRETE PAVEMENT (TRAIL PURPOSES) NOT TO SCALE VARIES FINISH GRADE ^MO 6:3 Sty PREMIUM 'TOPSOIL BORROW 3'' 6" PERFORATED DRAINTILE IF REQUIRED (SEE DESIGN NOTES) PROVIDE A 6" MULCH BUFFER ZONE FROM THE LAWN EDGING INWARD. KEEP THIS AREA FREE FROM PLANTINGS (INCLUDING PLANTS AT MATURE SIZE). APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION MEASURES SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE CURB CUT. THIS MAY INCLUDE SOD, TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT, ETC. ROUND END OR LINE POST APPROX. 5" X 96", TYP. ROUNDED RAIL, AS MANUFACTURED BY "FOUR SEASONS LOCKING RAIL" OR APPROVED EQUAL. APPROXIMATELY 4" IN GIRTH, TYP. A \) \4 A \/\/ J\4 \/\? J`PNI \I [-de-- 10', TYP. POST SPACING a 0 VARIES 1:10 SLOPE ROUND TRANSITION BETWEEN SLOPES DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE SEEDED, FERTILIZED AND COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, CAT. 3, z 0_ w ›- W AA 1 NOTES: 1. ALL COMPONENTS TO BE ACQ-TREATED PINE, TYPE "FOUR SEASONS LOCKING LOG RAIL" AS MANUFACTURED BY K FENCE OR APPROVED EQUAL. 2. RAILS TO BE ROUNDED ACQ-TREATED PINE. 3. POSTS TO BE DIRECT BURIED AND TAMPED. 4. RAIL -TO -POST JOINERY TO BE SCARFED -END RAILS WITH LAPPED INSTALLATION. 5. ALL COMPONENTS TO BE PRE -ASSEMBLED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE TO REDUCE, ON -SITE DRILLING, CUTTING, PLUGGING OR SANDING. TR-21 THREE RAIL FENCE NTS i 1 APPROX. 96" POST HEIGHT EXTEND BASE 12", MIN. TYPE SPWEB240B WEAR COURSE, 2" COMPACTED THICKNESS, MIN. TYPE SPNWB230B BASE COURSE, 3" COMPACTED THICKNESS, MIN. CL5 AGGREGATE BASE, 8" COMPACTED THICKNESS, MIN. SEED MnDOT MIX 25-141 @ 60 LB/AC, TYP. RESTORE SHOULDER AREA WITH TOPSOIL, CONFORMING TO MnDOT SPEC 3877. 6" THICKNESS, MIN. (MINIMIZE COMPACTION). COMPACT EXISTING SUBGRADE. TYPICAL RURAL BITUMINOUS ROAD SECTION NTS REVISIONS c O +� a. L U v 0 N (a 0 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY • J LU Q Z How =�0 ~U� a 0 J Q ww z O uj CT) CCLt 5• Ho Lu z a.(D Dw� U)CCw w U J Z_ coo E Q w STATE OF MINNESOTA. W 2 z REG. NO.43560 DATE 2/24/2017 DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN 763-559-9000 PHONE 3000 XENIUM LANE NORTH 763-557-5248 FAX PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441 L W We Can Ride Site Improvements Public Safety Site Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed By N S Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Details C801 Sheet 04 of 04 Agenda Item # 8A MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: March 30, 2017 MEETING: April 4, 2017 City Council SUBJ: LJP Development LLC. - 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Background LJP Development, LLC has requested a Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning for property located at 1432 Baker Park Road (County Road 29). The applicant requests a change of the future land use in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan from Commercial to High Density Residential and a Rezoning from Commercial -Highway to R-4, Limited High Density Residential. The draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan proposes to change the future land use to High Density Residential, so the proposed amendment would be generally consistent with the direction the City is heading. However, the applicant seeks to begin development sooner than the Comprehensive Plan update will be in effect. The subject property is approximately 2.12 acres in size, located north of Highway 12 on the east of County Road 29. An existing house and detached garage are currently located on the site. A multi -tenant commercial building is located to the south, a single-family home to the north, the City of Maple Plain is across County Road 29 and Baker Park Reserve to the east. The residential property to the north is guided similarly to the subject site and is also proposed to be changed to High Density Residential in the draft Comprehensive Plan update. The City Council reviewed at the March 7, 2017 meeting and directed staff to confer with the Metropolitan Council related to potential impacts on how the interim amendment may affect the forecasts within the broader Comprehensive Plan update when it is submitted. The City Council considered this feedback at the March 21, 2017 meeting and tabled the matter to continue discussion. The Council also directed staff to draft documents which would deny the request for review at the April meeting. Staff Feedback During the review of this request, there has been a great deal of discussion about whether memory care/nursing home units are considered dwellings for the sake of Metropolitan Council forecasts/requirements and whether their interpretation is appropriate. It has become apparent that while this consideration may be important within the context of broader housing and land use policy for the City and region, it is not particularly relevant to the decision now before the City. LJP Development, LLC Page 1 of 3 April 4, 2017 Comp Plan and Rezoning City Council Meeting The City is being requested to make the subject 2 acres available for development under the current 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan and the applicant has stated that the reason for the amendment is to allow construction during 2017. The Met Council has indicated that during the review of the decennial update, only property which is planned for development after the effective date of the update should be counted towards the acreage which is counted towards the City's affordable housing requirements. Development occurring prior to the Plan update should not be included in the amount. As a result, even if the units were counted, it would not be towards the City's required allocation under the decennial Plan update. The Met Council sector representative has suggested that the City may have some flexibility within the draft Plan. The draft Plan currently forecasts a minimum of 256 higher -density housing units, and the updated City allocation is 244 units. Development of 2 acres of property at this time would reduce the City's forecast under the draft Plan update to 232. The City may be able to make a strong argument that such a forecast is not inconsistent with the Met Council system statement, especially since the draft Plan also permits higher density development in the Uptown Hamel area but does not explicitly forecast additional units in this area. The amendment would introduce some uncertainty in the review process. In addition, it should be noted that the Plan update is still in process and has not yet been approved. It is possible that the City will receive comments during the jurisdictional review and preliminary Metropolitan Council review that may lead the City to consider changes to the draft Plan update. Flexibility within the land use plan may be an asset if the City wants to continue deliberation of the Plan. The draft Plan update may include errors or oversights which may need to be addressed. One of the other concerns raised by staff was the possibility that approving of a Comp Plan amendment during the review process may encourage other applicants to consider similar requests. In the meantime, the City received a request related to the adjacent HDR property for a similar amendment. This adjacent Comprehensive Plan request has subsequently been withdrawn as a result of the City's discussions, largely because the applicant was not intending to begin development until 2018. Review Criteria The City has the highest amount of discretion when reviewing Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Amendments should be consistent with and serve the overall vision and goals of the City. Because the City is in the midst of the 2020-2040 Plan update, it is reasonable to review the request within context of both the existing Plan and the draft Plan update. Staff has previously provided relevant information from both Plans. According to 825.35 of the zoning code: "[zoning] amendments shall not be issued indiscriminately but shall only be used as a means to reflect changes in the goals and policies of the community as reflected in the Plan or changes in conditions in the City." In this case, if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved, the rezoning would be appropriate in order to implement the change. LJP Development, LLC Page 2 of 3 April 4, 2017 Comp Plan and Rezoning City Council Meeting Potential Action The City Council has directed staff to prepare documents to either approve or deny the request for their consideration. If the Council finds that the requested Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning has the potential to negatively affect the planning process and the ability of the City to implement its land use planning objectives and land use regulations and/or if the Council finds that the amendment and rezoning do not serve the objectives or are inconsistent with the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan, the following motion would be in order: Move to adopt the Resolution Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning for LJP Development LLC at 1432 Baker Park Road. On the other hand, if the Council finds that the Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning do not have the potential to negatively affect the process and that the request is consistent with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the following motions would be in order: Move to adopt the Resolution Approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 1432 Baker Park Road. Move to adopt the Ordinance Rezoning 1432 Baker Park Road to the Limited High Density Residential zoning district. Move to adopt the Resolution authorizing publication of the Rezoning ordinance by title and summary Attachments 1) Letter from Scott Baker 2) Resolution denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning 3) Resolution approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment 4) Ordinance approving Rezoning 5) Resolution authorizing publication of the Rezoning ordinance by title and summary LJP Development, LLC Page 3 of 3 April 4, 2017 Comp Plan and Rezoning City Council Meeting March 30, 2017 Mayor Robert Mitchell and Members of the City Council City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dear Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council, am writing this letter as the owner of land ("Baker Property"} abutting the proposed LJP Development LLC matter before the City Council on April 4th. Unfortunately, I am currently out of the country and will be traveling on business on April 4tn The staff report of March 21, 2017 mentioned that prior to the City's review of the LJP application March 7, 2017 that another application was received for comp plan and rezoning on adjacent land to the east for "nursing home/assisted living//independent living". In fact, that applicant is Elim Care Foundation (Elim). Elim met initially with City staff on December 20, 2016 and their discussion included assisted living memory care as an integral part of their possible full program on the Baker Property. In light of the LJP application, Elim, a nationally recognized Minnesota based non-profit provider of elder care, decided to place their application on hold and instead submit for City concept plan review, which is scheduled for the Planning Commission on April 11, 2017 with the intent to bring their plan before the City Council in May 2017. For the past year Elim has had the Baker Property under contract with the intent to relocate their Maple Plain facilities to Medina and commence construction in the spring of 2018 on the first phase of what could potentially be a two phase project. The timing and the scope of the Elim Phase 1 and Phase 2 plan is dependent on final market studies, public approvals and the constraints of the Baker Property, which consist of approximately 4.8 acres of wetlands. I support the City's Comp Plan revision and believe that the Elim project would offer opportunities for diversity of housing, preserve wetlands, rural vistas and open spaces consistent with the City Staging and Growth Plan in the SW quadrant beginning in 2018. I understand the housing living unit definition constraint posed by the Metropolitan Council but believe the Elim Phased Plan for the Baker Property offers alignment with the City's growth objectives and the Comp Plan unit count goal for the SW quadrant in a measurable way. Three important points for the City Council to consider: 1. The Baker property is 14.23 acres but due to the wetland, wetland setbacks and wetland buffers required in the Code there is only 9.42 acres of buildable area on the Baker Property. Based on a City density of 12 -15 units per acre the site unit count would be 113 -141 units, well short of the 250 units planned by the City for the total SW quadrant. 2. Applying the 12 -15 dwelling unit density to the gross 14.23 acres, 171 - 213 units could be developed on the Baker Property of which 109 — 134 units would count toward the City's SW quadrant goal. Additional units would need to come from other SW quadrant properties. 3. In reading the staff reports and viewing the City Council meeting on line it is my understanding that the LJP Property was referenced as "just in case land" and " acreage contingency" to insure that the Plan unit count is met within reason, if the Baker Property cannot generate the number of required units. Since the Baker Property under any scenario is constrained with the wetland limitation and cannot produce the required units, it would seem advisable to seek some capacity for units that count on the LJP Property. It is important to emphasize that my input regarding the LJP matter is not based on their request for a guiding or zoning change. While Elim's program and continued interest in the Baker Property does require them to provide a continuum of care, which I whole heartedly support, a secondary concern I have is helping the City avoid making false assumptions about the potential density of my property and to recognize that an Elim phased project will be of significant importance to the City in achieving the City's Plan for the SW quadrant. A few final points: 1. Elim has an established base of patient care in Maple Plain and many other cities and states and would like to expand to the City of Medina with the intent to reposition their Maple Plain property and relocate that current resident base to the new state of the art, full continuum facility located in the City of Medina. 2. A Phase 1 facility will bring a minimum of 150 full time staff members to the City and could take advantage of the Park and Ride location in proximity to the site. Additionally, family members and volunteers could also utilize the transportation as well. 3. Elim has the financial capacity to perform under an approved plan for which they have commenced the City Planning and Council review process. I would appreciate any consideration the City Council might give to the points raised in this letter. A representative of Elim will be in attendance at the April 4th Council meeting to answer any questions. Thank you. Sincerely. Scott Baker Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION 2017-## RESOLUTION DENYING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING FOR LJP DEVELOPMENT LLC AT 1432 BAKER PARK ROAD WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Granite Investments, LLC (the "Owner"), is the fee owner land within the City which is located at 1432 Baker Park Road (the "Property") and is legally described as: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 30, Township 118North, Range 23 West of the 5* Principal. Meridian described as follows. Beginning at a point on the west line of said Northwest Quarter distant 813.00 feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence east at right angles a distance of472 feet; thence south at right angles adistance of 231.00 feet; thence west at right angles a distance of 472.00 feet to said west line of the Northwest Quarter; thence north along said west line to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, the Property is guided for a Commercial land use in the Comprehensive Plan and zoned Highway Commercial; and WHEREAS, the City is currently in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan as required by state statute every ten years; and WHEREAS, LJP Development, LLC (the "Applicant") has requested that the City amend its current Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use of the Property to High Density Residential and rezone the Property to R-4, Limited High Density Residential (the "Requests"); and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning requests at the March 7, 2017, March 21, 2017 and April 4, 2017 meetings; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact with regards to the Requests: 1) The City is currently considering the decennial update to its Comprehensive Plan as required by law, a process that involved months of public involvement, analysis, and deliberation and is still underway. Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 2) The decennial update to the Comprehensive Plan involves review by affected jurisdictions as well as by the Metropolitan Council prior to final approval by the City. Such review or other factors may still necessitate certain changes to the Comprehensive Plan update. Consideration of an amendment during this process has the potential to negatively affect the planning process and the ability of the City to implement its land use planning objectives and land use regulation. 3) Following adoption of the decennial update to the Comprehensive Plan, the City intends to make orderly changes to its official controls for similarly situated properties rather than making changes in a piecemeal fashion. 4) The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, considered on its own, is not consistent with the objectives and population forecasts of the Comprehensive Plan. 5) Absent approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the proposed rezoning to the R-4 zoning district is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Medina, Minnesota that the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning are each hereby denied. Dated: April 4, 2017. By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION 2017-## RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR LJP DEVELOPMENT LLC AT 1432 BAKER PARK ROAD WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Granite Investments, LLC (the "Owner"), is the fee owner land within the City which is located at 1432 Baker Park Road ("the Property") and is legally described as: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 30, Township 118North, Range 23 West of the 5* Principal. Meridian described as follows: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Northwest Quarter distant 813.00 feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence east at right angles a distance of472 feet; thence south at right angles adistance of 231.00 feet; thence west at right angles a distance of 472.00 feet to said west line of the Northwest Quarter; thence north along said west line to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, the Property is guided for a Commercial land use in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City is currently updating its Comprehensive Plan as required by state statute every ten years; and WHEREAS, the Property has been guided for a High Density Residential land use in the draft of the Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, LJP Development, LLC (the "Applicant") has requested that the City amend its current Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use of the Property to High Density Residential consistent with the anticipated change in the draft Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and recommended approval of the amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the amendment at the March 7, 2017 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Medina, Minnesota that a comprehensive plan amendment to re -guide the Property to Limited High Density Residential in the Land Use Plan as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto, is hereby approved subject to the following terms and conditions: Resolution No. 2017-## 1 April 4, 2017 1) The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment shall not be effective until reviewed by neighboring jurisdictions, approved by the Metropolitan Council, and subsequently adopted by the City Council. 2) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the proposed amendment and the cost of taking such other actions as are necessary to effectuate the proposed amendment. Dated: March 21, 2017. By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017-## 2 April 4, 2017 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Map 5-3 is hereby amended as follows: tald'OE'l alen E8 dH#J'WS4 aauZ '1,17.f1 LIOZ'94 a:ea dery rs•owz veal lia2'Ly l¢assei aueumuswp'Pasodald 'Pay4;an ivied BQ WOW% Paa'loan Anse ^.ewpwa4leniap' •astaald ylaoysd Lou si dose sad, vo s 17i. IeituaFiaay klwaa yb: y Pata-17 4em-70-144691 114P4M1 ,Lopivas Pasola ym O'vlgnd-loves aggnd - and g vado leu016aa Jo BieiS uoliewDaa .Je sired 1.111 (33Z1d) uo!teao:aa eien!,s1 Egg %meng [euysnpui ssaupng mouav - Ylfl 5Y - L ssa•-lisna - asr paxin _ yin 9 - 5 C OSP PDXin VoCt O£ - ! se8 Ausuaa 0, H _ Yin 6b'9 - 9'£ eaa A7,suaa -1+ IPA . V!fl IW C • O'L 9 ay RLIs J aka nn0i OEOZ ispd-buidotoon anvnauby Ienuapisaa luny !Lipid aNno ueid esn pue-i eimind VNI03W Z-S dew {tau aaoe S L 'ssoJ6 same g L.'E) lei;uepgse8 4suaci 1.16iy paptun o} ienJau uJoo a6ueya pasodoad M Pages 5-7 through 5-11 are amended as follows: The Guide Plan Medina's Future Land Use Plan, Map 5-2, is shaped by the City's General Land Use Development Policies, and the Land Use Goals and Strategies identified in Chapter 1 which keep a large portion of Medina rural and protect the City's natural resources while accommodating compact, systematic growth in strategic areas. Table 5-B below demonstrates the expected 20301and uses in the community. TABLE 5-B Future Land Use Plan Land Use Designation Gross Area Net Area Acres Percent Acres Percent Agricultural (AG) 251 1.4% 180 1.0% Rural Residential (RR) Low Density Residential (LDR) 7,827 923 45.2% 5.3% 4,978 614 28.7% 3.5% Medium Density Residential (MDR) 451 2.6% 307 1.8% High Density Residential (HDR) 123 0.7% 103 0.6% Limited High Density Residential (LHDR) Mixed Use (MU) 2 338 0.0% 1.9% 2 234 0.0% 1.3% Mixed Use - Business (MU-B) 59 0.3% 39 0.2% Developing Post-2030 444 2.6% 337 1.9% Commercial (C) /127 425 2.5% 308 306 1.8% General Business (GB) 580 3.3% 375 2.2% Industrial (IB) 68 0.4% 48 0.3% Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) 192 106 0.6% Public Semi -Public (PSP) 279 1.6% 177 1.0% Parks and Recreation 93 0.5% 46 0.3% Parks and Recreation - Regional or State 2,519 14.5% 1,528 8.8% Private Recreation (PREC) 358 2.1 % 272 1.6% Open Space (OS) 208 1.2% 153 0.9% Rights -of -Way 912 5.1 % 912 5.1 % Lakes 1,283 7.4% 1,283 7.4% Wetlands and Floodplains 5,335 30.8% Future Land Use Designations Agricultural (AG) identifies areas which are part of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program and are reserved for agricultural uses as a long-term land use. This area is not planned to be served by urban services and allows no more than one lot per forty acres. Resolution No. 2017-## 4 April 4, 2017 Rural Residential (RR) identifies areas for low -intensity uses, such as rural residential, rural commercial, farming, hobby farms, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. This area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by this Plan and requires each lot to have five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems. Developing Post-2030 identifies areas for future urban development in the City that will be provided municipal sewer and water services. This area is primarily concentrated around the City of Loretto and is presently planned for each lot to have five contiguous acres of acceptable soils. The purpose of the Developing Post-2030 designation is to communicate the future planning intentions to the community. Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units per acre and 3.49 units per acre which are served or are intended to be served by urban services. The primary use in this area is single-family residential development. The areas designated for low density residential uses are located near to existing low density residential uses, natural resources and provide a transition between higher density residential districts and the permanent rural areas of the community. Medium Density Residential (MDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 3.5 units per acre and 6.99 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses in this designation will be a mix of housing such as single family residential, twin homes, town homes, and row homes. This designation provides a transition area between the commercial and retail uses along the TH 55 corridor and the single-family uses. High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 7.0 units per acre and 30 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include duplexes, triplexes, town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. This designation is identified in areas that are generally accessible to transportation corridors and commercial uses. Limited High Density Residential (LHDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 units per acre and 15 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include duplexes, triplexes, town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. This designation is identified in areas that are generally accessible to transportation corridors and commercial uses. Mixed -Use (MU) provides opportunities for multiple, compatible uses on a single site including a residential component and one or more of the following: general business, commercial, office and public semi-public uses in each case where the primary use is residential. The areas designated with this land use will have residential densities between 3.5 units per acre and 6.99 units per acre over a minimum of half of the developable area. The mixed -use areas are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services in the future. Resolution No. 2017-## 5 April 4, 2017 Mixed -Use Business (MU-B) provides opportunities for multiple, compatible uses on one site including two or more of the following: residential, general business, commercial, or office. Residential densities in this designation will be between 7.0 units per acre and 45.0 units per acre across the entire area and may include some vertically integrated uses. The mixed -use business areas will be served by urban services. Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments; can include commercial, office and retail uses; is concentrated along the TH 55 corridor and are served or will be served by urban services. General Business (GB) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including light industrial and retail uses. This designation identifies larger tracts of land that are suitable for office and business park developments and are served or will be served by urban services. Industrial Business (IB) identifies areas that are currently used for manufacturing or processing of products and refers to lighter industrial uses in the community. The area is concentrated on TH 55 to allow access to primary transportation corridors and is served by urban services. Parks and Recreation includes parks and public recreational open space. Baker Regional Park has a significant impact on planning due to its size and attraction to those living outside of the City. Private Recreation (PREC) refers to areas that are currently used for recreational uses, are held under private ownership including a campground and golf courses and could be expanded to include other recreational uses that are not publicly maintained. Limited numbers of residential uses will be included within this land use designation. Open Space (OS) identifies public or privately held property protected as open space and includes known conservation easements, significant preserved natural resources and other areas that are protected through active measures. Public Semi -Public includes governmental, religious, educational, and cemetery uses. Rights -of -Way (ROW) refer to all public or private vehicular, transit, pedestrian, or rail rights - of -way. Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) identifies an area that was previously used for a sanitary landfill but is now closed. The land is owned by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and special land use regulations apply to the property. Resolution No. 2017-## 6 April 4, 2017 Net Residential Density The residential land uses described above creates a wide range of housing options. The Future Land Use Plan allows a fairly broad range of densities within the sewered residential land uses. The following tables illustrate a possible range of net residential density within the sewered residential land uses. TABLE 5-C Net Residential Density (Assuming Lowest of Density Range) Land Use # of Units Gross Acres Acres Undevelopablet Net Acres Commercial Net Acres Residential Net Density (Units/Acre) A B C D E=B-(C+D) AIE Existing LDR 486 346 55 291 1.7 Existing MDR 497 181 17 164 3.0 Existing HDR 140 17 2 15 9.3 Future LDR 646 577 254 323 2.0 Future MDR 501 270 126 143 3.5 Future HDR 616 106 18 88 7.0 Future LHDR 26 2.15 0 2.15 12.0 Future MU2 408 338 105 116 1162 3.5 Future MU-B3 273 59 20 393 7.0 TOTAL 3,567 3593 1 8941896 597 116 1,181 1183 3.01 1 Acres Undevelopable include wetlands, floodplains, and steep slope 2 The Mixed Use (MU) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over at least half of the developable area 3 The Mixed Use -Business (MU-B) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over the entire developable area TABLE 5-D Net Residential Density (Assuming Middle of Density Range) Land Use # of Units Gross Acres Acres Undevelopable) Net Acres Commercial Net Acres Residential Net Density (Units/Acre) A B C D E=B-(C+D) AIE Existing LDR 486 346 55 291 1.7 Existing MDR 497 181 17 164 3.0 Existing HDR 140 17 2 15 9.3 Future LDR 872 577 254 323 2.7 Future MDR 715 270 126 143 5.0 Future HDR 880 106 18 88 10.0 Future LHDR 29 2.15 0 2.15 13.5 Future MU2 580 338 105 116 1162 5.0 Future MU-B3 390 59 20 393 10.0 TOTAL 4460 4589 1 8941896 597 116 1,181 1183 3.85 1 Acres Undevelopable 2 The Mixed Use (MU) 3 The Mixed Use -Business include wetlands, land use requires (MU-B) land use floodplains, and steep residential units equivalent requires residential slope to the minimum density units equivalent to the minimum over at least half of the density over the developable area entire developable area Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 7 Table 5-F is amended as follows: Table 5-F Land Use in 5-Year Increments Land Use Designation Allowed Density Ranges Min I Max Existing 2008 2010 2015 2020 12025 2030 %Change 2010-2030 Residential Uses (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) -Rural Residential 2.5 acres or less 212 212 212 212 212 0% -Rural Residential 2.5 -10 acres 1 U/10A TBD1 2197 2207 2217 2227 2237 1.8% -Rural Residential 10-40 acres 1 U/40A 1 U/10A 3591 3661 3683 3713 3743 4.5% - Rural Residential 40+ acres 1 U/40A 1835 1755 1715 1675 1635 -10.9% -Agricultural 40+ acres 1 U/40A 251 251 251 251 251 0% Subtotal Unsewered Low Density Residential (LDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) 8086 2 3.49 346 3.5 6.9 181 8086 8086 600 713 326 451 8078 890 451 8078 923 451 8078 0% 923 54% 451 38% High Density Residential (HDR) 7 30 17 21 21 21 21 123 486% Limited High Density Residential LHDR Mixed Use (MU)2 Mixed Use — Business (MU-B)3 12 3.5 15 6.9 0 0 0 80 2 166 2 166 2 239 2 338 0% 323% 7 45 5 59 59 59 59 59 0% Future Developing Areas 1 U/10A 2501 1954 1372 982 Commercial Uses Commercial (C) General Business (GB) Industrial (IB) 246 256 92 92 349 347 214 380 378 396 771 444 -77% 380 378 501 /127 425 579 67% 529% 25 25 68 68 Institutional Uses Public Semi -Public (PSP) Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation — Regional/State .................................................................... Private Recreation (PREC) Open Space (OS) Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) 271 271 271 279 68 68 172% 279 279 0% 93 93 93 93 93 93 0% 2519 2519 2519 2519 2519 2519 0% 358 358 358 358 358 358 0% 208 208 208 208 208 208 0% 192 192 192 192 192 192 0% Right -of -Ways 912 Lakes 1,283 Wetlands and Floodplains 5,335 Total City 17,335 Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 8 CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REZONE 1432 BAKER PARK ROAD TO R4-LIMITED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THE CITY COUNCIL OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The official zoning map of the City of Medina is hereby amended to change the zoning classification of the following legally described property from CH, Commercial - Highway to R4, Limited High Density Residential, as displayed on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section. 30, Township 11$North, Range 23 West of the Sth Principal Meridian described as follows: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Northwest Quarter distant 813.00 feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence east at right angles a distance of472 feet; thence south at right angles adistance of 231.00 feet; thence west at right angles a distance of 472.00 feet to said west line of the Northwest Quarter; thence north along said west line to the point of beginning. Section 2. The City of Medina Zoning Administrator is hereby directed to publish the ordinance and make the changes to the official zoning map of the City of Medina to reflect the change in zoning classification only upon adoption of a Comprehensive Plan amendment guiding the property to Limited High Density Residential. Section 3. A copy of this Ordinance and the updated map shall be kept on file at the Medina City Hall. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, adoption of the above - referenced Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and publication. Adopted by the Medina City Council this 4th day of April, 2017. CITY OF MEDINA By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on this day of , 2017. Ordinance No. ### 1 April 4, 2017 EXHIBIT A Map Displaying Property Rezoned to R4 SL:0 0-0 0Z-0 0 66f}Z'£Z Annuar :pelepdn deW (sluauldvIanaq uun pauucgd) sand ultiwo.Aaiadold Oulp 06ai uKeuuayu1 al0LU la, i£494-£L1,f9L) yuawlul:daq 6uluueld a4k zz.eluaa aseald (and) luoludophda lun por.uuld (z-Hn) Z IO+EH. w+oldn ()ii(1) t iommH iwnidn - (nwi asn Paw (arv) laluaplse8 Alwej aldlllnlry - ('ea) Allsuap P IN-le!Iuaplsaa 6ulpued $uiuoiel -al in :SiO le0u0plsaa Alrwea-01N Pue aRulg _ Rulpued Ruln(3x l - LZI 4d)1erlua*A113 j a:Rws (8n) lepu opraaa ueQ1n I (a3) INUOR.1aoa umPngng ikin-a2U enlesea uegln-lalueplsea lend = (Z-va) z IlaplaPrsea hind iLbe) I• le.Iu@P!>aa Iona (.4d) le lug p sakl le1nu (eyj aAIDSald lslnllnoV W (esleA01 en) reweplseeu0N pua6ai f iegL.13pseu) devg Buiuvz VN1CI3 W NitAa+ 0 9 A 1 11� 3AN��a 711PNV_4„..yh NAZg-a l ` J it{II L .�3 oJr3-u15 Pr a:oa A_LNrlIn M1t].i�lf l:i -wn:ee (peoN ed Jeri 8 salryy l 4E 0 5.0 50.0 0 KOZ '£Z fuenuer velepdn dew (swewdowep vwt> peuueld) sand uiy;un4Pedold (31.1Arsetu uogeuua}ulaJow Jo}f£tr54-£1b-£9L1 }uaLUWe(la(t 3uhiueid ay} icewo7 aseafd (15) IluPur knueS _ (Ho)d1 5(qc cH leeuawumo a na (idea) Oulp}01{ ssau5ne lelna (ands luatocioRnao thin peuucd fob) weuao-lepew wo3 (Lail -Hp) Peculleb-demy[iIH lelmel- w0D — (HO) Avv(45I11-feiwawwo3 - (elf) )fled Ie>•lsnpul (a) sseuls% - (At) )Wed ssauisng 11= (5d2#)04411dlwesfaiind leln8 - (Shc d-rwaSP!Ignd (Z-Hfl) Z IaweH umaldn {E-HFI) 6-IaweH umg4n - (nw) esn paxmi (Z-88) Z-Iequep{sa l IeJna (Dv; eruaseid Iemllr-qu®v' _ as.(em eas - faltueplsab pua6a-) Oe!weNsaa-uaN) dew Cuijuvz VNIa3W O ct • O t O(Z4 ct a a o � O 0O N V M k+ralasii f4 — —IT _—T 111rv115- HJ V° 7c dIH3 lh3edl- u�•ry lip. s 4444E u4o- �I OYOtl (Paoi3 wad »}le8 Z£44) _ ted o; pauoaai aq o1 AVadoJd M Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-## RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. ### BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ### an ordinance amending the official zoning map to rezone 1432 Baker Park Road to R4-Limited High Density Residential; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes § 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is three pages in length and includes a map; and WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. ### to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the ordinance in its entirety: Public Notice The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ###, an ordinance amending the official zoning map to rezone 1432 Baker Park Road to R4-Limited High Density Residential. The full text of Ordinance No. ### is available from the city clerk at Medina city hall during regular business hours. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection and that she post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Resolution No. 2017-## April 4, 2017 Dated: April 4, 2017. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2017-## 2 April 4, 2017 Agenda Item # 8B MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: March 16, 2017 MEETING: April 4, 2017 SUBJ: Medina Mini -Storage — Setback Violation/Covenant Background Construction has been completed on the three new buildings at Medina Mini -Storage at 4780 Rolling Hills Road. After construction, the City found that the applicant and builder shifted the location of the northern building to the north. This change was not shown on any plans submitted to the City and was done without City review or approval. The location does not abide by the required setback from residential property. The property to the north within the City of Corcoran is residential. City staff discussed potential enforcement actions for the violation. Potential actions could include requiring demolition of the portion of the structure in violation, fine, or other actions to mitigate damage caused by the violation. After considering the potential enforcement actions, staff believed it would be reasonable to require extra plantings on the berm to the north of the building to mitigate the reduced setback. In addition, staff recommends recording the attached covenant which ensures the property owner maintains the landscaping, and also makes it clear that the building was built in violation of requirements and is not "grand fathered." The building would not be able to be replaced in the same location if destroyed. Potential Action Staff wanted to inform the Council of the situation, present the covenant, and confirm that the Council concurs with the actions described. If the Council concurs, staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the attached covenant. Attachments 1) Covenant Medina Mini -Storage Page 1 of 1 April 4, 2017 Setback Violation/Covenant City Council Meeting DECLARATION REGARDING SCREENING LANDSCAPING This Declaration Regarding Screening Landscaping dated this day of , 2017, is made by Highway 55 Rental Portable Storage, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the "Declarant"). The following recitals are a material part of this Declaration and are incorporated herein. RECITALS A. The city of Medina (the "City") is a Minnesota municipal corporation and has adopted a zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations to control the development of the community. B. The Declarant is the fee owner of the property (the "Property") legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. C. On November 17, 2015, the City granted site plan review of the Declarant's proposal to expand the self -storage facility on the Property. D. The Declarant subsequently expanded the facility on the Property but Building 3 was constructed 69 feet from the north property line and in violation of the approved site plan. E. The City's zoning ordinance requires that buildings on land zoned and guided as the Property is must be set back from adjacent residential properties at least 75 feet. F. The land to the north of the Property is located in Corcoran and zoned residential. G. The City and the Declarant wish to ameliorate the impact of Building 3 being closer to the north line of the Property than allowed without requiring that the building be removed or granting any form of approval of the location of Building 3. For the reasons set forth herein, the Declarant makes the following covenants and declarations with regard to the Property. 1. The Declarant agrees to install landscaping north of Building 3 in order to screen the building from the adjacent residential property. The landscaping shall include such materials and be installed in such location on the Property as provided for in the landscaping plan attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Declarant agrees to maintain the landscaping and replace any element of it which dies, becomes diseased or is destroyed. The obligation to maintain the landscaping shall be perpetual or until such time as the City shall consent, in writing, to its modification or removal. 2. The Declarant understands and acknowledges that Building 3 is and remains in violation of the City's zoning ordinance with regard to the required setback from the north boundary of the Property. The City has not granted a variance or any other approval regarding the location of Building 3. The setback of Building 3 from the 1 496240v1 ME230-619 north line of the Property is not a legal non -conformity and is not afforded any of the protections of Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subd. le or City code. 3. The Declarant shall reimburse the City for all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, in drafting and negotiating this Declaration and in its enforcement. 4. The terms and conditions of this Declaration shall be binding on the Declarant and its successors and assigns and shall run with the Property. 5. This Declaration may not be modified or terminated without the prior written approval of the City. The Declarant has signed this Declaration on the date first written above. HIGHWAY 55 RENTAL PORTABLE STORAGE, LLC By: Jeffrey Pederson, Chief Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2017, by Jeffrey Pederson, chief manager of Highway 55 Rental Portable Storage, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company. Notary Public 2 496240v1 ME230-619 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property That part of Government Lot 1, Section 4, Township 118, Range 23, lying north of State Highway No. 55, except that part of the east 380 feet of the west 778 feet as measured at right angles of said Government Lot 1 lying south of the north 300 feet thereof, as measured at right angles. All in Hennepin County, Minnesota A-1 496240v1 ME230-619 EXHIBIT B Landscaping Plan B-1 496240v1 ME230-619 Agenda Item # 8C MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: March 30, 2017 MEETING: April 4, 2017 City Council Meeting SUBJ: 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan Update — Housing Allocation Update Background The City Council reviewed the draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan update at the January 3 and February 7 meetings and directed staff to route the Plan to affected jurisdictions for review at the February 21 meeting. In preliminary discussions with the Met Council, and as a result of discussions surrounding the pending Comp Plan amendment, it came to staff s attention that the City's affordable housing allocation shifted slightly from a minimum of 253 units down to 244. Staff intends to update this information in the Housing chapter of the Plan. Staff will also add language noting that the City expects some higher density housing to be developed in the Uptown Hamel area as well, even though a minimum number is difficult to forecast because of the flexibility provided in the land use. These proposed changes are shown on the attached document. Potential Action Move to direct staff to update Chapter 4 of the DRAFT Comprehensive Plan update as shown on the attached document. Attachment 1. Red -lined version of Chapter 4 — Housing 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan Page 1 of 1 April 4, 2017 Housing Chapter Updates City Council Meeting Chapter 4: Housing and Neighborhoods Introduction Medina is a growing community that provides a variety of housing types and neighborhood styles while protecting and enhancing the City's open spaces and natural environment. Natural resources are the green infrastructure around which housing and neighborhoods in the City will develop. The availability of land in proximity to existing urban services provides an opportunity for a range of housing types and neighborhoods, while maintaining and protecting the existing ecological integrity of Medina's extensive natural areas. The following sections will provide general background information regarding housing trends, analysis and recommendations for diversifying neighborhoods and accomplishing the City's housing and neighborhood goals. Housing Inventory The following section provides a summary of the existing housing conditions in Medina and the foundation for developing the housing plan. This information has been obtained from a number of sources including the 2010 US Census, the 2015 Annual Housing Market Report from the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, and City Building Permit Information. Housing Supply The table below indicates that there were a total of 2,016 housing units in the City in 2014 consisting of 1,722 single family homes,110 townhomes and 184 multi -family units (multiplexes and apartments). Table 4-A Types of Housing Units (2014 Housing Type Number Percent Single Family detached 1,722 85.4% Townhomes (single-family attached) 110 5.5% Duplex, triplex and quad (2-4 units) 23 1.1 % Multifamily (5 or more units) 161 8.0 % Mobile homes 0 0% Total Housing Units 2,016 100% Source American Community Survey 2010-2014 From 2010-2015, the City issued building permits for approximately 379 single family homes and 67 townhomes. No permits for multi -family units were issued from 2010 to 2015. Chapter 4 — Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G A T Y 6 R IUI EDI NAB Page 4 - 1 Housing Tenancy In 2010, 93%of the housing units in Medina were owner -occupied and 7 percent were renter - occupied: Table 4-B Housing Tenure Housing Type Number of Units Percent Owner -occupied housing units 1,581 92.9% Renter -occupied housing units 121 7.1 % Total Occupied Units 1,702 100% o Source: Census 2010 Housing Conditions and Age The table below shows that nearly 20% of Medina's housing stock was built between 2010 and 2015. Approximately 31 % of the housing stock in the City was built before 1980 and is older than 35 years. Almost half of the homes in Medina were built between 1980 and 2009. Table 4-C Housina A (2015 Total Units Percent 2010-2015 446 19.9 % 2000-2009 401 17.9% 1990-1999 364 16.2% 1980-1989 332 14.8 % 1970-1979 245 10.9% 1960-1969 242 10.8 % 1950-1959 83 3.7% 1949 or earlier 132 5.9 % Source: City of Medina Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G T Y p z MIEDINA Page 4 - 2 Housing Costs Table 4-D describes the existing housing values in the City, and indicates affordability by showing the percentage of the area median income (AMI) that a particular valuation reflects. Seventy percent of the homes within the City currently exceed 100% of the AMI, which is a value of $300,500. Twenty-one percent of owner occupied housing units would be considered affordable in the City of Medina (below 80% AMI). Table 4-D Owner Occupied Housina Values (2015 Housing Values Parcels Percent $1 - $153,000 (50% and below AMI) 80 4% $153,001- $240,500 (50% - 80% AMI) 303 17% $240,500 - $300,500 (80% - 100% AMI) 182 10 % $300,501- $405,500 (101 % - 135% AMI) 219 12 % $405,501- $601,000 (136% - 200% AMI) 402 22% $601,001 and above (Greater than 201% AMI) 634 35% Total Owner Occupied Housing Units 1,820 100% Source: Hennepin County 2015 The median home sale price peaked in 2005 at $625,400 prior to the national housing market decline of 2007-2012. The table below shows that the average single family home price has been steadily increasing since 2011, recovering significantly from the decline. Table 4-E Housina Sales (2011-2015 Year Number of Home Sales Median Sale Price 2011 53 $485,000 2012 88 $457,985 2013 119 $521,623 2014 134 $527,500 2015 118 $555,047 Source: 2015 Annual Housing Market Report (Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors) According to the Metropolitan Council, a home is considered "affordable' if it costs 30% or less of the total income of a family earning 80% of the metropolitan area median income. In 2015, this calculation resulted in a home with a value of approximately $240,500 being considered affordable. Chapter 4 — Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G A T Y 6 R IVI EDI NAB Page 4 - 3 Housing Needs According to Metropolitan Council projections, Medina is forecasted to need housing for an additional 951 households by 2040. As described above, existing housing stock is generally high quality. The City seeks to preserve and enhance this quality while planning for projected growth. Housing Objectives The following objectives are consistent with the goals and strategies identified in Section 2 of this Comprehensive Plan. 1. Preserve and enhance the quality of life currently enjoyed by the residents. 2. Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives. 3. Require housing that maintains the open space and natural resources of Medina. 4. Preserve and protect single family housing and the neighborhoods in which they are located; encourage upkeep and improvement of housing stock over time; require platting and design of new housing to be high quality and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and encourage conservation design in new housing stock. 5. Support high standards for quality multi -family development in appropriately zoned areas. 6. Establish new and existing housing design standards to: (a) require quality building and site design; (b) provide for recreation, parks and trails; (c) require open space and trails including links to adjacent neighborhoods, nearby trails, and area parks; (d) respect and protect the natural environment, especially the lakes, wetlands, steep slopes, and woodlands. 7. Require lots in new subdivisions to access a local street rather than a collector street, county road or state highway. 8. Allow the use of conservation subdivision design to preserve rural character, preserve ecologically significant natural resources and retain open space 9. Require new urban residential development to be consistent with the City's Staging and Growth Plan. Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G T Y p z MIEDINA Page 4 - 4 Affordable Housing Plan The Metropolitan Council has identified affordable housing needs for all cities and townships in the region for 2021-2030. The housing element of each local comprehensive plan is required to reflect each community's share of this regional need for affordable housing. The Metropolitan Council has calculated the City of Medina's share of the 2021-2030 regional affordable housing need to be 253 total units. The table below indicates the expected need for affordable units in Medina by specific affordability level, with affordability based on percentage of Area Median Income (AMI). Table 4-G Affordable Housing Need Allocation (2021-2030) At Or Below 30% AMI 147142 From 31 to 50 % AMI 1-06102 From 51 to 80 % AMI 0 Total Units 253244 Source: Metropolitan Council forecasts Consistent with Metropolitan Council policy, the City has met affordable housing requirements by planning for higher -density residential development. The following areas provide the primary locations for higher -density residential development: • 13.4 net acres are planned at a minimum of 12 units per acre at Highway 12 and Baker Park Road (projected minimum of 161 units). This area of the City provides the most practical access to transit via the nearby park and ride in the City of Maple Plain. • A minimum of 58 units are planned at a minimum of 8 units per acre within the Mixed Residential land use at Highway 55 and Tamarack Drive • A minimum of 37 units are planned at a minimum of 8 units per acre within the Mixed Residential land use at Medina Road and Brockton Lane • The Uptown Hamel land use also permits higher -density residential development and additional construction is anticipated in this area. Uptown Hamel provides flexibility between commercial and residential uses and also for residential densities, so a minimum number of units meeting the density requirements may be difficult to forecast. The City supports creating a livable community through addressing the life cycle housing needs of area residents and the local workforce. Implementing an Affordable Housing Policy and Program in Medina is influenced by: • Socioeconomic demographics of the workforce population desiring to live in Medina • Growing number of senior citizens in Medina • Current land costs and/or availability of land in Medina and surrounding regions • Lack of infill opportunities in Medina • Zoning regulations and fees • Eligibility for supportive grants, programs, and partnerships • Capability to maintain long-term affordability • Strength of the current housing market • Defining appropriate design standards for the affordable housing market • Education of residents, city officials and staff concerning affordable housing Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G A T Y O F MEDINA Page 4 - 5 Affordable Housing Programs Various programs and actions are available to support the development of affordable housing. The City currently partners in a number of the programs in order to support affordable housing, including taking part in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) pool and other opportunities with Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Medina has established a goal to provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives. To support this goal, the City will evaluate opportunities to utilize public and non-profit programs or to partner with other agencies in these programs. The programs available to the City and developers to support affordable housing, depending on circumstances, include the following: Development Authorities: Medina does not have its own Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and depends on the Hennepin County HRA for affordable housing and redevelopment services. Housing Bonds: Minnesota State Statute allows HRAs to issue housing bonds to provide affordable housing. Tax Abatement: Cities may issue bonds to be used to support the construction of affordable housing, using a portion of the property tax received (tax abatement) from the development to finance these bonds. This removes this property from paying taxes for the services needed for this property, its residents and the community in general. The City may develop a tax abatement policy to determine if and when the level of affordable housing and the guaranteed length of affordability provide sufficient public benefit to justify the use of tax abatement. Tax Increment Financing: Cities may create a housing district to create a tax increment financing (TIF) district. The TIF bonds issued on this district are to be used to support the construction of affordable housing, and property taxes received above the original tax value (increment) from the development are utilized to finance these bonds. The property tax revenue that otherwise would be available to pay for city services would be restricted and not available to pay for the services. The City may develop a TIF policy to determine if and when the level of affordable housing and the guaranteed length of affordability to provide a public benefit is great enough to justify the use of tax abatement Minnesota Housing Consolidated Request for Proposals: The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency provides a request for proposal (RFP) once annually where affordable housing developers can apply for funding to construct affordable housing. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG): The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides CDBG funds to communities with over 45,000 residents for the use of providing and maintaining affordable housing. Hennepin County HRA administers these CDBG funds for the City of Medina. HOME Funds: The Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) is a flexible federal grant program that allows Hennepin County to fund affordable housing activities for very low and low-income families or individuals, homeless families, and persons with special needs. Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G T v p R Page 4 - 6 Affordable Housing Incentive Funds (AHIF): AHIF funds are administered by the Hennepin County HRA. This loan program funds the development of affordable housing units for very low-income households. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) Grants: The NSP was established by HUD for the purpose of stabilizing communities that have suffered from foreclosures and abandonment. The focus of this program is the purchase, rehabilitation and resale of foreclosed and abandoned properties. The NSP grants are administered by the Hennepin County HRA. Homebuyer Assistance Programs: Homebuyer assistance programs funded directly by Hennepin County HRA are currently not available. Medina encourages residents to contact the Minnesota Homeownership Center regarding homebuyer assistance programs that are currently available. Repair and Rehabilitation Support: The Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) provides home repair and rehabilitation assistance to Medina residents who meet the eligibility requirements. Foreclosure Prevention: The Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) provides foreclosure counseling to Medina residents. Energy Assistance: The Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) administers the energy assistance program for Medina residents who meet the eligibility requirements. Livable Communities Grants: Medina is a participating community in the Metropolitan Council's Livable Community Act (LCA) programs. Medina may, when applicable, apply for livable community grants on behalf of developers who provide a level of affordable housing and the guaranteed length of affordability that generates a public benefit greater than the resources required to apply for and administer the livable community grants. Local Fair Housing Policy: The Hennepin County HRA has a fair housing policy, which applies to the City of Medina. Therefore, Medina has not developed a local fair housing policy. Fee Waivers or Adjustments: Cities may waive or reduce fees to reduce the cost of construction of affordable housing. Conversely, State rules require that city fees correlate to the cost of providing the services. This waiver or reduction could create a deficiency in the funding for services, causing the City to rely on general funds to make up the deficiency. In considering a fee waiver or reduction, the City should determine when the level of affordable housing and the guaranteed length of affordability provide a sufficient public benefit to justify the reduction or waiver of development fees. Zoning and Subdivision Policies: The City has the ability to adjust its zoning and subdivision regulations through a planned unit development (PUD). Zoning and subdivision regulation are created in part to mitigate the impacts that a development may have on adjoining properties. When considering a PUD for affordable housing, the City should determine when the level of affordable housing and the guaranteed length of affordability provide a public benefit great Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G A T Y O F IVI EDI NAB Page 4 - 7 enough to justify the potential impacts that would result from a deviation in the zoning or subdivision regulations. 4(d) Tax Program: The 4(d) tax program provides a 4% tax credit to affordable housing developers. This program is administered through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. Land Trusts: A land trust achieves affordable home ownership by owning the land on which a house is located, allowing the resident to seek financing only on the house. The resident enters into a long-term lease for the home to remain on the property. The advantage of a land trust is that the trust can control the future sale of the property to ensure that affordability can be maintained and have the ability to scatter the land trust sites throughout the community. The disadvantage of a land trust is that it will take significant financial resources to purchase the land rights and those resources are never recovered during the period that the property remains affordable. Medina may evaluate if joining the West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust is the most efficient way to use its resources to provide affordable housing. Chapter 4 - Housing and Neighborhoods DRAFT April 4, 2017 G T Y p z MIEDINA Page 4 - 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: March 30, 2017 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates — April 4, 2017 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning —1432 County Road 29 — UP Development LLC has requested to reguide the subject property to High Density Residential (HDR) and to rezone to the R4 zoning district for potential development of a 28-42 unit memory care facility. The City's DRAFT 2040 Comp Plan identifies the property as HDR, but the applicant desires to move ahead quicker than the Comp Plan Review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at their February 13 meeting and recommended approval. The Council reviewed on March 7 and March 21 and has directed staff to prepare documents which would either approve or deny the request for review at the April 4 meeting. B) Three Rivers Park/We Can Ride CUP — 4301 County Road 24 — Three Rivers Park District and We Can Ride have requested a conditional use permit amendment to allow We Can Ride, a nonprofit that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special needs, to occupy the stable previously utilized by Three Rivers Park mounted patrol. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at their March 20 meeting and recommended approval of the request. The Council is scheduled to review on April 4. C) Woodridge Church Site Plan Review — 1500 County Road 24 — Woodridge Church has requested a Comp Plan amendment, rezoning, lot combination, conditional use permit amendment, site plan review, and interim use permit for construction of a 15,085 square foot addition to the north side of the existing building. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the lot combination, CUP interim use permit and Site Plan at their Monday, December 19, 2016 meeting, on the Comp Plan Amendment and rezoning on January 10. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of all of the applications. The City Council adopted resolutions and ordinance approving the requests on February 7. The Met Council has approved of the amendment, and staff will present for final City Council adoption at the April meeting. D) Elim Care Concept Plan — north of Highway 12, east of CR 29 — Elim Care has requested review of a concept plan for potential development of a 134-unit skilled nursing/assisted living/independent living facility in 2018. The applicant originally requested a Comp Plan amendment and rezoning to reguide the subject property to High Density Residential (HDR) and to rezone to the R4 zoning district. The City's DRAFT 2040 Comp Plan identifies the property as HDR, to allow them to move ahead quicker than the Comp Plan Review. The applicant has since withdrawn the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning, but continues to request Concept Plan Review. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and the application will be presented to the Planning Commission when complete, potentially at their April 11 meeting. E) 1822 Homestead Solar Panel CUP and Text Amendment — Peter and Mindy Rechelbacher have requested a conditional use permit to construct a ground -mounted solar array with a footprint of Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 April 4, 2017 City Council Meeting 1500 s.f. The applicants have also requested that the City amend its zoning code to increase the allowed footprint of solar arrays from 1000 s.f. to 1500 s.f. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to review the request at their April 11 meeting. F) 4035 Apache Drive Animal Structure Setback variance — Joe Molde has requested a variance to reduce the required animal structure setback of 150 feet for a small chicken coop. It appears that no location on the subject site could meet the 150 foot setback. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to review the request at their April 11 meeting. G) AutoMotorPlex, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery — The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. H) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll— These preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application I) Capital Knoll, Hamel Haven subdivisions — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded Other Projects A) Comprehensive Plan — The Planning Commission held the Public Hearing on the 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan update at the December 13 meeting. Following the hearing, Commissioners discussed all chapters of the plan and recommended a number of changes. Following discussion, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Plan. Staff presented the Plan for City Council review at the January 3 and February 7 meetings. The Council reviewed the infrastructure plans at the February 21 meeting and directed staff to route the Plan for jurisdictional review. Staff has been working with WSB to finalize the infrastructure plans for review. B) Mediacom Analysis — staff continued analysis and drafted a proposal consistent with City Council direction from the March 21 worksession. C) US Census Webinar — staff took part in a webinar related to how to submit the annexation approved by the City Council on the Just for Kix property to the Census Bureau. The webinar also discussed how the City can take part in the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA), the first step in the 2020 Census. D) Planning/GIS Intern — staff intends to recruit for an intern to assist with projects in the department over the next year. Planning's budget includes funds for part-time assistance or interns and staff will present the job description at the April meeting and request approval to hire the intern. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 April 4, 2017 City Council Meeting MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340.9790 p: 763.473-9209 f: 763.473-8858 non -emergency: 763-525-6210 MEMORANDUM Emergency 9.1_1 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor Robert Mitchell and City Council Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety, Through City Administrator Scott Johnson March 31, 2017 Department Updates Spring Burning Restrictions in Effect Spring burning restrictions go into effect on March 31, 2017. The restrictions will stay in place until the environment greens up. No burn permits will be issued by the Medina Police Department. If there are burns needed for agriculture purposes, the applicant can apply for a variance with the DNR. Request for Assistance with the Super Bowl in Minneapolis Minneapolis Police Department has sent out a request for assistance for police personnel to work the week of the Super Bowl at different events in the Minneapolis area. At this time they are asking for us to dedicate personnel for the entire week and they would be paid straight time and overtime only after 40 hours of work. They are not willing to pay for mandatory training or mandatory recap of the event. At this time I have no officers interested in this agreement. If something changes, I will let you know. Suspicious Package at Target On March 26, 2017, our department responded to the Target Store on a suspicious package that appeared to be a bomb. The package was 5" by 7" with wires running to two red LEDs that were flashing. The store was evacuated, a perimeter was established, and the Minneapolis bomb squad was called to evaluate the package. The bomb tech x-rayed the package and used their robot to inspect it. Once the robot picked up the package, they could see there were no explosives in the package. The store was swept by bomb dogs and the store was turned back over to the managers. The package was identified as a part to a store display in the follow-up investigation. A Target employee who was breaking down cardboard for recycling came across the part and set it on the person's desk that was responsible for recycling batteries. There was no criminal intent. Patrol by Sergeant Jason Nelson Training On March 21, 2017, I attended First Responder Training at Rogers Fire Department. On March 22nd, our entire agency attended annual use of force refresher training. Patrol Activities For the dates of March 15 to March 28, 2017, our officers issued 67 citations and 94 warnings for various traffic infractions. There were a total of eight traffic accidents, three medicals and 16 alarms. Officers have been very active with seasonal overweight restriction violations. There were numerous large overweight vehicles that were stopped the past two weeks which resulted in some of the largest civil fines that we have ever levied. On March 17, 2017, I took a criminal sexual conduct report of a 5 year old. The case was forwarded to Wright County as the alleged conduct occurred there. On March 20, 2017, Chief Belland and Officer Converse responded to a domestic in a vehicle on Highway 55. The vehicle was located and it was found that a husband and wife were verbally arguing over who was to pay for the funeral costs of a deceased brother. On March 20, 2017, Officer Converse took a theft report at McDonalds. It was discovered that a patron had attempted to pay for his meal with a counterfeit $20 bill. After interviewing the patron it was found that he did not intentionally pass a counterfeit bill and that he had received it as part of change from another establishment. On March 26, 2017, Officer Jessen was dispatched to Target for a suspicious looking package. It was thought that the package was possibly a bomb. Target was cleared of all the patrons and employees. Minneapolis bomb squad was called and a robot was used to look at the object and determined that it was not an explosive. Bomb sniffing dogs cleared the entire store before workers were allowed to come back. Case was forwarded to Investigations and it was discovered through investigation that the bomb was a display unit that had been taken down and the batteries and other components were placed on a supervisor's desk for recycling. On March 28, 2017, Officer Converse took an identity theft report. Victim stated that unknown persons used her credit card to purchase two laptops from Montgomery Wards and they were sent to an address in Florida. Case forwarded to Investigations. Investigations by Investigator Kevin Boecker Investigation of phone scam involving Medina resident found several of the gift cards had been redeemed out of state (Nevada, Utah) at five different Walmarts for iTune gift cards. Working on obtaining any surveillance video of suspect(s). Last update included a lead from a 2015 burglary where fingerprints from the scene were identified. The suspect was interviewed and denied having taken part in the incident but could not explain why his prints were on victim's car. The following week received a call from the suspect who remembered he had worked part-time at a valet service during the summer of 2015. I was able to make contact with the valet service and verified suspect's employment. I was able to determine that victim had attended a function in Wayzata in which the valet service was employed a day prior to the report of the burglary. Person of interest is no longer considered a suspect. Suspicious item/bomb threat: With assistance of Target investigators, we were able to determine that the item in question was a battery pack from a cardboard store display. Employee had removed the battery pack from the cardboard box in order to recycle the cardboard. The case has been requested to be closed. Continued investigation of theft report from Indiana resident who stated he purchased bicycle from someone from Medina for $540 and never received the bike. I finally made contact with the suspect after reaching out to family members and he advised he had refunded the money back to PayPal to reimburse the person from Indiana. Suspect was able to provide me confirmation that he had refunded the money. While I believe the suspects actions were criminal, if the victim receives his money back there will no longer be a victim in the case. I contacted person in Indiana and asked to let me know once he has his money back and the case will be closed. He was appreciative of our department's assistance in this case in getting his money back. Theft case involving multiple jurisdictions has been charged through Hennepin County Attorney's Office. Juvenile employee has been charged with theft from local business by Hennepin County Attorney's Office. Letters were sent out to all tobacco/alcohol license holders reminding them of upcoming compliance checks. There are currently 11 open cases assigned to Investigations. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: March 29, 2017 MEETING: April 4, 2017 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • I have been spending some time evaluating the streets in Medina in an effort to update the pavement management plan and also the CIP for the upcoming 5 years. • Linda and I have begun the process of preparing feasibility reports for the upcoming overlay projects including, Willow Drive (North of Chippewa Trail), Wichita Trail and Clydesdale Trail (from the CR 116 project to just past 600 Clydesdale Trail). These streets are in need of overlays and are on the OP for 2017. • Seasonal postings will continue for at least a few more weeks with the temperature still fluctuating a lot. The Police have been making a few stops to help enforce the postings. • PW has been crack sealing the streets that are scheduled for this year. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • Staff has made several trips to the Deer Hill Preserve project to address erosion control issues. We have been working closely with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed to bring the project into compliance. • I have instructed WSB to reserve some meters for us to start working on our I/ I study in the sanitary sewer system. We will have the scope for our project ready for the April 18th City Council meeting. PARKS/TRAILS • I have instructed our low quote contractor to schedule work on the dugouts. Work is scheduled to begin in 4-6 weeks. We were hoping for sooner, but it is the best they can do at this time. • PW will begin cleaning up the parks and getting ready for an early park tour this year. The tour is scheduled for April 19th MISCELLANEOUS • Linda has her back surgery scheduled for Monday, April 17th. She will be off at least one month, so we are trying to work ahead on things that will be coming up during that time. ORDER CHECKS MARCH 21, 2017 - APRIL 4, 2017 045681 ANDERSON, THERESA $125.00 045682 CUMMING, BONNIE $150.00 045683 NAYYAR, RAGHAV $350.00 045684 RASMUSSEN, KATHY & MARK $190.00 045685 SIDDIQUI, KHURSHEED & BADAR $250.00 045686 MOHAN CHETTIAR $1,070.00 045687 MN DVS $21.75 045688 ABDO, EICK & MEYERS LLP $11,400.00 045689 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE $52.70 045690 ASPEN MILLS INC $56.35 045691 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE $2,488.26 045692 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC $206.59 045693 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS INC $223.21 045694 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES $391.22 045695 DITTER INC $2,995.16 045696 DPC INDUSTRIES INC $1,104.97 045697 ECM PUBLISHERS INC $174.14 045698 GRAINGER $225.93 045699 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH $955.20 045700 HOLIDAY FLEET $63.42 045701 KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED $5,616.51 045702 LANO EQUIPMENT INC $3,621.21 045703 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR $392.00 045704 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES $20.00 045705 LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MGMT INC $41.00 045706 MADISON NATIONAL LIFE $634.66 045707 MARCO INC $30.97 045708 METRO AREA MGRS ASSN $30.00 045709 METRO ELEVATOR INC $175.00 045710 METRO WEST INSPECTION $13,721.00 045711 MORRIS ELECTRONICS INC. $195.00 045712 NELSON AUTO CENTER $24,915.71 045713 NORTHERN ESCROW, INC. $45,870.60 045714 OFFICE DEPOT $225.04 045715 OPG-3, INC $2,788.00 045716 PROTECT AND SERVE TRAINING LLC $500.00 045717 RANDY'S SANITATION INC $60.00 045718 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC $7,428.37 045719 STREICHER'S $75.96 045720 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL $621.90 045721 TACTICAL SOLUTIONS $282.00 045722 TEGRETE CORP $1,314.00 045723 TIMESAVER OFFSITE $241.00 045724 WSB & ASSOCIATES $14,720.00 045725 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE $62.85 045726 ZIEGLER INC $170.21 Total Checks $146,246.89 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS MARCH 21, 2017 - APRIL 4, 2017 004082E MINNESOTA, STATE OF $1,099.00 004083E SELECT ACCOUNT $1,574.48 004084E PR PERA $14,624.37 004085E PR FED/FICA $16,800.99 004086E PR MN Deferred Comp $2,470.00 004087E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA $3,407.03 004088E SELECT ACCOUNT $751.45 004089E CITY OF MEDINA $21.00 004090E CULLIGAN-METRO $32.75 004091E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL $35.00 004092E VALVOLINE FLEET SERVICES $65.97 004093E XCEL ENERGY $9,795.29 004094E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC $4,891.93 004095E DELTA DENTAL $2,538.70 004096E HOSTINGMINNESOTA.COM $60.00 004097E KONICA MINOLTA $168.48 004098E VERIZON WIRELESS $1,255.58 Plotted: 2/28/2017 9:14 AM ]:\DESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We Can ride FINAL.dwg PLAN SYMBOLS LEGEND PARK BOUNDARY COUNTY BOUNDARY CRY/MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PRIVATE BOUNDARY RIGHNOFWAY LINE —ROW RESOURCE PROTECTION EASEMENT TRANSPORTATION EASEMENT UTILITY EASEMENT PROPERTY SETBACK LINE RAILROAD TRACKS {{}}{•H}}}}14}} TRANSPORTATION CENTERLINE UNKNOWN LINEAR FEATURE (SEE UBEU AUTOMATIC VEHICLE ACCESS MANUAL VEHICLE ACCESS BICYCLE ACCESS DOG OFFLEASH ACCESS FENCE, UNSPECIFIED FENCE. SPECIFIED TYPE BW=BARBED WIRE CL=CHAIN LINK PS PS= POST AND SPINDLE X SR=SPLIT RAIL X SR SR WW = WOVEN WIRE ELEC = ELECTRIC POLE W/GUY ANCHOR POST OR BOLLARD, GRILL GUARDRAIL HANDRAIL SIGN W/SINGLE DOUBLE POST ID=SIGN CODE TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR (MAJOR( TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR (MINOR( if ELEC e N & —113— DITCH OR SWALE BOTTOM (FLOW INE) DRAINAGE ARROW (ROW DIRECTION) EDGE OF NORMAL WATER LEVEL —. .— ROODPLAINUNE WETAND EDGE. UNSPECIFIED _ WETLAND EDGE, DELINEATED), D CONIFEROUS IREELINE DECIDUOUS TREEUNE TREE CONIFEROUS AND DECIDUOUS .yFp�SI IRON MONUMENT, CONTROL POINT al BENCHMARK:1f IRON MONUMENT TEST PR UTILITY SYMBOLS LEGEND O O ELECTRIC. ULSPECIPED(ALL TYPES( —E UNDERGROUND CABLE------'E UG)OVERHEAD CABLE —EON MANHOLE METER, PEDESTAL O E E A E LIGHT, POLE UGH. MARKER POST • FUEL UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) F GASOLINE/REANED PETROLEUM GAS GEOTHERMAL HVAC/CONDENSATE NATURAL GAS OIL/UNREFINED PETROLEUM MANHOLE METER. PEDESTAL —NVAC —NGAS —OIL O B F UNDERGROUND TANK, MARKER POST VALVE (ANY). VENT E ® F hG I TELECOM, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) —COM UNDERGROUND CABLE —COM UG — OVetHEAD CABLE —COM OH UNDERGROUND PBES OPTIC —F/ UG OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC —F/ OH MANHOLE METER PEDESTAL MARKER POST WATER. UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) MANHOLE METER. PEDESTAL MARKER POST, CLEANOUT VALVE (ANY), CHECK CONTROL CURB BOX HYDRANT. WELL DRINKING FOUNTAIN IRRIGATION, UNSPECIFIED (ALL TYPES) MANHOLE METER, PEDESTAL MARKER POST, CLEANOUT VALVE (ANY(. CWERN SPRINKLER HEAD. WELL SANITARY SEWER. UNSPECIFIED GRAVITY PIPING FORCEMAIN PIPING MANHOLE MARKER, CLEANOUT LIFT STATION SEPTIC TANK VENT © C C 13 C ( O W W W 13 W W W Da IW N fr,� O e I ® O � I A ss X FT O ss ss co SS SS VALVE TAN1I. CHECK CONTROL D4 FW STORM SEWER, UNSPECIFED DRAIN TILE MANHOLE MARKER. CIEANOUI CATCH BASIN (SQUARE ROUND) APRON, W/ GRATE, VALVE IAN° co ®®® 1 A Da GENERAL NOTES 1.1 Survey coordinate and bearing basis: Hennepin County Coordinates 2.) No indication of wetland delineation by a qualified wetland specialist has been located or observed on site. Wetland shown Is current extents of cattails. 3.) At the time field work was performed for this survey, there was a significant amount of snow on the ground. Physical features were located to the best of our ability, but there may be additional features that were not visible and, therefore, not shown hereon. BENCH MARKS (BM) (NAVD 88 datum) 1.) Top of well to Front of Main enhance to Baker Public Safety Building. Elev = 1005.58 80 160 Feet 1—H BRUMINOUS CONCRETE GRAVEL AREA SUBABLE FOR GRAZING 5.30 ACRES l UTILITY NOTE: THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THE PUN IS UTILITY LEVEL QUALITY'C", UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF Cl/ASCE 38-02 ENTITLED 'STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY) THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT DOES NOT WARRANT THIS INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANY IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. WARNING CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL WORE DIGGING. 1-600-252-1166 REQUIRED BY LAW WETLAND BUFFER - NO MOW WETLANDITUFFER :^ x SIGNAGE, EVERY 250' x• x ' WE1I.AND ACREAGE . 0.58 AC r / - WA..ILRHC,r, 0.27 AC' •�. 0.18 AC - Wj WATERBODY ACREAGE 0.39 AC HORSE TRAIL ORIGINAL HORSE TRAIL ALIGNMENT - .a 002 A _ 1. , ,r/f."^.. �h e\,-e c VT' CM MAILBOX "10.. FLAGpG:E . 1005 EXISTING PARKING — LOT, CURBING AND STRIPING PROPOSED SIDEWALK ACCESS EXISTING OFFICE/BARN PROPOSED PADDOCK HORSE SHELTERS, TYP. PROPOSED CONCRETE APRON PROPOSED MANURE BUNKER (CONCRETE) FIRE ACCESS TURN -AROUND (20' X 120') PAVED FIRE ACCESS LANE 9 TON DESIGN 20' LANE, NO CURBING PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK ACCESS PROPOSED ARENA (65' X 120') EXISTING MAINTENANCE ROAD PROPOSED RAINGARDEN �ZrAc \ Lne �� 5‘-'0.fea lJtt.iCv- PROPOSED PASTURE FENCING m f 1QgX N ZSE/)LOI[[ r�0ag I LL O N W W N aW¢wmz? W ¢ac9�i Q65W�LL W N R' W w ELw��a ' s 35awrF�i e , 441 g . DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN 2 K s a z 0 Z ▪ Q OU- c� O IV O � O r, • Ln O Ln te, M rn n al S Q ZO W N Z UJ M f Z W ▪ 0 iK O >- O J ma to W W O Q 8-1 W ID 2 /kry C ^ft)• L1 W ,y � a Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed ByNS Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Construction Plan C602 Sheet 02 of 04 Plotted: 3/27/2017 2:34 PM JADESIGN STAFF\Nate\Projects\2017\BAK We can Ride Site Improvements\BAK We can ride FINAL.dwg H 1� t� `a4I9 UTILITY NOTE: THE SUBSURFACE UTILIY INFORMATION IN THE PLAN IS UTILITY LEVEL QUALITY "C". UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS QUALIFY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF Cl/ASCE 38-02 ENTITLED 'STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF PRIVATE MIMES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLYI THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT DOES NOT WARRANT THIS INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PRIVATE UTILTY COMPANY IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. WARNING CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE 000ING. 1-B00-252-1166 REQUIRED BY LAW _ 0 e 0 $o 160 Feet w ACCESS POINT # I PRO. CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ACCESS POINT #2 LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS, TYP. PROPOSED CONCRETE. TYP. acres h J'}')tine-1-0,-)'4. 0,3 4WIDE CONCRETE WALK 6" T ' SOIL MIN. RE' ORE WITH SEED MIX 35-241 TY' E I MULCH. DISC ANCHORE • • • I.E. 997.25 REMOVE EXISTING GRAVEL SCARIFY TO 12" DEPTH MIN RESTORE WRH SEED MIX 35-241 4 37 LBS/AC TYPE I MULCH, DISC ANCHORED 4 2 TONS/AC 03 RAIL FENCE AROUND PADDOCK AREA, TYP. SEE DETAIL. SHEET C801 FFE = 1002.3 1005 I.E. 997.5 / O60 — PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN y / BOTTOM ELEV = 999.75 AREA AT BOTTOM = 506.75 SF 4 OVERFLOW ELEV = 1001.00 I.E. 997.0 y / 6" DRAINTILE PER DETAIL ON SHEET C801. DRAINTILE TO BE CAPPED AT UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS. / � 1 \\ /7— \ � 3 7 LBS/AC \\ / \ 2 TONS/AC �a w�QOw y Z 2 N • �rw F-O�OaJ mmm¢m mwmawo z waaoz< =3 oawm DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Baker Park Reserve Proj. No. Not Assgn Survey Date Dec 27-28 Issue Date 2/24/2017 Surveyed ByNS Drawn By NS Checked By EN SHEET TITLE Grading Turf Establishment Erosion Control C603 Sheet 03 of 04 Jodi Gallup From: Scott Baker <sbaker@bkrdsn.com> Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 2:31 PM To: Scott Johnson Subject: Letter to Medina Hello Scott, Per our conversation, here is my letter with talking points. Thank you for taking my call! I am the owner of the vacant land parcel, aka Baker Land in Medina's SW quadrant, on the corner of Hwy 12 and CR 29. I was a resident of Medina for over 17 years and purchased this land many years ago with the intent to relocate my office to the property. I will be traveling on business but my wife, Nancy, will represent me at the meeting. I am devastated that I cannot attend the Council meeting personally. Elim Care has had my property under contract for a year, hoping to break ground next spring. City staff has known of Elim's program since Dec 20. I am not sure when LJP formulated their plan for their 2 acres. LJP filed first so Elim wanted to wait for LJP to go through the process but in light of much of the discussion about acreage and units my advisor with Elim's approval decided we needed to make sure the Council understood the site limitations (wetlands) of my land as it impacts acreage or units to meet SW quadrant goals. I am told that here was a limited conversation last Friday after my letter was submitted between my real estate advisor (also out of State) and Dusty wherein Dusty said that the whole 250 units in the Plan would not need to come from the SW quadrant i.e. 100 units are provided elsewhere. Elim has told me that between 109 - 134 units might count towards the City's goal on my property. I would like to see the Elim Care project move through the process with a full continuum of care because it would be tremendous for Medina. Incidentally, Elim has told me the memory care market is 16 units. Not a large number in their total program but a full continuum is essential. I also would like to see the city and Met Council resolve any planning issues so Elim can break ground in 2018. Respectfully, Scott W Baker BAKER 1650 West End Blvd Suite 200 i. Mpls, MN 55416 952.473.4882 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Medina City Council and Mayor Mitchell FROM: LJP Development, Larry and Jennifer Palm DATE: March 31, 2017 MEETING: April 4, 2017 SUBJ: LPJ Development LLC. - 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) — City Council and esteemed Mayor Mitchell: The attached documentation is provided for your convenience and review for the April 4th Council meeting regarding the LJP Development Memory Care project for 1432 County Road 29. LJP Proposes to build a memory care facility with private kitchens and bathrooms with an initial phase of 25 units and a second phase with 13 units. The residents will sign a lease, pay rent and receive a Certificate of Rent Paid each year for the rental of their home. The Met Council has confirmed that the units will count towards Medina's net residential density requirements. Please see Section 2 Met Council Correspondence. The Beehive of Medina, proposed, will employ 25-30 full time employees. Beehive Homes www.beehivehomes.com is an established company with almost 30 years of experience in Memory Care and Assisted living. The architecture is single level with a residential feel. It will be the perfect fit and compliment for the community. The LJP Project will offer Elder Waiver assistance in 30% of units, enabling the city to further expand affordable housing options in the city. The plan will provide sufficient berms and landscaping to screen the development from the property to the north. Please see Section 3, Why Beehive Homes. Senior aged citizens are the fastest growing group of residents in the community. One in six people are diagnosed with Alzheimer's. This is a community need. People with Dementia and Alzheimer's are a protected class by the ADA and Fair Housing regulations. (Please see Section 1 Development Project Points) The subject property and other adjacent properties are proposed to be guided High Density Residential in the draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan. The properties are also within the current staging period of both the current Plan and the draft Update. These properties were seen as a good opportunity for higher density housing because the park and ride across the street in the City of Maple Plain provides the only opportunity for transit in the City. LJP Development, LLC Page 1 of 3 March 31, 2017 Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting Met Transit—' Park and Ride IrClE P-.FP. i[ HveYnNct Existing residenc , Guid=hR 1300 COUNTY OAG'29 Salyer Park & servo Future High Density Residential The High Density Residential land use is described in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan as follows: "High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 7.0 units per acre and 30 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include duplexes, triplexes, town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. LJP Development, LLC Comp Plan and Rezoning Page 2 of 3 March 31, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting This designation is identified in areas that are generally accessible to transportation corridors and commercial uses." The draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan proposes to amend the density range of the HDR land use to 12 to 15 units per acre. As a result, the City will need to make adjustments to the zoning districts intended to implement the HDR land use. Medina staff and planning both unanimously approved the request. LJP proposes to construct a new street connection from Baker Park Road to the south of the subject property. The intent is for this new street to serve the property to the east and also to loop to the south where the existing shared driveway for Holiday and the multi -tenant building is located. This loop road would provide Hennepin County the opportunity to limit left turning traffic from the shared driveway north of Holiday in order to improve safety at the intersection of Baker Park Road and Highway 12. LJP will maintain the street privately until such time as it is extended in the future. LJP acknowledges the sidewalk extension on the west end of the parcel and will incorporate into the building permit request documents. LJP Proposes that Medina City Council approves this zoning change as it complies with the 2018-2038 proposed comp plan. Applicant would like to build as quickly as possible. This is a project that benefits the needs of the community. In the event that the Met Council will not count the units at in the new comp plan, LJP would like permits to demolish the existing structure, prepare the landscape and pour footings. No additional construction would take place until the Medina Comp Plan was sent to the Met Council for review. At that time further construction could take place, with a Certificate of Occupancy issued no sooner than the time of Met Council Approval of the Medina Comp Plan. In conclusion, this is a much needed project for the City of Medina and it falls in line with the Met Council goals (see Section 1 Development Points) and 2040 plan. This fulfills the needed net density requirements, affordable housing goals as well as enhancing the community. LJP Development, LLC Page 3 of 3 March 31, 2017 Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting Table of Contents Development Project Points 4-13 MET Council Correspondence 14-15 Why Beehive Homes 16 Exterior Design Concepts 17 Certificate of Rent Paid Information 18 Fair Housing 19-58 LJP Development Project Points: • 25 to 30 jobs created • 38 Dwelling Units • LJP Development has the financial capability to perform under an approved plan by council review process • Beehive has been in business for 26 years and have over 180 successful assisted living and memory care facilities around the country • Architecture blends into surrounding community, not an institutional feel • Over 30% of space designated as Elder Waiver Eligible, adds affordability to our community • This is a 2.12 acre lot, Both Freya Thamman, Met Council Sector Representative and Katie Rodriguez, Met Council District 1 Area Representative, said that this small parcel will likely not affect the city of Medina's High Density Land or Net Residential Density Requirements. They see no Red Flags or Concerns regarding The City of Medina's approval of the LJP Development project. Katie Rodriguez went on to state that this type of development supports the Met Councils Housing Policy Plan by providing safe, affordable housing for disabled people and helps attain the goal of providing housing to ALL people regardless of where they are in their life cycle. She urges cities to be more flexible in language and policy to enable providing housing to the fastest growing segment of the population. Ms. Rodriguez also encourages a community kitchen as it is a more "green" alternative for dense housing. Please see the attached email from Freya Thamman, Sector Representative • 1432 County Road 29 will not support an apartment building or other multi family structure; there simply isn't enough buildable space to accommodate the units and parking. • 1 in 6 people are diagnosed with Alzheimer's Additional Points taken directly from the Met Council 2040 Housing Policy Plan This Housing Policy Plan describes multiple strategies that advance the Metropolitan Council's overall housing policy priority: • Create housing options that give people in all life stages and of all economic means viable choices for safe, stable and affordable homes. (page1) • Expanding housing options for people in all life stages and of all economic means through a balanced approach of expanding housing choices for low- and moderate - income households in higher -income areas and enhancing the livability of low-income neighborhoods. (page 1) • Providing housing choices for the region's changing demographics. (page 3) The process of developing this Housing Policy Plan has produced rich conversation and discussion. However, it has become clear that the region needs to have dialogues beyond what the Council was able to achieve in developing this plan. The Council will convene regional discussions to address housing issues that are broader and more complex than any single agency or organization can advance alone. These include: • Reducing barriers to development of mixed -income housing and neighborhoods. • Improving the alignment of housing policies and decisions made by school districts. Expanding the supply of housing options accessible to seniors and people with disabilities. • Developing strategies to affirmatively further fair housing and address housing discrimination. • Building wealth and expanding investment in Areas of Concentrated Poverty. (page 4) We hope that this plan will advance the region's conversation about how to create housing options that give people in all life stages and of all economic means viable choices for safe, stable, and affordable homes. Demographic trends: Continued population and housing growth through 2040. More people Over the next 30 years, our region is projected to grow by 783,000 residents, a gain of 27% from 2010. More births than deaths and longer life expectancies will account for three-quarters of this population growth. People moving here from other parts of the nation and world —attracted by our region's economic opportunities —will account for the remaining one - quarter of this growth. (For more information, see the Metropolitan Council's MetroStats: Steady growth and big changes ahead (page 8) Demographic shifts in age Our region is aging rapidly. More than one in five residents will be age 65 and older in 2040, compared to one in nine in 2010. Furthermore, four -fifths of household growth between 2010 and 2040 will be among older households (those headed by individuals age 65 and older). Nearly half of net new households will be individuals living alone. These demographic changes will shape the location and type of real estate needed over the next three decades. Older households and single -person households are more likely to prefer attached housing in walkable, amenity -rich neighborhoods. While many senior households want to age in place, the massive increase in the senior population will magnify the impact of those seniors who choose to move. Senior households are likely to want smaller, low -maintenance housing products, and easy access to services and amenities. Most senior households live on fixed incomes and have a greater interest in or need for rental housing; this preference for renting increases as seniors age. (Page 9) A region with truly viable housing choice is one that allows households to secure housing affordable to them, in communities where they would like to live, while also: Matching their family size, whether growing, maintaining, or decreasing in size. Reflecting their household lifestyle, no matter where in the life cycle their household members are. Providing a high level of access to quality employment and educational opportunities without having to travel great distances. Offering reasonable proximity to essential services, amenities, and retail. Including features that make life easier, particularly for individuals requiring special care. Fostering a sense of inclusiveness and welcome for households of various types and origins. Creating options means balancing competing priorities and needs. For example, while changing demographics suggest a need for more smaller units, many low- or moderate - income households seek larger housing units that can accommodate a large or multi -generational family. (Page 52) Equitable development creates healthy vibrant communities of opportunity where low-income people, people of color, new immigrants, and people with disabilities participate in and benefit from decisions and investments that shape their neighborhoods. Sustained authentic public engagement with all residents is key to equitable development (see more on p. 85). (Page 54) Advance fair housing The Federal Fair Housing Act declares the federal government's intention to address and prevent discriminatory practices in housing: "It is the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States."31 The Act covers a broad range of prohibited housing and real -estate -oriented practices that may be undertaken by lenders, leasing agents, real estate brokers, and others including but not limited to: • Refusing to sell or rent to any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national • origin. • Discriminating by offering differential terms on the bases above. • Making, printing or publishing material pertaining to sale or rental of housing that • includes any stated "preferences, limitations, or discrimination" excluding protected • groups. • Discrimination in real -estate -related transactions and in provision of brokerage services. • Claiming to any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin that a unit is not for sale or rent when in fact it is. • Refusing to permit, at the expense of a person with disabilities, reasonable modifications that enable the tenant to have full employment of the premises. Additionally, the Minnesota Human Rights Act explicitly bans discrimination in housing and real estate: "Subdivision 1. Freedom from discrimination. (a) It is the public policy of this state to secure for persons in this state, freedom from discrimination: (1) in employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, status with regard to public assistance, sexual orientation, and age; (2) in housing and real property because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, status with regard to public assistance, sexual orientation, and familial status; (3) in public accommodations because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, and disability; (4) in public services because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, and status with regard to public assistance; and(5) in education because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, status with regard to public assistance, sexual orientation, and age. (b) Such discrimination threatens the rights and privileges of the inhabitants of this state and menaces the institutions and foundations of democracy. It is also the public policy of this state to protect all persons from wholly unfounded charges of discrimination. Nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted as restricting the implementation of positive action programs to combat discrimination." (Minn. Stat. 363A.02) (pages 56 & 57) Provide housing choices for a range of demographic characteristics Communities throughout the region recognize the significance of housing quality, choice, and affordability. The region is expecting 367,000 new households by 2040. In addition to population growth, other factors influence housing need. These include the changing composition of families, disparities in household income and wealth generation, and an aging population that on average will be living longer, spending more on health care, and that may not be able to afford their current housing due to limited incomes. Recently demand has increased for multifamily housing, among both seniors and younger residents. This is particularly true in the central cities, fueled by demographic changes and market interest in areas well served by transit and amenities. (page 65) As new residents come to the region, will they find places that facilitate their settlement, allow them to be connected and healthy, provide affordability, community and employment, and offer opportunities to prosper? Going forward, each jurisdiction should examine whether it offers satisfying living options to attract and maintain a competitive workforce and meet the needs of current residents as they age. For example, does the local housing stock: • Provide a range of sizes, from studios and one -bedrooms to units with three, four, or five? • Bedrooms that accommodate larger families as well as multigenerational living? • Vary among housing type, ranging from single-family detached to multistory multifamily? • Offer housing options for seniors at varying stages of independence? • Include multiple tenure options, such as ownership, renting, or cooperative forms of ownership? • Serve a range of incomes? • Incorporate flexible design and reflect special attention to accessibility? • Adapt to changes in demand, preferences, or lifestyle? • Create attractive places with aesthetic and architectural diversity? Housing preferences and needs are not "one size fits all." While living comfortably under one roof is important to some multigenerational households, other residents would prefer opportunities for smaller housing. Some cities are currently examining accessory dwelling units as a way to accommodate small housing units to create additional affordable housing opportunities and potential income streams for owners. Other local zoning changes could allow for reduced housing and lot sizes to maximize affordability and acknowledge changing needs and expectations for housing. The key to a livable region is a mix of housing options that include and value all households. Communities have a variety of additional tools at their discretion to encourage, incent, and even directly create affordable housing opportunities; guiding land at higher densities alone is insufficient to meet the existing or projected needs for affordable housing. Complete implementation programs must identify a community's "public programs, fiscal devices and other specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence" (Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 4) to meet housing needs as stated in statute, and clearly and directly link which tools will be used, and in what circumstances, to explicitly address the needs previously identified. (page 113) The Council can also play a significant role in sharing best practices developed by others. One example is the Minnesota Housing Policy Toolbox. Another is the award -winning initiative of the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs and the Housing Preservation Project, which identifies opportunities for cost savings and local means for lowering total development costs. Rather than reinventing the wheel, the Council will look for practical opportunities to direct local governments to and supplement these types of offerings. Topics that may be of particular interest include: (Page 115) Accessory dwelling units Cost-effective affordable housing preservation Preservation of unsubsidized affordable housing Access to unsubsidized affordable housing for low-income households Mixed -income development and neighborhoods Advancing equity in housing Flexible, resilient, and culturally sensitive design Community engagement Placemaking and housing Sustainable practices in housing design, rehabilitation, and construction The process of developing this Housing Policy Plan has produced rich conversation and discussion over the last year. However, it has become clear that the region needs to have broader, richer dialogues beyond what the Council was able to achieve in developing this plan. This part of the plan describes areas where the Council intends to convene collaborative regional discussions on how to move ahead in the coming years: Reducing barriers to development of mixed -income housing and neighborhoods. Improving the alignment of housing policies and decisions made by school districts. Expanding the supply of housing options accessible to seniors and people with disabilities. Assessing the feasibility of risk -sharing strategies. Increasing housing variety and affordability through common interest communities. Developing shared regional strategies to affirmatively further fair housing and address housing discrimination. Building wealth and expanding investment in Areas of Concentrated Poverty. If appropriate, the Council will amend the Housing Policy Plan to reflect any new policy direction emerging from these discussions. (page 119) Plan housing choices for the growing senior population Seniors age 65 and older will be the fastest growing segment of our population , doubling in absolute numbers by 2030 and reaching one in five of our region's residents by 2040. Households headed by seniors will grow from 17% of the region's households in 2010 to 33% by 2040. While the relative share of senior -headed households may decline after 2040, it is likely that the absolute number of these households will be stable as today's large Millennial generation enjoys the benefits of longer life expectancies. Fewer seniors have disabilities given advancements in health care. More seniors are financially independent. But the sheer size and absolute number of this demographic create increasing challenges for housing affordability, accommodating disabilities, and independent living.44 As residents age, their needs, preferences, and travel behaviors shift; some communities may be poorly designed to accommodate their residents' future needs. Some seniors choose to move to a downtown condo. Other seniors want to age in place, close to their places of worship, friends, or family members (especially grandchildren). Other households are deciding whether to move into a nursing home, assisted living facility, retirement community, or other arrangement. Many senior households do want to retain their independence, age in place, and enjoy homes they worked hard for and that contain so many memories. However, the massive increase in the senior population will magnify the impact of those seniors who choose to move. Regardless of their preferences for specific locations, most seniors share common interests in less household maintenance, one -level or accessible living, and easy access to nearby goods and services, especially health care. Homes with stairs, lots of space inside or outside to maintain, or other characteristics can pose challenges to an older resident with arthritis or other chronic illnesses, dementia, or limited income. Some seniors who want a different type of home in their community have trouble finding appropriate housing where they want to live. Most senior households live on limited incomes and have greater interest in or need of rental housing options; this propensity increases with age. Are there adequate housing choices, including age -integrated options, available for seniors to stay active, access goods and services conveniently, and be near friends and family? While many elderly individuals and households can afford to stay in their homes, transition to an assisted living facility, or pursue other living arrangements, many others cannot. Over one-third of households with a householder age 65 or older-74,000 households —pay more than 30% of their income on housing. Cost burden for seniors is particularly severe among those who rent; nearly two-thirds of renter households with a householder who is age 65 or older pay more than 30% of their income on housing. Moreover, there is a large wealth gap between seniors who own their homes and those who rent. The typical homeowner aged 65 or above has enough wealth to cover the cost of assisted living for more than six years; the average renter 65 or older can cover only two months. In addition, aging poses special housing challenges for people of color, who often have lower household wealth accumulation and who generally experience a lower rate of homeownership. Many organizations are providing or planning enhanced housing options for seniors. For example: Minnesota Housing addresses the housing needs of seniors in a variety of programs. Examples include single-family home improvement and rehabilitation loans, and multifamily preservation efforts. These often improve living conditions and extend affordability for older tenants living in project -based Section 8 properties, public housing, and other properties. The Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) Elderly Waiver Program and the Alternative Care Program fund home- and community -based services for income- and asset- eligible individuals and households age 65 and older who require the level of care provided in a nursing home but wish to reside in the community The City of Minneapolis is another government entity that provides dedicated assistance to adults 50 years and older. The City owns 11 high-rise buildings with on -site amenities and services and containing more than 1,800 apartments. The Minneapolis Public Housing Authority opened the Thomas T. Feeney Manor in 2011, an assisted living facility that focuses on issues of memory care. • The Dakota County Community Development Agency operates 43 age -restricted developments (mostly 55 or older, some 62 or older) with 1,596 affordable (low- to moderate -income) age - restricted units, including assisted living units. Expand the supply of housing options accessible to people with disabilities Providing high -quality, accessible housing options for people with disabilities is a challenge for housing development and especially affordable housing development. As our population grows and ages, the availability of quality, accessible housing options for people with disabilities will be increasingly important. In the seven -county region there are nearly 260,000 residents with a disability, accounting for nearly 9% of the regional population.47 More than four -tenths (44%) of the region's non -institutionalized residents aged 75 or older experience difficulty with vision, hearing, mobility, personal care, or independent living, and 11% have moderate to severe memory impairment.48 Given the significant recent and forecasted growth in these older age cohorts, there is likely to be additional growth in the number of people with disabilities due to aging and longer life expectancies. (page 127) Funders, architects, and others are increasingly embracing "universal design." This is a set of design strategies and features intended to make it easier for residents to live in, and for guests to visit now or in the future, even as households move fully through the life cycle. Universal design features include having at least one step -free entrance to the property, designing units for single - floor living, ensuring doorways and hallways are wide enough for people with disabilities to move about freely, positioning controls and switches so they are readily reachable, and use of task lighting directed to specific areas. Federal lawsnotably the Fair Housing Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), and the Americans with Disabilities Act —require government entities to provide access to services and programs to people with disabilities. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities for any program or activity receiving financial assistance from any federal agency, including HUD. Disability is defined as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, including but not limited to persons with: • A visual or hearing impairment. • A mobility impairment. • HIV infection. • Developmental impairment • Drug addiction (except current illegal use of or addiction to drugs). • Other impairments that limit major life activities such as performing manual tasks, caring for one's self, learning, speaking, or working. (page 129) Appendix D: Senior Housin Type of Unit Accessory Apartment Adult Day Care Assisted Living/Housing with Services Facilities (sometimes referred to as Personal Care, Board and Care, Residential Care, or Boarding Home) Care Center/Nursing Home/Long Term Care/ Convalescent Home Continuing Care Retirement Community/ Life Care Community Custodial Care g Types and Arrangements Description Provides a separate living unit inside or connected to a single-family home Activities in a day care service/setting that can be scheduled daily, weekly, or on a part-time basis State -licensed community offering assistance with daily living activities including meals, laundry, housekeeping, medication reminders and other services State -licensed facility that provides 24-hour nursing care, room and board, and activities for convalescent residents and those with chronic or long-term illness Commonly called Life Care, provides independent living, assisted living facilities and skilled nursing in a campus setting Provides supervision and/or assistance with activities of daily life in the home environment Advantages Allows people to remain in their homes and can provide source of caregiving from a friend or relative, provides physical closeness while maintaining privacy and can provide additional income and affordable rent for the tenant Provides a social environment and activities to accommodate needs of both physically and mentally challenged and in need of a protective environment Trained medical personnel can assist with medication administration, dressing, bathing, and social activities; can range from small homes to large full -service facilities These facilities must offer regular medical supervision and rehabilitation therapy Full selection of amenities associated with retirement living Typically 24-hour care for an individual who does not desire to live in a congregate home Home Health Care Hospice Independent Living Personal Care Facility Senior Apartment Skilled Nursing Facility Transitional Care Unit (TCU) State -licensed medical personnel offer medication assistance, homemaking, bathing assistance and rehabilitation therapy Specialized care to lessen the physical and emotional discomfort of the terminally ill and their families Multi -unit senior development that may or may not provide supportive services such as meals, housekeeping, social activities, and transportation Specializes in caring for memory -impaired residents; requires additional state licensing as staff are trained for special needs of dementia Age -restricted multi -unit housing with self-contained living units for older adults able to take care of themselves State -licensed long-term care facilities offering 24- hour medical care for very frail residents dependent on nursing care Provides a bridge between the hospital and home Services are provided in the home environment Can be provided in the home setting or at a hospice home or in some cases a hospital Encourages people to socialize by providing meals in a central dining area and through social programs Specializes in memory care and in serving clients with dementia Provides independent living without the maintenance responsibilities of home ownership Care provided by registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and certified nurse assistants Patients receive skilled nursing care and therapy to regain abilities and strength after a traumatic health event Begin forwarded message: From: "Thamman, Freya" <Freya.Thamman(a�metc.state.mn.us> Date: March 30, 2017 at 6:18:58 PM CDT To: "JBPalm1@yahoo.com" <JBPalm1@yahoo.com> Subject: Senior Housing Guidelines/ Need # Hi Jennifer, Below are the senior housing guidelines we were discussing today. This relates to a community's net residential density. However, it's my understanding that the City would be meeting/exceeding net residential density requirements. When the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update is submitted for Metropolitan Council review, we'll evaluate if there is sufficient residential land guided at higher densities to create opportunities for affordable housing. We will assess this by looking at the at minimum residential densities of 8+ units/acre to support the City total allocation of housing need (244 units) for the time period of 2021 — 2030. For a hypothetical example, if there are 20 acres guided high density during 2020-2030---with a minimum of 8 unit/ac — it would be providing opportunity for 160 units). A reduction in the acres of High Density Residential in the 2021-2030 time period (/change to earlier time period), can affect if there is sufficient land guided at 8+ units/acre. A change of 2 acres of High Density has the potential to bring the City slightly below what is needed for high density residential at 8+ units/acre during the. Thanks, Freya METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Freya Thamman Sector Representative I Local Planning Assistance freya.thamman a metc.state.mn.us P.651.602.1750 I F.651.602.1674 390 North Robert Street I St. Paul, MN 155101 I metrocouncil.org ,.. mowCONNECT WITH US boo 1Ca- Senior Housing Guidelines It is the Council's practice to follow the U.S. Census definition of "housing unit" consistently in the Council's research and monitoring programs. The definition has changed in last decennial Census, so the Council has updated its guidelines accordingly. The below guidelines follow U.S. Census practices and identify when a senior housing facility qualifies as a housing unit or is classified as group quarters. The following are considered housing units and are within the scope of the Council's Plat Monitoring Program and count toward the community's net residential density calculations: Independent senior housing Assisted living units • Memory care units if. • Part of a senior campus that includes Assisted Living units: or • The memory care units are apartment -like and have their own kitchen and bathroom. The kitchen needs to have an area for food preparation, overt/stove connection, and a kitchen sink. The following are considered group quarters and do not count toward a community's net residential density: • Memory care units that are not part of a senior campus or are not apartment -like with each unit having its own kitchen and bathroom areas. • Skilled nursing facilities MENU Schedule a Tour (888) 216-4131 Why BeeHive Homes At BeeHive Homes we enjoy a unique and personal approach to assisted living care services. Like most assisted living providers, we offer both long-term and respite care that combines housing, assistance with daily activities, and health care services as needed. In general, assisted living care is designed for those who require a little extra help with daily activities such as medication management, bathing, dressing, mobility, incontinence, or a number of potential challenges. Each resident at BeeHive Homes is given an assessment at the time they move in and then again periodically as assistance requirements might change. We do take pride in knowing we have created an environment that allows our owners, staff, and fellow residents the opportunity to become a family. Because of each facility's physical size, the staff, and the orientation of our homes, BeeHive Homes takes every measure possible to provide individualized assisted living care according to the needs and desires of each resident. We are also experiencing a growing need for those who require memory care or dementia services includingAlzheimer's disease. Our BeeHive Homes approach to memory loss assistance has proven to be very effective in helping our residents meet the challenges of dementia with minimal angst or uneasiness. We would encourage you to contact a BeeHive Home today and discuss our assisted living and memory care services. Meet the BeeHive Homes Family VIDEO GALLERY MATERIAL/ACCENTS LANDSCAPE COLOR/TEXTURE DETAIL PORCHES GABLES HOME EXTERIOR PRECEDENT IMAGES MEDINA, MN January 13, 2017 MEDINA MEMORY CARE MOHAGEN HANSEN Architocturo Interiors ����DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Property Tax Refund Certificate of Rent Paid (CRP): Information for Landlords Last Updated: 1 /30/2016 All rental property owners, managers or operators must provide a Certificate of Rent Paid (CRP) to each person who rented from them during the previous year unless the property is tax-exempt. You must give each renter a CRP by Jan. 31, 2017 if: property tax was payable in 2016 on the property, or you were not required to pay property tax but you made "payments in lieu of property taxes" For more information, see 2016 Landlord Instructions for CRP, Certificate of Rent Paid. Renters need the CRP to apply for the state Homestead Credit Refund (for Homeowners) and Renter's Property Tax Refund ("renter's refund"). If you have a lot of renters, you may prefer to use a software product to generate CRPs or to produce your own. For more information: View a list of CRP software products. Landlord Specifications for Reproducing Certificates of Rent Paid (CRP) FAIR HOUSING CHALLENGES FOR SENIOR HOUSING PROVIDERS I. THE FAIR HOUSING ACT A. The Original Act. The Fair Housing Act was enacted as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. It is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. The Fair Housing Act's substantive prohibitions outlaw discrimination on the basis of seven criteria in various housing -related practices dealing with every "dwelling" not covered by one of the Act's exemptions. 42 U.S.C. § 3604. Originally, the Act prohibited discrimination in the sale or rental of "dwellings" on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin. Congress later added three additional bases of prohibited discrimination to the Fair Housing Act: "sex" was added in 1974, and "familial status" and "handicap" were added in 1988. The Fair Housing Act's nondiscrimination requirements extend to all "dwellings" except those covered by a specific exemption in the statute. For purposes of the Fair Housing Act, a dwelling is defined as "any building, structure, or any portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence" by any individual or family and "any vacant land which is offered for sale or lease for the construction or location thereon of any such building, structure, or portion thereof." 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b). In addition to the obvious coverage of houses, condos and apartments, this definition includes every other kind of "residence." This concept has been broadly held to cover any acconunodation intended to be used by its occupant for more than a brief stay, including homeless shelters. In particular, the 1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) applies to all residential buildings with four or more dwelling units, but not to transient occupancies like hotels. See 42 U.S.C. § 3604. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has clarified that the Act applies to continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) even though they include health care and other services along with the housing component. While there is no doubt that the Fair Housing Act applies to independent living and assisted living facilities, an argument can be made that nursing homes are not covered by the Act. But see Hovsons, Inc. v. Township of Brick, 89 F.3d 1096 (31.4 Cir. 1996); United States r. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 764 F. Supp. 220 (D. Puerto Rico 1991). If application of the Act is dependent upon an individual's intended length of stay, a nursing home may or may not.be covered depending on the individual resident's circumstances. B. Familial Status and the Housing for Older Person's Exemption. The familial status provisions passed in 1988 were designed to prevent discrimination by housing providers against families with children. However, the law exempts "housing for older persons" from the prohibition. 42 U.S.C. § 3607(b)(1). The purpose of the exemption is to ensure that the Fair Housing Act's familial status prohibitions do not unfairly limit the housing choices of older persons. The following kinds of housing qualify as housing for older persons: (a) housing provided under any state or federal program determined by HUD to be specifically designed and operated to assist elderly persons (such as housing established under the Section 202 program); (b) housing intended for, and solely occupied by, persons 62 years of age or older; and (c) housing intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person 55 years of age or older per unit. See 42 U.S.C. § 3607(b)(2)(A), (B) and (C). 2 hi determining whether housing is intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person 55 years of age or older per unit, the following provisions apply: (1) at least 80 percent of the occupied units must contain at least one person age 55 or older; (2) the owner must publish and adhere to policies and procedures demonstrating an intent to provide housing to older citizens; and (3) the owner must comply with HUD rules for verification of age. See 24 C.F.R. Part 100. The HUD Occupancy Handbook references a valid passport, birth or baptismal certificate, social security printout and certain other documents, but not drivers licenses, as proof of age. Some senior housing communities may wish to restrict occupancy in ways that are not specifically contemplated by the Fair Housing Act's "housing for older persons" exemption. For example, a facility may wish to restrict occupancy to individuals who are at least 55 years old, but younger than 62. Or, a facility may wish to restrict occupancy to individuals who are 60 years old or older. In such situations, the question arises whether such restrictions violate the spirit of the Act. hn considering whether a facility can restrict occupancy to individuals who are at least 55 years old, but younger than 62, or to individuals who are 60 years old or older, it should be noted that courts have determined that facilities can enforce policies that are more restrictive than those proscribed in the Act. See Gibson V. County of Riverside, 181 F.Supp.2d. 1057, 1082-83 (C.D. Cal. 2002); see also, TOWII of Nortbborough v. Collins, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 978, 653 N.E.2d 598 (Mass. 1995); Colony Grove Association v. Braun, 220 Cal. App. 3d 195, 269 Cal. Rptr. 234 (1990). The Northborough and Colony Grove courts upheld restrictions that prevented any resident under 55 from living in a community. Both courts held that more restrictive criteria were allowed. Significantly, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development has signaled its approval of more restrictive requirements. In a 1995 publication entitled, "Questions and Answers Concerning the Final Rule Implementing the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995," HUD posed the following question: 3 May a housing facility/community impose an age limitation more restrictive than that required by HOPA and qualify for the 55 or older exemption? HUD answered this question by stating: Yes. For example, the housing facility/community may require that at least 80 percent of the units be occupied by at least one person 60 years of age or older. The housing facility/community may require that 100% of the units are occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older, or that 80% of the units be occupied exclusively by person aged 55 or older. However, the facility/community should review other state and local laws, including fair housing laws that may prohibit discrimination based on age, before establishing policies and procedures restricting occupancy based on age, or affecting survivors' rights to property, that are not covered under HOPA. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Questions and Answers Concerning the Final Rule Implementing the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (HOPA), http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/hopa95.pdf (last visited on January 16, 2008) (emphasis added). As is evidenced in HUD's response to the question posed, two factors must be considered in deciding whether to limit admission in a manner that is more restrictive than the "housing for older persons" exemption (e.g., by limiting admission across the board to those individuals who are 55 years of age or older). The first factor to consider is the facility's adherence to the Fair Housing standards. The second factor is to consider the local jurisdiction's age discrimination laws, if any. If a facility adopts a more restrictive policy, the requirements of that policy must be clearly addressed. For example, the policy must clarify whether all residents must be older than 55 years of age; whether only one resident of a unit must be 55 or older; or whether only 80 percent of the units need to be occupied by individuals who are 55 or older. In addition, if a facility intends on using a more restrictive standard, the following minimum standards must also be met: (1) the housing must be intended to be used for individuals older than 55; (2) at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person who is older than 55 years of age or older (the percentage can be 4 greater); (3) the community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate its intent to qualify for the exemption; and (4) the population must be periodically surveyed to ensure compliance. See 24 C.F.R. Part 100. Adherence to these requirements is important because, under the Fair Housing Act, status as senior housing is an affirmative defense for which defendants have the burden of persuasion. See Hagar Agua y Vida en el Desierto, Inc, v. Suarez -Medina, 36 F.3d 177, 182 n. 4 (1st Cir. 1994); Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 and 2 Civic Assoc., Inc., 3 F.3d 1472, 1475 (11th Cir. 1993). To maintain the defense, an entity asserting it must satisfy each of the threshold requirements. See, e.g., Massaro, 3 F.3d at 1482 (holding that homeowners association was not eligible for the exemption where it failed to satisfy the "policies and procedures" test). The facility, moreover, must demonstrate that it satisfied these elements at the time the alleged discriminatory acts took place, pursuant to the statutes and regulations then in effect. See Covey v. Hollydale Mobilehome Estates, 116 F.3d 830, 839 (91h Cir. 1997). Similar to restricting occupancy to residents between the ages of 55 years old and 62 years old, the issue can also arise regarding the legitimacy of age of entry restrictions higher than those set forth in the federal Fair Housing Act. For example, some communities may wish to establish age -based admission requirements related to other criteria such as Medicare participation (age 65) or to ages referenced in state licensing laws. The legitimacy of age of entry restrictions higher than those set forth in the Fair Housing Act has not been litigated, but any attempt to enforce such criteria would necessarily rely upon the specific exemptions of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 for its justification. Whether a senior housing provider is attempting to establish age restrictions higher or lower than those set forth in the Fair Housing Act, particular attention should be paid to state law to determine whether it contains any prohibition against "age discrimination' in housing. See Section V. B. 5 II. THE FAIR HOUSING ACT, THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION A. The Fair Housing Act and Disability Discrimination. Disabilities protected by the Fair Housing Act are very broadly defined to include any physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more life activities, a record of having such an impairment, or being regarded as having such an impairment. 42 U.S.C. § 3602(h). Debilitating conditions such as heart disease, arthritis, blindness, Alzheimer's disease, and ambulatory status are examples of covered disabilities. In addition, clinically recognized mental and addictive conditions such as depression and alcoholism are within the definition. Current use of or addiction to illegal drugs is expressly excluded from such coverage, but recovering addicts will be protected. 42 U.S.C. § 3602(h)(3); see also Assenberg v. Anacortes Housing Authority, 268 Fed. Appx. 643 (9th Cir 2008) (property owners do not have a duty to reasonably accommodate medical marijuana use). In 2008, Congress passed the ADA Amendments Ace which rejects several Supreme Court cases that strictly interpreted the definition of a disability covered by the Act. The Amendments expand the scope of the major life activities and bodily functions that, if impaired, will be covered by the law.2 The law also states that mitigating measures, such as medication and assistive services or devices, other than eyeglasses and contact lenses, shall not be considered in assessing whether a disability is present. An impairment that is episodic or in remission will be covered, but impairments that are transitory (up to 6 months) and minor, are not included. The Act further specifies that a reasonable accommodation need not be made to a person who is only "regarded" as being disabled. I P. L. 110-325. z Major life activities now include, for example, caring for oneself, sleeping, reading, bending, and communicating. Major bodily functions now include, for example, immune system, bowel, bladder, cell growth, hemological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine and reproductive functioning. 6 The Fair Housing Act prevents discrimination against the disabled including: • Refusing to rent or sell • Discriminating in the terms, conditions and privileges of sale or rental • Prohibiting any preference or limitation in advertising • Refusal to permit reasonable modification of existing premises at the expense of the disabled resident • To prohibit inquiries to determine whether resident has disability or handicap • Refusal to reasonably accommodate To prove a claim of disability discrimination under the Act, a claimant must show that the facility discriminated against a person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling or the provisions of services in connection with the dwelling because of the person's disability. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(0(2)(A). B. The Americans with Disabilities Act and its Relationship to Housing Issues. Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in all programs, activities, services of public entities, and "public accommodations operated by private entities." 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. Title III protects three categories of individuals with disabilities (which mirror the protected categories in the Fair Housing Act): • Individuals who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities • Individuals who have a record of physical or mental impairment • Individuals who are regarded as having an impairment 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2). When a facility provides both residential and social services or has areas that may be considered "public accommodations" the ADA, in addition to the Fair Housing Act, will apply. Title III of the ADA will not apply to housing that is residential in character. 7 Under the ADA, disability discrimination in public accommodations could include: • Improper eligibility criteria • Failure to provide services in the "most integrated setting" • Denying participation in programs or affording unequal services or benefits • Failure to reasonably accommodate See 42 U.S.C. § 12182. C. Reasonable Accommodation. As noted above, disability discrimination can include the refusal to make reasonable accommodations. A "reasonable accommodation" can be a change, adoption, or modification to a policy, program, or service allowing the resident to use or enjoy the dwelling, including its public and common spaces. The Fair Housing Act requires housing providers to "make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practice or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B). Since rules, policies, practices, and services may have a different effect on persons with disabilities than on other persons, treating persons with disabilities exactly the same as others will sometimes deny them an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. In addition, the question of what qualifies as a "reasonable accommodation" is necessarily fact -specific and must be determined on a case -by -case basis. A sample Reasonable Accommodation policy is attached as Appendix A. An example of a possible required accommodation is the waiver of an apartment complex's "no pet" Mile for disabled residents. Bronk v. Ineichen, 54 F.3d 425 (7lh Cir. 1995). Other accommodations could include allowing "under age" caregivers to live with the resident, waiving second person charges, or adjustments to other rates. 8 Accommodations that would fundamentally alter the nature of a program or impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the facility are not required. See, e.g., 24 C.F.R. §§ 100.203, 100.204; 28 C.F.R. §§ 36.302, 36.303, and 36.304. Where a particular requested accommodation is not reasonable, the facility should nevertheless offer some other available reasonable accommodation. Generally, HUD rules place the initial burden on tenants to request accommodation and to propose the specific accommodation. The property owner is then responsible for determining whether the proposed accommodation is reasonable. The tenant must prove that the requested accommodation is necessary to afford an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling. Coronado v. Cobblestone Village Community Rentals, 163 Cal App 4'h 831 (Cal Ct. App 2008); Bell v. Tower Mgmt. Services; 2008 U.S.Dist LEXIS 53514 (D. N.J. July 15, 2008). Generally, property owners must pay for reasonable accommodations, but not reasonable modifications. Fagumdes v. Charter Builders' Inc. 2008 US Dist LEXIS 9617 (N.D.CaI Jan 29, 2008)(unpublished). D. Direct Threat Exception. The Fair Housing Act does not protect an individual with a disability whose tenancy would constitute a "direct threat" to the health or safety of other individuals or result in substantial physical damage to the property of others unless the threat can be eliminated or significantly reduced by reasonable accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(0(9). The Act does not allow for exclusion of individuals based upon fear, speculation, or stereotype about a particular disability or persons with disabilities in general. A determination that an individual poses a direct threat must rely on an individualized assessment that is based on reliable objective evidence (e.g., current conduct, or a recent history of overt acts). The assessment must consider: (1) the nature, duration, and severity of the risk of injury; (2) the probability that injury will actually occur; and (3) whether there are any reasonable accommodations that will eliminate the direct threat. 9 Joint Statement of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Justice, "Reasonable Accommodation Under the Fair Housing Act," pp. 4-5 (May 17, 2004). The housing provider must have reliable, objective evidence that a person with a disability poses a direct threat before excluding him or her from housing on that basis. Id. III. ADMISSION ISSUES A number of issues implicating the Fair Housing Act can arise as a result of the admissions process. The types of issues that can arise are usually dependent upon the type of community and the level of services being offered. Senior housing providers should ensure that their admissions process and admissions criteria are carefully tailored to match the types of care and levels of services being provided. Criteria that may be acceptable for one type of community may not be lawful for another. A. Prohibited Admission Inquiries. Generally, pre -admission inquiries by a housing provider about an applicant's physical and mental disabilities can be considered unlawful disability discrimination. HUD's Fair Housing Act regulations specifically restrict such inquiries. See 24 C.F.R. Part 100. According to the relevant HUD regulations, housing providers are not allowed to make pre -admission inquiries in order to "determine whether an applicant has a handicap or to make inquiry as to the nature or severity of a handicap of such a person." Id. However, some licensed senior care providers need to inquire into an applicant's health care needs in Oder to comply with applicable statutes and regulations designed to ensure that residents receive an appropriate "level of care." Some commentators suggest that long term care providers take steps to clearly separate their health -related inquiries into two stages. See Robert G. Schwemm and Michael Allen, For the Rest of Their Lives: Seniors and the Fair Housing Act, 90 Iowa L.Rev. 193 (2004). Under this standard, the admission stage would be limited to a t0 narrow set of questions designed solely to determine an applicant's eligibility for living in the facility under state licensing criteria. Id. It is suggested that licensed providers must be permitted to inquire into an applicant's health care needs "in order to comply with applicable state regulations designed to insure that residents receive an appropriate level of care." Id. The justification for this first stage of inquiry is that the facility would be in violation of licensing regulations if it failed to properly screen individuals whose medical, nursing and personal care needs exceeded the level for which the facility had been licensed. Id. The second stage of inquiry should involve more detailed health -related inquiries by health care staff designed to ensure that residents receive proper care. Id. By separating eligibility inquiries from those necessary for care decisions, a residential care facility could comply with both the Fair Housing Act and state "level of care" requirements. Id. Under this analysis, a community offering fee -for -service care should limit its health related questions to information needed to determine whether the facility is capable of providing adequate care. However, communities offering a more inclusive range of care, like a continuing care retirement community, which helps cover the cost of future care through entrance fees and pooled periodic fees, should be able to inquire about health conditions and history that have a bearing upon the risk being assumed. See 42 U.S.C. § 12201(c), which allows administrators of benefit plans to underwrite and administer risks based on health condition. In addition, all health screening documents should be carefully reviewed to ensure compliance with anti -discrimination laws. Also, any applicant for admission to a continuing care retirement community, who is disqualified due to a health condition, should be considered for reasonable accommodation in order to avoid charges of unlawful discrimination. 11 In determining which medical questions are to be asked, senior housing providers should also look to limitations imposed by licensure regulations and considerations focusing on facility staffing, services and physical capacity. Requests for "general medical histories" that make inquiry into health conditions that are not strictly related to these fundamental requirements of the community's program may be considered overly broad and unlawful. • Laflamme, et al., v. New Horizons, 514 F. Stipp. 2d 250 (D.Conn 2007) Plaintiff, who has cerebral palsy, epilepsy and depression, filed a disability discrimination complaint alleging that an independent living community refused to allow her to return to her apartment after being admitted to a hospital for a gastro/intestinal problem. The facility allegedly concluded that the resident "could no longer care for herself independently." Plaintiff also alleged that the facility required residents to disclose their medical conditions prior to residing in order to gauge a resident's ability to "live independently" and remain "emotionally stable." Defendants denied plaintiff's allegations. Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction, which was granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, defendants were enjoined from asking for medical information and "background information" as these questions required the disclosure of confidential personal and medical information beyond what was necessary to determine whether a person met the requirements of tenancy. • Robards v. Cotton Mill Associates, 713 A.2d 952 (Me. 1998) A housing applicant sued the owner of a federally -subsidized housing project alleging that its use of an application inquiring into the nature of the person's disability was illegal. The provision in question consisted of requiring a physician to describe the applicant's medical condition. The parties disagreed as to whether the inquiry was permissible under an exception allowing a landlord to make a limited inquiry to 12 determine whether an applicant was qualified for housing available only to persons with disabilities. The court noted that "the purpose of [this inquiry] is to facilitate a landlord's determination whether an applicant is eligible for housing." The court went on to note: A permissible inquiry is therefore one limited to discerning whether an applicant has a handicap. Understandably, a landlord is allowed to request that a physician verify an applicant's handicap. A landlord is not, however, permitted to require the applicant to provide the landlord with a description of his handicap. By requesting a description of Robards' disability, Cotton Mill exceeded the scope of a permissible inquiry. B. Independent Living Requirements. Senior housing providers are prohibited from imposing a requirement that their tenants be capable of "independent living" unless owners consider the ability of the prospective resident to have the necessary functions performed by another person, such as a spouse, live-in aide, or outside social services agency, and if the applicant can obtain such assistance, to treat him or her as qualified for occupancy. Initially, the prohibition against independent living requirements was examined in Cason v. Rochester Housing Authority, 748 F. Supp. 1002 (W.D.N.Y. 1990). Cason began a series of cases interpreting the Fair Housing Act's ban on discrimination to prohibit housing providers from imposing a requirement that tenants be capable of "independent living." One of the most important of the post -Cason cases is United States v. Resurrection Retirement Community, Inc., (discussed in Section I. A), supra) where the Justice Department in 2002 brought a "pattern or practice" complaint against a 500-unit retirement community, alleging that the defendants discouraged prospective residents who used wheelchairs and required applicants to submit to medical assessments conducted by the defendants' employees as a condition of residency. Cason and its progeny, as discussed below, clearly show that "independent living" requirements should be avoided. The HUD Occupancy Handbook categorically states that it is unlawful to ask if an applicant is capable of living independently. • Cason v. Rochester Housing Authority, 748 F. Supp. 1002 (W.D.N.Y. 1990) 13 Three plaintiffs claimed that their applications for low-income housing were denied because of physical or mental disability. The housing authority's eligibility requirements included the "ability to live independently." The court determined that the Fair Housing Act was violated because defendants denied housing only to disabled applicants on the basis of an inability to live independently; no non -disabled persons were denied housing on this basis. The court ruled that this was not the least discriminating way to ensure resident safety. • United States v. Resurrection Retirement Community, Inc., No. 02-CV-7453 (N.D. III. October 17, 2002) See discussion of case in Section IV. A, supra. • United States v. Pacific Life Insurance Co., No. 5:04-CV-01175 (W.D. Tex. December 22, 2004) See discussion of case in Section IV. A, supra. • Edith Hoffinan v. Church of the Valley Retirement Homes, No. 03-CV-03590 (N.D. Cal. August 1, 2003) The DOJ filed a disability discrimination complaint against a retirement home for allegedly maintaining an "ability to live independently" policy. The parties entered into a consent order whereby the facility agreed to cease a preadmission assessment of residents, abandon the "ability to live independently" policy, implement training and pay a civil fine. • Symons v. City of Sanibel, No. 03-ev-00442 (M.D. Fla. August 7, 2003) Plaintiff was an 82-year-old resident of a housing development for low income seniors who filed a Fair Housing Act claim against the community. Plaintiff's complaint alleged that the community required residents to be "capable of living independently." Plaintiff alleged that he was threatened with eviction because he did not meet the program's requirement of "living independently." The matter was eventually settled with 14 defendant agreeing to review plaintiff's lease and to eliminate any reference to "ability to live independently" as a criteria for terminating residency. IV. TRENDS AND RECENT CASES A. Motorized Wheelchairs and Motorized Carts. The use of motorized carts is increasingly becoming an issue of concern in the senior housing and long term care settings. These large, mobile vehicles can cause injuries to other residents and property. However, any limitation on the use of these carts must be in compliance with the Fair Housing Act. A sample motorized cart policy is attached hereto as Appendix B. Use of motorized carts presents its own unique set of problems. Facilities struggle with how to accommodate residents' reliance on electric carts while ensuring the safety of other residents. Restrictions on the time, place, and manner of use of motorized carts because of safety concerns are more acceptable than an outright prohibition. See U.S. v. Hi!Maven Copp., 960 F. Supp. 259 (D. Utah 1997). In HiIlhaven, the facility adopted a policy prohibiting motorized carts in crowded lobby areas around meal times due to safety concerns. The facility established routes for electric cart users to enter the dining room and eat at tables near the exit. Several residents alleged that this restriction violated the Fair Housing Act. The court upheld the facility's policy based upon the reasoning that the time, place, and manner prohibitions implemented to protect resident safety were acceptable. Competency testing prior to or upon entering into the facility should be avoided. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are likely to consider such testing as discouraging occupancy. Competency testing can be appropriate if the facility and its staff have legitimate and founded concerns about a specific resident's ability to safely operate a motorized cart. Facility policies should address when and how competency testing will be applied. 15 Requiring motorized cart users to maintain liability insurance is a violation of the Fair Housing Act. Similarly, damage deposits targeted specifically at motorized cart users should be avoided. However, an after -the -fact charge for actual damage is acceptable. Motorized cart policies regarding their use in and around senior housing communities should be crafted carefully. Motorized cart safety rules should be acceptable to courts if they are drafted in a manner that reasonably accommodates disabled residents' ability to access facilities and services. Reasonable rules requiring safe operation, speed limits, yielding to pedestrians, and parking will be acceptable. The acceptability of time, place, and manner provisions, such as not using motorized carts in certain areas or at specified times, may depend on particular circumstances. The following are several representative cases involving motorized carts and wheelchairs: • United States v. Rathbome Retirement Community Inc. No. 2008-ev-00174 (S.D.Ind. Nov, 7, 2008) On November 7, 2008 the United States filed a complaint alleging that a fifty-five and older community discriminated against two former residents by adopting and maintaining a policy prohibiting the use of motorized carts and wheel chairs in the dining area and all resident apartments. The complaint also alleges that the Defendant's actions constituted a pattern and practice of discrimination and denial of rights to a group of persons. • United States v. Twining Service Corp., d/b/a Twining Village, No. 2:05-cv- 05177 (RD. Pa. September 30, 2005) The DOJ brought a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act. The DOJ's complaint alleged that the facility's policies (1) prohibited use of motorized carts in dining room and other public areas, including community center, auditorium and library, and (2) required residents using motorized carts to indemnify and hold defendant 16 harmless for injuries. The parties entered into a consent order enjoining the facility from (1) prohibiting use of motorized carts in common areas, and (2) requiring indemnification. The consent order did allow the facility to place restrictions on the use of motorized carts if the resident's use of the motorized cart was determined to be a "direct threat" to the health or safety of others or would result in substantial damage to the property of others. The facility was also required to change its policies, train staff, pay damages, and establish a settlement fund. • United States v. Covenant Retirement Community, No. 1:04-067320AWI (E.D. Cal. December 20, 2004) The DOJ brought a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act. The DOJ's complaint alleged that the facility (1) required residents using motorized carts to purchase liability insurance; (2) prohibited use of motorized carts in dining rooms; (3) required a competency assessment of individuals using motorized carts; and (4) prohibited use of motorized carts in certain common areas. The facility denied the allegations and engaged in a two-year battle resulting in a consent order. Under the terms of the consent order the facility agreed to amend its policies and establish a settlement fund. The agreed upon policy allowed the facility to restrict the use of motorized carts when it became evident "that the person's use of the motorized mobility aid constitutes a direct tlutat to the health or safety of others or would result in substantial physical damage to the property of others." • United States v. Pacific Life insurance Co., No. 5:04-cv-01175 (W.D. Tex. December 22, 2004) The DOJ brought a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act. The DOJ alleged that the independent retirement community implemented a new "occupancy agreement" requiring residents to (1) submit to medical assessments; (2) be able to evacuate the facility on their own; and (3) move if the resident received assistive services for more than a limited number of hours. It was also alleged that residents using 17 motorized carts were required to pay a non-refundable "damage deposit" and agree to "assume all risk" for the operation of the motorized vehicle. The DOJ claimed that the facility either evicted or threatened to evict residents who either could not walk or required more than normal care. The parties entered into a consent order whereby the facility agreed to substantial financial penalties, discontinuation of the alleged practices, and notification to "potential victims" of the existence of a settlement fund. • United States v. Savannah Pines, No. 4:01-cv-03303 (D. Neb. November 29, 2001) The DOJ brought a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act. The DOJ's complaint alleged that the facility discriminated against resident with motorized cart by (1) requiring a non-refundable security deposit; (2) requiring insurance; (3) prohibiting use in common areas; and (4) restricting those residents to the first floor. The facility denied the allegation and contested the matter. Eventually the parties entered into a consent decree requiring education of tenants, training of staff, a change in policies and compensation to victims. • United States v. Resurrection Retirement Community, Inc., No. 02-cv-7453 (N.D. Ill. October 17, 2002) The DOJ filed a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act. The complaint alleged that DOJ testers had visited the facility inquiring about residency for an elderly relative who used a wheelchair. The testers were allegedly questioned at length about the nature of the resident's disability and eventually steered to assisted living. The DOJ alleged that the facility (1) imposed an ability to "live independently" requirement on residents; (2) limited the number of hours a resident could receive assistive service; (3) engaged in illegal steering; and (4) required selected applicants to submit to medical assessment as a condition of tenancy. The facility denied the 18 allegations and eventually entered into a consent decree agreeing to policy changes, training of staff, and monetary damages. • Weinstein v. Cherry Oaks Retirement Community, 917 P.2d 336 (Colo. App. 1996) The Colorado Civil Rights Commission found that the retirement community policies at issue constituted discrimination and unfair housing practices under state law due to a facility requirement prohibiting wheelchairs from remaining in community dining rooms. The facility offered to provide staff members who could transfer residents from their wheelchair to the dining chair. Although management argued that fire safety concerns justified the policy, the court focused on evidence tending to show that the real motivation was to maintain a "disability -free atmosphere." The court determined that the facility had not demonstrated a legitimate purpose for barring wheelchairs. The court further found that conditioning dining room use on whether a person could move without a wheelchair or walker was arbitrary and had no material link to determining whether residents met facility standards for the use of common areas. • United States v. Hitlhaven Corp., 960 F. Stipp. 259 (D. Utah 1997) The DOJ brought an action against owners of a retirement community alleging that they unlawfully discriminated against disabled tenants and refused to make reasonable accommodations to their motorized cart policy. The policy and practices at issue restricted motorized cart use during meal times in crowded common areas. In ruling for the facility, the court noted that the facility's guidelines were not an outright ban on motorized cart use, but rather a restriction in common areas. The court went on to note that the purpose of the Fair Housing Act would not be served by invalidating guidelines which were established for the safety of elderly persons. B. Changes in Levels of Care. The increasing acuity of residents present challenges as facilities attempt to move residents into higher levels of care. 19 Licensing regulations, fire safety codes, industry standards of practice and the facility's ability to provide care should be used to establish the criteria for admission and continued stay. Reliance on licensing regulations and clear language in the admission agreement are important factors in ensuring that residents accept the proper level of care setting. The following are a few cases addressing issues arising from changes in level of care: • Estate of Blanche Bell v. Episcopal Church Home d/b/n Bishop Gadsden Retirement Community, No. 2:05-1953 (D. S.C. July 8, 2005) The Estate of deceased resident filed a disability discrimination action under the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act against a CCRC. The 80-year-old resident, who was living in independent living, developed progressive muscle weakness and began using a motorized cart. The resident required assistance with transfer to and from the motorized cart. Plaintiff's complaint alleged that the resident was directed to transfer to the CCRC's nursing home or leave the community. The complaint further claimed that the community's policies barred the use of personal assistants. The complaint also alleged that the community failed to reasonably accommodate the resident's needs. The facility denied all allegations and counterclaimed for declaratory relief, breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Eventually the parties entered into a consent order. Under the terms of the consent order, the facility agreed to enact a "transfer policy" governing transfer between levels of care and "traffic rules" governing the use of motorized devices. See Appendix D. The consent order also addressed the use of personal attendants, allowing their use with conditions. • Salle Herriot v. Channing House, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65871 (N.D. Cal. 2008)(not for publication) 20 In this case, a resident in the licensed independent living section of a CCRC claimed that it was a violation of the Fair Housing Act and the ADA for management to attempt to move her to skilled nursing, even though it was alleged that she needed 24- hour care from private duty aides with all activities of daily living. Plaintiff was assisted by legal counsel from the American Association of Retired Persons. The defendant contended that it was fundamental to the operation of a CCRC for the manager to make level of care transfer decisions and that state regulations required the move. The court determined that the CCRC could not reasonably accommodate the plaintiff by allowing her to remain in independent living because it would violate state regulations. A motion for reconsideration is currently under submission, along with further defense motions for summary judgment. (See Appendix D.) • Greater Napa Fair Housing v. Harvest Redwood Retirement Residence, LLC, No. C 07-3652 PJH, 2007 WL 2900500; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76515 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2007) Plaintiff, Greater Napa Fair Housing, filed a complaint alleging that the independent living community, which does not provide personal care services, required a resident to move out if the resident developed medical or behavioral conditions that made the resident a danger to himself or herself or others. Plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction restraining this conduct. The request for the preliminary injunction was denied on the ground that the owner had a reasonable, nondiscriminatory business justification for the policy. This matter eventually settled. • O'Neal v. Alabama Department of Public Health, 826 F. Supp. 1368 (M.D. Ala. 1993) The complaint was filed on behalf of two assisted living facility Alzheimer's residents who were to be evicted as part of a settlement allowing the facility to retain its license. 21 This action had its genesis in an Alabama Department of Public Health licensing inspection. The Department threatened to revoke the facility's license when it determined that the presence of two Alzheimer's residents required higher levels of care than could be provided under the state's assisted living license. The Department of Public Health first attempted to revoke the facility's license. Among the reasons given for the attempted revocation was the presence at the facility of residents who were unable to medicate themselves and who required more care than the facility could give them. An administrative hearing was held in order to determine whether the facility could remain licensed. The decision of the administrative panel was appealed to the Montgomery County Circuit Court. The facility and the State settled the suit. One of the items to which the facility and the State agreed to in the settlement was that the residents would leave the facility. As a result of the settlement, the facility informed the residents that they would have to make other arrangements. As a result, the residents sued. The court rejected all of the plaintiffs' claims holding that a waiver of the assisted living regulation was not a "reasonable accommodation" under the Fair Housing Act and the ADA. • Appenfelder r. Deupree St. Luke, No. 1:94-CV-00296-SAS, 1995 WL 17137468; 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21960 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 25, 1995) Plaintiff filed a disability discrimination complaint under the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act against defendant nursing facility. The nursing facility maintained a policy whereby residents requiring spoon feeding ate in a "dependent dining room" rather than the main dining room. The dining room program was laid out specifically in facility policy. The court's analysis rested primarily on the Rehabilitation Act holding that plaintiff was not "otherwise qualified" to participate in the dining room program. Because plaintiff could not feed herself, could not communicate with others, and could be disruptive, the court determined that she did not qualify. In addition, the court determined that allowing the plaintiff to participate would fundamentally alter the program. 22 " Grubbs v. Medical Facilities of America, Inc., 879 F. Supp. 588 (W.D. Va. 1995) Plaintiff was denied admission to two nursing homes due to her size and medical condition. Plaintiff was in need of "subacute care" and neither facility was a sub -acute care provider. In granting summary judgment in favor of the facility, the court determined that potential residents must meet all of a facility's program requirements to gain admission. Because the facility was neither engaged nor licensed to provide the level of care required by plaintiff, the court ruled in favor of the facility. The court ruled that an essential element in the admission to a nursing facility "is the level of care the patient will require." The court then held that, because plaintiff could not meet this essential requirement, she was not `otherwise qualified." Wagner v. Fair Acres Geriatric Center, 859 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Pa. 1994), rev'd 49 F.3d 1002 (3d Cir. 1995). A skilled nursing facility was required to accept a combative Alzheimer's patient where there was evidence that the facility could handle the occasional outbursts without fundamentally altering the nature of its business, and it was shown that a nursing facility setting was appropriate for a person with such a disorder. " Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Hunan Resources, 19 F.Supp.2d 567 (N.D. W.Va. 1998) The Buckhannon Board and Care Home, a "residential board and care home" (RBCH) challenged state law and regulations requiring all RBCH residents to possess the ability to remove themselves physically from the facility in the event of an emergency. On defendant State of West Virginia's motion to dismiss the complaint, the federal district court determined that the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act claims against the state agency and state fire marshal could go forward. While the action was pending, West Virginia amended state law to delete the requirement. As a result of 23 the amendments, the action became moot. See Buckhannon v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human Services, 532 U.S. 598 (2001). • Baggett v. Baird, No. CIV.A.4:94CV0282-HLM, 1997 WL 151544 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 18, 1997) The owners and residents of a "personal care home" sued the state alleging that safety policies adopted by the state violated the Fair Housing Act. State policy required non -ambulatory residents to reside in nursing homes and prohibited them from residing in "personal care homes." The state argued that these regulations were not discriminatory because nursing homes had stringent fire safety requirements, better staff, and non - ambulatory residents had more serious health needs. The court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiff claiming that the regulation in question forced non -ambulatory individuals to live in nursing homes without necessarily delivering an increase in health and safety. C. Private Duty Aides. Senior Housing providers providing no services or a limited may of services should admit disabled residents who can meet the requirements of tenancy, even if they require assistance from a third party. While senior housing providers that do not offer a full array of care services are not required to fundamentally alter their businesses by providing such services, they are required to provide "reasonable accommodations." Waivers of "no live-in guests" or "no private care provider" policies have been considered reasonable accommodations by the DOJ and the courts. Sally Herriot v. Channing Hottse, 2008 U.S. Dist LEXIS 65871 (N.D. Cal. 2008)(not for publication) discussed above. The availability of 24 hour private duty aides in plaintiff's residential apartment did not diminish the right of the CCRC provider to transfer plaintiff to nursing in accordance with state regulation. • United States v. Pacific Life Insurance, No. 5:04-cv-01175 (W.D. Tex. December 22, 2004) (discussed supra) 24 The complaint alleged that the facility's occupancy agreement required tenants not to be in need of personal assistants. Defendant claimed that no resident had ever been evicted under these provisions. Under the terms of the consent order, the parties agreed that "condition of tenancy" would not include reference to physical or mental health and that there would be no limit on the number of hours that a resident could receive private duty care. • United States r. California Mobile Home Park Management Co., 29 F.3d 1413 (9th Cir. 1994) The DOJ brought an action alleging that the owner and manager of a mobile home lot violated the Fair Housing Act by failing to make reasonable accommodations in housing. Plaintiff and her infant daughter were residing at a mobile home lot leased from defendant. Plaintiff's daughter had a respiratory disease which required her to be cared for by a home health care aide. The Management Company demanded payment from plaintiff for the presence of the home medical aide pursuant to its policy of charging residents a fee of $1.50 per day for the presence of long-term guests and $25.00 per month for guest parking. Plaintiff asked the Management Company to waive imposition of the fees on behalf of her daughter; however, that request was refused. As a result, plaintiff paid $175 for the 2-'/a months for which fees were assessed. Plaintiff filed a housing discrimination complaint against defendants with HUD. The Secretary of HUD investigated her complaint, determined that reasonable cause existed to believe defendants had engaged in discriminatory practices, and charged defendants with a violation of the Fair Housing Act. hr deciding the case for plaintiff, the court noted that among the discriminatory practices proscribed by the Fair Housing Act is the "refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford [a disabled] person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a 25 dwelling." 42 U.S.C. § 3604(0(3)(B). Plaintiff argued that a landlord's refusal to waive guest fees for a disabled person's medical aide may constitute a refusal to make reasonable accommodations, in violation of the Fair Housing Act. The court went on to note that provision of the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) imposing an affirmative duty upon landlords to reasonably accommodate the needs of disabled persons may require landlords to assume reasonable financial burdens in accommodating disabled residents. However, at trial, the plaintiff failed to show that the fee posed a barrier to her equal access to the housing and judgment was entered in the defendant's favor. 107 F. 3d 1374 (9th Cir. 1997). Sally Herriot v. Channing House, No. C06-06323 (N.D. Cal. October 10, 2006). See discussion of this case in Section IV. B, supra. D. Service Animals. The Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act protect the right of the disabled to keep service or support animals, including animals used for emotional support. Exceptions may need to be made to "no pet" policies or pet damage deposits as a reasonable accommodation. However, like any reasonable accommodation, residents must be able to substantiate their disability. In addition, residents must establish a link between the need for the animal and their ability to function. Facility rules or policies for service animals should include: (1) allowing animals even if the facility does not allow pets; (2) not placing limitations on size, weight, or type of animal; (3) reasonable rules on behavior; (4) requiring licensing; and (5) insuring that residents have the responsibility to care for and supervise their animals. In certain circumstances, animals that provide emotional support to a resident with a mental disability must also be permitted. Janush v. Charities Housing Development, Corp., 169 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (N.D. Cal. 2000); Evelberth v. Riverbay Corp., HUD ALI 02-93-0320-1 (1994). 26 In 2008 the Department of Justice was very active in prosecuting housing providers for alleged failure to reasonably accommodate disabled resident's needs for support animals. Consent decrees were entered in a number of United States District Courts the following matters: • United States v. National Properties Inc. No. 2:07-cv-00434(AB) (E.D. Penn.) (based on landlords refusal to allow service dogs) • United States v. Stealth Investments Inc. No. 4:07-cv-500(D. Idaho) (based on landlords refusal to allow service dogs) • United States v. Bouquet Builders, Inc. No. 07-3927(RHK) (D. Minn) (based on landlords refusal to allow assistance animals) • United States v. Husseni, No. 3:07-cv-01405-SRU (D. Conn.) (based on landlords refusal to allow assistance animals) In addition to the above -referenced consent decrees, the Department of Justice also filed complaints in three jurisdictions alleging that housing providers failed to waive their "no pets" policies for disabled residents requiring assistance animals. • United States v. The Townsend House Corp., No. 08-cv-9753 (S.DN.Y.) (alleging that housing provider failed to allow 11 year old with Asperger's Syndrome to have assistance dog) • United States v. Lucas No. 08-1108 (D. Or.) (alleging that housing provider failed to reasonably accommodate resident who requested companion animal needed due to stress) • United States v. Vail Raden Properties, Inc. No. 2008-cv-05873 ( D. Minn.) (alleging that owner of apartment building discriminated on the basis of disability when it refused to rent an apartment to a person with a service animal) In addition to these more recent matters addressing accommodation of service animals, additional matters addressing this issue include: 27 " United States v. Bolt, No. 2:07-cv-00118 (S.D. Ga. September 28, 2007) The DOJ filed a disability discrimination complaint against an apartment owner for adhering to a policy that refused to allow dogs. The complaint was the result of DOJ testers being refused rentals based on the need for service dogs. In September 2007, the parties entered into a consent order whereby the facility agreed to adopt a "reasonable accommodation policy" undergo training; pay compensation to aggrieved person(s); and pay a civil fine. " Henderson v. Des Moines Municipal Housing Agency, No. 06-144, 2007 WL 4553350 (Iowa App. Dec. 28, 2007) The resident claimed that her two 90-pound dogs were a required "reasonable accommodation" for her post traumatic stress disorder. Plaintiff sued under the Fair Housing Act. The district court granted summary judgment on behalf of defendant. The appellate court reversed and remanded determining that "reasonable minds could differ as to whether her requested accommodation was reasonable in light of her mental illness." Note: This case has a number of helpful citations to other service animal cases. " Bronk v. Ineichen, 54 F.3d 425 (7th Cir. 1995) Deaf tenants brought an action against their landlords for refusing to allow a "hearing" dog in a "no pets" development. In overturning a defense verdict, the Seventh Circuit noted that there was no requirement that a resident needed to show that the animal had actively been trained as a hearing dog. The court further noted that, balanced against the landlord's economic or esthetic concerns as expressed in a no -pets policy, a deaf tenant's need for accommodation for a hearing dog is per se reasonable. 28 Additional service animal cases: • Green v. Housing Authority of Clackamas County, 994 F. Supp. 1253 (D. Or. 1998) • Majors v. Housing Authority of the County of DeKalb, 652 F.2d 454 (5th Cir. 1981) • Housing Authority of City of New London v. Tarrant, No. 12480, 1997 WL 30320 (Conn. Jan. 14, 1997) • Whittier Terrace Associates v. Hampshire, 26 Mass. App. Ct. 1020, 532 N.E.2d 712 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989) • Durkee v. Staszak, 223 A.D.2d 984, 636 N.Y.S.2d 880 (NY. App. Div. 3`a Dept. 1996) • Crossroads Apartments Associates v. Leboo, 152 Misc.2d 830, 578 N.Y.S.2d 1004 (N.Y. City Ct. 1991) • Fulciniti v. Village of Shadyside Condominium Assn., No. 96-1825 (W.D. Pa. November 20, 1998) • Woodside Village v. Hertzmark, No. SPH9204-65092, 1993 WL 268293 (Conn. June 22, 1993) E. Religious Discrimination. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based upon religion. This prohibition covers instances of overt discrimination against members of a particular religion as well as less direct actions, such as zoning ordinances designed to limit the use of private homes as a place of worship. A landlord cannot impose his or her own religious beliefs on renters, nor can the landlord treat applicants of his or her own faith differently from people of other faiths. In addition, it is illegal for a landlord to ask about a resident's religion. Nor can landlords differentiate based on an applicant's religion or lack of religion. 29 The number of cases filed since 1968 alleging religious discrimination is small in comparison to some of the other prohibited bases, such as race or national origin. It should be noted that the Act does contain a limited exception that allows non- commercial housing operated by a religious organization to reserve such housing to persons of the same religion. These exemptions have been narrowly construed by the courts. Under these exemptions an organization may limit the sale and rental of housing to persons of the particular religion so long as membership in the religion is not itself restricted because of race, color, sex or national origin. It is an open question as to whether most religiously affiliated retirement communities are subject to classification as commercial enterprises and therefore are not exempt from the religious discrimination prohibitions. The narrowly drawn exemptions will more certainly apply to convents, monasteries, and homes for retired missionaries. • Bloch v. Frischholz, 533 F. 3d 562 (7°i Cir 2008) Rehearing En Banc Granted October 30, 2008. Jewish condominium residents brought action against a condominium association challenging a rule forbidding placement of signs and symbols on doors and in hallways. The residents argued that the association's rule constitutes religious discrimination because it forbade the placement of mezuzahs on doorways. The court determined that the rule was facially neutral and applied to all objects placed in the hallway, not just religious symbols. Accordingly, the court determined that the rule did not violate the Fair Housing Act. In addition, the court stated that in essence the plaintiffs were seeking a "reasonable accommodation of religion." The court went on to note that the Fair 30 Housing Act, while providing for accommodation of disabilities, did not mandate this form of reasonable accommodation. The court stated that: It would be especially inappropriate to adopt in the name of the fair housing act a principle that lack of accommodation equals discrimination, since the FHA itself distinguishes the two. By requiring accommodations of handicap but not race, sex, or religion, the statute's structure tells us that the FHA uses the word "discriminate" to mean something other than failure to accommodate. We cannot create an accommodation requirement for religion (race, sex, and so on). It should be noted that this matter has been granted re -hearing en bane. V. STATE FAIR HOUSING ISSUES State fair housing and anti -discrimination laws may supplement the federal Fair Housing Act. Providers should always consider state housing laws prior to taking any actions that could be construed as discriminatory. If state housing laws conflict with federal requirements, the federal laws will control. However, state housing laws may provide stricter prohibitions and not violate the federal act. hi addition, state laws may offer protections not covered by the federal laws. For example, some state housing laws provide protections against age, sexual preference, marital status, and military status discrimination, while these protections are not addressed in federal fair housing law. The federal age discrimination act is beyond the scope of this paper. A. Sexual Orientation and Marital Status. Currently, seventeen states3, the District of Columbia, and over 240 counties and municipalities offer gays and lesbians protection against housing discrimination. Some but not all of these jurisdictions offer similar protections to transgender residents. In 3 California, Washington, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Maine. 31 addition, several states¢ have reviewed marital status discrimination claims under state laws and municipal ordinances. Senior housing providers should proceed cautiously when considering enforcement of occupancy provisions based on marital status and sexual orientation. Communities that do not heed these antidiscrimination laws may face legal and financial consequences if their jurisdictions have adopted these protections. • Swinton v. Fazekas, 2008 WL 723914 (WDNY 2008) Lesbian couple claimed that they were denied housing based on sexual orientation. Defendant brought motion for summary judgment. Appling the McDonnell Douglas burden shifting analysis, the court determined that plaintiffs survived summary judgment and could proceed to trial. • Levin v. Yeshiva University, 96 N.Y. 2d 484, 754 N.E. 2d 1099 (Ct of Appeals NY 2001) Lesbian medical students sued private medical school under the state human rights law based on school's refusal to permit them to reside in school owned housing with their respective partners. The Court of Appeals determined that the students' complaint was sufficient to allege a disparate impact on the basis of sexual orientation. • St Clair v. Vermont Human Rights Commission, 2006 WL 5837522 (VT. 2006) (unpublished order) Vermont Supreme Court upholds lower court decision determining that landlord discriminated against gay tenants. 4 Alaska, California, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin. 32 " Fair Employment and Housing Commission V. Phillips, 12 Cal. 4m 1143, 913 P. 2d 909 (CA 1996) Landlord refused to rent to unmarried couples because it violated her religious beliefs. California Supreme Court determined that the state's ban on discrimination against unmarried couples did not "substantially burden" landlord's religious exercise within the meaning of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the State Constitution's free exercise of religion clause so as to exempt landlord from state discrimination law. B. Age Discrimination. The federal Fair Housing Act does not prohibit age discrimination in housing. Indeed, under the "housing for older persons" exemption, senior housing providers are able to restrict access to their communities to seniors above certain ages. See Section I. B. In contrast, some states5 and the District of Columbia have adopted statutes outlawing discrimination based upon age. However, these state statutes have been found to either incorporate the "housing for older persons" exemption or at least not interfere with a community's ability to apply the age restrictions. See Taylor v. Rancho Santa Barbara, 206 F. 3d 932 (9t'' Cir 2000); Town of Northborough v. Collins, 38 Mass App. Ct. 978, 653 N. E. 2d 598 (1995). VI. MARKETING AND ADVERTISING As previously stated, the Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to discriminate in the sale, rental, and financing of housing because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. 3600, et sett. Section �3604(c) of the Act makes it unlawful to make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed or published, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 33 any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling, that "indicates" any preference, limitation, or discrimination violating the provisions of the Act. Any material or marketing used to promote a community is covered by the Act. These include, print material, television, radio and other electronic media, brochures, pamphlets, annual reports, billboards, pictures of the facility posted in a sales office, specialty marketing devices, and even business cards. Because Section 3604(c) of the Act bans any housing -related communication that "indicates" discrimination, courts have adopted essentially a strict liability standard with respect to discriminatory advertising. In other words, because a legal analysis turns on what a particular advertisement "indicates" to the ordinary reader, courts are usually not concerned with whether the message was intended to be discriminatory but with whether the advertisement indicates a prohibited "preference" on its face. Accordingly, the use of language and imagery in advertising that can be construed or that tacitly communicates a preference or limitation with respect to race, color, religion, sex, handicap, or national origin are deemed to violate the Act. However, the prohibitions of the Act regarding familial status do not apply with respect to housing for older persons. 42 U.S.C. § 3607(s). Accordingly, senior housing providers can indicate a preference for older adults in compliance with the "55 or older" and "62 and older" provision of the Act. In general, the Act and related cases, commentaries and regulations address three particular areas of concern with respect to advertising content that may violate the provision of the Act. These areas are (I) the use of problematic language; (2) the use of human models; and (3) other questionable practices. 34 A. Problematic Language. Use of certain terms or phrases that convey a discriminatory preference may be considered unlawful under the Act. However, it is acceptable for communities to describe themselves and their activities rather than the prospective or hoped for resident. By doing so, the community can avoid the implications that admission may be limited based upon the applicant's ability to participate. For example, an advertisement describing current or prospective residents as "active" may imply that disabled residents are unwelcome, while a description of "activities" offered at the community would pass muster. Guidelines published by HUD lists numerous words and phrases that could be interpreted as conveying illegal discrimination under § 3604(c) of the Act. These words and phrases include terms related to designations of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, and disability. Advertisements should not contain explicit exclusions, limitations, or other indications that protected classes are not welcome or are exposed to different criteria than other potential residents. HUD guidance prohibits the use of language that could directly or indirectly be interpreted as conveying a discriminatory intent. Examples include: • Adjectives describing the community or preferred resident in racial, ethnic, or sex -based terms; • Words indicating preferred race, color, religion, natural origin, sex, disability, or familial status; and • Explicit exclusions indicating discrimination based on disability (e.g., "no wheelchairs"). 35 Communities must also be careful not to convey perceived religious discrimination. Any examination of perceived religious discrimination must undergo a preliminary determination as to whether the community is covered by the Act's rather narrow religious exception. If the community does not qualify under the narrow religious exclusion, HUD has specifically determined that "advertisements should not contain an explicit preference, limitation, or discriminate on account of religion." According to HUD, words and phrases to avoid include "Jewish Home," and indeed any reference to the words "Protestant," "Christian," "Catholic," or "Jew" in the designation of a dwelling or its residents. Similarly, HUD warns against the use of symbols or logotypes which imply or suggest a preference for members of a particular religion. HUD also suggests that the use of religious symbols, such as a cross or a Star of David without further explanation could communicate a discriminatory preference. Similarly, HUD has opined that directions to the community that refer to a synagogue, congregation, or parish could also indicate a religious preference. Therefore, although a retirement community may very well be sponsored by religiously affiliated groups or ethnic and cultural societies, advertising should be written to make it clear that the message being conveyed in the advertisement is not unlawful discrimination. For example, display of the Fair Housing logo within the advertisement and a corresponding statement that persons of all faiths are welcome can dispel claims of religious discrimination. In addressing communities with religious names, HUD has taken the position that: Advertisements which use the legal name of an entity which contains a religious reference (an example, Roselawn Catholic House) ... standing alone, may indicate a religious preference. However, if such an advertisement includes a disclosure (such as 36 the statement "This house does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap, or familial status"), it will not violate the Act. Thus, while communities must use caution in describing themselves in religious terms, these potential problems can be mitigated by clearly distinguishing that the community does not discriminate based on religion. However, mitigation or explanation is not required with respect to a description of the community or service offered. Thus, HUD has determined that descriptions of communities and services are generally permitted, even descriptions indicating that the facility has a `chapel" on the campus or that "kosher meals" are served daily. HUD does not see such descriptions as violating the Act as they "do not on their face state a preference for persons likely to make use of these facilities or services." B. Use of Human Models. HUD advertising guidelines cite the "selective use of human models" as a potential violation of §3604(c). The use of human models in advertisements raises the issue of whether the community is communicating a preference for one group of persons or another. In determining whether an illegal preference is being communicated, both single ads or entire multi -ad campaigns will be scrutinized. For example, in Sanders v. General Service Corporation, a housing complex's pictorial brochures and its newspaper advertising campaign were scrutinized. Sanders v. General Service Corp., 659 F. Supp. 1042 (E.D. VA 1987). The community's 68 advertising photographs contained "a vital absence of black models," thus indicating a racial preference. 37 In order to avoid allegations of "preference," communities should ensure that human models used in advertising reasonably represent minority and majority groups in the surrounding areas. Models should portray a mix of racial groups as well as sexes. The community should also ensure that the use of human models in advertisements include models with disabilities in order to avoid allegations that the community is attempting to communicate a preference for non -disabled residents. All models should be of equal social setting. Communities must avoid portraying minorities or women in predominantly subservient positions. C. Other Advertising and Marketing Techniques. Advertisers and marketers often select advertising media that are intended to reach a specific market. In some instances, this effort to target a specific audience can result in claims of illegal discrimination. HUD guidelines specifically address the possibility that the selective use of advertising can lead to discriminatory results in violation of the Act. HUD guidelines provide two relevant examples for how marketing selection can potentially violate the Act. One marketing technique that can potentially violate the Act is distribution of the advertisement within a limited geographic area. If the geographic area is not ethnically or racially diverse, a conclusion can be drawn that the advertiser is indicating a preference in violation of the Act. Similarly, another marketing technique that may violate the Act consists of advertising in newspapers of limited circulation which are mostly advertising vehicles for resettling particular segments of the community. By limiting advertising to such media 38 and failing to publicize to the broader community as a whole, an implication can be drawn that the advertiser is stating a preference for a particular group or class. Additionally, limiting advertising to media that use or focus on one particular language or ethnic preference can also be considered a violation of the Act. Thus, communities should not completely exclude marketing to areas with diverse populations. For example, marketing that is targeted to certain zip codes may be problematic if the campaign is not also balanced with similar ads to a broader population. In attempting to determine whether an advertising campaign suggests a preference for a particular type of resident, advertisers should ensure that the content as well as the circulation of the advertisement is sufficiently diverse. Communities engaged in advertising should take into consideration the demographic make up of the surrounding community and ensure that groups represented in advertising reflect the surrounding population. VII. RESOURCES 1. Paul Gordon, Fair Housing Compliance Guide: Charting the Way (American Seniors Housing Association; 2009) 2. Robert G. Schwemm and Michael Allen, For the Rest of Their Lives: Seniors and the Fair Housing Act, 90 Iowa L.R. 193 (2004) 3. The Compass Group, LLC and The National Affordable Housing Management Association, Fair Housing — A Guidebook for Owners and Managers of Apartments (The Compass Group, ed., The Compass Group 2000). 4. Jody Feder, The Fair Housing Act: A Legal Overview, CRS Doc No. 95-710 (Updated 2003), http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/95-710_20030506.pdf (last accessed January 18, 2008) 39 5. Joint Statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice, Reasonable Accommodation Under the Fair Housing Act, Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Justice (2004), httplAvww.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/jointstatement_ra.hun (last accessed January 18,2008) 6. Jonathan I. Edelstein, Family Values: Prevention of Discronination and the Housing for Older persons Act of 1995, 52 U.Miami L.Rev. 947 (1998) 40 004099E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN $1,956.09 Total Electronic Checks $61,548.11 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT MARCH 22, 2017 507798 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L $1,332.97 507799 BARNHART, ERIN A. $1,997.94 507800 BELLAND, EDGAR J $2,570.18 507801 BOECKER, KEVIN D. $2,456.45 507802 CONVERSE, KEITH A $2,085.88 507803 DINGMANN, IVAN W $1,793.98 507804 ENDE, JOSEPH $1,456.49 507805 FINKE, DUSTIN D. $2,178.55 507806 GALLUP, JODI M $1,752.05 507807 GLEASON, JOHN M. $1,882.65 507808 GREGORY, THOMAS $1,934.80 507809 HALL, DAVID M. $2,020.74 507810 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S $2,001.80 507811 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. $2,230.19 507812 KLAERS, ANNE M $1,154.57 507813 LANE, LINDA $1,492.97 507814 LEUER, GREGORY J. $1,865.26 507815 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R $1,533.97 507816 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D $2,129.84 507817 NELSON, JASON $2,450.63 507818 PETERSON, DEBRA A $1,684.69 507819 REINKING, DEREK M $1,767.53 507820 SCHARF, ANDREW $554.45 507821 SCHERER, STEVEN T. $2,289.30 507822 SWALCHICK, CRAIG M $1,270.46 507823 VIEAU, CECILIA M. $1,146.43 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $47,034.77