HomeMy Public PortalAbout04.19.2016 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
7:00 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
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
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the April 5, 2016 Regular Council Meeting
B. Minutes of the April 6, 2016 Special Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve E-poll Book Agreement with Hennepin County
B. Approve Fuel Dispensing System Services Agreement with Beaudry Oil & Propane
C. Resolution Accepting Donations for New Scoreboard and Installation Supplies
D. Authorize Purchase of Scoreboard and Installation Supplies
E. Approve Ball Field Rental Agreement with Orono Baseball Association
F. Approve Butterfly Garden Quote with Designing Nature
G. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for Deer Hill Preserve
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Dellcroft PUD Concept Plan Review — West of Arrowhead Drive, North and South of Hamel Road
B. Woodridge Church Addition — Covenant
C. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) — Annual Public Hearing
D. Minnesota Highway Users Tax Distribution Funding (HUTF) Update
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XI. ADJOURN
Posted 4/15/2016 Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: April 14, 2016
DATE OF MEETING: April 19, 2016
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve E-poll Book Agreement with Hennepin County — Hennepin County will be
purchasing electronic poll books (e-poll books) county wide to replace the paper check -in
rosters at the polls. There will be no costs to the cities for use of the e-poll books. Staff
recommends approval of the agreement.
See attached agreement.
B. Approve Fuel Dispensing System Services Agreement with Beaudry Oil & Propane — At
the April 5th meeting, the City Council directed staff to move forward with the fuel
dispensing system services agreement with Beaudry Oil & Propane. Staff recommends
approval of the agreement.
See attached agreement.
C. Resolution Accepting Donations for New Scoreboard and Installation Supplies — The
Hamel Lions Club was able to raise $12,000 toward the installation of a new scoreboard
at the Paul Fortin Memorial Field in Hamel Legion Park. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution accepting the donation.
See attached resolution.
D. Authorize Purchase of Scoreboard and Installation Supplies — The Park Commission
reviewed the scoreboard specifications and recommended the purchase through the
donations collected by the Hamel Lions Club and through Park Dedication funds. The
Park Commission recommended that up to 25% of the total project cost, but no more than
$3,000 should be spent in Park Dedication funds. The city will only need to spend
$1,149.49 of Park Dedication funds to complete the purchase. Staff recommends
approval.
See attached memo.
E. Approve Ball Field Rental Agreement with Orono Baseball Association — The City
substantially increased the ball field rental fee schedule in 2016 to account for the
grooming and field maintenance that would need to be done before each use in Hamel
Legion Park and Hunter Lions Park. A rental fee was not included to address the smaller
practice field at Medina Morningside Park. Staff recommends approval of the attached
agreement with Orono Baseball Association to rent the Medina Morningside field at a
reduced rate because the field will not be maintained to the same standard as the other
fields.
See attached agreement.
F. Approve Butterfly Garden Quote with Designing Nature — The Park Commission has
recommended use of Environmental Funds to plant butterfly gardens in Hamel Legion
Park. Staff recommends approval of the attached quote, but just starting with the planting
of one butterfly garden to measure its success and time commitment. The Park
Commission will be discussing the exact location and plant varieties the following
evening at their April 20th meeting.
See attached memo and quote.
G. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for Deer Hill Preserve — WSB & Associates have
prepared the attached wetland replacement plan recommendation for Deer Hill Preserve.
Staff recommends approval.
See attached memo.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Dellcroft PUD Concept Plan Review — West of Arrowhead Drive, North and South of
Hamel Road — BFP Development, LLC has requested review of a Concept Plan for a
161-lot residential development west of Arrowhead Drive, north and south of Hamel
Road. The applicant proposes a 22 lot Conservation Design -Planned Unit Development
(CD-PUD) on the 90 acres south of Hamel Road. The applicant proposes 109 single
family lots and 30 townhomes on the 65 acres north of Hamel Road to be developed
though a standard PUD process, not under the CD-PUD process. The Concept Plan
would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the guided land use of
the property north of Hamel Road to Low Density Residential. The City takes no formal
action during a Concept Plan Review, but the City Council should provide advisory
comments to the applicant.
See attached staff report
B. Woodridge Church Addition - Covenant — Woodridge Church desires to construct an
approximately 10,000 square foot addition to the south side of the building. This amount
would result in a building under the 85,000 square foot maximum, but the proposed
expansion is not in the general location set forth in the Covenant, Settlement Agreement,
and Variance. These documents contemplated all building expansion to the north of the
existing facility. The Church has provided a sketch showing the proposed realignment of
future expansion(s), which is attached for reference. An expansion to the south of the
existing structure would require an amendment to the Covenant and Variance. The
Covenant states that it may be amended with approval of the City. Before completing
full plans to amend the variance and to apply for Site Plan Review, the Church wanted to
inquire if the City Council would entertain an amendment to the Covenant to even allow
2
such an application. Staff does not recommend that the City Council take any formal
action with regards to the Covenant until the City has reviewed a request to amend the
variance and had properly noticed hearings. However, the Church was hoping to receive
feedback from the City Council regarding their interest to consider an amendment to the
Covenants.
See attached report.
Potential City Council Action: The Council can provide feedback to the Church
related to interest in amending the covenants, noting that action on such an
amendment should not occur until feedback is received through the full public
hearing process related to amending the variance.
C. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) — Annual Public Hearing — Public
Works Director Steve Scherer will be providing a presentation of 2015 accomplishments
and future best management practices (BMP's) for the City's SWPPP. The City is
required to conduct an annual public hearing on the SWPPP. No action is needed on this
item.
No attachments for this item.
D. Minnesota Highway Users Tax Distribution Funding (HUTF) Update - City Engineer
Tom Kellogg will be providing the City Council with information on the HUTF
program. The HUTF is the source of revenue for the MSA system that serves 148
municipalities with populations over 5,000. Medina is part of the MSA system and in
2016 the total allocation for Medina was $246,565 ($184,924 construction, $61,641
maintenance).
See attached memo and brochure.
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 003609E-003628E for $60,042.92,
order check numbers 44189-44247 for $110,585.10, and payroll EFT 507073-507104 for
$51,847.93.
INFORMATION PACKET
• Planning Department Update
• Police Department Update
• Public Works Department Update
• Claims List
3
DRAFT
2
3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 5, 2016
4
5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on April 5, 2016 at 7:00
6 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Acting Mayor Pederson presided.
7
8 I. ROLL CALL
9
10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Pederson, and Martin.
11
12 Members absent: Mitchell.
13
14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer
15 Jim Strmel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Public
16 Safety Director Ed Belland, and Recording Secretary Amanda Staple.
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 (7:00 p.m.)
24
25 A. Approval of the March 15, 2016 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
26 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the March 15, 2016 special City
27 Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
28
29 B. Approval of the March 15, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
30 It was noted on page two, line 32, it should state, "...Steering Committee..."
31
32 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the March 15, 2016 regular
33 City Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously.
34
35 C. Approval of the March 24, 2016 8:00 a.m. Special City Council Meeting
36 Minutes
37 Johnson explained that there was not a quorum present but the Council still needs to
38 acknowledge that there was a meeting.
39
40 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the March 24, 2016 special 8:00
41 a.m. City Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
42
43 D. Approval of the March 24, 2016 9:30 a.m. Special City Council Meeting
44 Minutes
45 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to approve the March 24, 2016 special
46 9:30 a.m. City Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
47
48 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:03 p.m.)
49
50 A. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for the Wealshire of Medina
51 B. Adopt 11.00 Social Media Policy
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
April 5, 2016
l C. Amend 8.30 Technology Policy
2 D. Authorize Sale of 2001 Chevrolet Pickup Truck
3 E. Authorize Investment Officers for Morgan Stanley
4 F. Resolution No. 2016-25 Designating Sioux drive as a Municipal State Aid
5 Street
6 G. Resolution No. 2016-26 Accepting Bids and Awarding the Contract for the
7 Sioux Drive Turn Lane Improvement Project
8 H. Resolution No. 2016-27 to Partner with Other Intergovernmental Agencies
9 to Pursue and Show Support in the Pursuit of Grants to Improve Water
10 Quality in the Long Lake Creek Subwatershed
11 Johnson referenced Items B and C, noting that the updates are based on a discussion
12 with Mayor Mitchell. He noted that he is pleased to report that the bids for the Sioux
13 Drive project came in lower than the Engineer's estimate.
14
15 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the consent agenda. Motion
16 passed unanimously.
17
18 VI. COMMENTS (7:06 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 will meet on April 20th and noted that a new
25 member has been appointed.
26
27 C. Planning Commission
28 Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to hold a
29 public hearing for a Concept Plan for Dellcroft and a public hearing for the Medina
30 Clydesdale Place PUD relating to a proposal for a new sign.
31
32 VII. PRESENTATIONS
33
34 A. Fire Department Annual Reports (7:08 p.m.)
35 Chief Ruchti, Hamel Fire Department, provided a brief overview of the number of calls
36 received during 2015 and the average response time. He summarized the number of
37 hours during the year dedicated to training, fundraising and maintenance. He stated that
38 two new members were added in 2015 and provided a brief overview of the highlights for
39 the year including the Five Alive program, which enhances medical information for the
40 use of first responders, the purchase of new hydraulic equipment and electrical devices,
41 and receipt of the AFG grant funds. He stated that 2015 was a busy and cost saving
42 year for the Hamel Fire Department.
43
44 Chief Eisinger, Maple Plain Fire Department, provided a brief overview of the number of
45 calls received and number of hours spent in Medina. He reviewed the hours spent
46 through the department on training. He stated that currently there are 30 members and
47 noted that there is a capacity for 35 members. He provided the average response time
48 for the department for each of the cities served, noting an average response time of 3.8
49 minutes for Medina. He reviewed the current organizational chart of the members. He
50 noted a training, which occurred this past summer with both the Maple Plain and Loretto
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
April 5, 2016
1 Fire Departments and also highlighted some of the incidents in which his department
2 received assistance from the Loretto Fire Department.
3
4 Chief Van Eyll, Long Lake Fire Department, stated that his department also received
5 AFG grant funds this past year, which was used to purchase equipment. He noted that
6 the department celebrated their 100th year this past summer. He stated that a new
7 Captain's position was added to the department and noted that the department will be
8 holding a pancake breakfast this Sunday and invited all to intend.
9
10 Martin asked if Long Lake also serves Orono.
11
12 Van Eyll confirmed that the department does serve Orono.
13
14 Martin noted that she has noticed the poor road conditions in Orono and asked if that
15 impacts the travel and trucks when in Orono.
16
17 Van Eyll stated that there is a little bit of an impact as the trucks must slow down on
18 those roads but did not have measurable results.
19
20 Chief Leuer, Loretto Fire Department, reported the number of calls received throughout
21 the department and those specifically for Medina. He stated that currently the
22 department has 30 members with a waiting list of four people. He stated that received a
23 shared grant for shared services with two of the other fire departments. He highlighted
24 some new equipment and vehicles that will be purchased this year and advised of
25 training, which took place. He noted that seven of the members of the department have
26 over 20 years of experience and highlighted some of the large incidents that his
27 department has experienced during that time including assisting in the successful birth of
28 a baby this past year.
29
30 VIII. NEW BUSINESS
31
32 A. Deerhill Preserve (formerly Stonegate) CD-PUD Final Plat; Right -of -Way
33 Vacation — Public Hearing (7:23 p.m.)
34 Johnson stated that this plat includes 41 single-family homes and approximately 90
35 acres of conservation area. He stated that the request also includes the vacation of
36 right-of-way along Deerhill Road.
37
38 Finke provided background information noting that the Council granted preliminary
39 approval in October 2015. He noted that out of the 41 homes, the first phase would
40 include ten homes along with the seven outlots for the conservation area, Outlot A which
41 would be deeded to the City for partial park dedication, and six outlots which will be
42 replatted for future phases. He stated that Deerhill Road is proposed to be constructed
43 by the developer but noted that may come back before the Council. He noted that much
44 of the stormwater improvements will be conducted during the first phase of development.
45 He displayed the proposed site layout, which is largely similar to what was approved with
46 the preliminary approval. He stated that there is an additional request to vacate most of
47 the right-of-way off of Deerhill Road, with the exception of the western 145 feet, and
48 noted that staff does not oppose this request as necessary right-of-way will be dedicated
49 with the plat. He stated that the Final Plat is very similar to the Preliminary Plat, noting
50 that the curve of Deerhill Road was changed to become gentler and the cul-de-sac was
51 reduced in length in order to increase the conservation area. He stated that a draft of
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
April 5, 2016
1 the Development Agreement has been sent to the developer and advised that the
2 developer is also working with the Watershed District to finalize the Conservation
3 Easement and Land Stewardship Plan. He noted that staff recommends that these
4 documents be finalized before the Council takes formal action on the plat. He noted that
5 proper permits would need to be obtained from the City of Orono for the roadway, which
6 will be constructed in the boundaries of that city. He stated that notice was sent out in
7 regard to the potential right-of-way vacation. He stated that the plat is generally
8 consistent with what had been preliminarily approved.
9
10 Martin asked if there were any stumbling blocks with the Conservation Easement and
11 Land Stewardship Plan.
12
13 Laura Domyancich, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, stated that there have not
14 been any stumbling blocks; both parties are simply attempting to ensure that all matters
15 are adequately addressed.
16
17 Pederson opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
18
19 Steve Pflaum, 2725 Deerhill Road, stated that he supports the plat as proposed. He
20 asked if the Council should also be vacating the right-of-way for the neighboring property
21 along with the vacation of this right-of-way.
22
23 Martin noted that the City has not received an application from that party and therefore
24 the Council cannot act without a request.
25
26 Pflaum stated that he would like to see the Development Agreement include language
27 that the existing Deerhill Road will not be used for construction traffic.
28
29 Martin asked if the Council was affirmative that Deerhill Road would not be used for
30 construction traffic.
31
32 Batty provided additional details and stated that the existing Deerhill Road would not be
33 used for construction traffic.
34
35 Jennifer Haskamp referenced the construction traffic, noting that they have received the
36 draft Development Agreement. She stated that construction traffic would be an item that
37 they would like to communicate with the City about. She stated that while she
38 understands the desire to keep the construction traffic off of Deerhill Road, for timing
39 purposes they would perhaps like to utilize Deerhill Road for the model construction.
40
41 Batty noted that the public hearing is simply for the vacation of the right-of-way.
42
43 Haskamp referenced the vacation and noted that they do not have ownership interest in
44 the other portion of right-of-way mentioned by the resident and that is why they did not
45 request the vacation of that portion.
46
47 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to close the public hearing at 7:40 p.m.
48 Motion passed unanimously.
49
50 Batty asked if there should be further discussion of the Orono situation.
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
April 5, 2016
1 Finke stated that the road has been planned through Orono since the start of the project.
2 He stated that Medina was informed by the City of Orono that the grading operations
3 that are necessary to construct the street within Orono are subject to permit requirement
4 of that City, one of which is that a Conditional Use Permit would be required which will
5 add time to the review process. He noted that adequate access does not exist without
6 that entrance.
7
8 Anderson asked if the Council should be moving forward directing staff to prepare a
9 resolution of approval with the substantial items that are outstanding.
10
11 Martin stated that she would be comfortable with that direction as the item would come
12 back on the Consent Agenda and could be removed for discussion if necessary.
13
14 Finke stated that a copy of the comments that staff has provided on the outstanding
15 documents were included in the packet and those will be addressed in order to place the
16 item on the Consent Agenda. He noted that if the items are not addressed, the item
17 would be placed on Old Business for further discussion.
18
19 Batty stated that in fairness to the developer they did not see the draft Development
20 Agreement until last week and naturally there is some back and forth negotiations. He
21 stated that if direction is given tonight to prepare the resolution, the item will not come
22 back for adoption until everything is ready to go.
23
24 Martin noted that the list is not unusually long for a development of this size.
25
26 Pederson concurred with the comments of Martin.
27
28 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to direct staff to prepare a resolution granting
29 final plat approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report and to finalize the
30 Development Agreement by and between the City of Medina and Property Resources
31 Development Corporation. Motion passed unanimously.
32
33 B. Connection Fee Reduction Request for Proposed Wealshire Project (7:49
34 p.m.)
35 Johnson noted that the City received a request from the applicant in regard to the city
36 sewer and water connection fees. He stated that currently the policy allows for payment
37 over a three-year period while the applicant is requesting a five-year period. He stated
38 that staff would support the five-year period of repayment. He noted that the applicant
39 also requested a reduction in the fee amount but stated that staff is not supportive of
40 reducing the connection fees.
41
42 Pederson stated that it is important as a Council to remain fair and consistent and it
43 would be unfair to a previous developer if a new developer received a lower fee. He was
44 supportive of the extended time period for repayment.
45
46 Johnson stated that the City will have an opportunity to review the connection fees
47 during the update to the Comprehensive Plan.
48
49 Anderson agreed that it would make sense to extend the time period for repayment from
50 three years to five years, while leaving the connection fees at the proposed rate.
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
April 5, 2016
1 Cousineau agreed that this would be a good compromise for the project.
2
3 Tom Wiskow, President/CEO/General Contractor for the project, stated that this
4 development would be an 84-unit dementia and memory care facility. He stated that the
5 goal for the development was to begin construction one year ago but had been advised
6 that they should delay construction because of the high bidding prices. He hoped that
7 they could begin construction this May. He thanked Johnson and Finke for their
8 assistance, which has allowed the project to get to this level. He advised that there is a
9 great demand for this type of facility, noting that 53 percent of those over the age of 83
10 will suffer a form of dementia or Alzheimer's disease. He stated that he has prepared a
11 document, which highlights the challenges, primarily financial, that they are facing in this
12 development. He noted that the Rogers facility was rated number one in the State and
13 Country for their services. He stated that he would like to work together with the City as
14 partners in order to make the development a win for the City and the developer. He
15 noted that the facility will only be as good as the staff that they are able to hire and
16 maintain.
17
18 Pederson stated that the Council has made their consensus on what they would be
19 willing to do in terms of the connection fees and noted that some of the issues, such as
20 staffing, do not have an impact on this decision. He noted that the information has
21 shown that the overall fees are 20 percent lower than the fees in Bloomington.
22
23 Wiskow stated that over $650,000 has already been invested and without some
24 assistance from the City this project would most likely not move forward. He asked that
25 the Council read the information in full that he will provide. He noted that the
26 Cavanaughs have been very supportive and extended the purchase agreement twice,
27 and advised that they must make a decision by April 22nd whether to purchase the land.
28 He acknowledged that the extension from three to five years would help but was also
29 disappointed.
30
31 Martin confirmed that it would be helpful for the applicant to extend the term from three
32 years to five years for the repayment of connection fees. She asked the applicant to
33 state what amount of reduction he is requesting to the connection fees.
34
35 Wiskow stated that the current connection fees would be $181,000. He stated that he is
36 already over budget and has to reduce the budget by more than $1,000,000 in order to
37 move forward.
38
39 Martin noted that the City does have a significantly reduced tax rate, which is a positive
40 influence on the long-term budget. She asked for more specific information on the
41 amount of reduction desired.
42
43 Wiskow stated that he would like to see the connection fees removed entirely, or
44 reduced to $100,000 or $120,000.
45
46 Martin explained that it would be unfair to create a separate set of rules for specific
47 developers as other developers have found ways within their budget to move forward
48 with their development. She asked the applicant to consider the larger picture that the
49 City does have a significantly less tax rate and the location is such that there should not
50 be the same competition for staff as there is in Bloomington where that facility is closely
51 located to major hospitals. She explained that the City is willing to go beyond the usual
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6
April 5, 2016
1 three-year deferral and would be willing to extend the repayment term for the connection
2 fees from three years to five years to assist.
3
4 Anderson agreed with the comments made by Martin. He noted that this would not only
5 be a protection for the developers that have come before this request but also those that
6 will come after. He noted that the City does have a lot to offer developers.
7
8 Wiskow provided an update on the progress thus far noting that he has approval from
9 his Board to move forward if an additional $1,200,000 is reduced from the budget.
10
11 Martin noted that the line item for the City is $181,000 and the City is willing to defer the
12 repayment up to five years but cannot reduce the fees.
13
14 Batty stated that the numbers are based on studies to support the infrastructure in the
15 City and a reduction to those numbers for anyone would mean an increase for someone
16 else.
17
18 Wiskow asked the Council to review the document he has prepared and respond.
19
20 Martin stated that this is the answer from the Council, increasing the repayment term
21 from three years to five years.
22
23 Joe Cavanaugh stated that this project will not create a lot of traffic. He noted that a
24 $70,000 assessment for Chippewa Road is included.
25
26 Pederson disagreed that this will not cause additional traffic.
27
28 Cavanaugh asked if the term could be extended further to ten years.
29
30 Martin stated that additional deferrals mean that the funds do not come into the pot when
31 they are needed. She stated that she would not extend past five years as the funds will
32 need to be available to support infrastructure needs.
33
34 Batty noted that the City is already charging lower units for this development.
35
36 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve language changes to 21.00
37 Economic Development Fee Deferral Program to allow for payment over 5 years for
38 projects over 10 units or $90,000 in SAC/WAC fees. Motion passed unanimously.
39
40 C. Fuel Tank Lease at 600 Clydesdale Trail (8:23 p.m.)
41 Scherer stated that the fuel tanks were removed from the 600 Clydesdale Trail location
42 early in the project to reduce costs. He stated that the public works and police have
43 been getting gasoline from gas stations and the tanks located at City Hall. He noted that
44 he investigated the use of above ground tanks, which Corcoran currently uses. He
45 advised that the equipment would belong to Beaudry Oil and the City would only be
46 responsible for supplying electric service for a cost of four cents per gallon above the
47 current rate and the pumps. He noted that the tanks would also be equipped with a
48 monitoring system, which would allow the police and public works to track the use. He
49 believed that this is a very reasonable cost, noting that Corcoran is very happy with their
50 service. He asked that the Council approve the item, noting that $5,000 had already
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7
April 5, 2016
1 been budgeted for the electric service. He noted that an additional electric line would
2 need to be run for emergency services, which would have a cost of $2,000.
3
4 Anderson asked the size of the tanks.
5
6 Scherer reported that each of the two tanks would be 1,000 gallons. He noted that the
7 tanks at City Hall were 6,000 gallons, so these tanks would be smaller.
8
9 Anderson stated that he has been pushing for a backup at City Hall. He stated that he
10 likes the idea that there would be a backup fuel source if something were to happen at
11 600 Clydesdale.
12
13 Scherer noted that he has spoken with other communities in the area that also have
14 backup power on their fuel systems. He stated that it would be very slim that the power
15 would be out and all the neighboring communities were also out of fuel. He noted that
16 there is a shared equipment agreement with neighboring communities that he could firm
17 up to include fuel, should that be a concern.
18
19 Belland noted that the Emergency Management Ordinance would address that aspect.
20 He noted that it would have to be a catastrophic storm to take out the fuel supply from all
21 the commercial fuel stations as well.
22
23 Martin asked if there would be fencing for the fuel tanks.
24
25 Scherer stated that there would be cement bollards to ensure that people cannot run into
26 the tanks and noted that a key fob would be needed along with an employee number
27 and pin in order to access the pumps. He noted that they are also located at the police
28 station.
29
30 Anderson asked the amount of fuel that departments are using.
31
32 Belland reported that he ran a quick estimate and annually there is a usage of 15,000 to
33 17,000 gallons for the police department.
34
35 Scherer reported that since October public works has used approximately 3,000 gallons
36 of fuel.
37
38 Pederson stated that in his business he uses the same supplier and system and has had
39 great experiences and zero issues with the fuel or company.
40
41 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to direct staff to hook up emergency
42 power to the new pumps at a cost of $2, 000 and enter into an agreement with Beaudry
43 Oil using the no cost option #2 of the proposal. Motion passed unanimously.
44
45 IX. OLD BUSINESS
46
47 A. City Hall Lower Level Remodel Plans and Specifications (8:36 p.m.)
48 Johnson stated that Finke has done a fantastic job working with the architect and
49 owner's representative for the basement remodel. He stated that the plans for the lower
50 level would include much -needed additional restrooms, a break room for staff, a
51 conference room that is badly needed, and additional space for the planning department.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8
April 5, 2016
1
2 Finke noted that the remodel would include space for more than just the planning
3 department and provided a brief overview of the proposed design. He noted that this
4 design would allow the City to work efficiently and could house the planning activities
5 and additional staff needs for more than the foreseeable future.
6
7 Johnson noted that the original cost estimate was $240,000 and this quote is $242,000.
8 He noted that staff will continue to value engineer the project. He noted that additional
9 costs will come forward for other parts of the project. He thanked Public Works Director
10 Steve Scherer and his Staff for the demolition work on the lower level space. Their work
11 saved the City a large amount of money.
12
13 Martin did not think there is a need to spend funds updating the Council Chambers
14 above painting.
15
16 Cousineau agreed that the Chambers could be last on the list for updates.
17
18 1. Resolution No. 2016-28 Approving Plans and Specifications and
19 Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Medina City Hall Lower Level
20 Improvements
21 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adopt Resolution No. 2016-28 Approving
22 Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Medina City Hall
23 Lower Level Improvements. Motion passed unanimously.
24
25 X. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (8:44 p.m.)
26 Johnson reported that the Hollydale transition line open house will be held in May, noting
27 that staff will pass on the date and time once it is made available. He stated that the
28 Board of Appeal and Equalization will be held the following night at 6:30 p.m.
29
30 XI. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (8:44 p.m.)
31 Martin stated that she found the business tours to be enjoyable and interesting.
32
33 Anderson stated that he attended the Loretto Fire Department pancake breakfast at
34 which they had 800 people come through. He noted that it was great to see the
35 members of this community and neighboring communities at the event.
36
37 XII. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (8:45 p.m.)
38 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the bills, EFT 003584E-
39 003608E for $63,568.91, order check numbers 44121-44188 for $265,554.86, and
40 payroll EFT 507047-507072 for $46,048.25. Motion passed unanimously.
41
42 XIII. ADJOURN
43 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:46 p.m.
44 Motion passed unanimously.
45
46
47 Jeff Pederson, Acting Mayor
48 Attest:
49
50
51 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 9
April 5, 2016
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES OF
APRIL 6, 2016
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in session for the Local Board of Appeals
and Equalization meeting on April 6, 2016 at 6:30 p.m. at the Medina City Hall. Acting
Mayor Pederson presided.
Members present: Anderson, Martin, Cousineau, Pederson
Members absent: Mitchell
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson; City Assessor Rolf Erickson,
Southwest Assessing; Mike Carroll, Southwest Assessing; Representatives of the
Hennepin County Assessor's Office Janene Hebert and Ashley Ferguson
Acting Mayor Pederson called the meeting to order and explained the City Council can
only address the market values of property at this meeting.
Rolf Erickson provided an overview of the purpose of the Board of Appeals and the
meeting process. He explained that this evening's session is based on past year
assessments and transactions between October 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015. He
stated that tonight's session is to discuss market values.
Clara and Jay Echtenkamp 3041 Wild Flower Trail
Jay Echtenkamp submitted his appeal packet via e-mail. Council reviewed the
information submitted by Echtenkamp. The property owner requested a value of
$577,485 based on remodeling and mold remediation costs. Rolf Erickson explained the
Assessor's rationale for the value at $693,000. The City Council reviewed the
information and recommended a value of $658,000 based on the information provided
on the mold remediation cost of $37,000. Anderson moved, Cousineau seconded and
the motion passed unanimously. Motion passed unanimously.
Paul Jaunich 3205 Highway 55
Paul Jaunich requested a reduction of the value of the property to $3,100 based on the
property not being buildable because it does not have two septic sites, which is required.
The City Council reviewed the information and recommended a land value of $3,000
based on the information provided. Martin moved, Cousineau seconded and the motion
passed unanimously. Motion passed unanimously.
Lisa Ringer 1700 Deer Hill Road
Lisa Ringer requested a classification change from residential back to agricultural
preserve. Rolf Erickson confirmed Lisa Ringer operates a greenhouse business on the
property. The City Council reviewed the information and recommended a classification
change from residential to agricultural preserve. Martin moved, Anderson seconded and
the motion passed unanimously. Motion passed unanimously.
Janet and Otto Seidenberg 1552 Tamarack Drive
Otto Seidenberg provided information to the City Council on his property. Council
reviewed the information submitted by Seidenberg. Rolf Erickson explained the
Assessor's office be reevaluating the property in 2016 and recommended the property
be reduced to last year's valuation. The City Council reviewed the information and
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
April 6, 2016
recommended the prior valuation of $1,420,000 based on the information provided.
Martin moved, Anderson seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Motion
passed unanimously.
Tim Holland 275 Bergamot Drive
Holland submitted his appeal packet via e-mail. Council reviewed the information
submitted by Holland. The property owner requested a value of $1,400,000 and
explained he had overpaid for the property. Erickson stated his staff reviewed the
request and the home appraised out at the proposed value. He suggested a value of
$1,600,000. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed with a value of
$1,600,000 based on the information provided. Anderson moved, Cousineau seconded
and the motion passed unanimously. Motion passed unanimously.
Properties Reviewed by Assessor's Office After 10 Day Notice Period.
Recommended Changes by the City Assessor
Rolf Erickson reviewed the proposed changes and answered questions from the City
Council. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed with the proposed
changes based on the information provided.
PID#
Address
Original Value
Recommended
Reason
02-118-23-42-0028
1057 Jubert
Trail
$484,000
$479,000
Finished
Basement
Difference
05-118-23-32-0003
3975 Chippewa
Circle
$598,000
$598,000
No Change
12-118-23-11-0080
3911 Linden
Place
$717,000
$717,000
Appeal to the
County
12-118-23-33-0007
3285 Carriage
Drive
$471,000
$398,000
Dome home
limited appeal
12-118-23-34-0002
3375 Hunter
Drive
$400,000
$307,000
Partially
Complete
Home
13-118-23-43-0007
2412 Holy
Name Drive
$585,000
$585,000
No Change
18-118-23-22-0118
3035
Lakeshore Ave
$516,000
$516,000
No Change
21-118-23-14-0008
2275 Willow
Drive
$1,082,000
$720,000
Auction home
being improved
23-118-23-42-0007
1932 High
Crest Drive
$342,000
$315,000
Reduced for
Condition
24-118-23-23-0011
2182 Pinto
Drive
$1,242,000
$1,126,000
Interior
Inspection
Interior
Inspection
27-117-23-23-0003
1370 Phillips
Drive
$947,000
$875,000
Martin moved, Anderson seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Motion
passed unanimously.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
April 6, 2016
Adjournment
Cousineau moved, Martin seconded, to adjourn at 7:36 p.m. Motion passed
unanimously.
Jeff Pederson, Acting Mayor
Attest:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
April 6, 2016
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
April 6, 2016
Agreement No. A165116
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a political subdivision of
the State of Minnesota ("County"), and the CITY OF MEDINA ("City").
1. TERM OF THE AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall commence on June 6, 2016 and expire on February 28, 2023,
unless cancelled or terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of this
Agreement.
2. EQUIPMENT LICENSE
During the term of this Agreement and subject to the terms herein, County hereby
provides to City and grants City a limited, revocable, non-exclusive, royalty -free license
to use 10 KNOWiNK Poll Pad Hardware and Software units, and 2 Verizon Jetpack
Hotspot(s) (the "Election Equipment") exclusively for official election use. Unless
County otherwise agrees in writing, said license is restricted to access and use of the
Election Equipment by City's employees, contracted personnel and duly authorized
election officials performing election duties and responsibilities on behalf of City.
The parties may agree by written addendum executed by all the parties to modify the
quantity or definition of the Election Equipment included within the scope of this
agreement. County hereby delegates authority to execute such an addendum to the
Hennepin County Elections Manager. City hereby delegates authority to execute such
an addendum to its
Unless the parties otherwise agree, City shall provide and/or maintain, at City's sole cost
and expense, secure wireless and other telecommunications necessary for the operation
of the Election Equipment. Further and as necessary, City shall acquire or otherwise
provide all subscriptions, accounts or other licenses necessary for the operation of the
Election Equipment.
City shall secure, safeguard and control the Election Equipment, including but not
limited to system authentication and passwords, in the same manner that City secures,
safeguards and controls its own critical or confidential equipment, systems, software,
data, passwords or other information. While the Election Equipment is in City's
possession, custody and/or control, City shall exercise best efforts to (i) use and handle
the Election Equipment in a manner that avoids damage or harm to the Election
Equipment; (ii) use and handle the Election Equipment in accordance with County
direction and any third -party specification; and (iii) safeguard and secure the Election
Equipment from theft, loss or other damage.
Page 1 of 6
City shall be responsible for implementation of the Election Equipment.
Unless the parties otherwise agree, County or its designated third -party vendor shall be
perform all maintenance and repair of the Election Equipment. City shall not repair,
change, modify or alter the Election Equipment unless expressly authorized by County
or its designee. If any Election Equipment needs repair or maintenance, City shall follow
the direction and process provided by County. City acknowledges and agrees that, as
directed by County, (i) City may be required to deliver, at City's sole cost and expense,
Election Equipment to County or its designee for maintenance and repair; and (ii) City
may be required to provide access to the Election Equipment for inspection,
maintenance or repair during City's regular business hours, including but not limited to
granting the right to enter into and upon the premises where the Election Equipment is
located.
Upon reasonable notice, County shall have the right to enter into and upon the
premises where the Election Equipment is located for the purposes of inspecting the
Election Equipment or observing its use. On an annual basis, during the term of this
Agreement, City shall comply with County's request for verification of Election
Equipment inventory.
Upon the express written permission of County's Election Manager, or her/his
designee, City may sub -license Election Equipment to a school district within City's
territorial boundaries. Said sub -license shall be made pursuant to a written agreement,
between City and the school district and shall include substantially the same terms as
those contained herein.
3. OWNERSHIP
County represents and warrants and City acknowledges and agrees that County is duly
authorized to grant the license herein exclusively for use by City in its official elections.
Pursuant thereto, use of the Election Equipment for any other purpose other than that
authorized herein is strictly prohibited absent express written consent of County.
City acknowledges and agrees that the Election Equipment may contain proprietary and
trade secret information that is owned by a third party and is protected under state and
federal patent, copyright law or other laws, rules, regulations and decisions. City shall
protect and maintain the proprietary and trade secret status of the Election Equipment.
4. DISCLAIMER, LIABILITY AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
COUNTY, BY AND THROUGH ITS DULY AUTHORIZED VENDOR, IS PROVIDING THE
ELECTION EQUIPMENT ON AN AS -IS BASIS WITH NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER. THERE IS
NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, NO WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR
USE, NO WARRANTY OF NON -INFRINGEMENT, NO WARRANTY REGARDING THE USE OF
Page 2 of 6
THE INFORMATION OR THE RESULTS THEREOF AND NO OTHER WARRANTY OF ANY
KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED.
CITY ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT COUNTY DOES NOT OWN OR CONTROL THE
DATA SOURCE/SYSTEM NECESSARY FOR OPERATION OF THE ELECTION EQUIPMENT.
WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THE
PERFORMANCE OF THE ELECTION EQUIPMENT OR RELATED COMMUNICATIONS OR
CONNECTIONS TO ANY DATA SOURCE/SYSTEM, THAT THE DATA SOURCE/SYSTEM WILL
BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, THAT THE DATA IS ACCURATE, COMPLETE AND
CURRENT OR THAT DATA DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, OR THAT THE DATA
SOURCE/SYSTEM IS FREE OF HARMFUL CODE.
IN NO EVENT SHALL COUNTY BE LIABLE FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,
INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOSS OF PROFIT, LOSS OF BUSINESS OR
ANY OTHER FINANCIAL LOSS OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES EVEN IF COUNTY HAS BEEN
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. COUNTY'S SOLE LIABILITY AND CITY'S
SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR ANY DAMAGES RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LIABILITY FOR ELECTION EQUIPMENT
NONPERFORMANCE, ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, SHALL BE LIMITED TO RESTORING OR
CORRECTING THE ELECTION EQUIPMENT TO THE EXTENT AND DEGREE COUNTY IS
CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE SAME AND AS IS REASONABLY POSSIBLE UNDER THE
PERTINENT CIRCUMSTANCES.
Subject to the foregoing limitation of liability and to the provisions (below) regarding
responsibility for the costs related to lost, stolen, destroyed or damaged Election
Equipment, each party shall be responsible for their own acts and omissions and the
results thereof to the extent authorized by law. The parties are not agreeing, in any
manner whatsoever, to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other party. As
applicable, County's liability is governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 466 and City's liability is governed by the provisions of
. The statutory limits of liability for the parties may
not be added together or stacked to increase the maximum amount of liability for either
or both parties.
5. ROYALTY FREE LICENSE - OTHER COSTS
Except as expressly set forth below, City shall not pay County any amount for the license
granted herein.
City shall be responsible for the cost and expense of Election Equipment delivery from
and to a location as directed by County.
Except for routine wear and tear resulting from use in conformance with the terms
herein, City shall be responsible for and shall pay all costs, including but not limited to
Page 3 of 6
shipping costs, necessary for the repair or replacement of lost, stolen, destroyed or
damaged Election Equipment.
Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason, City shall, at City's
sole cost and expense, deliver, or have delivered, the Election Equipment to County or
its designee, complete and in good order and working condition, except with respect to
Election Equipment with defects attributable to County's vendor or supplier.
6. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven (7) day written notice to
the other. Termination of this Agreement by either party and for any reason shall not
relieve City of any duties or obligations hereunder including but not limited to the
obligation to safely and securely return and deliver the Election Equipment as set forth
above.
7. DATA PRACTICES
The parties, their officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and
subcontractors shall abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data
Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, chapter 13 (MGDPA) and all other applicable state
and federal laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy or confidentiality,
which may include the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
(HIPAA).
8. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
The parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local statutes, regulations,
rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted including but not limited to the
MGDPA, Minnesota Statutes section 16C.05, subd 5 and Minnesota Statutes section
471.425, subd. 4a and, as applicable, COUNTY's Affirmative Action Policy.
No delay or omission by either party hereto to exercise any right or power occurring
upon any noncompliance or default by the other party with respect to any of the terms
of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver
thereof unless the same is consented to in writing. A waiver by either of the parties
hereto of any of the covenants, conditions, or agreements to be observed by the other
shall not be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach thereof or of any
covenant, condition, or agreement herein contained. All remedies provided for in this
Agreement shall be cumulative and in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other remedies
available to either party at law, in equity, or otherwise.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Page 4 of 6
It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained
herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations
between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Except as expressly provided
herein, any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this
Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an
amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto.
City shall not assign, sublicense or transfer this Agreement or the rights, duties and
obligations herein, either in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of
County, and any attempt to do so shall be void and of no force and effect.
It is expressly understood and agreed that the obligations and warranties of City and
County hereof shall survive the completion of performance and termination or
cancellation of this Agreement.
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS BLANK.
Page 5 of 6
APPROVAL
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Reviewed by the County STATE OF MINNESOTA
Attorney's Office
Date:
By:
County Administrator
Date:
CONTRACTOR
CONTRACTOR warrants that the person who
executed this Agreement is authorized to do so on
behalf of CONTRACTOR as required by applicable
articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances*.
CITY OF MEDINA
Printed Name:
Printed Title:
Date:
Page 6 of 6
Agenda Item # 5B
FUEL DISPENSING SYSTEM SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made this 19th day of April 2016, by and between Beaudry Oil &
Propane, 630 Proctor Ave. NW, Elk River, MN 55330, a Minnesota corporation (the "Contractor")
and the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City").
Recitals
1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for Fuel Dispensing System
services; and
2. The City has approved the contract for Fuel Dispensing System services with the
Contractor; and
3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows:
Terms
1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. "Fuel Dispensing System Services Agreement" will consist of the
Contractor supplying two tanks (one for diesel fuel and one for unleaded gasoline), metering /
tracking equipment and maintenance of all equipment; and in turn the City purchases petroleum
products from the Contractor for a minimum of 5 years, with the equipment remaining the property
of the Contractor. The OPW Petrovend 100 fuel management system would be installed at no
charge and be maintained by Contractor, including painting the tanks as needed, as shown on the
attached Exhibit A. The City would be responsible for electrical, site work, concrete, permits and
vehicle protection.
2.0. TERM. The term and prices of this contract shall remain in effect from April 2016 until
April 2021, or until such later date as may be mutually agreed upon.
3.0 COMPENSATION. The City and Contractor would enter into a five year agreement, with
the City buying diesel fuel and unleaded gasoline from the Contractor at a rate of twenty one cents
per gallon over Minneapolis/St. Paul OPIS Rack Average on the day of delivery. All fuel will be
considered on -road. The Contractor shall invoice the City for the state fuel tax and any applicable
fees due on the fuel purchase, and then forward collected taxes to the proper agency. The City
would be exempt from State sales tax and Federal fuel tax. The contractor statement will include an
itemized list of taxes and fees paid.
4.0 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
4.01 Both the Contractor and the City acknowledge and agree that the Contractor
is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Any employee or
subcontractor who may perform services for the Contractor in connection with this
Agreement is also not an employee of the City. The Contractor understands that the City
will not provide any benefits of any type in connection with this Agreement, including but
not limited to health or medical insurance, worker's compensation insurance and
1
unemployment insurance, nor will the City withhold any state or federal taxes, including
income or payroll taxes, which may be payable by the Contractor.
4.02 The Contractor will supply and use its own equipment and tools to complete
the services under this Agreement.
4.03 The Contractor acknowledges that any general instruction it receives from
the City has no effect on its status as an independent contractor.
5.0 INSURANCE. The Contractor will maintain adequate insurance to protect itself and the
City from claims and liability for injury or damage to persons or property for all work performed by
the Contractor and its respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Contractor shall
name the City as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy in limits
acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall
provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective.
6.0 WORKER'S COMPENSATION.
6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker's
compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this
Agreement.
6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker's compensation insurance and will
provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this
Agreement.
7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its
officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and
expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney's fees) for claims as a result of
bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor's
performance under this Agreement.
8.0 PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND. The Contractor may be asked to provide a
Payment and Performance Bond to the City at no additional cost to the City.
9.0 PRIVATIZATION CLAUSE. Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act (the "Act") and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to
data privacy or confidentiality. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or
disseminated by the Contractor in performing its obligations is subject to the requirements of the
Act, and the Contractor must comply with the requirements of the Act as if the Contractor was a
government entity.
10.0 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement
will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota.
11.0 ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement or procure the services of
another individual or company to provide services under this Agreement without first obtaining the
express written consent of the City.
2
12.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement constitutes the entire
Agreement between the parties, and no other agreement prior to or contemporaneous with this
Agreement shall be effective, except as expressly set forth or incorporated herein. Any purported
amendment to this Agreement is not effective unless it is in writing and executed by both parties.
13.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its
entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law.
14.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason.
If the contract is terminated early, the City will pay a prorated fee for the services performed to date
in that calendar year.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year
written above.
By
By
CITY OF MEDINA
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE
(CONTRACTOR)
By
3
Beaudr
OIL & PROPANE
FUEL AND EQUIPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE CO
AND CITY OF MEDINA
Beaudry Oil & Propane will supply, install and maintain the following equipment at no charge
or lease. All the following equipment will remain the property of Beaudry Oil & Propane.
• 1000 gallon Flameshield tank for Diesel.
• 1000 gallon Fireguard tank for Unleaded Gasoline.
• Both tanks will be equipped with the following: vent, spill bucket, external
mounted pump, gauge and electronic tank level monitor.
• Used, single product one to two hose mechanical dispenser for the gasoline
tank
• Single hose Wayne Reliance S 1 Fleet Dispenser for diesel tank
The City of Medina would be responsible for electrical, site work, concrete, permits and
vehicle protection.
City of Medina agrees to buy all their fuel purchases for a minimum of 5 years from Beaudry
Oil & Propane. Upon completion of 5 years, option of another 5 years of terms to be
negotiated between Beaudry Oil & Propane and City of Medina.
Beaudry Oil & Propane will price fuels $0.21 per gallon over Minneapolis/St. Paul OPIS
Rack Average on the day of delivery.
Steve Scherer
Public Works Director
City of Medina
Date
2-/l- /g.
Trevor Beaudry Date
Chief Operating Officer
Beaudry Oil & Propane
DIESEL FUEL
GASOLINE FUEL OIL LUBRICANTS PROPANE
630 Proctor Avenue NW, Elk River, MN 55330 • Phone: 763-441-2383, 800-637-4117 • Fax: 763-441-1688 • BeaudryOiLcom
Agenda Items # 5C & 5D
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant City Administrator
DATE: April 14, 2016
MEETING DATE: April 19, 2016
SUBJECT: Donations toward Scoreboard and Authorization to Purchase
Background
The existing 30 year old scoreboard no longer works and parts have become obsolete at the Paul
Fortin Memorial Field (the City's only regulation baseball field). Ted Fust with the Hamel Lions
Club and Hamel Hawks Adult Baseball League has worked diligently to research options, seek
quotes, raise funds, get volunteers, and create a replacement plan. Ted has been before the Park
Commission multiple times to propose the replacement plan and get their endorsement.
New Scoreboard
The proposed new scoreboard will be similar in color scheme to the existing scoreboards at the
little league field and quad #3 field, but it would be more advanced with LED digital display.
The new scoreboard would have wireless controls that would be stored in a lockbox in the 1st
base dugout. The dimensions of the old scoreboard are 12 feet wide by 8 feet tall. The new
proposed scoreboard will be 20 feet wide by 13 feet tall. The scoreboard itself would be 8 feet
tall with 2 %2 feet of advertising boards on the top saying "Hamel Baseball" and 2 1/2 feet on the
bottom saying "Donated by Westside Tire and Ditter Heating & Cooling " for a total of 13 feet.
These two donors would receive permanent recognition for their level of donations (Westside
Tire donated $6,000 and Ditter Heating and Cooling donated $3,000). The other donors would
be recognized with 48" round signs that would be posted on the fence for three years.
Funding
The total cost of the scoreboard and materials will be $13,149.49 and $12,000 has been raised in
donations. It has been past practice that the city funds certain ballfield improvements at 25% of
the total cost. The Park Commission reviewed this request and has recommended that up to 25%,
but no more than $3,000 of the project cost come out of the Park Dedication fund. The Hamel
Lions Club is seeking a city contribution of $1,149.49 to complete the purchase. The Public
Works crew will also help with the installation of the new scoreboard. Staff recommends
approval.
Recommendations
Approve resolution accepting the donations for the scoreboard and installation supplies.
Approve purchase of scoreboard and installation supplies.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR NEW SCOREBOARD AND
INSTALLATION SUPPLIES
WHEREAS, the Hamel Lions Club has raised funds from various sponsors and
generously offered to donate the funds in the amount of $12,000 (the "Donation") to the city of
Medina (the "City"); and
WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated toward the purchase and installation of a
new scoreboard at the Paul Fortin Memorial Field in Hamel Legion Park; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to the
Hamel Lions Club, Westside Tire, Ditter Heating and Cooling, Farmers State Bank of Hamel,
Highway 55 Rental, Api Supply, and Quality Forklift 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 the various sponsors.
Dated: April 19, 2016.
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. 2016-
April 19, 2016
SCOREBOARD ESTIMATE
REAL COSTS
SCOREBOARD ITSELF:
2-New 25' I beams
Fence signage-48" round sign- 3 yrs only-3@215.00 ea
Total material cost:
Hamel Lions Club Donation
12-Apr-16
Cost
$11,478.49
$896.00
$645.00
$13, 019.49
($12,000.00)
City Of Medina Contribution: $1,019.49
( UP TO $3000.00)
ADDITIONAL DONATED SERVICES
Demoliton-site prep -installation -by public works:
Recycling of old steel by others(TCGD-Ted Fust)
$700.00
Yes -Public
Works
JLG Rental -Lull handler --1 day ( Quality Forklift)
$400.00
Yes.
Man lift rental-1 day ( Api Supply)
$400.00
Yes
Misc. materials (paint, fasteners)-Annonymous/Hamel Lions
$300.00
Yes
Electric connection to existing supply -Hamel annonymous.
$300.00
Yes
Total Donated Srv:
$2,100.00
Hamel Lions to donate additional $500.00 to off set addition! misc. cost over runs
for items in red and cement etc.
Scoreboard graphics: -Permanent
Fence Ads:
48" Round signs-3 years:
One Banner 4'x2'-1 year:
Westside Tire=$6000.00
Ditter Cooling, Heating & Electrical: $3000.00
Farmers State Bank --Highway 55 Rental -Hamel Lions $1000.00 ea.
Api Supply ---Quality Forklift for donated services/equipment
All signage to compy with approved Park Commission specs.
106 Max Hurt Drive
Murray, Kentucky42071
boardsocom
SAVE 3VA) Cirt IVIOrtE
BUYING IRECTI
TOL4FREE:866-S7S-OS / 7
FAX: 2]0-%rjf_0{)D4 _ Quotation
Date: 9/10/2015
Quote Number: 85679-2
Prepared By: Charlene Knight
Notes: FREE sponsor panel discount ends
September 30th, 2015
Customer: HAWKS BASEBALL CLUB
Address:
HAMEL MN 55340
Phone: 6122215090
Fax:
Email: ted.fust@twincitygaragedoor.us
Contact: TED FUST
Model
Description
Qty
Unit Price
Ext. Price
VSBX-320R
BASEBALL 8' X 20'
1
$6,495.00
$6,495.00
ROYAL BLUE
POWDER COAT ROYAL BLUE
1
$0.00
$0.00
White Letter Color
White Letters on Scoreboard
1
$0.00
$0.00
Royal Blue Trim
Royal Blue Scoreboard Trim
1
$0.00
$0.00
VSBX-WC2.4ARTNP
LCD WIRELESS NEW PLATFORM 1TX 1RX
1
$745.00
$745.00
VSBX-PWRPK4000
INTERNAL BATTERY PACK
1
$95.00
$95.00
VSBX-PN20
SPONSOR PANEL 31"X 20' OD
2
$695.00
$1,390.00
ROYAL BLUE
POWDER COAT ROYAL BLUE
2
$0.00
$0.00
VSBX-ETNR-845
ELECTRONIC TEAM NAME 8" OUTDOOR
RED
1
$2,465.00
$2,465.00
FREE SPONSOR PANEL PN-20
FREE SPONSOR PANEL PN-20
1
($695.00)
($695.00)
Subtotal: $10,495.00
Total: $10,495.00
Shipping:
$983.49
Sales Tax:
$0.00
Quote Total:
$11,478.49
Thank you for the opportunity to quote on your project! If you have any questions concerning this quotation or if there is
anything else I can do for you, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
aditertz\gnAfid----
t
sconm,A,.s
Charlene Knight
?'�l4 ma FREE
266-575-0577
"h' 160
Frr.: 12701 759,0004
194 MSR Nhoi D'ivo
!Molar. KY 42071
#,o Fe eknlgh[pncarskoudf.aM1i
W W dr, 4i► iitystursboatdevon
Charlene Knight
Sales Associate
CharleneKnight@scoreboard1.com
866-575-0577 ext. 160
Quote valid for 30 days. Installation and electrical work not included. Visa, Mastercard, American Express
and personal checks accepted for your convenience.
North Second Street Steel Supply Inc.
2212 North Second St.
Minneapolis, MN 55411
Phone: (612) 522-6626 Fax: (612) 522-1517
Website: www.nssss.com
April 14, 2016
10:52:10AM
Page 1 of 1
Quotation No. 411201601
Bill To TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR
5601 BOONE AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, MN 55428
Customer P.O. #:
Terms: .5 % 10 NET 30
Sales 1: SHAWN MAXEY
Ship To
F.O.B.: Delivered
Sales 2: CHAD 18
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR
5601 BOONE AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, MN 55428
Phone: 763-533-3838
ATTN:
Ship Via: Our Truck
Due Date: 04/12/2016
Quote Date: 04/11/2016
Order Qty Description Width Length Weight Price UM Extension Tax
2 WF BEAM 8 X 31# 25' 0" 1,550.00 $448.00 E $896.00 E
Total Weight 1,550.00
Unloading Instructions:
Receiving Hours:
Max Bundle Weight: 0
Spacers
Messages:
Subtotal Non taxable
Subtotal taxable
$896.00
$0.00
MH: 7.28% $0.00
Total $896.00
SUBJECT TO PRIOR SALES & AVAIL. AT THE TIME OF ORDER. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED,SUBJECT TO PRICE IN
EFFECT AT TIME OF ORDER, PRICING BASED ON RECEIPT OF ALL ITEMS QUOTED -ADJUSTMENT TO ITEMS/QTY
COULD RESULT IN REQUOTE.
Equal Opportunity Employer
WRAP CITY
GRAPHICS
Wrap City Graphics
62 6th Ave South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Proposal For:
Ted Fust
Hamel Lions
Estimate
Date
Estimate #
3/23/2016
16-360
952.920.4664
kimberly@wrapcitygraphics.com
%fc
G
MEMBER
3M Certified
Graphics Installation Company
Vehicle Graphics
Architectural
Item
Qty
Description
Rate
Total
Di -Bond / Alumacorr
1
24 by 48 single sided Team Sponsor sign
100.00
100.00T
Full color digital print with overlaminate
Includes set up, proofing, materials & production with holes
drilled for hanging and rounded corners
Option B: Double Sided $ 140
Di -Bond / Alumacorr
1
48" diameter single sided Capital Fund Sponsor
215.00
215.00T
Full color digital print with overlaminate
Includes set up, proofing, materials & production with holes
drilled for hanging
Option B: Double Sided $ 295
Estimate is valid for 30 days
Change orders may incurr additional costs
Subtotal $315.00
A deposit may be required.
Sales Tax (7.28%) $22.93
Vehicles must be delivered clean, free of snow, ice, rust and oxidation. If not,
they may be re-jected or additional charges will apply.
Total $337.93
Agenda Item # 5E
BALL FIELD RENTAL AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made this 19th day of April, 2016, by and between the city of Medina, a
municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (the "City") and the Orono Baseball
Association, a Minnesota non-profit corporation, herein called the "Licensee".
WHEREAS, the Licensee desires to use the baseball field for youth baseball
owned by the City and located in the City's Medina Morningside Park (the "Subject
Property") depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto.
WHEREAS, the City is willing to allow the Licensee to use the Subject Property, subject to
certain terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City and the Licensee wish to have a written agreement memorializing
the terms and conditions under which the City and the Licensee will accomplish the above.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the mutual covenants and obligations contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:
1. The City hereby grants the Licensee permission to use the Subject Property from April 25,
2016 through June 22, 2016 on Monday and Wednesday evenings from 5:30 p.m. until 8
p.m.
2. The Licensee shall provide the City with a written schedule of any changes in the schedule
at least ten days prior to such use.
3. The Licensee shall maintain an insurance policy in the amount of $1,000,000, single limit
of liability per occurrence to protect itself and the City from claims and liability for injury
or damage to persons or property for all work performed by the Licensee and its
respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Licensee shall name the City
as an additional insured under its general liability policy in limits acceptable to the City.
Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Licensee shall provide
evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective.
4. The Licensee shall submit a damage and maintenance deposit in the amount of $500.00 to
the City prior to April 25, 2016. The City shall return the deposit to the Licensee, minus
expenses for any damage or maintenance to the Subject Property following inspection by
the City after June 22, 2016.
5. The City shall provide for regular mowing of the Subject Property.
6. The Licensee shall provide all equipment necessary to conduct baseball activities and
shall provide for all other regular maintenance of the Subject Property including but not
limited to chalk lining for normal ball field measurements and boundaries, grooming the
fields, filling in divets, re-establishing Ag Lime, and picking up all trash, paper, and debris
after use of the field.
7. Upon termination of this Agreement, the Licensee agrees to remove from the Subject
Property all temporary structures, equipment and other items used by the Licensee, leave the
Subject Property free from debris and return the Subject Property to its condition prior to its
use by the Licensee.
8. The Licensee shall pay the City $200.00 for use of the Subject Property for the term of
this agreement. Payment of the $200.00 shall be submitted to the City by April 25, 2016.
9. The Licensee hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers,
employees and agents, from any liability, damages, claims, costs, judgments or expenses,
including reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting directly or indirectly from the Licensee's
use of the Subject Property.
10. The City may cancel, terminate, suspend or modify the terms of this Agreement upon
default by Licensee or failure of the Licensee to comply with this Agreement.
CITY OF MEDINA
By
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
By
Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator
ORONO BASEBALL ASSOCIATION
(LICENSEE)
By
Print Name:
2
Exhibit A
Medina Morningside Park Ball Fields
Agenda Item # 5F
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant City Administrator
DATE: April 14, 2016
MEETING DATE: April 19, 2016
SUBJECT: Butterfly Gardens
In the spring of 2015 the City Council had supported the promotion of Milkweed seeds for the
Monarch butterflies to our residents in the Medina Message newsletter and at the Spring Cleanup
Day. The city continued our efforts to help the Monarch butterflies by partnering with the
Monarch Joint Venture to hold a pollinator seminar last summer
The Park Commission reviewed various parks and nature areas in the city to determine the best
location to plant milkweed and diverse nectar sources for the Monarchs. Most of our nature areas
already naturally contain some milkweed so the Park Commission wanted to focus on an active
park to educate the public. Last fall, the Park Commission recommended the use of
Environmental Funds to plant the butterfly gardens in Hamel Legion Park. The garden would
also include a Monarch Waystation Sign that says "This site provides milkweeds, nectar sources,
and shelter needed to sustain monarch butterflies as they migrate through North America".
The attached quote shows two options and has been provided by Designing Nature, who
maintains our other gardens in the city. Designing Nature will supply the plants and plant the
garden.
Staff will discuss the specifics of the location(s) and plant varieties with the Park Commission
the following evening at the April 20th Park Commission meeting. Staff recommends planting
one butterfly garden at this time to measure its success and time commitment. We have received
some interest from residents as part of our Friends of the Park program to help maintain the
butterfly garden.
Recommendation
Approve quote with Designing Nature to plant a butterfly garden at Hamel Legion Park.
DESIGNI
a.,C.u.11lr_/
L A N D S C A P I N G s E R v I c E s
3312 Red Fox Drive
Hamel MN 55340
Phone: 763-478-4565
Fax: 763-477-5827
www.designingnatureinc.com
Designing Nature Inc is pleased to submit the following cost estimate:
Project: City of Medina- Butterfly Garden
Terms: Progress billing, Net 30 days
JOB ESTIMATE
Date: 4/8/2016
Job number: 16347-3
Quantity Description Price Total
General Butterfly Garden
Install the plants listed below according to sketch:
This garden plan can be placed in any sunny location.
Shrubs have a one year warranty. See description below.
Perennials
9 Butterfly Flower (Asclepias tuberosa) #1
11 Moonbeam Tickseed (Coreopsis verticillata 'Moonbeam) #1
19 Ruby Star Coneflower (Echinacea purpurea 'Ruby Star) #1
7 Little Joe Joe Pye Weed (Eupatorium dubium 'Little Joe) #1
7 Venus Flase Sunflower (Heliopsis helianthoides 'Venus) #1
9 Passinoate Returns Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Passionate Returns) #1
8 Floristan White Blazing Star (Liatris spicata 'Floristan White) #1
10 Grape Gumball Bee Balm (Monarda 'Grape Gumball) #1
6 Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) #1
11 Autumn Joy Sedum (Sedum Autumn Joy) #1
Shrubs
4 Pink Perfume Lilac (Syringa x 'Pink Perfume) #3
Mulch & Edging
Create a natural cut edging to create a kidney shape bed
similar to sketch.
Install double shredded hardwood mulch in bed.
Community Building Butterfly Garden
Install the following plants according to sketch:
This plan has more shade tolerant plants for front of building.
Perennials
6 Vibrant Dome Aster (Aster novae-angliae 'Vibrant Dome) #1
7 Hot Lips Turtle Head (Chelone Hot Lips) #1
6 Moonbeam Tickseed (Coreopsis verticillata 'Moonbeam) #1
11 White Swan Coneflower (Echinacea purpurea 'White Swan) #1
6 Phantom Joe Pye Weed (Eupatorium 'Phantom) #1
5 Arizona Apricot Blanket Flower (Gaillardia aristata 'Arizona Apricot) #1
$1, 940.40
$418.75
$1,178.21
5 Venus Flase Sunflower (Heliopsis helianthoides 'Venus) #1
10 Goldstrum Rudbeckia (Rudbeckia fu/gida 'Goldstrum) #1
7 Blue Heaven Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium 'Minnblue A) #1
3 Autumn Joy Sedum (Sedum 'Autumn Joy) #1
5 Prairie Dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) #1
Mulch & Edging
Create a natural cut edge from existing vinyl edging to create a
new planting bed as shown in sketch.
Install double shredded hardwood mulch in bed.
Plant Warranty:
Designing Nature Inc. guarantees shrubs that fail to grow.
We do not assume responsibility for losses of plants due to flood,
drought, winterkill or other natural causes beyond our control. Shrubs
are guaranteed for 1 year from installation upon evaluation of proper watering and providing
the account was paid when due and damages were reported within the warranty period.
Plants damaged or destroyed by deer, rabbits etc. are void of any warranty.
Shrubs will be replaced once, free of charge.
*Upon acceptance of this estimate a contract will be drafted for your signature and
and returned to us with the downpayment. Supplies will be ordered and delivered upon receipt
of your check.
* Price is subject to any 2016 increases in material costs.
Accepted By: Submitted by: Sarah Notch
$358.13
Designing Nature Inc.
Date: Date: 4/8/16
4/8/16
3 Butterfly Flower
3 Floristan White Blazing Star
3 Little Bluestem
3 Moonbeam Tickseed
3 Passinoate Returns Daylily
G Autumn Joy Sedum
7 Ruby Star Conef lower
2 Pink Perfume Lilac
3 Venus False Sunflower C
7 Little Joe Joe Pye Weed
4 Ruby Star Conef lower
3 Little Bluestem
4 Venus
BJTTHR
=L GARD-
-.-..
Nr OF "-DI
SCALE I/4" _
False Sunflower
2 Pink Perfume Lilac
G Butterfly Flower
3 Moonbeam Tickseed
\A
1_011
4 Grape Gumball Bee Balm
6 Passinoate Returns Daylily
8 Ruby Star Conef lower
5 Autumn Joy Sedum
5 Floristan White Blazing Star
5 Moonbeam Tickseed
6 Grape Gumball Bee Balm
CO
V
V
\
T' B �101
\ G
YARD
3 Vibrant Dome Aster
3 Moonbeam Tickseed
5 Goldsturm Rudbeckia
3 Blue Heaven Little Blue Stem
4 Hot Lips Turtle Head
FRONT OF COMMUNITY BUILDING
6 White Swan Conef lower
5 Venus False Sunflower
EXISTING BED
BUILDINIG
)*
�,
BUTTERFLY GARD_
CITY OF "EDI\A
SCALE 1/8" - 1'-0"
5 Arizona Apricot Blanket Flower
5 Prairie Dropseed
3 Vibrant Dome Aster
Mk� 3 Autumn Joy Sedum
3 Moonbeam Tickseed
5 White Swan Conef lower
3 Hot Lips Turtle Head
G Phantom Joe Pye Weed
5 Goldsturm Rudbeckia
4 Blue Heaven Little Blue Stem
EXISTING VINYL EDGING
Butterfly Garden- General
Plants
Botanical Name
Common Name
Bloom Season
Asclepias incarnata
Asclepias tuberosa
Coreopsis verticillata 'Moonbeam'
Echinacea purpurea 'Ruby Star'
Eupatorium dubium'Little Joe'
Heliopsis helianthoides'Venus'
Hemerocallis 'Passionate Returns'
Liatris spicata'Floristan White'
Monarda 'Grape Gumball'
Schizachyrium scoparium
Sedum 'Autumn Joy'
Shrub
Syringa x'Pink Perfume'
BUTTERFLY GARDEN BUILDING
Plants
Swamp Milkweed
Butterfly Flower
Moonbeam Tickseed
Ruby Star Coneflower
Little Joe Joe Pye Weed
Venus False Sunflower
Passinoate Returns Daylily
Floristan White Blazing Star
Grape Gumball Bee Balm
Little Bluestem
Autumn Joy Sedum
Pink Perfume Lilac
June -August
August -October
June -September
June -August
August -October
July -August
June -October
June -September
July -September
August -September
August -September
Spring and Fall
Botanical Name
Common Name
Bloom Season
Aster novae-angliae'Vibrant Dome'
Chelone 'Hot Lips'
Coreopsis verticillata 'Moonbeam'
Echinacea purpurea 'White Swan'
Eupatorium 'Phantom'
Gaillardia aristata 'Arizona Apricot'
Heliopsis helianthoides'Venus'
Rudbeckia fulgida 'Goldsturm'
Schizachyrium scoparium 'Minnblue A'
Sedum 'Autumn Joy'
Sporobolus heterolepis
Vibrant Dome Aster
Hot Lips Turtle Head
Moonbeam Tickseed
White Swan Coneflower
Phantom Joe Pye Weed
Arizona Apricot Blanket Flower
Venus False Sunflower
Goldsturm Rudbeckia
Blue Heaven Little Blue Stem
Autumn Joy Sedum
Prairie Dropseed
Ausutst-October
August -September
June -September
June-Autust
July -September
June -September
July -August
July -September
September
August -September
August -September
WSB
& Associates, Inc. engineering • planning • environmental • construction
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor Mitchell and Medina City Council Members
From: Dustin Simonson, WSB & Associates, Inc.
CC: Dusty Finke, City of Medina
Date: April 11, 2016
Re: Deer Hill Preserve — Wetland Replacement Plan
City Project No. WF-16-068
WSB Project No. 2712-800
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
The Deer Hill Preserve project will result in a total of 0.57 acres of wetland impact to four
wetlands. The proposed impacts are from the construction of the main road within the housing
development along with the loss of hydrology to farmed wetlands as a result of the development.
Replacement is proposed at a 2:1 ratio through project specific replacement that will be on -site
and in -kind as part of a 51-acre landscape restoration that is planned for the site. Of the 51-acre
restoration 1.14 acres of wetland mitigation will be included to meet WCA and COE
replacement standards.
The application was noticed to the Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel on
February 2, 2016. Comments were allowed until April 1, 2016. The BWSR representative had
comments of the need for more detail within the grading plan, outlet elevations for the wetland
mitigation, pre and post drainage areas, and legal protection of the mitigation. These comments
were addressed in compliance with WCA. Updated plan sheets were sent out showing the
elevations and outlet elevation along with the drainage area. The mitigation will be under a
conservation easement.
Financial Assurance is needed since wetland replacement is not in -advance of wetland impacts.
$38,500 has been calculated as construction costs at 150% needed for the completion of on -site
mitigation. It is recommended that this amount be obtained from the applicant prior to wetland
impacts.
On behalf of the City of Medina, Local Government Unit for the Wetland Conservation Act, I
recommend that the City Council approves the wetland replacement plan for the Deer Hill
Preserve. A Notice of Decision is attached for review and signature.
Attached
Notice of Decision
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
K:\02712-800\Admin\Docs\MEMO - Medina Mayor & CC - NOD - DRAFI'.docx
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit (LGU)
City of Medina
Address
2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN 55340
1. PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant Name
Project Name
Date of Application
Application
Property resources Development
Corp (Sussan Seeland)
Deer hill Preserve
02/09/2016
Number
WF-16-068
(2712-800)
a Attach site locator map.
Type of Decision:
n Wetland Boundary or Type ❑ No -Loss
® Replacement Plan
❑ Exemption
❑ Banking Plan
n Sequencing
Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation (if any):
® Approve n Approve with conditions ❑ Deny
Summary (or attach): BWSR commented on needing more information on the grading plan, outlet details,
pre and post drainage areas, and easements. Once these comments were addressed.
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION
Date of Decision: 4/19/16
® Approved
❑ Approved with conditions (include below)
❑ Denied
LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary):
Property Resources Development Corporation (PRDC) proposes to develop 41 single family home sites
and related infrastructure on 170 acres for a rural residental type development. The project will also
include a through road that connects to Homestead Trail along the west to Deer Hill Road on the east of
the site and two cul-de-sacs. PRDC plans to preserve and protect 39.2 acres of existing wetland and
forest and restore 51.0 acres of farmed area to native prairie and wetland communities.
Wetland impacts are proposed for 0.12 acre of Wetland A (Type 2 Fresh Meadow), 0.18 acre of Wetland
2 (Type 1 Seasonally Flooded Basin), 0.18 acre Wetland H (Type 1 Seasonally Flooded Basin), and 0.09
acre of Wetland I (Type 1 Seasonally Flooded Basin) for a total of 0.57 acre of wetland impacts.
Wetland mitigation will be accomplished with project specific replacement on -site and in -kind by
restoring the hydrology and native vegetation of 1.20 acres of the partially drained Wetland G3 into Type
3 wetland. The applicant is proposing the use of MN Rule 8420.0526 Subp.4(A) to guide the applicable
restoration credit ratio. Restoration of this wetland basin will fullfill the required replacement ratio of 2:1
and one hundred percent of the basin size is eligible for restoration credit.
BWSR Forms 7-1-10
Page 1 of 3
The City will require financial assurance in the amount of $38,500 until the requirements of the
replacement plan are met.
For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank:
Bank Account #
Bank Service Area
County
Credits Approved for
Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01
acre)
Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the
approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following:
® Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial
assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule
8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings).
® Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that
the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland"
forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located.
Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that
BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved
replacement plan.
Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met!
LGU Authorized Signature:
Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255,
Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as
specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner and
are available from the LGU upon request.
Name
Dustin Simonson
Title
Environmental Scientist
Signature
Date
4/19/16
Phone Number and E-mail
763-270-3475
diimonson@wsbeng.com
THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT.
Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all
appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands.
Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period
for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant may be
responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts.
This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the
TEP and specified in this notice of decision.
3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION
Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a
BWSR Forms 7-1-10
Page 2 of 3
petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of
this Notice to the following as indicated:
Check one:
❑ Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send
petition and $500 fee (if applicable) to:
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
® Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send
petition and $500 filing fee to:
Executive Director
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES
® SWCD TEP member: Stacey Lijewski, stacy.lijewski@co.hennepin.mn.us
® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer, Ben.Meyer@a,state.mn.us
❑ LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact):
® DNR TEP member: Leslie Parris, Leslie.Parris@n,state.mn.us
n DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member)
® WD or WMO (if applicable): Katherine Sylvia, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
ksylvia(&,,minnehahacreek. org
® Applicant and Landowner (if different)
® Members of the public who requested notice: Jennifer Haskamp, jhaskamp@a,swansonhaskamp.com
Kelly Bopray, kjbopray@yahoo.com
Dusty Finke, Dusty.Finke@ci.medina.mn.us
® Corps of Engineers Project Manager: Melissa Jenny, Melissa.M.Jenny@a,usace.army.mil
n BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan decisions only)
5. MAILING INFORMATION
➢For a list of BWSR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf
➢For a list of DNR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR_TEP_contacts.pdf
➢Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices:
NW Region:
NE Region:
Central Region:
Southern Region:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
2115 Birchmont Beach Rd.
NE
Bemidji, MN 56601
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
1201 E. Hwy. 2
Grand Rapids, MN 55744
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
261 Hwy. 15 South
New Ulm, MN 56073
For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr regions.pdf
➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/default.asp?pageid=687
or send to:
US Army Corps of Engineers
St. Paul District, ATTN: OP-R
180 Fifth St. East, Suite 700
St. Paul, MN 55101-1678
➢For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to:
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
Wetland Bank Coordinator
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
6. ATTACHMENTS
BWSR Forms 7-1-10
Page 3 of 3
In addition to the site locator map, list any other attachments:
El
El
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 4 of 3
.155 — Not to Scale
'Lk
LORETTO
c ni7d3
IARKIN TR.
a
g
Spuree
HAMEL
I
Lake
fri.dei5endence • H
0
K car I nri
cz.
is
TR.!
MEDINA
15
------
5TH
Classert
112 -
„
•
1.3
HAss
iFl
SC.4-1MADT
0.KF
PN-i•••••
Lf)
LAKE
131
PLYTUTH
I , ROCKFORD
551 -
Approxinnate
Site Location
A Mr
2
22
UCEN SE •
EXAMMING "7711.'1.
S 7 A 7 a'.)14 virjr
N.
:4 or 5
L.
A
th-,---1
.\ BaY ' 4:J:' ORONO ---- --
W
:,4,
1 r
1
AYZATA
----7»IlIll---2:LVD :: I "7 1:,,r"
AP' id 161.
co-\ :49
st,
-4 (
19AB
Ehay :44---",..
i *-Q/4,
(Gray's 1)".
'1. Bay
_ WOODLANIY,Lihas
MINMETDNir
L
7
BEACH ../ MINN: ETONKA -,4
: , ,
,---- -----CWW1ER LAKE,, D E E P H AV E, •_-,
® - -
. ; Laj-ayetL8 , '..-7
. -' IV1INNETONKA k
135
LONG
-
LAKE
Ma r.woU
North''. EkLy _ hrow.,-,.,
z
jenritrtg4 -- -- - Arm ', .3\-'51-:1...p Bay
_1 Bay -...., .---- .,...,- / Smak
7:r-- -ve,,,, , ,---Cryucq BOEY . Bin,
Arm
" MINNETONKA i LAKE
,
-114ACIUNID
i) SHORE' ..`"'' .
- -
63,
Bay
•90
I5opra
r nvironmentai
Figure 2. Location Map
Deer Hill Preserve
Orono and Medina, Minnesota
Project No. 2015.021
bopray
r nvironmentai
Figure 2. USGS Quadrangle Map
Deer Hill Preserve
Orono and Medina, Minnesota
Project No. 2015.021
Agenda Item # 7A
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: April 14, 2016
MEETING: April 19, 2016 City Council
SUBJ: BFP Development LLC — "Dellcroft" — PUD Concept Plan Review —
West of Arrowhead Drive, North and South of Hamel Road
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: March 16, 2016
60-day Review Deadline: May 15, 2016
Summary of Request
BFP Development, LLC has requested review of a Concept Plan for a 161-lot residential
development west of Arrowhead Drive, north and south of Hamel Road. The applicant proposes
a 22 lot Conservation Design -Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) on the 90 acres south of
Hamel Road. The applicant proposes 109 single family lots and 30 townhomes on the 65 acres
north of Hamel Road to be developed though a standard PUD process, not under the CD-PUD
process.
The subject site, both north and south of Hamel Road, is guided and zoned Rural Residential
which would generally require a minimum of 5 acres of contiguous suitable soils per lot. The
Concept Plan would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the guided land
use of the property north of Hamel Road to Low Density Residential. The northern portion of
the development is proposed to be supported by City sewer and water through such an
amendment.
The applicant has indicated that they recognize that the City is currently in the midst of
reviewing the Comprehensive Plan and do not intend for the Concept Plan to subvert this
process. The applicant has indicated that they do not intend to apply for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment on the northern parcel ahead of the process, but desire the City to consider the
subject property for this type of development during the broader City-wide Comp Plan process.
The southern portion of the Concept proposes private septic and wells through the CD-PUD
process. The applicant requests a density bonus as described in the CD-PUD zoning district in
consideration for permanent conservation of approximately 51 gross acres (27.3 buildable acres).
The applicant proposes additional conservation within the development north of Hamel Road,
but does not propose to include the northern land in the CD-PUD.
The Hennepin County Public Works facility is located north of the subject property. The land
east of Arrowhead Drive, north of Hamel Road is planned for future Business development in the
Comprehensive Plan. Property to the west, south, and east include existing Rural Residential
land uses which are planned to remain rural.
Dellcroft Page 1 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
The existing use on the subject property is predominantly tilled agricultural land. There are
wetlands scattered throughout the property. The property south of Hamel Road includes a
wooded area in the northwest and along a wooded ravine north -to -south through the center of the
property. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below:
Comprehensive Plan
Both parcels are guided Rural Residential (RR). As noted, the applicant seeks to amend the
guiding on the northern parcel to Low Density Residential (LDR). The Comprehensive Plan
defines RR and LDR as follows:
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.
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 existing low
density residential uses, natural resources and provide a transition between higher density residential districts and
the permanent rural areas of the community
Dellcroft Page 2 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review
City Council Meeting
The Comprehensive Plan includes policies, objectives and strategies for these land uses which
are informative for this request. Staff has included an attachment with this information. This
information should guide the City when reviewing the requested Comprehensive Plan
amendment.
The City is currently in the midst of its decennial Comprehensive Plan update. The Steering
Committee has put together drafts of a Vision, Community Goals, and a Land Use Concept.
This information is attached for reference. Because the update of the Comp Plan is underway,
and because forecasted residential growth has been reduced in the City, staff believes it may be
wise to consider this concept plan within the context of the draft Plan as well. For example, the
Vision and Community Goals speak to only expanding urban services as necessary to support the
minimum forecasted growth. The subject property is not proposed for urban services. In order
to support the goal of limiting expansion, the City may wish to discuss reducing growth in
another location if expanding services to this site.
Proposed Site Layout
As noted above, the applicant proposes different types of development north and south of Hamel
Road. Although the Concept Plan is a single application, staff believes it is easier to describe the
two portions separately.
North of Hamel Road, the applicant proposes a mix of single-family lot sizes, with most of the
lots being 75 feet wide and approximately'/4 acre. Larger 1/2 acre lots are proposed in the
northwest portion of the site. Thirty townhome units are proposed in the northeast portion of the
site. An open space corridor is proposed north -to -south through the center of the site which
would connect to the wooded ravine south of Hamel Road.
The gross area north of Hamel Road is 66 acres with approximately 9 acres of wetland and
wetland buffers, resulting in net area of approximately 57 acres. The applicant proposes
approximately 12 buildable acres of open space within the central corridor. Much of this area
would be restored to native grassland, although a portion is proposed to be an active park area.
Generally, the City would expect development with the Low Density Residential land use to be
developed under the R1 standards. The following table summarizes these standards. The
applicant proposes a PUD to allow for the mix of housing described above. The overall
proposed net density is approximately 2.44 units per acre. If the open space acres are publicly
owned and subtracted, the density is approximately 3 units/acre.
R1 Requirement
Proposed
65' and 75' Lots
Proposed
90' Lots
Minimum Lot Size
11,000 s.f.
8,000 s.f
20,000 s.f.
Minimum Lot Width
90 feet
65 and 75 feet
90 feet
Minimum Lot Depth
100 feet
Not discussed
Not discussed
Front Yard Setback
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
Front Yard Setback (garage)
30 feet
25 feet
25 feet
Side Yard Setback (combined)
25 feet (15
& 10)
15 feet (10' &
5')
15 feet (10'&
5')
Side Yard (corner)
25 feet
15 feet
15 feet
Rear Yard Setback
30 feet
10 feet
10 feet
Max. Hardcover
40%
Not discussed
Not discussed
Dellcroft
Concept Plan Review
Page 3 of 9
April 19, 2016
City Council Meeting
South of Hamel Road, the applicant proposes a CD-PUD development of 221ots with
approximately 57 acres of conservation area (27 buildable acres). The CD-PUD district is an
option a developer is encouraged to consider as an alternative to conventional development in
order to preserve the City's ecological resources, wildlife corridors, scenic views, and rural
character. The CD-PUD allows flexibility to various zoning standards, the most significant
being a maximum density up to 200% of the base density for conventional rural development.
According to Section 827.53: "Conservation design is an option that a property owner is
encouraged to consider as an alternative to Conventional Development... The City will give
heightened consideration to such requests where the opportunities to achieve conservation
objectives are significantly higher than that available through conventional development." The
City maintains the ultimate discretion to determine whether a proposal sufficiently meets the
objectives of the CD-PUD district in order to justify the amount of flexibility sought by the
applicant. These objectives are:
1. Protect the ecological function of native hardwood forests, lakes, streams, and
wetlands.
2. Protect moderate to high quality ecologically significant natural areas.
3. Protect opportunities to make ecological connections between parks and other protected
lands and ecologically significant natural areas.
4. Protect important viewsheds including scenic road segments.
5. Create public and private trails for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space resources.
6. Create public and private Open Space for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space
resources.
In creating a CD-PUD proposal, an applicant is required to go through a site design process
which sets a priority on first identifying the areas which are to be preserved. Only after the
conservation priorities are set should house sites, streets, and trails be planned. Staff went
through a similar exercise, a summary of which is attached.
The applicant claims that there are 56 contiguous acres of suitable soil on the parcel. This
information will need to be verified following wetland delineation and survey review. If correct,
it would result in a Base Density of 11 lots with 5-acre contiguous suitable soils. The applicant
requests 221ots, which is 200% of the base density and the maximum density allowed by the
CD-PUD district.
The CD-PUD allows flexibility to additional zoning standards, but also sets limitations on the
amount of flexibility in some cases. The following table summarizes the general RR standards,
any limitations placed on flexibility within the CD-PUD district, and the proposed standards by
the applicant.
Dellcroft Page 4 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
RR Requirement
CD-PUD Limitation
Proposed
Rural Lots
Minimum Lot Size
5 acres contiguous
suitable
As permitted by
PUD; density bonus
1-2 acres+
Minimum Lot Width
300 feet
As permitted by PUD
190 feet
Minimum Lot Depth
200 feet
As permitted by PUD
Not discussed
Front Yard Setback
50 feet
35 feet
35 feet
Side Yard
50 feet
30 feet
30 feet
Rear Yard Setback
50 feet
As permitted by PUD
10 feet
Max. Hardcover
40%
As permitted by PUD
Not discussed
Tree Preservation and Buffer Yards
As noted above, there are existing wooded areas in the northwest corner of the southern parcel
and along a ravine bisecting the southern property. Staff recommends that these areas be
incorporated into Conservation Areas and to limit impact and removal of trees to the extent
possible.
The proposed development south of Hamel Road is divided into two areas by the wooded ravine.
The Developer proposes to connect these areas with a street and trail connection. While
connecting the two areas may be a goal, it may be preferable to maintain an undisturbed
greenway along the ravine and to remove the street connection.
Staff would recommend that the Developer examine opportunities to increase the buffer along
the western edge of the northern development to the extent practical. Perhaps the greenway
could be extended straight north from the wooded ravine for some distance rather than through
the center of the development.
Wetlands and Floodplain
There are wetlands located in various locations on the site. It appears that the Developer has
proposed to avoid wetland impacts. Upland buffers will be required adjacent to the wetlands on
the property.
There is a very large wetland south of the subject site which extends into the southwest corner of
the site. This wetland is classified as a good quality black ash swamp. The Developer proposes
a large buffer from this area.
FEMA floodplain maps show a floodplain over the large wetland in the southwest corner of the
southern parcel. This floodplain does not have a defined elevation and likely does not extend
onto the site as far as displayed on the state level FEMA maps. Staff does not believe there will
be any floodplain impacts, but the applicant will need to provide data to confirm.
Transportation
The subject site is adjacent to Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road, which are both County Roads
(118 and 115 respectively). Hamel Road is classified by the City as a Major Collector and
Arrowhead Drive as a Minor Collector. Both roadways have speed limits of 40 miles per hour
Dellcroft Page 5 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
and carry comparatively low volumes. Hamel Road had an average daily traffic (ADT)
approximately 1300 and Arrowhead Drive approximately 700.
The County Engineer and City Engineer have both recommended that the Developer review the
site plan to reduce the access points. Arrowhead Drive at Highway 55 is a signalized
intersection with existing turn -lane improvements.
Staff recommends that the Developer provide data to the County and City Engineer to determine
whether the development would require turn lane improvements.
The City Engineer and Public Works Director have reviewed the internal street alignment and
made a number of suggestions including:
1) Recommend private streets in the southern portion of the development. Recent rural
developments have been served with private streets (except through -street connections).
2) Consider a single access point on Arrowhead Drive, perhaps just south of the townhomes.
The townhomes could then be served with a private street off of this access.
3) Recommend 28 foot wide roads north of Hamel Road.
4) Eliminate landscaping islands, street "eyebrows" and other plowing hazards at
intersections. "Parkway" streets with landscaping in the center would be acceptable if
setback from intersections.
Sewer/Water
The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water down Arrowhead Drive from the north and
through the portion of the development north of Hamel Road. The City Engineer has provided
comments, which are attached for reference.
The most consequential comment involves confirming that the area can be served via gravity
sewer main. Staff would be less likely to support an extension of the sewer service area if such
an expansion would necessitate a lift station with its high operation, labor, and capital costs. A
brief review based on the information provided suggests that gravity sewer main should be
achievable, but the applicant needs to confirm.
Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review
The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans, but the applicant describes a
fairly expansive stormwater system following Low Impact Development (LID) principles. Any
development proposal would ultimately be subject to relevant stormwater standards.
Park Dedication
The City's subdivision regulations requires up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated
for park purposes. The City may also choose to accept cash in -lieu of all or a portion of this land
dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre -developed market value, up to a maximum of
$8000 per home, or $1,288,000. Staff does not believe the fee would reach the maximum in this
case, but it will be determined more precisely during the preliminary plat review.
The applicant proposes a substantial trail network throughout the development. In fact, there
may be more trails proposed than City resources would support maintenance. The Park
Dellcroft Page 6 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Commission will review and determine how many of these connections should be open to the
public. The applicant could also maintain the other connections as private trails.
The applicant proposes an active park near the center of the development north of Hamel Road.
Staff believes such an amenity would be important because the subject site is not located within
1/2 mile of a park. The Park Commission will discuss this matter as well.
Purpose of Concept Plan Review/Review Criteria
According to Section 827.33 of the City Code: "As the first step in the review procedure for a
PUD, an applicant shall complete and submit... [a] Concept Plan..." "Comments and actions by
the City during review of the Concept Plan are purely advisory and in no way shall bind the City
to subsequent approval...nor imply any future approval."
The City has a great deal of discretion in the Planned Unit Development and the Conservation
Design Planned Unit Development. The City also has a great deal of discretion in the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment which the applicant would need to request in order to develop
the property with municipal sewer and water as requested. The Concept Plan process allows the
developer to receive feedback in order to determine whether they will invest in the formal
development proposal.
The purpose of the PUD district is described below. In addition to the goals, policies, and
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the City should consider this purpose when determining
whether to support the development north of Hamel Road.
"Section 827.25. PUD - Planned Unit Development Regulations - Purpose. PUD - Planned
Unit Development provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards
designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential
areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process,
by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and
depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage:
Subd. 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of
economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of
structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments.
Subd. 2. Higher standards of site and building design.
Subd. 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as
high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic
features and the prevention of soil erosion.
Subd. 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development
practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the
standard requirements of the City.
Subd. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to
surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and
lower intensity uses.
Subd. 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and
orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of
development and service facilities.
Dellcroft Page 7 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Subd. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby
lower development costs and public investments.
Subd. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive
Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.)
Subd. 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict
application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City."
The CD-PUD south of Hamel Road would also be subject to the general PUD purpose described
above as well as the specific objectives described on page 4 of this report.
Staff Comments
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City provide comments to the applicant.
Ultimately, the Planning Commission and Council have a great deal of discretion in determining
if the quality and benefits of the proposed development justify the amendment and flexibility
requested by the applicant.
If the applicant proceeds to a formal application, staff provided a number of comments to be
considered throughout this report, and the main points are summarized below for convenience:
1) Future plans shall meet relevant requirements of City Code.
2) Impacts in existing wooded areas should be avoided to the extent possible and these areas
should be included in the Conservation Area.
3) Buffering should be improved between the proposed sewered development and existing
occupied rural property to the west.
4) The applicant should confirm that the proposed sewer service could be provided via
gravity flow.
5) The applicant shall provide documentation to support claimed floodplain locations and to
ensure no impacts to the floodplain.
6) The applicant should provide information to verify base density of the property south of
Hamel Road.
7) The applicant should update street alignment consistent with direction of the City
Engineer and Public Works Director.
Planning Commission Review
The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the Concept Plan at the April 12 meeting,
the draft minutes of which are attached for reference. Over a dozen people spoke at the Public
Hearing. Most of the speakers raised concerns about the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
which would be necessary for the development shown north of Hamel Road. Speakers preferred
that the land use remain rural residential. Some comments also questioned if the Conservation
proposed on the south parcel justified the density bonus requested.
Planning Commission comments also were largely opposed to changing the Rural Residential
land use north of Hamel Road. The Commission was more split on whether the proposed
Conservation Areas justified the amount of density bonus requested by the applicant. Some
Commissioners indicated that it may be justified, but most suggested it would not.
Dellcroft Page 8 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
City Council Feedback Requested
As noted above, the applicant recognizes that the City is currently in the midst of reviewing the
Comprehensive Plan and do not intend for the Concept Plan to subvert this process. The
applicant has indicated that they do not intend to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
on the northern parcel ahead of the process, but desire the City to consider the subject property
for this type of development during the broader City-wide Comp Plan process.
The City takes no action during a Concept Plan Review, but the City Council should provide
advisory comments to the applicant.
Attachments
1. Excerpt from DRAFT 4/12/2016 Planning Commission Minutes
2. List of Documents
3. Public Comments Received
4. Engineering Comments
5. Hennepin County Transportation Comments
6. Existing 2010-2030 Comp Plan Objectives and Policies
7. DRAFT 2020-2040 Comp Plan Vision, Community Goals, Land Use Concept
8. Staff CD-PUD Site Design Exercise
9. Applicant's Narrative
10. Concept Plan Documents
Dellcroft Page 9 of 9 April 19, 2016
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
1 CITY OF MEDINA
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes
4 Tuesday April 12, 2016
5
6 1. Call to Order: Chairperson V. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
7
8 Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Chris Barry, Randy Foote, Kim Murrin,
9 Robin Reid, Victoria Reid, and Janet White.
10
11 Absent: None.
12
13 Also Present: Planning Consultant Nate Sparks and City Planner Dusty Finke
14
15 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda
16
17 There were none.
18
19 3. Update from City Council Proceedings
20
21 Anderson reported that the City Council met the previous Tuesday to consider the Final Plat
22 approval for Deerhill Preserve on ten of the lots, which the Council approved subject to the
23 conditions recommended by staff and the signing of a Development Agreement and an
24 agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. He advised that the Council also
25 considered a request to reduce sewer and water connection fees for the Wealshire of Medina
26 applicant, noting that the Council approved extending the repayment period from three years
27 to five years, but did not reduce the connection fees. He stated that the Council also approved
28 the advertisement of bids for the updating of the City Hall, which will include additional
29 restrooms, a conference room and expanded space for the planning department on the lower
30 level, as well as an updating of paint on the upper level.
31
32 4. Planning Department Report
33
34 Finke provided an update.
35
36 5. Approval of the March 8, 2016 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
37
38 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Barry, to approve the March 8, 2016, Planning
39 Commission minutes as presented. Motion carries unanimously.
40
41 6. Public Hearing — Dellcroft — PUD Concept Plan for a Subdivision of 131
42 Single Family Lots and 30 Townhomes West of Arrowhead Drive, North and
43 South of Hamel Road
44
45 Finke presented a request for the Commission to review a Concept Plan for Dellcroft, noting
46 that the purpose is to provide input to the applicant prior to submission of a full application.
47 He stated that this Concept Plan is for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 22 home
48 conservation design development on the 90 acres south of Hamel Road and 109 single family
49 and 30 townhome standard developments on the 65 acres north of Hamel Road. He stated
50 that both parcels are zoned rural residential in the Comprehensive Plan. He explained that the
51 conservation design PUD would provide additional flexibility in return for additional
52 conservation efforts, noting that approximately 30 percent of the buildable land south of
1
53 Hamel Road would be placed in conservation easements. He noted that a Comprehensive
54 Plan amendment would be needed for the parcel north of Hamel Road to allow for that
55 increased density and extension of City water and sewer utilities into the area currently
56 identified as rural residential. He provided additional details on the zoning and planned use
57 of the adjacent parcels of land. He displayed the proposed Concept Plan and provided
58 information on the proposed reguiding for the property, noting the items that the City should
59 consider when reviewing a Comprehensive Plan amendment. He noted that the City is in the
60 process of updating the Comprehensive Plan and advised of upcoming public meetings, May
61 14`h and 16th, where the public can provide input on the process. He reviewed the details of
62 the portion of development proposed to be north of Hamel Road, providing the proposed lot
63 sizes for the single-family homes and noting that the homes would surround a central open
64 space corridor of approximately 12 buildable acres which would include an active park. He
65 stated that the applicant is requesting a PUD to allow the mix of housing styles proposed and
66 to allow smaller lots within the property. He explained that the same number of homes
67 allowed under the R-1 zoning district would be proposed, but with smaller lots which would
68 help to create the 12 acres of open space. He stated that the net density proposed is 2.44, and
69 would be 3 units per acre if the open space area is not considered. He advised that 221ots are
70 proposed for the parcel south of Hamel Road, but noted that if this moves forward, a wetland
71 delineation would need to be completed. He stated that in a conservation design PUD the
72 applicant would need to be protecting resources in return for increased flexibility and advised
73 that the Commission would need to provide input on that factor. He stated that the purpose of
74 this discussion is purely advisory to provide comments, as will the City Council at their
75 meeting the following week.
76
77 Albers asked if there are similar PUDs in Medina that the Commission could use as a
78 comparison.
79
80 Finke stated that perhaps the best comparison would be Wild Meadows but flipped. He noted
81 that the northern lots in Wild Meadows are a bit smaller than the lots proposed in the
82 conservation design PUD for this concept, and the southern portion of Wild Meadows has
83 similar lot sizes to the northern portion of this concept. He stated that the Deerhill Preserve
84 conservation design PUD is perhaps similar, as well, with the conservation design proposed
85 here, although these lots are a bit smaller than the Deerhill Preserve lots.
86
87 V. Reid asked the density bonus allowed in the Deerhill Preserve development.
88
89 Finke replied that the Deerhill Preserve received a density bonus of almost 200 percent.
90
91 Murrin stated that the property is currently zoned rural residential and asked what the guiding
92 of the property will be under the new version of the Comprehensive Plan that the City is
93 currently working on.
94
95 Finke replied that the conceptual land use of the property thus far is to remain rural
96 residential.
97
98 V. Reid stated that the goal is to have the update of the Comprehensive Plan completed in the
99 next year and asked the timing for potential development.
100
101 Finke stated that he would leave that response for the applicant, but noted that the applicant
102 fully recognizes that the City is in this process.
103
104 Paul Robinson, representing the applicant, provided background information on his
105 experience with development and municipalities, noting that he previously worked for the
2
106 City of Medina. He provided photographs and highlighted accomplishments of developments
107 that these partners have worked on in the City and surrounding communities, including
108 Foxberry Farms, Wild Meadows, Locust Hills, and Woodland Cove. He stated that the
109 common goal for these developments is to set aside as much open space as possible creating a
110 community with trails and open space that can be enjoyed by the residents. He stated that
111 they believe the majority of the traffic will come down Highway 55 and then Arrowhead
112 which would not impact residential neighborhoods and would instead come through the
113 commercial areas. He stated that they are requesting a Comprehensive Plan amendment to
114 bring the northern area of the proposed development into the urban service area and are
115 flexible with timing as they are aware that the City is currently updating that plan. He noted
116 that the southern area of the proposed development does not require a Comprehensive Plan
117 amendment and therefore they are simply requesting input on whether that would meet the
118 conservation design PUD criteria. He stated that the open space proposed for the north would
119 be 30 percent and 50 percent for the southern portion, for a total of 45 percent of the overall
120 area. He stated that the open space would create a connective greenway corridor which
121 would continue on to two open space areas considered significant by the City of Medina. He
122 reviewed the conservation efforts which would include restoration of the wetland areas and
123 establishment of buffers, which do not currently exist; the establishment of an oak savanna;
124 restoration of the woodlands, to the extent possible; and incorporation of native themes into
125 the landscaped areas. He stated that the conservation efforts would create a habitat for
126 wildlife and pollinators, as well as additional treatment for stormwater. He provided details
127 on the 2.8 miles of proposed trails and 1.5 miles of sidewalks, noting that the trails could also
128 connect to neighboring developments, but stated that the Blackfoot development was not very
129 excited about that potential connection. He noted that there would be a variation of five
130 different home product types that would range in value from $275,000 to $1,500,000. He
131 provided details on the proposed stormwater aspects, noting that many of the developments
132 that they have constructed have won awards for their stormwater treatment. He provided
133 details on the landscaping proposed, noting that there would be over 1,000 trees on this
134 project. He stated that this would create a high quality community with low impact
135 development and a variety of home products for buyers to choose from. He stated that they
136 are known to create high quality developments and that is their intent for this development as
137 well. He thanked the Commission for their time and welcomed their feedback. He noted that
138 they met with 12 of the neighbors of these parcels and received a range of responses from
139 supportive to non -supportive. He stated that they agree with the comments of staff that a
140 better buffer should be created between the north side of the property and the property to the
141 west.
142
143 R. Reid asked if the developer would be interested in doing the southern parcel of the
144 property if the northern parcels were not approved.
145
146 Robinson replied that they would need to consider that option and advised that the current
147 agreement with the property owner is for both parcels.
148
149 Murrin asked the reason for providing a wide range of home options and the large range of
150 diversity.
151
152 Robinson replied that the northern portion of the site would range from $270,000 to $500,000
153 or $600,000, while the southern portion of the development would have the higher range of
154 prices, explaining that the diversity would be split by the north south division.
155
156 Murrin asked if there was a reason that the developer does not want to just follow the Wild
157 Meadows model throughout the parcels. She also asked why the developer chose Medina.
158
3
159 Robinson stated that they were reading into the Comprehensive Plan to create some of the
160 housing specified such as workforce housing. He stated that Medina is a great place to build
161 because it has a great reputation with a great school district.
162
163 Albers stated that the developer went up to the limit of 100 percent density bonus and asked if
164 there was a consideration to not push the limit of the bonus and instead ask for a smaller
165 bonus.
166
167 Robinson explained that they are creating smaller lots in order to create a conservation
168 easement where they would spend additional funds on restoration. He stated that they will
169 take the input of the City to determine where the bonus could end up.
170
171 V. Reid stated that she has concern with the size of the park.
172
173 Robinson noted that there would be flexibility to change the size of the park.
174
175 V. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.
176
177 Paul Ohnsorg, 1475 Blackfoot Trail, stated that the neighbors share a lot of the same
178 concerns. He stated that they are concerned with the lighting in both developments, but
179 specifically the lower development, as the lighting would go out and up and the neighbors
180 value their view of the night sky. He was also concerned with traffic patterns on Hamel Road
181 and Hunter Drive because even though the developer stated that most of the traffic would
182 utilize Highway 55 and Arrowhead, some of the traffic would choose to use the other route.
183 He was also concerned with the trail system, noting that they would not like to see the
184 Blackfoot Trail connection as that would cause additional traffic into an area that is pretty
185 rural at this time.
186
187 Jeff Evanson stated that the property is currently zoned rural residential and also expected to
188 remain that way in the draft of the new Comprehensive Plan which extends to 2040. He
189 stated that as citizens they view the Comprehensive Plan as a critical document that lays out
190 the goals of the community and did not see a reason to review this Concept Plan while the
191 Comprehensive Plan is being updated. He noted that while the proposed development
192 complies with some elements of the Comprehensive Plan it does not comply with other
193 elements and therefore asked the Commission not to consider this rezoning request. He noted
194 that south of this property there is a concentration of over 30 herring nests and advised that
195 this development would significantly impact the flight patterns of those birds.
196
197 Michael Mergens, representing Greenwood Stables 2, stated that he understands that this is a
198 Concept Plan and his intent is to provide feedback to the developer. He stated that his clients
199 have made substantial financial investments into their property based on the fact that their
200 property is zoned rural residential and the property around them is zoned rural residential. He
201 stated that under that zoning, the expectation is at least five acres per home and this
202 development is not even close to meeting that specification of the Comprehensive Plan. He
203 stated that the increased level of density is not compatible with a horse farm and each and
204 every time he has seen that happen, the horse farm had to relocate. He stated that going from
205 one house per five acres to one house per quarter acre directly abutting the horse farm is not
206 appropriate. He stated that he was glad to see that the developer is open to creating a larger
207 buffer between the developed property and the horse farm, but noted that buffer would need
208 to be substantial and the lots would need to be larger. He stated that the proposed
209 development in no way matches the Comprehensive Plan and the City should consider the
210 intent of the Comprehensive Plan when reviewing requests.
211
4
212 John Turrittin, 1525 Blackfoot Trail, stated that he met with the developers the previous week
213 and had a nice conversation and appreciated the opportunity to provide direct input. He
214 stated that the Comprehensive Plan should guide development, rather than development
215 driving the Comprehensive Plan. He referenced the trail system to the southeast corner of the
216 development leading to his driveway, which is in no way a trail and would not work. He
217 wanted to ensure that there are adequate and significant buffers to properties adjoining this
218 development, both on the north and south.
219
220 David Crosby, 2402 Hamel Road, stated that most of the points he was going to make have
221 already been covered. He asked if there are any precedents for a development of this size
222 within Medina that are/were in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, not only as it exists,
223 but as it is proposed to move forward. He noted that the traffic on Hamel Road would be
224 significantly impacted.
225
226 V. Reid stated that there have been Comprehensive Plan amendments in the past few years,
227 although not for a housing development.
228
229 Jim Lane, 2605 Hamel Road, stated that he knows the applicants to be great developers and is
230 happy to welcome them back to Medina, but does not believe that this is the right location for
231 this development. He noted that he had submitted a letter to the City stating that he is
232 actively opposed to consideration of this project while the City is in the process of updating
233 the Comprehensive Plan, as a development of this size could have an impact on the process of
234 updating the Comprehensive Plan. He asked that the City ask the developer to withdraw their
235 request until after such time when the Comprehensive Plan has been submitted to the
236 Metropolitan Council. He stated that the north portion of this proposed development is not
237 only inconsistent with the current Comprehensive Plan, but also with the draft
238 Comprehensive Plan. He believed that the northern and southern portions of the project
239 should be split up and considered separately. He was also concerned with the implications
240 that could occur in regard to the Wayzata School District, as intense growth will have
241 additional costs and growth needs for an already large school district.
242
243 V. Reid stated that as part of the Comprehensive Plan, Finke has met with the various school
244 districts to determine their needs and be respectful of their needs.
245
246 Kristin Chapman, 1910 Iroquois Drive, echoed the comments of Mr. Lane and reminded the
247 Commission about the density issues and quality of what is being conserved in the proposed
248 conservation design PUD, noting that everything on this land is very low quality. She stated
249 that the Deerhill Preserve development has high quality resources which are being preserved,
250 and that is why the high -density bonus was provided. She commented that while the
251 developer has done a nice job of thinking about what would be important to the people that
252 would buy these homes; they did not do a good job of thinking about what is important to the
253 existing Medina residents in this rural area and the rural character of Medina.
254
255 Dan Strand, 1985 Hamel Road, stated that his property would abut the east line of the south
256 development. He pointed out that in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan under housing objectives;
257 it states that lots in new subdivisions should have frontage roads with direct access to a local
258 street and not a County road or State highway. He noted that 116 is a County road. He
259 referenced the south properties and asked, and received confirmation that those lots would
260 utilize septic systems and wells for sewer and water services. He had a safety concern with
261 the pressure of water on a tightly built community, noting that in case of fire there may not be
262 sufficient water pressure. He noted that with the homes tightly built, the fire could easily
263 jump and spread. He stated that he attended the 2030 Comprehensive Plan process and that
264 plan states that there will be no development for Hamel Road until sewer and water is
5
265 brought to the area, noting that there is no sewer and water for that area. He stated that the
266 plan for this development would be to connect to Highway 55 sewer and water and during the
267 2030 Comprehensive Plan process it was specified that connection to the Highway 55 sewer
268 and water would not be allowed. He stated that people invest in their property and with what
269 is specified in the Comprehensive Plan, explaining that people have invested in their property
270 with the understanding that this area will remain rural residential. He stated that the
271 Commission and Council are the gatekeepers of the community and asked that they do what
272 is right and stand up for what the people in the community want and have been told would be.
273
274 Beth Strand, 1985 Hamel Road, stated that they purchased their home in 1991 and moved to
275 Medina to have space and the rural character. She stated that in the Medina City Code,
276 Subdivision 5, Section 720, it states that two septic sites are required for new lots; she
277 received confirmation that two sites have been platted for each lot. She asked if the sites
278 would be a minimum of 75 feet away from the wetlands as specified; it was confirmed that
279 the developer believes so, but would have to confirm that figure. She noted that the
280 Comprehensive Plan specifies that the lots must be a minimum of five acres in the rural
281 residential zoning district and felt that the water character of the area would be negatively
282 impacted by this development.
283
284 Kristin Evanson, 3072 Willow Drive, stated that her biggest concerns are with the increased
285 traffic, as traffic from the south would utilize Willow Drive. She stated that she lives on a
286 horse farm and moved to this area because of the five -acre minimum lot size, with the belief
287 that Medina stood behind that minimum lot size. She stated that this development would
288 change the character of this area significantly, as people currently ride their horses and the
289 traffic would impact that ability. She noted that the greenway corridor identified by the
290 developer is not the path that the wildlife currently takes. She stated that she shutters at the
291 development north of Highway 55 and does not want this area to become like that.
292
293 Betty Goodman, 2495 Willow Drive, echoed the comments of the residents thus far who view
294 the project unfavorably. She stated that the traffic on Willow Drive is already stacked in the
295 mornings at County Roads 6 and 24 and believed that those problems would become worse
296 with this level of development. She stated that although the developer has stated that people
297 will go north to Arrowhead and Highway 55, people will want to go south too and will take
298 Willow Drive.
299
300 Chris Renier, 3392 Hamel Road, stated that she likes the comments thus far made by
301 residents. She stated that while it is tempting to get distracted by conversations about traffic
302 wildlife, or lot size, the bottom line is that this is in direct conflict with the Comprehensive
303 Plan and should be rejected on that basis alone. She commented that this is a terrible position
304 for the property owner of Greenwood Stables to be in as the only option would be for the
305 horse farm to sell and therefore that would increase this type of development in the area.
306
307 Kent Williams agreed with the comments that were made tonight and believed that this
308 development is a terrible idea for Medina. He stated that conceptually the Commission
309 would have to consider what the developer could get without the conservation design, which
310 would be 25 to 30 homes. He stated that then the Commission should consider what would
311 be better for the environment, to have 30 homes or 160 homes. He stated that the rezoning
312 and reasoning for that should be considered first, as the developer would be jumping from 30
313 homes to 160 which is far beyond the 200 percent density bonus allowed and the only way in
314 which the developer is able to do that is by rezoning. He stated that the Commission should
315 consider why the rezoning request for this property and whether that makes sense for the area
316 itself and the surrounding residents. He stated that once you get past the rezoning and
317 Comprehensive Plan amendment, the Commission would need to consider the conservation
6
318 design element, which would double the density to reach the overall number of houses, and
319 determine what would be conserved. He noted that in a conservation design, the developer
320 would be preserving an asset that exists on the lot and asked about the asset that is being
321 conserved as he has not heard that. He stated that there are trees proposed to be planted and
322 prairie grasses planted but noted that would be done with normal development. He stated that
323 this request makes no sense. He referenced the first applicant that came in with a request to
324 build three homes that was denied because it was not worth it and noted that this request is
325 now to build 160 homes. He believed that this is the time for the City to draw the line and
326 state that this rezoning does not make sense and this is not an appropriate use of the
327 conservation design PUD.
328
329 V. Reid closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m.
330
331 V. Reid stated that even though this is presented as one application, the Commission could
332 consider the requests separately, as only one section would require a Comprehensive Plan
333 amendment. She suggested reviewing the northern portion of the development first.
334
335 White stated that she appreciated the developer's ideas in regard to a variety of housing
336 which appears to be laid out well. She noted that it is a bit too dense and does not have
337 appropriate buffers. She stated that she would not support the rezoning of the parcel. She
338 referenced the southern half of the development and would not support a conservation design
339 because she did not feel that there were high quality views on the property and the best view
340 in that area is when you are driving on Hamel Road, which would not be preserved.
341
342 Murrin commented that she likes the development but has concerns with the location within
343 the City. She asked what the incentive was to change the zoning from rural residential and
344 how the City would benefit from adding a large number of homes that would place burdens
345 on the infrastructure and utilities which are already stressed. She stated that she has concerns
346 with the number of lots and would like to see fewer houses with bigger lots. She asked what
347 the City is getting in return for the conservation design density bonus and what is actually
348 being conserved, as well as the amount of buildable land being conserved. She believed that
349 the City should abide by the Comprehensive Plan and what has been guided for this area.
350 She stated that while she does like the development she does not believe that this is the
351 appropriate location, as it does not align with the goal and objectives for that rural residential
352 area.
353
354 Albers believed that the City would be better served if that area were to continue with rural
355 residential as zoned, which would allow 11 homes on the southern portion. He stated that in
356 regard to the parcel to the north, he agrees that the development would not be happy with the
357 neighboring horse farm and would complain and ultimately drive out that property owner.
358 He stated that he would not support amendment of the Comprehensive Plan.
359
360 Barry stated that the updating of the Comprehensive Plan cannot be the trigger for this type of
361 request. He stated that he would struggle to rezone this parcel as there are not new things
362 needed. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan would remain consistent, as this area has
363 been planned rural residential for the past 20 years and would continue. He noted that there
364 is nothing being conserved on the southern portion that would justify a conservation design
365 PUD and therefore that area should also remain under the current guiding for one home per
366 five acres.
367
368 R. Reid commented that there is a larger issue with the Comprehensive Plan, as both the
369 current and draft forms have an intent to preserve the rural character of the City, noting that
370 Hamel Drive is the most rural route in the City and should be preserved as such. She stated
7
371 that if the City goal is to remain with the Comprehensive Plan, than the last thing the City
372 should do is allow even low density residential into a rural residential area. She stated that it
373 can be tempting to allow a nice development, but noted that once that door is opened more
374 developers will come through. She noted that a lot of families have requested to develop
375 their properties and have been told no and therefore the City should have the courage to say
376 no. She stated that this is a test and the City needs to stand firm on their preservation of rural
377 residential. She stated that the City does not need this and would be sacrificing too much to
378 get this.
379
380 Foote stated that the northern portion is much too dense and the Comprehensive Plan process
381 needs to be continued as is. He stated that he does like the southern portion of the
382 development and noted that Wild Meadows is one of the best he has seen. He stated that he
383 would not support the northern portion of the development at all. He agreed that the
384 development would be a huge problem for the horse farm.
385
386 V. Reid stated that she agrees that the southern parcel of the development is separate. She
387 noted that a 200 percent density bonus is too much, but prefers thoughtful development as
388 opposed to sprawl. She stated that the northern parcel is tricky, as the City is updating the
389 Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the requirements of the Plan. She agreed that the
390 Comprehensive Plan should drive development and not vice versa. She stated that the reality
391 is that the City will need to do development, including some high -density development, and
392 acknowledged that the northern portion of the City has taken the brunt of that development.
393 She stated that she would not support the northern portion of the development.
394
395 V. Reid asked if the northern portion of the development would meet the requirements of the
396 Metropolitan Council.
397
398 Finke replied that the development would not fulfil the requirements of the Metropolitan
399 Council.
400
401 Finke commented that the Concept Plan will be presented to the City Council the following
402 Tuesday. He noted that this was the public hearing and although the Council may allow some
403 comments, it would not be to this extent. He stated that he was pleased to hear the interest in
404 the Comprehensive Plan and reminded residents of the public meetings that will occur on
405 May 14th from 9:30 a.m. to Noon and May 16th from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m.
406
407 V. Reid briefly recessed the meeting at 8:41 p.m.
408
409 V. Reid reconvened the meeting at 8:47 p.m.
410
411 7. Public Hearing — Clydesdale Market Place, LLC — Amendment to Planned Unit
412 Development Adjacent to 345 Clydesdale Trail to Construct a Larger Replacement
413 Monument Sign Closer to Highway 55
414
415 Finke presented a request to amend the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Clydesdale
416 Market Place in regard to the signage, specifically to increase the size of the monument sign
417 at the southwest corner of the development. He stated that the proposed sign would be a 30-
418 foot tall sign with over 300 square feet in total size. He noted that the current sign is 87
419 square feet in size. He stated that within the PUD two monument signs were approved for the
420 site and provided a photograph of the other approved sign which has a size of 120 square feet.
421 He noted that was the extent of signage allowed for the development. He explained that the
422 applicant is asking for the larger sign in order to provide additional visibility for the tenants
423 which are not listed on the current monument signs and do not have visible signage from the
8
424 roadway. He stated that there are 13 different occupants to the development and only 4 have
425 wall signage which is visible from the roadway. He noted that the terms of signage specified
426 in the PUD is more restrictive than what would be allowed for the development otherwise, as
427 each tenant could have an 80 square foot sign. He stated that this is a narrow amendment for
428 the overall PUD. He stated that the staff report states that staff generally supports an increase
429 in signage and concurs that the number of businesses is not supported by the current amount
430 of signage. He noted that the question would be the amount of increase, noting that the
431 maximum sign regulation allows for a 20-foot high sign and this request is for 30 feet. He
432 stated that the panels requested are 31 inches tall and could be reduced in size to
433 accommodate all the tenants within the maximum height limit. He stated that a reasonable
434 amount of signage for this development would be three signs of 80 square feet for a total of
435 240 square feet. He stated that there are benefits to a coordinated commercial development
436 such as this through PUD, as scattered development would have much more signage. He
437 stated that perhaps this sign be allowed as a size of 20 feet by 12 feet, which when combined
438 with the other sign would provide a total of 360 square feet of signage along Highway 55.
439
440 Foote asked if there is any sign similar to the proposed height of 30 feet outside of Medina in
441 surrounding communities.
442
443 Finke stated that Lowes in Plymouth is about 30 to 35 feet while CVS is approximately 27
444 feet. He confirmed that all the signs in Medina are capped at 20 feet with the exception of the
445 Medina ballroom which has a variance because of the grade, noting that the sign from
446 highway grade does not exceed 20 feet.
447
448 Albers asked at what point drivers would start to see the sign if it is allowed at 30 feet.
449
450 Finke stated that the only item that would be visible at 30 feet would be the Target tenant.
451
452 Muffin asked if the other sign could be made to be the taller sign since that sign already sits
453 up higher.
454
455 Finke stated that the applicant could speak to that more, but noted that sign would not be as
456 visible to the eastbound traffic.
457
458 Albers referenced the property south of Wells Fargo that was approved as an Indian
459 restaurant.
460
461 Finke stated that property has not been withdrawn.
462
463 Eric Olson, representing the applicant, provided pictures of the Lowes sign in Plymouth to
464 provide a reference. He stated that when he started a few of the smaller, locally owned
465 tenants commented that the largest marketing effort they have to bring in customers is
466 signage which is how this process arose. He stated that the goal is to provide signage for the
467 smaller locally owned tenants. He explained that the proposed size of the signage is meant to
468 help increase visibility for drivers from the roadway. He stated that there is also a challenge
469 for the site with being up on the hill and the current sign has zero visibility from the west. He
470 stated that the current monument sign is only visible from traffic moving in one direction and
471 does not have visibility for the other direction until drivers are past the sign. He stated that
472 the liquor store tenant was going to attend, but runs the store himself and was unable to get
473 away, noting that the liquor store tenant stated that he does get business from the smaller real
474 estate type signs he places.
475
9
476 Finke stated why Target occupies 30 percent of the sign if the driver of this request is the
477 other tenants.
478
479 Olson explained that the site is governed not only by the PUD, but also through an
480 Operational Easement Agreement (OEA) which Target sets up when they build a site. He
481 explained that the request would not only need to be approved by the City, but also by the
482 members of the OEA; and Target would not approve the request without their inclusion. He
483 noted that when the sign was originally proposed, it was smaller and Target had their own
484 requirements in order to approve the request.
485
486 Foote asked if this would be approved by Target.
487
488 Olson stated that conceptually the sign has been approved, but would go back to Target for
489 final approval. It was confirmed that Target would then have their name on two signs. He
490 provided additional details on the requirements from Target regarding signage.
491
492 V. Reid asked if the applicant would be in agreement with a 20-foot sign.
493
494 Olson replied that this proposed size would be the smallest that they would like to go.
495
496 V. Reid referenced a nearby sign that lists multiple tenants off County Road 101 that is
497 smaller. She stated that it is rare to allow signage closer to the highway rather than closer to
498 the buildings and was concerned with site pollution.
499
500 Olson appreciated V. Reid's concern and noted that they would match the material of the sign
501 to the nearby retaining wall. He confirmed that the existing sign would be removed. He did
502 not believe the new sign would be taller than the top of the Caribou Coffee building. He
503 stated that the current panels for the sign are 21.75 feet, while the new panels are proposed to
504 be 31 feet.
505
506 Murrin asked how tall and wide the current panels are compared to the new panels.
507
508 Olson replied, providing the current panel and proposed panel dimensions.
509
510 Murrin asked if the applicant considered making the other existing sign taller.
511
512 R. Reid replied that sign is not visible from both directions of traffic.
513
514 Olson replied that the other sign is currently 20 or 21 feet high and did not consider that
515 location because that is more of the Target sign. He noted that they would consider that if the
516 same goals could be met and if Target would agree to that, but explained that their lot ends
517 before that Target sign.
518
519 Murrin asked if the 30-foot sign would be higher than the Target sign, noting that she realizes
520 that the grade is different.
521
522 Olson stated that he believed that the sign would be lower than the Target sign because of the
523 change in topography.
524
525 Barry asked how the brushed aluminum finishing was chosen as compared to the brushed
526 rock, which fits in with the surroundings.
527
10
528 Olson confirmed that the finish could be modified to better fit in with the surroundings as the
529 brushed aluminum was just chosen as the sign was modeled from a sign at another property
530 they own.
531
532 Drew Palmer, Wells Fargo Corporate Real Estate Group, stated that he is here in support of
533 the sign request. He stated that Wells Fargo loves this community and would like to have
534 increased visibility to service their customers. He noted that the business currently has a
535 problem with signage issues as customers are not finding this location and therefore going to
536 the Plymouth or even Buffalo locations. He believed that this would be a great opportunity
537 for this location to thrive and alert customers to this location.
538
539 V. Reid opened the public hearing at 9:21 p.m.
540
541 No additional comments.
542
543 V. Reid closed the public hearing at 9:21 p.m.
544
545 Barry stated that he supports this proposed height, noting that the intent for this corridor is to
546 support business and he would like to see the smaller businesses supported with increased
547 visibility. He noted that his only comment would be for the aesthetic of the sign to blend into
548 the surrounding aesthetics.
549
550 Foote echoed the comments of Barry in regard to the aesthetics and noted that he would
551 support the 30 foot height, as he believed 20 feet would be too small.
552
553 R. Reid stated that this is a unique situation because the stores are up so high and are not
554 visible from the roadway when driving by and therefore supported the 30 foot height for the
555 sign.
556
557 Albers stated that he would support 30 feet, as it is important for both westbound and
558 eastbound drivers to have visibility in time to make the turn into the development.
559
560 Murrin stated that she would be in favor of increased signage for the businesses in that area in
561 order to help those businesses grow and be successful. She asked if the sign would be
562 perpendicular to Highway 55 and would be lit from both sides.
563
564 Olson confirmed that the sign would be perpendicular to the roadway and would be lit to
565 increase visibility.
566
567 Murrin asked if the 30 feet would be high enough to alert drivers, noting that she would
568 support the sign as proposed.
569
570 White stated that she would also support this request, as this sign would be an improvement
571 from the existing sign. She asked how this signage was a part of the original PUD and if
572 there is background that should be considered.
573
574 Finke stated that the applicant did request larger signage, but the City did not approve the
575 request at that time.
576
577 V. Reid stated that she believes that the sign is too big and that 20 feet would be sufficient.
578 She believed that all the tenants should be able to list their names, but believed that this
579 would be giving Target too much visibility. She did not want Medina to become Plymouth
580 and noted that she will vote against the request.
11
581 Motion by Murrin, seconded by Foote, to recommend approval of the PUD Amendment
582 based upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to conditions recommended by
583 staff, with the additional condition that the brushed aluminum be changed to match the
584 nearby fence. Motion approved 6-1 (V. Reid opposed).
585
586 8. Update on Comprehensive Plan Update Process
587
588 Finke asked the Commission to speak to their friends and neighbors to check out the
589 information on the website and provide any comments. He reminded everyone about the
590 public meetings on Saturday, May 14th from 9:30 a.m. to Noon and then Monday, May 16th
591 from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m. at City Hall. He noted that the Steering Committee will meet the
592 following Thursday, April 26th. He noted that there was a lot of interest tonight and hoped
593 that interest would continue to the public meetings.
594
595 R. Reid stated that she still has concern with the vision statement and wanted to ensure that
596 does not fall between the cracks as the Plan moves forward, noting that is the one statement
597 that everyone will read.
598
599 9. Council Meeting Schedule
600
601 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Commissioner
602 White volunteered.
603
604 10. Adiourn
605
606 Motion by Albers, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m. Motion
607 carried unanimously.
12
Project: LR-16-180 — Del!croft Concept Plan
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
3/14/2016
3
Y
Fee
3/14/2016
3/8/2016
1
Y
$1000
Mailing Labels
3/16/2016
3/16/2016
Labels
Y
Narrative
3/14/2016
3/11/2016
12
Narrative
Y
Concept Plan
3/14/2016
3/10/2016
14
ConceptPlan
Y
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Notes
Engineering Comments
3/25/2016
2
EngComments-03-25-2016
Building Official Comments
3/16/2016
1
BuildingComments-03-16-2016
Not enough info to comment
Legal Comments
3/20/2016
1
LegalComments-03-20-2016
Hennepin County Comments
3/29/2016
1
CountyComments-03-29-2016
Legal Notice
4/1/2016
Planning Commission Report
4/7/2016
8
52 pages w/ attachments
Public Comments
Document Date
Electronic
Notes
Planning Commission minutes
4/12/2016
Jim Lane Comments
4/9/2016
Greenwood Stable Comments
4/12/2016
JAMES SARGENT LANE
2605 Hamel Road
Medina, Minnesota 55340-9785
763/473-3302 or 763/473-1075
jamesslane2605@gmail.com
April 9, 2016
Victoria Reid, Chair
CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
2052 County Road 24
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Re: Dellcroft Farms, LLC land use application - CD-PUD concept plan
Dear Ms. Reid:
I plan to appear before the Medina Planning Commission on Tuesday, April 12,
2016, to state my unequivocal opposition to the City of Medina's consideration of a
major land use application by Dellcroft Farms, LLC, or by any other land use applicant,
while the City is updating its Comprehensive Plan. See The Medina Message, April/May
2016, page 2.
Residents and other property owners must be able to rely upon the City's
Comprehensive Plan and timetables for updating the Plan from one 10-year planning
cycle to the next, especially during update periods when the current plan is subject to
review, community input and public comment. The current update process has been
underway for several weeks, and two community meetings to solicit comments and
suggestions on future growth and development plans already have been scheduled for
May 14 and May 16. That orderly process should not be diluted or influenced, even
indirectly, by individual land use applications while the update process is underway.
As a matter of principle and good public policy, and after public hearing on April
12, the Planning Commission should recommend either (1) denial or (2) applicant
withdrawal of the pending Dellcroft Farms land use application until the City's 2030-
2040 comprehensive plan update has been completed, submitted to the Metropolitan
Council, and approved.
Very truly yours,
James S. Lane, III
Ilk
■ENTREPARTNER
April 12, 2016
Mayor Mitchell & Cite Council Members
CITY QP MEDINA
c/o Scott Johnson, City Administrator
2052 County Road 24
Medina, Minnesota 55340
RE: Delfctijt PUD Concept
Dear Mayor Mitchell & Council Members:
Michael J. Mergens
direct: 612.314.8003
email: miket@entir6alinerlamconr
VIA EMAIL ONLY
(scotijohnson cx a Pr firra.rmr.rra)
This firm represent GREENWOOD STABLES II, LLC ("Greenwood Stables" ), the owner of an
award -winning horse farm on property located at 1982 Hamel Road, Medina, Minnesota. On behalf
of Greenwood Stables, I write in opposition to the PFJD Concept Plan (the "Concept Plan")
proposed by BFP DEVELOPMENT, LLC ("BFP").
BFP's Concept Plan proposes to develop two properties that are zoned and guided rural residential.
The proposed development would include a total of 161 new housing units, including townhotnes
and a. mixture of single-family homes on various lot sizes. The proposed density is troubling. The
proposed 3 units per acre on the north parcel in general, and the density envisioned to abut
Greenwood Stables in particular, is deeply problematic.
First, the Concept Plan is a massive deviation from the requirements of its current rural residential
zoning. That zoning requires 5 acres of contiguous suitable soils for each newly created lot. That is,
the density in the rural residential district should be 1 unit per 5 acres, not multiple units per single
litn. To birtg about this proposed development, the City would be required to approve a dramatic.
rezoning for two parcels that are surrounded by rural residential parcels to a designation that is
anything but rural.
Second, and more importantly, the Concept Plan is an equally massive deviation from the 2030
Comprehensive Plan ("Comp Plan"). As you know, when a municipality undertakes land -use
planning —including adoption of a comprehensive plan, official controls, and zoning ordinances —it
does so under the authority in Minnesota's municipal planning act (as amended). Importantly, since
Medina is in the Metropolitan area, the Comp Plan is the controlling land -use document and the
City cannot adopt official controls or allow land -use activity in conflict with its duly -adopted
comprehensive plan.'
Here, the Concept Plan is in dim" cor7ict with the Comp Plan. The properties in the Concept Plan
are guided as "rural residential" in the Comp Plan. This guiding is designed to ensure "low -intensity
Minn. Stat. § 473.865, label. 2.
EntrePartner Law Firm, PLLC
Highlight Center 807 Broadway Street Northeast, Suite 140 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413
(office) 612.314.8001 (fax) 612.314.8002 www.entrepartnerlaw.com
CITY OF MEDINA
Ap it 1Z 2016
Page 2o,f4
uses" and "requires each lot to have five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems." In
other words, the Comp Plan clearly and expressly states that the density for the properties at issue
must be no more than .2 units per acre.
The primacy focus of the 2030 City of Medina Comprehensive Plan is the city's commitment to
protecting residents from "indiscriminate development, exploitation of resources, and the
consequences of unplanned public services." The plan identifies goals, strategies, policies, and
standards for growth and development that "preserve the rural character, open spaces, and natural
resources that make. Medina a unique place." This focus mirrors the values held by the residents of
Medina, who —as the Comprehensive Plan acknowledges multiple times —are concerned about
maintaining the rural character and heart of the City of Medina. With these community values in
mind (and at risk), the plan makes clear that those goals and strategies aimed at preserving Medina's
rural nature "will provide guidance for accomplishing the vision for the future of the community
even when changes are necessary to the land use plan."
The 2030 City of Medina Comprehensive Plan directs the City Council to "preserve the rural
character of Medina by supporting compact and orderly growth near existing and planned
infrastructure" and only allow "development flint is compatible with existing development." By
capitulating to a developer's desire to shoehorn an apartment complex directly adjacent to
Greenwood Stables, the City would disregard its commitment to "maintain the characteristics of the
Medina rural community and its land through thoughtful planning."
The proposed placement of the apartment complex is inconsistent with existing land use patterns.
And the failure to recognize and appreciate potentially conflicting land uses would create
irreconcilable conflict between the farm and its residential neighbors. We anticipate, as the City
must, that the noise and smells accompanying Greenwood Stables' horse farm will bring about an
(entirely preventable) era of unending conflict between the residential and rural neighbors, with no
permanent solution available.
The current development planning does not create a staging plan that "supports well -planned and
orderly growth within the designated growth areas" or "uses existing land use plans to help guide
consistent development throughout the community," nor does the development "preserve and
respect existing character and development while accommodating and serving new development."
Further yet, the proposed zoning does not support die City's objective to "regulate noise,
illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety" or to "protect
urban residential areas from excessive noise, odors, and illumination." Placing the apartment
complex near Greenwood Stables demonstrates a complete failure to appreciate the farm and the
apartment complex's distinct, conflicting needs. The proposed rezoning and resulting development
would only result in a fractured Comp Plan and unending land use conflict in the Hamel
neighborhood,
The City is committed to supporting development that preserves its rural character and being
strategic about development consistent with current land use patterns. The City is also committed to
expanding recreational opportunities in Medina. For example, the City has endeavored to "improve
and expand existing facilities and provide expanded recreational opportunities where appropriate,"
with development preference given to areas with recreational uses. More specifically, the City has
made it one of its objectives to "allow for land uses, such as home -based businesses, hobby farms,
CITY OFMEDEVA
April 12, 2016
Page 3 of =1
horse stables, nurseries, and other smaller -scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining
residential development." If this is indeed the case, preserving Greenwood Stables and embracing its
recreational impact is of paramount importance (and certainly more compelling than an ill-fitting
apartment complex) if the City is to give any weight at all to its Comprehensive Plan and the goals
and objectives clearly outlined in it.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan highlights the City's commitment to preserving rural areas. For
example, the City clearly expects to "provide housing that will maintain the rural character of
IGledina's rural residential areas," and to promote high quality multi -family developments only in
"appropriately zoned areas" and, then, only with an explicit requirement that "new urban residential
development [ ] be consistent with the city's Growth Strategy." Likewise, the city's general land use
development policies are guided by the Future Land Use Plan, which "guides future development to
strengthen, enhance, and protect the city's rural character and natural environment." Those land
uses subject to incompatible development are required to provide landscaping, berms, or other
screening methods to ensure the integrity of the neighborhoods.
As a result of increased development through 2030, the City of Medina acknowledges in its
Comprehensive Plan that "maintaining the integrity of rural neighborhoods and promoting
development patterns consistent with existing rural residential development" and "recognizing
neighborhood characteristics and promoting new development compatible in scale, architectural
quality, and style with existing neighborhoods" are vital objectives to be considered when reviewing
proposed development projects.
Plainly, the Concept Plan is grossly inconsistent with the Camp Plan. But it will also have a dramatic
(and detrimental) impact on Greenwood Stables. Greenwood Stables has made enormous capital
investments in redeveloping a formerly -blighted property into a national award -winning horse farm
and recreation center. Greenwood Stables has substantial property dedicated to horse paddocks. It is
rural to its core and, as a result, brings with it all the benefits and drawbacks of an active fama.
This, of course, is where we turn to the odiferous (and particularly relevant) topic of excrement..
While it is a fact of life in rural areas, manure is rarely welcomed, accepted, or tolerated near
suburban residential development. Ironically, the Concept Plan proposes some of its highest density
directly along its border with Greenwood Stables' property. The nuisance and odor complaints that
would emanate from that choice would be unrelenting, and Greenwood Stables should not be
forced into that putrid arrangement. This is particularly true where the City would be required to
voluntarily circumvent the very land -use controls designed to protect horse farms like Greenwood
Stables.
Greenwood Stables relied on the City's land use controls when it invested its time, money, expertise,
and other resources to upgrade the property. For example, Greenwood Stables razed a dilapidated
barn, spent about $300,000 on site improvements, constructed a new, fast -class horse barn, and
placed shutters where requested along the barn, among many other things. In gaining community
and neighborhood support to invest their time, energy, and capital into Greenwood Stables, and in
complying with the City's Comprehensive Plan in its redevelopment efforts, Greenwood Stables
reasonably anticipated it could rely on the City to enforce for others the zoning guidelines outlined
and committed to by the City in its Comprehensive Plan.
Cny OF MEDINA
Apig 12, 2016
Page 4 of 4
To be clear, Greenwood Stables objects to the proposed Concept Plan. The tarty should, too. Please
do not hesitate for a moment to contact me with any questions you may have.
Sincerel
Michael ergens
j
Attachment 2 - Engineer Comments (2 pages)
WSB
Associates, Inc. engineering • planning • environmental • construction
March 25, 2016
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Dellcroft PUD Concept — Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-16-180
WSB Project No. 02712-830
Dear Mr. Finke:
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-5414800
Fax: 763-541-1700
We have reviewed the Dellcroft PUD Concept submittal from BFP Development, LLC dated March
11, 2016. The plans propose to construct 131 single family and 30 townhome units between the
north and south parcels.
The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general
engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with
regards to engineering and stormwater management matters.
Site Plan & Civil
1. Verify structure builds and the feasibility of serving the area with a gravity sewer system as
proposed.
2. Looping connections will be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections,
specifically at the north end of Street F.
3. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water.
Traffic
4. The traffic generation from the development would be approximately 1421 daily trips, 147
pm peak hour trips and 111 am peak hour trips based on ITE Trip Generation Manual rates.
With that amount of potential traffic the intersections should be analyzed to determine if turn
lanes are required on Hamel Road or the site entrances for either capacity or safety.
5. The intersections appear to be spaced at least 1/8 mile apart, although no scale is shown on
the plans. This should be adequate for operations and safety.
6. The posted speed limit on Hamel Road is currently 40 mph. There are also horizontal and
vertical curves on the current roadway adjacent to the site. With these situations, the
proposed intersections should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns.
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
K:\02712-830U1dmin\Docs\031116 Submittal\_2016-03-25 Dellcroft Development - PUD Concept - WSB Comments.docx
Dellcroft PUD Concept — Engineering Review
March 25, 2016
Page 2
7. The proposed site plan shows 4 pedestrian crossings of Hamel Road. This should be
reviewed and consideration given to reducing this to a maximum of two with a supporting
pathway system on both sides of the roadway.
Stormwater
8. The development will need to meet the City's infiltration requirement, which can be met by
reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation.
9. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
K\02712-830\Admin\Docs\031116 Submittal\_2016-03-25 DeOcxoft Development - PUD Concept - WSB Comments.docz
Attachment 3 - Hennepin County Comments (1 page)
Dusty Finke
From: Jason D Gottfried <Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 8:09 AM
To: Dusty Finke; Debra Peterson
Cc: Robert H. Byers
Subject: RE: Dellcroft PUD Concept
Good Morning,
The Hennepin County Plat Review Committee reviewed the Dellcroft PUD Concept Plans on Tuesday, March 22nd and
made the following comments:
Access:
- Although we prefer one central access point along each roadway with internal connections; If developer seeks
more than one access point, and is able to meet access spacing guidelines (660 feet), as well as demonstrate
desirable sight distance (530 feet to the left, 440 feet to the right) along either county roadway, additional
access points may be acceptable
A 3-lane roadway section may be necessary to accommodate turning movements
Bicycle/Pedestrian:
Mid -block trail crossings would not be permitted along either county road.
An off -road shared use trail along Arrowhead Road is in the County Bike Plan and would likely be along the
western side of the road
For the proposed trail along Hamel Road, a northern routing may be preferable for future east -west
connections
Right -of -Way:
- In order to accommodate a shared use trail alongside both county roadways we are seeking a minimum of 17
feet of additional ROW. This may need to be increased depending on the necessity of turn lanes
In order to accommodate a future roadway connection with Blackfoot Trail to the south, we suggest that the
city seeks additional right-of-way along the southeastern development to correct the offset intersection with
Arrowhead Road at Hamel Road
Maintaining proper drainage along county roads will need to be closely considered
Thank you,
Jason Gottfried
Senior Planning Analyst
Hennepin County
From: dusty.finke@ci.medina.mn.us
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 8:19 AM
To: Jason D Gottfried <Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us>; Debra Peterson <Debra@ci.medina.mn.us>
Subject: RE: Dellcroft PUD Concept
Email # 2
i
Attachment 4 - Existing Comp Plan Policies (6 pages)
Future General Land Use Policy Direction
The City continues to be primarily a rural community with opportunities for agricultural uses,
commercial and residential development and open spaces. These factors will continue to guide
development but will also include opportunities for diversification of land uses not presently
found in the community.
The City has guided future development and increased density along the TH 55 corridor to help
encourage sustainable land use patterns. Sustainability principles include proximity to existing
transportation systems and available infrastructure without leap -frogging into areas not currently
served by urban services. The majority of growth and development will be located in the areas
with urban services to maintain the rural character of the community and to use the infrastructure.
The Future Land Use Plan is primarily an extension of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan area. The
areas guided for future development are within the 2000 service areas but phasing and available
land has been adjusted to reflect recent experience, growth and population projections. Although
the proposed plan is consistent with the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, changes occur within the
specific land use designations.
General Land Use Development Policies:
1. The Future Land Use Plan guides future development to strengthen, enhance, and protect the
City's rural character and natural environment.
2. Medina recognizes the historical development pattern as a framework for the City's future
land use policy.
3. Medina will guide growth in compact efficient locations to preserve open space and the rural
heart of the community.
4. The Planning Commission and Council will review each development proposal to ensure
consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
5. The staging plan will be referenced for all future development plans in the growth corridor
and shall guide future land use decisions to ensure availability and adequacy of services.
6. Medina will encourage commercial and business development to locate along the TH 55
corridor and retail and service opportunities to locate in mixed -use areas.
7. Developments will be required to provide buffers between incompatible land uses and will be
required to provide landscaping, berms, or other screening methods to ensure the integrity of
neighborhoods.
8. Ecologically significant natural areas will be protected using conservation easements and other
open space tools as identified in the Open Space Report.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
G 1 T Y k
MEDINA►
Page 5- 5
Future Land Use Plan Principles
The Plan guides the development of Medina through 2030, and will be used to implement the
City's goals, strategies and policies. The purpose of the Plan is to create a community with the
following characteristics:
• A well integrated and preserved natural resources and open space system focused on
maintaining the rural heart of the community.
• Housing diversity and options within the community including rural, suburban and urban
densities with the most compact development guided along the TH 55 transportation
corridor.
• Opportunities for business and commercial development along major transportation
corridors and intersections.
• An efficient, safe transportation system.
• Support of active living opportunities such as a well planned parks and trails systems that
are accessible to all residents.
Four physical land use elements affect the overall character of the community:
1. Suburban and rural development patterns and neighborhood form;
2. Major road patterns;
3. Open spaces and natural resources; and
4. Commercial and business development.
The relationship of these elements will impact the transportation system and community facilities
and may need review as a result of increased development.
Development Patterns and Neighborhood Form
• Encourage open spaces, parks and trails in all neighborhood development. The survey
indicated that a high quality of life is found when residents have visual access to green
spaces.
• Create neighborhoods with a variety of housing types that are well connected with
roads, trails or sidewalks.
• Maintain the integrity of rural neighborhoods and promote development patterns
consistent with existing rural residential development.
• Recognize neighborhood characteristics and promote new development compatible in
scale, architectural quality and style with existing neighborhoods.
• Guide density to areas with proximity to existing infrastructure and future
infrastructure availability.
• Concentrate higher density development near service oriented businesses to help
promote walkability.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
Y a T
MEDINA
Page 5- 6
Land Use Policies by Area
The following section provides policies for land use designations and is categorized into
generalized subsections with the following land uses: Rural Designations, Urban Service
Designations, and Public Semi -Public Designations. The policies for each category as provided
below directly support the goals and strategies outlined in Chapter 2.
These designations are generalized land uses and are not specific zoning districts. The City will
update the zoning ordinance and applicable codes to be consistent with the land use plan and
designations identified in this section.
The planning process revealed a strong interest in promoting good, sustainable development in
the City. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for large scale or master plan types of
development, regardless of whether they are residential, commercial or mixed -uses will be
available and will be supported through zoning.
Rural Designations
The rural designations include Agricultural, Rural Residential and Developing Post-2030. A
large percentage of the community falls into these two categories. The purpose of these
designations is to provide low -intensity land uses, such as rural residential, farming, hobby
farms, horticulture, conservation of natural and ecologically significant natural resources and
passive recreation. This area will not be provided with water or sewer service during the
timeframe covered by this Plan.
The City's goal is to maintain the rural character of this area. The 2005 Metropolitan Council
Regional Framework shows the majority of this area as Diversified Rural, and the City utilizes the
Rural Residential designation to be consistent with the System Statement.
A significant segment of this area consists of large, rural parcels with single-family homes. The
City recognizes that such low -density, development will continue to be a desired housing
alternative.
The City's Open Space Report proposes several different implementation techniques for
allowing open space development and planning to maintain rural character and simultaneously
preserve significant natural resources. This result may take the form of innovative
developments that clusters smaller lots on larger parcels with permanently conserved open
space. Such innovative arrangements can help preserve the City's natural resources, open space
and rural character, while still maintaining an average overall density of ten acres per unit.
Medina's wetlands, lakes, scattered woodlands and soil conditions prevent smaller, unsewered
lot development, but are ideal for low -density rural housing.
Medina's policy in the permanent rural area is to keep strict soil requirements for septic sites, but
allow flexibility for Open Space design developments and to ensure that the permanent rural area
will remain rural by eliminating the need for future extension of a sanitary sewer service to
replace failing systems.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
i S Y O d
IVIEDINA
Page 5- 12
Objectives:
1. Allow low -density development in the Rural Residential Area including innovative
arrangements of homes that preserve open space and natural resources.
2. Encourage conservation of open space, farms and ecologically significant natural
resources in the rural areas.
3. Enforce standards for the installation and maintenance of permanent, on -site sewage
disposal systems.
4. Allow public facilities and services, such as parks and trail systems, if compatible with
rural service area development.
5. Allow land uses, such as home -based businesses, hobby farms, horse stables, nurseries
and other smaller -scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining residential
development.
6. Regulate noise, illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and
safety.
7. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per forty acres for property in the Agricultural
land use.
8. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for new development in the Rural
Residential and Developing Post-20301and use. The City will continue to utilize a five -
acre contiguous suitable soils requirement in order to pursue this objective. This
requirement has maintained the required density for the past decade (see Table 5-E
below) and the City will monitor rural subdivisions and adjust regulations in the event
the density is consistently exceeded.
TABLE 5-E
Density of Rural Subdivisions 2000-2008
Subdivision
# of Lots
Gross Acres
Acres/Unit
Winchester Hills
3
15.7
5.2
Wild Acres
3
75.0
25.0
Dahl 2nd Addn
2
23.3
11.6
Leawood Farms
9
212.0
23.6
High Pointe Ridge
3
51.4
17.1
Beannact Farm
3
42.1
14.0
Parkview Knoll
2
72.6
36.3
Unplatted
2
24.8
12.4
Willow Hill Preserve
4
31.2
7,8
Tuckborough Ridge
7
47.8
6.8
Fox Path Farm
2
27.4
13.7
All Rural Subdivisions
40
623.3
15.8
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
i Y U
4 F
IVIEDINA
Page 5- 13
9. Continue to enforce five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems per
development site, but consider exceptions for open space developments that protect
natural features and put land into permanent conservation. Within the Metropolitan
Council's long term sewer service area (see Map 5-4), these exceptions will not be allowed
to result in development with a density in excess of one unit per ten gross acres.
10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Developing
Post-20301and uses during this planning cycle.
11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant natural
characteristics.
12. Determine lot sizes by soil types and conditions as defined in the City's on -site septic
system requirements.
13. Protect property within the City's Developing Post-2030 designation from subdivision
and development by requiring ghost plats for subdivisions so that future urban
expansion is not compromised.
14. Reduce impervious surfaces where possible by applying low impact design standards
and encourage innovative materials and plans that reduce runoff.
15. Encourage landowners to participate in the protection and conservation of significant
natural resources.
Urban Service Designations
The Urban Service Area includes the residential and commercial areas of the City that are
currently or will be served by municipal water and sewer services.
Residential Uses
Objectives:
1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant
natural characteristics of the property.
2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that
protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district.
3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary.
4. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED)1 principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low
impact development design standards.
1 LEED defined under Chapter 7 - Implementation (pg. 7-8)
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
Y Y
IVIEDINQ
Page 5- 14
5. Protect urban residential areas from excessive noise, odors, and illumination.
6. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public
facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth
strategies.
7. Restrict commercial development to areas designated in this Plan.
8. Limit industrial activities, including agri-business facilities, to the urban commercial or
industrial park areas.
9. Protect property within the City's 2030 MUSA boundary from development prior to the
provision of urban services that will hinder future division.
10. Create more flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of
homes, conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the
City's open space and natural features.
11. Promote attractive, well -maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with
adequate facilities and open space.
12. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety.
13. Allow for a variety of housing types with a range of economic affordability in the urban
residential areas.
14. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot
sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land
use, market demands, and development standards.
15. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible
with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of
ecologically significant natural resources.
16. Require standards for site improvements that ensure compatibility with adjacent
residential areas.
17. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic
enhancement and safety.
18. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to
reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required.
19. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new
development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space.
20. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD's in
exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi -family
units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources.
21. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development
characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
G T Y k
MEDINA
Page 5- 15
Attachment 5 - DRAFT 2020-2040 Vision, Goals, Concept Land Use (4 pages)
Vision Statement
Medina is one community. The City will strive to maintain its unique heritage by promoting and
protecting its rural character and its natural environment. Medina will foster well -designed
neighborhoods and promote public and private destinations for the community to gather. The
City will develop in a deliberate fashion which is commensurate with the resources and
infrastructure available to sustain a high quality of life for residents.
Community Goals
Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of the community to promote the
rural character of Medina.
Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources throughout the community.
Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly approaches to planning,
engineering and development.
Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate regionally forecasted residential
growth, desired business opportunities and achievement of other Community Goals.
Develop at a sustainable pace proportionate with capacity of schools and transportation, water
supply and wastewater infrastructure available to the City.
Spread development so that it is not geographically concentrated during particular timeframes.
Promote public and private gathering places and civic events that serve the entire community.
Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community recreational facilities, connect
neighborhoods, and encourage healthy lifestyles of its residents.
Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all
stages of their lives.
Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that complements the residential areas of
the City.
184050
Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of the City's police depai ti'tent and
coordination with its contracted volunteer fire departments.
Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes, retaining a skilled and efficient staff and
long-range planning and financial management.
184050
IPPEVJA
CREEKVIEW
l SUMMIT
CRESTVIEW
HILLVIEW y
i LORETTO F
NJ
"J fl �• MALLARD
ELSEN 9�O
COUNTY ROAD 11 ALBERT ��m+
COUNTY ROAD 24
SYCAMORE
ES RANCH
LOST HOR.E
1 RINKA
CHIPPEWA
PAWNE
BLACKFOOT
y
0' Q �� CHEROKEE
i C' 2 M-•OOWOODS
f trj a DEERHILL
HACKAMORE
N
gILIM%
MEDINA
Planned Future
Development
Guide Plan
DRAFT 3/4/2016
Legend
Future Land Use
Future Land Use
Low Density Res (2-3 units/acre)
- Medium Density Res (4-6 units/acre)
- High Density Res (12-15 units/acre)
- Mixed Residential (3.5-4 units/acre)
_ Commercial
_ General Business
Wetland Locations
Wetland Locations
Map Date: March 4, 2016
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
SOMA)
1,
9 0 9Z•0 0
91.0Z '4 :aiea den
II!iPue� pesola -
o!14nd-!waS/oNnd -
leuo!ini!isul -
uogeenaa aienud �Pi
sseu!sng !emu EN
sseu!sng leiauao -
le!aawwoa -
laweH umoidn _
(e/n 9i ZL) le!ivap!sab Ai!suaa y6!H -
(e/n b 9'E) leRuep!saH pex!W
(e/n g-q) leguep!sab Al!suea wn!pan
(e/n E-Z) le!ivap!saa Alpuea Awl
legueppeu !mu
<semen 191410 pe>
(leuldaouoo) esfl puel pauueld
pue6ai
91-0Z/17/£ LAVHa
ldaauo0
ash puel amin j
NINIQ3I111
Li1391V �� OVO?J
1,13913
O6`�'$ � ONb77Vy�
01132101 n O
IAMATIH m'a
M31ALS3L0 e,
mums
N31AN33>JO
;aad 00Z' l 009 00E 0
(90a) 91.0Z'9 Hiciv :oleo den
suogoeuuoo lepa;od
suopeuuoo lepa;od
suo!pauuo0 Ainuapi - £ dais
sapsawoH lequa;od a;eooi - Z dais e
samsawoH lel;ua;od - Z delS
uogeniasuoo anepunqun
seaiy uogemasuoo amepun8 lepa;od
uonemosuo9 - 6 dais
s!sAieuv ails
and -cm uonilea
tiNla3w
suoisualx3
Jopwoo lepelod
A1!leno p990
dwems us'd Vera
awnosab 4len0
poop LuauJagng
wawaoueL ua
`le!lualoo
Teepee
pawls!
uopeuuoo
i0p1100 ipaualod -
��e l l c r o f t
0
. , 2 C o n c e p t
5 u A l i t t a l 3 e - b a i t s &