Loading...
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 - ��ellcroft 0 .,2 Concept 5uAlittal 3e-baits & \arrative March 11, 2016 .3eI I croft General Information Landowner: Dellcroft Farms, LLP., 3300 Wells Fargo Tower, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402-4140 Applicant: BFP Development, LLC., 4918 Birch Lake Circle, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Consultants: Stantec, 2335 West Highway 36, Roseville MN 55113 • Marc Putman PLA LEED AP — Planning and Site Design • John Shardlow FAICP — Planning & Design • Roger Humphrey PE RLS — Civil Engineering • Suzanne Short — CAD Drafting • Ryan Mielke — CAD Drafting • Paul Bockenstedt — Native Vegetation Restoration • John Smyth — Wetlands • Dan Roeber, RLS Survey Evidence of Control: Land use application is signed by owner Status of Development Property Property: (see Exhibit A) • North Parcel - Hennepin County PID — 10-118-23-41-0001— 1722 Hamel Road • South Parcel - Hennepin County PID — 10-118-23-41-0001— 1975 Hamel Road Existing Comp Plan Guiding: (see Exhibit B) • North Parcel — Rural Residential/Outside existing MUSA • South Parcel — Rural Residential/Outside existing MUSA Existing Zoning: (see Exhibit C) • North Parcel — Rural Residential • South Parcel — Rural Residential Sewer Staging: (see Exhibit D) • North Parcel — Proposal to include in MUSA • South Parcel — Not needed in MUSA March 11, 2016 2 Dellcroft PUD Concept Narrative Introduction The Dellcroft development team is highly experienced and regarded. We have collectively developed over 15,000 residential lots in the Twin Cities. Several of our communities have received environmental recognition, in particular for providing wildlife habitat and for their treatment of storm water. We have previously developed in Medina, both Foxberry Farms and Wild Meadows. Our objective is to bring these attributes to this site, to create a diverse community that integrates and serves a wide income range of households and at the same time includes a meaningful system of open space, wildlife corridors and trails. Prologue We believe strongly that the timing and location for this development works well with the City's plans. We also understand that the purpose of a concept submittal is to receive feedback. The principles and goals of our development efforts can be accomplished in many ways. The unit mix can be altered. The location of certain units can be moved. We want to hear your ideas and make this a collaborative effort. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss our ideas for the Dellcroft property. Goal of the Development • Create a successful well designed community. This comes from... o A meaningful trail system that links the neighborhood together through open spaces as well as connects the neighborhood to existing and future trails that extend beyond its boundaries. (See Site Plan — Exhibit E) o A connected greenway that uses the open space connections to link the neighborhoods together within Dellcroft and beyond its borders. Not only for human use but also for wildlife. (See Open Space Plan/Greenway Corridor — Exhibit F) o Restoration of open spaces to create a native habitat that provides opportunities for wildlife, a scenic backdrop to homes and helps to protect the waterways by more effectively treating storm water. (See Restoration Plan — Exhibit G) o A variety of housing sizes and types for a variety of income levels. This neighborhood includes five lot types/sizes ranging from large lot rural homesites to townhomes. o Creative site design which is described further below. o Access to a central park for all residents. The exact design and use is yet to be determined, but we anticipate it could incorporate a grassy open space for casual play, sand box, play structure and could possibly include a bath house and pool. March 11, 2016 3 Dellcroft PUD Concept How Dellcroft fulfills the PUD purpose - 827.25 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. • This is the basis of the entire concept submittal. Dellcroft includes and balances multiple product types while creating a meaningful trail and open space experience and also protecting, enhancing and restoring the natural environment of which it's a part. Subd. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. • This is accomplished through creative site design which includes: o Use of varied setbacks and angles to the road which create visual interest, improved aesthetics and improved views of nature. o Curvilinear roadways which increase the interest and beauty of the streetscape, help to calm traffic and make the neighborhood safer and more pedestrian friendly. o Limited use of cul-de-sacs to provide access while at the same time accommodating a more uninterrupted open space experience. o Placement of homes to allow residents to experience open space from their homes as well as when they enter the neighborhood. o Natural treatments for screening views of homes from roadways through the use of planted earth forms including planting well beyond the buffer planting criteria require by the City, integrated with storm water runoff ponding for storm water management and improving the beauty of the transportation corridor. o Views and vistas into protected open spaces. Amenity features visible from entry settings. Plantings used in ways to create and frame vistas. o Strong main entry settings that provide views into the open spaces. 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. • Our project includes all three. (As background It may be helpful to review the current conditions exhibits H and I) o Preservation ■ Wetlands - Our intent is to preserve all of the wetland areas shown on the concept plan. A wetland delineation has not yet been completed so it remains to be seen if all impacts can be avoided. City wetland maps indicate a couple smaller wetland areas within the farmed areas of the property. At this time we believe these are not wetlands and have not included them in our concept. Today there are little to no meaningful buffers around any of the wetlands on the property. These will be provided to ensure the wetlands are preserved. ■ Woodlands — Most of the woodlands have been classified by the County in the MLCCS as low quality, non-native and disturbed. However, it is our intent to March 11, 2016 4 Dellcroft PUD Concept keep impacts to the amount allowed by City code and preserve the remaining significant portion of the existing woodland areas. ■ Open Spaces — Most of the open space that is not wooded or a wetland is currently farmed therefore there are no areas that need to be preserved in their current condition. ■ Topography — Overall the site design follows and uses the natural topography of the property. While grading will be needed, the development team intends to take advantage of the properties ridgelines and vistas. o Enhancement & Restoration ■ Restoration Plan - A formal restoration plan will be developed and implemented in the open spaces. A general restoration concept is included as Exhibit G and is described below. ■ Wetland and Wetland Buffers — Several wetland areas exist on the property. With this development we expect to not only preserve but restore them to the extent possible. Since they are currently dominated by narrow leaf cattail as well as reed canary grass and surrounded by areas with similar non-native vegetation, a full restoration to 100% native species will be unlikely. Nonetheless the quality of the wetlands and adjacent buffers can be improved and enhanced. The wetlands area would likely include a mix of shallow open water with margins interspersed with native plants. Plants anticipated for this area include blue flag iris, manna grass, several species of sedges and rushes, great blue lobelia, spotted joe-pye weed and similar. Native species will be introduced and managed and will help protect the existing wetlands as well as provide for a more diverse habitat. Wetland margins are proposed to include a mix of native grasses, sedges, rushes and flowers characteristic for the Medina area. To the south of the Dellcoft property there is a wetland that has been identified as ecologically significant in the MLCCS. A portion of this complex is located on the Dellcroft property. With this development plan this area will continue to be buffered by the existing woodlands but would also include a restored upland buffer and with that buffer and the additional storm water treatment, the water entering this wetland complex from the site will be significantly improved. ■ Woodlands — As mentioned above, the woodland areas on the property are dominated by non-native species. This fact in and of itself does not mean they are necessarily bad. Trees provide a valuable function for treating storm water and providing habitat, even if non-native. The intent of the restoration would be to remove some of the dead and diseased trees to encourage growth and sustainability of the healthy trees as well as to selectively open the ground layer to sunlight which will help to establish a more native groundcover. It is also our intent to plant new native varieties of trees within and adjacent to the forested areas to gradually reestablish native varieties. March 11, 2016 5 Dellcroft PUD Concept As mentioned above the woodlands along the south portion of the property help to buffer the large ecologically significant wetland complex to the south. ■ Open Spaces — Consistent with Medina's natural heritage, the concept for open space restoration at Dellcroft is to restore a native savanna in most open space areas. This will create a scenic landscape that provides quality wildlife habitat, benefits water quality, and is reasonable to maintain. Vegetation in this zone would include scattered bur oak, swamp white oak and similar savanna trees. The goal for ground cover would be to create a diverse assemblage of native plants that provide season -long interest and value to wildlife. This anticipates a mix of native grasses like Indian grass, bottlebrush grass, satin grass and sideoats grama as well as flowers such as brown -eyed susan, early meadow rue, golden alexanders, bergamot, and more. Much of the upland areas at Wild Meadows could be seen as an example of this type of open space conversion. Most of the open space at Wild Meadows was once farmed or part of the Turkey farming operation and today they are a savanna dominated by a diverse variety of native species and interspersed with trees. 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. • We will use a variety of methods to treat stormwater and have had much experience creating and implementing a variety of innovative storm water treatment methods that can meet or exceed the City standards. (See Exhibit J the schematic storm water plan) 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. • A homeowner's association will be tasked with maintaining the open space. An installation and maintenance plan will be created along with a conservation easement over a majority of the open space. • A greenway has been designed though the site, connecting both the north and south parcel as well as linking to open space connections beyond the property boundaries (see Exhibit F). • A minimum 50' buffer with significant landscape will be provided along Hamel Road and Arrowhead Drive. 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. • North Parcel o This development provides a transition from the proposed and existing commercial uses on the east side of the site to the Rural Residential Areas to the west. Often low density residential uses such as we are proposing are used to buffer commercial from rural areas of the City. This reduction in intensity also continues with the Dellcroft site as the density reduced from the low density residential on the north parcel to the clustered rural residential densities on the south parcel. March 11, 2016 6 Dellcroft PUD Concept " South Parcel o The clustered rural development provides for a more efficient use of the property while also preserving open space and serving as a buffer to the low density residential to the north. If it were divided into typical rural residential lots there would be little to no control of the open space since all of the area would be within private homesites providing little public benefit. Subd. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. " North Parcel o Dellcoft uses a significant amount of existing infrastructure. �% It is adjacent to two county roadways and uses those roadways as the primary access to the development. �% Its residents will likely use the existing signalized intersection at TH 55 and Arrowhead Drive as its primary access to the neighborhood. This also means that access to the Dellcroft neighborhood does not require impacting other residential neighborhoods. �% Sewer service is 675' away from the property and is a size and depth that it can serve the property by gravity. �% An existing 12" watermain is also very close and is of sufficiently size to serve the property. �% See Exhibit M for a Schematic Utility Plan o The project will also achieve an overall density 3 units/acre or greater. Meeting the typical Metropolitan Council minimum density. " South Parcel o Since the south parcel is a rural development the efficiencies gained on this parcel are through clustering the homesites. o Because the homes are clustered the street system used to access them is more efficient and accesses more homes than a typical Rural Residential development would. 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.) " We understand that you are in the process of updating your goals. We believe that many of the current Comprehensive Plan goals are achieved with this development. Since there are a number of Comprehensive Plan goals that apply to our project we have instead highlighted the general themes of the Comprehensive Plan that apply. o Development that protects and enhances the natural environment. o Provides meaningful trails and greenway corridors. o Efficiently uses existing transportation and utility infrastructure. o Creates high quality neighborhoods. o Effectively transitions from developed areas to undeveloped areas. o Uses Low Impact Development techniques including innovative storm water treatment. o Provides a diversity of housing options including housing that as the Comprehensive Plan states "workers in Medina could afford". o Development that helps support Uptown Hamel. March 11, 2016 7 Dellcroft PUD Concept Subd. 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. • Many of the amenities and benefits described in this narrative would not be possible if the code were strictly applied. Proposed Market and Demand Medina is a beautiful well located City and is generally in demand from a variety of homebuyers. In addition, the areas within the Wayzata School District are desired by many families who look to have their children educated in that district. While some of the homesites within the Dellcroft neighborhood fit the type of homesites currently found elsewhere in the district and City, others do not and provide a unique opportunity. We expect that the single family homes will start in the low $400's on the north parcel and exceed $1,000,000 on the south parcel. This mix of home sites is further diversified by 30 townhomes sites that we expect will start around $275,000. There is a limited supply of new townhomes starting at this price within the City and within the Wayzata school district. Relationship to Comprehensive Plan In order for the development of the north parcel to occur as proposed, a Comprehensive Plan update or amendment would needed. Development of the south parcel would not need a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The south parcel is shown using CD-PUD zoning within the context of its current RR zoning. The development proposal for the south parcel is consistent with the both the zoning and Comprehensive Plan guiding. We understand that modifying the MUSA area may be the most significant question that this development proposal poses for the City. The main supporting themes from the narrative are summarized below. • High Quality Development . • Diversity of Housing Options. • Greenway, Meaningful Trails, Significant Open Space. • Access to existing transportation corridors, and well as sewer and water facilities. • Provides a transition from Commercial to Rural. • Significant screening and buffering along County roadway. • Supports Uptown Hamel. Site & Development Facts* * All area calculations are measured estimates based on a hand drawn concept. While reasonably accurate once a final plan is created and digitized exact calculations can be made. Table # 1 — Type and Number of Units North South Total Parcel Parcel Single Family —200' Single Family —90' Single Family —75' Single Family —65' Townhomes 14 68 27 30 22 Total 139 22 161 March 11, 2016 8 Dellcroft PUD Concept Table # 2 — Area Calculations (Acres) North % of South % of North & % of Parcel Total Parcel Total South Total Single Family Area 33.3 51% 32.1 36% 65.4 42% Townhome Area 1.6 2% 0 0% 1.6 1% Road Right of Way 9.3 14% 6.9 8% 16.2 10% Open Space* 21.7 33% 50.8 57% 72.5 47% Total 65.9 100% 89.8 100% 155.7 100% *Open spaces include wetlands, buffers, storm water treatment elements, trails, park, and buffers Table # 3 — North Parcel Net Density North Parcel Total Area 65.9 Protected Open Space* (20.3) Net Acres 45.6 Units 139 Units /Acre 3.05 *Does not include roadway buffer areas Table # 4 — Buildable Area in Open Space South Parcel Total Site Acres 89.8 Lot Area -32.1 Roadway -6.9 Wetlands -15.6 Wetland Buffers -3.2 Floodplain* -3.2 Slopes Greater the 18% -1.5 Total Buildable Open Space 27.3 Total Buildable Open Space % 30.4% *Assumes completing a FEMA Map amendment Table # 5- Trails and Sidewalks (Linear Ft.) North South Total Total Parcel Parcel (Feet) (Miles) Trails (Internal)* Sidewalks 5,648 7,923 8,951 0 14,599 7,923 2.8 1.5 Total 13,571 8,951 22,522 4.3 *Once a final restoration plan is completed some duplicative trail segments may be removed to foster the restoration efforts. Also the trails along Hamel Road and Arrowhead Drive are not included in the total. March 11, 2016 9 Dellcroft PUD Concept South Parcel - Additional Details South Parcel Soil Calculation (see Exhibit K - Current Conditions) After analyzing the soils our surveyors believe that topography and soils for the south parcel are likely slightly skewed on the Hennepin County maps and that all of the good soils found on the south parcel are contiguous. There is a narrow pinch point along Hamel Road where there is a contiguous connection from the east to the west on the site. Additionally, there are some areas where the slopes and floodplain areas have been better defined providing a small net increase in the amount of good soils on the southern parcel. In the future A FEMA map amendment will be needed to formalize the floodplain alteration. With these modifications the total contiguous good soils is 56.04 acres or at 5 acres per homesite this provides a base density of 11 units. The CD-PUD allows for up to a 200% increase of the base density for proposals that meet the purpose of the CD-PUD. We hope that you agree that we have provided the necessary evidence, at least preliminarily, to qualify for a doubling of the units with a cluster approach or 22 units as shown on the concept plan. Purpose of the CD-PUD 827.51 1. Protect the ecological function of native hardwood forests, lakes, streams, and wetlands. As mentioned above what we are proposing is more than protection, we plan to actively restore the open space areas. 2. Protect moderate to high quality ecologically significant natural areas. Also mentioned above the South Parcel is adjacent to and includes a small portion of a large wetland complex that is considered ecologically significant by the MLCCS. This neighborhood includes a greenway connection to that wetland complex. 3. Protect opportunities to make ecological connections between parks and other protected lands and ecologically significant natural areas. Similar to above and as shown on Exhibit F connections are not only being preserved but are being created. 4. Protect important viewsheds including scenic road segments. As much as possible viewsheds have been used as a part of creating the neighborhood and trails systems. 5. Create public and private trails for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space resources. The trail as shown in the City Parks & Trails Plan on the Dellcroft property (Exhibit L Park and Trail Plan) has been included. In additional to the trail over 4.5 miles of trails and sidewalks connect the neighborhood. Exactly which trails are public and which may be private is a conversation we would like to have with the City in the future. In any case the east -west trail as shown in the City's Parks and Trails plan would be public. 6. Create public and private Open Space for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space resources. Over 45% of the total development and over 50% of the southern parcel are included in the open space and are linked together with 2.8 miles of trails. March 11, 2016 10 Dellcroft PUD Concept Additional Requested Information for PUD Concept Restrictive Covenants Like most of our communities, we would include restrictive covenants to create common rules for a number of activities. This would include such items as the architecture of the homes, landscaping, yards, fences, use of the common property, storage, on -site parking, use of common elements and a number of items the one would typically find in an association. Generally these are common sense items that the homeowners themselves can chose to change or modify if needed as a community. Generally these rules are more restrictive than the City code unless agreed to by the City within the PUD agreement. Staging This site is likely to be built out in stages. At this time, it is difficult to know the exact staging. Since the north and south parcels have such different product types and price points it is possible that they would or could be developed simultaneously. If the north parcel were to be staged it would likely be from the east to the west and north to south. The entrance to the neighborhood from Arrowhead may initially be the primary entrance. A better idea of phasing will be explored with subsequent submittals. Overall, we would expect a site like this to be fully developed over a 3-5 year timeframe. Comprehensive Plan — Steering Committee We recognize and understand that the City has had a steering committee work on a revised Comprehensive Plan and that they recently prepared a draft land use plan. As an example Exhibit N shows what the guide plan would look like if the north Dellcroft Parcel were added to the MUSA and shown in on the guide plan. We believe that this shows how the Dellcroft site would likely meet the community goals and that in particular it balances the geographical disbursement of the development areas. Initial Development Standards North Streets 50' ROW, with 26' B-B Lots Front Setback — 25' (20' for Side Loaded Garage) Rear Setback —10' Side — 5' & 10' (7.5' average) Corner Lot Side — 15' Lot Area — 8,000- 47,000 sq. ft., Generally 65' 8,000-10,000 sq. ft., 75' 9,000-12,000 sq. ft., 90' 20,000- 30,000 sq. ft. South Streets 60' ROW, with 26' rural section roadway. Lots Front Setback — 35' Rear Setback — 30' Side — 30' Lot Area —1-2+ acres March 11, 2016 11 Dellcroft PUD Concept Submittal Exhibits • Exhibit A — Area Map — Location Map • Exhibit B — Guide Plan Map • Exhibit C — Zoning Map • Exhibit D — Sewer Staging Plan • Exhibit E — Site Plan • Exhibit F — Open Space Plan/Greenway Connection • Exhibit G — Restoration Plan • Exhibit H — Existing Conditions — Topography, Topo, Woodlands, Wetlands, Drainage ways • Exhibit I — Existing Conditions — Viewsheds and Vistas • Exhibit J — Schematic Utility Plan — Storm Water • Exhibit K — Existing Conditions — Suitable Soils/Steep Slopes • Exhibit L— Existing and Proposed Parks and Trails • Exhibit M — Schematic Utility Plans — Sewer, Water, Wells and Septic • Exhibit N — Steering Committee Land Use Plan — Proposed Amendment March 11, 2016 12 Dellcroft PUD Concept 3 4 5 D 2 E F G H I J i Pi.dden G¢ke i 6 lnclepMdaeme _41 0 CO a 0 cr � '11' 0 O N CO M 04 a O O b •crN V [�] [Cs C co crzt co ¢y7 L -4400 4000 yad a-3600 n 3200 2800 -i -2400 P I -2000 b -1600 1200 � x v G MEDINA Street & Address Finder Map See Reverse for Grid Guide and Neighborhood Maps i1 0 0.25 0 5 Map pale: January 30, 2014 P.1ale5 i Exhibit B - Guide Plan Map 5-2 1VIE©1NA Future Land Use Plan Guide Plan Rural Residential ▪ Agriculture Developing -Post 2030 Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 UTA Medium Density Res 3.5- 6.99 UfA _ High Density Res 7 - 30 UfA - Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 UTA _ Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 UTA l♦ Commercial 1M General Business 11.1 Industrial Business gm Private Recreation (PREC) - Parks and Recreation - P-R - State or Regional Open Space - Public Semi -Public 0 UTA ` Closed Sanitary Landfill Right -of -Way `This reap is not perfectly precise. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified. Last Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA 2030-4) Adopted: November 17, 2009 UTM, Zone 15N, NAR 83 Scale: 1:30,000 V I IGHWAY 55 z 3 O HACKAL40 RE er4: MEDINA Zoning Map (Residential) Legend Non -Residential (see reverse) -Agricultural preserve (AG) Rural Residential (RR) Rural Residential 1 (RR I) ;. Rural Residential (RR-2) LI Rural Residential -Urban Reserve (RR-UR) Suburban Residential (SR) Urban Residential (UR) Single Family Residential (R1) R1 - rezoning pending _ Single and Two -Family Residential (R2) R2-rezoning pending Residential -Mid Density (R3) _ Multiple Family Residential (MR) Mixed Use (MU) _ Uptovvn Hamel 1 (UH-1) Uptown Hamel (UH-2) Planned Unit Developmenl (PUD) Please contact the Planning Department (763-473.4643) for more information regarding property within PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) Map Updated: January 23. 2014 0 025 0.5 0.75 t Miles Exhibit D - Sewer Staging Proposed MUSA Line Expansion Map 5-3 MEDINA Staging and Growth Urban Services Phasing Plan _ Oeveloped 2006 _ 2001-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 "2016-2020 ▪ 2021-2025 ^.1 "2021-2025 - 2026-2030 MI "2026.2030 Post 2030 Met Council LTSSA f//74 "Mote: Crosshatched areas are proposed to be amended from an earlier staging period to the period indicated. There are several critical infrastructure milestones that will control growth Including: - The existing water infrastructure has capacity of approximately 160 units available until 2009. - The sewer constraints shall limit development to 2,000 unrts without Ill9-rn uvements Generally, the Phasing Plan demonstrates that development shall proceed in an east to west. paten hl s ¢tasi rg ¢ al d lois ®i HI 4ry2lL between adjacent for development twa-years prior to the Indicated phases to allow for proper infrastructure planning and development. The Grey area reflects the area identified try the City to be developed Post 2030. The Met Council has identified the LTSSA for potential future access to urban services. No services are planned during the timeframe covered by this Plan. Proposed Amendment: November 2014 Scale: 1:30,000 Map Date: December 24, 2014 9ellcrof-b Exhibit E - Site Plan North Parcel* Gross Acres - 65.9 Gross Open Space - 21.7 (33%) Net Acres - 45.6 Net Density - 3.05 units/acre Minimum Lot Widths 90' Single Family - 14 lots 75' Single Family - 68 lots 65' Single Family - 27 lots Townhomes - 30 units Total Units - 139lots/units South Parcel* Gross Acres - 89.8 Gross Open Space - 50.8 (57%) Buildable Open Space - 27.3 (30.4%) Minimum Lot Width 200' Single Family - 22 lots Total Lots - 22lots * Area calculations are measured esti- mates based on hand drawn concept. prr bevelopment [IC /5 10i 2.016 Open Space Plan/Greenway Connection ASSESSING OPEN SPACE PLAN PRIORITY AREAS: COMPOSITE Areas Already Protected Lakes Streams and Ditches Web and Systems High Quality N atural Areas Intersection of Wetlands and High Quality Natural Areas L- Medina Boundary Roads U.S. Higrrimair 'fir State Highway f County or Local Road Railroad Pellcroft Exhibit G - Restoration Areas Wetland Buffer Restoration Wetland Restoration Oak Savannah Restoration Existing Woodlands Landscape Open Space Buffer ltslot part of restoration but part of the open space) an ,fEE5C t 1 13M° bevelopment [IC 3/ 10/ 2016 /N1/4, Pellcroft Exhibit H - Ex'sting Conditions Wetlands, Woodlands Drainage Ways Wetlands Woodlands Drainage ways, ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Ridge Lines (Drainage Divides) Culvert Preserve 13M° bevelopment [IC 3/ 10/ 2016 a Pellcroft Exhibit I - Existing Conditions Viewsheds and Vistas 13F1' bevelopment [IC 3/ 10/ 2016 4,1/4, iellcroft Exhibit J - Schematic Utility Plan Storm Water Treatment _System Legend: Biofiltration Infiltration Water Quality & Rate Control Pond ABio-Filtration Swale Pre-treatment Filtration with Underdrain Storm Sewer — -� ` 13F19 bevelopment [IC 3/ 10/ 2016 a Pellcroft Exhibit K - Ex'sting Conditions Suitable So Is/Steep Slopes Dellcroft Property Septic Suitable Contiguous Sails Area Analysis Suitable Contiguous Soils - 51.78Ac. Suitable Soils from Excess Floodplain - 2.43 Ac. Soils Indicated not Suitable Due to Slopes - 4.85Ac. Wetland Actual Soils not Suitable Due to Slopes - 3.02 Ac. 988' Elevation Contour FEMA 100-Year Floodplain Map Site Boundary Actual Floodplain below 988' Elevation Actual Septic Suitable Contiguous Soils Area = 51.78+(4.85-3.02)+2.43=56.04 Ac. 100 20C, 400 Feet N 13FP bevelopment 11C 3/ 10/ 2016 I! COUNTY 99 �aird� J. •� N 5 airc¢r RreT Ff � e 0 0.25 0.5 1 Map 6-2 MEDINA Existing and Proposed Trails Legend Existing City Trail Proposed CWeal! Existing County Trail Recommended County Trail Existing Regional Trail Proposed Regional Trail ATTENTION: This map represents a comprehensive trail plan. It DOES NOT differentiate between trail locations, whether trails are o$- or on -road, type/material of trail construction, nor prioritization level. Further analysis, including prioritization, surface type, and preferred location, will be developed in future studies. "This map Is not perfectly precise. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified. Adapted: November 17, 2009 Parcel data current as of October 2005 UTM,.Zone 15N, NA❑ 8.3 Scale: 1:30,000 Pellcroft Exhibit M - Schematic Utility Plan Water & Sanitar _Sewer tt Sanitary Sewer Septic Sites (general mdicatlon only - exact mcabon to be determined with Perc tests) Well (general indication only -exact location to be determined by homeowner) • Sewer connection 675' north on Arrowhead Dr. • Water connection 1,300' north_on Arrowhead Dr.,' fji•.+jr eii rnq,N}ryr; l�- 13F1' bevelopment 11C 3/ 10/ 2016 MEDINA Future Land Use Concept DRAFT 3/2/2016 Legend Future Land Use Low Density Res (2-3 units/aore) Medium Density Res (4.6 units/acre) ▪ High Density Res (12-16 unitsyacre) Mixed Residential p.54 units/acre) _ Commercial - General Business ▪ Industrial Business Wetland Locations .,»; Wetland Locations FFousehold Density Upon Development : 1 Dot = 1.00601702 • ResUnits Notes: Muted Residential would require a rn nanum of 1 Inn density residential unit per acre Each dot represents one household Map Date: February 26. 2016 0 0.25 0.5 1 Mlles Agenda Item # 7B 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 Meeting SUBJ: Woodridge Church Addition — Covenant Background On February 5, 2013, the City entered into a Settlement Agreement with Woodridge Church related to a lawsuit commenced by the Church titled Woodridge Church v. City of Medina. After the terms of the settlement agreement were met, the lawsuit was dismissed. The conditions of the Settlement Agreement included that the City grant the Church a variance which would allow the Church to expand the building to 85,000 square foot and to construct up to 400 parking spaces on their property at 1500 County Road 24. City zoning regulations would generally limit the floor area of structures within the Rural Public/Semi-Public Zoning District to 40,000 square feet and limit parking spaces to 300. The City Council granted such a variance on April 16, 2013. Another condition of the Settlement Agreement was that the Church record a covenant against its property which states that the building may only be expanded in the general location shown in the Settlement Agreement and Variance, among other restrictions. The Covenant, Settlement Agreement, and Variance resolution are attached for reference. The 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 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. Woodridge Church Addition Page 1 of 3 April 19, 2016 Covenant City Council Meeting Analysis The Church has not submitted sufficient information to allow a full review of all implications of the proposed construction, but staff reviewed information available. The proposed addition to the south of the existing building would be set into the hillside to the south of the building. This would necessitate a larger retraining wall, which, along with the berm between County Road 24 and the driveway, screens the proposed location fairly well from the south. An aerial of the site can be found below. The proposed location of the addition to the south of the building is highlighted in yellow. With a brief review, staff did not identify any concerns with shifting a portion of the square footage from the north of the building to the south. The proposed addition would impact some of the existing parking spaces, which will likely need to be made up for in connection with the Site Plan Review for the expansion. 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. Woodridge Church Addition Covenant Page 2 of 3 April 19, 2016 City Council Meeting Attachments 1. Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions (w/ attached Settlement Agreement and Resolution 2013-22, granting Variance approval) 2. Sketch showing potential change to layout Woodridge Church Addition Page 3 of 3 April 19, 2016 Covenant City Council Meeting i i i i i i i 111 i i 1111 Doc No A09955600 V Certified, filed and/or recorded on 5/22/13 3:36 PM Office of the County Recorder Hennepin County, Minnesota Martin McCormick, County Recorder Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 33 Doc Name: Declaration Document Recording Fee Attested Copy or Duplicate 0rig inai Pkg ID 975162C $46.00 $2.00 Document Total MAO This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document. DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS ftd THIS DECLARATION made this iii J day of a , 2013, is made by Woodridge Church (hereinafter "Declarant") in consideration for th4Settlement Agreement between the Church and City of Medina, dated Fe h r u G 7 S , 2013 attached hereto as Exhibit I (hereinafter" Settlement Agreement"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of eertain real property described in Exhibit 2 (hereinafter "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, the Church as the owner of the Subject Property has the requisite authority to snake this Declaration binding on and rim with the Subject Property; and WIEIEREAS, the Subject. Property is subject to the Settlement Agreement and tocertain zoning and land use restrictions imposed by the City in connection with the approval of a variance dated `11 Xi /3 and attached hereto as Exhibit 3 (hereinafter `;Variance"); and WHEREAS, the City has approved the Variance on the basis of the determinstiora by the City Council of the City that the development of the Subject Property authorized by the Variance is acceptable only because no further development of the Subject Property shall be made beyond that allowed therein and the Declarant will not seek any further or more intense development of the Subject Property, the details and terms of which are set forth in the Settlement Agreement; and that but for the details and terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Variance would not have been granted; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the Settlement Agreement, the City has required the execution and recording of this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (hereinafter "Declaration") in favor of the City; and WHEREAS, to secure the Benefits and advantages of the Settlement Agreement, Declarant desires to forever subject the Subject Property to the terms hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held, transferred, sold, conveyed, and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions hereinafter set forth. I. The recitals and all Exhibits are incorporated into this Declaration. 2. The Subject Property may only be used and developed in a manner consistent with the Settlement Agreement and Variance, including, but not limited to, the following: s. The existing church building on the Subject Property may be expanded up to a maximum of 85,000 contiguous square feet in the general location set forth in 1 the Settlement Agreement, with no further or more intense development allowed. b. No more than 400 standard parking stalls shall be constructed, maintained, or exist on the Subject Property. All parking stalls on the property shall comply with the design, distribution, and location agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Settlement Agreement. 3. No development, ether than that specifically allowed for in the Settlement Agreement and Variance shall be permitted. 4. The two residential homes an the Subject Property shall not be expanded, but may be maintained through repair and restoration. 5. Except as provided herein, use of the Subject Property and all development on it shall conform to all current and future regulations of the City of Medina, 6. The obligations and restrictions of this Declaration run with the land of the Subject Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City. This Declaration may be amended from time to time in the sole discretion of the City and Declarant by a written amendment executed by the City and Declarant, its successors and. assigns, WOODR.IDGE CHURCH By Dated: Brent Nolby Its: Board Chairman STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ] ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on the Zz—day of ik t c�, 2013, by Brent Noiby, as Board Chairman of Woodridge Church, on behalf of the Chur h. w - - - -,� - e . - -� WENDY A FISHER Notary Public Minnesota m C4mrnissbri Expires Jan, 31, 2014 Drafted by: Hoff, Barry & Kozar, P.A. 775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 160 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Notary Publi 2 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THI SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") is made and entered into this 3"' day of , 2013 (hereinafter "Effective Date') by and between Woodridge Church (hereina er "Church") and the City of Medina, a Minnesota mwitip al corporation (hereinafter "City"). The Church and City may be referred to individually as a Party or collectively as the Parties. RECITALS WEIEREAS, the Church awns tvra parcels of land In the City totaling approximately 27.6 acres; to wit the parcel of land upon which the Church currently sits and which is legally described on the attached Exhibit A (hereinafter "Church Property") and the parcel to the 'West of the Church Property that is [wily described can the attached Exhibit B (hereinafter "Scherer Property"); the Church Property and Scherer Property may from time to time be referred to collectively as the "Subject Property", and WHEREAS, the Church as the owner of the Subject Property has the requisite authority to make this Agreement binding en and run with the Subject Property, and WHEREAS, the Church Property is currently zoned Rural Public Semi -Public (hereinafter " RPS Zone"), which limits the maximum combined square footage of all structures to 40,000 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Church filed an application to expand its structure can the Church Property to a total of 42,500 square feet, but withdrew the application; and WHEREAS, the Church coruanenced a lawsuit against the City titled Woodridge Church v City ofAfedfna, Civil Action No. 11-CV-275, in the United States DistrictCourt for the District of Minnesota (hereinafter "Lawsuit") making various statutory and constitutional challenges related to its withdrawn application to expand its church structure and the City's legislative zoning actions with respect to the creation of the RPS Zone; and AREAS, the City and Church engaged in a ,Settlement Conference with Magistrate Judge Franklin Nod, in the U. S. District Coitrt, Minneapolis, Minnesota on September 10, 2012 and discussed general settlement terms which were subject to the drafting and execution by each Party of written settlement agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement memorializes the general settlement terms discussed by the Parties at the September 10, 2012 Settlement Conference; and WHEREAS, the parties agree, understand, anti acknowledge that approval of this Settlement Agreement by the City must take place at a. duly called and noticed public City Council meeting; and 1 EXHIBIT a- to Declaration NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Church and City agree as follows: 1. Incorporation. The foregoing recitals are incorporated into this Agreement. 2. Compliance with Rclulations. Except•for the variance as contemplated by this .Agreement related to building square footage and the parking requirements set forth herein, the Church shall be subject to and comply with all cwrent and future City Regulations and Ordinances, including, but not limited to zoning regulations covering the Subject Property. 3. Church Expansion. Pursuant to the process in Paragraph 5, the City shall allow the Church to expand its current church building up to a total building size not to exceed 85,000 square feet. No part of the expanded church building shall exceed the height limits set forth in the Medina City Code. The expanded church building shall be one contiguous structure built in the general location and footprint shown on the attached Exhibit C. No additional development, expansion, building, use, or construction, other than parking as discussed in Paragraph 4 of this Agreement, shall occur on the Subject Property. The Scherer Property shall only be used as a residential house, any parking allowed under Paragraph 4, or as a landscaped buffer area. The residential home on the Scherer Property may be reconstructed provided its square footage and height shall not exceed the existing square footage and height and the footprint shall match the location and size of the existing foundation. 4. Project Parking. Pursuant to the process set fortis in paragraph 5 herein, the City shall allow the Church to have up to a total of 400 parking stalls on the Subject Property. There are currently 29+6 stalls on the property, meaning the Church can only add 104 new stalls (hereinafter "New Stalls"). New Stalls may be located to the North of the current parking on the Church Property, on the Scherer Property, and, on the portion of the Church Property where the Reiser house currently stands, to the extent that it is not subject to legal restrictions by way of an existing life estate. In no instance shall more than half of the New Stalls (fifty-two) be located to the North of the current Church parking lot, unless this restriction is expressly waived in writing by the City. All New Stalls constructed to the North of the current Church parking lot must be constructed using a pervious surface approved by the City. No New Stalls shall be installed until they are necessitated by expansion, all normal governmental approvals have been received in due course, and their design, distribution, and location approved by the City working in collaboration with the Church. In the event that the Parties cannot agree on the design, distribution, and location of the New Stalls the matter will be submitted for mediation. If an agreement is riot reached at mediation the proper design, distribution, and location of the New Stalls shall be submitted to a binding arbitration, with the Parties agreeing on a neutral arbitrator. If the Parties cannot agree on a neutral arbitrator, each Party will select one arbitrator and the 2 two chosen arbitrators shall select a third arbitrator and the three arbitrators shall decide the parking configuration. 5. Variance and Effectuation. The Church shall submit a complete variance application to effectuate the rights set forth in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Agreement. A complete variance application shall consist of a complete application farm attached hereto as Exhibit G ("Application Form"), mailing labels for all property owners within 1,000 feet of the Subject Property, and Exhibit C showing a maximum building size of 85,000 square feet with up to a total of no snore than 400 parking spaces on the Subject Property. ("Complete Application"). A Complete Application shall be deemed complete under City Code and the application processed thereunder. The City expressly reserves the right to condition the variance as set forth in this Agreement as may otherwise be necessary to allow the Project to proceed consistent with City Code and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Said conditions shall include a waiver of any City Code provisions requiring the construction and expansion contemplated in the variance to commence or be completed by a certain date. The City retains the right to deny the variance. The Church shall apply for the variance within 60 days of the City executing the Agreement and diligently pursue the same through the City's processes (hereinafter "Application Period"). The City will waive the application fees for the variance application. if the City denies the variance contemplated herein, the Agreement shall became null, void, and of no further force and effect, and. the Church shall not bring any claim against the City for denial of the variance; the only remedy being the reinstatement of the Lawsuit. f. Lot Combination and Treatment. The Church will diligently take all steps necessary to cause the combination of the Church Parcel and the Scherer Property into one parcel of record before seeking any ether approvals necessary to undertake the expansions contemplated in Paragraphs 3 and 4, other than the variances contemplated herein. Until such time as the Church combines the Church Parcel and the Scherer Property into one parcel of record, the Church shall treat them as though they are one property for purposes of this Agreement and the expansions contemplated in Paragraphs 3 and 4. 7. Dismissal of Lawsuit. 1f the City approves the variance contemplated in Paragraph 5 or the Church fails to submit a Complete Application for the variance during the Application Period, the Church shall execute and file with the Court the dismissal of the Lawsuit attached hereto as Exhibit D within ten days of the City's approval or the expiration of the Application Period. 8. Release. If the City approves the variance contemplated in Paragraph 5 or the Church fails to submit a Complete Application for the variance during the Application Period, the Church shall execute the release of claims attached hereto as Exhibit E within ten days of the City's approval or the expiration of the Application Period. 9. Restrictive Covenant. The Church shall execute the restrictive covenant memorializing the terms and limitations on the use of the Subject property attached hereto as Exhibit F on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns to be recorded against the Church Property and Scherer Property within ten days of the City granting the variance 3 contemplated in Paragraph 5, if the City so grants. Upon request of the City, the Church shall execute another restrictive covenant in the same form attached hereto, except it will recite the new legal description for the Subject Property upon Dot combination pursuant to this Agreement. The parties will cooperate to assure the recording of the restrictive covenant, including execution of other necessary documents, if any. 10. Merger and Modification. This Agreement and any attached exhibits shall constitute: the entire agreement between the Church and City. This Agreement can only be modified by a writing signed by bath parties. The possibility of -modification does not create any right thereto, and a refusal to modify is in the sale discretion of the party being asked to modify the agreement. 11. Corttrolling Law. This Agreement has been made under the taws of the State of Minnesota and such Iaws will control its interpretation. 12. Binding Effect. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on the Parties and their respective successors, assigns, agents, insurers, executors, and members, and the benefits and burdens shall run with the Subject Property. 13. City Council Approval and Assent. The Church recognizes that only the Medina City Council acting as a body can approve this Agreement and that it is necessary for this Agreement to came before the Medina City Council at a duly called public meeting. The Church shall execute this Agreement on or before 12:00 pm central standard time on January 25, 2013, widths execution cannot be revoked or modified for forty-five days to give the Medina City Council time to meet, review, and approve or deny the Agreement. If the City Council rejects the Agreement or does not approve the Agreement within forty-five days of the Church signing it, the Agreement shall become null and void and have no further binding effect. 14. Good Faith. The parties will work together in good faith with respect to implementing the terms of this Agreement. 15. Acknowledgement. Each Party states that it htas carefully read this Settlement Agreement in its entirety and has conferred with its attorney and knows and understands the contents of this Agreement. • 4 WOODRIDi E CHURCH By: Brent Nolby Board Chairman STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN } ss. } Dated:. . This instrument was acknowledged before me on thez, day of , 2013, by Brent Nolhy, as Hoard Chairman of Woodridge Church, on behalf of the Chureh. 5 CITY OF MEDINA By: T. M. Crosby, r. Its: Mayor Dated: Its: City Administrator -Cleric STATE OF MINNESOTA ) } ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged befote me on the .5 day of �; 2013, by T. M. Crosby, Jr. and Scott T. Johnson, as Mayer and City Administrator-CIe. respectively of the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the municipal corporation. 0. ._ Idotary"ubIic HOMY ifyCondit* dpiric161,2047 6 LEGAL' DESCRIPTION OF CHURCH PARCEL The Church Property is: The parcel of property with Hennepin County PM No. 23-118-23-23-0001, which is legally described as: The South One -Half (S 1/2) of the East One -Half (E 1/2) of the Vest One -Half (W 112) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4), Section Twenty-three (23), Township One Hundred Eighteen (118), Range Twenty-three (23). EXHIBIT A to Settlement Agreement LEGAL, DESCRIPTION OF SCHERER PROPERTY The Scherer Property is; The parcel of property with Hennepin County P1D No. 23-118-23 23-0005, which is IegaIly described as: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 23, Township I I8, Range 23; thence Fast, a distance of 663.78 feet, along the North line of said Section; thence South to a point which is 1320.06 feet North from the South line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section, for the paint of beginning of the parcel herein described; thence South a distance of 1320.06 feet to the South line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section; thence West, a distance of 269.15 feet along said South line; thence North, a distance of 1320.06 feet, thence East, a distance of 268.47 Feet to the paint of beginning and there ending. to Settlement Agreement I 4? t:'•;) It WM% LC:;-.. sr -1'17,7 Ve 'ON OVOH AtNft0",),. 5 5 12 Eximmiti to:: Settlement Agreement ''Woodridge Church, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT" OF MINiwESOTA ) ) ) ) v' ) STIPULATION OF Civil Action No. 11 CV 275 MJD/FLN ) DISMISSAL WITH City of Medina, ) PREJUDICE AND ORDER } Defendant. ) ) The above parties, through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate and agree that the Plaintiffs complaint be dismissed in its entirety and that the foregoing (natter, having been filly compromised and settled, may be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice, without costs, disbursements, or attorney's fees to any party. Dated: , 2012 Joel Oster Alliance Defense Fund 15192 Rosewood Leawood, KS 662M And Charles Shreffler (#183295) Shreffler Law, PLLC 410 l 1 th Avenue S. Hopkins, MN 55343 (612) 872-8000 Attorneys for Plai nitff EXHIBIT D to Settlement Agreement Dated: , 2012 George C. Hoff(#45846) Kimberly B. Kozar (#0268951) David M. Quealy (#38%83) Hod Barry & Kozar, P.A. 775 Prairie Center Drive 160 Flagship Corporate Center Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (952)941-9224 Attorneys for Defendant ORDER Based upon the dismissal of the action through counsel, the undersigned, being Chief Judge in the above -entitled court, hereby orders the above matter to be dismissed with prejudice without costs, disbursements, or attorney's fees to any party. LET JUDGMENT 13E ENTERED ACCORDINGLY, Dated: 2012 BY THE COURT Michael L Davis United States District Court Chief Judge RELEASE OF CLAIMS by Woodridge Church Against the City ofMedina Woodridge Church and its shareholders, members, insurers, agents, servants, officers, managers, board, heirs, executors, assigns, and; administrators completely release and forever discharge the City of Medina and its insurers, agents, servants, officers, managers, successors, heirs, executors, assigns, and administrators (hereinafter "City"), from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, damages, casts, loss of services, expenses, and compensation whatsoever, including court costs, legal expenses, engineering and other consultant or expert fees, and attorney's fees, whether known of unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, (hereinafter "Claims") that they may now or hereafter have, against the City on account of or in any way related to the subject matter and allegations set forth in the matter of Woodridge Church v. City of Medina, Civil Action No. I I-CV-275 MJDIFLN. WOODRIDGE CHURCH By: Dated: [insert name] Its: [insert position] STATE OF liviiNNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ) ss. This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of 2013 by [Insert Name], as [Insert Position] of Woodridge Church, on behalf of the Church. ' Notary Public EXHIBIT E 1 I to Settlement Agreement DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS THIS DECLARATION made this day of , 2013, is made by Woodridge Church (hereinafter "Declarant") in consideration for the Settlement Agreement between the Church and City of Medina, dated 2013 attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (hereinafter "Settlement Agreement"). REGTTAES WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain real property described in Exhibit 2 (hereinafter "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, the Church as the owner of the Subject Property has the requisite authority to make this Declaration binding on and run with the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is subject to the Settlement Agreement and to certain zoning and land use restrictions imposed by the City in connection with the approval of a variance dated and attached hereto as Exhibit 3 (hereinafter "Variance"); and WHEREAS, the City has approved the Variance on the basis of the determination by the City Council of the City that the development of the Subject Property authorized by the Variance is acceptable only because no further development of the Subject Property shall be made beyond that allowed therein and the Declarant will not seek any farther or more intense development of the Subject Property, the details and terms of which are set forth in the Settlement Agreement; and that but for the details and terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Variance would not have been granted; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the Settlement Agreement, the City has required the execution and recording of this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (hereinafter "Declaration") in favor of the City; and WHEREAS, to secure the benefits and advantages of the Settlement Agreement, Declarant desires to forever subject the Subject Property to the terms hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held, transferred, sold, conveyed, and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions hereinafter sett forth. 1. The recitals and all Exhibits are incorporated into this Declaration. 2. The Subject Property may only be used and developed in a manner consistent with the Settlement Agreement and Variance, including, but not limited to, the following: a. The existing church building on the Subject Property may be expanded up to a maximum of 85,000 contiguous square feet in the general location set forth in 1 EXHIBIT F to Settlement Agreement the Settlement Agreement, with no further or more intense development allowed. b. No more than 400 standard parking stalls shall be constructed, maintained, or exist un the Subject Property. All parking stalls on the property shall comply with the design, distribution, and location agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Settlement Agreement. 3. No development, other than that specifically alloyed for in the Settlement Agreement and Variance shall be permitted. 4. The two residential homes on the Subject Property shall not be expanded, but may be maintained thmugh repair and restoration. S. Except as provided herein, use of the Subject Property and all development on it shall conform to all current and future regulations of the City of Medina. 5. The obligations and restrictions of this Declaration run with the land of the Subject Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City. This Declaration may be amended from time to time in the sale discretion of the City and Declarant by a written amendment executed by the City and Declarant, its successors and assigns. WOODRIDGE CHURCH By: Dated: [insert name] Its: [insert position] STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPINN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of , 2013, by [Insert Name], as [insert Position] of Woodridge Church, on behalf of the Church. Notary Public 2 " " Plarming & Zoning Department 26.2 County Road 24 Phones (763) 473-4643 Medina, MN amo Iext (763) 473 9359 Application for Planning C,!onstderation !" " w.i" rw" ss" " �% re :Type- v, f Request 0 Agricultural Preserve Apg lExpirration " 0 Appeal Administrative Decision " " Appeal of Wetland Functional Assessment and Value Classification Q' Comprehensive Plan Amendment � Concept PM Review 0 Conditiorm lse Permit 0 Conservatien Design Gant Setting Proms Q' Environmental Review (eg, RAW, EiS) Q Interim Use Pcrmil Q Lot Combination or Spot(Suw yey &IN) 0 La:Subdivision 0 Lot Combination 0 Lot Line eirrange meat CJ Mixed Use Development 0 Stage IPlan 0 Stagell Plan 0 Stage 1lI Pion 0 Planned Unit Development 0 Conce,p1Pion 0 PUD Genera: Plan 0 MID Plan 1Plan 0 Platted Subdivision 4 Preliminary Prat 0 Final Plat Q Site Pion Review d Vacation (right-of-way or easement) 0 Varlanee 0 Wetland Conservation Act Permit Review 0 Ziming Amendment 0 Rezoning (Mop Amentimen0 TcetAmearnent " s Pate P(anulne Received: (Stamp Rene) .. Requeit; Site Address or Property Identification riumber(s); (to be known herein as the "subfectproperty 9 Note: All application submittals must have a pre - application meeting with City Planning Staff at least one week prior to submittal. Please be sure to read, understand and follow the checklist attachments) that accompany any of the "Type of Request" items you are submitting to the City. Office Use Only Application Cbde # Check # to Settlement Agreeme REQ SIGNATURES ***Nate: Allparties whh afee interest in the real estate must sign this application before the City will rePiew for co:vietim:1 *" Applicant Information: Fee Time )Property Owner Information (if different than applicant) Name: Name: (please print) (please print) Address: Address: City, State, Zip:. City, State, Zip: Phone: Phone: Cell -Phone: Cell- Phone: Email: Signature Signature; Date: Dote: Checklist: Please review the checklist for the type of application ,you are requesting. Minnesota State Statute provides the City of Medina 15 business days to determine the application's completeness. Completeness depends on whether or not the checklist items are fulfilled. Review Deadline and Timeline: All applications must be received by the deadlines noted on the attached sheet. Failure to submit by the date shown will result in a delay in the scheduling of the' application or the project. Meeting the deadline does not guarantee that an application will be heard at the next meeting. Ira, fact, to improve likelihood of appearing on an agenda, it is recommended that applications be submitted earlier than deadline. Most applications have a Statutory review period o, f 60 slays, with the City's ability (which includes city stajp to extend an additional 60 days if necessary due to insufficient information, directive to provide additional information, the tabling or postponement of an application, lack ofquuorum, or schedules. -.: .44plicatioij for NonniFey (Pkaasoiwa4convidiyand re atand yaw- retitailibffitles astivkired lirpreapppllcati oe The iffy of Medina has set truth a tee schedule ibr the year2013 by City [ainunce (SHE ATTACHED EXHIBIT -A). Hoswever. projects of lerge scope that Include two or more requests may be required to provide a higher deposit than the resehcion sate forth as determined by the City Administrator. The fees eollected for land use projpets are collected es deposits only. ALL Invoices associated with each died use.eppileaticet wlld be bided dtreatbo to the applicant immediately upon receipt by the City for oath project. The C3ly ofMadina often utilizes oonsululting fin= to assist in the review of projects. The consultant said City rhea are shown at the bottom of this form. By sign* this tbrm, the sole responsibility for any and all fags � with the laird use s� Application 8otia tine toestmotion monitoring stage; end ail the way th i review to � release etagy lirrarrciKl guarantees for an In the event the Applicant fails to make payment rife fear wed with the � per' sufficient to cover said coats, the City of Medina will t � and the lash appl . anon Is not prQJett, ageing the -orb �' �bttpaiti or doilrhquept fees related to this aApltaa�an or ent property', if a project to denied dry the CIO" Council Or Withdrawn the l fcan the foes essoeleted fbr the prolett untli such dental or withdrawal, remain the Applicent'a respaethility. � UWE UNDERSTAND] THE FEE STATEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS LAND USE APPLICATION: APPLICANT FEE TITLE PROPERTY C3Va►NSR Mitifteetfrom Appt)a 0 Signalare Printed Name Date SYSnakire PrIntedNorne Date Applicant andforProperty Owner must inlaid all a below k r this application to be considered complete. L the Applicant noted ab€rra, undeOhnd that the � - deposit will be retained by the City ofM hi itp entirety wrtil tho agipticetien or project 1s ojose i urid paying's!! b lla Invoiced to me direct hr and that the ce oland toy s y such ti In i P� ask WILL I+i{(y"I' be radhraeil- dry aucli whit' billings. lithe AMINO; undetilat<d that the (:tte of htedlea often reties dip VEY on consultants fie preperatlari afreetarieis, inspection, curd project ate pmvlde arvd � aerrices related to land -ram ttpp,one Nrd prqieets and that I will be billet at the cansultard'a 100% reimbursable rate forth*, whim provided on �Plk L my I, the Applicant, uaderaard h Is the pry of Medina's policy to pay ail #hes associated with Medina elaff review and project management related to my applieaati their tinge and resourcesspent on `'°}°�, I understand that Muhuestefl?deorrmr�rta ° apptl� and dual wilt be billed et the atafre 100% reimbursable rate for thetas earviceeprovided. I, the Applicant audtor Fee Title i:Tomo Owner, have reviewed and understand the City aoknoiiedge myfoorrospouaibillty to pity forall fees appilcable to protesting tree Sah dobrrme:It won, eonatructian and lnspeetion rw ile is M8 end review a nl`rny application, closegeneral project mane,hemant, and p:�ojeet close arrt. i, the Fee Tide 1're,perry Owner n otad above 0fditi'orortt from aroma ea to Applicant noted herein) undotstarrd ea the fee owner Oft the properly that the City ofhledlna trill aseess arty unpaid or delinquent thee related to this application or project emu{ raY properly. t, the Re Title Property Owner noted above, request le have copies dell invoices hnalled to my address. 32111_110 (effete one) EXHIBIT - A (i.r110i.(4. i 141.1fji'.lJ lift `I ESiit}4uI� i_.q3 . MAO +sag ZII 1P• 7...71 s€esora9ntend VOA aosy jpR { cats ool to ("9Yr•ig # c.o.s. If Use Sine l Flea sooty rl . 200000+C.D.s. !tr > l6060es* t"'rFfl7ri++Iv r. •+ r. "rr: a 11 q r.r73117ofholdVett+g JULrumm I + r,1I1� •n�.,.. +i:'J�;�y , 1. e I � r:�l 11322111 }-••w.�l. s ►'Ili! f..il �}'f� 11� f". r. YJw...JwL rl�`-t` 11 ' w• 1 IT, I y E 1�� .E. ` +�+j��� !� [ � �1..r• i�•f�.11 [E �+ra� :Idi�li�S).+1y r�` rot•1. •r its :} . _p.-' r[�. m Eia} I�i 1ra:iLm [ o • i,� ;1se:'•1�� •Y,1 hl.l[ arnw - __ rrl (120o419 + c ae fie F. + Use • •TKeppli rOV413411191r pinTMUm] ►�*,+ r,p *,sir n Censer a en edge r• , r +tit*goof Wing owes: 1 1 crawl o 65U • OntriOnti 1 r' °.00 (deposit) *rn c r;i11,1(1.:,,Sitj+ 1 1.. r..11,I::a••1 75.00 ,t ( E • ��j•1 � 'EEP:M, itp,'(. tiErarLIMMil EI I E rr=.!. r •..t. .!•.1 °�.1 ,.e��si:�:C •'`-1�,i��1k2AIAA �o! ['xmt7�l1 � r Zlr � � .l i . • � .{I'r�l�ljzm nm al'ei.' +. 1 I i 11rd rS1 17 • =I$ — Thai w6W 2840r112 1 p...31T." I �y.'T'1 �, Transfer of Application and Fee Obligation (applies only when the original applicant transfers application to a new party) I, (existing applicant), and (existing land owner if different) hereby recognize the transfer of this land use application, .fees and associated deadlines with said application to the following: (new applicant). New Applicant In for Mt! on: Name: Address: City, State, Zip: Phone: Cell Phone: Email: I LTNDEItSTAND THE FEE STATEMENT AND RESPONSIBILI't th.S ASSOCIA'I'ED WITH THIS LAND -USE APPLICATION: Previous Applicant Signature: Applicant Signature: Owner Signature (if dffererrtj: � Date: * New Applicant and/or Owner will be required to complete and sign a new Fee Statement Form in order for this transfer to be deemed acceptable by the City of.Medina. This page Intentionally left blank Planning & Zoning Department 2052 Count/RNA 24 Phan& (763) 473-4643 Medina, MN 35340 Fax (763) 473-9339 2013 Application Deadlines for Meeting and/or Public Hearing Dates iftml.11.Il.V11(013) iJ C111r.'i-,,��t11111, %,r�, NOTES: 1. The schedule above can generally be thought of as the best -case scenario, and an application may take additional time. Submitting materials prior to the deadline does not guarantee the application will be heard at the following Planning Commission meeting, particularly if the materials are incomplete or the request is complex. Additionally, the Planning Commission and City Council may require additional meetings for review. Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit materials earlier than the deadline to ineizase the likelihood of meeting the review schedule. 2. The Planning Commission typically meets on the second Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hail (2052 County Road 24; Medina, MN 55340), unless otherwise noted by posted agendas. 3. The City Council typically meets on the first and third Thesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall (2052 County Road 24; Medina, MN 55340), unless otherwise noted by posted agendas.. 4. No e-mail or fax submittals will be conaidered, unless explicitly authorized by City stall. 5. THE APPLICANT OR A, DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE IS REQUIRED TO ATTEND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. The Subject Property The Subject Property is: The parcel of property with Hennepin County MD No. 23-118-23.23-0001, which its legally described as: -The South One -Half (S 112) of the East One -Half (E 1/2) of the West One -Half (W 1/2) of the Northwest Quarter 1f4), Section. Twenty-three (23), Township One Hundred Eighteen (118), Range Twenty-three (23) TOGEMER. WITH The parcel of property with Hennepin County PID No. 23-118-23-23-0005, which is legally described as: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 23, Township 118, Range 23; thence Fast, a distance of66338 feet, along the North line of said Section; thence South to a point which is 1320.06 feet North from the South line ofthe Northwest Quarter of'said Section, for the point of beginning of the parcel herein described; thence South a distance of 1320.06 feet to the South line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section thence West, a distance of 269.15 feet along said South lane; thence North, a distance of 1320.06 feet, thence East, a distance of 268.47 feet to the point of beginning and there ending. If the above described parcels are combined into one parcel, the legal description and Hennepin County PID No. for the combined parcel shall govern and the Declaration shall apply to the entirety of the combined parcel. 4 to Declaration of Covenants and Restrirrinnc Member Martinson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION 2013-22 RESOLUTION APPROVil►1Cx VARIANCES FOR WOODRIDGE CHURCH RELATED TO FUTURE EXPANSION LOCATED AT 1500 COUNTY ROAD 24 WWRDEAS, the city of Medina (the -City") is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Woodridge Church (the "Applicant") owns property ty at 1500 County Road 24 and 1542 County Road 24 (the "Property") which is legally described inExhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a variance from the Maximum Building Size requirement of the Rural PubliclSomi-Publie zoning district to allow the church structure to be up to .a maximum of 85,000 square feet in floor area, with additional floor area allowed for the existing residential structure currently located at 1542 County Road 24; And WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a variance from the Maximum Off -Street Parking Spaces Allowed requirement of the Rural Public/Se nti-Public zoning district to allow up to 400 -perking spaces on the Property, and WHEREAS, current regulations of the Rural Public/Semi-Public zoning district limit the combined floor area of all structures on a site to 40,000 square feet and Ilmit the total number of parking spaces one a site to 300; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting to discuss the application can March 12, 2013 and following such discussion recommended approval of the requested variances; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the application at the April 2, 2013 meeting and took additional testimony, and WHEREAS, based on the written and oral record before the Planning Commission and City Council on the above, the City -Council makes the following findings of fact in regards to the application: 1) The variances, with the conditions limiting the intoslty of use in the rural area rioted ]Herein, ,are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. 2) The variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan as the conditions applied to the approval take into consideration the character of the surrounding land uses. 3) A religious institution, with the conditions set forth for the variances herein, would put the property to a reasonable use, Resolution No. 2013-22 April 16, 2013 EXHIBIT 3 to Declaration of Covenants and Re 4) The size of the parcels, after combination, is unique to the Property; as is the fact that the topography limits visibility of the structure from public streets. 5) The variances will not alter the essential character of the locality. NOVV, THEREFORE RE iT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota approves the following Variances, subject to the conditions noted in this resolution: 1. The maximum combined floor area of all structures on the Property is hereby increased from the 40,000 square feet allowed in the Rural Pdblic/Semi-Public .zoning district to a maximum of 85,000 square feet for the church structure along with additional floor area for the existing single family home located at 1542 County Road 24. 2. The maximum off-street parid ng spaces is hereby increased from the 300 allowed in the Rural Public/Semi-Public zoning district to 400. BE n FURTHER RESOLVED that the approval granted herein shall be subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The church structure shall not be expanded to a size of more than 85,000 square feet of floor area. Future expansion shall be subject to relevant approval processes and all other regulations in place when construostiOn is proposed. 2. The number of parking spaces on the Property shall not exceed 400. Future expansion shall be subject to relevant apprevai processes and all other regulations in place when construction is proposed. 3. No construction or expansion activity is approved through this variance. Future requests for expansion shall be subject to review and approval processes described by ordinance and law prior to any work taking place. 4. With the exception -ofthe specific variances granted herein, all activities and -construction on the property shall meet and be consistent with all then.=current regtlations of the City, state, county, watershed district, and any other agency having juriadiction over such activities. 5. Prior to any expansion on the Property, the twosubjectparcels at 1500 County Road 24 and 1542. County Road 24 shall be combined into a single lot. Such oombination shall be requested by the Applicant of the City and shall be subject to relevant review processes. 6. Any expansion to the church building shall be located in the general location and within the general footprint shown in the conceptual site plan dated January 17, 2013 but need not occupy the entirety of such footprint. 7. Any new parking constructed north of the existing church structure shall be of a pervious material approved by the City. 8. The one-story single4amily home with a footprint of 2700 square feet at 1542 County Road 24 shall be permitted in addition to the square footage permitted for the church structure by this variance, but shall not be expanded in size. 9. Notwithstanding time limitations within City code for the validity of variance approvals, the City Council hereby waives any requirement to use the variance within a certain timeframe. Resolution No. 2.0133-22 2 Apti116, 2013 Dated April 16, 2013. ;#41;9,474/ ,�1/�� B abefih'Weir, Acing Mayor ATTEST; Scott T. Anson, iy Administrator -Cleric The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly Bonded by member Pederson and upon vote being taken thereon, the fallowing voted in favor thereof: Anderson, Martinson, Pederson, Weir And the following voted against same. (Absent: Crosby) None Whereupon said resolution was declared. duly passed and adapted. Resviution 4No, 2013-22 3 April -16, 2013 Exhibit A Legal Description of the Property Legal Description of 1504 County Road 24: The parcel of property with Hennepin County P1U Na. 23-118-23-23-0001, which is legally &styled es: The; South One -Half (S 112) ofthe :gest One -Half (E in) of the West One -Half (W 1/2) Of the Northwest Quarter 114), Section Twenty -time (23), Township tine Hunched Eighteen (118), Range Twenty-three (23). Legal Description of 1542 County Road 24: ' The parcel of property with Hennepin County RD No, 23=118-23.23-0005, which is legally described as: Commencing at the Northyvest :corner of Section 23, Township 118, Range 23; thence East, a &swop of 663.78 feet, along the North lino of said Section; thence South to a point which is 1320.06 feed North from the South line of the Northwest. Quarter of said Section, for the point of beginning of the parcel heroin descrihOt thence South a distance of 1320.06 feet to the South line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section; thence West, a distance of 269. is feet along said South line; thence North, a distance of 132a.46 feet, thence East, a distance of268.47 feet to the paint of beginning and there ending. Resolution No. 2013.2.2 4 April 16, 2013 UU'Uj U2 2 26.20 ' IN:D SUFFER I ! —�_=�] ('MEMO NOV. 24,2003) H \E/ �- ED77 GE GF WEZL4NG AS GELINEATEG B ! I \ •���� `� KJOLHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL ON 10-16-08 W I , /------_ _ F— ! IL ! IR� ell a i "SANITARr 'OUNDT' ��3 pi EXAc1 SIZE TO 011E DESIGNED / / BV SEPTIC DEYGNERDb TIT 20 WETLAND BUFFER IN (MEMO NOV. 24,200B) Irr7- " i ! 1 � I 11-r 1 O)To \� D, � s P INV G . )__ QN _ 17 �yl DIM �� I_; R I I '9&6-- ; ; '--_ \ \ 111 ItC'x -- EDG OF WETLAND AE OEGNN A6 \ \ -TIH ensry Inv=(ee�,�s) \ 1 I j \\KJOL I ENVIRONMENTAL ON 10-16-08 10 �—�------- 98E--_--���--� \ I I �t� -�--_ ------------_----------Ao 98 81- -- I � �V - 1I ,— -- eo- -----------------P/-a—z ---------------------------------I —>�— -- ------__ — — -1- - -` -I- 1\ -� - V 128&05 -- ---- i— a Or a.e vY oa I ( 20' WETLAND BOFFER 1\ \\\\ \\ 1 (MEMO NOV. 24,2d08) / \ 11 \I ` \ \\16 \ \ \ r CD x vv o, II B� c�u \ v­\ �\ 11 o) E --- --- --- ------40—I ? - --- --- --- --- --- — -- --- N 00°01'46" W I I 1 1 1\ \ 1 1 \ I \ I \ \ PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BLDG. AREA PARKING STALLS EXISTING 2016 PROPOSED FUTURE 28,069 S.F. 9,976 S.F. 46,955 S.F. 296 —24 +128 TOTAL 85,0000 S.F. 400 STALLS d 1 i Ir L _ v CDN IS _ a M VwLn oW�z Q 00c U CL 00� G. 0 E:S 0 00 z �zz ■ �z <mi xJ O xa ,n a Nw �z z 2 ISSUE/REVISIONS JE-to kEVIEW SITE PLAN Al SITE PLAN SCALE: 1-50'-0" MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Tom Kellogg, City Engineer DATE: April 7, 2016 MEETING: April 19, 2016 SUBJECT: Minnesota Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund Backj4round: The state of Minnesota utilizes a highway user's tax fund (HUTF) to help finance more than 100,000 miles of trunk highways, county state aid highways, municipal state aid (MSA) streets and township roads. Funding for the HUTF comes from fuel tax revenues, license fees and motor vehicle sales tax revenues. In 2016 the HUTF totaled $2,064,072,400 of which more than $820,000,000 was distributed to local governments. The attached flow chart shows how the 2016 HUTF was distributed. 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). City Council Action Requested: No action necessary, this is for informational purposes. Bridge 69A18, Highland St., City of Duluth Minnesota's economic strength and vitality depends on an effective transportation system. To support the state's system of streets, roads and bridges, the Minnesota Department of Transportation distributes funds for highway maintenance and construction to counties, cities and townships based on a formula determined by the legislature. The department's State Aid for Local Transportation division works closely with local levels of government to ensure the state maintains a safe, effective and coordinated highway network. Monies from the Minnesota Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund are used to support more than 100,000 miles of trunk highways, county state aid highways, municipal state aid streets and township roads. Funding sources, including fuel tax revenues, license fees and motor vehicle sales tax revenues, support the highway users fund. For fiscal year 2016, MnDOT distributed over $820 million to local governments from the highway users fund. In addition to funding support, the SALT division provides technical assistance in highway and bridge design, construction and maintenance; authorizes grants for bridge construction; coordinates local federally funded projects; and provides overall management of the state aid system. SALT links MnDOT with city and county engineers to transfer technical expertise and determine ways to improve the state's highway system. Trunk Highway 11,814 County State Aid Highways30,706 Municipal State Aid Streets Z 3,734 County Roads 14,197 Township Roads 55,306 Other Municipal Streets 18,911 Other Minor Systems 7,230 141,898 miles In 87 counties Z In 148 cities of population greater than 5,000 Trunk Highways 4,030 County Roads 8,159 City Streets 1,492 Township Roads 6,220 19,901 bridges MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: April 14, 2016 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates April 19, 2016 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Dellcroft Concept Plan — west of Arrowhead Drive, north and south of Hamel Road — BFP Development, LLC has requested that the City review a concept plan which identifies 131 single family and 30 townhomes. The Concept Plan contemplates a Comprehensive Plan Amendment north of Hamel Road to extend City sewer and water and contemplates a Conservation Design-PUD south of Hamel Road with 22 lots on private well and septic. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on April 12. Comments from the public and the Planning Commission opposed changing the land use north of Hamel Road from Rural Residential. The City Council is scheduled to review on April 19. B) Deer Hill Preserve (Stonegate Farms) Final Plat — Property Resources Development Company has requested final plat approval for the Deer Hill Preserve CD-PUD subdivision, formerly known as Stonegate Farms. The first phase of the development is proposed to include 10 lots in the northeast corner of the site, near the current termination of Deerhill Road. The City Council reviewed at the April 5 meeting and directed staff to prepare approval documents after the applicant submits adequate Conservation Easement and Land Stewardship documents. The applicant has now requested that the City construct Deerhill Road through a 429 Assessment process. Staff has begun preparing for this process, including preparation of necessary petition and waiver agreements. C) Clydesdale Marketplace Sign PUD Amendment — northeast corner of Highway 55 and Clydesdale Trail. Clydesdale Marketplace LLC has requested an amendment to the Medina Clydesdale Marketplace PUD in order to allow construction of a monument sign at the northeast corner of Highway 55 and Clydesdale Trail. This sign would replace the sign on top of the large retaining wall and provide additional space for more tenants. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on April 12 and unanimously recommended approval of the request. Staff intends to present to the Council on May 3. D) Wealshire LLC Comp Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan Review — Wealshire, LLC has requested a site plan review for construction of a 173,000 sf memory care facility. The request also includes a rezoning from RR-UR to Business Park and an Interim Use Permit to permit continued agricultural use of the portion of the property not proposed to be developed. The Met Council has also approved of the previous Comp Plan amendment. The Planning Commission reviewed the rezoning, site plan review and interim use permit at the February 10 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The City Council reviewed at the May 19 meeting and directed staff to prepare approval documents. The applicant has subsequently changed their proposed site plan which was presented to the Planning Commission and Council. The applicant is working on finalizing construction plans. E) Kal Point Site Plan Review, PUD Amendment — 340 Clydesdale Trail — Kalyan Vempaty has requested an amendment to the Medina Clydesdale Marketplace PUD and a Site Plan Review to construct a commercial building containing a restaurant and upstairs office space on the final lot within Clydesdale Marketplace. Staff is conducting a preliminary review to determine if the application is complete for review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the December 8 meeting and recommended approval. The Council reviewed on January 5 and directed Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 April 19, 2016 City Council Meeting staff to prepare resolution of approval, which will be presented after the applicant secures approvals for the proposed shared parking. F) Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery, Wright -Hennepin Solar Panels, Medina Mini - Storage —The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. G) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll— These preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application H) Bradford Creek, Hamel Haven, Buehler subdivisions — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before construction begins. Other Proiects A) Comprehensive Plan — staff is preparing to begin discussions with the Park Commission related to the Parks, Trails and Open Space plan at their April 20 meeting. Staff is also preparing for the April 21 Steering Committee meeting. Community Meetings are scheduled for May 14 and May 16, and staff intends to send out a mailer to all residents in the next few weeks. B) City Hall Lower Level Improvements —staff reviewed furniture options. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 April 19, 2016 City Council Meeting MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340.9790 p: 763.473-9209 f: 763.473-8858 MEDINA non-cmergenM 763-525-6210 MEMORANDUM Emergency 9-1_1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: April 15, 2016 RE: Department Updates Reserves Hold Annual Training On April 1 Oth, the Medina Police Reserves held their annual training for the regional reserve squads. The training was on responding to traffic accidents. They set up a mock accident scene at the police and public works facility. Approximately 25 reserve officers participated in the training. The training was set up by Reserve Coordinator Patrol Officer Tom Gregory and Reserve Sergeant Mike Chorley. We received very positive comments on the training. Fire Training and Manpower Study Underway On April 81h, I attended a meeting at the Long Lake Fire Department with McGrath Consultants for the study of a possible joint training officer and manpower sharing plan for the Loretto, Maple Plain, Long Lake and Mound Fire Departments. The consultants were collecting data for the study. Long Lake Fire Pancake Breakfast On April 1 Oth, I attended the Long Lake Fire Department's pancake breakfast. It was reported that they had fed almost 1,600 people; a good time was had by all. Long Lake Fire Boundaries will not Change At the April 1 lth Orono Council meeting, there was a proposal to have Long Lake Fire Department take over the portion of Orono covered by the Wayzata Fire Department. The council discussed the cost saving and took public comment. It was a 3 to 2 vote to keep the Wayzata Fire service covering the eastern portion of Orono. Heroin Death Case Update On April 13th, we were notified that the Federal Attorney will be taking our heroin homicide case. The suspect McClellan, James Edward, was indicted by a federal grand jury on nine separate charges related to our case with the most serious charge being "Distribution of Heroin Resulting in Death". Patrol by Sergeant Jason Nelson Training On April 5th, we held a department meeting where we covered policy review and evidence procedures. On April 71h, we meet with representatives of Glock who brought out several different styles of handguns to the range so that we could shoot different calibers of guns. Most of our current handguns are 15-20 years old. With new technology of both the guns and ammunition, we have been researching the cost of possibly upgrading our current 40 caliber handguns to 9 caliber. After shooting multiple different guns, it was determined that the 9 caliber would best suit our agency and would save us approximately $1,300 in practice ammo cost per year. Officer McGill, who is our firearms instructor, is working on a proposal to trade in our old guns. On April 12-16, Officer Jessen attended Radar and Lidar instructor school. On April 12th, Officer Boecker attended use of force refresher school. Patrol Activities For the dates of March 30 to April 14, 2016, our officers issued 50 citations and 55 warnings for various traffic infractions. There were a total of one driving while impaired arrests, four traffic accidents, seven medicals and 14 alarms. The start of our summer traffic enforcement campaign has begun with focus on distracted driving. We are working with the Lake Area Safe n Sober grant group to conduct extra patrols looking for texting and other distracted driving offenses. In May, we will focus on seatbelt enforcement. During one four-hour shift in Rogers, officers issued 31 texting citations. Truck enforcement is winding down as road restrictions are almost complete. I will have a total for you in two weeks with the number of violations and civil fines that were issued. On March 31, 2016, I was dispatched to Delano High School to take a domestic abuse report that occurred the previous evening in Medina. After conducting initial interviews, it was admitted that the domestic report had been made up and the young female had even went as far as putting on make-up around her eye to make it appear that she had a black eye. On April 10, 2016, Officer Gregory took a report of a male that had entered another's apartment in Loretto. Over the past year, it had been reported that this same male had done this in several other apartments on numerous occasions. This event was caught on video and when confronted the male admitted to checking doors due to his obsessive compulsive disorder. Nothing was taken and the issue has been handled by management. The male had since been evicted. On April 12, 2016, I took a report of a civil issue with a business in our city. We have had numerous complaints about business practices on this business. Case will be forwarded to Investigations. Criminal Investigations by Investigator Charmane Domino Received a report of neighbor trouble. A neighbor was suspected of entering a residence. Occupant placed a camera inside the door of the residence and caught the neighbor on video opening the door and looking inside. A business reported someone had placed orders with a stolen/fraudulent credit card. Over $12,000 in products had been shipped before learning the card was not good. Items were found listed for sale on Ebay. Investigation to continue. A home that is listed for sale has been fraudulently listed as a rental by an unknown person. Investigation to continue. Open cases currently under investigation: 10 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: April 12, 2016 MEETING: April 19, 2016 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • Spring weight restrictions will be lifted on most of the streets by the time we meet on Tuesday. The more vulnerable streets will remain posted until I see fit. • The crew has been cleaning up some remaining tree and brush work along the road sides. • We have seen a couple of bouts of snow flurries since the last report, but hopefully it is winding down for the year. • The Sioux Drive pre -con has been set for Wednesday, April 20th. We will be discussing schedules and timing. May 41h we are having a neighborhood meeting with the businesses being impacted by the project. • Spring sweeping has begun now that weight restrictions and the threat of snow are gone. All the city streets should be swept in the next week or so weather permitting. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • Jack Gleason our field inspector has been working on storm water pond inspections as part of the MS4 requirements. This will take a few weeks to document. Then we will have to prioritize any maintenance that needs to be done. • Greg Letter has been busy getting our water system ready for the summer - replacing chlorine lines and general maintenance for the summer demand. • The Well #8 project will begin soon now that the weight restrictions are being removed. PARKS/TRAILS • The crew has been very busy working on the baseball fields this spring doing our part to help out with spring maintenance. Boards have been replaced on benches and bleachers, the fields have been rolled, and ag lime was delivered to the site for HAC to install where needed. • I am putting together a quote for the Park Commission to install electric service, including a light for the Fields of Medina Park. MISCELLANEOUS • Everything is lined up for Cleanup Day again this year and we should have another great turnout. The 190 trees will be delivered on Wednesday, April 27th, and we will work on getting them separated and covered with mulch. • Derek has been utilizing the new shop to rehab two of our oldest trucks - sandblasting and painting on the boxes and frames to clean up rust in order to extend their life. • Public Works removed the split rail fence that was in disrepair at German Liberal Cemetery. Since that time, we received a request to replace it. I will look into the cost and the perpetual fund to make sure it is in our best interest moving forward to replace it. ORDER CHECKS APRIL 5, 2016 - APRIL 19, 2016 44189 AMIC, LISA/AARON.............................................................. $4,907.00 44190 CEDAR HOLLOW HOA............................................................ $250.00 44191 CENTURYLINK....................................................................... $200.40 44192 CHILLARIGI, HARISH............................................................. $150.00 44193 J.T. MILLER COMPANY......................................................... $2,000.00 44194 LENNAR (US HOME CORP)....................................................... $41.95 44195 MATTAMY MINNEAPOLIS PRTNSHP.......................................... $89.50 44196 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY(DMV).......................................... $20.75 44197 PATRIN, TABITHA................................................................. $250.00 44198 WIYNINGER, GRACE.............................................................. $250.00 44199 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC..................................................... $99.00 44200 AFO CONSULTANTS............................................................. $4,270.00 44201 ALLINA HEALTH...................................................................... $20.00 44202 ALLSTAR ELECTRIC............................................................... $603.09 44203 BIFFS INC............................................................................. $247.30 44204 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN ..................................... $33,233.00 44205 BUDGET PRINTING................................................................ $280.95 44206 CANVAS SOLUTIONS, INC...................................................... $372.00 44207 CAREFREE SERVICES INC...................................................... $969.00 44208 CENTERPOINT ENERGY ....................................................... $1,451.53 44209 ECM PUBLISHERS INC........................................................... $213.71 44210 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC.............................................. $262.45 44211 GRAINGER............................................................................ $370.39 44212 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER ..................................................... $435.00 44213 HARMON AUTOGLASS............................................................ $462.50 44214 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH .................................................... $923.41 44215 HIGHWAY 55 RENTAL............................................................ $123.00 44216 J.O.T.S. COMPUTER SERVICES INC........................................ $150.00 44217 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ............................................... $40.00 44218 LEXISNEXIS............................................................................ $38.50 44219 MAPLE PLAIN, CITY OF .......................................................... $515.93 44220 MET COUNCIL (SAC)............................................................ $9,815.75 44221 MET COUNCIL (WASTEWATER SVC)................................... $22,637.15 44222 MN BCA (BUR CRIM APP)......................................................... $65.00 44223 MN BOARD OF PEACE OFFICERS ............................................ $450.00 44224 MN DEPT OF HEALTH.......................................................... $9,107.52 44225 NAPA OF CORCORAN INC...................................................... $566.76 44226 NORDGREN AUTOMATIVE INC............................................. $1,335.34 44227 NORTH MEMORIAL EMS EDUCATION ....................................... $50.00 44228 OFFICE DEPOT...................................................................... $294.03 44229 ORONO, CITY OF.................................................................. $697.91 44230 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR & WELDING ...................................... $400.00 44231 PITNEY BOWES..................................................................... $337.00 44232 READY WATT ELECTRIC...................................................... $2,860.00 44233 RUSSELL SECURITY RESOURCE INC....................................... $230.00 44234 SAMS CLUB........................................................................... $156.92 44235 SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LAB .................................................. $119.70 44236 STREICHERS INC................................................................. $1,395.46 44237 SUPPLY SOLUTIONS LLC........................................................ $381.24 44238 TACTICAL SOLUTIONS........................................................... $282.00 44239 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI......................................................... $4,388.87 44240 TASER INTERNATIONAL........................................................ $144.40 44241 TIME SAVER OFFSITE SEC SVCS IN ........................................ $136.00 44242 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY .................................................. $9.53 44243 TOWMASTER INC.................................................................. $675.54 44244 ULINE................................................................................... $156.62 44245 VESSCO, INC......................................................................... $327.00 44246 FARUQUE, KAISER................................................................. $175.00 44247 JAIDKA, ANURAG.................................................................... $150.00 Total Checks $110,585.10 *REPLACES CK #43854 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS APRIL 5 2016 —APRIL 19 2016 003609E PR PERA........................................................................... $15,191.24 003610E PR FED/FICA..................................................................... $16,530.63 003611E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................ $2,260.00 003612E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA.................................................. $3,399.25 003613E SELECT ACCOUNT................................................................. $793.12 003614E CITY OF MEDINA..................................................................... $19.00 003615E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL............................................ $20.00 003616E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL............................................ $35.00 003617E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC............................................... $5,889.56 003618E CULLIGAN-METRO................................................................... $31.80 003619E FRONTIER............................................................................... $55.66 003620E MARCO (LEASE).................................................................... $868.46 003621E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC.......................................................... $277.98 003622E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC......................................... $367.15 003623E PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE BY PHONE .................................. $1,000.00 003624E PIVOTAL PAYMENTS INC....................................................... $269.37 003625E PREMIUM WATERS INC......................................................... $176.09 003626E SELECT ACCOUNT................................................................. $850.18 003627E XCEL ENERGY.................................................................... $9,385.97 003628E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE ................................................... $2,622.46 Total Electronic Checks $60,042.92 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT APRIL 6, 2016 507073 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L..................................................... $1,314.63 507074 ANDERSON, JOHN G.............................................................. $230.87 507075 BARNHART, ERIN A............................................................. $1,965.67 507076 BELLAND, EDGAR J.............................................................. $2,522.48 507077 BOECKER, KEVIN D............................................................. $2,332.89 507078 CONVERSE, KEITH A ............................................................ $3,896.94 507079 COUSINEAU, LORIE K............................................................ $230.87 507080 DINGMANN, IVAN W............................................................ $1,586.38 507081 DOMINO, CHARMANE.......................................................... $1,766.60 507082 ENDE, JOSEPH.................................................................... $1,614.62 507083 FINKE, DUSTIN D................................................................ $2,110.19 507084 GALLUP, JODI M.................................................................. $1,667.32 507085 GLEASON, JOHN M.............................................................. $2,376.54 507086 GREGORY, THOMAS............................................................ $1,809.42 507087 HALL, DAVID M................................................................... $3,532.72 507088 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S........................................................... $2,201.21 507089 JOHNSON, SCOTT T............................................................ $2,271.25 507090 KLAERS, ANNE M................................................................. $1,116.32 507091 LANE, LINDA....................................................................... $1,506.20 507092 LEUER, GREGORYJ............................................................. $1,922.22 507093 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M........................................................... $230.87 507094 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R.................................................... $1,435.40 507095 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D......................................................... $1,327.99 507096 MITCHELL, ROBERT G........................................................... $327.07 507097 NELSON,JASON.................................................................. $2,578.96 507098 PEDERSON,JEFF................................................................... $221.28 507099 PETERSON, DEBRA A ........................................................... $1,614.14 507100 REINKING, DEREK M........................................................... $1,606.01 507101 SCHERER, STEVEN T........................................................... $2,319.30 507102 STAPLE, AMANDA.................................................................. $485.22 507103 VIEAU, CECILIA M............................................................... $1,194.36 507104 WENANDE, BRANDON S.......................................................... $531.99 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $51,847.93