HomeMy Public PortalAbout05.16.2017 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 16, 2017
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 May 2, 2017 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Hamel Fire Department Acknowledgement of Financing and Written Agreement
B. Approve Agreement for Advanced Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Inspections
C. Resolution Entering into Master Partnership Contract with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation
D. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Laurie Rengel from the Planning Commission
E. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Chris Barry from the Planning Commission
F. Resolution Accepting Donation from the Hamel Lions Club
G. Resolution Approving Animal Structure Setback Variance for Joseph Molde at 4035 Apache
Drive
H. Approve Final Pay Application for City Hall Lower Level Project
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Conservation-Design-PUD Ordinance
1. Ordinance Regarding Conservation Design; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code
2. Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary
B. Liquor Ordinance Amendment Regarding Off -Sale of Intoxicating Liquor on Sundays
1. Ordinance Amending City Code Section 625 Regarding Alcoholic Beverage Licenses
2. Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XI. ADJOURN
Posted 5/12/2017 Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: May 11, 2017
DATE OF MEETING: May 16, 2017
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Hamel Fire Department Acknowledgement of Financing and Written
Agreement — The Hamel Fire Department is required under the Internal Revenue Code to
have the attached acknowledgement approved and signed by the City of Medina for
financing equipment in 2018. Staff recommends approval.
See attached agreement.
B. Approve Agreement for Advanced Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Inspections —
Metro West Inspections is not licensed to inspect advanced subsurface sewage treatment
systems. Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testing is licensed to inspect advanced
systems. City Planner has recently reviewed a few projects that will require advanced
subsurface sewage treatment inspections. Staff recommends approval.
See attached agreement.
C. Resolution Entering into Master Partnership Contract with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation — The Master Partnership Contract provides a framework for MnDOT and
Local Agencies to provide services and payment to each other. MnDOT is requesting an
updated agreement with the City of Medina. Staff recommends approval.
See attached resolution, letter, and agreement.
D. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Laurie Rengel from the Planning Commission —
Staff received the attached resignation letter from Laurie Rengel resigning from the
Medina Planning Commission. Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting
her resignation.
See attached resolution and letter.
E. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Chris Barry from the Planning Commission — Staff
received the attached resignation letter from Chris Barry resigning from the Medina
Planning Commission. Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting his
resignation.
See attached resolution and letter.
F. Resolution Accepting Donation from the Hamel Lions Club — The Hamel Lions Club has
offered to donate $750 towards the Bike Safety Rodeo for kids. Staff recommends
accepting the donation and thanking the Hamel Lions Club.
See attached memo and resolution.
G. Resolution Approving Animal Structure Setback Variance for Joseph Molde at 4035
Apache Drive — At the May 2nd meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare the
attached resolution of approval. Staff recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
H. Approve Final Pay Application for City Hall Lower Level Project — Staff has received the
final pay application for the lower level project and all work has been completed per the
agreement. Staff recommends approval.
See attached final pay application.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Conservation-Design-PUD Ordinance — The CD-PUD is intended to encourage
conservation and protection of natural resource areas and open space by offering
flexibility to developers in exchange for the applicant placing portions of the property
into permanent conservation. During the February 7, 2017 City Council Meeting, staff
was directed to update the language per the discussion and bring back the proposed
ordinance.
See attached report, ordinance and resolution.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt ordinance regarding conservation design; amending
chapter 8 of the city code
Recommended Motion # 2: Adopt resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by
title and summary
B. Liquor Ordinance Amendment Regarding Off -Sale of Intoxicating Liquor on Sundays —
Under new state law, off -sale of intoxicating liquor may occur on Sundays between the
hours of 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. as of July 1, 2017. If the City intends to continue to comply
with the hour and day of sale limitations set forth in state law, the City Council should
approve the attached ordinance amendment reaffirming the City's desire to comply with
the new state law.
See attached memo, ordinance and resolution.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt ordinance amending city code section 625 regarding
alcoholic beverage licenses
Recommended Motion # 2: Adopt resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by
title and summary
2
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 04135E-04152E for $51,951.29,
order check numbers 045832-045900 for $133,323.05, and payroll EFT 507881-507911 for
$47, 667.23.
• Planning Department Update
• Police Department Update
• Public Works Department Update
• Claims List
3
DRAFT
2
3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 2, 2017
4
5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on May 2, 2017 at 7:00
6 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided.
7
8 I. ROLL CALL
9
10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Pederson, Martin, and Mitchell.
11
12 Members absent: None.
13
14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer
15 Jim Stremel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief
16 of Police Ed Belland
17
18 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.)
19
20 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:01 p.m.)
21 Johnson requested to add an item following the Closed Session titled Summary of
22 Conclusions Regarding the Evaluation.
23
24 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion
25 passed unanimously.
26
27 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.)
28
29 A. Approval of the April 18, 2017 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
30 Moved by Martin, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the April 18, 2017 special City
31 Council meeting minutes as approved. Motion passed unanimously.
32
33 B. Approval of the April 18, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
34 It was noted on page two, line 33, it should state, "Martin agreed noted that the solar
35 array calculations seemed..." On page four, line 28, it should state, "Anderson stated
36 that the Council is was in agreement with the applicant's request but the policy
37 discussion has was of more concern." On page three, line four, it should state, "...an
38 allowed conditional or permitted..." On page three, line two, it should state, "...solar
39 equipment..." On page three, line 15, it should state, "...homes in Medina, and there are
40 often accessory structures on the rural residential properties..." On page three, line 30, it
41 should state, "...as it seems within and promotes the rural character of the City...."
42
43 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the April 18, 2017 regular City
44 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously.
45
46 C. Approval of the April 19, 2017 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
47 Anderson commented that despite the weather conditions of the night the consensus
48 was that the City is blessed with an array of parks that range in size and amenity and
49 thanked those that contribute to the parks.
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
May 2, 2017
I Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the April 19, 2017 special City
2 Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
3
4 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:05 p.m.)
5
6 A. Approve Staff Needs Analysis and Succession Plan
7 B. Approve Seal Coating Services Agreement with Pearson Brothers, Inc.
8 C. Approve Mill and Paving Services Agreement with Omann Brothers Inc.
9 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion
10 passed unanimously.
11
12 VI. COMMENTS (7:06 p.m.)
13
14 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda
15 There were none.
16
17 B. Park Commission
18 Scherer reported that the Park Commission held the annual tour, which took the place of
19 the last regular meeting. He stated that even though the weather was rainy, they were
20 still able to see everything.
21
22 Mitchell stated that he is less informed about the trail plan and would like some
23 additional information at some point in the future.
24
25 C. Planning Commission
26 Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to hold three
27 public hearings regarding a conditional use permit for accessory structure and dwelling
28 unit; the conservation design subdivision ordinance; and regulations regarding the limit
29 high density zoning district, specifically related to nursing home and memory care
30 facilities and the high -density zoning district.
31
32 VII. NEW BUSINESS
33
34 A. Molde — Animal Structure Setback Variance — 4035 Apache Drive — Public
35 Hearing (7:08 p.m.)
36 Finke presented a request to reduce the required 150-foot animal structure setback to 40
37 feet. He stated that the proposed structure is a chicken coop. He stated that although
38 the parcel is three acres in size, the triangular shape and the easements restrict the
39 placement of the structure on the site. He noted that wetlands encumber a large portion
40 of the south of the parcel. He noted that there is not a location on the site which would
41 meet the setback. He identified the public right-of-way, private easements for a private
42 road, and wetlands that restrict the property. He stated that there is a three-part test
43 when reviewing variances and noted that the variance, if granted, would be in harmony
44 with the intent of the ordinance and there are practical difficulties in complying with the
45 zoning ordinance. He stated that the Planning Commission considered this request at
46 their meeting the previous month and recommended approval of the request. He stated
47 that reasonable use item can be viewed from two points of view, whether the use is
48 reasonable or unreasonable based on the intent of the ordinance and size of the lot. He
49 stated that the Commission found the request to be reasonable and the allowable animal
50 units would be reduced by 50 percent. He stated that the Council, as the Board of
51 Appeals, should hold a public hearing before taking any action. He stated that this
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
May 2, 2017
I request could open the door to other requests for similarly sized lots to request a small
2 chicken coop. He noted that staff could review the ordinance to determine if a smaller
3 setback should be set for certain small animal structures.
4
5 Anderson asked if the use of the chickens would be personal or commercial.
6
7 Mr. Molde, the applicant replied that it is personal use and they will just have a couple
8 small chicks, estimating about ten chickens.
9
10 Finke provided clarification on the number of chickens that equate to an animal unit. He
11 noted that there have been other requests for a reduced setback for other small animals.
12
13 Mitchell stated that in regard to the ordinance, if staff feels that revision is necessary he
14 would support that, but otherwise feels that the ordinance works fine. He stated that if
15 the control for the number of animals is adequate he could support the current situation.
16
17 Cousineau asked if the chickens would be penned or running into the setback.
18
19 Mr. Molde, 4035 Apache Drive, replied that he intends to have an eight by eight building
20 with a caged area that would allow the chickens to run outside. He stated that he is just
21 requesting to have a few chickens.
22
23 Mitchell opened the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
24
25 No comments made.
26
27 Mitchell closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
28
29 Martin commented that the variance is warranted because of the unique characteristics
30 of the site which were not created by the applicant, including the right-of-way and
31 wetlands. She believed that the natural topography and tree line of the neighboring
32 property will provide an adequate buffer.
33
34 Mitchell stated that chickens are pretty neutral in small numbers compared to horses or
35 pigs.
36
37 Johnson confirmed that staff will look into the ordinance for possible updates in regard to
38 the setback and type of animal.
39
40 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of
41 approval based upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to conditions
42 recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion passed unanimously.
43
44 B. Elim Care Assisted Living/Nursing Home Concept Plan Review — PID 30-
45 118-23-23-0001 (7:21 p.m.)
46 Finke noted that this is a concept plan review and therefore only input is requested and
47 formal action is not required. He stated that the applicant's proposal would be a 134-unit
48 facility that would provide a mix of living options between independent living up to
49 memory care. He noted that a second lot is also shown on the concept plan, as the site
50 is bisected by a wetland. He stated that a conceptual footprint is shown as a possibility
51 in the future but is not the main interest of the applicant. He stated that if you subtract
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
May 2, 2017
1 wetlands and wetland buffers there is under ten acres of buildable property. He stated
2 that in the Comprehensive Plan update the land is guided for high density residential,
3 which would occur in 2018. He stated that currently the City allows this type of use as a
4 conditional use in the high -density zoning district and noted that the City will be
5 reviewing the controls to ensure compliance with the new Comprehensive Plan in the
6 nine months following adoption of the plan. He stated that the density land use has
7 changed the density ranges for high density zoning to be a range of 12-15 units per
8 acre. He stated that the Planning Commission will begin to review the land controls for
9 the high -density zoning district in attempt to come into compliance with the
10 Comprehensive Plan update before adoption. He identified the property location and
11 adjacent land uses, noting that Baker Park Reserve lies to the east and north. He noted
12 that much of the building would be three stories in height, although some portions of the
13 building would be two stories. He reviewed the transportation network for the
14 surrounding area and provided photographs of other projects the applicant currently has
15 in other municipalities. He noted that the hope for this development would be for a high-
16 density apartment building in order to utilize the transportation services and retail
17 businesses in the area. He stated that staff would also like input on the density range for
18 nursing home/memory care units as those units would have a smaller size and would
19 require less parking and therefore would have a smaller footprint. He stated that
20 perhaps you would allow a higher density range for that type of use because of the
21 smaller footprint. He stated that the applicant is hoping to start construction next year,
22 which would be in line with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the
23 applicant would hope to begin the land use approval process this year before the plan is
24 adopted in order to move forward with financing and finalization of design plans.
25
26 Martin asked how many of the 134 units would meet the Metropolitan Council test for
27 kitchens.
28
29 Anderson Centanni, representing Elim Care, thanked the Council for their time tonight
30 and to staff for their ongoing cooperative work in mapping a strategy for the project. He
31 thanked Pederson and Anderson for taking time to discuss the larger context. He
32 provided information on Elim Care, which was founded in 1927. He stated that they
33 would like to provide a full continuum of care ranging from skilled memory care to
34 independent living. He noted that the only units that would count towards the Met
35 Council requirements would be 60 and would include the assisted living and
36 independent living units. He stated that the location would allow the residents to take
37 advantage of the outdoors and park area with Baker Park Reserve next door, for those
38 residents that can take advantage. He stated that the proximity to the transit and Maple
39 Plain would also be beneficial for the site. He stated that they would relocate the
40 residents living in the Maple Plain facility to the new facility. He stated that phase I
41 would bring 75 new staff members in addition to the 75 existing staff members at the
42 Maple Plain facility. He stated that they would like to break ground in the spring of 2018
43 but on the current trajectory they are looking at August of 2018. He noted that the phase
44 II project, which is not a primary project, would bring an additional 50-75 units of
45 independent living which would count towards the Met Council requirements and would
46 also bring an additional 20 staff members. He stated that they attended recent meetings
47 and are fully aware of the City's status in the updating of the Comprehensive Plan and
48 understand that the City takes that very seriously. He stated that they are attempting to
49 find a solution that will make this work. He stated that they have a funding source
50 through the State, which provides a timeline of 45 months. He noted that the 45-month
51 window would be held but permits must be in hand within 18 months in order to secure
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
May 2, 2017
1 that financing and that is why they are acting proactively in order to continue service
2 levels for the current residents that they serve in Maple Plain. He stated that they are
3 attempting to find a position to successfully move forward in Medina on this project.
4
5 Mitchell stated that this concept plan approval seems similar to the last senior housing
6 request the Council considered with timing for the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that
7 staff still does not have a firm opinion from the Metropolitan Council on whether these
8 units would count.
9
10 Martin stated that if they were to allow a project to move forward, the land designated for
11 high density residential in the updated Comprehensive Plan would be removed from the
12 proposed zoning and would be in jeopardy of the Council having to find new land to
13 designate. She stated that once the Comprehensive Plan is approved this property and
14 the neighboring property could be allowed to move forward and provide valuable
15 resources to seniors and their families in the community.
16
17 Cousineau stated that the City should have a policy in place which would give applicants
18 an expectation rather than having to respond to each application and give them the
19 same answer in that the Comprehensive Plan needs to be approved before they can
20 respond to the requests.
21
22 Anderson agreed with the statements regarding timing.
23
24 Martin stated that she is curious about kitchens as that is how the Met Council defines a
25 unit. She stated that a memory care unit is a person's home and therefore should be
26 considered a housing unit. She stated that the concern is that if the City takes the land
27 and moves the land into a guiding which is not approved by the Met Council, the City
28 would then be in jeopardy of having to designate additional land. She stated that if the
29 Met Council does a review of the plan half way through, the City could be poised to find
30 additional land for high density residential units should memory care units not count.
31 She noted that the City is separated by Highway 55 and the area to the north has been
32 residential development filled with and therefore the City has made a commitment that
33 they would minimize additional residential development close to Highway 55 and
34 therefore this location was a great spot for high density residential as it would keep
35 congestion off Highway 55, the north/south corridor, and the Wayzata School District.
36
37 Mitchell stated that he likes the housing units and is interested in meeting the setbacks.
38 He stated that he is interested in an analysis of the required parking and has come to
39 understand the issue with the Met Council and approval process. He stated that the
40 timing with the draft plan puts the City in a different situation as this is a great idea but
41 will have to wait a bit. He stated that he does not want the applicant, or the City, to get
42 in the situation where there is a lot of development on lot one and there are constraints
43 on lot two which restrict development.
44
45 Pederson stated that the internal roadways would be something to be worked out
46 between the two developers. He stated that he likes that the employees will use the
47 mass transit in that location.
48
49 Cousineau stated that she does like the concept but noted that the footprint is large for
50 the site. She stated that it appears that landscaping and buffering would be difficult and
51 it seems that this building is slightly large for the site. She agreed with the comments
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
May 2, 2017
1 regarding timing. She stated that even though three stories are allowed she does have
2 concerns with a building that large.
3
4 Mitchell stated that there was a similar issue with another concept review request that
5 had a large building on a site and there was question as to whether there would be room
6 for residents to walk outside along the site.
7
8 Cousineau stated that the building is very big with a lot of units.
9
10 Mitchell noted that if the building goes up to three stories than perhaps the footprint of
11 the building should be smaller to allow more outdoor space.
12
13 Cousineau stated that she would like the building to meet the design and setback
14 standards.
15
16 Martin stated that she agrees with the comments thus far. She noted that the nice trees
17 on the site will be eaten up by driveways but stated that the trees would be replaced and
18 landscaping buffers would be required. She stated that it would be helpful to have a site
19 line that would provide an elevation of the complex to see what the three stories would
20 look like from different points on the trails. She stated that she is concerned with eating
21 up the site with so much driveway circumference. She also agreed that she would not
22 want to see lot two compromised and would like it to be a real lot rather than an outlot
23 with cross access easements to ensure it remains developable.
24
25 Anderson agreed that it would be appropriate to have sight lines from Baker Park
26 Reserve, as they would not want to impact the scenic views from the trails.
27
28 Bob Dahl, CEO Elim Care, thanked the Council for their time noting that they are looking
29 for strong feedback for their unique circumstances. He referenced the revenue stream
30 that is available to them to construct a new nursing home facility. He stated that the
31 State created a program to reduce the number of nursing homes and that funding is then
32 allocated to help build a new facility. He stated that the current site in Maple Plain would
33 be moved to the new facility, thus not creating an additional facility but combining the
34 current residence with a new state of the art facility. He stated that last week they
35 received a letter from the department of health stating they would need to have
36 construction permits in hand within 18 months in order to qualify for the funding. He
37 stated that they are looking for a strong indication to move forward and they are not
38 hearing that. He stated that he is sorry to hear that as they cannot risk losing the
39 revenue stream and will have to investigate options for other sites in other municipalities,
40 which is frustrating. He stated that while he understands the concerns with the Met
41 Council, it is unfortunate when bureaucracy gets in the way of the needs of the people.
42
43 Martin asked for a copy of the department of health letter.
44
45 Centanni replied that because it's a care center a review is needed by the department of
46 health. He stated that the timeline for the health department is seven to eight weeks and
47 that is being generous as it usually takes longer. He stated that the department of health
48 permit needs to be in hand by October 18, 2018. He confirmed the information that
49 would be necessary in order to obtain that permit. He noted that $2,500,000 would be at
50 risk if they continue to move forward with no strong positive comments from the City to
51 move forward. He stated that they have tried to obtain an extension but has not found
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6
May 2, 2017
1 any comfort on extending that timeline. He noted that if the timeline was 24 months he
2 would feel a lot better waiting for City approvals. He stated that this is a very difficult
3 position to be in.
4
5 Dennis Zylla stated that he has known Scott Baker for over 12 years and he asked him
6 to come out retirement two years ago to help him sell his property. He stated that
7 previously they promoted his property as commercial. He noted that he was also
8 involved in city government for many years as a staff member for municipalities and as a
9 member of the Plymouth Planning Commission. He stated that they began marketing
10 the property in 2006/2007 and had a national commercial buyer that was going to
11 purchase the property but the deal collapsed when the market collapsed. He stated that
12 they have been in front of the City on a few occasions. He stated that there have been
13 discussions on whether the property should be commercial or residential. He stated that
14 they put together a deal with Mr. Palm and spoke with many organizations. He stated
15 that in 2015 they began discussions with Elim Care and provided a timeline of the
16 progress they have made. He stated that Scott has owned the property for 20 years.
17 He stated that he clearly tried to advise Scott that you have to look at the market, which
18 was commercial in 2006/2007 but the market today is residential to a large degree. He
19 stated that the builders do not want the noise from Highway 12 and therefore high -end
20 townhouses would not be a good fit because of the noise from the traffic. He stated that
21 if not Elim, is there a market for high density residential. He stated that he has a letter
22 from Hans Hagen in which he stated the use that is proposed with Elim is the best use
23 for the property. He stated that high density residential would not be the ideal use. He
24 asked if the land should remain commercial if Elim is not the right fit. He stated that he
25 was hoping that perhaps PUD would be a good fit, or a business park guiding, which
26 would allow the applicant to have a level of comfort to move forward with their
27 investment. He stated that perhaps the land could be zoned to make the applicant
28 comfortable and then reguided when the Comprehensive Plan is adopted. He stated
29 that his hope is that the City can find a way to make this move forward, or give some
30 guidance to the property owner. He stated that they are willing to go to the Met Council
31 office with City staff, if that is what needs to occur.
32
33 Scott Baker, property owner, stated that he was a resident in Medina on the north side of
34 55 for many years but moved because it became too dense. He stated that he likes the
35 open space and that is why he purchased the property because of the proximity to Baker
36 Park Reserve. He stated that they talk about high density residential but they need more
37 trees and fewer parking lots. He stated that if they give the density range the Council
38 wants, the view from Baker Park would be infringed. He stated that to lose that would be
39 a huge detriment. He stated that they lost a potential buyer in the past because he was
40 emotionally involved with the property and the buyers wanted to put in a lot of parking lot
41 and commercial building space. He stated that many people have family members that
42 require memory care and start out vibrant and able to walk near the property but then
43 have to move to another facility without the view of nature. He stated that this facility
44 would allow residents to maintain the views of nature while remaining in the same facility
45 as their condition requires more care.
46
47 Larry Palm stated that he has heard many of the same comments through the past
48 several meetings. He stated that the applicant is asking for the same thing he asked for.
49 He stated that the applicant wants an idea of when they would have some timeline. He
50 stated that he is again hearing the same comments he heard, that the Council supports
51 the project but the timing is off. He asked about the timing.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7
May 2, 2017
1
2 Mitchell stated that the plan is out for review by municipalities and asked City Planner
3 Dusty Finke to provide a timeline update.
4
5 Finke stated that the plan is out for jurisdictional review from April to October and
6 hopefully staff would be able to support the plan formally in November, which would
7 allow a 90-day approval period by the Met Council which would provide a February date
8 of adoption, if there are no comments that need to be responded to by the City. He
9 stated that he has had many conversations with the applicant about the overall timeline
10 with land use approvals and all the review before a structure is actually built. He stated
11 that he has suggested that the City not take formal land use approvals on a project
12 under the new Comprehensive Plan until the plan is in effect. He stated that he has left
13 the door open for the review process to occur while the Comprehensive Plan is still
14 under review, at the full risk of the applicant. He stated that therefore a land use
15 application could be submitted in October/November of 2017 to become effective in
16 conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that it is in the City's best interest
17 to not consider a land use application until the plan is formally submitted to the Met
18 Council.
19
20 Pederson stated that this is a good project and good use and would hate to see it go
21 away simply because of timing.
22
23 Mitchell stated that everyone is generally in favor of the project but the timing is the
24 issue.
25
26 Anderson stated that November is assuming that a lot of things go right, but that is not a
27 guarantee as things can go awry.
28
29 Batty stated that the timeline proposed by Finke is just an estimate as many things can
30 lengthen that process to make the timeline longer. He urged the Council not to focus on
31 a specific date as that can change. He stated that this would be an atypical review
32 period as the City would be considering and initiating approvals before the draft
33 Comprehensive Plan is adopted. He stated that realistically the deadlines talked about
34 assume that the Council would be willing to initiate the approval process, with what
35 might be a contingent approval, which would spring into action when the Comprehensive
36 Plan is adopted.
37
38 Pederson asked what would happen if the approval process was initiated and could not
39 be completed within the 120-day window.
40
41 Batty stated that the City would have 60 days and would extend another 60 days. He
42 stated that the position then would be to request another extension or face the
43 consequence of denial. He noted that generally developers are willing to grant an
44 extension because the alternative is that the project would be denied.
45
46 Mitchell stated that the October/November 2018 deadline could be met but realized that
47 puts risk on the applicant. He stated that there is support for the project and the City will
48 do what it can to help move this along, although it may seem that the City is part of the
49 obstacle.
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8
May 2, 2017
1 C. Board of Appeal and Equalization vs. Open Book Process Discussion (8:36
2 p.m.)
3 Rolf Erickson stated that Johnson asked him to talk about how to make the local Board
4 of Review more efficient and compare that to open book. He stated that essentially at
5 the first meeting you would only review the requests that you've received ahead of time
6 and then you would allow people that walk into the meeting to speak and provide
7 comments. He stated that typically the second meeting would be very short. He
8 provided examples of how other municipalities hold a reconvene meeting and which
9 actions take place at the original and reconvene meetings. He stated that is the easiest
10 method in order to make the meeting efficient.
11
12 Mitchell stated that the first issue would be whether the City wants to go to the open
13 book meeting process to just hold a meeting with the assessor and the Council is out of
14 the process. He stated that his thought is that the Council is elected and therefore
15 should be involved as part of their job and confirmed the consensus of the Council. He
16 asked if the process of the Board of Appeal and Equalization should be made more
17 efficient by adopting some of the steps suggested. He confirmed the consensus of the
18 Council that staff should attempt to streamline the process to match the more efficient
19 process.
20
21 Martin stated that she would like to have the applications listed in order of submission
22 with the information that is helpful including the PID number, the value proposed by the
23 assessor, a notes area, and final conclusion. She stated that way people that follow the
24 process receive priority and it sets the stage for the future. She noted that the
25 comparable packet should be updated and include the property address and helpful
26 information for an index, where each case could reference a specific page number.
27
28 Anderson stated that because of the sensitivity of the nature of the topic it will be
29 important that the City communicates clearly with residents on how the process will work
30 and the benefits of streamlining the process.
31
32 D. Willow Drive Improvement Project (8:50 p.m.)
33 Scherer noted that he would go through the three projects and then action could be
34 taken individually. He stated that the projects are fairly simple but noted that Willow
35 Drive and Clydesdale Trail are more commercial areas. He noted that the wrong street
36 sections were included in the figure one information but advised that Finke will pull up
37 the correct figure one for the projects. He stated that Willow Drive would be north of
38 Highway 55 and north of Chippewa through to the gravel section. He stated that they
39 are not going to mill the course but level it and add two inches to the top, so it is an
40 overlay project that will stop at the gravel.
41
42 Martin stated that in receiving the feasibility report it will be amended to state that figure
43 one will be changed to two inches.
44
45 1. Resolution No. 2017-28 Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling for
46 Public Hearings on Willow Drive Improvement Project and Levying
47 Special Assessments for Same
48 Moved by Martin, seconded by Pederson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-28 receiving
49 feasibility report and calling for public hearings on Willow Drive improvement project and
50 levy special assessments for same provided that the Council agreed to amend the
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 9
May 2, 2017
1 feasibility report to replace figure one with the figure one presented at the meeting
2 tonight. Motion passed unanimously.
3
4 E. Wichita Trail Improvement Project (8:56 p.m.)
5 Scherer noted that this would be a similar project with an overlay and some curb
6 sections being added. He noted that this is a simple project. He spoke with a resident
7 that is going to do an email blast to the other residents in the area. He noted that this is
8 a low assessment and he will make a call to the residents to walk through the project,
9 noting that there are only six homes in the project area. He noted that the assessment
10 would be 50 percent because it is a dead-end residential road.
11
12 1. Resolution No. 2017-29 Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling for
13 Public Hearings on Wichita Trail Improvement Project and Levying
14 Special Assessments for Same
15 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-29 receiving
16 feasibility report and calling for public hearings on Wichita Trail improvement project and
17 levy special assessments for same. Motion passed unanimously.
18
19 D. Clydesdale Trail Improvement Project (8:57 p.m.)
20 Scherer noted that this will be about 845 feet and will be in essence an extension of the
21 CR 116 project. He stated that over the years the road has not been overlayed or
22 received a lot of improvements. He noted that corings were done last year and showed
23 approximately six inches of blacktop with just the top that needed improvement. He
24 noted that two inches will be milled off and there will be curb replacement with the
25 overlay to finish. He noted that this is an urban collector roadway and the assessment
26 would have a 40 percent share for residents/businesses. He noted that curbs are
27 calculated on a frontage basis. He noted that it would be a fairly large assessment to
28 the neighbors west of the City property because of the amount of property they own on
29 both sides of the street.
30
31 Mitchell asked if the City would pay a frontage share and assessment share.
32
33 Scherer replied that the City would pay both assessments. He noted that he plans to
34 start this project later in the summer once the CR 116 project progresses.
35
36 Finke displayed the updated figure one.
37
38 1. Resolution No. 2017-30 Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling for
39 Public Hearings on Clydesdale Improvement Project and Levying
40 Special Assessments for Same
41 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-30 receiving
42 feasibility report as amended with the revised figure one and calling for public hearings
43 on Clydesdale Trail improvement project and levy special assessments for same.
44 Motion passed unanimously.
45
46 VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (9:02 p.m.)
47 Stremel provided an update on the I&I issues noting that metering began a few weeks
48 ago and weekly maintenance occurred the previous week. He stated that they found
49 that one of the metering stations showed a fairly significant flow. He noted that some
50 inspections were done.
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 10
May 2, 2017
1 Scherer noted that along Clydesdale Trail there was a gap of a couple of inches where
2 water was running out at a good pace. He stated that Stremel has done some
3 calculations and they are going to include the findings in the appeal to the Metropolitan
4 Council.
5
6 Stremel noted that calculations were done to include in the appeal, noting that about half
7 of the flow and cost is being appealed. He noted that he also requested an extension
8 because of the metering data as they might find more areas that require repair and
9 therefore those could be included in the appeals.
10
11 Scherer stated that staff has been walking almost every day in the rain in an attempt to
12 find other areas where repair is needed.
13
14 Mitchell asked some of the reasons that the City could be relieved of some of the cost.
15
16 Stremel noted that reasons that would be supported are for things that happen out of the
17 City's control including repairs that could've resulted from outside of the City's control.
18 He noted that there is no guarantee that the City will be granted the appeal.
19
20 Anderson thanked Stremel and staff for their work in identifying potential decreases in
21 the cost.
22
23 Belland advised of a proposed closure for Highway 55 on Saturday night from CR 116 to
24 CR 101 from 12:45 a.m. to 4:45 a.m. He stated that Medina Ballroom has a prom
25 scheduled that night but it should be done and people will have left before the closure
26 begins.
27
28 Johnson noted that the closure information is on the City's website and Facebook page.
29
30 Belland stated that the special events permits for the summer are beginning to come in.
31 He noted that two to three noise complaints come in each year for the Hamel Rodeo
32 Dance. He stated that as that area continues to develop, perhaps an earlier time should
33 be enforced for outdoor music activity. He noted that 11 p.m. would be reasonable for
34 other events and perhaps that would be a good end time for the outdoor music for the
35 Hamel Rodeo as well. He asked for the opinion of the Council.
36
37 Mitchell stated that is always an issue and should continue to be watched closely rather
38 than amend the time now.
39
40 Anderson noted that if there is a spike in complaints that should be brought to the
41 attention of the Council.
42
43 Mitchell referenced the emailed article that was sent from Belland and asked that the
44 article to be printed for him to read.
45
46 IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (9:12 p.m.)
47 Pederson stated that he had a resident call him regarding fast traffic on Chippewa and
48 noted that he forwarded the complaint to the police department. He noted that the
49 resident was very happy with the efforts of the police department.
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 11
May 2, 2017
1 Mitchell noted that there has been a lot of rain recently and the ditches, creeks and
2 drainage systems are working properly. He stated that although it is not the
3 responsibility of the City, residents sometimes call with questions about their private
4 drainage and thanked staff for attempting to respond. He stated that Clean -Up Day was
5 the previous Saturday and was well attended. He applauded everyone for the
6 successful community event.
7
8 Martin stated that she had a good meeting with the Long Lake Fire Department Chief
9 and representatives from Long Lake and Orono. She stated that they have been
10 working to amend the language of the agreement which has been presented and well
11 received. She stated that they have also reviewed the Hamel budget and that is going
12 well.
13
14 X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (9:15 p.m.)
15 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the bills, EFT 04116E-04134E
16 for $57,187.31, order check numbers 045794-045831 for $62,270.24, and payroll EFT
17 507855-507880 for $47,032.44. Motion passed unanimously.
18
19 XI. CLOSED SESSION: MINN STAT. 13D.05, SUBD 3 (a) TO EVALUATE THE
20 PERFORMANCE OF AN INDIVIDUAL SUBJECT TO ITS AUTHORITY
21
22 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adjourn the meeting to closed session at
23 9:18 p.m. for the purpose of evaluating the performance of an employee, Officer Craig
24 Swalchick.
25
26 Further discussion: Batty noted that this is an exception to the open meeting law
27 because the employee is under the authority of the Council. He noted that the Council
28 has the right to close the meeting. He noted that an individual has the option to block
29 that and keep the meeting open. He noted that the employee does not oppose to close
30 the meeting but would like the opportunity to speak at the closed session meeting. He
31 reviewed the procedure that should be followed in order to allow the individual to speak
32 to the Council.
33
34 Motion passed unanimously.
35
36 The meeting returned to open session at 10:12 p.m.
37
38 XII. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE EVALUATION
39 Mitchell noted that the Council discussed in closed session the employment of Officer
40 Craig Swalchick.
41
42 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-31 terminating
43 the employment with Officer Swalchick. Motion passed unanimously.
44
45 Further discussion: Mitchell noted that in closed session there was input provided from
46 Swalchick along with Belland and Nelson and the consensus was that termination would
47 be the appropriate course of action.
48
49 Anderson noted that the decision is made with regret.
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 12
May 2, 2017
1 Motion passed unanimously.
2
3 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to authorize the police department to begin
4 the process of hiring a new officer. Motion passed unanimously.
5
6 XIII. ADJOURN
7 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adjourn the meeting at 10:14 p.m.
8 Motion passed unanimously.
9
10
11
12
13 Bob Mitchell, Mayor
14 Attest:
15
16
17 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 13
May 2, 2017
To be typed on City of Medina letterhead
Agenda Item # 5A
Acknowledgement of Financing and Written Agreement
The undersigned Official of City of Medina (hereinafter referred to as "Municipality") hereby acknowledges that the
Hamel Volunteer Fire Department Incorporated plans to enter into an Agreement to finance equipment consisting
of One (1) New Midwest Fire Tanker which will be located at the fire house of the Hamel Volunteer Fire
Department Incorporated. I further acknowledge that pursuant to the Agreement, the Hamel Volunteer Fire
Department Incorporated has agreed to indebtedness in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$192,000.00 to purchase the equipment. The Municipality is not a party to the Agreement and is not
financially liable for the debt of the Hamel Volunteer Fire Department Incorporated.
This Municipality acknowledges that the Hamel Volunteer Fire Department Incorporated has a written agreement
with the Municipality to provide firefighting and other services for the Municipality. The written agreement does
not obligate the Municipality to pay any portion of the principal of or interest on the indebtness incurred by the
Hamel Volunteer Fire Department.
Dated as of May 16, 2017
City of Medina
Signature of Mayor Bob Mitchell
Name and Title
- 24-VolStd
AGREEMENT FOR ADVANCED SUBSURFACE SEWAGE
TREATMENT SYSTEMS INSPECTIONS
This Agreement is made this 16t1 day of May, 2017, by and between Inspect Minnesota &
Midwest Soil Testing, P.O. Box 383, Hugo, MN 55038, a Minnesota corporation (the
"Contractor") and the City of Medina, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN 55340, a Minnesota
municipal corporation (the "City").
Recitals
1. The City desires to purchase the services of the Contractor as an Advanced Inspector of
subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) in the City in order to ensure compliance with
applicable ordinances, rules, and regulations.
2. The Contractor warrants that it is licensed by the State of Minnesota to provide the services
described in this Agreement and is willing and able to perform such services; and
3. The parties wish to define the scope of services, compensation, and terms of their
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows:
Terms
1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform all plan review, inspections, and
reports requested by the City and/or required by applicable Ordinances, Rules and
Regulation related to subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) which require review by
an Advanced Inspector through Minnesota Rules. The Contractor shall also review
Operating Permits for compliance with relevant regulations and practices. Following review
and inspection for compliance with relevant requirements, the Contractor shall issue a
Certificate of Compliance. The Contractor shall maintain necessary licensure in order to
perform the services described.
2.0. TERM. The term of this contract will commence on May 17, 2017 and terminate at such
time either party terminates this Agreement as described in paragraph 14.
3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor as described below:
4.01 Plan Review for residential SSTS with a design capacity of 950 gallons per day or
less: $340.00
4.02 Inspections for residential SSTS with a design capacity of 950 gallons per day or
less: $425.00
4.03 Plan Review for non-residential SSTS or residential SSTS with a design capacity of
950 gallons per day or more: $425.00 + $85.00 per hour for all work in excess
of 5 hours.
4.04 Inspections for non-residential SSTS or residential SSTS with a design capacity of
950 gallons per day or more: $510.00 + $85.00 per hour for all work in excess
of 6 hours.
4.05 The City shall compensate the Contractor for other services based upon an hourly
rate of $85.00 per hour.
1
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 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.
6.01 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 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement
will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota.
9.0 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
10.0 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.
11.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its
entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law.
12.0 DATA PRACTICES. All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for
any purpose by the activities of the Contractor under this Agreement is governed by the
Minnesota Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as amended, the Minnesota
Rules implementing such Act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy.
13.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Neither the Contractor nor its employees shall accept or
engage in any activity, business, employment, or consulting that would cause a conflict or a
perception of a conflict with the ability to perform the services described in this Agreement.
14.0 TERMINATION.
14.01. If the Contractor fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or fails to
administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, such failure shall
constitute a default and the City may immediate cancel this Agreement in its entirety.
14.02. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause for any reason by either
party upon forty-five days written notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year
written above.
CITY OF MEDINA
By
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
By
Scott Johnson, City Administrator
INSPECT MINNESOTA & MIDWEST SOIL TESTING
By
Brian Humpal,
3
Agenda Item # 5C
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO MASTER PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT
WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WHEREAS, The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) wishes to
cooperate closely with local units of government to coordinate the delivery of
transportation services and maximize the efficient delivery of such services at all levels
of government; and
WHEREAS, MnDOT and local governments are authorized by Minnesota
Statutes sections 471.59, 174.02, and 161.20, to undertake collaborative efforts for the
design, construction, maintenance and operation of state and local roads; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to be able to respond quickly and efficiently to such
opportunities for collaboration and have determined that having the ability to write "work
orders" against a master contract would provide the greatest speed and flexibility in
responding to identified needs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the City of Medina enter into a Master Partnership Contract with the
Minnesota Department of Transportation, a copy of which was before the City
Council of the City of Medina.
2. That the proper City officers are authorized to execute such contract and any
amendments thereto.
3. That the City Administrator is authorized to negotiate work order contracts
pursuant to the Master Contract, which work order contracts may provide for
payment to or from MnDOT. The City Administrator is authorized to execute
work order contracts on behalf of the Local Government for up to $5,000.00
without approval of each proposed work order contract by its governing body.
The City Administrator is authorized to execute work order contracts on behalf of
the Local Government for over $5,000.00 with approval from City Council.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
Attest:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
Milk DEPARTMENT OF
• TRANSPORTATION
Metro State Aid 651-234-7773
1500 County Road B2, Roseville, MN 55113 sharon.lemay@state.mn.us
To: Local Agency Date: April 24, 2017
RE: Proposed Master Partnership Contract
Attached is a copy of a proposed master partnership contract between the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT) and your Local Agency.
The Master Partnership Contract provides a framework for Mn/DOT and Local Agencies to provide
services and payment to each other. A few MnDOT provided routine services are included in the
contract —see Exhibit A-- but all other services require work orders describing costs and scope.
Kindly review the enclosed document and if acceptable, arrange to have it presented to your
Council/Board for their approval and execution. Please provide signatures only under the Local
Government heading.
Also required is a new resolution passed by the Council/Board authorizing its officials to sign and
execute the agreement on its behalf. (Only the named officials may sign the agreement: if anyone else
signs in the named official's place, the agreement will not be executed.)
Please return to me at the address listed above or as a pdf to sharon.lemay@state.mn.us. Please note
that no work shall be performed by Mn/DOT personnel until the full execution of the agreement. After
execution by Mn/DOT and other State officials, a copy of the agreement will be returned to you.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact me at 651-234-
7773. If your local agency will not be executing this contract, please send me an email informing me of
this so I can remove you from our list.
Thank You
Sharon LeMay, Metro State Aid
An Equal Opportunity Employer
0
MDEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AND
CITY OF MEDINA
MASTER PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT
This master contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation in this contract
referred to as the "State" and the City of Medina, acting through its City Council in this contract referred to as the "Local
Government."
Recitals
1. The parties are authorized to enter into this contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, §§15.061, 471.59 and 174.02.
2. Minn. Stat. § 161.20, subd. 2, authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and
cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving the trunk
highway system.
3. Each party to this contract is a "road authority" as defined by Minn. Stat. § 160.02, subd. 25.
4. Minn. Stat. § 161.39, subd. 1, authorizes a road authority to perform work for another road authority. Such work
may include providing technical and engineering advice, assistance and supervision, surveying, preparing plans
for the construction or reconstruction of roadways, and performing roadway maintenance.
5. Minn. Stat. § 174.02, subd. 6, authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to enter into contracts with other
governmental entities for research and experimentation; for sharing facilities, equipment, staff, data, or other
means of providing transportation -related services; or for other cooperative programs that promote efficiencies in
providing governmental services, or that further development of innovation in transportation for the benefit of the
citizens of Minnesota.
6. Each party wishes to occasionally purchase services from the other party, which the parties agree will enhance the
efficiency of delivering governmental services at all levels. This Master Partnership Contract (MPC) provides a
framework for the efficient handling of such requests. This MPC contains terms generally governing the
relationship between the parties. When specific services are requested, the parties will (unless otherwise specified)
enter into a "Work Order" contracts.
7. After the execution of this MPC, the parties may (but are not required to) enter into "Work Order" contracts.
These Work Orders will specify the work to be done, timelines for completion, and compensation to be paid for
the specific work.
8. The parties are entering into this MPC to establish terms that will govern all of the Work Orders subsequently
issued under the authority of this Contract.
Master Partnership Contract
1. Term of Master Partnership Contract; Use of Work Order Contracts; Survival of Terms
1.1.
1.2.
Effective Date: This contract will be effective on the date last signed by the Local Government, and all
State officials as required under Minn Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 2.
A party must not accept work under this Contract until it is fully executed.
1.3. Expiration Date. This Contract will expire on June 30, 2022.
Page 1 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
1.4. Work Order Contracts. A work order contract must be negotiated and executed (by both the State and the
Local Government) for each particular engagement, except for Technical Services provided by the State
to the Local Government as specified in Article 2. The work order contract must specify the detailed
scope of work and deliverables for that project. A parry must not begin work under a work order until the
work order is fully executed. The terms of this MPC will apply to all work orders contracts issued, unless
specifically varied in the work order. The Local Government understands that this MPC is not a guarantee
of any payments or work order assignments, and that payments will only be issued for work actually
performed under fully -executed work orders.
1.5. Survival of Terms. The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this master contract
and all work order contracts: 12. Liability; 13. State Audits; 14. Government Data Practices and
Intellectual Property; 17. Publicity; 18. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; and 22. Data Disclosure.
All terms of this MPC will survive with respect to any work order contract issued prior to the expiration
date of the MPC.
1.6. Sample Work Order. A sample work order contract is available upon request from the State.
1.7. Definition of "Providing Party" and "Requesting Party". For the purpose of assigning certain duties and
obligations in the MPC to work order contracts, the following definitions will apply throughout the MPC.
"Requesting Party" is defined as the party requesting the other party to perform work under a work order
contract. "Providing Party" is defined as the party performing the scope of work under a work order
contract.
2. Technical Services
2.1. Technical Services include repetitive low-cost services routinely performed by the State for the Local
Government. These services may be performed by the State for the Local Government without the
execution of a work order, as these services are provided in accordance with standardized practices and
processes and do not require a detailed scope of work. Exhibit A — Table of Technical Services is
attached.
2.1.1. Every other service not falling under the services listed in Exhibit A will require a work order
contract.
2.2. The Local Government may request the State to perform Technical Services in an informal manner, such
as by the use of email, a purchase order, or by delivering materials to a State lab and requesting testing. A
request may be made via telephone, but will not be considered accepted unless acknowledged in writing
by the State.
2.3. The State will promptly inform the Local Government if the State will be unable to perform the requested
Technical Services. Otherwise, the State will perform the Technical Services in accordance with the
State's normal processes and practices, including scheduling practices taking into account the availability
of State staff and equipment.
2.4. Payment Basis. Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties prior to performance of the services, the State
will charge the Local Government the State's then -current rate for performing the Technical Services.
The then -current rate may include the State's normal and customary additives. The State will invoice the
Local Government upon completion of the services, or at regular intervals not more than once monthly as
agreed upon by the parties. The invoice will provide a summary of the Technical Services provided by the
State during the invoice period.
3. Services Requiring A Work Order Contract
3.1. Work Order Contracts: A party may request the other party to perform any of the following services
under individual work order contracts.
Page 2 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
3.2. Professional and Technical Services. A party may provide professional and technical services upon the
request of the other party. As defined by Minn. Stat. § 16C.08, subd. 1, professional/technical services
"means services that are intellectual in character, including consultation, analysis, evaluation, prediction,
planning, programming, or recommendation; and result in the production of a report or completion of a
task." Professional and technical services do not include providing supplies or materials except as
incidental to performing such services. Professional and technical services include (by way of example
and without limitation) engineering services, surveying, foundation recommendations and reports,
environmental documentation, right-of-way assistance (such as performing appraisals or providing
relocation assistance, but excluding the exercise of the power of eminent domain), geometric layouts,
final construction plans, graphic presentations, public relations, and facilitating open houses. A party will
normally provide such services with its own personnel; however, a party's professional/technical services
may also include hiring and managing outside consultants to perform work provided that a party itself
provides active project management for the use of such outside consultants.
3.3. Roadway Maintenance. A party may provide roadway maintenance upon the request of the other party.
Roadway maintenance does not include roadway reconstruction. This work may include but is not limited
to snow removal, ditch spraying, roadside mowing, bituminous mill and overlay (only small projects),
seal coat, bridge hits, major retaining wall failures, major drainage failures, and message painting. All
services must be performed by an employee with sufficient skills, training, expertise or certification to
perform such work, and work must be supervised by a qualified employee of the party performing the
work.
3.4. Construction Administration. A party may administer roadway construction projects upon the request of
the other party. Roadway construction includes (by way of example and without limitation) the
construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of mainline, shoulder, median, pedestrian or bicycle
pathway, lighting and signal systems, pavement mill and overlays, seal coating, guardrail installation, and
channelization. These services may be performed by the Providing Party's own forces, or the Providing
Party may administer outside contracts for such work. Construction administration may include letting
and awarding construction contracts for such work (including state projects to be completed in
conjunction with local projects). All contract administration services must be performed by an employee
with sufficient skills, training, expertise or certification to perform such work.
3.5. Emergency Services. A party may provide aid upon request of the other party in the event of a man-made
disaster, natural disaster or other act of God. Emergency services includes all those services as the parties
mutually agree are necessary to plan for, prepare for, deal with, and recover from emergency situations.
These services include, without limitation, planning, engineering, construction, maintenance, and removal
and disposal services related to things such as road closures, traffic control, debris removal, flood
protection and mitigation, sign repair, sandbag activities and general cleanup. Work will be performed by
an employee with sufficient skills, training, expertise or certification to perform such work, and work
must be supervised by a qualified employee of the party performing the work. If it is not feasible to have
an executed work order prior to performance of the work, the parties will promptly confer to determine
whether work may be commenced without a fully -executed work order in place. If work commences
without a fully -executed work order, the parties will follow up with execution of a work order as soon as
feasible.
3.6. When a need is identified, the State and the Local Government will discuss the proposed work and the
resources needed to perform the work. If a party desires to perform such work, the parties will negotiate
the specific and detailed work tasks and cost. The State will then prepare a work order contract.
Generally, a work order contract will be limited to one specific project/engagement, although "on call"
work orders may be prepared for certain types of services, especially for "Technical Services" items as
identified section 2.1.. The work order will also identify specific deliverables required, and timeframes for
completing work. A work order must be fully executed by the parties prior to work being commenced.
Page 3 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
The Local Government will not be paid for work performed prior to execution of a work order contract
and authorization by the State.
4. Responsibilities of the Providing Party
4.1. Terms Applicable to ALL Work Order Contracts. The terms in this section 4.1 will apply to ALL work
order contracts.
4.1.1. Each work order will identify an Authorized Representative for each party. Each party's
authorized representative is responsible for administering the work order, and has the authority to
make any decisions regarding the work, and to give and receive any notices required or permitted
under this MPC or the work order.
4.1.2. The Providing Party will furnish and assign a publicly employed licensed engineer (Project
Engineer), to be in responsible charge of the project(s) and to supervise and direct the work to be
performed under each work order contract. For services not requiring an engineer, the Providing
Party will furnish and assign another responsible employee to be in charge of the project. The
services of the Providing Party under a work order contract may not be otherwise assigned,
sublet, or transferred unless approved in writing by the Requesting Party's authorized
representative. This written consent will in no way relieve the Providing Party from its primary
responsibility for the work.
4.1.3. If the Local Government is the Providing Party, the Project Engineer may request in writing
specific engineering and/or technical services from the State, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section
161.39. The work order Contract will require the Local Government to deposit payment in
advance. The costs and expenses will include the current State additives and overhead rates,
subject to adjustment based on actual direct costs that have been verified by audit.
4.1.4. Only the receipt of a fully executed work order contract authorizes the Providing Party to begin
work on a project. Any and all effort, expenses, or actions taken by the Providing Party before the
work order contract is fully executed are considered unauthorized and undertaken at the risk of
non-payment.
4.1.5. In connection with the performance of this contract and any work orders issued, the Providing
Agency will comply with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations. When the
Providing Party is authorized or permitted to award contracts in connection with any work order,
the Providing Party will require and cause its contractors and subcontractors to comply with all
Federal and State laws and regulations.
4.2. Additional Terms for Roadway Maintenance. The terms of section 4.1 and this section 4.2 will apply to
all work orders for Roadway Maintenance.
4.2.1. Unless otherwise provided for by contract or work order, the Providing Party must obtain all
permits and sanctions that may be required for the proper and lawful performance of the work.
4.2.2. The Providing Party must perform maintenance in accordance with MnDOT maintenance
manuals, policies and operations.
4.2.3. The Providing Party must use State -approved materials, including (by way of example and without
limitation), sign posts, sign sheeting, and de-icing and anti -icing chemicals.
4.3. Additional Terms for Construction Administration. The terms of section 4.1 and this section 4.3 will
apply to all work order contracts for construction administration.
4.3.1. Contract(s) must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder or best value proposer in
accordance with state law.
Page 4 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
4.3.2. Contractor(s) must be required to post payment and performance bonds in an amount equal to the
contract amount. The Providing Parry will take all necessary action to make claims against such
bonds in the event of any default by the contractor.
4.3.3. Contractor(s) must be required to perform work in accordance with the latest edition of the
Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Construction.
4.3.4. For work performed on State right-of-way, contractor(s) must be required to indemnify and hold
the State harmless against any loss incurred with respect to the performance of the contracted
work, and must be required to provide evidence of insurance coverage commensurate with project
risk.
4.3.5. Contractor(s) must pay prevailing wages pursuant to applicable state and federal law.
4.3.6. Contractor(s) must comply with all applicable Federal, and State laws, ordinances and
regulations, including but not limited to applicable human rights/anti-discrimination laws and
laws concerning the participation of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in federally -assisted
contracts.
4.3.7. Unless otherwise agreed in a work order contract, each party will be responsible for providing
rights of way, easement, and construction permits for its portion of the improvements. Each party
will, upon the other's request, furnish copies of right of way certificates, easements, and
construction permits.
4.3.8. The Providing Party may approve minor changes to the Requesting Parry's portion of the project
work if such changes do not increase the Requesting Party's cost obligation under the applicable
work order contract.
4.3.9. The Providing Party will not approve any contractor claims for additional compensation without
the Requesting Parry's written approval, and the execution of a proper amendment to the
applicable work order contract when necessary. The Local Government will tender the processing
and defense of any such claims to the State upon the State's request.
4.3.10. The Local Government must coordinate all trunk highway work affecting any utilities with the
State's Utilities Office.
4.3.11. The Providing Party must coordinate all necessary detours with the Requesting Party.
4.3.12. If the Local Government is the Providing Party, and there is work performed on the trunk
highway right-of-way, the following will apply:
4.3.12.1 The Local Government will have a permit to perform the work on the trunk highway.
The State may revoke this permit if the work is not being performed in a safe, proper
and skillful manner, or if the contractor is violating the terms of any law, regulation, or
permit applicable to the work. The State will have no liability to the Local Government,
or its contractor, if work is suspended or stopped due to any such condition or concern.
4.3.12.2 The Local Government will require its contractor to conduct all traffic control in
accordance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
4.3.12.3 The Local Government will require its contractor to comply with the terms of all
permits issued for the project including, but not limited to, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and other environmental permits.
4.3.12.4 All improvements constructed on the State's right-of-way will become the property of
the State.
5. Responsibilities of the Requesting Party
Page 5 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
5.1. After authorizing the Providing Party to begin work, the Requesting Party will furnish any data or
material in its possession relating to the project that may be of use to the Providing Party in performing
the work.
5.2. All such data furnished to the Providing Party will remain the property of the Requesting Party and will
be promptly returned upon the Requesting Party's request or upon the expiration or termination of this
contract (subject to data retention requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and
other applicable law).
5.3. The Providing Party will analyze all such data furnished by the Requesting Parry. If the Providing Party
finds any such data to be incorrect or incomplete, the Providing Party will bring the facts to the attention
of the Requesting Party before proceeding with the part of the project affected. The Providing Party will
investigate the matter, and if it finds that such data is incorrect or incomplete, it will promptly determine a
method for furnishing corrected data. Delay in furnishing data will not be considered justification for an
adjustment in compensation.
5.4. The State will provide to the Local Government copies of any Trunk Highway fund clauses to be included
in the bid solicitation and will provide any required Trunk Highway fund provisions to be included in the
Proposal for Highway Construction, that are different from those required for State Aid construction.
5.5. The Requesting Parry will perform final reviews and inspections of its portion of the project work. If the
work is found to have been completed in accordance with the work order contract, the Requesting Party
will promptly release any remaining funds due the Providing Party for the Project(s).
5.6. The work order contracts may include additional responsibilities to be completed by the Requesting Parry.
6. Time
In the performance of project work under a work order contract, time is of the essence.
7. Consideration and Payment
7.1. Consideration. The Requesting Party will pay the Providing Party as specified in the work order. The
State's normal and customary additives will apply to work performed by the State, unless otherwise
specified in the work order. The State's normal and customary additives will not apply if the parties agree
to a "lump sum" or "unit rate" payment.
7.2. State's Maximum Obligation. The total compensation to be paid by the State to the
Local Government under all work order contracts issued pursuant to this MPC will not
exceed $500,000.00.
7.3. Travel Expenses. It is anticipated that all travel expenses will be included in the base cost of the
Providing Party's services, and unless otherwise specifically set forth in an applicable work order
contract, the Providing Parry will not be separately reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses
incurred by the Providing Party in performing any work order contract. In those cases where the State
agrees to reimburse travel expenses, such expenses will be reimbursed in the same manner and in no
greater amount than provided in the current "MnDOT Travel Regulations" a copy of which is on file with
and available from the MnDOT District Office. The Local Government will not be reimbursed for travel
and subsistence expenses incurred outside of Minnesota unless it has received the State's prior written
approval for such travel.
7.4. Payment.
7.4.1. Generally. The Requesting Party will pay the Providing Party as specified in the applicable work
order, and will make prompt payment in accordance with Minnesota law.
7.4.2. Payment by the Local Government.
Page 6 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
7.4.2.1. The Local Government will make payment to the order of the Commissioner of
Transportation.
7.4.2.2. IMPORTANT NOTE: PAYMENT MUST REFERENCE THE "MNDOT
CONTRACT NUMBER" SHOWN ON THE FACE PAGE OF THIS CONTRACT
AND THE "INVOICE NUMBER" ON THE INVOICE RECEIVED FROM
MNDOT.
7.4.2.3. Remit payment to the address below:
MnDOT
Attn: Cash Accounting
RE: MnDOT Contract Number 1028147 and Invoice Number ######
Mail Stop 215
395 John Ireland Blvd
St. Paul, MN 55155
7.4.3. Payment by the State.
7.4.3.1. Generally. The State will promptly pay the Local Government after the Local
Government presents an itemized invoice for the services actually performed and the
State's Authorized Representative accepts the invoiced services. Invoices must be
submitted as specified in the applicable work order, but no more frequently than monthly.
7.4.3.2. Retainage for Professional and Technical Services. For work orders for professional and
technical services, as required by Minn. Stat. § 16C.08, subd. 2(10), no more than 90
percent of the amount due under any work order contract may be paid until the final
product of the work order contract has been reviewed by the State's authorized
representative. The balance due will be paid when the State's authorized representative
determines that the Local Government has satisfactorily fulfilled all the terms of the work
order contract.
8. Conditions of Payment
All work performed by the Providing Party under a work order contract must be performed to the Requesting
Party's satisfaction, as determined at the sole and reasonable discretion of the Requesting Party's Authorized
Representative and in accordance with all applicable federal and state laws, rules, and regulations. The Providing
Party will not receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of
federal or state law.
9. Local Government's Authorized Representative and Project Manager; Authority to Execute Work Order
Contracts
9.1. The Local Government's Authorized Representative for administering this master contract is the Local
Government's Engineer, and the Engineer has the responsibility to monitor the Local Government's
performance. The City Administrator is authorized to execute work order contracts on behalf of the Local
Government for up to $5,000.00 without approval of each proposed work order contract by its governing
body. The City Administrator is authorized to execute work order contracts on behalf of the Local
Government for over $5,000.00 with approval from City Council.
9.2. The Local Government's Project Manager will be identified in each work order contract.
10. State's Authorized Representative and Project Manager
10.1. The State's Authorized Representative for this master contract is the District State Aid Engineer, who has
the responsibility to monitor the State's performance.
10.2. The State's Project Manager will be identified in each work order contract.
Page 7 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
11. Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Contract Complete
1 1.1. Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this MPC or any work
order contract without the prior consent of the other and a fully executed Assignment Contract, executed
and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this MPC, or their successors in office.
11.2. Amendments. Any amendment to this master contract or any work order contract must be in writing and
will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and
approved the original contract, or their successors in office.
11.3. Waiver. If a party fails to enforce any provision of this master contract or any work order contract, that
failure does not waive the provision or the party's right to subsequently enforce it.
11.4. Contract Complete. This master contract and any work order contract contain all negotiations and
contracts between the State and the Local Government. No other understanding regarding this master
contract or any work order contract issued hereunder, whether written or oral may be used to bind either
party.
12. Liability.
Each party will be responsible for its own acts and omissions to the extent provided by law. The Local
Government's liability is governed by Minn. Stat. chapter 466 and other applicable law. The State's liability is
governed by Minn. Stat. section 3.736 and other applicable law. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal
remedies a party may have for the other party's failure to fulfill its obligations under this master contract or any
work order contract. Neither party agrees to assume any environmental liability on behalf of the other party. A
Providing Party under any work order is acting only as a "Contractor" to the Requesting Party, as the term
"Contractor" is defined in Minn. Stat. § 115B.03 (subd. 10), and is entitled to the protections afforded to a
"Contractor" by the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act. The parties specifically intend that
Minn. Stat. §471.59 subd. la will apply to any work undertaken under this MPC and any work order issued
hereunder.
13. State Audits
Under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5, the party's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and
practices relevant to any work order contract are subject to examination by the parties and by the State Auditor or
Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this MPC.
14. Government Data Practices and Intellectual Property
14.1. Government Data Practices. The Local Government and State must comply with the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under
this MPC and any work order contract, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored,
used, maintained, or disseminated by the Local Government under this MPC and any work order contract.
The civil remedies of Minn Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by
either the Local Government or the State.
14.2. Intellectual Property Rights
14.2.1. Intellectual Property Rights. The Requesting Party will own all rights, title, and interest in all of
the intellectual property rights, including copyrights, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and
service marks in the Works and Documents created and paid for under work order contracts.
Works means all inventions, improvements, discoveries (whether or not patentable), databases,
computer programs, reports, notes, studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings,
specifications, materials, tapes, and disks conceived, reduced to practice, created or originated by
the Providing Party, its employees, agents, and subcontractors, either individually or jointly with
others in the performance of this master contract or any work order contract. Works includes
"Documents." Documents are the originals of any databases, computer programs, reports, notes,
Page 8 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, tapes, disks, or other
materials, whether in tangible or electronic forms, prepared by the Providing Party, its employees,
agents, or contractors, in the performance of a work order contract. The Documents will be the
exclusive property of the Requesting Party and all such Documents must be immediately returned
to the Requesting Party by the Providing Party upon completion or cancellation of the work order
contract. To the extent possible, those Works eligible for copyright protection under the United
States Copyright Act will be deemed to be "works made for hire." The Providing Party
Government assigns all right, title, and interest it may have in the Works and the Documents to
the Requesting Party. The Providing Party must, at the request of the Requesting Party, execute
all papers and perform all other acts necessary to transfer or record the Requesting Party's
ownership interest in the Works and Documents. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Requesting
Party grants the Providing Party an irrevocable and royalty -free license to use such intellectual
property for its own non-commercial purposes, including dissemination to political subdivisions
of the state of Minnesota and to transportation -related agencies such as the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
14.2.2. Obligations with Respect to Intellectual Property.
14.2.2.1. Notification. Whenever any invention, improvement, or discovery (whether or not
patentable) is made or conceived for the first time or actually or constructively reduced
to practice by the Providing Party, including its employees and subcontractors, in the
performance of the work order contract, the Providing Party will immediately give the
Requesting Party's Authorized Representative written notice thereof, and must
promptly furnish the Authorized Representative with complete information and/or
disclosure thereon.
14.2.2.2. Representation. The Providing Party must perform all acts, and take all steps necessary
to ensure that all intellectual property rights in the Works and Documents are the sole
property of the Requesting Party, and that neither Providing Parry nor its employees,
agents or contractors retain any interest in and to the Works and Documents.
15. Affirmative Action
The State intends to carry out its responsibility for requiring affirmative action by its Contractors, pursuant to
Minn. Stat. §363A.36. Pursuant to that Statute, the Local Government is encouraged to prepare and implement an
affirmative action plan for the employment of minority persons, women, and the qualified disabled, and submit
such plan to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. In addition, when the Local
Government lets a contract for the performance of work under a work order issued pursuant to this MPC, it must
include the following in the bid or proposal solicitation and any contracts awarded as a result thereof:
15.1. Covered Contracts and Contractors. If the Contract exceeds $100,000 and the Contractor employed more
than 40 full-time employees on a single working day during the previous 12 months in Minnesota or in
the state where it has its principle place of business, then the Contractor must comply with the
requirements of Minn. Stat. § 363A.36 and Minn R Parts 5000.3400-5000.3600. A Contractor covered
by Minn. Stat. § 363A.36 because it employed more than 40 full-time employees in another state and
does not have a certificate of compliance, must certify that it is in compliance with federal affirmative
action requirements.
15.2. Minn. Stat. § 363A.36. Minn Stat. § 363A.36 requires the Contractor to have an affirmative action plan
for the employment of minority persons, women, and qualified disabled individuals approved by the
Minnesota Commissioner of Human Rights ("Commissioner") as indicated by a certificate of compliance.
The law addresses suspension or revocation of a certificate of compliance and contract consequences in
that event. A contract awarded without a certificate of compliance may be voided.
15.3. Minn. R. Parts 5000.3400-5000.3600.
Page 9 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
15.3.1. General. Minn. R. Parts 5000.3400-5000.3600 implement Minn Stat. § 363A.36. These rules
include, but are not limited to, criteria for contents, approval, and implementation of affirmative
action plans; procedures for issuing certificates of compliance and criteria for determining a
contractor's compliance status; procedures for addressing deficiencies, sanctions, and notice and
hearing; annual compliance reports; procedures for compliance review; and contract
consequences for non-compliance. The specific criteria for approval or rejection of an affirmative
action plan are contained in various provisions of Minn. R. Parts 5000.3400-5000.3600 including,
but not limited to, parts 5000.3420-5000.3500 and 5000.3552-5000.3559.
15.3.2. Disabled Workers. The Contractor must comply with the following affirmative action
requirements for disabled workers:
15.3.2.1. The Contractor must not discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment because of physical or mental disability in regard to any position for
which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified. The Contractor agrees to
take affirmative action to employ, advance in employment, and otherwise treat
qualified disabled persons without discrimination based upon their physical or mental
disability in all employment practices such as the following: employment, upgrading,
demotion or transfer, recruitment, advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or
other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship.
15.3.2.2. The Contractor agrees to comply with the rules and relevant orders of the Minnesota
Department of Human Rights issued pursuant to the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
15.3.2.3. In the event of the Contractor's noncompliance with the requirements of this clause,
actions for noncompliance may be taken in accordance with Minn. Stat. Section
363A.36, and the rules and relevant orders of the Minnesota Department of Human
Rights issued pursuant to the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
15.3.2.4. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and
applicants for employment, notices in a form to be prescribed by the commissioner of
the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Such notices must state the Contractor's
obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in
employment qualified disabled employees and applicants for employment, and the
rights of applicants and employees.
15.3.2.5. The Contractor must notify each labor union or representative of workers with which it
has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract understanding, that the
Contractor is bound by the terms of Minn. Stat. Section 363A.36, of the Minnesota
Human Rights Act and is committed to take affirmative action to employ and advance
in employment physically and mentally disabled persons.
15.3.3. Consequences. The consequences for the Contractor's failure to implement its affirmative action
plan or make a good faith effort to do so include, but are not limited to, suspension or revocation of
a certificate of compliance by the Commissioner, refusal by the Commissioner to approve
subsequent plans, and termination of all or part of this contract by the Commissioner or the State.
15.3.4. Certification. The Contractor hereby certifies that it is in compliance with the requirements of Minn.
Stat. § 363A.36 and Minn R Parts 5000.3400-5000.3600 and is aware of the consequences for
noncompliance.
16. Workers' Compensation
Each party will be responsible for its own employees for any workers compensation claims. This MPC, and any
work order contracts issued hereunder, are not intended to constitute an interchange of government employees
under Minn. Stat. § 15.53. To the extent that this MPC, or any work order issued hereunder, is determined to be
Page 10 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
subject to Minn Stat. § 15.53, such statute will control to the extent of any conflict between the contract and the
statute.
17. Publicity
17.1. Publicity. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of a work order contract where the State is the
Requesting Party must identify the State as the sponsoring agency and must not be released without prior
written approval from the State's Authorized Representative. For purposes of this provision, publicity
includes notices, informational pamphlets, press releases, research, reports, signs, and similar public
notices prepared by or for the Local Government individually or jointly with others, or any
subcontractors, with respect to the program, publications, or services provided resulting from a work
order contract.
17.2. Data Practices Act. Section 17.1 is not intended to override the Local Government's responsibilities
under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.
18. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue
Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this master contract and all work order
contracts. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this master contract or any work order contracts, or the breach of
any such contracts, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey
County, Minnesota.
19. Prompt Payment; Payment to Subcontractors
The parties must make prompt payment of their obligations in accordance with applicable law. As required by
Minn. Stat. § 16A.1245, when the Local Government lets a contract for work pursuant to any work order, the
Local Government must require its contractor to pay all subcontractors, less any retainage, within 10 calendar
days of the prime contractor's receipt of payment from the Local Government for undisputed services provided by
the subcontractor(s) and must pay interest at the rate of one and one-half percent per month or any part of a month
to the subcontractor(s) on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor(s).
20. Minn. Stat. § 181.59. The Local Government will comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 181.59 which
requires: Every contract for or on behalf of the state of Minnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school,
school district, or any other district in the state, for materials, supplies, or construction shall contain provisions by
which the Contractor agrees: (1) That, in the hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance of any work
under any contract, or any subcontract, no contractor, material supplier, or vendor, shall, by reason of race, creed,
or color, discriminate against the person or persons who are citizens of the United States or resident aliens who
are qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates; (2) That no contractor, material
supplier, or vendor, shall, in any manner, discriminate against, or intimidate, or prevent the employment of any
person or persons identified in clause (1) of this section, or on being hired, prevent, or conspire to prevent, the
person or persons from the performance of work under any contract on account of race, creed, or color; (3) That a
violation of this section is a misdemeanor; and (4) That this contract may be canceled or terminated by the state,
county, city, town, school board, or any other person authorized to grant the contracts for employment, and all
money due, or to become due under the contract, may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the
terms or conditions of this contract.
21. Termination; Suspension
21.1. Termination by the State for Convenience. The State or commissioner of Administration may cancel this
MPC and any work order contracts at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days written notice to the
Local Government. Upon termination, the Local Government and the State will be entitled to payment,
determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed.
21.2. Termination by the Local Government for Convenience. The Local Government may cancel this MPC
and any work order contracts at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days written notice to the State.
Page 11 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
Upon termination, the Local Government and the State will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro
rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed.
21.3. Termination for Insufficient Funding. The State may immediately terminate or suspend this MPC and
any work order contract if it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota legislature or other funding
source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services
covered here. Termination or suspension must be by written or fax notice to the Local Government. The
State is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of
termination or suspension. However, the Local Government will be entitled to payment, determined on a
pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. The State will
not be assessed any penalty if the master contract or work order is terminated because of the decision of
the Minnesota legislature or other funding source, not to appropriate funds. The State must provide the
Local Government notice of the lack of funding within a reasonable time of the State's receiving that
notice.
22. Data Disclosure
Under Minn. Stat. §270C.65, subd. 3, and other applicable law, the Local Government consents to disclosure of
its federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to
the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state obligations. These
identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and state tax laws which could result in action
requiring the Local Government to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any.
23. Defense of Claims and Lawsuits
If any lawsuit or claim is filed by a third party (including but not limited to the Local Government's contractors
and subcontractors), arising out of trunk highway work performed pursuant to a valid work order issued under this
MPC, the Local Government will, at the discretion of and upon the request of the State, tender the defense of such
claims to the State or allow the State to participate in the defense of such claims. The Local Government will,
however, be solely responsible for defending any lawsuit or claim, or any portion thereof, when the claim or cause
of action asserted is based on its own acts or omissions in performing or supervising the work. The Local
Government will not purport to represent the State in any litigation, settlement, or alternative dispute resolution
process. The State will not be responsible for any judgment entered against the Local Government, and will not be
bound by the terms of any settlement entered into by the Local Government except with the written approval of
the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Transportation and pursuant to applicable law.
24. Additional Provisions
[The balance of this page has intentionally been left blank — signature page follows]
Page 12 of 13
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
MnDOT Contract Number: 1028147
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
The Local Government certifies that the
appropriate person(s) have executed the contract on
behalf of the Local Government as required by
applicable ordinance, resolution, or charter
provision.
By:
Title:
Date:
By:
Title
Date:
By:
Title
Date:
By:
Date:
Page 13 of 13
(with delegated authority)
Assistant Commissioner or
Assistant Division Director
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
As delegated to Materials Management Division
CM Master Partnership Contract (CM Rev. 04/10/2017)
Agenda Item # 5D
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF LAURIE
RENGEL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Laurie Rengel's term on the Planning Commission of the city of Medina does
not expire until December 2017; and
WHEREAS, on May 5, 2017, Laurie Rengel submitted a letter of resignation from her
position on the Planning Commission addressed to the City Planner; and
WHEREAS, Laurie Rengel's resignation from her position as Planning Commissioner shall
become effective immediately.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
Laurie Rengel's letter of resignation from the Planning Commission is hereby accepted.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
5 May 2017
Dear Dusty,
Regretfully I will be resigning my City of Medina Planning Commission seat effective 5/8/2017. I have
greatly enjoyed my short time on the commission and leave for no other reason than a charity I support
heavily has asked me to join their Board. It means the world to me and I need to make a choice as I am
unable to maintain both positions properly.
Thank you for everything and all my best wishes to you all on all future business.
Kind Regards,
Laurie Rengel
1149 Jubert Trail, Medina, MN 55340
Agenda Item # 5E
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF CHRIS BARRY
FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Chris Barry's term on the Planning Commission of the city of Medina does
not expire until December 2018; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2017, Chris Barry submitted a letter of resignation from his
position on the Planning Commission addressed to the City Planner; and
WHEREAS, Chris Barry's resignation from his position as Planning Commissioner shall
become effective immediately.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
Chris Barry's letter of resignation from the Planning Commission is hereby accepted.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
To: Dusty Finke, Medina City Planner May 10, 2017
From: Chris Barry
1822 Morgan Rd
Medina, MN 55356
Dusty,
I regret to inform you that I must resign my position as a Commissioner on the Medina City
Planning Commission effective today, May 10, 2017. Due to a personal matter, I feel it is in the
best interest of the City that I no longer serve on the Planning Commission.
I have enjoyed my time working with you and your Staff at the City and look forward to being
part of the community that you help ensure stays the way it is today.
Many thanks and best of luck.
Chris Barry
MEDINA POLICE DEP
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item # 5F
600 Clydesdale Trail
Medina, MN 55340-9790
p: 763-473-9209
f: 763.473.8858
non -emergency' 763.525-62I0
Emergency 9-1-1
TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council
FROM: Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety,
Through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: May 12, 2017
RE: Hamel Lions Donation
The Hamel Lions have made another generous donation to the Medina Police Department.
Gail Schuette with the Lions informed me that the Lions are donating $750 for the 2017
Medina Police Bike Rodeo. The funds will be used for water bottles for the participants,
supplies and other prizes.
I would ask the Medina City Council to accept this donation and direct staff to thank the
Hamel Lions for their generous donation.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM
THE HAMEL LIONS CLUB
WHEREAS, the Hamel Lions Club has generously offered to donate $750.00 (the
"Donation") to the city of Medina (the "City"); and
WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated towards the Police Department's Bike
Safety Rodeo for Kids event; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to the
Hamel Lions Club 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 Hamel Lions Club.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
Agenda Item # 5G
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2017-##
RESOLUTION APPROVING ANIMAL STRUCTURE SETBACK VARIANCE
FOR JOSEPH MOLDE AT 4035 APACHE
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Joseph Molde and Christina Welch (the "Applicants"), own property
located at 4035 Apache Drive (the "Property"), which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested a variance to reduce the required animal
structure setback from property lines from 150 feet to 40 feet or construction of a chicken coop
not to exceed 144 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested variance at a duly noticed
public meeting on April 11, 2017 and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the requested variance at the May
2, 2017 meeting, reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation, and heard testimony from
City staff, the Applicant and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, based on the written and oral record before the Planning Commission and
City Council on the above dates as well as all additional testimony submitted to the City, the City
Council makes the following findings of facts in regards to the variance request:
1. The proposed variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in harmony
with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the
conditions noted below.
2. Keeping animals on the property is a reasonable use which is permitted in the district.
3. The plight of the Applicants is due to the dimensions of the Property and the various
right-of-way and access easements which encumber the Property.
4. The plight of the Applicants was not created by the landowner and is relatively
unique to the Property.
5. The proposed variances do not confer special privileges which are not afforded to
owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district and will not alter
the essential character of the neighborhood.
6. The Applicants have established that there are practical difficulties in complying with
the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
Resolution No. 2017-##
May 19, 2017
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
hereby approves a variance to reduce the required animal structure setback from 150 feet to 40
feet, subject to the following terms and conditions:
1) The structure shall be constructed in the approximate location shown on the site plan
received by the City 3/29/2017 after the Applicants have verified that the structure is a
minimum of 40 feet from the north property line.
2) The size of the structure shall not exceed 144 square feet.
3) The maximum animal units permitted to be kept on the property shall be reduced by 50%.
4) The Applicant shall not remove any of the vegetation surrounding the proposed animal
structure without replacing on an inch:inch basis.
5) The Applicant shall utilize the variance within one year of approval, or the variance shall
be considered null and void.
6) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the variance and other relevant documents.
Dated: May 16, 2017
By:
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
By:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same: (Absent:)
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-## 2
May 16, 2017
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property
Net porn of lace Southaas4 ,fitly of Ma Souff.+mesf Cluarlar
or Sa.cf;ari d, Towne* TM Rdstar, Heimann Comfit
.+litt~a.. 40.124Y,440+ fadar 2
igagkriaby s! Ma Scuthearl Carriar 30kr Soothaus2
Oucotar a! &a ShadomesP f.4aor4aa rt.oe.ce ors arc omoormed
6eNdokos of ark orkxnr J*e to11 f10 Of 144 Saa.lbw—sr
Cloatioe ei fh* Sarrfh.asf tjeianie o a4mranat of 620.00 &at
fo a patrat hereinen r rtlarrod to ats Ptak.! A Maarct
Plbstorry or a ftQfat aa'Pu fo soil' East tine o dslorace of
200.0.0 fear; theme efkvrh ponamedward eaid Ease Lim a
wig POP!' A a* moos o.rrd adoog a AA* d aim Marad,gfp sore
Rapt! .art anal ,parallel draft Me Sour?' Rae of sold Sou hoosa
Clexirfer al ram Savio axF Cuorter: itmore Alesderap pe'a4et
ROA trail , .fh Ate ro a fend OVirr+ dwV#rs 00
.amPaviem iarc-er-di Erie 'Vona Um pumaof
lfttnwr 8etulh 45 throws 00 niJoutas CIO socor�� ff
dfne pcht of begin-m 1.
rhoJ por4 of rho Easr Huff of *a. Soofmnpat OV40er of 5eckr,
4, Tip lfel +w/rr, Rang* likof or afro .51J1, P tinerjoof
MiffiAiNk drseribr,Y as &Wear -
Thom pert at the 6.0.71.4.2 doivrtDad tractof )and Ctercrbad
dto i">v's'!I' pf chat dl r" Of *Ike F4.41.4.t Ther~er Se►+rb
an fh# gvarrar fin* of said sreeian, LTD Mai: Moot 11140
3,3 If rods, thrice FNorrhwnsfoq fv a pobta art •FeM horfrr
line of the Sc arhmest Ou-Grrer i! aotl Secrcr+ 4. 52 rods
OW Lahr the poet* el begr'' ekka; thrlts ForRI ate rho
Ncelk lAta ar maid f■a smeliaa fa Jha ofaat of brgino.. .
Mot Nos ttorrhwrly of Mne Anllow,Vag dascnbee prepevrle
That port of fhe Siorutheas4 Droner of ihr Satrrhrrest
Cupreer of Se Oan 4. rottnehfp fry, ape ?J: rfunrepia
Cour,th itr*haesohn desngne' va ilcdtGwe
flagvieie9 err Saufhaasf ewrnar of said
Soo heos2 jai- of Me Smifhr+*sl a.arfer_ chance
ar' ora arssN~ bred.Q at 040r01. .24 ,7 rho Ease
me of aatd Set.11 4.0 0,47dtei of the 5ovrhrmrad'
.QA,Wele G dnpfanef or sic tal] lair to a Pawil
hrftinofirr Waimea' 2a as Ponf A; thence. Wastatrly
al a rijrrrh ongfa to said Eaasr Mic a elsrorrce aor
26.0.120 )fear; rhamce 1Norfh p'xoAke mifh snw1C {wsr
ri're. o OIVOMGe of 52' fvrct to o pow oisron4
7 ,(400 foot lrrj A Coe rnOtuagree Q A
fitie dfara<rt flYou5Y` sa.;a ea'r,f A. anal paealla! rwiln
Ito Saolh Aso or said Sowfhewsf 0...arter of df
solo' 5'ctaM+ finer ti i Okla dre+•*r N1.4n, 45 degrees
QC1 rr,;r4dte 4-47 db frytl fry fhT 0,744 r:?
.frisCeof€g Mew.. SavMa 45 ela}°i tJt7 m.;eu2as t]a
socands East go tha pan' of Oooft .Sty".
And i;es &A,4 44Y or rhd fa►klmina OrsV6t4l. eine t +fa
rmlf#'ly emieosiew
Cornrowdria or Me Sa uffioaza com,n, of the Southwest
&veto" of oirk0 r+cr5 4, rowire norahrrfy oaorrR the
F4#y No. of staid Sawlilmt#J ava'f-l+ a r$4,1
28.r?110 fear to Mae pairq of boginainal of Mr Pvtt bairigt
dessrk.a4' 211eraee wlesttwl# dehfecfrho Seri' $!'threes 4
ere rates secturds er Gim, 0,74. 617A200 feet ornat 3atd
Arai Fhd■d v.$
.#taw' Airs ilissJ W lee bosf 31.00 .reef or m.o. Fast Hatt of
iha Sourewcsf Ouctr4er.
5AinirEIVR5 harES
). rha piaperly aerscrymaa a,sed for Mo.4s sufre r ,'s based L.paat
)Otto Proj*et N a3-049d9. Ono 0:1-o0ct 4fa. ?a-NILS teas
for a Tod' ctrrrOinr447r. 14$ ire,e ++err rYadrd w'th o uarrem
td rd 4•4*Ar.•w lfr# 40 0054,h10 arOpl*dd
2. Trier Half Sacafon Moo has lfpocia-e lkl,e fatoeod err the scurf)
are eari sides of Mee prGPerry. ilia mere nil X044651 moth
orry karxr►aa4itarr es to COMener:rW arG+ATITA WV taut" located
amen *howl Nerd 1-e0dl ,as 2riowrd-
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
May 16, 2017
AlA Document G702 -1992
Application and Certificate for Payment
TO OWNER:
City of Medina
2052 County Rd. 24
Medina. MN 55430
FROM CONTRACTOR: lyawe and Associates
2500 New Brighton Blvd., STE 203
MPLS, MN 55418
PROJECT: Medina City Hall Lower Level
Renovation
VIA ARCHITECT:
292 Design Group
3533 E. Lake Street
MPLS, MN 55406
APPLICATION NO: Final
PERIOD TO: 10/1/16 - Now
CONTRACT FOR: Medina City Hall Lower Level Ren.
CONTRACT DATE: 5/5/2016
PROJECT NOS: 0
Distribution to:
OWNER ❑
ARCHITECT 0
CONTRACTOR ❑
FIELD ❑
OTHER 0
CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
Application is made for payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract.
continuation Sheet, AIA DocumentG703, is attached
1.ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM $ 240,000.00
2. Net change by Change Orders .5.0162. O 3$ AE0-
3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1+2) 2 Y5) 014.a A4j1,ia60roti
4. TOTAL COMPLETED 8 STORED TO DATE (Column G on G703) S 245,096.03
5. RETAINAGE:
a. 0 %of Completed Work
( Column D + E on G703)
b. 0 % of Stored Material
( Column F on G703)
$
$
0.00
0.00
Total Retainage (Lines 5a+5b or Total in Column I of G703.......................... $
0.00
6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE $ 245,096.03
( Line 4 Less Line 5 Total)
7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT S 228,000.00
( Line 6 from prior Certificate)
8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE
9. BALANCE TO FINISH INCLUDING RETAINAGE
( Line 3 less line 6)
CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY
ADDITIONS
DEDUCTIONS
Total changes approved in previous months by Owner
$ 0.00
-$
0.00
Total approved this Month
$ 0.00
-$
0.00
TOTALS
$ 0.00
-$
0.00
Net Changes by Change Order
$
0.00
t ne unaersrgneo contractor unities mat to me best of me uontractor's tcnowteage, mtormatton
and belief the Work covered by this Application for payment has been completed in accordance
with the Contract documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for
which previous Certificates for Payments were issued and payments received from the Owner, and
that current payment shown herein is now due.
CONTRA
By
State of: (`) l Yi n R bob
County of ti e v-) r-Ik ko, Vl
Subscribed and swom to before krp rt 1.
methis )Z day of 2p i't -30,0
,,�,h;. NOTARY RiBUC • 111NE50TA
Notary Public:& l/w'— �`(Sk�� r, , I„IVCp16NS9ONE Otp1/202t
My Commission expires: 01131 1 'Zo 2 t '"r',y
Date: I / !Z(
' �: r NONE CHEYENNE LEON LL
> s
...... r
ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT
In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on -site observations and the data comprising
this application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Architect's lnowledge,
information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quantity of the Work is in
accordance with the Contract Documents. and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the
AMOUNT CERTIFIED.
$ /7 a 96,- a 3
AMOUNT CERTIFIED
(Attached explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied. Initial a / figures on this
Application and on t/ ntinua ' n Sheet that are changed to conform with the amount certified.)
ARCHITE
By: Date:
i
i
T ` ertiftcate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor
named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of
the Owner or Contractor under this Contract
4/Z0/7
Copyright 2006 by computerized-aia-g702-g703-payment-software.com. AIA is a registered trademark. Computerized-aia-g702-g703-payment-software.com is not affiliated with AIA, nor do we claim to be.
aq of wiep am op JOU "viv qpm palerge lou sl woq aiem4os- luawAed-6026-zoz5-eie-pazuamdwo0 )0E'
IV WOO aJEAAPS- luawAed-coL6-ML6-eie-pazuaindwoo AP 900Z 1u6uAq00
0 0 0 $
0 0 0 S
0 0 OS
00' OS
0 0 ' OS
00OS
0 0 0$
00'OS
0 0 0 $
00'0$
00'0$
0 0 0$
00'0$
0 0 0 $
0 0 $
0 0 0$
0 0 'O$
0 0 0 $
0 0 0$
0 T 0$
0 0 '0$
Ili1V121VA 111
-39VNIV1721
0 0 OS
0 0' OS
00' OS
0 0. OS
0 0 0 S
0 0 OS
0 0 0 S
0 0' OS
0 0 OS
0 0 'OS
0 0' 0
0 TOS
0 0 'OS
0 TO S
00' OS
00' 0 S
00' OS
0 0 'OS
0 0 0 $
0 0 0 $
0 0' OS
01
0'0
0'0
00
00
0'0
00
0'00L
TOOL
0'00L
TOOL
0'00L
TOOL
0 OOL
0 OOL
0 00
0 OOL
0 OOL
0 OOL
0 00 L
/
E0:960'90Z$
00'0$
00 0$
00'0$
00 0$
00'0$
00 0$
00'0$
CO'960`SS
00.0os'en
00.001.'6CS
00'009'6ZS
00'009`Z LS
00'000'ES
00'000.9£$
00000'e LS
00.00t1
00'009'S$
OTOOTZS
OTOOS'ZS
00'006'0PS
0 0 0$
00 0$
0 0 0$
0 0 ' 0 $
00 0$
OTOS
00: 0 $
0 0 ' $
0 T OS
00'0$
0 0 0$
OTOS
0 0 0 S
0 0 0 $
00 0$
0 0' OS
OTOS
00 0$
0 0 0 $
00 0$
0 0' OS
:ON 1031'02:id S,10311HONV
6eLlieleti :01 GOINad
9 L L/L :31V0 NOLLVOIlddV
ieuid :ON NOI1VOIlddV
(A 210 (1
NI _LON)
„ll1N3SP.21c1
E0.09VZL$
00.0$
00'0$
00'0$
00.0$
00'0$
00'0$
00'0$
ET96TSS
00.0t.6'LS
001799'LS
00' 49 L' LS
00'0$
OTOZ
OTOS
00 OZ.L.$
00'0$
00 OZZS
00 OS
00 OS
00'9E9'LS
(1OI11.1,1 SIH.L
Cl]
00.91.9ZEZ$
00'0$
00'0$
00.0$
00 OS
00'0$
OTOS
00.0$
00 OS
00 099'9V$
00'9Eg'LES
00'94 4'9ZS
00 005'Z L$
00.099•Z$
00 000'9CS
00.09Z`L LS
00'0014
OTO9n$
00.000'Z$
00 00S'a
00 V9t6ES
O + Qi
NOLLVDrIddV
SCICLEADId IN011:1
E0'960`94Z$
00•0$
OTOS
00 OS
OTOS
00.0$
00 0$
OTOS
ET960'99
00'009'917S
00'00 `6CS
00'009'6ZS
00.009`Z L$
OTOOTES
00'000'9ES
00-000'eL$
00:000$
00'00n$
OTOOTZS
00 OOP' ZS
00:006'04S
iTlv,\
crincraos
#00
leoP10913
OVAH
6thquinid
sausiu.ind
saijieoads
saysij.ijj
s6Lijuado
uoijoaloJd aglsoinj
sapsodwoo pue oijseid 'pooh
alanuoo
uomoLuao
ieiauao
N).10A\ :10 NOLLdllIDSal
fl
OZ
61.
LL
9L
SL
Zl
EL
OL
6
9
9
'ON
IN 11.1
aimy au!' ioj qguii!rial qicial..pm "3.131111 SP/141.10.)UL) l ULUI110D
'lei lop )soaau alp m palms yr sitinount 'mopq suoprinprIul
.pqtiqmpu si uoilequpiaq potaits sdopulitioD.Stnu!uluop
'1N31NAVd 2I0d NOLLV31:11J_WA3 (INV NOLLY31-1,1dV 'ZOO) luawnqoa viv
jeatis uo,Nenupuoj
Agenda Item # 7A
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: May 11, 2017
MEETING: May 16, 2017 City Council
SUBJ: Conservation Design-PUD Ordinance
Background
In 2010, the City adopted an ordinance establishing regulations for a Conservation Design
Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) process as an alternative to conventional development
practices. The CD-PUD is intended to encourage conservation and protection of natural resource
areas and open space by offering flexibility to developers in exchange for the applicant placing
portions of the property into permanent conservation. The primary flexibility offered for
residential development is an increase in the base density. For a rural CD-PUD, the ordinance
permits the City Council to grant up to a maximum of double the base density. The City
maintains full discretion to determine how much flexibility, including bonus density, is
justifiable based upon the extent to which the proposal meets conservation objectives.
Since the ordinance was adopted, the City has reviewed three requests for CD-PUD
developments. All three requests were for rural CD-PUD projects, and all three requested the
maximum bonus density. The requests were the Marx CD-PUD (east of Parkview Drive and
north of CR24), the Deerhill Preserve (aka Stonegate) CD-PUD (east of Homestead Trail and
west of Deerhill Road), and a portion of the Dellcroft CD-PUD (west of Arrowhead, south of
Hamel Road).
The Dellcroft CD-PUD did not move ahead following a concept plan review after it appeared
that the Planning Commission and City Council were not going to support the requested density
bonus.
Deerhill Preserve was approved by the City with a density bonus which was just under the
maximum allowed. In the case of Deerhill Preserve, over 90 acres of property was placed into
permanent conservation (of which over 30 acres was buildable). The developer received
approval for 41 lots, where conventional development would have been limited to 221ots.
A proposal for the Marx CD-PUD was reviewed in 2011-2012 and an amended concept earlier in
2017
After the review of Stonegate/Deerhill Preserve and the Dellcroft requests last year, a number of
Council members expressed an interest in reviewing the CD-PUD ordinance. The City Council
discussed at the December 20, 2016 and the February 7, 2017 City Council meeting. Some
members of the Council expressed an interest in reviewing and potentially reducing the
maximum bonus density permitted in rural CD-PUD, but there was not a consensus at the time to
do so. The Council did direct staff to review the ordinance and to make amendments which
Conservation Design-PUD Page 1 of 3
Ordinance
May 16, 2017
City Council
would better tie the amount of flexibility and bonus density (if any) to the requirements of a
proposed CD-PUD meeting the conservation objectives of the City.
Excerpts from the minutes are attached for reference.
Ordinance Description
The CD-PUD ordinance is attached, and staff has recommended changes to emphasize the fact
that the amount (if any) of flexibility the City will grant, including bonus density, is dependent
on the amount and quality of the conservation area and how well the proposal meets the
conservation objectives described.
Staff did not incorporate any policy changes to the ordinance at this time. The only other change
made was to move the location of the requirement that setbacks from the perimeter of the
subdivision should not be reduced.
Although the primary incentive contained in the ordinance is density bonuses, it should be noted
that the ordinance also allows flexibility for setbacks and park dedication fees. The CD-PUD
ordinance requires a minimum of 30% of the buildable area of property to be included in the
conservation area.
The CD-PUD ordinance is intended to offer incentives to developers in order to encourage
conservation. The incentives need to be substantial enough to offer such encouragement if the
ordinance is to serve its purpose.
However, it is important to remember that the City ultimately has the discretion to determine
whether the amount of flexibility requested is justified by the extent to which the proposed CD-
PUD meets the City's conservation objectives better than would be achieved through
conventional development.
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the ordinance at their May 9, 2017 meeting.
An excerpt from the DRAFT minutes of this meeting are attached.
No one spoke at the hearing. Commissioners inquired generally about how many sites in the
City would be eligible for a rural Conservation Design subdivision. Staff responded that we did
not have the information immediately available, but that there was a fair amount of area which
would be eligible. Staff estimated approximately 40 parcels in the City were 40 acres in area or
greater. Upon subsequent review, it appears that approximately 50 parcels are 40 acres or
greater, covering a fairly substantial portion of the rural area. These parcels are identified on the
map at the top of the following page.
Following review, the Planning Commission recommended that staff shift the section of the code
related to appealing the Open Space map to later in the ordinance so that it was better placed in
context. With that change, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the
ordinance.
Conservation Design-PUD Page 2 of 3
Ordinance
May 16, 2017
City Council
Potential City Council Action
Following review of the ordinance, if the Council does not desire any additional changes or
review, the following motions would be in order:
1. Motion to adopt the ordinance related to Conservation Design.
2. Motion to adopt the resolution authorizing publication by title and summary.
Attachment
1. DRAFT Ordinance
2. Resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by title and summary
3. Excerpt from DRAFT May 9, 2017 Planning Commission minutes.
4. Excerpt from December 20, 2016 City Council worksession minutes
5. Excerpt from February 7, 2017 City Council minutes
Conservation Design-PUD Page 3 of 3
Ordinance
May 16, 2017
City Council
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. ###
AN ORDINANCE REGARDING CONSERVATION DESIGN;
AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I. Section 827.51 eq. seq. of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended
by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows:
CONSERVATION DESIGN DISTRICT (CD)
Section 827.51. Conservation Design (CD) — Purpose.
The purpose of this district is to preserve the City's ecological resources, wildlife corridors,
scenic views, and rural character while allowing residential development consistent with the
goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Report as updated
from time to time. The specific conservation objectives of this district are to:
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.
Section 827.53 Applicability.
Subd. 1. Conservation design is an option that a property owner is encouraged to consider
as an alternative to Conventional Development, as defined herein. 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.
Conservation design may be considered on qualifying parcels lying in the Rural Residential
District and all sewered residential districts.
Section 827.55 Intent.
Subd. 1. It is the intent of the City to accomplish the stated purpose of this District by
approving a Planned Unit Development. In exchange for achieving the conservation
objectives, it is the intent of the City to provide density and design flexibility and to
encourage development review through a Collaborative Process.
Ordinance No. ### 1
DATE
Subd. 2. The permitted, conditional and accessory uses and other regulations set forth in
the existing zoning districts shall apply unless specifically addressed in this District, the
PUD District, or if determined by the City Council to be inconsistent with the purpose and
intent of this District as part of the final PUD documents.
Subd. 3. The procedures and regulations set forth in the PUD District shall apply unless
specifically addressed in this District. If a final PUD plan is approved by the City, the
subject property shall be rezoned to Conservation Design-PUD District (CD-PUD). The
permitted uses and all other regulations governing uses on the subject land shall then be
those found in the CD-PUD zoning district and documented by the PUD plans and
agreements. The following subsections are requirements for all CD-PUDs unless
exceptions, as part of a PUD, are otherwise approved by the City Council.
Section 827.57. Definitions.
Subd. 1. Base Density. The maximum number of units or lots that are allowed on a parcel
in accordance with the standards of the existing zoning district and the Zoning and
Subdivision Codes.
Subd. 2. Buildable Land Area. The total land area in a proposed Conservation Design
Subdivision less the amount of land that includes: slopes greater than 18%, wetlands,
required wetland buffers, lakes, and land contained within the 100 year floodplain.
Subd. 3. Collaborative Process. A development review process that results in a
development plan in which clearly defined conservation objectives are achieved in
exchange for greater flexibility from the requirements of the base zoning district and the
Zoning and Subdivision Codes.
Subd. 4. Conventional Development. Development that meets the standard minimum
requirements of the City's ordinances regulating development.
Subd. 5. Conservation Easement. As defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 84C: A
nonpossessory interest of a holder in real property imposing limitations or affirmative
obligations the purposes of which include retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -
space values of real property, assuring its availability for agricultural, forest, recreational,
or open -space use, protecting natural resources, maintaining or enhancing air or water
quality, or preserving the historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural aspects of real
property.
Subd. 6. Conservation Design Subdivision. Any development of land that incorporates
the concepts of designated Conservation Areas and clustering of dwelling units.
Subd. 7. Conservation Area. Designated land within a Conservation Design Subdivision
that contributes towards achievement of one or more of the conservation objectives. A
Conservation Easement is placed on Conservation Areas to permanently restrict the
Ordinance No. ### 2
DATE
Conservation Area from future development. Conservation Areas may be used for
preservation of ecological resources, habitat corridors, passive recreation, and for pasture,
hay cropping and other low impact agricultural uses.
Subd. 8. Homeowners Association. A formally constituted non-profit association or
corporation made up of the property owners and/or residents of a development for the
purpose of owning, operating and maintaining common Conservation Areas and/or other
commonly owned facilities and Open Space.
Subd. 9. Open Space. Land that is not designated as a Conservation Area that is used for
parks, trails or other uses. Open Space may be owned and managed by the City,
homeowner's association or other entity.
Subd. 10. Viewshed. The landscape or topography visible from a geographic point,
especially that having aesthetic value.
Subd. 11. Yield Plan. A conceptual layout that shows the maximum number of lots that
could be placed on a parcel in accordance with the standards of the existing zoning district
and the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. The Yield Plan shows proposed lots, streets,
rights -of -way, and other pertinent features. Yield Plans shall be drawn to scale. The layout
shall be realistic and reflect a development pattern that could reasonably be expected to be
implemented, taking into account the presence of wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, and
existing easements.
Section 827.59. General Performance Standards.
Subd. 1. Minimum Size of Subdivision.
(a) The minimum land area required for development shall be:
(1) 40 contiguous acres in the Rural Residential District
(2) 20 contiguous acres in sewered residential districts
(b) A subdivision in the Rural Residential District of over 20 contiguous acres but less than
40 contiguous acres may apply for approval if they meet all the requirements for CD,
and the visual impact of the subdivision from existing adjacent roadways is mitigated
by existing topography, existing vegetation, and/or acceptable vegetative buffers.
Subd 2. Required Conservation Area. The minimum required Conservation Area within
the CD development shall be:
(a) At least 30% of the total Buildable Land Area in the Rural Residential District, or
higher depending on the land and opportunities to achieve the City's conservation
objectives.
(b) At least 20% of the total Buildable Land Area in sewered residential districts, or
higher depending on the land and opportunities to achieve the City's conservation
obj ectives.
(a) The required amount of Conservation Arca shall be designated and located to maximize
Ordinance No. ### 3
DATE
achievement of the City's conservation objectives. Opportunities for achieving these
parcel. Each parcel will be evaluated for opportunities to achieve the following primary
and secondary conservation objectives over and above that achievable under
(1) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following primary conservation
objectives will be given higher consideration for flexibility from performance
standards.
(1) The protection and/or restoration of the ecological function of native
wetlands.
(2) The protection, restoration, and/or creation of moderate to high quality
identified as priority areas on the Composite Map of the Open Space
Report as updated from time to time.
(3) The reservation of land connecting these aquatic and terrestrial
ecological resources in order to restore and/or create new ecological
resources suitable for habitat movement corridors.
(2) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following secondary conservation
objectives r a , bo s;de- t-i-e f r foxibi-li ., r, pe-f manco sta„ la -as.
i. The protection of scenic views and viewsheds including the views from
roads identified as "Scenic Roads" on the Scenic Roads Map of the Open
Space Report as updated from time to time.
ii. The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order
to create connections to existing or planned trails as identified in the
current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan.
ii. The reservation of land for incorporating public and /or private Open
Space in order to achieve goals as identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 4. Perimeter Setbacks. Structure setbacks from the perimeter of the subdivision
shall be the same as the existing zoning district.
applicant is not in agreement with the Composite Map of the Open Space Report or the data
contained within a report on which the Composite Map is based upon, the applicant may present
an appeal to the city.
Subd. 1. The applicant shall put the appeal in writing, accompanied by the fee as described
by the City's Fee Schedule, and is responsible to provide documentation supporting their
aPPeah
Subd. 2. The appeal shall be reviewed by city staff, with the assistance of any technical
consultants which city staff shall determine are appropriate. Such consultants may
include, but are not limited to, environmental engineers, wetland scientists, arborists and
other similar experts. City staff shall make a determination on the appeal within sixty
Ordinance No. ### 4
DATE
days of receipt of a complete appeal application.
Subd 3. The applicant may appeal city staff s decision to the city council. The appeal must be
filed within thirty days of staffs determination.
Subd. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs accrued by the City in review of the
appeals described above, including the costs of technical consultants hired by the City.
Section 827.61. Density and Design Flexibility.
Flexibility from the requirements of the existing zoning district or other requirements of this
code may be granted at the discretion of the City Council. In considering the amount, if any, of
such flexibility, the City will evaluate the amount and quality of Conservation Area protected
and how well the project achieves the following conservation objectives over and above that
achievable under conventional development and the amount and quality of conservation area
protected.
Subd. 1. Conservation Objectives and Determining Flexibility. Conservation Area(s)
shall be designated and located to maximize achievement of the City's conservation
objectives. Opportunities for achieving these objectives will vary depending on the
location, size and specific qualities of the subject parcel. Each parcel will be evaluated for
opportunities to achieve the following primary and secondary conservation objectives over
and above that achievable under conventional development.
(a) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following primary conservation
objectives will be given higher consideration for flexibility from performance
standards.
(1) The protection and/or restoration of the ecological function of native
hardwood forests (e.g. Maple -Basswood Forest), lakes, streams and
wetlands.
(2) The protection, restoration, and/or creation of moderate to high quality
ecological resources including the sensitive ecological resources
identified as priority areas on the Composite Map of the Open Space
Report as updated from time to time.
(3) The reservation of land connecting these aquatic and terrestrial
ecological resources in order to restore and/or create new ecological
resources suitable for habitat movement corridors.
Ordinance No. ### 5
DATE
(b) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following secondary conservation
objectives may be given consideration for flexibility from performance standards:
(1) The protection of scenic views and viewsheds including the views from
roads identified as "Scenic Roads" on the Scenic Roads Map of the Open
Space Report as updated from time to time.
(2) The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order
to create connections to existing or planned trails as identified in the
current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan.
(1) 31_ The reservation of land for incorporating public and /or private
Open Space in order to achieve goals as identified in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Subd.12. Additional Density.
(a) Density, in addition to the Base Density, may be granted at the discretion of the City
Council. Any additional density or additional number of dwelling units shall be
calculated as a percentage of Base Density. The Base Density shall be that established
by regulations in the relevant existing zoning district. The granting of additional
density shall be at the full and complete discretion of the City based upon the amount
and quality of the Conservation Area protected and extent to which the proposal meets
the objectives over and above that achievable through Conventional Development.
(1) In the Rural Residential District, Base Density shall be determined by calculating
the number of 5-acre areas of contiguous soils suitable for a standard sewage
disposal system that are located on the subject property.
(2) In sewered residential districts, a Yield Plan shall be developed to determine Base
Density. Regulations of the base district and all other relevant land use regulations
of this Code shall be used for completing the Yield Plan.
(b) The total number of dwelling units in a CD-PUD development shall be guided by the
density limitations contained in the Comprehensive Plan and may be:
(1) Up to 200% of the calculated Base Density in the Rural Residential District.
(2) Up to 120% of calculated Base Density in all sewered residential districts.
Subd. 23. Other areas of flexibility
(a) In the Rural Residential District, flexibility may include:
(1) Lot size, lot width and structure setbacks provided setbacks comply with the
following minimums:
i. Setback from local streets: 35 feet.
ii. Setback from Arterial and Collector Streets: 100 feet.
iii. Interior structure setbacks: 30 feet.
Perimeter setbacks: Minimum structure setbacks from the
perimeter of the subdivision shall be 50 feet.
(2) Housing type.
(3) Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of
these regulations are met for the site as a whole.
(4) Due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when
calculating park dedication requirements.
(5) Variations to City regulations regarding septic systems.
Ordinance No. ### 6
DATE
(b) In all sewered residential districts, flexibility may include:
(1) Lot size, lot width, and structure setbacks, except that setbacks from the
perimeter of the subdivision shall be equal to or greater than that required in the
underlying zoning district.
(2) Housing type.
(3) Landscaping.
(4) Screening.
(5) Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of
these regulations are met for the site as a whole.
(6) Buffer yard.
(7) Due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when
calculating park dedication requirements.
Section 827.63. Conservation Area Protection and Ownership.
Subd. 1. Land and improvements in areas designated as Conservation Areas in a CD-PUD
shall be established, protected and owned in accordance with the following guidelines:
(a) Designated Conservation Areas shall be surveyed and subdivided as separate outlots.
(b) Designated Conservation Areas must be restricted from further development by a
permanent Conservation Easement (in accordance with Minnesota Statute Chapter
84C.01-05) running with the land. The Conservation Easement must be submitted with
the General Plan of Development and approved by the City Attorney.
(1) The permanent Conservation Easement may be held by any combination of the
entities defined by Minnesota Statute Chapter 84C, but in no case may the
holder of the Conservation Easement be the same as the owner of the underlying
fee.
(2) The permanent Conservation Easement shall be recorded with Hennepin County
and must specify:
i. The entity that will maintain the designated Conservation Area.
ii. The purposes of the Conservation Easement, that the easement is
permanent, and the conservation values of the property.
iii. The legal description of the land under the easement.
iv. The restrictions on the use of the land and from future development.
v. To what standards the Conservation Areas will be maintained through
reference to an approved land stewardship plan.
vi. Who will have access to the Conservation Area.
(3) Ownership of the underlying fee of each designated Conservation Area parcel,
may be held by any combination of the following entities:
i. A common ownership association, subject to the provisions in the PUD
District.
ii. An individual who will use the land in accordance with the permanent
Conservation Easement.
iii. A private nonprofit organization, specializing in land conservation and
stewardship, that has been designated by the Internal Revenue Service as
qualifying under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Ordinance No. ### 7
DATE
iv. A government agency (e.g. park and/or natural resource agency or
division).
v. The City of Medina, in rare situations when there are no other viable
options.
(c) Open Space areas that do not achieve the City's conservation objectives may be
established under a homeowner's association without protection by a Conservation
Easement. Such areas shall be regulated according to provisions of the PUD District.
Section 827.65. Land Stewardship Plan.
Subd. 1. Plan Objectives. Where a CD-PUD has designated Conservation Areas, a plan
for the development, long-term use, maintenance, and insurance of all Conservation Areas,
may be required. The plan shall:
(a) Define ownership and methods of land protection.
(b) Establish necessary regular and periodic operation and maintenance responsibilities.
(c) Estimate staffing needs, insurance requirements, and other associated costs associated
with plan implementation and define the means for funding the same on an on -going
basis. This shall include land management fees necessary to fund monitoring and
management of the Conservation Easement by the easement holder. The fees shall be
estimated and validated by the proposed easement holder.
(d) Meet the requirements of the future conservation easement holder.
Subd. 2. Plan Submittal Requirements. A preliminary Land Stewardship Plan shall be
submitted with the General Plan of Development. A Final Land Stewardship Plan shall be
submitted with the Final Plan Stage of PUD development. The plan shall contain a
narrative describing:
(a) Existing conditions, including all natural, cultural, historic, and scenic elements in the
landscape;
(b) Objectives for each Conservation Area, including:
(1) The proposed permanent or maintained landscape condition for each area.
(2) Any restoration measures needed to achieve the proposed permanent condition,
including:
i. Measures for correcting increasingly destructive conditions, such as
erosion and intrusion of invasive plant species.
ii. Measures for restoring historic features (if applicable).
iii. Measures for restoring existing or establishing new landscape types.
(3) A maintenance plan, including:
i. Activities needed to maintain the stability of the resources, including
mowing and burning schedules, weed control measures, planting
schedules, and clearing and cleanup measures and schedules.
ii. An estimate of the annual on -going (post restoration) operating and
maintenance costs.
Subd. 3. Funding of Operation and Maintenance. At the discretion of the City, the
applicant may be required to escrow sufficient funds for the maintenance and operation
costs of Conservation Areas for up to four years depending on restoration measures.
Ordinance No. ### 8
DATE
Subd. 4. Enforcement. In the event that the fee holder of the Conservation Areas,
common areas and facilities, or any successor organization thereto, fails to properly
maintain all or any portion of the aforesaid common areas or facilities, the City in
coordination with the holder of the easement, may serve written notice upon such fee
holder setting forth the manner in which the fee holder has failed to maintain the aforesaid
common areas and facilities. Such notice shall set forth the nature of corrections required
and the time within which the corrections shall be made. Upon failure to comply within the
time specified, the fee holder-, or any successor organization, shall be considered in
violation of this Ordinance, in which case the City shall have the right to enter the premises
and take the needed corrective actions. The costs of corrective actions by the City shall be
assessed against the properties that have the right of enjoyment of the common areas and
facilities.
Section 827.67. Conservation Area Design Standards.
The following Conservation Area design standards shall also be considered in designing the
CD-PUD:
Subd. 1. Conservation Areas should be interconnected wherever possible to provide a
continuous network of Open Space within the PUD and throughout the City. It should
coordinate and maximize boundaries with Conservation Areas and Open Space on adjacent
tracts.
Subd. 2. Incorporate public and private trails with connections to existing or planned
regional trails as identified in the most recent Park, Trail and Open Space Plan.
Subd. 3. Designated public access trails shall be protected by an access easement owned
by the City.
Subd. 4. Incorporate public and/or private Open Space as designated in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Subd. 5. Views of new dwellings from exterior roads and abutting properties should be
minimized by the use of existing topography, existing vegetation, or additional
landscaping. Ridge and hilltops should be contained within designated Conservation Areas
wherever possible. Trees should not be removed from ridges and hilltops.
Subd. 6. The boundaries of designated conservation areas shall be clearly delineated and
labeled on CD-PUD plans. These areas shall be delineated in the field with signage or
other measures approved by the city.
Subd. 7. Stormwater management facilities may be located in designated conservation
areas.
Ordinance No. ### 9
DATE
Subd. 8. Existing land in row -cropping use shall be converted to a use that supports the
achievement of the City's conservation objectives.
Section 827.69. Landscape Design Standards.
Subd. 1. Street trees may be planted, but are not required, along internal streets passing
through common Conservation Areas or Open Space.
Subd. 2. Irregular spacing is encouraged for street trees, to avoid the urban appearance
that regular spacing may invoke.
Subd. 3. The selection of vegetation should be guided by the natural community types
identified in the City's 2008 Natural Resources Inventory.
Subd. 4. Planted buffers between clusters of residential lots are encouraged to enhance
privacy and a rural appearance between lots.
Subd. 5. Buffers consisting of an informal arrangement of native plant species combined
with infrequent mowing are strongly encouraged, to create a low -maintenance, natural
landscape.
Subd. 6. Planted buffers are also encouraged along natural drainage areas to minimize
erosion.
Subd. 7. Grading for Conservation Areas and other common landscaped areas and
stormwater management areas shall be avoided to reduce compaction and impacting water
infiltration rates. Soil testing and decompaction may be required if site construction
activities negatively impact soil permeability.
Subd. 8. Better Site Design/Low Impact Development practices as identified in the
Minnesota Stormwater Manual published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency shall
be used to design sites and meet the performance standards.
Section 827.71. Subsurface Sewage Treatment Facilities.
Subd. 1. Where city services are not available, CD-PUD developments may be platted to
accommodate home site lots with either individual septic tanks and all required
drainfields/mound systems located on the lot, or individual septic tanks and primary
drainfield/mount system located on the lot and secondary drainfields/mound system located
in the designated Conservation Area or other Open Space.
Subd. 2. All septic systems shall conform to the current performance standards of
Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and its appendices, or the amended Rules in effect at the
time of installation. Except in instances where flexibility has been explicitly granted by the
City, septic systems shall also conform to relevant City regulations, including the
requirement to identify a primary and secondary drainfield site.
Ordinance No. ### 10
DATE
Subd. 3. The City may consider shared sewage treatment systems which are consistent
with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) regulations and relevant City
ordinances, provided adequate agreements are in place related to monitoring and
maintenance procedures and replacement of the system in case of a failure.
Subd. 4. Secondary drainfields/mound systems may be located in designated Conservation
Areas and other Open Space provided that:
(a) They are located within a limited distance of the lots they serve.
(b) Construction of drainfields/mound systems do not result in the destruction of ecological
resources.
(c) The Conservation Area or Open Space parcel containing the drainfield/mound system is
owned in fee by a common ownership association which owns non -Conservation Area
land within the subdivision and in which membership in the association by all property
owners in the subdivision is mandatory.
(d) The individual lot owner is responsible for maintenance and repair of the
drainfield/mound system.
(e) The ground cover over the drainfield/mound system is maintained according to the
Land Stewardship Plan.
(f) Recreational uses are prohibited within 50 feet of the drainfields/mound systems.
(g) The Conservation Easement for the dedicated Conservation Area parcel describes the
location of individual drainfields/mound systems.
Section 827.72 Open Space Report Composite Map Appeal Process. In the event that an
applicant is not in agreement with the Composite Map of the Open Space Report or the data
contained within a report on which the Composite Map is based upon, the applicant may present
an appeal to the city.
Subd. 1. The applicant shall put the appeal in writing, accompanied by the fee as described
by the City's Fee Schedule, and is responsible to provide documentation supporting their
appeal.
Subd. 2. The appeal shall be reviewed by city staff, with the assistance of any technical
consultants which city staff shall determine are appropriate. Such consultants may
include, but are not limited to, environmental engineers, wetland scientists, arborists and
other similar experts. City staff shall make a determination on the appeal within sixty
days of receipt of a complete appeal application.
Subd 3. The applicant may appeal city staff s decision to the city council. The appeal must be
filed within thirty days of staffs determination.
Subd. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs accrued by the City in review of the
appeals described above, including the costs of technical consultants hired by the City.
Section 827.73. Site Design Process.
At the time of PUD Concept Plan development and review, applicants shall demonstrate that
Ordinance No. ### 11
DATE
the following design process was performed and influenced the design of the concept site plan.
Subd. 1. Step 1—Identify Conservation Areas. Identify preservation land in two steps.
First identify "unbuildable" areas which include: slopes greater than 18%, wetlands,
wetland buffers, lakes, and land within the 100 year floodplain. Next, identify
Conservation Areas which include those areas designated as Conservation Areas (Section
827.59 Subd. 3.) The remaining land shall be identified as the potentially Buildable Land
Area. The applicant shall identify the quantity of land designated as unbuildable,
Conservation Area, and potentially Buildable Land Area.
Subd. 2. Step 2—Locate Housing Sites. Locate the approximate sites of individual
houses in regard to protected views and the potentially buildable land areas.
Subd. 3. Step 3—Align Streets and Trails. Align streets in order to access the lots.
New trails and connections to regional trail systems, if any, should be laid out to create
internal and external connections to existing and/or potential future streets, sidewalks, and
trails.
Subd. 4. Step 4—Lot Lines. Draw in the lot lines.
Section 827.75. CD-PUD Application Processing.
The review and approval procedures of the PUD District shall be used to review and approve
CD-PUDs. Prior to the Concept Plan Stage PUD application, the City encourages applicants to
engage in an informal collaborative project goal setting process with the City. The purpose of
this process is to jointly develop site design and conservation objectives and assess areas of
regulatory flexibility for achieving developer and City objectives for the specific parcel of land.
The Collaborative Process may include council members, city commission members, land
owners, developers, city staff, other governmental jurisdiction staff, the potential future
Conservation Easement holder, and other participants as appropriate. The outcome of the process
is a Project Guidance Report prepared by city staff. The report will summarize the project
concept, project objectives, and preliminary understanding of regulatory flexibility needed to
achieve the objectives.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina city council this day of , 2017.
Attest:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Published in the Crow River News on the day of , 2017
Ordinance No. ### 12
DATE
Member _ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-##
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO. ### BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ### an
regarding conservation design; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes § 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is twelve pages in length; and
WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the
public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
the city clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. ### to be published in the
official newspaper in lieu of the ordinance in its entirety:
Public Notice
The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ###, an ordinance
regarding Conservation Design. The ordinance amends regulations related to the
Conservation Design -Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) in order to more explicitly
state that the flexibility permitted under the CD-PUD district is based upon the amount and
quality of conservation area protected and how well the conservation meets the objectives of
the City.
The full text of Ordinance No. ### is available from the city clerk at Medina city hall
during regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city
clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection and that she post a
full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city.
Resolution No. 2017-##
DATE
Dated: DATE.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-## 2
DATE
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT May 9, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the City Zoning Code Related to
Regulations for Conservation Design
Finke stated that this is a request by the City Council for the Commission to review the Conservation
Design PUD Ordinance in response to the requests the City has considered in the past years. He
provided background information on the ordinance. He stated that there has been some concern
raised by the Council related to the density allowed under this ordinance. He stated that the Council
would like a direct link to the density and the conservation design elements and to make the language
clearer that the objectives must be well met in order to justify the density and flexibility. He stated
that staff amended the language in that manner in the proposed ordinance. He stated that the density
bonus may have caused pause because of the sheer scale of the request that approved and that may be
a unique request in that there were 22 base lots to begin with. He noted that there are very few
properties that would have that level of base density to begin with in the rural residential zoning
district.
Reid referenced page four of the draft ordinance which includes referenced of an open space
composite map but believed that should be moved.
Albers stated that the one project that was approved was unique because of the scale. He asked how
many other parcels of land would have that same opportunity.
Finke stated that he did not have the exact number but noted that a 40-acre minimum would be
required but the door would be open for a 20-acre parcel. He stated that in the rural residential zoning
district there are about 200 parcels that have 20 acres but noted that the number becomes smaller at
40 acres.
White noted that you would also need to consider how many of those parcels would have elements
that would qualify for conservation.
Albers stated that he is curious to see how many other 40-acre lots that could be split and would
qualify in terms of natural resources that would be worth protecting. He acknowledged that may be a
lot of additional work for staff.
Finke replied that it would be relatively easy to do because you could overlay the natural resources
map over the City and identify 40-acre lots. He stated that you would be hard pressed to find any lot
of that size that do not have some resource as technically maybe all of the 40-acre lots would qualify
but some might have higher quality resources.
Reid reminded the Commission that the Stonegate development was reached through litigation and
therefore is not the normal request.
Murrin asked if this would be more flexible.
Albers stated that this draft would be more restrictive than the current language.
Reid stated that this language correlates the resources preserved and conservation efforts to the
density bonus available.
Murrin stated that she believes this language is better because it does require higher quality resources
to preserve rather than just allowing a prairie to be the main element.
1
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT May 9, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Finke stated that this ordinance is an incentive to the property owner to choose this option over
regular development, as this would conserve 30 percent of the buildable land. He noted that
incentives need to be built into the ordinance but the discretion should be left to the City. He stated
that there are about 40 properties in the rural residential district that are above 40 acres and about 200
20 acre properties. He noted that the minimum requirement is 40 acres but there is an exception for
20 acres if there is something exceptional for protection.
White opened the public hearing at 7:39 p.m.
No comments made.
White closed the public hearing at 7:39 p.m.
DesLauriers stated that "at the discretion of the City" is mentioned multiple times throughout the
ordinance and therefore felt that it was clear. He referenced another time period that refers to four
years and asked for more information on that time period.
Finke replied that four or five years is a pretty typical timeframe for restoration efforts and ensures
that the activity begins with development. He provided additional information on the escrow that is
required and noted that it would be hard for a developer to fund that in perpetuity and therefore the
timeframe was identified.
Albers referenced the language regarding street trees and suggested striking a portion of the sentence
which states "but are not required".
Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the Ordinance related to
Conservation design with the direction to staff to move the open space composite map to another
section of the ordinance. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Rengel)
2
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 20, 2016
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on December 20, 2016 at
6:00 p.m. at the Medina City Hall, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN.
I. Call to Order
Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Martin, Mitchell and Pederson
Members absent:
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City
Engineer Jim Stremel, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Public Safety Director Ed
Belland, and City Planner Dusty Finke
II. Water Tower Rehabilitation Project
Public Works Director Steve Scherer provided information on the water tower
rehabilitation project with City Engineering firm WSB. Scherer also provided back
ground information on the color options, logo options, technical issues that may occur
when the tower is down and timing on the project. The City Council directed Staff to
paint the tower light blue (current color) and not include the name or logo. The project
will be scheduled for the fall of 2017 and is estimated to cost $400,000.
III. Conservation Design — PUD Discussion
City Planner Dusty Finke provided the City Council with background information and
preservation goals for the ordinance. The City Council discussed the Metropolitan
Council's lot requirements, protecting ecologically significant areas, Council discretion
under the current ordinance, bonus density concerns, minimum lot sizes, preserving
buildable areas, public access to preserved areas and view sheds, the quality of the
resources protected, and encouraging innovative home design. Staff was directed to cross
reference the objectives of the ordinance and make adjustments to the ordinance
language.
Adjournment
Mitchell closed the meeting at 6:58 p.m.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1
December 20, 2016
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2
December 20, 2016
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
Conservation Design-PUD Ordinance Discussion (7:07 p.m.)
Johnson noted that at a previous Council meeting the Council requested background
information on how the ordinance was developed which has been provided in the packet for the
review of the Council. He noted that this is open for discussion as requested by the City
Council.
Sparks provided a brief summary of the background information. He noted that the ordinance
could continue as written or the Council could choose to further discuss the topic.
Mitchell stated that the City is in the middle of the Comprehensive Plan process and this is an
important part of that. He stated that the object is to discuss the packet information tonight and
then obtain input from Finke when he is available.
Cousineau commented that there was a lot of work and comparative analysis done to develop
this ordinance. She stated that in her opinion this is a good ordinance that keeps the control in
the hands of the City. She stated that how the City implements the ordinance is what matters,
noting that the City has the discretion whether or not to award the density bonus and therefore
she is comfortable with the ordinance.
Martin echoed the comments of Cousineau. She stated that she was a part of the process
when the ordinance was developed and felt that it was a comprehensive process and was well
studied. She stated that if the ordinance were to be reviewed again, she would strengthen it a
bit not by decreasing the density bonus but enhancing language regarding discretion and tree
preservation. She stated that any type of maximum density should call for some type of public
access. She stated that she would like to keep the density bonus but it should be made clear
that it is only earned through an absolute homerun and providing access to residents. She
stated that this ordinance allows the City to protect elements that they would not normally be
able to protect as the land develops. She stated that the preservation not only has an impact
today but also for residents of Medina in the future. She stated that the Comprehensive Plan
speaks of preserving the rural character of Medina and this is one way to do it.
Pederson agreed with the comments thus far noting that discretion is a big element. He
explained that in order for someone to earn the maximum density bonus, someone would really
have to present something special.
Martin asked staff to look at the ordinance with that in mind, keeping in mind the discretion
element and the public access towards the front of the discussion.
Batty stated that the Council did discuss that on December 20th and directed staff to prepare
some ordinance amendments to more closely link the conservation goals with the incentives.
He noted that Finke is attempting to do that, but on January 3rd, the discussion was related to
how the City got to the 200 percent density bonus and therefore the information in the packet is
in response to that question. He stated that staff intends to address those questions and bring
back an amended ordinance.
Anderson asked if there is interest from the Council in tying density bonus incentives to the
number of homes proposed by the applicant, noting that perhaps the 200 percent density bonus
be linked to a lesser number of homes. Cousineau stated the ordinance might be better suited
for larger parcels rather than the smaller ones in the ordinance, i.e. 40 acres as currently
defined.
1
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
Martin stated that the concept of discussing the impact of the homes being developed and the
surrounding neighborhood is good, but noted that she would not want to see that tied to a
number of homes. She stated that there should be flexibility. She stated that a lot of these
things are in the ordinance but could be made more clear.
Mitchell stated that 30 years ago, there was not a conservation design subdivision ordinance.
He stated that he lives on Willow Drive near Medina Morningside, which is a suburban
neighborhood with smaller lots. He stated that he is aware of the difference between rural
development and suburban development. He stated that his concern is that in the middle of a
rural area you would create a more dense/suburban neighborhood. He referenced an
agreement with the Metropolitan Council that brought sewer to Hamel and stated that he is
concerned that this additional density could have an impact on that.
Martin noted that this ordinance provides the conservation of the rural Medina elements and
providing a great trail system that can be enjoyed by all the residents, those that live in the rural
areas and those that live in the suburban areas. She stated that a density drive will come back
again from the Metropolitan Council sometime in the future and this will allow the City to
preserve tracts of land from falling into regular suburban development.
Mitchell stated that he would like to see the density bonus lower than 200 percent or at least
strengthening of what is being protected.
Martin stated that she would not want to narrow the latitude of future Council's to give the right
incentive to the right project.
Batty stated that the ordinance allows discretion, which is key. He stated that the other thing
that arose is that it is probably a mistake to only focus on the percentage and instead look at the
absolute number of lots. He used the example of doubling two or three compared to doubling
20 or 30 lots. He noted that if there is going to be a large doubling of lots, then the City should
be getting more in terms of conservation.
Johnson noted that staff can review the language and bring the topic back for further discussion.
Martin noted that it is the discretion of the Council and therefore she would not want to see the
bargaining ability of the City reduced.
Cousineau stated that her fear is that the City is not using their discretion and should be using
that more. She wanted to ensure that the Council knows they are empowered.
Martin stated that the Council has said no twice and the one that was approved was under the
settlement agreement.
2
Agenda Item # 7B
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant City Administrator
DATE: May 10, 2017
MEETING: May 16, 2017
SUBJECT: Liquor Ordinance Amendment Regarding Off -Sale of Intoxicating Liquor
on Sundays
Background
Under new state law, off -sale of intoxicating liquor may occur on Sundays between the hours of
11 a.m. and 6 p.m. as of July 1, 2017.
The City of Medina updated our ordinance in 2015 to remove the city's hours and days of sale to
state that we strictly comply with the hour and day of sale limitations set forth in Minnesota
Statutes Section 340A.504 to allow Sunday on -sale license holders to serve intoxicating liquor
with food on Sundays as early as 8 a.m. (the bloody mary law).
Ordinance Amendment
Attorney Andrew Biggerstaff with Kennedy and Graven reviewed the city code and new state
law and is recommending that we adopt the attached ordinance reaffirming our desire to comply
with the new state law. His reasoning behind this is that it is an opinion of the Attorney General
and the League of Minnesota Cities that city ordinances adopting state statute by reference only
adopt that statute that is in place at the time of the ordinance's adoption. So, future changes in
state law (such as the changes to the days of sale statute) are not automatically added to city
ordinance.
If the city intends to continue to comply with the hour and day of sale limitations set forth in
state law to allow off -sale of intoxicating liquor on Sundays between the hours of 11 a.m. and 6
p.m., the city should approve the attached ordinance amendment reaffirming our desire to
comply with the new state law.
Recommended Action:
1. Approve Ordinance Amending City Code Section 625 Regarding Alcoholic Beverage
Licenses
2. Approve Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Ordinance Amending City Code
Section 625 by Title and Summary
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO.
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 of the City Code of Ordinances
Regarding Alcoholic Beverage Licenses
The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I: Medina city code section 625.01 is amended by adding the double
underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows:
Section 625.01. Provisions of State Law Adopted. Except as may be provided for in
this ordinance, the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 340A, as it may be amended from
time to time, are hereby adopted and made a part of this ordinance as though fully set out herein.
SECTION II: Medina city code section 625.26, subdivision 1 is amended by adding the
double underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows:
Sections 625.26. Hours and Days of Sale.
Subd. 1. All licenses. Licensees must strictly comply with the hour and day of sale
limitations set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.504, as it may be amended from time to
time, for each type of license held by the licensee. In addition, the following provisions apply to
Sunday sales:
(a) On -Sale of Intoxicating Liquor. Except as provided in paragraph (b) below, the on -
sale of intoxicating liquor on a Sunday requires a Sunday sales license.
(b) On -Sale Brewer Taproom. The holder of an on -sale brewer taproom license is
authorized to conduct on -sale business on Sundays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 11:59
p.m. without having to obtain a separate Sunday sales license.
(c) Off -Sale Growlers. Malt liquor in growlers only may be sold by brew pubs, brewer
taprooms3 and small brewers at off -sale on Sundays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. on Sunday
and 11:59 p.m. without having to obtain a separate Sunday sales license. Growlers must meet the
definition of "required packaging" that is set forth in this Section.
SECTION III. The ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2017.
Bob Mitchell., Mayor
496571v1 ME230-5
1
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News the day of , 2017.
496571v1 ME230-5
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO. BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No.
amending section 625 of the code of ordinances regarding alcoholic beverage licenses; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, § 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is 2 pages in length; and
WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the
public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
the city clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. to be published in the
official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. , an amendment to
section 625 of the code of ordinances regarding alcoholic beverage licenses. The amendment
reaffirms the city's desire to comply with the hour and day of sale limitations set forth in Minnesota
Statutes Section 340A.504, as it may be amended from time to time. The full text of Ordinance No.
is available for inspection at Medina city hall during regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city
clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection and that she post a
full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Resolution No. 2017-
May 16, 2017
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017- 2
May 16, 2017
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: May 11, 2017
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates — May 16, 2017 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) 4035 Apache Drive Animal Structure Setback variance — Joe Molde has requested a variance
to reduce the required animal structure setback of 150 feet for a small chicken coop. It appears that
no location on the subject site could meet the 150 foot setback. The Planning Commission reviewed
at their April 18 meeting and recommended approval. The City Council held a public hearing at the
May 2 meeting and directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval. The resolution will be
presented at the May 16 meeting.
B) Johnson Accessory Dwelling Unit CUP — Robin Johnson has requested a CUP to allow an
accessory dwelling unit in an accessory structure at 1325 Tamarack Drive. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the May 9 meeting and recommended approval. The request is
scheduled to be presented at the June 6 meeting.
C) MultiFamily Residential Setback Amendment — Brian Fragodt has requested that the City
consider amending its zoning code to permit a reduced rear setback within the MR zoning district for
property adjacent to commonly -owned open space. The property owner owns a twinhome at 3500
Pinto Drive, which backs up on a large Outlot owned by the HOA. Other districts in the City permit
such a reduction and the owner seeks to expand their existing deck. The request is tentatively
scheduled for a public hearing at the June 13 meeting.
D) Reserve Phase II PUD Concept — Toll Brother has requested review of a concept plan for a
potential Planned Unit Development for the future phases of the Reserve project. The applicant
proposes to plat the same amount of lots, but to narrow many of the lots in order sell 4 acres of land
to the City for a City park. The matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing at the June 13
Planning Commission meeting.
E) Dykhoff Septic Variance — 3396 Elm Creek Drive — Michael Dykhoff has requested a variance to
reduce the required 75 foot setback for a replacement septic system from wetlands. The only area on
the property which could accommodate a mound system is approximately 55 feet from a wetland.
Staff is reviewing the information and will present to the Council when complete, potentially at the
June 6 or June 20 meeting.
F) Elim Care Concept Plan — north of Highway 12, east of CR 29 — Elim Care has requested
review of a concept plan for potential development of a 134-unit skilled nursing/assisted
living/independent living facility in 2018. The applicant originally requested a Comp Plan
amendment and rezoning to reguide the subject property to High Density Residential (HDR)
and to rezone to the R4 zoning district. The City's DRAFT 2040 Comp Plan identifies the
property as HDR, to allow them to move ahead quicker than the Comp Plan Review. The
applicant has since withdrawn the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning, but
continues to request Concept Plan Review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing
and provided comments at their April 11 meeting and the City Council reviewed on May 2.
The project will now be closed.
G) Three Rivers Park/We Can Ride CUP — 4301 County Road 24 — Three Rivers Park District
and We Can Ride have requested a conditional use permit amendment to allow We Can
Ride, a nonprofit that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special
Planning Department Update
Page 1 of 2 May 16, 2017
City Council Meeting
needs, to occupy the stable previously utilized by Three Rivers Park mounted patrol. The
Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at their March 20 meeting and
recommended approval of the request. The Council adopted resolutions for approval on
April 18. Staff will work with the applicant on meeting the conditions of approval.
H) Woodridge Church, AutoMotorPlex, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery — The City
Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with
the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects.
I) Woods of Medina — This preliminary plat has been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat
application
J) Capital Knoll, Hamel Haven subdivisions — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff
is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded
Other Projects
A) Land Use Application activity — Staff has received 3 land use applications in the last week and it
sounds likely an additional 3 will be submitted shortly. This is a comparatively high level of
activity.
B) Comprehensive Plan — The draft Comprehensive Plan has been routed to affected jurisdictions for
their review. Staff intends to send a follow-up after a few months in attempt to receive comments
sooner in the 6-month period.
C) Conservation Design-PUD Regulations — The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the
May 9 meeting and recommended approval of an amendment to the ordinance. Staff intends to
present the ordinance to the City Council at the May 16 meeting.
D) Nursing Home/Memory Care/Assisted Living regulations; R-4 Zoning District Regulations — The
Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on regulations for the high density residential zoning
districts at the May 9 meeting. The Commission also discussed regulations related to nursing
homes, memory cares, and assisted living facilities. The Commission recommended approval of an
amendment to the R-4 and R-5 district which is intended to be presented to the Council on June 6.
E) Predatory Offender Ordinance — Planning staff drafted the ordinance based on a template provided
by the Police Department. The ordinance is scheduled to be presented to the City Council at the
May 16 worksession.
F) Economic Development-MnDEED meeting — Staff met with a representative from DEED and an
existing business in the City related to incentives available for a potential construction of a larger
facility in the City.
G) Advanced Septic Inspector — staff interviewed a potential Advanced Inspector to provide review and
inspection of specialized septic systems in the City. Metrowest does not provide these services, so
the City will need to contract separately. Staff intends to present a contract at the May 16 meeting.
Planning Department Update
Page 2 of 2 May 16, 2017
City Council Meeting
MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT
600 Clydesdale Trail
Medina, MN 55340.9790
p: 763.473-9209
f: 763.473-8858
non -emergency: 763-525-6210
MEMORANDUM Emergency 9.1_1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Mayor Robert Mitchell and City Council
Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety,
Through City Administrator Scott Johnson
May 12, 2017
Department Updates
Drug Take Back Success
During the 2017 Medina Cleanup Day, Medina residents brought in just over 100 lbs. of prescription
drugs to be destroyed. This was our first drug take back event; we are working with all Hennepin
County police departments to reduce the amount of drugs people keep in their homes. Reducing the
amount of drugs in homes reduces the chance for accidental overdoses, people becoming addicted to
prescription drugs, and home burglaries. This was a good start.
Fire Training
The Hamel Fire Department held the first of two classes on "First Due" fire training at the Public
Works/Police Facility in Medina on Monday, May 8th. This class covered the planning of the first
five minutes of a fire call, setting up incident command structure, and planning out the event. They
had firefighters from Plymouth, Long Lake and Hamel. I also attended the training. The second half
of the class will be Monday, May 15th
Patrol by Sergeant Nelson
Patrol Activities
For the dates of April 27 to May 9, 2017, our officers issued 29 citations and 63 warnings for various
traffic infractions. There were a total of four traffic accidents, two DWIs, eight medicals and five
alarms.
On May 8, 2017, Officer Converse took a theft from motor vehicle report. Victim reported that
someone entered his vehicle and stole $2 worth of change.
On May 6, 2017, Officer Jessen was dispatched to a medical in which dispatch stated someone was
having trouble breathing. Upon arrival, the husband was preforming CRP on his wife with a child
present. CPR was continued by Officer Jessen and the Loretto Fire Department until North
Memorial arrived. The female was worked on by paramedics for some time but all rescue attempts
failed.
On May 5, 2017, Officer Gregory was dispatched to take a domestic report over the phone. Officer
Gregory spoke with the victim who indicated that she had been assaulted by her boyfriend in Medina
and that she now was back in Mankato at school. Officer Gregory worked with Mankato Police and
photographs were obtained of apparent injuries. The suspect has not been located and the case
continues.
On May 4, 2017, Officer McKinley took a burglary report at the Wealshire of Medina. Construction
workers reported that numerous construction tools had been stolen. Case was forwarded to
Investigations.
On May 2, 2017, Officer McGill took a criminal sexual conduct report. Reporting party indicated
their juvenile daughter had been picked up in the middle of the night and taken to Brooklyn Center
where she had sexual relations with an unknown person. Juvenile is 15 and the suspect was found to
be 19. Case was forwarded to Brooklyn Center Police for further investigation as the crime
happened there.
On May 2, 2017, Officer Converse responded to an assist of the Hennepin County Sheriff s
Depal tment in Greenfield with a juvenile male that was out of control. The caller stated that the
juvenile was under the influence of narcotics. Upon arrival, it was discovered that the juvenile had
set fire to the residence and was hiding in the attic inside the garage. Officer Converse was able to
talk the juvenile down from the attic and he was taken to the hospital for a mental health evaluation.
The fire was small and was able to be extinguished by officers.
Investigations by Investigator Kevin Boecker
Conducted surveillance on an identity theft suspect with help from the West Metro Drug Task Force
members. We were attempting to locate where the suspect had been staying after appearing for
court.
Completed the background investigation for the intern applicant. Report will be forwarded to Chief
Belland.
Investigated an alleged financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult case reported by a family
member. The suspect was reported to be another family member. After obtaining bank records I
found no evidence of any suspicious transactions. The reporting party will be notified of my
findings and the case will be closed.
Investigated a reported criminal sexual conduct involving a 15 year old victim. During the course of
investigation, I was able to identify the suspect and found that the crime had occurred in another
jurisdiction. The case will be forwarded on to the other department for further investigation and
charging.
Identified the suspect in a damage to property where someone had gone off-roading on private
property resulting in substantial damage to the turf. Currently working with the property owner to
decide whether to charge the suspect or obtain money for the damages and avoid charges.
Currently assigned a burglary report from a large construction site in Medina where the building and
a construction trailer were broken into and a large amount of tools were stolen. We are working
with the owner of the project to improve their security.
Continued investigation of an online fraud where person had believed they were purchasing a
motorcycle. Victim wired $8600 and never received the motorcycle. Sales ad on Cycle Trader is
believed to have been fraudulent. Investigation is ongoing.
There are currently 10 open cases assigned to investigations.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: May 11, 2017
MEETING: May 16, 2017
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
STREETS
• The roads in the City have held up relatively well through the winter, I really expected
the roads to be in worse shape due to the moisture last fall.
• The Deer Hill Road project is moving along. The road base passed the roll test and the
contractor will begin pouring some of the curb and preparing for asphalt. This will be an
ongoing project for several years to come. Staff will have to decide how we want to
handle the final lift of blacktop. The developer will not be at 80% buildout for some time
in my opinion.
• I am still gathering some quotes on repairing the intersection near Wells Fargo on
Clydesdale Trail. The concrete is in disrepair and is in need of replacement. This is a
concrete failure and the concrete product clearly did not live out its full life expectancy.
WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER
• PW continues to inspect manholes and sewer lines throughout the city looking for UI in
the system. We have located at least three Manholes that have been hit or were installed
improperly in the Wild Meadows area. We may be looking for several months to get a
handle on exactly what is going on this area.
• PW has been doing some sump inspections in the Wild Meadows North area. We have
not turned up any illegal connections as of today, but we will keep looking until we find a
solution to our problem.
• Well #8 is now pumping to the Lennar irrigation pond. The well has been running to the
city system for most of the winter. PW did this to make sure everything was working well
during the warranty period.
PARKS/TRAILS
• Asphalt will be placed at the new parking lot at the Paul Fortin Field soon. PW rebuilt the
portion of driveway between the community center and the new parking lot last week so
it can all be paved.
• The parks have been fertilized, cleaned up, and now they are being sprayed for weeds.
• The irrigation and the Fieldhouse are all up and running at the Legion Park.
ORDER CHECKS MAY 3, 2017 - MAY 16, 2017
045832 BHARDWAJ, JYOTSNA $225.00
045833 BRASS DIANA $47.00
045834 GREAT START MONTESSORI SCHOOL $250.00
045835 MEDINA MOBIL, INC $262.15
045836 RODBERG,JILL $500.00
045837 DANINE SUPER $250.00
045838 CAREFREE SERVICES INC $4,455.00
045839 US HOME CORP $49.38
045840 MN VORTEX SOFTBALL CLUB $800.00
045841 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC $203.94
045842 BAILEY NURSERIES, INC $5,601.00
045843 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS $195.00
045844 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE $1,515.98
045845 BIFFS INC $644.92
045846 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN $29,129.03
045847 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS $581.53
045848 CENTERPOINT ENERGY $734.87
045849 CENTURYLINK $223.00
045850 DINIUS FENCE LLC $12,125.00
045851 DESIGNING NATURE, INC $290.00
045852 DESLAURIERS & SONS INC $1,775.00
045853 DITTER INC $747.00
045854 EARL F ANDERSEN INC $726.00
045855 ECM PUBLISHERS INC $150.40
045856 ESS BROS. & SONS, INC. $595.00
045857 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. $128.72
045858 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC $99.24
045859 FIRST STUDENT LOC 1399 $145.00
045860 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL $249.75
045861 GRAINGER $44.90
045862 HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES I $500.00
045863 HAMEL LUMBER INC $802.86
045864 HAMEL LIONS CLUB $525.00
045865 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH $955.20
045866 HENN COUNTY SHERIFF $125.13
045867 HENN CTY RESIDENT/REAL ESTATE $51.50
045868 HIGHWAY 55 RENTAL $149.00
045869 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY $329.85
045870 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC $1,645.35
045871 LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MGMT INC $96.50
045872 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN $1,228.76
045873 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL $9,840.60
045874 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL $25,399.93
045875 METRO WEST INSPECTION $8,289.80
045876 MN DEPT OF COMMERCE $845.39
045877 MN DEPT OF LABOR/INDUSTRY $2,439.66
045878 MN DEPT OF LABOR/INDUSTRY $100.00
045879 MN SAFETY COUNCIL INC $630.00
045880 MOTLEY AUTO SERVICE LLC $434.00
045881 NAPA-GENUINE PARTS CO $31.99
045882 NAPA OF CORCORAN INC $25.57
045883 NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR $250.00
045884 NORTH MEMORIAL $30.00
045885 NORTHWEST ASSOC CONSULTANTS $440.00
045886 OFFICE DEPOT $237.62
045887 CITY OF ORONO $573.72
045888 PITNEY BOWES $196.32
045889 POCKET PRESS INC $98.40
045890 PONTEM SOFTWARE BY RIA $247.50
045891 JAMIE R WIOME $10,083.34
045892 STREICHER'S $268.89
045893 SURPLUS SERVICES $290.00
045894 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI $2,568.78
045895 TIMESAVER OFFSITE $173.00
045896 ULINE $68.16
045897 MN DVS $21.75
045898 MN DVS $11.00
045899 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE $251.00
045900 ZIEGLER INC $323.67
Total Checks $133,323.05
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS MAY 3, 2017 — MAY 16, 2017
004135E PR PERA $14,261.40
004136E PR FED/FICA $16,757.10
004137E PR MN DEFERRED COMP $2,470.00
004138E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA $3,358.46
004139E SELECT ACCOUNT $751.45
004140E MEDINA, CITY OF $21.00
004141E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC $4,753.00
004142E CULLIGAN-METRO $32.75
004143E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC $424.57
004144E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC $635.32
004145E PREMIUM WATERS INC $27.09
004146E SELECT ACCOUNT $1,760.29
004147E VERIZON WIRELESS $1,241.31
004148E FRONTIER $56.13
004149E CITY OF PLYMOUTH $905.53
004150E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE $2,784.31
004151E PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE BY PHONE $1,000.00
004152E XCEL ENERGY $711.58
Total Electronic Checks $51,951.29
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT MAY 3, 2017
507881 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L $1,332.97
507882 ANDERSON, JOHN G $230.87
507883 BARNHART, ERIN A. $1,997.95
507884 BELLAND, EDGAR J $2,615.17
507885 BOECKER,KEVIN D. $2,162.81
507886 CONVERSE, KEITH A $2,251.05
507887 COUSINEAU, LORIE K. $230.87
507888 DINGMANN, IVAN W $1,554.35
507889 ENDE, JOSEPH $1,715.97
507890 FINKE, DUSTIN D. $2,178.55
507891 GALLUP, JODI M $1,752.05
507892 GLEASON, JOHN M. $1,779.60
507893 GREGORY, THOMAS $1,844.43
507894 HALL, DAVID M. $2,020.74
507895 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S $2,001.80
507896 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. $2,237.15
507897 KLAERS, ANNE M $1,154.57
507898 LANE, LINDA $1,492.96
507899 LEUER, GREGORY J. $2,057.12
507900 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M $230.87
507901 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. $1,470.19
507902 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D $1,959.91
507903 MITCHELL, ROBERT G. $327.07
507904 NELSON, JASON $2,096.22
507905 PEDERSON,JEFF $221.92
507906 PETERSON, DEBRA A $1,684.69
507907 REINKING, DEREK M $1,767.53
507908 SCHARF, ANDREW $594.48
507909 SCHERER, STEVEN T. $2,289.29
507910 SWALCHICK, CRAIG M $1,275.69
507911 VIEAU, CECILIA M. $1,138.39
Total Payroll Direct Deposit $47,667.23