The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About08.05.2015 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, August 5, 2015 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 July 21, 2015 Special Council Meeting B. Minutes of the July 21, 2015 Regular Council Meeting V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution Authorizing Amendment to Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County B. Resolution Amending 2015 Appointments and Designations to Various City Services, Authorities, Commissions, and Agencies C. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Police Officer John Vinck D. Authorize Staff to Recruit Police Officer Replacement Position E. Approve Job Description and Reclassification of City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator to Pay Grade 5-6 as of January 1, 2016 F. Approve 2016 Hamel Fire Budget G. Resolution Approving Proposed Transfers and Assignment of Fund Reserves H. Ordinance Amending Section 625 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Wine Licenses I. Approve Street Striping Services Agreement with Twin City Striping, Inc. J. Approve Display Contract Agreement with RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. for Medina Celebration Day K. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Fields of Medina Park Development L. Ordinance Regarding Site Plan Review Processes; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code M. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Site Plan Review Ordinance by Title and Summary VI. COMMENTS A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda B. Park Commission C. Planning Commission VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Stonegate CD-PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat B. Town Line Road North Improvement Project 1. Resolution Approving Plans According to Feasibility Report and Ordering Town Line Road North Improvement Project — Public Hearing 2. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Town Line Road Overlay Project —Public Hearing C. Ordinance Related to Solar Equipment; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code 1. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Ordinance by Title and Summary VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS XI. ADJOURN Posted 7/31/2015 Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Medina City Council FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator DATE OF REPORT: July 30, 2015 DATE OF MEETING: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report V. CONSENT A. Resolution Authorizing Amendment to Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County — Each year, Hennepin County receives money (SCORE funds) from the State of Minnesota that is dedicated to help the residential recycling programs. Hennepin County passes all the money they receive on to the individual cities within Hennepin County based on the number of residential curbside recycling households within each city. This year, the legislature has allocated additional SCORE funds to be dedicated to organics recycling. Staff recommends approval of the amended residential recycling grant agreement with Hennepin County to be able to continue collecting SCORE funds to help off -set the costs of our recycling programs. See attached letter, resolution and agreement. B. Resolution Amending 2015 Appointments and Designations to Various City Services, Authorities, Commissions, and Agencies — City Attorney Ron Batty's memo explains that two elected or appointed officials must serve on the Hamel Fire Department Fire Relief Association Board of Trustees. Staff recommends updating the resolution of 2015 appointments to show Kathleen Martin as a second board member instead of an alternate. Jeff Pederson was previously listed as a board member and would continue to serve on the board. See attached memo and resolution. C. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Police Officer John Vinck — Officer John Vinck has accepted a position with the City of Minneapolis and has formally submitted his resignation notice. Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting his resignation. All are invited to a farewell reception for Officer Vinck on Thursday, August 6th from 3:30 — 4:30 p.m. at 600 Clydesdale Trail. See attached memo, resolution, resignation letter and reception invite. D. Authorize Staff to Recruit Police Officer Replacement Position — Staff recommends authorization to post and recruit a Police Officer position to replace Officer Vinck. A tentative timeline is included in the attached "Instructions to the Applicant" document. See attached memo and job recruitment packet. E. Approve Job Description and Reclassification of City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator to Pay Grade 5-6 as of January 1, 2016 — The City Council reviewed this change at the July 21st budget work session and recommended moving forward. Staff recommends approval of the job description and reclassification of City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator to Pay Grad 5-6 effective January 1, 2016. See attached memo. F. Approve 2016 Hamel Fire Budget — Staff was directed at the July 21, 2015, City Council Work Session to bring forward the proposed 2016 Hamel Fire Budget for approval. Staff recommends approval. See attached budget. G. Resolution Approving Proposed Transfers and Assignment of Fund Reserves — Staff recommends approval of the resolution transferring and assigning fund reserves. See attached memo and resolution. H. Ordinance Amending Section 625 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Wine Licenses — Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment to clarify that the municipality allows holders of wine licenses, who also hold 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, to sell intoxicating malt liquor without an additional license. This amendment will allow restaurants to serve wine and beer without having to get a full on -sale liquor license. See attached memo and ordinance. I. Approve Street Striping Services Agreement with Twin City Striping, Inc. — Staff is recommending extending the 2013-2014 Striping Services Agreement with Twin City Striping for an additional two years which will cover 2015 and 2016. The contractor has agreed to extend the agreement for an additional two years at the same compensation rate. Staff recommends approval of the street striping services agreement with Twin City Striping, Inc. See attached agreement. J. Approve Display Contract Agreement with RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. for Medina Celebration Day — Staff recommends approval of the Display Contract Agreement with RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. for Medina Celebration Day. The City has been happy with their services in the past and they have agreed to keep the cost at $4,000. See attached letter and agreement. K. Approve Change Order No. 1 for The Park at Fields of Medina — Staff recommends approval of change order no. 1 for the Park at Fields of Medina. The items include the addition of a basketball goal that was originally going to be done separately by the City, but the Contractor had a goal available to reduce shipping time. The remainder of the items includes adjustments in actual quantities, with one deduction as well as increases in quantities. The largest increase in quantity was the import of granular material for the tennis court in order to get it to the proper subgrade elevation See attached letter and change order. L. Ordinance Regarding Site Plan Review Processes; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code — The City Council reviewed this ordinance at the July 21 st meeting. Staff has made the recommended changes and recommends approval of the ordinance See attached ordinance. 2 M. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Site Plan Review Ordinance by Title and Summary — Staff recommends approval of the resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance regarding site plan review processes by title and summary. See attached resolution. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Stonegate Planned Unit Development General Plan and Preliminary Plat — Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. (PRDC) has made an application for a Conservation Design Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) General Plan & Preliminary Plat. The applicant is proposing a 42 lot CD-PUD on approximately 170 acres on a property located east of Homestead Trail and west of Deerhill Road and Morningside Road. A CD-PUD is a type of PUD permitted by the City where an alternative development plan (including increased density) to traditional zoning is employed in order to encourage preservation of ecological resources, wildlife corridors, scenic views, and rural character. The City reviewed the Concept Plan related to this CD-PUD in February. Potential Motion / Council Action Requested Possible Motion #1: If the City Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation, the following motion would be in order, which may be revised.• Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial of the request based on the Planning Commission's findings of fact [as may be modified by the city council.] Possible Motion #2: If the council finds that the application meets the relevant objectives of the CD-PUD District and Comprehensive Plan and should be approved, the following motion would be in order. This motion would not require the applicant to update the plans prior to the City Council granting preliminary approval, but the approval would still be subject to all of the terms and conditions. Move to direct staff to prepare an ordinance rezoning the property to CD- PUD based on findings that the proposed development meets the objectives of the CD-PUD ordinance and a resolution granting preliminary plat approval, subject to the terms and conditions noted in the staff report [as those may be modified or amended by the city council.] Possible Motion #3: If the council finds the application should be approved, but only if certain changes are shown on a revised plan prior to granting preliminary approval, the following motion may be in order. As noted above, staff recommends that conditions/plans be updated and 3, 6, and 7 be addressed prior to any approvals. Move to direct staff to prepare an ordinance rezoning the property to CD- PUD based on findings that the proposed development meets the objectives of the CD-PUD ordinance and a resolution granting preliminary plat 3 approval but only if the applicant submits a revised plat and plans making the following revisions: [specify required revisions] or, if a revised plat and plans are not submitted, a resolution of denial based on the Planning Commission's findings of fact [as may be modified by the city council.] B. Town Line Road North Improvement Project — The City accepted the Feasibility Report on July 21, 2015. Proper notice was given for two hearings to be held on August 5, 2015; an improvement hearing and an assessment hearing. The hearings were scheduled in order to give the public an opportunity to comment on the project. See attached memo, feasibility report and resolutions. Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt resolution approving plans according to feasibility report and ordering Town Line Road North improvement project Recommended Motion # 2: Adopt resolution adopting assessment roll for Town Line Road Overlay Project C. Ordinance Related to Solar Equipment; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code — Staff has prepared a draft ordinance allowing ground -mounted solar equipment on residential property to help guide the discussion to determine Council's interest in adopting such an ordinance. The ordinance was adapted from the ordinance adopted back in February. The attached staff report highlights a number of things in the ordinance for discussion. The Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance at their July 14th meeting and unanimously recommended approval. See attached report, ordinance and resolution. Recommended Motion #1: Adopt ordinance related to solar equipment; amending chapter 8 of the city code Recommended Motion #2: Adopt resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by title and summary X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 003256E-003270E for $43,221.76, order check numbers 43122-43186 for $561,420.88, and payroll EFT 506557-506582 for $46,237.16. INFORMATION PACKET • Planning Department Update • Police Department Update • Public Works Department Update • Claims List 4 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 21, 2015 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on July 21, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. at the Medina City Ha11, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN. I. Call to Order Members present: Mitchell, Anderson, Cousineau, Martin, Pederson Members absent: Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, Public Safety Director Ed Belland, and City Planner Dusty Finke II. 2016 Budget/Capital Improvement Plan Finance Director Erin Barnhart provided information on the updated proposed 2016 Budget and Capital Improvement Plan. The proposed budget includes a General Fund Levy increase of 5.2% and a Total Levy increase of 7.0%. The proposed tax rate would increase from 23.577% to 23.586%. Staff updated the City Council on the following changes: adding approximately 8 hours per week to the Part-time Finance position under the 2016 Budget, reclassifying the Assistant to City Administrator position to a City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator position, and reviewing the organizational structure of the Planning Department. The proposed 2016 Budget includes 2.5% cost of living increase for wages, an 11.5% increase for insurance costs, and will add the road improvement bonds for the Tower Drive project. Staff also provided information on the proposed Capital Improvement Plan for 2016. The equipment fund is currently funded until 2017. Staff is proposing that the City move forward with the purchase of an equipment bond to help pay for future equipment needs in 2017. City Planner Dusty Finke provided an update on the discussions with Mediacom. He reviewed the updated counter proposal and the City Council directed staff to move forward with providing the counter proposal to Mediacom. III. Hamel Fire Budget 2016 Finance Director Erin Barnhart provided an update on the proposed 2016 Hamel Fire Budget and Capital Expenditures. She discussed concerns with the portion of the proposed budget based on fundraising and donations, $31,000 in 2016. She further explained how this was not a good strategy for budgeting because the City would be responsible for any future budget overruns. Finally, she explained that Hamel Fire Department has a capital fund, but the fund has no revenue source at this time due to fundraising and donations going towards the operating budget and that when their capital fund is depleted all equipment financing would become the responsibility of the City. Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1 July 21, 2015 Staff provided responses to the City Council on the following topics; Hamel Fire has met their contract terms, Hamel FD should look into expanding fundraising and donation opportunities, and continue to look for grant opportunities. Staff was directed to put the 2016 Hamel Fire Department Budget on the August 5, 2015, Consent Agenda for approval. Adj ournment Mitchell closed the meeting at 6.•52 p.m. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Scott Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2 July 21, 2015 DRAFT 2 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 21, 2015 4 5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on July 21, 2015 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 Tom Kellogg, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Public 16 Safety Director Ed Belland. 17 18 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 19 20 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 21 The agenda was approved as presented. 22 23 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.) 24 25 A. Approval of the July 7, 2015 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 26 It was noted on page two, line 31, it should state, "...contract and percentage of interest 27 increase..." On page two, line 30, it should state, "...different reasons for each outage 28 but believed we think that perhaps the outages..." On page five, line 23, it should state, 29 "Mitchell educated the City Council about serial meetings under the Minnesota Open 30 Meeting Law and encouraged Council members to send questions or comments to the 31 City Administrator." On page five, line 11, it should state, "She stated that the morc the 32 any Council is involved involvement in hearsay and issue raising innuendo the more 33 challenging that is to undermines the confidence that of those departments..." On page 34 five, line 24, it should state, "...Johnsons..." On page five, line 27, it should state, "...Er 35 nor..." On page five, line 30, it should state, "...consolidations..." On page six, line 24, it 36 should state, "...six weeks months..." 37 38 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the July 7, 2015 regular City 39 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 40 41 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:06 p.m.) 42 43 A. Award the Bid for the Well No. 9 Project to Mark J. Traut Wells, Inc. 44 B. Approve 2016 Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed Management Commission 45 Budget 46 C. Approve Tree Trimming and Brush Grinding Services Agreement with 47 Burnham Tree Experts 48 D. Approve Subwatershed Retrofit Cooperative Agreement for the Ardmore 49 Lake Subwatershed with Hennepin County and Hakanson Anderson 50 E. Call for a Special City Council Meeting on Tuesday, September 1st at 6:00 51 p.m. for the 2016 Budget Open House Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 July 21, 2015 1 F. Ordinance No. 583 Amending the Medina Clydesdale Marketplace Planned 2 Unit Development District for Goddard School 3 G. Resolution No. 2015-57 Authorizing Publication of the Ordinance Amending 4 the Medina Clydesdale Marketplace Planned Unit Development District for 5 Goddard School by Title and Summary 6 H. Resolution No. 2015-58 Approving Site Plan Review for Construction of 7 Goddard School at 345 Clydesdale Trail 8 I. Approve Development Agreement by and Between the City of Medina and P 9 J Norman, LLC 10 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 11 passed unanimously. 12 13 VI. COMMENTS (7:08 p.m.) 14 15 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 16 There were none. 17 18 B. Park Commission 19 Scherer reported that the Park Commission met the previous week to discuss Stonegate 20 properties and recommended obtaining a trail easement that would run on the north side 21 near Deerhill to ultimately connect the old horse trail to Baker Park Reserve. He 22 provided additional details on the easement to the north and noted that a 23 recommendation was not finalized regarding park dedication and whether a percentage 24 of the open space should credit towards the park dedication. He stated that the 25 Commission also reviewed the CIP specific to the parks. 26 27 C. Planning Commission 28 Planning Commissioner White reported that the Planning Commission met the previous 29 week and considered four items. She provided an update on the Stonegate public 30 hearing and reported that the Commission recommended denial of the plan as they did 31 not feel the plan sufficiently met the goals of the conservation design ordinance. She 32 stated that the Commission also held a public hearing to consider an amendment to City 33 Code regarding ground mounted solar equipment and recommended approval of the 34 ordinance amendment, which would allow ground mounted solar equipment on 35 properties of five acres or more in the rural residential zoning district. She stated that 36 the Commission held another public hearing to consider an amendment to City Code 37 that would change the upland wetland buffer setbacks for decks from 15 feet to five feet 38 and advised that the Commission recommended denial of that request. She stated that 39 the Commission held one additional public hearing to consider the site plan review 40 process and reported that the Commission recommended approval of an amendment, 41 which would allow administrative review for certain items and reviewed the proposed list. 42 43 VII. PRESENTATIONS 44 45 A. Resolution No. 2015-59 Recognizing John Gleason for Five Years of 46 Service to the City of Medina (7:13 p.m.) 47 Mitchell stated that the Council is thrilled to have and retain the amazing staff members 48 that they have and recognized John Gleason. He read aloud the resolution thanking 49 John Gleason for his five years of service to the City through the Public Works 50 Department. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 July 21, 2015 1 Scherer stated that Gleason does site inspections for the City and does a great job for 2 the City. He thanked him for his service and stated that he is proud to have him as a 3 member of the Public Works Department. 4 5 Moved by Martin, seconded by Cousineau, to adopt Resolution No. 2015-59 recognizing 6 John Gleason for five years of service to the City of Medina. Motion passed 7 unanimously. 8 9 B. Mike Kramer, Xcel Energy Update on Power Outages (7:17 p.m.) 10 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, introduced Mike Kramer who explained the power outages 11 and Xcel's plan to fix that issue. 12 13 Mike Kramer, Xcel Energy, distributed maps to the Council and stated that there have 14 been four outages that have affected customers north of Hamel Road beginning June 15 7th. He provided detail on how the system is setup in that area. He provided additional 16 information on the events, noting that the June 7th event was caused by a tree falling as 17 was the event on July 13th. He stated that additional fuses have been added in that area 18 following the July 13th event. He stated that the June 21st and June 28th events occurred 19 on Sundays and were caused by failing lightning arresters. He stated that infrared 20 testing was completed and the failing arresters will be replaced. He noted that there was 21 a decent record of service before the events in June and July occurred, noting that there 22 was only one outage in 2014, which was due to a customer making contact with an 23 overhead line. He stated that the outages in 2015 are not typical and this has been a 24 high priority. 25 26 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, stated that this is a reliability issue and is not an issue of 27 capacity. He stated that the Hollydale issue in Plymouth is an issue of capacity but 28 noted that this issue is not the same. 29 30 Anderson asked if Medina is well covered in terms of capacity. 31 32 Kramer stated that he does not have a concern for the feeders that supply the City. He 33 stated that he works with planning engineers that plan for capacity. He encouraged 34 anyone that wants to add load to the Xcel system to contact Xcel so that they can 35 anticipate that addition. 36 37 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, stated that Medina will be indirectly affected as the City has 38 infrastructure that can help to solve the Hollydale issue. 39 40 Scherer questioned the policy on cutting trees, noting that he has called Xcel in the past 41 to report trees that are leaning over the lines and he has been brushed off. 42 43 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, stated that this area was trimmed in 2014 and advised that 44 there is a five-year trimming cycle. He stated that Scherer can call him directly and he 45 will get the correct person to resolve the situation. 46 47 Mitchell referenced the second set of outages, which were due to failing equipment and 48 asked if the equipment was old and planned for replacement or was failing for another 49 reason. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 July 21, 2015 1 Kramer stated that he does now have data on which equipment needs to be replaced. 2 He stated that once the equipment is removed he will be able to inspect the equipment 3 to determine what the problem was that caused the failure. 4 5 Mitchell asked Kramer to email City Administrator Johnson with the results. 6 7 Pederson stated that the problem has been constant for about five years, with outages 8 occurring in the summer months. 9 10 Kramer stated that he reviewed the outage history in 2014 and there was only one 11 outage caused by customer contact. He stated that in 2013 he noticed three outages 12 that were caused by storm damage. 13 14 Pederson stated that he has a business on the corner of Highway 101 and 55 and there 15 are several outages at that intersection. 16 17 Kramer stated that he can only use the history recorded. 18 19 Cousineau received confirmation that the lightning arrester failure affected more than 20 just the area in Medina. She suggested that the history be reviewed further back 21 through 1999, as the outages have been significant through that time period. 22 23 Kramer stated that he always looks back two years to review the most current data. 24 25 Fred Webber, 100 Clydesdale Trail, thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak. 26 He stated that he made comments at the July 7th Council meeting regarding Xcel 27 Energy's frequent power outages and believed there to have been three to four events 28 each year for the past ten years. He recognized the demand there is for service on Xcel 29 Energy workers throughout the state. He stated that it appears that the growth and 30 demand in this area appears to have surprised Xcel, which should not have. He stated 31 that there have been a number of power outages over the past ten years, which have 32 affected customers and businesses alike. He stated that he has spoken to Medina 33 Ridge Condominium, Medina Highlands, the Holiday Station Store, Target, Jimmy's 34 Pizza, Medina Entertainment Center, Highway 55 Rental, and various other businesses 35 in Uptown Hamel which have all had issues and losses due to the power failures. He 36 stated that he received a letter on July 9th from Xcel and read excerpts aloud. He stated 37 that while it seems that there are good reasons for each outage, when reviewing this on 38 a ten-year basis that is not reasonable. He stated that the homes and businesses have 39 had to throw out food. He noted that his facility is a senior building and therefore when 40 the power is out and the elevators are not working the fire department has to be called to 41 assist those that need to get to a lower floor and that can cause additional delays in a 42 medical situation. 43 44 Kim Murrin, 290 Cherry Hill Trail, stated that she has concerns with the issue of safety 45 as well as the expenses that businesses incur when the power outages occur and food 46 needs to be thrown out. She asked why the outages occur in this area more frequent 47 than other areas of Medina. She stated that there were additional outages that occurred 48 over the weekend, which she noted may have been weather related. She asked and 49 received confirmation that additional fuses have been installed and the arresters have or 50 are being replaced. She received confirmation that the issue is not related to capacity 51 right now. She referenced the comment that the Medina infrastructure may be used to Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4 July 21, 2015 1 offset the problems occurring at Hollydale and questioned if that would take away 2 Medina resources. 3 4 Fernando Vivanco, 4508 Bluebell Trail S, referenced the comment from Xcel that the 5 City is well covered and the issue is not capacity related. He questioned if that comment 6 is in conflict with the statement made by Xcel one year ago that additional capacity 7 would be needed in the area to support continued development. He stated that the 8 recent power outages are a concern among many residents that the development is 9 outpacing the infrastructure available and asked the Council to consider that when 10 making decisions regarding additional potential development. 11 12 Paul Raskob, Vice President of Medina Entertainment Center, thanked the Council and 13 Xcel for this meeting. He stated that after several outages he called Xcel and was finally 14 able to reach a person. He stated that the suggestion made by Xcel staff was to 15 purchase a generator. He stated that with the size of his building he is not able to afford 16 a generator that would be sufficient and thought the comment made by Xcel staff was 17 rude. He stated that the Medina Entertainment Center is a three-phase building, which 18 means that when there is an outage his full building does not always lose power and 19 therefore his equipment is burning up. He noted that during a recent outage there was 20 almost a fire on the roof because of equipment damage. He stated that there are lost 21 sales and spoiled food that occur during outages. He stated that Sunday is family night 22 and he has to turn away business when the power is out because it is not safe. He 23 noted that his staffs wages are mostly tip generated and cannot support their families 24 when the outages cause a loss in business. He hoped that the issue could be resolved 25 because it is impossible to run a business without power. 26 27 Todd Leadens, 210 Clydesdale Trail, owner of Jimmy's Pizza, echoed the comments of 28 Raskob in regard to phased power. He further explained how an outage in one phase of 29 power affects the other two phases, which fight each other without the missing link. He 30 noted that if all the phases went out that would be safer. He stated that he is a 31 restaurant owner and a licensed electrician. He stated that the outages are causing 32 losses to the business and are not safe. 33 34 Kramer stated that it is the customer's responsibility to protect itself from single phasing. 35 He stated that Xcel cannot protect against single phasing although he recognized that 36 there are additional challenges in a three -phased system. He stated that right now the 37 issues in Medina are not capacity issues but agreed that there are capacity needs for 38 this region in the future. He stated that the planning engineer has been working for the 39 past five years to address that concern. He stated that while that is a concern for the 40 future, he was asked to address the recent power outages, which were not an issue of 41 capacity. He stated that he began in this position with Xcel eight years ago and cannot 42 speak for issues in the past. He recognized the pain and concern of the residents and 43 stated that his responsibility is the equipment and the system, noting that the planning 44 engineers will continue to work on the capacity issues for the future. 45 46 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, stated that Xcel held their hearing at the Medina Ballroom 47 in the past and will meet again this fall to discuss the capacity issues. He noted that 48 there will be notification mailed before the meetings this fall to discuss the capacity 49 issues. He thanked Mitchell and the Council for their time. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5 July 21, 2015 1 Kramer stated that from personal experience with the planning staff they are very 2 serious about the capacity of the system, although it may not appear that way to 3 residents. He hoped that residents realize that he cares about reliability, noting that he 4 is always trying to solve and determine the cause of outages. 5 6 Martin asked if it would help if there was an open line of communication between Xcel 7 and the residents or businesses, as it appears there is a disconnect between the 8 outages reported by residents and the records that Xcel has. 9 10 Kramer stated that he would be open to providing his business line, providing that he 11 would not receive constant calls. He stated that he is the only technical person dealing 12 with 120,000 customers. 13 14 Anderson questioned if email would be a better method of communication. 15 16 Scott Johnson, Xcel Energy, noted that email would be better as it could be done on a 17 24-hour basis. He stated that the residents see the outage but they do not see the 18 things that occur behind the scenes, noting that safety is the number one concern. 19 20 Martin stated that perhaps Webber can continue as the spokesperson for the groups he 21 listed. 22 23 Webber confirmed that he would ask the businesses and residents he listed to funnel 24 requests through him that he could forward to Kramer. 25 26 Mitchell appreciated the comments made by residents and businesses as well as Xcel. 27 He asked Xcel to report to the City after outages so that information can be 28 communicated with residents and businesses. He asked that residents communicate 29 about outages in writing so that an appropriate record can be made. 30 31 C. Senator Osmek Legislative Update (7:59 p.m.) 32 Senator Osmek stated that he is the ranking member of the Energy and Environment 33 Committee and noted that he would like Xcel to meet in his office in September to 34 discuss the capacity issue. He provided background information on himself and his 35 career in politics. He provided an update on the recent special session activity and was 36 disappointed that there was no tax relief provided to Minnesota residents. He stated that 37 an additional session will soon be held to discuss bonding issues. He stated that a small 38 cities fund was created in the special session and noted that additional funds have been 39 designated to MSA as well. He stated that he was proud to have sponsored Colton's 40 Bill, which was passed during the last session. He stated in the interim there is a Digital 41 Equipment Repair Act that is being worked on and provided additional information on 42 that. He stated that he would also be working to determine if a quiet zone can be gained 43 in the Highway 55/County Road 116 area. 44 45 Anderson thanked Osmek for his assistance with the Highway 116 and 55 intersection. 46 47 Osmek stated that he is always surprised at the help that a phone call from himself can 48 provide. 49 50 Mitchell thanked Osmek for his report and assistance. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6 July 21, 2015 1 Martin asked what Osmek's thoughts are regarding the construction along 494 and 394. 2 3 Osmek stated that he has received phone calls regarding the traffic issues on 494 and 4 394. He noted that while it is inconvenient, once it is done the roads will be great. He 5 recognized the stress that completing all the work at once causes. He was hopeful that 6 the traffic will get better. He encouraged the Council to reach out with any concerns. 7 8 VIII. NEW BUSINESS 9 10 A. Town Line Road North Improvement Project (8:10 p.m.) 11 Johnson stated that Scherer will walk through the Feasibility Report on the proposed 12 project. 13 14 Scherer stated that this project would be an overlay for Town Line Road, noting that it 15 had been projected to occur the following year but had been moved up in order to work 16 together with the City of Independence. He noted that additional costs savings were 17 obtained through combining the projects. He highlighted aspects of the Feasibility 18 Report and asked the Council to accept the Feasibility Report and call for the public 19 hearing on the project and levying special assessments for the same. 20 21 Johnson stated that there is also a Joint Powers Agreement and noted that City Attorney 22 Batty has reviewed the agreement and suggested some minor tweaks. 23 24 Anderson questioned the number of property owners. 25 26 Scherer explained that there are two property owners and provided further explanation 27 on how the assessment was determined. 28 29 Finke stated that Independence is paying half of the cost while Medina will pay half and 30 explained how the assessment was determined. 31 32 Mitchell questioned the magnitude of difference in the assessment rates. 33 34 Finke stated that it could be four to five times higher if using another assessment 35 calculation. He explained that Independence has a development on their side while 36 Medina only has two properties. 37 38 Batty stated that the 20 percent assessment rate applies when selling debt and the City 39 is not using bonds for this project so that rule does not apply. 40 41 Martin stated that she believed that this is fair and equitable. 42 43 Anderson also commended staff for using this method. 44 45 1. Resolution No. 2015-60 Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling for 46 Public Hearings on Town Line Road Improvement Project and 47 Levying Special Assessments for the Same 48 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 2015-60 receiving the 49 Feasibility Report and calling for the public hearings on the Town Line Road North 50 improvement project and levying special assessment for the same. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7 July 21, 2015 1 Further discussion: Mitchell noted that this is an unusual circumstance with a small 2 number of properties on the Medina side of the road while there are a number of 3 properties on the Independence side. 4 5 Motion passed unanimously. 6 7 2. Joint Powers Agreement Between the City of Independence and the 8 City of Medina Regarding Town Line Road Repair Project 9 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to enter into the Joint Powers Agreement with 10 the City of Independence for the Town Line Road North Improvement Project subject to 11 the modifications suggested by Batty and Scherer. Motion passed unanimously. 12 13 B. Ordinance Regarding Site Plan Review Processes; Amending Chapter 8 of 14 the City Code (8:20 p.m.) 15 Finke stated that Commissioner White summarized this item well in her update. He 16 noted that this arose from the discussion during the business forums in October 2014 17 and explained the current process of approval noting that these reviews have very little, 18 if any discretion. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended making 19 various processes administrative. He noted that there was more discussion regarding 20 parking lot expansions, specifically whether there would be more parking than desired by 21 the City. He stated that there are no parking maximums under City Code today. 22 23 Martin noted that there are hardcover limitations that would limit how much pavement 24 could be placed on a piece of property, which would cover that item. 25 26 Finke agreed that public comment would not have an impact on that item. He reviewed 27 the items recommended to become an administrative review by the Planning 28 Commission. He stated that Martin had suggested some changes to the recommended 29 approval. 30 31 Martin referenced an item that states City staff and suggested that instead be tied to the 32 planning department, such as City Planner or City Planning Director. 33 34 Finke stated that "Zoning Administrator or their designee" could be used to be in line with 35 the language in the Code. 36 37 Martin referenced the proposed change of use and suggested adding the language "that 38 is not a conditional use". 39 40 Pederson stated that he is happy to see this action moving forward as it was brought 41 forward through the business forums and suggested that an item be added to the City 42 newsletter advertising this to the businesses to show that the City listened to their 43 comments. He referenced the size of 1,000 square feet for an accessory structure and 44 believed that to be too small. 45 46 Mitchell agreed that seems small. 47 48 Finke provided additional information regarding the language as proposed for accessory 49 structures and building additions. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8 July 21, 2015 1 Anderson stated that perhaps it would make more sense to be consistent between the 2 building addition and accessory structure, allowing the larger of the two (the percentage 3 and maximum square footage). 4 5 Mitchell stated that perhaps it would make more sense to err on the conservative side as 6 the ordinance could be amended in the future if needed. 7 8 Martin suggested adding a statement that a matter could come before the Council, 9 and/or Planning Commission, at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. 10 11 Finke noted that he could look at adding that statement with some rational and bring 12 back the Ordinance once amended with the changes suggested. 13 14 Johnson agreed that the matter could be tabled and the item could come back to the 15 Council under the Old Business portion of the agenda in the future. 16 17 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Martin, to table the Ordinance regarding Site Plan 18 review processes, amending Chapter 8 of the City Code. Motion passed 19 unanimously. 20 21 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT 22 23 A. Audio -Visual Upgrades to Council Chambers (8:32 p.m.) 24 Johnson stated that staff met with Tierney Brothers and the technology consultant to 25 discuss possible upgrades. He provided an update on the proposed improvements that 26 make the most sense and are the most cost efficient. He stated that staff would support 27 option one with a cost of $10,913.92, which is about $4,000 less than option two. 28 29 Pederson asked for additional information on the possible integration of 1pads for 30 Council use at the dais. 31 32 Johnson stated that personal !pads or laptops can by synced to follow the presentations. 33 He stated that the large screen would be the only screen. He stated that the ultimate 34 plan would be for the Council to have individual monitors to follow along with the 35 presentations. 36 37 Martin stated that she would prefer to bring her own 1pad to follow along with. 38 39 Johnson stated that if approved the upgrades could begin in the near future. 40 41 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve option one for the audio-visual 42 upgrades to the Council Chambers. Motion passed unanimously. 43 44 Martin stated that if she brings her own laptop for the meeting would the information on 45 her laptop then be subject to the Data Practices Act, noting that she has private client 46 information on her device. 47 48 Johnson stated that he did share that concern and would review the issue with Batty. 49 He stated that the best option may be to purchase tablets for the Council to use solely in 50 the chambers. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 9 July 21, 2015 1 Martin stated that individual monitors could also be used. 2 3 Johnson noted that the price for a tablet has been reduced and that may be the most 4 cost efficient method. 5 6 X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (8:37 p.m.) 7 There were none. 8 9 Xl. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (8:37 p.m.) 10 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the bills, EFT 003233E-003255E 11 for $70,198.56, order check numbers 43068-43121 for $439,013.31, and payroll EFT 12 506531-506556 for $47,682.24. Motion passed unanimously. 13 14 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (Continued) (8:37 p.m.) 15 Johnson noted that Night to Unite will be held on Tuesday, August 4th which is the night 16 the regular Council meeting would be held therefore the Council meeting has been 17 schedules for Wednesday, August 5t" 18 19 XII. CLOSED SESSION: Attorney -Client Privileged Discussion on Ongoing 20 Litigation Matter Specifically Stonegate Farm, Inc. V. City of Medina, Pursuant to 21 Minnesota Statute Section 13d.05, Subdivision 3(b) 22 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting to closed session at 23 8:39 p.m. to discuss litigation matters, specifically the case of Stonegate PRDC versus 24 the City of Medina, the case in Hennepin County and the case in Federal District Court, 25 pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 13d.05, Subdivision 3(b). Motion passed 26 unanimously. 27 28 The meeting returned to open session at 9:55 p.m. 29 30 XIII. ADJOURN 31 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adjourn the meeting at 9:57 p.m. 32 Motion passed unanimously. 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Bob Mitchell, Mayor 42 Attest: 43 44 45 Scott Johnson, City Administrator Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 10 July 21, 2015 Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy 701 Fourth Avenue South, Suite 700 612-348-3777 REDUCE.REUSE.RECYCLE Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1842 612-348-8532 & 612-348-6510 Faxes 612-348-6500 Facility INFO Line www.hennepin.us/recycling July 17, 2015 Ms. Jodi Gallup CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Road 24 Hamel, MN 55340 Ms. Gallup: This year the County has $3.7m in SCORE funds available to award to cities for their recycling and organics programs. The Residential Recycling Funding Policy sets the terms and conditions for awarding those funds. On June 16, 2015 the County Board adopted a resolution to amend the Residential Recycling Funding Policy. The following changes were approved: • Extend the contract period from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2016 • Incorporate state requirements to expend additional SCORE funds on organics recycling The legislature dedicated additional funds to SCORE last year. As a result, the County has $813,764 more in SCORE funds in 2015 and will have approximately $600,000 more in 2016. Per state statute, 50 percent of the additional funds must be spent on organics. Enclosed are two originals of the Amendment to Agreement A120120 between Hennepin County and the CITY OF MEDINA. I have enclosed a copy of the revised Residential Recycling Funding Policy as Attachment A. Please have both originals signed by an authorized official. Mail the signed originals to me along with a resolution that confirms the City's approval of the amendment and confirms the signatory's delegation of authority. A sample resolution is enclosed as an example. When I receive the signed originals and the authorizing resolution, I will forward them to county administration and the County Board for final signatures. One of the originals will be mailed to you. Recycling funds will be distributed as they have in the past. I will send out an application for organics funds in August. The application will ask cities to report the number of households that are receiving organics service as of September 1, 2015. The application will also request a description ofhow funds will be used. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me by email at ben.knudson@hennepin.us or by phone at 612-596-1176. Sincerely, Ben Knudson Enclosures — 3 An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.552, counties shall ensure that residents have an opportunity to recycle; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires that each city implement and maintain a recycling program; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board adopted a resolution to amend the Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy to incorporate requirements to expend additional SCORE funds on organics recycling, and extend the contract period of the Residential Recycling Funding Policy from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, in order to receive grant funds, the City must sign the agreement; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to receive these grant funds each year. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota, that the City Council accepts the agreement as proposed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the Mayor, City Administrator or his designee to execute such Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with the County. Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -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: Resolution No. 2015- August 5, 2015 And the following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Resolution No. 2015- 2 August 5, 2015 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT A120120 This Agreement is between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, A-2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 ("COUNTY"), on behalf of the Hennepin County Environment and Energy Department, 701 Fourth Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1600 ("DEPARTMENT") and the CITY OF MEDINA, 2052 County Road 24, Hamel, Minnesota 55340 ("CITY"). WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY entered into a four-year Residential Recycling Grant Agreement, Contract No. A120120 ("Agreement"), for a residential recycling grant commencing on January 1, 2012; and WHEREAS, the County Board, by Resolution No. 15-0216 adopted on June 16, 2015, amended the Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy to incorporate requirements to expend additional SCORE funds on organics recycling, extended the period from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2016, and authorized grant funding for municipal recycling programs consistent with said policy; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to extend the term and incorporate other changes; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that Agreement A120120 is amended as follows: 1. Paragraph a. of Section 1, TERM AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT, shall be amended to read as follows: This Agreement shall commence upon execution and terminate on December 31, 2016. 2. Section 2, SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED, shall be amended to read as follows: The CITY shall operate its recycling program in accordance with the requirements described in the County's Residential Recycling Funding Policy ("Policy"), attached as Attachment A and incorporated by this reference, and fulfill the responsibilities of the Policy. 3. Section 3, METHOD OF PAYMENT, shall be amended to read as follows: The COUNTY will distribute SCORE funds as described in the Policy. The CITY shall follow the requirements for use of funds described in the Policy. Except as amended, the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. COUNTY BOARD AUTHORIZATION Reviewed by the County Attorney's COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Office STATE OF MINNESOTA Assistant County Attorney Date: By: Chair of Its County Board ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of County Board Date: By: David Hough, County Administrator Date: By: Assistant County Administrator, Public Works Recommended for Approval Date: By: Director, Environment and Energy Department Date: MUNICIPALITY CITY warrants that the person who executed this Agreement is authorized to do so on behalf of CITY as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances.* Printed Name: Signed: Title: Date: *CONTRACTOR shall submit applicable documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances) that confirms the signatory's delegation of authority. This documentation shall be submitted at the time CONTRACTOR returns the Agreement to the COUNTY. Documentation is not required for a sole proprietorship. Attachment A Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy January 1, 2012 —December 31, 2016 Public Works Environment and Energy Department Adopted November 29, 2011, Revised June 16, 2015 I. Policy Description The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners determined that curbside collection of recyclables from Hennepin County residents is an effective strategy to reduce reliance on landfills, prevent pollution, reduce the toxicity of waste, conserve natural resources and energy, improve public health, support the economy, and reduce greenhouse gases. Therefore, the county adopted the goals established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) in its Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan and developed a Residential Recycling Funding Policy to help reach a 75% recycling rate by 2030. The county will distribute all Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment (SCORE) funds received from the state to cities for curbside collection of residential recyclables, including organics. If cities form a joints powers organization responsible for managing a comprehensive recycling and waste education system for the residents of those cities, the county will distribute a recycling grant to that organization. Cities are expected to fulfill the conditions of the policy. Length of Residential Recycling Funding Policy Hennepin County is committed to implement this policy and continue distributing all SCORE funds received from the state for the purpose of funding curbside residential recycling programs from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2016. The county may revise this policy if it determines changes are needed to assure compliance with state law and MPCA goals established for metropolitan counties. In the event that SCORE funds are eliminated from the state budget or significantly reduced, the county will consult with cities to develop a subsequent recommendation for the county board that will continue this policy and fund curbside recycling programs. Fund Distribution The county will distribute to the cities one hundred percent (100%) of SCORE funds that the county receives from the state. SCORE funds are based on revenue collected by the State of Minnesota from the solid waste management (SWM) tax on garbage services. SCORE funds are subject to change based on actual SWM revenue and the funds allocated by the State Legislature. Funds distributed to cities for the current calendar year will be based on SCORE funds received by the county in the state's corresponding fiscal year. In 2014 the State Legislature allocated additional funds to SCORE in 2015 and 2016. Beginning in fiscal year 2015 and continuing thereafter, of any money distributed that exceeds the amount the county received in fiscal year 2014, 50 percent must be expended on organics recycling. 1 II. Recycling Allocation of Funds The following formula will be utilized to determine each city's recycling SCORE grant each year. # of households with curbside recycling in city Total # of households with curbside recycling in county X Total SCORE funds Recycling grant amount available for available to the city recycling Eligible households are defined as single family through eight-plex residential buildings or other residential buildings where each housing unit sets out refuse and recycling containers for curbside collection. The cities will determine the number of eligible households by counting the number of households with curbside recycling service on January 1 of each funding year. The number will be reported in the application for funding. The total SCORE grant available for recycling will equal the 2014 base year amount plus 50 percent of additional SCORE funds. If the total SCORE funds are less than the 2014 base year, 100 percent of those funds will be available for recycling. The grant can be used for recycling program expenses including capital and operating costs. Expenses associated with residential collection of organics are eligible recycling program expenses. However, yard waste expenses are ineligible. If organics and yard waste are commingled, the organics expenses must be tracked separately. Responsibilities of Cites A. Grant Agreement Each city seeking funding under the terms of the Residential Recycling Funding Policy must enter into a Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with the county for a term concurrent with the expiration of this policy, December 31, 2016. The grant agreement must be accompanied by a resolution authorizing the city to enter into such an agreement. B. Application for Funding Each city must complete an annual application by February 15 to receive funding for that year. The application consists of the Re-TRAC web -based report and a planning document submitted to the county describing the programs or activities the applicant will implement to increase recycling and make progress toward recycling goals. C. Minimum Program Performance Requirements 2 1. Collection of Recyclables. Cities that contract for curbside recycling services will require a breakout of the following expenses when renewing or soliciting bids for new recycling services: a) containers — if provided by the hauler b) collection service c) processing cost per ton d) revenue sharing 2. Materials to be Collected. At a minimum, the following materials must be collected curbside: a) Newspaper and inserts; b) Cardboard boxes; c) Glass food and beverage containers; d) Metal food and beverage cans; e) All plastic containers and lids, #1 — Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET, PETE), #2 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), #3 — Vinyl Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC), #4 — Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) and #5 — Polypropylene (PP) plastic bottles, except those that previously contained hazardous materials or motor oil; fJ Magazines and catalogs; g) Cereal, cracker, pasta, cake mix, shoe, gift, and electronics boxes; h) Boxes from toothpaste, medications and other toiletries; i) Aseptic and gable -topped containers; and j) Mail, office and school papers. The county may add materials to this list and require cities to begin collection within one year of receiving notification from the county. Cities will notify the county if materials not found on this list will be collected. 3. Collection Methods. Cities must use one of the following systems to collect materials at the curb: a) single sort system - all materials combined in one container; or b) dual sort system - glass, metal and plastic together with paper separate If one of these two systems is not in place, the city must submit a plan with its application for converting to a single or dual sort system by December 31, 2016. If the municipality is unable to meet this deadline, an alternative implementation schedule must be negotiated with the county. 4. Education and Outreach. a) County Responsibilities 3 1) Coordinate meetings of the communications committee, which will be composed of county, cities, and other stakeholders. 2) Produce education material templates and print the template materials for cities. Materials will also be available online to download. 3) Provide a minimum of eight promotional resources that will include a newsletter article, a web story, social media posts, and printed promotional materials for municipalities on a variety of waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and proper disposal messages. 4) Develop an annual priority message campaign. The campaign will be one main message to promote throughout the year; for example "recycle magazines." The message and the materials will be developed with the communications committee. The county will provide templates and be responsible for primary distribution of the campaign through direct mail, advertising, or public relations. The cities will be required to support the campaign through their communication channels. b) City Requirements 1) Use county terminology when describing recycling guidelines (i.e. description of materials accepted and not accepted, preparation guidelines, etc.). 2) Use images provided by the county or the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board, if using images of recyclables. 3) Use the county's terminology, preparation guidelines and images on the city's website. 4) Mail a recycling guide once a year to residents using a template developed by the communications committee and produced and printed by the county at the county's expense. If a municipality does not want to use the template produced by the county, the municipality may develop its own guide at the municipality's expense, with prior approval by the county. If the city relies on its hauler to provide the recycling guide, this guide would also require approval by the county. 5) Complete two additional education activities from a menu of options developed by the communications committee to support the priority message campaign. Any print material that communicates residential recycling guidelines that were not provided by the county template will require county approval. This does not apply to waste reduction and reuse, articles on recycling that do not include guidelines, and social media posts. The county will respond within five business days to any communication piece submitted. 4 5. Use of Funds. a) The city must use all grant funds for waste reduction and recycling capital and operating expenses in the year granted. Cities will not be reimbursed any funds in excess of actual expenses. b) The city may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees or any other method for that portion of the costs of its recycling program funded by county grant funds. c) The city must establish a separate accounting mechanism, such as a project number, activity number, or fund that will separate recycling revenues and expenditures from other municipal activities, including solid waste and yard waste activities. d) Recycling and waste reduction activities, revenues, and expenditures are subject to audit. e) Cites that do not contract for curbside recycling services will receive grant funds provided that at least ninety percent (90%) of the grant funds are credited back to residents and the city meets all minimum program requirements. The additional ten percent (10%) may be used for administrative and promotional expenses. 6. Reporting Requirements. a) Each city must submit an annual recycling report to the county electronically using the Re-TRAC web -based reporting system by February 15 of each year. If a city is unable to access Re-TRAC, the county must be contacted by February 1 to make arrangements for alternative filing of the report. b) Each city must calculate its participation rate in the curbside recycling program during the month of October. The participation rate will be reported in Re-TRAC. The methodology for measuring participation must be provided to the county upon request. c) Each city must submit an annual planning document to the county describing the programs or activities the applicant will implement to increase recycling and make progress toward county goals. 7. Recycling Performance. On an annual basis, each city must demonstrate a reasonable effort to maintain and increase the average amount of recyclables collected from its residential recycling program to at least 725 pounds per household or a minimum recovery rate of 80%, by December 31, 2015. The goal remains the same for December 31, 2016. An alternative performance option for cities with organized waste collection is to validate at least a 35% recycling rate. To ensure the accuracy of data for these metrics, cities will be required, upon request, to provide documentation on the methodology used to calculate performance. To the extent practicable, the results should rely on actual data rather than estimates. Failure by a city to demonstrate measureable progress toward goals will result in the city being required to submit a recycling improvement plan within 90 days of being notified by the county. The recycling improvement plan must be negotiated with the county and specify the efforts that will be undertaken to yield the results necessary to achieve the goals. The plan shall focus on the following areas: type of container, sort method, materials collected, 5 frequency of collection, education and outreach, performance measurement, and incentives. Funding will be withheld until the city's recycling improvement plan is approved by the county. In cooperation with the county, the city may be required to participate in waste and recycling sorts to identify recovery levels of various recyclables in their communities. Based on the results of the study, the county and city will collaborate to increase the recovery of select recyclable materials being discarded in significant quantities. D. Partnership The partnership between the county and cities has been highly effective in educating and motivating behavior of residents resulting in significant amounts of waste being reduced and recycled. In order to continue this partnership and increase these efforts, program activities of cities must be coordinated with county and regional efforts. Cites are responsible for cooperating with the county in an effort to reach the county's goals for recycling and organics recovery. Quarterly recycling coordinator meetings are an opportunity to share resources and facilitate the coordination of efforts. Responsibilities of Hennepin County A. Application Form The county will provide an application form by December that each city will use to report on its recycling program and request grant funding for the next year. B. Payments The county will make grant payments to each city in two equal payments. One payment will be made after the county receives the application, which will consist of the Re-TRAC report and the planning document. A second payment will be made after the report has been approved, measurable progress toward the goals has been confirmed, and, if necessary, a recycling improvement plan has been approved by the county. If the city meets the county requirements, both payments will be made during the same calendar year. 6 III. Organics Recycling Allocation of Funds The following formula will be used to determine a city's organics grant each year. Number of households with curbside organics in city Total number of households with curbside organics in county Total SCORE funds Organics grant x available for = amount available to organics the city The total SCORE funds available for organics recycling will equal 50 percent of the additional SCORE revenue allocated by the State Legislature. If the total SCORE funding is less than the 2014 base year, no funds will be available for organics recycling. Application for Funds To apply for funds, a city must submit the number of eligible households that signed up for organics to the county by September 1 of each funding year. Use of Funds The grant funds may be used for organics program expenses, including the following: • Contract cost of service (to the city or its residents) • Discount to new customers • Carts • Compostable bags • Kitchen containers • Education and outreach Program administration is an ineligible expense. Yard waste expenses are ineligible expenses. If organics and yard waste are collected together, the organics expenses must be tracked separately. If the city passes funds through to a hauler, 100% of those funds must be credited to households' bills. In addition, the following requirements apply: • All grant funds must be used during the term of the agreement. Funds not spent must be returned to the county. • Funds must be expended on eligible activities per Minnesota State Statute 115A.557. • A city may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees or any other method for that portion of the costs of its organics program funded by county grant funds. • Cities must able to account for organics expenditures separately upon request by the county. Expenditures are subject to audit. 7 Education and Outreach The partnership between the county and cities has been highly effective in educating and motivating the behavior of residents, resulting in significant amounts of waste being reduced and recycled. In order to continue this partnership with organics recycling, the county encourages cities to coordinate program activities with county and regional efforts. The county will work with cities to provide assistance with the following: • Standard terminology and images • Organics recycling guide (yes -no list) • Promotional resources to increase participation Reporting A report on the city's organics program must be submitted electronically to the county by February 15 following each funding year. The report must include, but is not limited to, the following: Basic Program Information: • Hauler • Collection method • Where organics are delivered to and processed at • Is service opt -in or opt -out • Cost of service to residents and contract cost to the city • How the service is billed • Items included in service: curbside collection, cart, compostable bags, etc. Results • Tons • Number of households signed up • Average pounds per household per year • Participation (set -out rate on pickup day) • How funds were used 8 Agenda Item # 5B Kennedy Graven CHARTERED Ronald H. Batty 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9262 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax rbatty@kennedy-graven.com http://vvvvw.kennedy-graven.com MEMORANDUM To: Ed Belland, Chief of Police From: Ron Batty, city attorney Date: July 15, 2015 Re: Hamel Fire Deparlment Fire Relief Association Board Membership You asked a question about the appropriate board membership for the Hamel Fire Department Fire Relief Association Board of Trustees ("Board"). Minnesota Statutes, Section 424A.04 specifies the makeup of volunteer fire relief associations' boards of trustees. The membership of the Board is therefore guided by state law. The statute discusses two types of relief associations. The first is a relief association which is directly associated with a municipal fire department. The second is a relief association that is a subsidiary of an independent nonprofit firefighting corporation. The Hamel Fire Department Fire Relief Association falls into the latter category because the Hamel Fire Department is an all - volunteer, non-profit firefighting corporation. Under the statutory framework, the Board must consist of nine members. Of these, six members must be drawn from the "membership of the relief association," meaning those individuals served by the relief association. Additionally, the fire chief serving with the independent nonprofit firefighting corporation must be a member. Along with the seven individuals listed above, the Board must include two elected or appointed officials from the municipalities being served by the fire department. In the case of the Hamel Fire Department, the only municipality being served through a fire services contract is the city of Medina. Therefore, under state law, the Medina city council must annually designate two elected or appointed officials to serve one-year terms on the Board. These members must be notified of all official business of the Board and they have the right to attend all meetings of the Board. Under state law, these members have all rights and duties accorded to any other member of the Board, except that they are not eligible to serve as officers of the relief association. Please let me know if you would like any additional information. 464801v1 AMB ME230-1A Agenda Item # Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015- AMENDING 2015 APPOINTMENTS AND DESIGNATIONS TO VARIOUS CITY SERVICES, AUTHORITIES, COMMISSIONS, AND AGENCIES WHEREAS, the City contracts with various consultants and businesses to provide services to the City, and WHEREAS, the City is required to appoint City representatives to City commissions as well as area jurisdictions, agencies, authorities and commissions as indicated by governing documents, State statute, or City codes. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Medina hereby amends the 2015 appointments and designations listed on Exhibit A. Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator - 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. 2015- August 5, 2015 Exhibit A Council Office/Liaisons 2015 Appointment(s) Acting Mayor Jeff Pederson Public Safety Liaison Jeff Pederson Public Works Liaison Kathleen Martin Planning & Zoning Liaison John Anderson Parks Liaison Lorie Cousineau Administration Liaison Bob Mitchell City Consultants Auditing Services Abdo Eick and Meyers LLP Building Inspector Metro West Inspection City Assessor Southwest Assessing (Rolf Erickson) City Attorney Kennedy & Graven (Ron Batty) City Engineer WSB (Tom Kellogg) Financial Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Fire Marshal Loren Kohnen Metro West Inspection (alternate) IT Cipher Laboratories (Mike Brocco) Planning Consultant Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Prosecuting Attorney Tallen & Baertschi (Steve Tallen) City Staff City Treasurer Erin Barnhart Human Resource Officer Scott Johnson Jodi Gallup (alternate) Data Compliance Officials Scott Johnson Jodi Gallup (alternate) Ed Belland - Police Cec Vieau - Police Erin Barnhart - Finance Dusty Finke - Planning Steve Scherer - Public Works Responsible Authority for MN Government Data Practices Act Scott Johnson Zoning Administrator Dusty Finke Deb Peterson (alternate) City Committee, Agency, Commission Representatives Communities in Collaboration Council Ed Belland Elm Creek Watershed (2nd Wednesday @ 11:30 a.m., Maple Grove City Hall) Elizabeth Weir Madeleine Linck (alternate) Hamel VFD Relief Association (2nd Monday @ 8:00 p.m.) (need 2 elected officials as ex-officio members) Jeff Pederson Kathleen Martin Resolution No. 2015- August 5, 2015 1 Exhibit A Highway 55 Corridor Coalition Joint Powers Jeff Pederson Scott Johnson (1st alternate) Lake Independence TMDL through Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed Hakanson Anderson Scott Johnson (alternate) Lake Sarah TMDL through Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed Hakanson Anderson Scott Johnson (alternate) Elm Creek TMDL through Elm Creek Watershed Hakanson Anderson Elizabeth Weir (alternate) Minnehaha Creek Watershed Peter Rechelbacher Northwest Hennepin League of Municipalities (2nd Wednesday @ 6:30 p.m.) Bob Mitchell Kathleen Martin (alternate) I-94/Northwest Suburban (NWS) Chamber of Commerce Scott Johnson Jodi Gallup (alternate) Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed (third Thursday @ 4:00 p.m., Independence City Hall) Mike McLaughlin Pat Wulff(lst alternate) Scott Johnson (2nd alternate) Uptown Hamel Inc. (Business Assn.) (third Tuesday @ Noon, location changes) Jeff Pederson Scott Johnson (alternate) Weed and Tree Inspector Steve Scherer Cable Franchise Liaison Judy Mallett Designation of Official Depositories & Investment of Idle Funds Farmers State Bank of Hamel 21 st Century Bank of Loretto Citigroup/Smith Barney MBIA Voyageur Asset Management Inc./(4M) Fund RBC Dain Rauscher, Inc. Designation of Official City Legal Newspaper Crow River News Resolution No. 2015- August 5, 2015 2 MEDINA POLICE DEPA MEMORANDUM Agenda Item # 5C 600 _-.,.._., ... _.... Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763-473-9209 f: 763.473.8858 non-emergencys 763.525-62I0 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: July 31, 2015 RE: Officer John Vinck's Resignation On July 22, 2015, Officer John Vinck turned in his resignation letter. John is moving on to work for the Minneapolis Police Department. John has done a great job for the City and the police department for the last 10 years. The resolution accepting John's resignation, his resignation letter, and an invite to his farewell reception are attached. I would ask that the City Council accepts Officer John Vinck's resignation. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF POLICE OFFICER JOHN VINCK WHEREAS, John Vinck is currently employed a Police Officer by the city of Medina; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 2015, John Vinck submitted a letter of resignation from his position addressed to the Police Chief; and WHEREAS, John Vinck's resignation from his position shall become effective on August 7, 2015. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that John Vinck's letter of resignation is hereby accepted with gratitude for a job well done. Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator - 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. 2015- August 5, 2015 MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340.9790 P: 763.473.9209 f:763.4734858 non-emer¢encyr 763.525-6210 Emageacy 9-1-1 July 23, 2015 Medina Police Department Dear Ed BeHand, Please accept this letter as notification of my resignation from my role as part of the Medina Police Department. My last day with the agency will be August 7, 2015. You have been a great supervisor and great role model to me. I want to also thank you for the opportunity you gave to me 10 years ago. I have truly enjoyed working for the Medina Police Department as if it is my family and will miss all of our department members. I do not want to weigh down anyone else's workload and am pulling together all of the notes needed to make the transition smooth. I welcome anyone from the agency calling me with any questions after my departure at Yours res ectfully, 3:\ V 1- mck PLEAM JO UC SH OFF CH OOCiN � FAREWELL AMR R D WEAM OCR MED_ POOL=OCR MPARMENU 2 a) PM V IJ UO Ca) PM V IJ GOO C LUDESDALE T'RQ� L Cake and RetezhEneM Pfododad __1 A A NE( C�Q MEDINA POLICE DEP MEMORANDUM Agenda Item # 5D 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763-473-9209 f: 763.473.8858 non-emergencys 763.525-62I0 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: July 31, 2015 RE: Request to Fill Open Position With the resignation of Officer John Vinck, I am requesting City Council permission to post and conduct a hiring process to fill the open officer position. Attached to this memo is the job advertisement and instructions to the applicant which includes our tentative hiring timeline. Police Officer Position Job Advertisement The City of Medina is currently seeking qualified applicants to fill a full-time licensed Peace Officer Position. Applicants must be currently licensed or eligible to be licensed as a full-time peace officer in the State of Minnesota by August 1, 2015. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. The starting range of pay will be from $23.13 to $28.86 per hour, depending on qualifications. An application packet and job description can be downloaded from the City of Medina's website at http://medinamn us/job-announcements/, or can be picked up at City Hall, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN 55340. Application deadline is August 24, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. 8/15 TO PROSPECTIVE APPLICANTS FOR THE CITY OF MEDINA POLICE OFFICER POSITION Application materials required for this position include the following items: • Cover Letter o One -page, single-spaced. Include a statement or paragraph addressing why you would be the best candidate for this position. • Resume • Completed Application • Supplemental Application • Veteran's Preference Form The application will be disqualified if any of the above information is not submitted or is incomplete. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR POSITION • Associate's degree in law enforcement and completion of skills training. • Valid Minnesota POST license or eligible to be licensed on day of hire. • Valid Minnesota driver's license. • Must meet all state -mandated and employer -required certifications, medical/psychological, background checks, and other requirements. • Ability to maintain First Responder and CPR certification and attend other continuing education classes. The application will also be disqualified if the applicant does not meet the minimum qualifications for the position listed above. Finalists will be required to produce transcripts prior to appointment. Deadline for Application Packets: Must be received at City Hall no later than 4:30 p.m., Monday, August 24, 2015. Mail completed application to: (Faxed or Emailed Application Packets will NOT be accepted.) Jodi Gallup CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Questions regarding the materials or hiring process should be directed to: Jodi Gallup, Assistant to City Administrator at (763) 473-8850 or jodi.gallup@ci.medina.mn.us Projected Hiring/Appointment Timeline • August 24 — Application Deadline at 4:30 p.m. • August 25-28 — Review/Scoring of Applications • September 9 — Initial Interviews and Written Tests • September 15 — 1st Round of Interviews • September 18 — 2nd Round of Interviews (Background packets will be given to finalists) • September 21 — Chief s Interview • September 28 — Background Packets Due • October 9 — Preliminary/Contingent Offer/Acceptance of Recommended Appointee • Week of October 12 — Psychological and Medical • October 20 — City Council Appointment of Recommended Appointee • November 2 — Preferred Starting Date of Appointee Profile of the City of Medina The City of Medina has been an incorporated city since 1974 and has a population of about 6,000 people. The community continues to experience rural -residential, urban -residential, and commercial growth in what has historically been a fairly predominant rural setting. Most of Medina's commercial and higher -density residential growth is guided to progress along the Trunk Highway 55 Corridor. Medina consists of 26 square miles, with approximately 28% of the land cover consisting of water (wetlands, lakes, etc.). Twenty-four (24) full-time employees are employed by the City of Medina. The City Administrator is the chief administrative officer for the City. Four Department heads report to the Administrator, including the Public Works Director, Planning Director, Finance Director and Police Chief/Public Safety Director. The Police Department consists of the Director of Public Safety, one Sergeant, two Investigators, six Patrol Officers, one part-time Community Service Officer, one full-time Administrative Assistant and one part- time Administrative Assistant. We have seven active Reserve Officers who assist our officers on a daily basis. Profile of the Police Officer Position The Police Officer position performs non -supervisory, patrol and police work in support of law enforcement, crime detection/prevention and investigation, traffic control, emergency response, and public assistance activities. Responsible for minimal administrative functions; assists with some educational and safety programs in public schools; and provides law enforcement at community functions. Majority of time is spent responding to calls to enforce laws and patrolling to protect the property and serve the residents of the community. Summary of Benefits and Wages The City believes strongly in attracting and retaining quality employees. The starting wage for this position is competitive to other Cities ranked in our class size, at $23.13 to $28.86 per hour, DOQ, while the range ultimately extends to $34.55 per hour after four years of continuous service to the City of Medina. In addition, Medina offers one of the best benefit packages amongst cities within our class size. The two illustrations on the next page demonstrate the total monthly premium rates and the employee's share of each health insurance plan (via B1ueCross B1ueShield through the LOGIS pool) effective for 2015. The City also pays for 100% of the single and family dental policy (Delta Dental), and pays for the life insurance premium for a $50,000 policy. Retirement plan is contributed through MN PERA (Public Employee Retirement Association). As a public employee, 10.8% of your pay will be contributed to PERA Police and Fire; the City will contribute an additional 16.2% into your account. This position is part of a union with Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. (LOCAL #36). 2015 Health Insurance (total monthly premium rates) 2015 monthly Health Insurance rates will be as follows: Plan Class I (Employee only) Class 2 (Employee + spouse) Class 3 (Employee + child(ren) Class 4 (Employee + family) High Option — $30/100% $838.74 $1,760.24 $1,676.24 $2,179.24 $2500 Deductible — HRA Compatible $605.74 $1,270.24 $1,209.74 $1,572.24 $2600 Deductible— HSA Compatible $553.24 $1,160.74 $1,105.74 $1,436.74 The employee's monthly share of each plan is as follows: Plan Class I (Employee only) Class 2 (Employee + spouse) Class 3 (Employee + child(ren) Class 4 (Employee + family) High Option — $30/100% $0 $264.03 $251.44 $326.89 $2500 Deductible — HRA Compatible $0 $0 $0 $0 $2600 Deductible— HSA Compatible $0 $0 $0 $0 City of Medina Position Description POLICE OFFICER Position Title: Police Officer Department: Police Department Supervisor's Title: Police Sergeant Pay Grade: 5 (within Union Scale) FLSA Status: NON-EXEMPT Work Status: Full-time PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF POSITION Performs non -supervisory, patrol and police work in support of law enforcement, crime detection/prevention and investigation, traffic control, emergency response, and public assistance activities. Responsible for minimal administrative functions; assists with some educational and safety programs in public schools; and provides law enforcement at community functions. Majority of time is spent responding to calls to enforce laws and patrolling to protect the property and serve the residents of the community ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS ■ Keeps supervisory employees informed of all pertinent matters through daily activity reports and regular intra-departmental communications. ■ Provides oversight and training to Community Service Officer, newly -hired and part-time police officers. ■ Communicates internally with administrative staff, public works, fire employees, and City Attorney; and, externally with Hennepin County law enforcement, judicial and social services personnel, area police departments, state and federal law enforcement agencies, business people, City visitors, and residents. ■ Assesses daily reports and confers with Police Chief, Sergeant, Administrative Assistant, and other officers to determine activity in the community and potential problems. ■ Patrols community by car, bike, or on foot to provide a police presence, enforce traffic and other state and federal laws as well as City ordinances; writes tickets for violations as appropriate. ■ Locates and arrests suspects, taking prisoners to jail; prepares written reports of crimes, and assists in the prosecution of violators. ■ Checks businesses and residential areas for signs of vandalism or break-in. ■ Responds to calls for service; makes out initial reports; and investigates and performs follow-up work as needed. ■ Responds to emergency situations and identifies hazardous situations; notifies appropriate emergency, public works, or other personnel; and makes proper decisions for assisting sick or injured persons. ■ Conducts criminal and other investigations —with assistance from Hennepin County attorneys —by interviewing witnesses/complainants/victims, interviewing/interrogating suspects, collecting and preserving evidence, preparing written reports; informs Chief of status of investigations; attends court proceedings to serve as witness and present evidence and other information. ■ Conducts welfare checks and serves official documents such as warrants, ex parte orders, eviction, subpoenas, juvenile papers and makes death notifications. ■ Provides security and police assistance at community events including crowd and traffic control measures. ■ Assists other law enforcement agencies in their crime prevention and investigation efforts as needed and according to mutual aid agreements. ■ Prepares a variety of complete and accurate reports such as incident, arrest, and investigative reports, preliminary criminal charges, and initial complaint reports, court testimony and ensures adequate record keeping. ■ Identifies hazards to traffic and pedestrians and reports matters requiring attention to public works department. ■ Mediates and resolves disputes between individuals using an appropriate degree of tact and persuasion. ■ Answers residents' requests for information including directions, regulations, ordinances, and where to obtain additional information. ■ Responds to animal complaints; locates and transports animals to current impound facility. ■ Inspects and maintains vehicle and all personal and departmental equipment. ■ Attends mandatory and other classes for required continuing education to maintain POST licensure and meet department's training needs. City Council Approved: 02/15/2011 City of Medina Position Description POLICE OFFICER ■ Participates in department's public education efforts by providing information and advice to the residents and business people regarding law enforcement and public safety issues. ■ Engages in community -oriented policing: participates in informal community talks, formal meetings, and sponsored events; assists with a variety of departmental programs; and pursues a variety of networking opportunities. ■ Supervises part-time officers and serves as field training officer, when assigned, for new hires. OTHER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ■ Perform other related duties as delegated by Supervisor or apparent. ■ Provides good working habits and a willingness to cooperate with others and contribute in a positive way to a pleasant working climate. HIRING AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING KNOWLEDGE, SHILLS, AND ABILITIES: ■ Knowledge of local geography, City streets and addresses, business and residential areas. ■ Knowledge, skill, and ability to effectively use personal and departmental equipment. ■ Knowledge of relevant City ordinances and policies and departmental policies and procedures. ■ Knowledge of all departmental directives. ■ Knowledge of, and ability to understand/apply, state and federal laws, POST standards, City ordinances and policies, departmental policies, procedures and directives. ■ Knowledge of principles, practices, and procedures used in law enforcement, police science and administration, court proceedings, and public safety. ■ Knowledge of relevant radio/dispatch procedures and FCC radio communications requirements. ■ Knowledge of county jail procedures. ■ Knowledge of basic medical and judicial procedures, practices and terminology. ■ Skill in gathering appropriate information through interviewing victims, witnesses, and suspects; working with crime scenes; and contacting other law enforcement agencies. ■ Skill in operating a police vehicle in all kinds of weather conditions and situations. ■ Skill in handling and discharging firearms and ensuring their proper use. ■ Skill in using an appropriate degree of tact and persuasion during numerous and varied interpersonal communications. ■ Skill in standardized field sobriety testing. ■ Ability to attend mandatory classes and obtain required continuing education credits. ■ Ability to use senses of sight, hearing, and smell. ■ Ability to use several types of vision (far, near, depth, peripheral, color and night). ■ Ability to exert considerable physical effort when required during calls for service or emergency situations (e.g. subduing others, transporting victims, rescue actions, etc.) ■ Ability to stand, walk, and sit for long periods of time; ability to bend, crouch, stoop, stretch, or crawl as needed. ■ Ability to comprehend/apply federal, state, county, and city criminal, traffic, and other civil laws and procedures and keep current on changes. ■ Ability to work independently and interact with many diverse groups such as juveniles, minorities, intoxicated persons, people on drugs, mentally ill persons, and the elderly. ■ Ability to maintain certification as a First Responder. ■ Ability to analyze a variety of problems/situations, oftentimes stressful and during emergencies, and take decisive and effective action. ■ Ability to use computer, typewriter, tape recorder, and police management software. ■ Ability to prepare routine reports, forms, and correspondence with completeness and accuracy. ■ Ability to communicate effectively, orally and in writing, with supervisors and general public and maintain appropriate level of confidentiality. ■ Ability to transport victims/suspects/others to appropriate medical/crisis facilities. City Council Approved: 02/15/2011 City of Medina Position Description POLICE OFFICER ■ Ability to respond to medical emergencies and analyze situation to determine proper intervention including use of defibrillators. Machines, tools, and equipment used: Squad cars, MDC's, mobile and portable radios, radar, firearms and other weapons, cameras and audiovisual equipment, intoxilizer, portable breath tester, defibrillator and other medical equipment, investigative equipment, computer and office equipment, phone, and numerous other personal and departmental equipment. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ■ Associate's degree in law enforcement and completion of skills training. ■ Valid Minnesota POST license or eligible to be licensed on day of hire. ■ Valid Minnesota driver's license. ■ Must meet all state -mandated and employer -required certifications, medical/psychological, background checks, and other requirements. ■ Ability to maintain First Responder and CPR certification and attend other continuing education classes. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS ■ Experience working in a variety of assignments as a Police Officer. ■ Projects a work style characterized by confidence, energy and enthusiasm. ■ Good public speaker, capable or projecting a positive image. ■ Good listener, capable of empathizing with the concerns of department staff, other city employees and community residents. ■ Bachelor's degree in Law Enforcement or related field. WORKING CONDITIONS Work is performed both indoor at the Police Department and in the field. The exceptions include response to emergency, police or fire incidents and trips to meetings, training, and conferences. Generally, the position requires light lifting, usually less than 10 pounds, with up to 150 pounds on occasion, climbing stairs/ladders, and performing life-saving and rescue procedures. Some hazardous materials or chemicals are exposed to on this job, including toxic materials, blood borne pathogens and other infectious environments. Other hazardous conditions may include having to deal with unruly or dangerous individuals, confined or high work spaces, dangerous animals, loud noises, emergency driving, unsafe building sites and deadly force, traffic control and working in and near traffic, inclement weather, and natural or man-made disasters. City Council Approved: 02/15/2011 Agenda Item # 5E MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE OF REPORT: DATE OF MEETING: SUBJECT: Medina City Council Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator July 15, 2015 July 21, 2015 Personnel Change for 2016 - City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator General Background The City of Medina continues to budget conservatively and to spend taxpayer dollars as needed. This is attributable to the City Council's fiscal leadership and department heads working with staff members to keep expenses down as much as possible. The philosophy of the City of Medina has been to keep a small staff with diverse job responsibilities. Employees have taken on new substantial job responsibilities and have followed through on training opportunities to take on leadership roles in the organization. These efforts have allowed the City to retain a smaller staff. Jodi Gallup completed the 3-year clerk certification program and has continued to grow in this position. Attached is a proposed updated job description with the added job responsibilities that are handled by a City Clerk position; Maintains custody of minutes, resolutions, ordinances, agreements, policies, City Code and all official records and documents and prepare certified copies as requested, Signs all official documents and serves as custodian of the official seal, Serves as the Responsible Authority for Data Retention and responds to public data requests. Develops and maintains a comprehensive plan for utilization of records management principles in conjunction with current data privacy laws, including retention schedules, storage, historical documentation, and injuries, losses, and claims. Publishes all legal notices for the City Council as required by law or ordinance Coordinates notifying property owners of public hearings as per applicable State and Local Laws. I am recommending a reclassification of the position from Deputy Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator to City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator. The position, pending the outcome of a performance review for 2015 (must meet or exceed expectations), would receive the same percent wage increase as the other non -union staff in 2016. Mrs. Gallup is meeting or exceeding expectations of performance in all areas including technical knowledge of the position, exceptional ability to handle detail/organize projects, provides great leadership for the clerk and elections processes, excellent decision -making and has high organizational commitment. In my assessment, Mrs. Gallup has delivered extremely well on meeting the expectations of her duties and adding knowledge since the City invested in her 3-year clerk certification. Staff is also putting together a draft 10 year staffing plan that will be discussed at the August Work Session. I am recommending that the City Planner position be promoted to a Planning Director position. There would be no change in compensation because the position is already compensated at a Department Head level. Dusty Finke is also considering other possible changes for the Planning Department that he will discuss at the July 21s` Work Session. I encourage the Council to contact me prior to the meeting if you have any questions or additional comments on Mrs. Gallup's job performance Recommendation I recommend a salary reclassification to pay grade 5-6 with a step increase of 2.85% ($66,330 annually) and job description changes for City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator Jodi Gallup. All other benefits to be at the same rate as other non -union employees, in accordance with the City Personnel Policies. The salary reclassification is recommended to take place with the 2016 Budget on January 1, 2016. City of Medina Position Description CITY CLERK/ASSISTANT TO CITY ADMINISTRATOR Position Title: City Clerk/Assistant to City Pay Grade: Step 5-6, DOQ Administrator FLSA Status: NON-EXEMPT Department: Administration Work Status: Full-time Supervisor's Title: City Administrator PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF POSITION Serves as the City Clerk and performs intermediate skilled administrative support work for the City Administrator and the City Council in order to facilitate the operation of the government. Coordinates state and local elections, serves as Responsible Authority for data retention and requests, administers employee benefits, issues municipal licenses, responsible for records management, coordinates public relations efforts, acts as recycling coordinator and facilitates park and environmental planning. Work is performed under the general direction of the City Administrator. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF POSITION City Clerk ■ Administers oaths to all elected and appointed officials. ■ Maintains custody of minutes, resolutions, ordinances, agreements, policies, City Code and all official records and documents and prepare certified copies as requested. ■ Signs all official documents and serves as custodian of the official seal. ■ Notarizes documents for the public. ■ Serves as the Responsible Authority for Data Retention and responds to public data requests. Develops and maintains a comprehensive plan for utilization of records management principles in conjunction with current data privacy laws, including retention schedules, storage, historical documentation, and injuries, losses, and claims. ■ Publishes all legal notices for the City Council as required by law or ordinance. Coordinates notifying property owners of public hearings as per applicable State and Local Laws. ■ Coordinates state and local elections including preparing notices, arranging for printing of City ballots and materials, recruitment of judges, election training, staffing polling sites, candidate filing, campaign finance reporting, and administering absentee ballots. ■ Oversees the municipal licensing process, including the processing of applications and renewals, collection of fees and review of violations. Recommends Changes to licensing ordinances, as appropriate. Issues various municipal licenses and permits including but not limited to solicitor permits, special event permits, tobacco licenses, liquor licenses and private kennel licenses. ■ Monitors legislative issues and actions affecting elections, licensing, data practices, records management, and human resources and implements any necessary changes to city practices. ■ Attends meetings as needed and provides staff support including recording minutes. ■ Oversees and assembles City Council packets including agendas, minutes, memorandums and attachments. ■ Provides verbal, written, or electronic correspondence to consultants and colleagues. ■ Creates, updates, implements and audits procedures and policies for the administration department. ■ Reviews policies and city code on a regular basis for compliance and relevance and makes recommendations accordingly. Assistant to City Administrator ■ Coordinates various human resource functions such as administering employee benefits and required notices, implementing personnel policies, hiring processes, and reporting requirements. ■ Maintains personnel files, while being aware of the data privacy act. ■ Maintains the distribution of the City of Medina's Personnel Policies to all employees. ■ Serves on the Safety Committee and coordinates OSHA forms, first reports of injury, and workers compensation claims City Council Approved: 2015 City of Medina Position Description CITY CLERK/ASSISTANT TO CITY ADMINISTRATOR ■ Acts as secondary public relations representative before various outside entities in the absence of the City Administrator. ■ Attends Chamber of Commerce meetings and business events and acts as resource to local businesses. ■ Acts as Editor of the Medina Message newsletter and oversees the creation, printing, and distribution of the Medina Message and intra-office newsletters. ■ Promotes and notifies the public of upcoming events, meetings and other city news. ■ Creates and maintains the entire city website with current events, announcements, and current information for residents and businesses. ■ Plans and coordinates community events and intra-office functions. ■ Acts as the City's primary IT and communications contact and facilitates trouble -shooting or other system errors with City's contracted consultant. ■ Assists in coding bills and annual budget planning for various administration department accounts. ■ Ensures collection and retention of all letters of credit, certificates of insurance, and payment and performance bonds. ■ Maintains address database of all Medina residents and businesses. Parks & Environment ■ Acts as Recycling Coordinator for the City by attending quarterly Hennepin County meetings, compiling tonnage reports, applying for annual SCORE funds, and responding to public concerns. ■ Acts as City liaison for the Hamel Community Building; communicates with the Hamel Lions. Works at keeping the operating agreement and rental agreements current. Answers questions by the general public relating to the community building. ■ Prepares and coordinates materials for the Park Commission and maintains minutes and files. ■ Facilitates park and environmental improvements and planning efforts. ■ Coordinates the rental of various park facilities and athletic association contracts. Miscellaneous ■ Provides information and assistance to the public, City Council and City staff on issues regarding records management, data practices, elections, licensing, city code, human resources, communications, recycling, parks and other general city information. ■ Perform all other necessary duties as apparent or assigned. OTHER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ■ Facilitates work with city interns or part-time employees under guidance of supervisor. ■ Performs other duties as delegated by supervisor or apparent. ■ Provides good working habits and a willingness to cooperate with others and contribute in a positive way to a pleasant working climate. ■ Represents the City of Medina in a tactful manner that commands respect of the public, contractors, developers and others. HIRING AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING KNOWLEDGE, SHILLS, AND ABILITIES: ■ Knowledge of general municipal operations, City policies and procedures. ■ Knowledge of City Council processes. ■ Knowledge of, and skill in, the correct use of English in business writing. ■ Knowledge of guidelines/practices related to records retention. ■ Knowledge of data privacy and open meetings law requirements. ■ Knowledge of Minnesota election laws. ■ Knowledge of human resource compliance laws. ■ Skill to communicate with a variety of individuals and handle a variety of customer service situations. City Council Approved: 2015 City of Medina Position Description CITY CLERK/ASSISTANT TO CITY ADMINISTRATOR ■ Skills in the operation of computers and pertinent software packages. ■ Ability to handle detail and follow through in the completion of projects. ■ Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with elected officials, City employees, and the public. ■ Ability to work independently and plan, organize and prioritize work tasks. ■ Ability to prepare work results with completeness and accuracy. ■ Ability to handle interruptions and concentrate on the task at hand. ■ Ability to handle multiple ongoing tasks and complete work in a timely manner. ■ Ability to occasionally lift, move and/or carry files, deliveries, and storage boxes. ■ Ability to use various office equipment. Machines, tools, and equipment used: City or personal vehicles, computers, calculator, copier, fax, scanners, postage machine, multi -line phone system, election equipment, and various other office tools/equipment. Ability to operate general Microsoft applications and other municipal software programs. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS ■ Bachelors degree in Office Administration, Public Administration, Business Administration, Community Development, Public Relations or related field. ■ Three -years of increasingly responsible experience in a local government setting involving general administration, facilitating/managing projects, processing technical documents, and public relations. ■ Minnesota Municipal Clerks Institute training and certification or the ability to acquire within three years of hire. ■ Experience coordinating elections. ■ Valid Class D driver's license in the State of Minnesota DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS ■ Previous experience as a Municipal Clerk. ■ Previous experience in communications and graphic design. ■ Previous experience in human resource functions. WORKING CONDITIONS Most work is performed indoor at city hall. The exception is trips to meetings, training, conferences and site visits to other City property. Generally, the position requires light lifting, usually less than 10 pounds, with up to 50 pounds on occasion. Aside from cleansers for cleaning office workspace, no hazardous materials or chemicals are used on this job. City Council Approved: 2015 City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator - West Metro Cities of Comparable Size Municipality Population Region 1 Organization's Job Title Range Minimum Range Maximum Hrs/Week Union Reports To Minnetrista 6296 Metro Assistant City Administrator 71,718.40 89,648.00 40 No City Administrator Corcoran 6000 Metro City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator 56,804.80 69,284.80 40 No City Administrator Dayton 5072 Metro City Clerk 60,092.53 76,036.22 40 No City Administrator Orono 7980 Metro City Clerk 44,595.20 59,446.40 40 No City Administrator Rogers 11500 Metro Asst. City Administrator/Clerk 76,273.59 93,017.60 40 No City Administrator Shorewood 7618 Metro Deputy Executive City Clerk 77,743.00 77,743.00 40 No City Administrator °Victoria 6727 Metro City Clerk 53,705.60 67,662.40 40 No City Administrator Waconia 10183 Metro Assistant City Administrator 76,321.00 89,789.00 40 No City Administrator Average 64,656.77 77,828.43 Medina 6000 Metro City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator 53,872 73,424 40 No City Administrator uty uerK/Assistant Municipality t0 Lily mammistrator Population Region - All metr0 Lives or Lomparaole Nze Organization's Job Title Range Maximum Hrs/Week Union Reports To Range Minimum Minnetrista 6296 Metro Assistant City Administrator 71,718.40 89,648.00 40 No City Administrator Circle Pines 5279 Metro Assistant City Administrator for Public 71,614.40 94,224.00 40 No City Administrator Corcoran 6000 Metro City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator 56,804.80 69,284.80 40 No City Administrator Dayton 5072 Metro City Clerk 60,092.53 76,036.22 40 No City Administrator Lake Elmo 8326 Metro Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk 66,625.00 66,625.00 40 No City Administrator Little Canada 10036 Metro City Clerk 63,606.40 75,732.80 40 No City Administrator Orono 7980 Metro City Clerk 44,595.20 59,446.40 40 No City Administrator Rogers 11500 Metro Asst. City Administrator/Clerk 76,273.59 93,017.60 40 No City Administrator Shorewood 7618 Metro Deputy Executive City Clerk 77,743.00 77,743.00 40 No City Administrator Victoria 6727 Metro City Clerk 53,705.60 67,662.40 40 No City Administrator Waconia 10183 Metro Assistant City Administrator 76,321.00 89,789.00 40 No City Administrator Average 65,372.72 ° 78,109.93 (Medina I 6000 Metro (City Clerk/Assistant to City Administrator I 53,8721 73,4241 40 No City Administrator MEDINA POLICE DEPI Agenda Item#SF MEMORANDUM 6LV t 1r44aLL$ll ll$ll Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763-473-9209 f:763.473.8858 non -emergence 763.525-6210 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: Administrator Scott Johnson and Medina City Council FROM: Director of Public Safety Ed Belland DATE: August 5, 2015 RE: Hamel Fire Budget for 2016 Background At the June 16, 2015, work session, the Hamel Fire Department presented their proposal for the 2016 Hamel Fire Department budget. They are requesting a 2.2% increase; a total increase of $5,100 to their operating budget. The 2015 operating budget is $228,115 and the proposed 2016 is $233,215. The proposed increases for 2016 include; $1,000 for payroll wages, $1,000 for Radio/Comm Expenses, and $600 for Equip Maintenance. All of the proposed 2016 increases are fiscally responsible and necessary based on the growth of the area and the equipment needs of the Department. Council Member Pederson, City Administrator Johnson, and I also reviewed the Position Qualification Compliance requirements under the current contract. The Hamel Fire Department complies with the agreement based on the information from the Hamel Fire Department's 2014 Year -End Report. Staff was directed at the July 21st Work Session to bring forward the Budget for approval on the August 5th Consent Agenda. Revenues The only significant revenue change from 2015-2016 is a reduction of $2,000 due to a decline in public donations and rodeo/gambling fundraising. Expenditures Minimal increases totaling $5,100 are being requested for radio, wages, equipment maintenance and utilities. Summary To offset the revenue reduction; Medina's responsibility for the overall operating budget increase includes the expenditure increase of $5,100 in addition to the $2,000 of decreased donations. The increase totaling $7,100 or 3.6% would be an overall increasing from $195,115 in 2015 to $202,215 in 2016. See attachment HFD Proposed 2016 Operating Budget Revision 2. Capital Hamel is requesting $70,000 on their 10 year capital plan for 2016. The number has been adjusted upward from the 2015 plan based on projected costs and denial of grant funding. There are three major purchases proposed in 2016; ongoing PPE replacement at $10,000, overhaul and retrofit of utility eleven vehicle and the purchase of a pumper tanker; which was proposed back in 2011, but put off during the consolidation talks. Analysis Finance Director Erin Barnhart and I met with Chief Ruchti and Firefighter Mario Fabrizio to review the budget. Over the last six years, the Hamel Fire Department has averaged a 1.6% increase in their operating budget. In 2012 and 2013 that included a portion from the Corcoran Municipality; beginning in 2014 Medina became their sole client. In looking at the call volume, calls in 2016 are projected to surpass the total number of calls that the Hamel Fire Department responded to with both Medina and Corcoran. In 2012, the total number of calls was approximately 180 and they are projecting approximately 200 calls for the Hamel Fire Department in Medina alone in 2016. Over the last two years, the Hamel Fire Department has run a $5,000 deficit on the operating side of their budget due to increased calls and equipment that needed replacement or repair. Over the past five years, the population of the Hamel Fire District in the City of Medina has increased dramatically by approximately 1800 people. Their call load continues to grow and they continue to add new personnel to meet the demands. The costs are increasing and from our analysis, the costs are justified on both the operating and capital side. Future Concerns After our meeting with Chief Ruchti and Fabrizio, Barnhart and I discussed the issues that are facing the Hamel Fire Department. Currently, the fire department funds a portion of their operating budget, approximately $33,000, from gambling revenue and donations. Those funds are not guaranteed and are a concern for the future if something would happen to their ability to earn money on the gambling funds or if the donations continue to drop off they will be short funds to run their operations. Based on a trend they are seeing they have projected a decrease of $2,000 in those funds for 2016, from $33,000 to $31,000. We believe that we need to address this issue. The second issue of concern is their equipment fund. By contract, we require that Hamel Fire hold $100,000 in a special revenue fund for major equipment breakdowns and failures, this is to ensure that they have the ability to get that equipment fixed and back up and running without delay. They also have a special equipment fund with a current balance of $215,000, which, in the past, has been used to pay for their portion the capital expenses. This fund is currently without a revenue source because any money earned as a department goes towards the operating budget; as time goes on, if this fund goes down it will lead to depletion and 100% of capital funding will fall on the City. Our concern is that the current path we are on will lead to this outcome and Medina will be taking on 100% of the cost to replace all equipment at the Hamel Fire Department. To address these issues we would like to over time change their funding strategy so that the gambling proceeds and donations come out of the operating revenue budget and go into the special equipment fund, supplying a revenue source and potentially offsetting the chance of depletion. Over time, Medina would have to pick up the entire cost of the operating budget. This guarantees that Hamel's operations would be funded 100% in the future and they would continue to contribute to the capital equipment purchases. 2013 2014 2015 Proposed 2016 Fire Services Fire Services Fire Services Fire Services Hamel $ 144,417.00 53.39% $ 169,400.00 60.04% $ 195,115.00 63.69% $ 202,215.00 63.84% Loretto $ 96,536.99 35.69% $ 83,266.00 29.51% $ 80,575.16 26.30% $ 82,992.41 26.20% Long Lake $ 24,420.00 9.03% $ 24,220.00 8.58% $ 24,977.00 8.15% $ 25,726.31 8.12% Maple Plain $ 5,135.00 1.90% $ 5,238.30 1.86% $ 5,665.00 1.85% $ 5,834.95 1.84% $ 270,508.99 $ 282,124.30 $ 306,332.16 $ 316,768.67 Capital Capital Capital Capital Hamel $ 0.00% $ 60,000.00 77.08% $ 60,000.00 76.92% $ 70,000.00 70.00% Loretto $ 0.00% $ 17,839.00 22.92% $ 18,000.00 23.08% $ 30,000.00 30.00% Long Lake $ 0.00% $ 6,000.00 7.71% $ 6,000.00 7.69% $ 7,000.00 7.00% Maple Plain $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ $ 77,839.00 $ 78,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Total Paid Total Paid Total Paid Total Paid Hamel $ 144,417.00 53.39% $ 229,400.00 62.68% $ 255,115.00 65.36% $ 272,215.00 64.24% Loretto $ 96,536.99 35.69% $ 101,105.00 27.63% $ 98,575.16 25.25% $ 112,992.41 26.66% Long Lake $ 24,420.00 9.03% $ 30,220.00 8.26% $ 30,977.00 7.94% $ 32,726.31 7.72% Maple Plain $ 5,135.00 1.90% $ 5,238.30 1.43% $ 5,665.00 1.45% $ 5,834.95 1.38% $ 270,508.99 $ 365,963.30 $ 390,332.16 $ 423,768.67 Hamel Loretto Long Lake Maple Plain Analytics by Function 2013 2014 2015 Proposed 2016 MV MV MV MV 862,139,500 70.55% 898,302,000 72.17% 998,102,800 73.25% 1,091,236,400 74.32% 191,292,800 15.65% 192,634,000 15.48% 199,230,100 14.62% 201,880,400 13.75% 158,603,000 12.98% 143,825,400 11.56% 151,783,800 11.14% 160,510,500 10.93% 9,977,600 0.82% 9,866,100 0.79% 13,522,300 0.99% 14,678,000 1.00% 1,222,012,900 1,244,627,500 1,362,639,000 1,468,305,300 * Market Values are based on prior year evaluations Hamel Loretto Long Lake Maple Plain Calls Calls Calls Calls 126 64.95 % 166 68.31 % 155 68.28 48 24.74% 55 22.63% 52 22.91 17 8.76% 17 7.00% 17 7.49% 3 1.55% 5 2.06% 3 1.32% 194 243 227 * Call numbers come from prior year actuals Hamel Loretto Long Lake Maple Plain i Population Population Population Population 3,857 71.60% 792 14.70% 643 11.94% 95 1.76% 5,387 * Population is mathmatically estimated by district Housholds Households I I 4,507 74.09% 811 13.33% 662 10.88% 103 1.69% 6,083 Households Housholds Hamel 1,344 71.60% 15.48% 1,533 74.09% Loretto 276 14.70% 11.56% 276 13.34% Long Lake 224 11.93% 0.79% 225 10.87% Maple Plain 33 1.76% 0.00% 35 1.69% 1,877 2,069 * Households are mathmatically estimated by district Parcels Parcels Parcels Parcels Hamel 1,952 70.22% Loretto 476 17.12% Long Lake 280 10.07 Maple Plain 72 2.59% 2,780 * Parcels are mathmatically estimated by district Per Capita Per Capita Per Capita Per Capita Hamel $ 37 14.90 % i 43 18.39 Loretto $ 122 48.49 % 99 42.21 Long Lake $ 38 15.11 % 38 16.03 Maple Plain $ 54 21.50% 55 23.37% $ 251 $ 235 * Per Capital is calculated by contract amount and population HFD Proposed 2016 Operations Budget Revision 2 2015 Approved Budget 2016 Proposed Budget Delta Comments ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES 31,500 31,500 - OPERATIONS EXPENSES 179,615 184,715 5,100 Increases in year -year fuel costs, radio administration, labor, maintenance and utilities TRAINING EXPENSES 17,000 17,000 - ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE 228,115 233,215 5,100 2.2% increase in budget NON -FEE FUNDING Medina Fees (Operations) 33,000 31,000 (2,000) 15% of operations still not being funded/supported by Medina Fees Decrease in public donations and gambling proceeds 195,115 202,215 7,100 3.6% increase in Medina Fees TOTAL FUNDING 228,115 233,215 5,100 Page 1 of 1 Created: 7/13/2015 Hamel Fire Department Capita Equipment Plan .... Proposed 2016 Capital Budget Revision 2 Equipment Medina Funded Capital (excludes other capital) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Ongoing PPE Replacment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Utility 11 Overhaul/retrofit 65,000 21,667 21,667 21,667 Command Vehicle Replacement 20,000 4,320 4,320 4,320 4,320 4,320 Engine 11 Refurbishment 100,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Pumper/Tanker 450,000 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 38,917 Light Rescue Replacement 200,000 17,296 17,296 PROPOSED Medina Annual Capital Outlay 70,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000 Projected Annual Consumption 70,583 74,903 74,903 73,237 73,237 73,237 68,917 68,917 66,213 66,213 Agenda Item # 5G MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and City Council FROM: Erin Barnhart, Finance Director DATE: Augustay 5, 2015 SUBJ: Proposed Transfers and Assignment of Fund Reserves Summary The City's fund balance policy states the goal will be to maintain an unrestricted fund balance in the General Fund of the greater of (1) 50% of the next year's General Fund property tax levy, or (2) a minimum of five months of the next year's budgeted expenditures of the General Fund. For 12/31/14, the fund balance goal is $1,716,461 (using 5/12 of 2015 budgeted expenditures of $4,119,507). The General fund balance at 12/31/14 was $2,102,951, or $386,490 above the goal. Transfers From General Fund Total transfers of $201,000 from the General Fund to various other funds are proposed for 2015. General Fund transfers out are proposed to include: • Road Improvement Fund: $101,000 to assist in financing upcoming road projects • General Capital Improvement Fund: $100,000 for City Hall renovations Assignment of General Fund Balance Total assignment of $185,000 within the General Fund is proposed to include: • Retirement Liability: $65,000 for post -retirement benefits. • Comprehensive Plan: $80,000 for engineering and planning consultants. • Health Insurance: $40,000 for potential buy -in costs to self -insure. Actions Requested • Approve Resolution authorizing $201,000 of operating transfers from the General Fund to various other City funds, effective August 5, 2015 and assign $185,000 of General Fund reserves for the above mentioned costs, effective August 5, 2015. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015- RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNMENT OF FUND RESERVES WHEREAS, for 12/31/14, the fund balance goal is $1,716,461 (using 5/12 of 2015 budgeted expenditures of $4,119,507). The General fund balance at 12/31/14 was $2,102,951, or $386,490 above the goal. BE IT RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Medina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following actions be: $201,000 be Transferred from the General Fund to the following funds: - Road Improvement Fund: $101,000 to assist in financing upcoming road projects - General Capital Improvement Fund: $100,000 for City Hall renovations $185,000 be Assigned from General Fund reserves: Retirement Liability: $65,000 for post -retirement benefits. Comprehensive Plan: $80,000 for engineering and planning consultants. Health Insurance: $40,000 for potential buy -in costs to self -insure. Date: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Resolution No. 2015- August 5, 2015 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. 2015- 2 August 5, 2015 Agenda Item # 5H MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant to City Administrator DATE: July 29, 2015 MEETING: August 5, 2015 SUBJECT: Wine & Beer License A prospective new restaurant owner who is looking at opening a sandwich shop on Westfalen Trail has inquired about getting a wine and beer license, but does not want a full on -sale liquor license. She will have limited restaurant hours and will not operate as a "Bar". State Statute doesn't specifically allow "Strong Beer" licenses, but it does authorize holders of wine licenses, who also hold 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, to sell intoxicating malt liquor (strong beer) without an additional license as long as the municipality authorizes it by ordinance. The City of Medina's code authorizes on -sale licenses to sell wine as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.404, subdivision 5, but Medina's code does not specifically state the City allows holders of a wine license, who also hold a 3.2 percent malt liquor license, to sell intoxicating malt liquor without an additional license. Staff has consulted with Attorney Sarah Sonsalla, who helped us with our recent liquor ordinance amendments, and she recommends adding a sentence to our code to specifically authorize holders of a wine license, who also hold a 3.2 percent malt liquor license, to sell intoxicating malt liquor without an additional license. Recommended Action: Approve Ordinance Amending City Code Section 625 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Wine Licenses CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Amending Section 625 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Wine Licenses The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I: Medina Code Section 625.03, Subd. 3. (b) (2) is amended by adding the double underlined material as follows: (2) Wine. The city may issue an on -sale license to sell wine as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.404, subdivision 5. Holders of an on -sale wine license, who are also licensed to sell 3.2 percent malt liquors at on -sale pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.411, are authorized to sell intoxicating malt liquors at on -sale without an additional license. SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2015. By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: By: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the Crow River News this day of , 2015. Ordinance No. August 5, 2015 Agenda Item # 5I STREET STRIPING SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this 5th day of August 2015, by and between Twin City Striping Inc., 1846 110th Street S.E. Delano, MN 55328, a Minnesota corporation (the "Contractor") and the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"). Recitals 1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for street striping services; and 2. The City has approved the contract for street striping services with the Contractor; and 3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows: Terms 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform street striping services for the City of Medina urban residential and commercial streets as approved by the City Public Works Director. 2.0. TERM. The term of this contract will be from August 5, 2015 to October 31, 2016. 3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor a per linear foot rate of $.076, for street striping services as defined in the Scope of Services above and approved by the Public Works Director. 3.01 The Contractor shall pay for all licenses and permits. The City is tax exempt. 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, tools, and materials, including traffic control, 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 general liability policy in limits acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective. 6.0 WORKER'S COMPENSATION. 6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker's compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this Agreement. 6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker's compensation insurance and will provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this Agreement. 7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney's fees) for claims as a result of bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor's performance under this Agreement. 8.0 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. The Contractor shall provide the City with copies of all contracts for assigned services. 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 immunities under statute or common law. 12.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason. 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 T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk TWIN CITY STRIPING (CONTRACTOR) By Wayne R. Jones, Owner RES Specialty Pyrotechnics MAGIC IN THE AIR Thursday, July 23, 2015 Jodi Gallup City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Dear Jodi: We would be delighted to design another fireworks program for the City of Medina on Saturday, September 19, 2015. Our proposal indicates size, shell effect, and quantity of shells. The shells listed in our proposal will be used to design the following segments: Opening Barrage, Main Show Body, Select Patriotic Shell, Signature Pattern Shell, Multiple Effects Barrage Cake, and Grand Finale. Our show design uses piled, stacked and multi -break shells. Our displays are electronically fired for added safety. Our customer service and communication principles are based on personal relationships. We listen to your needs and expectations. We then implement them into your program, resulting in a unique one -of -a -kind show. Our displays are a turnkey operation and are coordinated with your event. The entire show is electronically fired for added safety. Our proposal includes all materials, equipment, certified display operators, necessary permits, and $5,000,000.00 liability insurance. The total cost will be $4,000.00. In closing, let me state that I can personally guarantee you a show with a finale so intense that you will forget to breathe. Please feel free to contact me should you have any additional questions. Please feel free to contact me should you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Ervin J. Haman Director of Business Development RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. 21595 286th Street ■ Belle Plaine, MN 56011 ■ Phone: 952.873.3113 ■ Fax: 952.873.2859 RES Specialty Pyrotechnics MAGIC IN THE AIR DISPLAY CONTRACT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this 23rd day of July, 2015 between RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. hereafter referred to as the SELLER and City of Medina, hereafter referred to as the BUYER. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED BETWEEN THE SELLER AND THE BUYER AS FOLLOWS: Service Provided Date(s) Time Duration Location Event Sponsor OBLIGATIONS OF SELLER: Outdoor Fireworks Display Saturday, September 19, 2015 8:00 PM (approximately) 16-18 minutes (depending on intensity) Hamel Community Building; Medina, MN City of Medina SELLER shall provide all materials, equipment and personnel necessary to perform the above -mentioned display. SELLER is required and will comply with NFPA 1123, Code for Outdoor Display of Fireworks, 2010 edition and NFPA 1126, Pyrotechnics before a Proximate Audience, 2006 edition. SELLER shall provide show liability insurance in the amount of $5,000,000.00 to cover the fireworks display and cleanup. SELLER shall include the BUYER, as co-insured on Certificate of Insurance. OBLIGATIONS OF BUYER: BUYER shall provide a suitable location for firing of the fireworks display. BUYER shall provide and cover all costs for security, safety and cleanup at the display site. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The terms of this agreement shall begin on the day of the signing of this agreement and shall conclude upon the completion of the display. This agreement shall run no longer than one (1) calendar year. However, if before the date of the scheduled performance, the BUYER has not performed fully its obligations under the terms of this agreement or that the financial credit of the BUYER has been impaired, the SELLER may cancel this agreement at any time. In the event the BUYER does not perform fully all of its obligations herein, the SELLER shall have the option to perform or refuse to perform hereunder, and in either event the BUYER shall be liable to the SELLER for any damages, compensation or costs incurred including but not limited to attorney and court fees in addition to the compensation herein. The SELLER shall retain the right to stop or interrupt the display at any time if, in the opinion of the SELLER, conditions have become unsafe. In event of rain, fireworks may be rescheduled at a mutually agreeable date. 21595 286th Street ■ Belle Plaine, MN 56011 ■ Phone: 952.873.3113 ■ Fax: 952.873.2859 Contracted amount: $4,000.00 inclusive of sales tax, if applicable. Contracted amount includes fire watch and permit fee. All payments shall be paid by BUYER to and in the name of RES Specialty Pyrotechnics, Inc. in the form of a company check, certified bank check, money order, or cash. CANCELLATION: In the event the BUYER cancels this agreement any time during the contract period, the SELLER shall be entitled to and receive 25% of the contracted fee for the remainder of the contract period plus compensation for any pre- and post -production costs incurred. THIS AGREEMENT is the whole agreement of the parties' above named. No representation inducement or agreement has been given by one to the other to enter into this agreement other than expressly set forth herein. This agreement shall not be altered, modified, or amended except in writing by a duly authorized officer of each party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto set their names on the day and year listed below. CONTRACT VALID WHEN SIGNED BY AUTHORIZED PERSONS. BUYER: Title: Signature: Date: SELLER: Ery Haman — RES Specialty Pyrotechnics Title: Director of Business Development Signature: Date: 7/23/2015 21595 286th Street ■ Belle Plaine, MN 56011 ■ Phone: 952.873.3113 ■ Fax: 952.873.2859 WSB 111111. && Associates, engineering • planning • environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 July 30, 2015 Steve Scherer, Public Works Superintendent City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Fields of Medina Change Order #1 WSB Project No. 02712-070 Steve, Attached you will find Change Order #1 for the Fields of Medina Park project. The items include the addition of a basketball goal that was originally going to be done separately by the City, but the Contractor had a goal available to reduce shipping time. The remainder of the items include adjustments in actual quantities, with one deduction as well as increases in quantities. The largest increase in quantity was the import of granular material for the tennis court in order to get it to the proper subgrade elevation. The subgrade needed to come up about a foot overall. This may be one item you could go back to the developer for compensation based on previous agreements you may have had. The change order also includes the addition of a larger area for the final grading and restoration work to be completed by the Contractor. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 763-231-4848. Once the change order is approved, please sign and date the bottom and I will have the remainder of the signatures filled out for your records. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Candace C. Amberg, RLA Senior Landscape Architect Attachments: Change Order #1 St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com 1002712-070\Admin\Construction Admin\LTR - Change Order 1 Letter.doc Contract Summary Sheet Contract Change Order #1 for: Fields of Medina Park Development City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 To (Contractor): Sunram Construction 20010 - 75th Ave North Corcoran, MN 55340 Distribution To: ❑ Owner ❑ Consultant ❑ Contractor ❑ Field ❑ Other Date: 30-Jul-15 Consultants Project: 02712-070 CHANGES TO THE CONTRACT (The contractor shall make the following changes to the contract) # DESCRIPTION ADD DEDUCT C01.1 Furnish and install basketball goal standard 2,300.00 C01.2 Adjustment in quantities for bid item 1.03 - Export of Excess Soill for an increase of 103 cy @ $11.80/cy 1,215.40 C01.3 Adjustment in quantities for bid item 1.16 - 4" perforated HDPE draintile for an increase of 200 If @ $6.30/If 1,260.00 C01.4 Adjustment in quantities for bid item 1.17 - 4" PVC for a reduction of 180 If @ $12.65/If 2,277.00 C01.5 Import and placement of granular material for tennis court subgrade - 330 cy @ $21.60/cy 7,128.00 C01.6 Additional restoration work to include finished grading, seeding and blanket 9,200.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER ADDS AND DEDUCTS: 21,103.40 2,277.00 NET CHANGE ORDER TOTAL: $18,826.40 Contract Summary to Date Original Base Bid Contract Sum: 235,856.00 Previously Authorized Change Orders: - Net Change of this Change Order: 18,826.40 Total Contract Sum (Including all Change Orders to Date): $254,682.40 Page 1 of 2 Consultant: WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Ave. South - Suite 300 Signature Date Minneapolis, MN 55416 Contractor: Sunram Construction 20010 - 75th Ave North Signature Date Corcoran, MN 55340 Owner: City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Signature Date Medina, MN 55340 Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item # 5L CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE REGARDING SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESSES; AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 825.55, et.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: Section 825.55. Site Plan Review — Application. Subd. 1. All new commercial, business, and multiple family residential uses and developments shall require site plan review under this section prior to the issuance of any permits. In addition, all changes, additions and expansions of existing commercial, business, and multiple family residential uses and developments shall require site plan review prior to the issuance of any permits unless the change, addition or expansion qualifies for review by city staff as a minor change pursuant to Subd. 4 of this Section. plan review if the change, when combined with all other changes made since the effective date of this ordinance, would no longer qualify as a minor change under the applicable district regulations. Subd. 2. The owner or developer shall submit an application for site plan review to the zoning administrator. The application shall be accompanied by the following information and documentation to the extent it is not otherwise required by another land use application made by the owner or developer for the same site at the same time: (a) legal description of the property; (b) identification of developer and owner, if different; (c) survey showing property boundaries; existing improvements, including utilities, drainage tiles and wells; topography of the site and area within 100 feet of the property boundaries with contours at 2-foot intervals; significant trees and existing vegetation which would meet ordinance landscaping requirements; easements of record, including the dimensions thereof; and wetlands; (d) site plan of proposed improvements showing all buildings, including details of loading docks; parking areas; driveways; access points; berms; easements; and adjacent public or private streets; (e) floor plans and building elevations, including list of building materials, showing a Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE sketch or computer -generated image of proposed buildings as viewed from surrounding uses; (f) site plan of existing uses on property in non-residential zones adjacent to the site and on property in residential zones within 720 feet of the site, measured at the closest point, showing buildings, including loading docks, entrances and other significant features and illustrating sight lines to proposed uses; (g) proposed grading plan with contours at 2-foot intervals; (h) soils map; (i) tree preservation plan; (j) landscaping plan, including species and sizes; (k) drainage and storm water plan; (1) utility plan; (m) sign plan; (n) lighting plan; (o) table of all proposed uses by type and square footage, including estimated water and sanitary sewer usage; (p) schedule of staging or timing of development; and (q) application fee. Upon receipt of an application for site plan review, the zoning administrator may determine that, due to the nature or scale of the development, not all of the above information must be submitted or that additional information must be submitted in order to allow reasonable review of the development. Subd. 3. Upon receipt of an application for site plan review, the zoning administrator shall determine whether the application is complete. If the application is not complete, the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant in writing that the application is not complete and shall specify the additional documentation or information that the applicant will be required to submit before the application will be considered complete. When the application is complete, the zoning administrator shall refer the matter to the planning commission for review. Subd. 4. Minor changes: (a) The following changes ean may be reviewed and approved by the zoning administrator or their designee City staff upon a written finding and filing the Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE report in the property file that the proposal meets the requirements of the district and is in compliance with the relevant ordinance standards. The zoning administrator may determine that review of minor changes by the Planning Commission and City Council is required if deemed appropriate based upon the nature of the changes. Review by the Planning Commission and City Council shall be required if made in connection with another request which requires review, including but not limited to conditional use permits, subdivisions, and variances. 1. Change in the use of the property if the proposed use is less intense and a more restrictive use complies with relevant ordinance standards. 2. Expansion of an existing building} by less than 1,000 square feet of floor area provided the proposed expansion complies with relevant ordinance standards and does not exceed the greater of the following amounts in a single year: (a) 10% of the existing floor area, or (b) 1,000 square feet of floor area. 3. Changes of less than 10,000 square feet to the exterior walls or surface of the buildingA. the proposed exterior surface complies with relevant ordinance standards. 4. Expansion(s) of the an existing parking lot by which complies with relevant ordinance standards and which do(es) not cumulatively exceed the greater of the following amounts within a consecutive 24-month period: (a) 25% of the existing parking lot area; or (b) less than 10 spaces or less than 10,000 square feet, whichever is less. 5. Outdoor lighting changes involving 2 or fewer light poles without changing the type of lighting provided the new lighting complies with relevant ordinance standards, including maximum output or photometric requirements. 6. Changes to the topography involving less than 1 foot in elevation 1000 cubic yards of disturbance, provided such changes comply with relevant ordinance standards or —less than 24,000 square feet of lot area. 7. An addition to exposed rooftop equipment if the addition is less than 64 cubic feet and complies with relevant ordinance standards. 8. Construction of an accessory structure which complies with relevant ordinance standards and which does not exceed the lesser of the following: (a) 20% of the floor area of the principal structure; or (hb 1,000 square feet of floor area. (b) A request for site plan review of minor changes shall include all information described in 825.55 Subd. 2, including relevant City fees. (c) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the staff under this subdivision may appeal to the Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE city council. Appeals must be submitted in writing and must be received by the staff within 30 days of the date the staff s written report is filed. The city council shall decide an appeal within 60 days of the date of receipt of the appeal. Section 825.56. Site Plan Review - Planning Commission Review. Subd. 1. Except as provided in Section 825.55, Subd. 4, tThe planning commission shall review the proposed site plan on the basis of the information and documentation submitted by the applicant and any other information available to it. The review may occur separately or in conjunction with any other city hearing or review required under state statute, this ordinance or other applicable law regarding the same property or development and occurring at the same time. Subd. 2. Except as provided in Section 825.55, Subd. 4, tThe planning commission shall review the proposed site plan to determine whether it is consistent with the requirements of this ordinance, including the applicable development standards and the purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located. Following the review, the planning commission shall recommend that the site plan be approved, approved with conditions or denied. The planning commission shall forward its recommendation to the city council. Section 825.59. Site Plan Review - City Council Review. Subd. 1. Except as provided in Section 825.55, Subd. 4, tThe city council shall consider the recommendation of the planning commission after receipt of its report and may consider any additional information or conduct such additional review, if any, as it determines would serve the public interest. The city council shall make its decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny the site plan. The city council may condition its approval in any manner it deems reasonably necessary in order to promote public health, safety or welfare, to achieve compliance with this ordinance, or to accomplish the purposes of the district in which the property is located. Subd. 2. Any site plan approval granted by the city council shall be valid for a period of one year following final action by the city council or such longer period, not to exceed one additional year, as the council may specify. After the expiration of that period, the approval granted by the city council shall be null and void and no permits may be issued pursuant to the approval. Prior to the expiration of the period, the city council may grant an extension for good cause upon Medina City Code written request by the applicant. Subd. 3. An application to amend an approved site plan shall be reviewed under this section in the same manner as an initial application for a site plan review except that any change, addition or expansion which qualifies as a minor change as specified in the standards applicable for the district in which the property is located shall be subject to an administrative site plan review by the zoning administrator. Ordinance No. ### 4 DATE SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this day of , 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the Crow River News on the day of , 2015. Ordinance No. ### 5 DATE Agenda Item # 5M Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-## RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. ### BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ### an ordinance regarding site plan review processes, amending chapter 8 of the city code; 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 four 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 administrator -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 site plan review processes. The ordinance amends the requirements in order to allow more construction activities on commercial, business, industrial, and multiple family residential properties to be reviewed administratively rather than requiring formal site plan review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The full text of Ordinance No. ### is available from the city administrator -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 administrator -clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in his office at city hall for public inspection and that he post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Resolution No. 2015-## August 5, 2015 Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -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. 2015-## 2 August 5, 2015 Agenda Item # 7A NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULT NTS. INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 65422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 plannersignacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT To: Medina Mayor and City Council From: Nate Sparks, Consulting Planner Date: July 29, 2015 Re: Stonegate CD-PUD General Plan & Preliminary Plat Application Date: May 8, 2015 Review Deadline: September 5, 2015 File No: LR-15-163 BACKGROUND / GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. (PRDC) has made an application for a Conservation Design Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) General Plan & Preliminary Plat. The applicant is proposing a 421ot CD-PUD on approximately 170 acres on a property located east of Homestead Trail and west of Deerhill Road and Morningside Road. A CD-PUD is a type of PUD permitted by the City where an alternative development plan (including increased density) to traditional zoning is employed in order to encourage preservation of ecological resources, wildlife corridors, scenic views, and rural character. The City reviewed the Concept Plan related to this CD-PUD in February. SUBJECT SITE The subject property consists of four parcels in the Hennepin County property tax records. The total area of the properties is approximately 170 acres. The property lies to the west of the western terminus of both Deerhill and Morningside Roads and east of Homestead Trail. There are several wetlands on the site including a large wetland area on the northern edge of the property that is greater than 30 acres in size. There are also areas of steep slopes on the property. The upland areas on the site are predominantly tilled farmland. The surrounding properties are residential in nature. The sewered Medina Morningside and Keller Estates developments are to the southeast of the site. Otherwise, the site is surrounded by rural residential property. To the west of Homestead Trail is the Baker Park Reserve. To the south is the City of Orono. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ ZONING The property is zoned RR, Rural Residential. The surrounding properties are primarily zoned RR, as well. To the southeast there are properties zoned UR, Urban Residential and SR, Suburban Residential. In the Comprehensive Plan, this property is guided for a Rural Residential Land Use. The Rural Residential designation identifies areas for low -intensity uses, such as rural residential, rural commercial, farming, hobby farms, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. This area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by the current Comprehensive Plan. In rural areas, the City must maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for all new development. The City generally utilizes the five acre contiguous suitable soils requirement in order to pursue this objective. This requirement has maintained the required density in the recent past and the City monitors rural subdivisions to ensure this standard is continuing to be met. In the Comprehensive Plan and through the CD-PUD Ordinance, flexibility is permitted for allowing open space development and maintaining rural character and simultaneously preserving significant natural resources. This result may take the form of innovative developments that clusters smaller lots on portions of a site in order to provide permanently conserved open space. Such innovative arrangements may help preserve the City's natural resources, open space and rural character, while still maintaining an average overall density of ten acres for each unit. While the City continues to enforce five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems per lot, the City also may consider exceptions for open space developments, such as this proposal, that protect natural features and put land into permanent conservation. However, the Comprehensive Plan states that within the Metropolitan Council's long term sewer service area (LTSSA), "exceptions will not be allowed to result in development with a density in excess of one unit per ten gross acres." Maps 5-3 and 5-4 in the Comprehensive Plan identify this property as being in the LTSSA. The proposed density is approximately one unit per four gross acres. If the one per ten gross acres limitation is interpreted to apply to the LTSSA in the aggregate, this additional density will affect the opportunity for the City to grant additional density for conservation design on other sites in the LTSSA. A CD-PUD is an option that a property owner is encouraged to consider as an alternative to conventional development. The City will give heightened consideration to such requests where the opportunities to achieve conservation objectives are significantly higher than that available through conventional development. The Open Space Plan identifies this property as being a high quality natural resource area. The northern portion of the site is identified as primarily a tamarack swamp. Homestead Trail along the western edge of the site is identified in the plan as a scenic road. GENERAL PLAN & PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW Minimum Site Requirements The minimum land area required for a CD-PUD is 40 contiguous acres in the Rural Residential District. The subject property is 170 acres in size. Density of Development The CD-PUD District requires a base density calculation and then allows for additional density as part of the PUD flexibility. The base density is established by regulations in the underlying zoning district. In the Rural Residential District, the base density is 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. In addition to the base density, additional 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 the base density. 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 up to 200% of the calculated base density. The applicant has provided a yield plan depicting a base density of 221ots. The proposed development plan includes 421ots which is 190.9% of the provided base density. In considering such flexibility for the additional density, the City must evaluate how well the project achieves the conservation objectives over and above what is achievable under conventional development and the amount, quality and character of conservation area protected. 2 Proposed Lots The applicant is proposing 42 parcels that range from 1.28 to 2.63 acres in size. Front setbacks within a CD-PUD may be reduced from the 50 feet required in the RR district, but are required to be 35 feet from local roads. It does not appear that the applicant proposes to reduce the front setbacks, but staff recommends that a reduced setback of 40 feet be considered to reduce driveway length and hardcover if right-of-way width is increased as described below. Side yard setbacks are required to be 20 feet, as determined by the requirements of the underlying RR, Rural Residential District. In addition to the 42 single family lots, there are also eight outlots. The outlots include the wetlands, storm ponds, infiltration basins, and the conservation area. Outlot D is proposed to have a pool, pool house, and parking area. The pool is intended to be a community pool and would be required to be built to such standards in the building code including fencing and accessibility. Transportation System The primary road entrance to the development is proposed from Homestead Trail in Orono. The property in Orono is under the control of the developer. This will result in a City of Medina maintained road within the City of Orono. The road then goes north through the subject site and connects with Deerhill Road. There are two cul-de-sacs that will need to be maintained as private roads within outlots. Since the concept plan review, the applicant has reduced the size of the right-of-way of the road to 50 feet in width from 60 and also reduced the driving surface of the road to 22 feet from 24 feet. The applicant states that this will provide a low impact development design, lessen impervious surfaces, and also provide for a better match with the existing Deerhill Road. Public Works and Engineering staff recommends that the new road be built to City ordinance standards with a 24 foot wide surface, shoulders, and ditches. This will allow for the proper provision of safe passage for all vehicles including emergency vehicles, parking (especially during events), pedestrians, and bicycles while also accommodating for drainage. As proposed, there appear to be drainage features associated with the roadway that lie outside the right-of-way. The applicant has stated that they propose the reduced right-of-way width as a result of requests by neighboring property owners. The width of the right-of-way within this subdivision and the existing right-of-way width of Deerhill Road to the east of the site are not linked. The City has no plans for improvements to Deerhill Road at this time. If the existing Deerhill Road were to be improved, which is not planned for in any capital improvement plans, its improvements would be determined independently and the road width within this subdivision would have no impact on the outcome of the analysis. This CD-PUD proposal is a new subdivision and is intended to meet the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, like all other new subdivisions, while the existing portion Deerhill Road is an established road with a different and unique set of circumstances. With regards to low impact development standards, reducing the width of the street from 24 feet to 22 feet would reduce the impervious surface created by the road by approximately 8.3% and the total impervious surfaces expected on the site (including homes, driveways, etc.) by approximately 3.5%. The reduction of the right-of-way width could, theoretically, reduce some additional driveway length, but the house pads shown by the applicant exceed the minimum setback requirement of the CD-PUD district. As such, the full 60-foot right-of-way could be platted without increasing the length of driveways proposed. Rather than reducing right-of-way width, staff would recommend that the Planning Commission and City Council consider a reduced front setback (perhaps 40 feet or the minimum of 35 feet permitted in the CD- PUD district) if reducing driveway length is of interest. 3 The applicant is proposing a trail along the new street extending west from Deerhill Road in the northern portion of the site. It exits the site to the northwest and in the west central portion. The trail is primarily adjacent to the roadway but does travel through the interior of Outlot E, which was stated as a preference during the Concept Plan review. There are trail corridors identified in the City's trail plan for these general areas. The Park Commission also recommended a bituminous trail connection from Morningside Road to the main road within the development. Three lots in the northwest corner of the development share a driveway access off of a private cul-de-sac. Shared driveways are acceptable for 4 or fewer homes provided the applicant meets the requirements of the City's driveway ordinance regarding the provision of a reciprocal easement and maintenance agreement satisfactory to the City that is recorded against all properties. The width shall also meet the standards required by City regulations. Utilities In rural areas, 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/mound system located on the lot with the secondary drainfields/mound system located in the designated conservation area or other such open space. 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 as well as City regulations. Secondary drainfields/mound systems may be located in designated conservation areas provided that they are located within a limited distance of the lots they serve. Construction of septic systems in these instances shall not result in the destruction of ecological resources. The conservation area or open space parcel containing the drainfield/mound system must be owned in fee by a common ownership association in which membership is mandatory. In these cases, the lot should have direct and ensured access to the area where the proposed secondary site is located. The applicant is proposing a primary and secondary septic site on each lot within the plat except for one which has an alternate site within the conservation area. The applicant is also stating that they may wish to place up to 25% of the secondary sites (up to 10 sites) within the conservation area if needed by the individual builder on the lots based on their home locations. There are three proposed septic sites in the plan that do not meet the City's required setbacks to wetlands. Section 720.05 requires that all septic systems shall be 75 feet from wetlands. Staff would recommend that this be adjusted and that sites meeting relevant requirements be provided prior to preliminary plat approval. Outlot D which houses the pool is depicted with no specific septic sites. According to the Building Official, the lot is required to have a primary and alternate site or a variance from the septic requirements would need to be granted. The applicant has stated the possibility of using a holding tank at this site. Any accommodation for this type of system would require an acceptable maintenance plan including pumping agreements and record retention. The pool would require plans for management of the water, possibly including de -chlorination with surface draining or other such methods. The preliminary plat and general plan of development for a PUD is intended to identify conforming lots that can be depicted on a final plat for approval. Therefore, the three proposed septic sites which do not meet wetland setbacks should be corrected prior to any approval. The approved preliminary plat should also depict all septic sites to be utilized for the development. If the applicant intends to use sites in the 4 open space area these sites should be identified and reviewed for conformance with requisite codes and the objectives of the CD-PUD Ordinance. As stated during the Concept Plan review, the applicant is proposing Multi-flo pre-treatment systems for the development. These systems provide an increased level of effluent treatment before being discharged to the drainfield. In order to operate effectively, these systems may require a higher degree of maintenance than a standard system. It may be advisable to have the HOA involved in the maintenance responsibilities, as a result of the increased density and smaller lots being contemplated. A portion of this site is located within the City's Drinking Water Supply Management Area. The City will need to register the wells in this area to monitor possible contamination sites. Grading / Drainage / Wetlands The lots are primarily intended to be custom graded. The applicant is proposing five storm water ponds and four infiltration basins in the conservation area for storm water management purposes. The City Engineer's comments are attached for reference. There are numerous wetlands on site including a large wetland on the north side. There are four smaller wetlands that are proposed to be filled and two that will be partially filled primarily to allow for the construction of the road. During the concept plan review, Staff had recommended minimizing this impact as much as possible. Two wetlands the center of the site are proposed to be enlarged and are being considered by the applicant as part of mitigation for impacts. Upland planting buffers and easements are required. The wetland delineation for the southern 90 acres of the site is expired and will need to be resubmitted prior to or concurrent with final plat application in order to verify compliance with regulations, including base density calculations. Tree Preservation / Landscaping Most of the upland of the subject site is tilled farmland. Therefore, tree removal is minimal. Almost all of the trees that may be impacted were planted by the applicant and are intended to be spaded and relocated. The applicant is proposing street trees within the right-of-way where the street is adjacent to open space areas. The location of the trees is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and Public Works Director. Irregular spacing is encouraged for street trees, to avoid the urban appearance that regular spacing may invoke. Details on the proposed trees and a detailed planting schedule shall be provided. The selection of vegetation should be guided by the natural community types identified in the City's 2008 Natural Resources Inventory. Conservation Areas The minimum required conservation area within a CD-PUD development is required to be 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). The buildable land area is defined as the total area of the site minus slopes greater than 18%, wetlands, required wetland buffers, lakes, and land contained within the 100 year floodplain. After the deductions, the buildable land area is 126.7 acres. A minimum of 30% of this total would need to be preserved as conservation area. The applicant has provided a table depicting the method by which they are calculating the percentage of conservation area, stating that the 38.47 acres of conservation area equates to 30.3% of the buildable land area. 5 In the CD-PUD Ordinance, conservation areas are required to be platted into separate outlots. The areas must be restricted from further development by a permanent conservation easement (in accordance with Minnesota Statute Chapter 84C.01-05). The easement must be submitted with the General Plan of Development and approved by the City Attorney. The permanent easement may be held by any entity defined by Minnesota Statute Chapter 84C, but in no case may the holder of the easement be the same as the owner of the underlying fee. The permanent conservation easement shall be recorded with Hennepin County and must specify the entity that will maintain the designated conservation area. The applicant is in discussions with the Minnehaha Creek Wattershed District to hold this easement. On Outlot E, the applicant proposes a 2.5 acre "recreation area" on the north side of the trail that appears to be mowed grass for a recreation area. Staff questions whether this use and landscaping contributes positively to the quality of the conservation area or whether it would be best to not include this in the conservation area if the intended use is active recreation. Restoring this area more consistent with the remaining upland areas would provide a significantly wider connection between the conservation areas on the east and west of the site. Perhaps this area would maintain its conservation values if used in a very limited fashion for passive recreation (perhaps limiting mowing and use to a few times per year). According to the ordinance, 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. The City may evaluate the density bonus requested based on the amount, quality, and character of the conservation area protected. Land Stewardship Plan Where a CD-PUD has designated conservation areas, a plan for the development, long-term use, maintenance, and insurance of all conservation areas is required. This land stewardship plan needs to define ownership and methods of land protection and establish necessary regular and periodic operation and maintenance responsibilities. The plan also needs to estimate staffing needs, insurance requirements, and other 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 maintenance. The applicant has provided a memorandum of understanding with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in order to assist in establishing the land stewardship plan. Also, a preliminary land stewardship plan was provided that identifies areas of reserve and restoration. 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. The land stewardship plan describes an annual fee of $300-$450 per acre of the buildable conservation area to be divided amongst the homes within the subdivision for the sake of ongoing maintenance of the conservation area once the restoration is completed and it is established. The ultimate easement holder will need to be consulted to ensure that sufficient funds are available for the work that needs to be completed. This amount results in a negligible HOA fee of only approximately $30 per lot per month once the subdivision is fully built out. Park Dedication The subdivision ordinance permits the City to required dedication of land for park and trails, cash -in -lieu of parkland dedication or a combination of the two. The applicant intends to largely satisfy park dedication requirements through the provision of trails. The total area of the subject site is 170.63 acres and after deducting wetlands the buildable area is 132.43 acres. The subdivision ordinance states that up to 10% of this land area may be required for dedication 6 for park purposes which would be 13.243 acres. The cash -in -lieu amount is based on 8% of the value of the land with the minimum cash contribution being $3,500 per dwelling unit and the maximum at $8,000 per dwelling unit. The maximum cash contribution would be capped at $336,000. The Park Commission reviewed several different trail configurations at their July 15`h meeting. Their recommendation was to require and east -west trail from Morningside Road to the main road within the subdivision and then accept the proposed turf trails proposed by the applicant. On the applicant's submission, there is identified approximately 2,850 linear feet of trail from existing Deerhill Road to the west of the site. The assumption would be that this would be provided within a 20' wide easement. Therefore, the applicant is proposing to dedicate 1.31 acres which is 9.9% of the required dedication amount. Additionally, the trail to the northeast of the wetland would be approximately 560 linear feet, for an area of 0.26 acres (2.0% of the required dedication). The trail corridor from Morningside Road directly west to the north -south portion of new Deerhill Road would constitute approximately 1005 linear feet. Again, assuming a 20 foot wide easement, the area of dedication would be 0.46 acre, or 3.5% of the required dedication. The City Engineer estimates that turf trail construction would cost about $9 a linear foot and bituminous trail construction is about $60. The construction of the turf trails would cost about $30,690 (2850 + 560 x $9). The estimated cost of the bituminous trail would be $60,300 (1005 x $60). This is equivalent to 27.1 % of the maximum park dedication fee. The trail easements are 15.4% of the maximum land requirement, for a total of 42.5%. The remaining cash -in -lieu fee would be $193,200. The applicant has also requested due consideration for the private pool and open turf amenities shown on their plans plus consideration for the conservation areas so that no additional fee would be required. State statute states that the City "shall give due consideration to the open space, recreational, or common areas and facilities open to the public that the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision." The CD-PUD district does suggest park dedication as one of the areas where the City may offer flexibility. However, it should be noted that the proposed pool and recreational area are stated to be for the benefit of only residents of the subdivision and not the general public. The City Council should discuss what due consideration would make sense, and lower the $193,200 remaining fee accordingly. Phasing Plan & Construction The applicant intends to submit a petition and waiver for construction of the road upon approval of the final plat. No phasing plan was proposed. However, if the applicant were to intend to plat the development in phases, the recommendation would be to have the conservation area outlot dedicated with the first phase and the restoration plan put into effect. REZONING With an approval of the PUD plan, the subject property would 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. Final plans will need to be submitted for review and approval with the final plat application. Failure to provide plans consistent with the General Plan and Preliminary Plat approvals will render the final plat application inconsistent with the preliminary plat approval. CD-PUD REVIEW The purpose of the CD-PUD 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 7 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. Additionally, in Section 827.25, the City states the purpose of a planned unit development. It states that the PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 1) Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2) Higher standards of site and building design. 3) The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4) Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5) Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6) A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7) An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering development costs and public investments. 8) A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. PUDs are not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles. 9) A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. In Section 827.35 Subd. 4, it states that the City must base its action on the PUD on the compatibility of the plan with the purpose statement above, consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is located, and the adequacy of the following: internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking, public facilities, recreational uses, open space, and buffering and landscaping. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their July 14t'' meeting. The Commission unanimously recommended denial of the request. The Commissioners felt that the density bonus sought was not justified by the amount, quality, or character of the conservation area and that the development did not meet the objectives of the CD-PUD Ordinance. There were also concerns voiced about traffic. Eleven members of the public spoke at the public hearing. An excerpt from the draft Planning Commission minutes is attached for reference. 8 POTENTIAL CONDITIONS The City Council should review the request and consider if the proposed plan meets the intent of the CD- PUD Ordinance. The Council should also evaluate how well the project achieves the conservation objectives over and above that achievable under conventional development and the amount and quality of conservation area protected. If the Council finds that the objectives described above are met through the amount, quantity, and character of the conservation areas being proposed and the flexibility being requested, it would be recommended to approve the CD-PUD General Plan, Preliminary Plat, and Rezoning with the following conditions: 1. Private roads shall be placed within outlots and road maintenance details shall be provided. 2. Shared driveways shall meet relevant standards and include a reciprocal easement and maintenance agreement satisfactory to the City, which shall be recorded against the properties. 3. Public streets shall be built to the standards required by City ordinances including a 24 foot wide surface, shoulders, and a 60 foot wide right-of-way. 4. Homeowner Association documents shall be provided for review and approval of the City. 5. Any future phasing plan shall include the conservation area within the first phase of development. 6. All septic sites shall meet the City's setback requirements and septic sites shall be identified for Outlot D. 7. All septic sites for use in the plat shall be identified on the plans. 8. The entirety of Outlot E shall be planted entirely in a manner consistent with the restored upland areas. 9. All wells within the City's Drinking Water Supply Management Area shall be registered to monitor possible contamination sites. 10. The applicant shall obtain and submit an approved wetland delineation for the southern 90 acres of the subject property prior to or concurrent with the application for final plat. If the delineation, as approved, identifies more than 1.6 acres of wetlands in excess of those identified on the preliminary plat, the applicant shall submit an updated Yield Plan. If the updated Yield Plan identifies a reduction of the Base Density on the southern 90 acres, the preliminary plat approval shall be considered null and void. Under such circumstances, the applicant may submit a revised preliminary plat for consideration which adjusts the number of lots accordingly. 11. A wetland replacement plan approval shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat application. 12. Wetland buffer planting plans and easements shall be provided. 13. Detailed planting plans and schedules for all landscaping shall be provided for review and approval by the City Planner. 14. Street tree placements is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and Public Works Director. 15. Details on any tree removal shall be provided. 16. The conservation easement shall be in a form and of substance acceptable to the City. The easement holder for the conservation area shall be secured prior to application for final plat and be willing to accept the easement in the manner required by the CD-PUD District Ordinance. 17. The applicant shall provide funds sufficient to cover the maintenance and operation of the conservation areas for four years following establishment. 18. The applicant shall dedicate 20' easements for the trails depicted on the plan and for a trail segment from Morningside Road to the new Deerhill Road. The remainder shall be cash -in -lieu in the amount of $193,200. 19. All comments from the City Attorney, City Engineer, and Hennepin County should be addressed. 9 20. The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall include the conditions described in this approval as well as other requirements by City ordinance or policy. 21. Except as explicitly authorized by City resolution or ordinance, all aspects of this subdivision shall comply with all applicable state laws, city codes, ordinances, and regulations, and the terms and conditions of the contingent settlement agreement dated December 18, 2014. 22. The Applicant shall obtain necessary approvals and permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, and other relevant agencies. 23. The application for final plat shall be submitted to the City within 360 days of preliminary approval or the preliminary plat shall be considered null and void. 24. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Prior to any preliminary plat approval, staff would recommend the applicant provide a revised plan depicting conditions 3, 6, and 7. In order to be considered for the August 18 meeting, these changes would need to be submitted by August 10, 2015. POTENTIAL MOTION / COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1. If the City Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation, the following motion would be in order, which may be revised: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial of the request based on the Planning Commission's findings of fact [as may be modified by the city council.] 2. If the council finds that the application meets the relevant objectives of the CD-PUD District and Comprehensive Plan and should be approved, the following motion would be in order. This motion would not require the applicant to update the plans prior to the City Council granting preliminary approval, but the approval would still be subject to all of the terms and conditions. Move to direct staff to prepare an ordinance rezoning the property to CD-PUD based on findings that the proposed development meets the objectives of the CD-PUD ordinance and a resolution granting preliminary plat approval, subject to the terms and conditions noted in the staff report [as those may be modified or amended by the city council] 3. If the council finds the application should be approved, but only if certain changes are shown on revised plans prior to granting preliminary approval, the following motion may be in order. As noted above, staff recommends that conditions/plans be updated and 3, 6, and 7 be addressed prior to any approvals. Move to direct staff to prepare an ordinance rezoning the property to CD-PUD based on findings that the proposed development meets the objectives of the CD-PUD ordinance and a resolution granting preliminary plat approval but only if the applicant submits a revised plat and plans making the following revisions: [specify required revisions] or, if a revised plat and plans are not submitted, a resolution of denial based on the Planning Commission's findings of fact [as may be modified by the city council.] 10 ATTACHMENTS A — Document List B — Draft excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes from July 14, 2015 C — Draft excerpt of Park Commission Minutes from July 15, 2015 D — Minutes from Planning Commission Concept Plan Review from February 10, 2015 E — Minutes from Park Commission Concept Plan Review from February 18, 2015 F — Minutes from City Council Concept Plan Review from March 3, 2015 G — City Engineer Comments dated 7/9/2015 H — Building Official Comments dated 6/29/2015 I — Hennepin County Comments dated 5/22/2015 J — Hennepin County Comments dated 6/24/2015 K — Public Comment received (Pflaum/Nadeau/NadeauBurkstrand/Schafer, Alger, Nadeau) L — Applicant Narrative M — Applicant Responses to Comments N — Settlement Agreement O — Preliminary Plat and Plans P — Potential Conflict of Interest Memo from Attorney Project: LR-15-162 — Stonegate CD-PUD General/Prelim Plat The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 5/8/2015 5/8/2015 3 Application Y Fee 5/8/2015 5/7/2015 1 Fee Y $10,000 Mailing Labels 5/8/2015 5/6/2015 9 Mailing Labels Y Narrative 5/8/2015 5/8/2015 11 Narrative Y Appendices listed below Yield Plan 5/8/2015 5/1/2015 3 Appendix 1 Y Includes Tam Ridge and Stonegate Traffic memo 5/8/2015 3/24/2015 4 Traffic Y Land Stewardship Plan 5/8/2015 5/8/2015 17 Land Stewardship Y Conservation Easement 5/8/2015 N/A 15 Conservation Easement Y Concept Plan Graphics 5/8/2015 3 Concept Graphics Y Includes concept plan and site design Narrative — Updated 6/19/2015 6/19/2015 13 Narrative-Updated6-19-2015 Y 61 pages with all appendices Traffic-sightline memo 6/19/2015 6/13/2015 3 Sightline Memo Y Minnehaha MOU 6/19/2015 6/18/2015 4 Minnehaha MOU Y Preliminary Plat 5/8/2015 N/A 4 Prelim Plat Y Preliminary Plat— Updated 6/19/2015 N/A 4 PrelimPlat-06-19-2015 Y Lot Tabulation 5/8/2015 5/8/2015 2 Lot Tabulation Y Alta Survey 5/8/2015 5/7/2015 4 Alta Survey Y Plans 5/8/2015 5/1/2015 12 Plans Y Includes grading, eros cont, existing Plans — Updated 6/19/2015 6/19/2015 6/19/2015 10 Plans-6-19-2015 Y +3 pages existing conditions Landscaping Plans 7/6/2015 6/19/2015 3 Landscaping Plan N Stormwater Calcuations 5/8/2015 5/8/2015 338 Stormwater N Includes Soil Survey Septic Information 5/8/2015 5/7/2015 85 Septic Y Applicant Response 6/19/2015 6/19/2015 2 ApplicantResp-6-19-2015 Y Applicant Response 7/7/2015 7/7/2015 3 ApplicantResp-7-7-2015 N Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Building Official Comments 6/29/2015 1 Yes Building Official Comments 5/15/2015 1 Yes Police Comments 5/18/2015 N/A Yes No Comments Engineering Comments 5/20/2015 4 Engineering Comments 7/9/2015 2 Yes Hennepin County Comments 5/22/2015 2 Yes Hennepin County Comments 6/24/2015 2 Yes Three Rivers Park Comments 7/13/2015 1 Yes Planning Commission Report 7/8/2014 8 137 pages w/ attachments and plans Park Commission Report 7/9/2015 5 41 pages w/ attachments and plans Public Comments Document Date Notes Electronic Letter (Pflaum, Nadeau, Nadeau, Burkstrand, Schafer) N/A Letter from Stuart Alger 7/10/2015 Letter from Pauline Nadeau 7/29/2015 Y Comment Cards from 7/14/2015 Planning Commission 7/14/2015 Excerpt from 7/14/2015 Planning Commission 7/14/2015 Excerpt from 7/15/2015 Park Commission 7/15/2015 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — Property Resources Development Corporation — East of Homestead Trail, West of Deerhill Road — Planned Unit Development General Plan and Preliminary Plat for a Proposed Conservation Design Subdivision to Include 42 Single Family Home Lots Sparks provided additional explanation on the definition of a conservation design subdivision, noting that there are specific criteria to review such requests against, similar to a planned unit development request. He stated that the subject site is approximately 170 acres in size and is predominately farmland and wetland with some sloping. He noted that both Morningside and Deerhill Road terminate into the property on the east and Homestead Trail is also adjacent the property. He stated that the concept plan was reviewed at the February meeting of the Planning Commission. He reviewed the base density for the subject site and stated 42 units would be 190 percent of the 200 percent base density allowed by ordinance. He stated that the City Engineer had reviewed the proposed access to Deerhill Road and had found it to be acceptable. He noted that the access into the property would be through Orono, noting that the property owner also owns the adjacent parcel in Orono. He described the circulation and its connection to Deerhill Road. He noted that the two cul-de-sacs would be private roads. He stated that following the concept plan review the applicant had reduced the right-of-way and street width in order to be more in line with low impact development and to reflect comments made regarding Deerhill Road. He said staff recommended the roads be built to City standards for safety purposes rather than the proposed narrower streets. He stated that additional details would be needed regarding the shared driveway and the maintenance plans for the cul-de-sacs. He provided additional details on the proposed trail alignment and stated that staff believes there are a number of ways to achieve the goals of the trail plans and therefore perhaps a connection to the park should be provided. He stated that primary and secondary septic sites are provided on each lot with the exception of one lot which has a secondary site proposed in the conservation area. The application also requests the flexibility to shift up to nine other secondary septic sites into the conservation area. He advised that three lots do not meet the City standards for septic setback to a wetland. He noted that the City's drinking water area runs through the middle of the property and therefore the City would need to be alerted to well placement. He stated that the grading will be custom and done on a lot -by -lot basis rather than grading the entire site at once. He stated that there will be minimal tree removal, he believed only one tree will be removed due to road placement. He stated that the final wetland delineation had not been provided but would be provided prior to the final review, noting that if there are major changes needed to lot placement the application would need to come back before the Planning Commission. He stated that 30 percent of the buildable area would need to be placed in a conservation area under the regulations and noted that the request proposes 30.3 percent, which meets that requirement. He noted that potential conditions for approval were included in the packet should the Commission recommend approval. Reid appreciated seeing the details of the settlement agreement but found it confusing that the Commission would still need to determine whether this application meets the requirements of a conservation design subdivision. Sparks stated that the Commission should still do what they are tasked to do as the Commission and review the application under the regulations of a conservation design subdivision. Finke stated that every aspect of the application is up for discussion. He provided additional explanation regarding the potential settlement. Reid stated that she felt input was given at the review of the concept plan and yet this is still the same plan coming forward. She referenced the width of the roads and confirmed that the City would like the roads to be 24 feet in width. She questioned if the City has an opinion on the filling of wetlands. 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Sparks stated that the comments provided in the concept review were to limit the fill of wetlands but noted that there are procedures you can follow to mitigate wetlands. Finke stated that on a farm property it is not uncommon to see pocket wetlands that are eventually filled when developed. Reid questioned the date of the settlement agreement and it was confirmed to be December of 2014. Albers questioned the quality of the wetlands proposed to be filled. Sparks noted that the full wetland report has not yet been provided so that is not known. Williams stated it is his understanding that under the conservation design regulations, conservation objectives should be identified and prioritized. He questioned the primary conservation objective for this application. Sparks stated that the applicant can provide additional details but believed that the applicant would be restoring an area that was farmland and on the northern portion of the site, the large wetland is a Tamarack swamp and would be protected. Williams questioned the high quality resources that would be protected within the conservation area, other than the Tamarack swamp. Sparks stated that area would be restored. Williams questioned the acreage of the conservation area that was actually buildable. He stated that it is his understanding that the Commission is supposed to compare the yield plan to this plan to determine if the benefits provided is equivalent to the density bonus requested. Finke confirmed that a substantial wetland is within the conservation easement. Williams stated that under regular development, 22 homes could be built and he is simply trying to determine if the benefit provided would be equal to the density requested. He stated that when he reviewed the Comprehensive Plan maps a large portion of this site was considered unbuildable and that area matches with part of the area within the proposed conservation easement. He questioned if there would be any limitations regarding the sewer service area. Sparks stated that this area is identified in the long-term sewer service area. He stated that this development could make it very unlikely that any other property in that area could connect. Williams stated that he found the language in the Comprehensive Plan to be confusing in regard to the long-term sewer service area. Sparks provided additional information on the interpretation of the language. Williams referenced Deerhill Road and the traffic study, which was cited by the applicant. He confirmed that as the applicant proposed, Deerhill Road would not need to be widened or improved. He questioned if the City had done an assessment on the condition of the roadway as it is today. 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that the expectation is that this would cause more trips as the traffic would be doubled and the City would need to determine if the past maintenance of Deerhill Road could be continued or whether that would need to be adjusted. Reid stated that this property is within the rural residential zoning district and questioned if there is anything other than the size of the lots that is specific to that district. Sparks stated that the main concern specific to rural residential as a land use under the Comprehensive Plan would be density. Finke stated that almost explicitly the conservation design subdivision ordinance language allows an alternate to what is provided under the zoning in order to provide additional benefit. He stated that the rural residential regulations would apply with some flexibility as allowed by the City. Nolan referenced the septic sites, specifically the ten sites that could encroach on the conservation area and the three additional sites that would encroach on the wetland setback area. Finke stated that the applicant is requesting a maximum of ten secondary sites in the conservation area. If these three sites were shifted into the conservation area, they would count towards the ten total. Nolan questioned what would happen if there are no alternate sites for those three that would encroach on the wetland setback area. Sparks stated that there is a potential condition that could require those lots to somehow be amended to meet that setback. Williams confirmed that this area was under a conservation preserve area and questioned what happened to the plantings that were done. Finke stated that the area was converted back to agricultural uses. Albers questioned if each home would have a well and whether there is concern with the number of wells and the placement to the septic. Sparks stated that there are regulations for well and septic placement. He stated that 12 wells would be within the area from which the City draws its drinking water but noted that proper monitoring of well placement could prevent issues from arising. White referenced the pool area and asked for details. Sparks stated that the pool would be within a separate outlot that would be owned by the homeowners association and would have a well and septic. He advised that there were no plans for the septic provided but noted that a holding tank could be an option. Jennifer Haskamp, SHC, stated that she has been working on this project with the property owner and developer for the past three years. She introduced the members of the team who were present at the meeting. She stated that there is a contingent settlement agreement associated with this property, which was reached after two years of negotiations, which included the concept plan, which is very similar to this plan. She stated that they are attempting to develop a plan consistent to the concept plan, which was attached to the contingent settlement and reviewed the similarities of those plans. She stated that they have also tried to listen to the comments received from the Park and Planning Commissions, staff and the 3 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes City Council. She stated that approximately 90 acres of the site will be placed into conservation easement, which is about half of the site. She provided additional information on the roadways and the proposed connection to Deerhill Road and stated that they are attempting to limit their impact on the rural roadway. She stated that they are proposing a width of 22 feet for the roads in order to limit the impervious surface and improve infiltration. She referenced septic systems and stated that as drawn today 41 out of 42 lots have their primary and secondary sites on their lots, which was done in order to address the concerns expressed during the concept plan review. She stated that they are requesting the flexibility of nine more of secondary sites to be relocated into the conservation area because some of the lots are challenging. She noted that only the secondary sites would possibly be located within the conservation easement, and that all primary site would be within the lots. She stated that the likelihood of a secondary site being used is very small and if it were placed within the conservation easement, prairie grass would be planted and you would not be able to distinguish the septic site by eye. She stated that a septic system has not been identified for the pool lot as the system would need to be sized to the use and demand. She explained that the initial recommendation had been to install holding tanks until the usage can be determined and an appropriate sized system would then be installed. She briefly summarized the details of the landscaping plan and amenities. She provided additional details regarding the active restoration plan and the reserve areas. She provided brief details regarding the input of the Watershed on the conservation areas. She stated that they would like to maintain the rural character and would not be interested in creating a suburban character. She stated that over 52 percent of the gross site would be preserved which they feel meets the intent of the conservation design subdivision ordinance and fulfills the requirement of park dedication. She stated that under the contingent settlement agreement they agreed to follow the State rules and explained that under the State rules there are no wetland setbacks. Murrin questioned if the pool area would have a clubhouse or a restroom. Haskamp confirmed that intent would be to have a small restroom facility with a patio area that would perhaps have a refrigerator for residents to put snacks in. Murrin questioned and received confirmation that there would be a homeowners association (HOA). She questioned if the HOA would manage the septic systems. Haskamp stated that the HOA would have specific duties outlined and there would be a list of regulations for homeowners to manage their septic systems. She stated that the HOA would have the power to step in in the event that a homeowner does not maintain their system. Williams referenced a traffic impact report and asked if there was a report requested for the intersection of Homestead Trail and Highway 6. Haskamp stated that they did not prepare the report and have been in communication with Hennepin County. She stated that the County's concern was regarding the access point in general and in proximity to the intersection but not with the number of trips generated. Williams stated that traffic does get backed up at that intersection, especially during the school year, and questioned the impact that stacking would have on the ability to get in and out of the development. He stated that the impact report for Deerhill estimated that 25 percent of the traffic would use that access but questioned the impact that stacking could have on traffic choosing instead to use Deerhill if there is stacking at the other access point. Haskamp stated that when the traffic engineer looked at the situation he made a judgement based on the layout of the development to determine roughly the percentage of traffic that would use either access point. 4 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Albers stated that Highway 6 is very busy when he drives his children to school, and believed that the number of trips that will utilize Deerhill Road was grossly underestimated. He believed that the percentages would be reversed with 75 percent using Deerhill and only 25 percent using the other access point. Haskamp stated that the traffic engineer that they used is very familiar with this area and she is confident with the information he provided. Albers referenced the creek bed, which is dry, and questioned if that would be grass or another material such as stone or rubble. Haskamp stated the idea is that it would be architecturally designed with boulders and outcroppings and would convey some of the excess water in a 100-year storm event. Albers referenced lot four and questioned if there is concern with the septic locations as the two identified back up to the creek bed. Haskamp provided additional information regarding the orientation of the septic systems and noted that in that case there is sufficient space to place a retaining wall as well. Reid stated that there was a reference to private trails and public trails and stated that it appears that most of the trails proposed will be private trails. Haskamp stated that the proposed trails would be public and are consistent with the 2014 Park Trails Master Plan. Reid asked whether the recreation area would be public or private. Haskamp replied that the area would be private and would be managed by the HOA. She noted that would be a passive recreation area with no structures or equipment. Murrin questioned if the passive recreation area is included in the 30 percent that would be placed in the conservation easement. Haskamp confirmed that is correct and explained that the City's regulations provide a list of acceptable activities within the conservation easement, such as recreation. Nolan stated that he was not present at the concept review and recognizes that there is a contingent settlement agreement but explained that as a Commissioner he is tasked to use the conservation design district rules to apply evenly to all applications. He stated that the applicant is asking for close to the highest density allowed under the conservation rules, at 190 percent out of 200 percent; providing a trail, which is also provided under normal development, and providing an additional trail; restoring prairie grass that had been prairie grass six to seven years ago; and the area that will be conserved is 30.3 percent, noting that the minimum amount that must be conserved under the rules is 30 percent. He asked why the Commission should be considering a near maximum density request when the conservation efforts appear to be near the minimum. Haskamp referenced a table on page nine of the submittal, which shows that of the 170-acre parcel, 38.47 acres of upland buildable land would be in the conservation easement. She stated that in a normal development, the wetland and wetland buffers become privatized and the quality can be degraded. She 5 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes stated that wetland buffers are buildable and therefore nearly eight acres of wetland buffer area will also be conserved that is not necessarily required in additional to the 38.47 acres. She stated that the contiguous area of open space makes prairie grass successful and that would be uniquely provided in this parcel. She stated that it is a labor of love to install a prairie and make it successful and viable in the long-term. She stated that the conservation design ordinance specifies both public and private trails and noted that they worked together with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed to design private turf trails in a design which will assist in making the prairie restoration successful and improving the wetlands and water quality. Nolan referenced property in the northwest corner that would not front on a road and noted that it appeared to be an effort to pack in additional lots. He asked for additional information on how that would be an aspect of conservation design. Haskamp stated that originally, there had been cul-de-sacs and when working with staff it had been suggested to shorten the cul-de-sacs lengths to reduce the impervious surface. She explained that shortening the cul-de-sacs changed the design to have a shared driveway for the one lot. Reid stated that the contingent settlement references a main arterial road and questioned if that is the serpentine road that starts at Homestead Trail and continues through to Deerhill Road. Haskamp confirmed that is correct. Williams questioned why the prairie grass was plowed to begin with. Haskamp stated that the property had been under the CRP program and once the ten-year period expires the property owner may use the land for economic purposes and that is why the land was used for agricultural purposes. Williams questioned if there is a map that highlights the buildable land and the definition of five contiguous acres of suitable soils. Haskamp stated that information is provided on a map and confirmed that information identifies the 22 lots that would be available under normal development standards. Williams referenced the yield plan and stated that the map provided does not appear to identify the buildable area on it. Haskamp provided additional information on the coloring and marking of the map. Nolan opened the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. Nolan referenced a letter received by the City Planner dated July 10th from Stuart Alger, an attorney for Steven Pflaum, which will be a part of the public record. Steven Pflaum, 2725 Deerhill Road, stated that his property abuts the subject property and he generally supports the development. He referenced the eastern buffer woods that will be preserved and would not normally be preserved under normal development. He stated that he also supports restricting the width of the road through the subdivision, which he believed would be a better fit to the existing Deerhill Road, which is a historic road. He stated that his main concern is preserving the current character and configuration of Deerhill Road as a historic farm road. He noted that there has been a petition signed by those that do not support the upgrading or changing the configuration of Deerhill Road. 6 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Nolan asked for confirmation that the issue regarding upgrading was the width and that he would not be opposed to the paving of the road. Pflaum confirmed that the residents would not be opposed to the upgrading of the surface of the road. Stuart Alger, who in representation of the Pflaums, stated that the Pflaums do support the development but do not want the road widened in conjunction with the project. He stated that they would like to keep the right-of-way width at 50 feet with a road width of 22 feet paved. He stated that the City ordinance provides discretion to approve road widths less than the standard if traffic conditions permit. He stated that the Pflaums have met with Stonegate and appreciate their willingness to work together and preserve the wooded forest area. Kylie Schefers, who spoke in representation of Barb Burkstrand who lives adjacent to the proposed project north of the Pflaums, stated that the property owner had concerns with erosion control and how that would be handled towards her property. She stated that she has concern with the septic areas and how that would be cleaned up if it does go into the secondary sites. She stated that the property owner generally supports the request but also had concern with construction equipment that could possibly be traveling on Deerhill Road. Nolan referenced the north side of the property that appears to be within the conservation area and questioned if that would be prairie grass. Haskamp stated that all the areas within the restoration area would be prairie grasses and the existing hardwood areas would be protected and would not be touched. Nolan asked for additional information on the staged grading and how the equipment would access and exit the site. Haskamp replied that the roadway would be constructed at one time. She stated that the individual sites would be graded carefully as they are constructed because of the septic sites. She stated that the lots are still fairly large and there is plenty of space on the rear of most of the lots for proper grading and water handling. Nolan asked for clarification on what would happen under the HOA or development agreement once the lot is sold. Haskamp stated that there are certain sites that have aspects that need to be protected and noted that additional measures, such as deed restrictions would apply. John Septer, who spoke in representation of Judah and Hannah Buckley, stated that the presentation referenced that the project has been worked on for years. He asked that the Commission and applicant consider additional details tied into the conservation elements in regard to the subdivision, specifically as it applies to the neighboring properties. He referenced an open area near where the new Deerhill would be constructed and stated that there are homes in that area. He expressed concern with headlights shining into homes and traffic noise. He stated that the rural character is important to this area and under conservation design and believed that a vegetative landscaping screen should be installed. He stated that the road speeds should also be managed to reduce emissions and road noise. He suggested placing speed bumps and limiting that section of Deerhill Road to 15 miles per hour. He echoed the comments of Pflaum applauding the developer for wanting to preserve and maintain the rural elements. 7 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Linda McGinty stated that she lives in Morningside, which is denser than what is proposed for this development. She questioned who would be plowing this neighborhood and received the response that the public roads would be the responsibility of the City while the private cul-de-sacs would not be the responsibility of the City. She questioned if the Watershed provided rate control and infiltration assessments and received confirmation that had been done. She questioned who would be responsible for checking the septic systems and received the response that the HOA would take an active role and the City would also require proof that the system had been cleaned once every two years. Finke noted that the system proposed actually had more stringent maintenance and monitoring requirements. McGinty questioned if the City would require a development agreement with escrow and warranties and received confirmation that would be required as well. She also confirmed that the prairie restoration would be covered in the development agreement. She received confirmation that homeowners would be allowed to have swimming pools. She questioned if busses will travel into the development and whether routes had been examined. Nolan stated that would be the decision of the School District and noted that would be a public road. McGinty stated that quality of life is not something that can be put into a concept plan or development agreement but is something that is important to the residents of Medina. She stated that preserving rural character is important to the community and the only way to do that is to limit growth. She stated that people live here because of the rural character and the good school district. She hoped that idea is kept at the forefront of the Commission's mind. Nolan stated that he believes that everyone cares about the quality of life and that is why they live here but noted that they work under the planning and zoning rules as people have the right to develop their property. Chad Grochowski, 1265 Maplewood Drive, stated that he lives adjacent to the far southeastern corner of the property, which is the one property with a proposed alternate septic system and asked for additional information on the alternative septic system. He stated that his well is on his far western border, which is near that area of the conservation area. He questioned if it is the preference of the homeowner to use an alternate septic system noting that area is within a treed area and believed the applicant stated that the wooded areas will be preserved. He questioned if the septic site could be nearest to the home being constructed rather than closest to his home. He noted that there are additional lots that are along his western border and questioned if those lots would be part of the alternative septic system as he was concerned with septic systems near his well. Haskamp stated that the development agreement can specify that no more than a set number of septic sites could be within the conservation easement. She stated that would not be an alternative septic system but would be a secondary septic site, which is to be used only in the event that the primary site fails, or cannot be used. She stated that none of the secondary sites would be constructed when the primary site is. She explained that the secondary sites would be planted with the prairie grass and would simply be protected in the case a primary site fails. She stated that the preference is to keep the primary and secondary septic sites on the lot, if at all possible. She referenced the site the resident referenced and noted that they would look at the placement of his well as required under State law to ensure that the septic is placed the sufficient distance from the well. She believed the marked area is within the planted trees and not the hardwood forest. 8 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Murrin referenced the septic location on lot five and stated that it appears to be outside of a suitable soils area. It was noted that the soils map is based on county -wide, and that it may be possible that circumstances on an individual lot may differ slightly. Clarkson Lindley, 1588 Homestead Trail, spoke in representation of his family and stated that his concern is with the overall density and the number of septic and well systems and the affect that would have on the groundwater. He stated that many of the drain fields are adjacent to another lot line or a conservation easement, which he did not feel met the purpose of a conservation easement. He stated that he has concern with a possible drawdown of the groundwater, which would affect his well. Nolan stated that there are State guidelines as to how close wells can be placed to another well or septic system and confirmed that the applicant would follow those rules. Amy Alworth, 1602 Homestead Trail, echoed the comments of Linda McGinty and stated she also believed that it is important to preserve the rural characteristic of Homestead Trail. She was also concerned with the traffic as Highway 6 already backs up from the school. She stated that she would prefer the 22 homes allowed under the Comprehensive Plan and would not want to see this high density. Kristin Chapman, 1910 Iroquois Drive, stated that she is not directly affected as her home is not adjacent to the property. She stated that residents that are not next to the development are still affected as this would increase traffic on Willow Drive and other roads as well. She referenced the rural character of the City and stated that at these density volumes there would be additional traffic lights and four way stops at several intersections. She did not believe that only 25 percent of the development traffic would utilize Deerhill Road and believed that the traffic backup on Highway 6 would cause residents of that development to instead use Deerhill Road. She stated that as the City has grown over the past 20 years she has seen the enforcement of City rules to be very poor and would like to see that when the development is ultimately approved there are enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the terms are agreed upon regarding septic systems, restoration of the prairie, and long-term trail maintenance. Cindy Piper, 2905 Willow Wood Farm Road, stated that she can guarantee that the trails as delineated on the plan would cause complaints from homeowners about horse poop on the roads. She stated that there are other ways to route the trails. She referenced the HOA and stated that once the developers leave the homeowners would be required to take over and would be tasked to do the work that the developers hope they would. She asked that the City review the terms of the HOA and questioned when the HOA would take over, whether that would be when the development is 50 percent complete or 80 percent complete. She asked that the City carefully review the HOA. Nolan questioned the role of the City in creating and/or managing an HOA. Finke stated that the City reviews HOA covenants pretty closely to determine how they compare to the City regulations and stated that they would be looking closely in regard to the long-term maintenance of the conservation areas. He stated that if tied to a condition the terms of the HOA cannot be changed without approval of the City. Reid questioned if there is enforcement if the items are not followed through on. Finke confirmed that would be enforceable. Danny Nadeau, 2632 Deerhill Road, stated that he is present in representation of his parents Bud and Pauline. He agreed with the comments of Pflaum regarding the rural characteristics of Deerhill Road, noting that the road functions well for the people that it currently serves. He stated that if the roadway is 9 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes opened up there would be major changes needed. He stated that his mother recommends that the City study and look at the possibility of having an entrance to Old Crystal Bay, rather than Deerhill, which would solve a number of issues. He stated that his mother also had an issue with the trail construction that is planned along Deerhill and questioned if there would be a plan to make that connection all the way down Deerhill. He stated that the conservation easement is really nice but a trail along Deerhill might be difficult to accomplish. Finke stated that the Park and Recreation Commission will consider the issue of trails at their meeting the following night. Nolan closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m. Reid questioned what the applicant would do if the City does not approve the additional flexibility for the secondary septic sites. Haskamp stated that they would ask why the City would take that position, since the conservation design ordinance permits secondary sites. She stated that they would bring the request to the City Council in hopes for a different answer. Nolan questioned if there are alternatives that have not yet been explored if the alternate secondary sites are not allowed within the conservation easement. Haskamps stated that they have demonstrated that on 41 of 421ots a primary and secondary septic location can be placed within the lots. She stated that on the last lot the alternative may be to relocate the lot where it was on the concept plan near the Pflaum property as the lot would have a primary and secondary septic location within the lot lines. Nolan asked why the applicant is asking for the flexibility when 41 out of 421ots have already been identified within the lots and questioned why then the flexibility is needed. Susan Seeland, applicant, stated that they would use that as a backup plan because things happen during development and the best laid plans do not always work as planned. She stated that the odds of ever having to use a secondary site with a multi -flow system is very low. She stated that they are doing the best that they can and simply want to ensure that if there is a problem there is an alternative. Murrin referenced lot five and questioned if she understood correctly that if the secondary site is needed for that lot the lot lines would be reconfigured if the additional flexibility is not provided. Haskamp stated that is not correct and explained that lot number five does not have a primary and secondary location within the lot lines and therefore if the flexibility is not given, the lot would be relocated to its original location on the concept plan adjacent to the Pflaum property. Murrin received confirmation that if relocated lot five would then be in the area marked as a conservation easement and questioned if that would then decrease the 30.3 percent marked as conservation easement. Haskamp stated that the percentage would not be decreased as the existing location of lot five would then be added to the conservation easement. Reid referenced the cost of monitoring the well location to ensure that other water supplies are not affected. She stated that there is concern regarding the additional stress that would place on the water supply in addition to the number of septic systems that would be added in proximity to wells. 10 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes Albers stated that he has concern regarding the exit to Deerhill Road as the traffic level will be highly increased on that roadway. He stated that he drove down Deerhill Road recently and it reminds him of being up north because of the rural characteristics and would hate to lose that because of this development. Williams stated that he tends to review the issue from a larger perspective and stated that from a conservation design standpoint priority resources need to be identified that are being preserved, which has been identified as the Tamarack swamp and forest. He noted that under the plans for what could be developed under regular development there would be eight homes placed in that high quality resource area. He stated that when comparing the proposed conservation plans to the plans that would be allowed under regular development there are 15 homes in the high quality resource area under the conservation design. He did not understand how doubling the number of homes within that area marked as a high quality resource advance any conservation objective. He stated that he walked the site and there are significant slopes that would direct runoff into the Tamarack swamp. He noted that there are buffers proposed that would not be provided through regular development. He questioned the tradeoff that would be received for the extra buffers, noting that there would simply be area preserved to the south that is currently crops. He stated that the applicant already dug up the established prairie once and questioned what would stop the applicant from doing that again in the future. He stated that he did not see the application meeting a number of objectives of the conservation design ordinance. He stated that the density requested far exceeds the benefit the City would be receiving. He was also concerned with the added traffic this would add to the Homestead and Highway 6 intersection and also believed that the added traffic would require Deerhill Road to be upgraded to handle that traffic. Murrin believed that if this moves forward an importance should be placed on the HOA covenants and the enforcement of that, specifically regarding the septic systems. She stated that it seems to make sense that the neighborhood would need an additional access point but did not believe that Deerhill Road could handle that extra traffic. She stated that although the City would be gaining a conservation easement she did not see that the minimum allowed conservation easement would equal the maximum density allowed. White stated that she did not feel that the maximum density would be justified by what the City would be receiving in return. She stated that the viewshed from Homestead Trail is important and had concern. She also had concern with the added stress this would place on Deerhill Road. She stated that she did not feel that this application meets all of the objectives for a conservation design subdivision. Muffin stated that if there were only 22 homes exiting onto Deerhill Road that would place a significantly less amount of stress on the roadway. Nolan echoed the comments that he did not see that the primary benefits would justify the maximum allowed density. He stated that this process has to be give and take and acknowledged that 38 acres is a lot of land and the size of this parcel allows something more meaningful to be done. He stated that he sees a lot of property that does not have street frontage and in the spirit of conservation it seems that the applicant is attempting to fit in extra lots. He stated that the applicant is also asking for additional flexibility with the septic sites. He stated that if this site is so tight that additional leeway must be given to allow septic sites within the conservation easement perhaps that is not the best application of the conservation design ordinance. He stated that another property owner is present tonight listening to this discussion because he has brought forward similar conservation design plans. He stated that his message must be consistent in that this is an incentive program and the more the applicant gives to the City, the more the City can give to the applicant. He stated that even 20 houses would change the character of Deerhill Road. He stated that when looking at the proportionality of what is being asked for must be considered and more must be given in return for requesting the maximum density allowed. He stated that 11 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/14/2015 Meeting Minutes when talking about conservation he would like to see that conservation is not lost in translation. He stated that Medina is rural and there is a method for this to work, but it must be equal on both sides. He stated that perhaps this plan could work if a few amendments were made to reduce the density. Murrin questioned if the development could be planned to not access Deerhill Road. It was confirmed that could not be done. Nolan stated that as nice as Deerhill Road is that would not be the first road in Medina that needs to be updated. Motion by Williams, seconded by Albers, to recommend denial of the Conservation Design -Planned Unit Development General Plan, Preliminary Plat and Rezoning subject to the findings that were provided during the discussion, that the objectives of the conservation design ordinance are not met through the application. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Foote) Finke stated that the City Council will review this item at their meeting on Wednesday, August 5th. Nolan briefly recessed the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Nolan reconvened the meeting at 10:03 p.m. 12 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: 1) Stonegate CD-PUD General Plan & Preliminary Plat — Park Dedication Review Finke presented the staff report for Stonegate (Property Resource Development Corporation, Inc.), which has applied for a Conservation Design Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) General Plan and Preliminary Plat. The applicant is proposing a 421ot CD-PUD on approximately 170 acres on a property located east of Homestead Trail and west of Deer Hill Road and Morningside Road. The primary access to the site would be off Homestead Trail, though the development would connect to Deer Hill Road. Finke explained that under a CD-PUD the code allows more flexibility than the regular standards in order to act as an incentive to preserve ecological resources, wildlife corridors, scenic views, and rural character. He noted that the CD-PUD allows a benefit of up to 200% of the density allowed in a standard Rural Residential subdivision. Finke noted that the subject site is predominately farm field and wetlands. He noted that Deer Hill Road and Morningside Road both terminate on the eastern side of the property and the property is adjacent to Homestead Trail on the west. The City of Orono is to the south of the site. Finke stated that the property is zoned Rural Residential and it is guided for Rural Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that rural development is allowed at an aggregate of one unit per ten acres and one unit per five acres of suitable soils, but the CD- PUD allows flexibility including density bonus. Finke stated that the proposed 421ots range between 1.28 to 2.63 acres in size, plus the pool lot. He noted that the base density would allow for approximately 221ots. The CD-PUD allows up to 200% bonus based on how well the proposed development achieves conservation objectives over conventional development and the applicant is proposing 190% bonus. Finke stated that 30% of the total buildable area is required to be in conservation areas and the applicant is proposing 30.3% of buildable area which is 38.47 acres and an additional 36 acres of wetlands and 8 acres of wetland buffer. He noted that outlot E contains recreational area. He explained that conservation areas should be interconnected and conservation easements must be provided over the area and held by a qualified entity. He also noted that a preliminary land stewardship plan had been provided by the applicant. Linck questioned if all the wetlands would be protected in the conservation easement. It was noted that all the remaining wetlands would be protected. 1 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: Finke stated that the applicant is proposing a turf trail to the west and north which is generally in alignment with the proposed trail in the Comprehensive Plan. It was noted that the Comprehensive Plan also showed a natural study area on the northern portion of the property. Three trail corridors in the Comprehensive Plan were included in the Master Park and Trail plan and two of the trail corridors were not included in the Master Plan. Finke explained for Park Dedication purposes, the city can require 10% of the buildable land which would be 13.24 acres, 8% of the market value at a maximum of $336,000 or a combination. He explained the number for various possible dedication options: • Deer Hill Trail segment and NE corner = 1.57 acres (11.9%) • Connection to Morningside o North -South Option A = 0.89 acres (6.7%) o East-West Option B = 0.46 acres (3.5%) • Connect between Option B and applicant proposed trails 0.95 acres (7.2%) • Paving Option B is approximately 17.9% of total dedication It was noted that Minnehaha Watershed District will likely hold the conservation easement and they were concerned with Option A because it bisects the conservation area. They were okay and less concerned with Option B. Finke noted that the applicant has requested turf trails, private amenities and that the protected conservation areas be considered when calculating park dedication and that no additional fee be charged. Finke reviewed CD-PUD objectives and stated that the Planning Commission recommended that the applicant did not meet these CD-PUD objectives. Pearson asked that the applicant define their open spaces, wooded acres, restored prairies, and wetlands. Reid questioned if the City would usually give Park Dedication credit for private amenities? Finke noted that State Statute says cities shall give due consideration for open space, recreational, or common areas and facilities open to the public. He said it doesn't require it to be acre for acre. Jennifer Haskamp, Planning Consultant with SHC, LLC, introduced herself and the project team working with the applicant. Haskamp summarized the park and open space related items in the contingent settlement agreement for this property. She noted the following: 2 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: • Wetland delineation was to use the 2011 boundaries. The north 80 acres were approved and they updated delineation on the southern 90 acres. • The conservation area could not be less than 30% per the city definition. • A land stewardship plan will be prepared and three acres of additional wetland restoration will be included in the central area. • The public trails will be dedicated in compliance with those identified in the trail plans. Trail dedication will be credited against park dedication fees. • Due consideration for park dedication credits related to conservation areas may be considered by the city. Haskamp stated that the concept plan detail in the contingent settlement agreement included: • 42 Rural Residential lots, sized from 1.0-2.5 acres. • Approximately 31% of upland buildable area dedicated for conservation area. • 2011 wetland delineation used as a base. • Public trails on site are consistent with City's park and trail master plan adopted on March 18, 2014. Haskamp stated that the applicant's goals and objectives are the following: • Consistency with the contingent settlement agreement. • Incorporate staff and council comments from the contingent settlement agreement negotiations related to the draft concept plan. • Meet the goals of the conservation design ordinance. • Listen to comments and concerns of staff, park commission, city council and neighbors. • Create an exceptional conservation development with integrated networks of public and private trails and open space. Haskamp stated that the summary of key points on the preliminary plat are as follows: • 42 lots, ranging in size from 1.39 acres to 2.63 acres. • 52.8% of gross site dedicated in conservation easements. o All conservation easements in separate outlots. O 30.3% upland buildable. O 1.5% private open space. • 47.2% developed area. Haskamp noted that the applicant's proposed turf trails align with the trails shown in the City of Medina's Park and Trail Master Plan that was adopted on March 18, 2014. She also noted that the applicant has no objection to dedicating an easement on the northeast corner of the site for a future trail. She also noted that there is an existing paved regional trail along County Road 6 that runs through the applicant's property in Orono which is directly to the 3 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: south of this site. She stated that the applicant believed this regional trail accommodates the needs of these residents to connect to Baker Park. Haskamp showed a map of the proposed trails and noted that the public trails on the north 80 acres match the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and the 2014 Park and Trail Master Plan. She also noted that the private turf trails in the southern corridor of the conservation areas meets the objectives of the City's Conservation Design Ordinance. She noted that the reason for private trails in the southern corridor is to best establish good prairie restoration. The private trail network would change in different locations in different years to solve different objectives to maintain the prairie. Haskamp stated that the applicant is working with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to hold the conservation easement on the site. She stated that Minnehaha Creek Watershed District preferred private turf trails in this area and noted that they absolutely did not want bituminous trails. Haskamp reviewed the landscape plan, showing a possible nature area per the Comprehensive Plan in the northeastern corner of the site. She noted that outlot D would be a community pool and gathering space which was located in the southern part of the site. She noted that outlot E is the half-moon shaped lot which would be split between passive recreation open space and short grass prairie, divided with a public trail. The Park Commissioners questioned if all the areas that Haskamp described should be considered for Park Dedication. Haskamp discussed the site tabulations that were in the applicant's narrative for the buildable upland conservation area, community pool, wetlands and wetland buffer areas. Haskamp explained the Land Stewardship Plan which states that they will restore the CRP prairie grasses similar to the diversity level that was planted on -site between 1997 and 2007. The plan will show areas of protection including the existing Tamarack and Hardwoods. Pearson noted that he needed to leave the meeting to catch a flight out of town. He stated that he was concerned with the quality of the nature areas being preserved and wanted more information on what it looked like. Leslie Witterschein, Attorney with Monroe Moxness Berg, introduced herself as the Attorney representing the applicant. She wanted to remind the Park Commission of Minnesota Statute 465.35 Subd. 2b regarding Park Dedication. She noted clause (d) states "in establishing the portion to be dedicated or preserved or the cash fee, the regulations shall give due consideration to the open space, recreational, or common areas and facilities open to the 4 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: public that the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision." She also noted that Minnesota Statute 465.35 Subd. 2c references the "Nexus." She noted that clause (a) states "There must be an essential nexus between the fees or dedication imposed under subdivision 2b and the municipal purpose sought to be achieved by the fee or dedication. The fee or dedication must bear a rough proportionality to the need created by the proposed subdivision or development. Witterschein stated that per Minnesota State Statute, the city shall give consideration for the following: • 38.47 acres of buildable upland conservation area. • 43.93 acres of unbuildable conservation area. o 3 acres of wetland restoration. o Approximately 8 acres of wetland buffers which are buildable. • 1.86 acres of open space including the community pool. • 1.73 acres on the northeastern corner of the site. • Areas for public trails on the northern 80 acres. • Areas for private trails on the southern 90 acres. Witterschein noted that the above areas exceed 52% of the gross site. Witterschein ended her presentation by stating that the national park standards are 1.5 acres per 100 residents. She noted that the proposed development is 42 households at approximately 3 people per household which equals 126 people. Cindy Piper, 2905 Willowwood Farm Road, addressed the Park Commission. She stated that she has been riding horses on the subject property for a number of years while under various different ownership. She stated that she is concerned if the trails were turned over to the Homeowners Association because they will eventually get tired of horses. She questioned if the public turf trails would be open for horseback riding. The Park Commission confirmed that horses would be allowed on the public turf trails and asked the applicant if the future property owners would be aware of the horse trails prior to buying the property. The property owner confirmed that future homeowners would be aware that horses were allowed on the public turf trails. Piper questioned if the public turf trails could go around the back side of the homes along the edge of the wetland buffer instead of going through the front yards adjacent to the road. She noted that the homeowners were not going to like the horse poop in their front yards. She felt like the backyard trail would feel more rural residential and better accommodate the horses. 5 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: Piper noted that horseback riders currently cross this property at Deer Hill Road. Discussion occurred if that was currently a public right-of-way. Susan Seeland, property owner, stated that the Deer Hill Road access is currently the subject of litigation. She also noted that she was absolutely opposed to the trail going through people's backyards. She confirmed that the front yard trails shown on the plan will be public turf trails for horses. Peter Rechelbacher, 1242 Hunter Drive, stated that he had recently purchased the Reimer property which is west of the northern portion of the subject site. He stated that he had a major concern with the proposed trail access point in the northwest corner of the site that ends at his property. He stated that he also is working with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to put a conservation easement on his property to preserve the Maple Basswood forest, Tamarack and wetlands. He stated that he did not want horses riding through his property. Lee questioned if there was a spot on his property that made sense to connect a trail. Rechelbacher stated that it was all wetlands. Reid questioned if Rechelbacher was planning on developing the site. Rechelbacher stated that he plans to build a single home on the site and the remaining site would remain intact. Haskamp noted that it was important for the applicant's development to have access to Baker Park from his property or the Deer Hill Road access to the south of his site. Piper agreed with Rechelbacher that it would be difficult to access Baker Park from his property. Lee stated that when the Park Commission reviewed the concept plan in February, they stated that they would like to see a connection from this development to Medina Morningside. Haskamp mentioned that she did not think the February Park Commission minutes were accurate stating that she knew there was some discussion, but did not think there was a unanimous decision. Lee reaffirmed that he would still like to see a trail connection from this site to Medina Morningside for these residents to access the city's well established neighborhood park in Medina Morningside and for the Medina Morningside residents to be able to access Baker 6 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: Park. He asked Haskamp what she would suggest for a trail connection to Medina Morningside. Haskamp stated that she would suggest private turf trails and nothing else. Scherer felt that a bituminous trail made the most sense to connect the Medina Morningside residents to a road within the proposed subdivision. Haskamp reiterated that Minnehaha Watershed District was completely against bituminous. Haskamp stated that the applicant's residents would be able to access Medina Morningside Park through private turf trails. Lee stated that the private turf trails would not allow Medina Morningside residents to access Baker Park and the existing regional trail along County Road 6 is too far out of the way for the residents on the west side of the Medina Morningside development. Lee suggested to have a paved trail run straight south from Medina Morningside and then down and around the conservation area so it does not bisect it. Haskamp noted that additional hardcover was not good for the site either. Seeland stated that she would have been more willing to work with the city on this trail connection, but she has not been able to work well with the city. She went into a lengthy explanation on the history of her property. She noted that her and her husband bought the property in the 1990's as an investment property and it was a farm at that time. She said that Hennepin County had approached her in 1997 to establish prairie grasses on the site, which she thought would make her site more desirable. Later, her property showed up on all the DNR maps as a native mesic prairie and it was untouchable. She explained that she served on the open space task force to better understand the city's processes. She also submitted a concept plan during the Comprehensive Plan review and no one would consider it. She stated that she had no choice but to plow her fields and turn it back into farmland. Reid questioned if a short public turf trail would work to connect to Medina Morningside. Witterschein reminded the Park Commission that the trails needed to be flexible to establish the prairie. Discussion occurred on the direction the Park Commission wanted to go with this application. There was a general consensus to take the northeastern corner of the site for a future overlook when the adjacent property developed. It was also noted that an easement 7 Excerpt of Draft Minutes from July 15, 2015 Park Commission Meeting: could be taken for the northwestern trail segment in case the western property developed in the future, but the trail did not have to be developed at this time. Witterschein stated that a trail connection to Medina Morningside could not be required because the contingent settlement agreement stated that the applicant only had to show the trails based on the 2014 Park and Trail Master Plan. Finke clarified that the exact language in the contingent settlement agreement says "city trail plans" and did not specifically state the 2014 Park and Trail Master Plan. Haskamp stated that she could sense a motion was getting ready to be made and asked that if a recommendation to connect to Medina Morningside was going to be made that it not be done through a side yard, but connect in the open space directly to the road. A motion was made by Reid and seconded by Meehan to recommend that the turf trail be installed as shown, minus the northern branch, but take the easement for the northern branch and to recommend a public connection from Medina Morningside to the road in the subject site. Motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Meehan and seconded by Linck to recommend taking the northeastern corner overlook easement. Motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Lee and seconded by Jacob to recommend taking dedication per the recommended easements and have the City Council give due consideration for the private recreation and amenities. Motion passed unanimously. 8 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 2/10/2015 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — Property Resources Development Corporation — PUD Concept Plan for a Conservation Design Subdivision of 421ots on 170 Gross Acres Located East of Homestead Trail and West of Deerhill Road Sparks provided additional information on the process for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan as well as conservation design subdivisions. He identified the subject site, which is approximately 170 acres in size and is primarily farmland and wetlands. He stated that the property is currently zoned rural residential, which would allow one unit per ten acres. He explained that the conservation design district would allow for density bonuses if the criteria can be met. He provided additional information on the septic system proposed for the development by the applicant and advised that the tree preservation plan would be addressed during the Preliminary Plat phase of the review. He stated that the Commission should review the request to determine if it meets the criteria of a conservation design subdivision. Williams referenced the conservation easement objectives and questioned which aspect specifically would apply to this parcel that would be protected. Sparks advised that there are significant wetlands, including one identified as a Tamarack Swamp. Williams inquired if the base density allowed under this situation would be 22 homes, prior to density bonuses. He questioned how many homes would be allowed for development if the developer would have just wanted to develop the land outside of this type of request. Sparks confirmed that a different calculation would be used to determine the allowable number of homes outside of this type of request. Williams reference the multi-flo septic system proposed and asked for additional information regarding the performance of the system. Finke stated that there are a number of this type of system installed throughout the City. He advised that the system is on the list of allowable technologies. He did not know of any concerns with systems that have been installed in Medina. He explained that the active parts of the treatment plant need to be maintained in order to ensure operations. Sparks confirmed that the maintenance is handled by the homeowners but noted that additional information in that aspect would come forward further in the review process. Reid referenced tree preservation and confirmed that aspect would not be discussed until the Preliminary Plat review phase of the process. Murrin referenced the access points proposed and questioned if Orono has been approached to determine if they would approve of that access. She also questioned if Deerhill Road would need to be expanded. Finke advised that this is simply the review of the Concept Plan and those aspects would be discussed further along the process. Jennifer Haskamp, SHC, introduced those present to represent the applicant tonight. She stated that they have been working on this plan for the past few months in order to create a plan that would meet the criteria of the conservation design ordinance. She stated that there are approximately 40 acres of buildable area proposed to be located in the conservation easement noting that the plan integrates open spaces with the lots and also provides buffers between the properties to preserve the character of the neighborhood. She also identified a trail corridor included in the plans to coincide with the desires of the 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 2/10/2015 Meeting Minutes City. She stated that they have entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Watershed in order to take a proactive approach to providing the best function of the areas proposed to be protected. She stated that they have really tried to develop a functional plan that respects the land and the concerns that have been voiced by neighboring property owners. Williams referenced the map, which identifies the wetlands and asked if there is another map that identifies conservation areas that are not already protected. He questioned which land the City is gaining into a conservation easement that would not already be protected. Haskamp referenced that map and identified the color used to highlight that area, noting that is approximately 40 acres of land in addition to the wetland and wetland buffer areas. Williams questioned which ecological resources would be protected by this proposal in addition to the Tamarack Swamp. Haskamp stated that there are different methods to achieve the objectives. She stated that there is an inherent value to the Tamarack Swamp. She stated that there are pocket wetlands and they are proposing to improve the quality of those wetlands to benefit not only this property but also the surrounding region. Williams questioned what resources exist within the areas identified with the dark green color that are not wetland but proposed to be conserved. Haskamp explained that the areas are currently being farmed and this project would provide an opportunity to protect the wetland boundaries existing and actually improve those wetlands. She stated that although those wetlands exist, the function is not as high as it could be. She referenced an area to the east where there are not only wetlands but also trees that would be preserved. She stated that the City plan identifies this parcel as having high natural resource value and therefore they have identified the corridor and open space area to match the Comprehensive Plan of the City. She advised that the required land stewardship plan would be developed in the next phase of this process. Foote referenced a large wetland that he believed is located on the Orono portion of the property and stated that it appears three lots will go directly over that wetland. Haskamp stated that the Concept Plan excludes the Orono site. She stated that they will make every effort possible to provide a primary septic system on each site but stated that there may be an area or two where a community system would be needed. Reid questioned how the number of homes was determined. Haskamp stated that they used the base calculation for the ordinance and then determined what they felt would be accomplished, in addition to maintaining consistency with the settlement. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. Finke advised of written items that will become part of the record. Stuart Alger, Attorney for resident residing at 2725 Deerhill Road, stated that his comments relate specifically to Deerhill Road. He stated that the residents along Deerhill Road are concerned that this project threatens the unique condition of Deerhill Road, specifically the tree canopy. He stated that the Concept Plan is an improvement from past plans for development. He stated that the Concept Plan does not identify plans for Deerhill Road but noted that the residents are concerned that there would be pressure to widen Deerhill Road, which they are opposed to. He stated that two possible options were 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 2/10/2015 Meeting Minutes included in his written comments including making Deerhill Road a private road, which staff has stated they could possibly support. He advised that the other would be that the main access road would remain public but that the connection to Deerhill Road would be for maintenance or emergency use only, noting that a gate would then be installed in that location. He stated that staff has stated that they would not support the second option but advised that is the option that the residents would prefer. Williams asked for input from staff regarding the gate option. Finke explained that there would be two cul-de-sacs that would need to be maintained and advised of the other burdens the gate option would place on the City and City staff. He explained that if the roadway is to be a public street, full access would be needed. Reid questioned if there is any possibility that Deerhill Road could remain narrow with this development. Finke explained that as part of a development review staff also needs to review the surrounding infrastructure to determine if those aspects can support the development. He stated that on the previous development proposed Deerhill Road had been the primary access point for the development and noted that in this plan the primary access point would be Homestead Trail so that would be a difference. He advised that the impact to existing infrastructure would be reviewed further into this process to determine if improvements would be needed. Foote confirmed that the existing Deerhill Road does not meet the minimum road standards. Murrin questioned who owns the land that would be needed should the road need to be expanded. Finke explained that acquisition of right-of-way would be a part of a public improvement process if that step is needed. Steve Pflaum, 2725 Deerhill Road, stated that he believes the Concept Plan proposed is a large improvement over what had originally been proposed. He stated that the density would be mitigated by the large open space areas. He stated that this is a significant proposal for the City. He referenced the presentation of the applicant, which includes preservation of a wooded area and noted one lot that would not preserve that area. He stated that it appears the City would like to widen Deerhill Road as a part of this project and was strongly opposed to that option. He noted that would require a significant amount of trees to be cut down and believed that there are better alternatives. He recognized that is not part of the Concept Plan review tonight but wanted to ensure that the concerns of the homeowners are addressed. Nancy Lindlee, 1588 Homestead Trail, commented that it seems that this proposal includes too many homes for a rural residential area. She referenced the septic issue and was concerned that 42 septic tanks could leak into the drinking water area for the City. She did not believe that this was the right type of development for this space. Tom Rassieur, 1845 Willow Drive, echoed the concern regarding the septic system. He also has concerns regarding the water table as the homes would be pumping water to irrigate their lawns. He was also concerned with the long-term maintenance of the septic system and what would occur if the homeowner chooses not to maintain the septic system. He questioned if there would be environmental effects that are not recognized at this time. He found it odd that the proposal is completed in corporate names and wanted to know more specific information on the people included in this development and their track record. Amy Alworth, 1602 Homestead Trail, asked the Commission to preserve the rural quality of Homestead Trail and asked the Commission to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. 3 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 2/10/2015 Meeting Minutes Reid closed the public hearing at 8:17 p.m. Reid commended the members of the public in attendance for their participation and summarized the concerns brought forward by the public. Williams confirmed that no decisions would be made tonight and explained that this is simply a format in which to provide comments to the applicant. Albers stated that he has concerns with the number of lots proposed for the rural residential area as well as the comments made regarding the forest area. Foote appreciated the intent to create open space but did have concern with the number of lots proposed. Murrin stated that she would be concerned with Deerhill Road and would want more information on that situation. She referenced the issue of sewer and questioned if there would be an option to connect to City sewer. Reid stated that there would not be an option for City sewer. Murrin stated that she would like to see additional information on the septic system proposed. Foote stated that while most people would utilize Homestead Trail, he believed that Deerhill Road would also need to remain as a connection. Williams stated that there are not many conservation easement developments and questioned if there are, or will be, others in the City. He stated that his approach would be to determine what the City is gaining through the proposal that would warrant an increase in density. He stated that the applicant is requesting about 190 percent in density bonuses but did not feel that there were significant ecological resources that would be protected, as the wetlands would already be protected. He stated that the previous resource inventory was done approximately ten years ago and would like to see more information. He stated that he would be viewing the request in terms of what the City is gaining compared to what the City would be giving in bonuses. He stated that while the decision regarding Deerhill Road would not need to be made at this point that issue would need to be considered because the more homes in the area, the more pressure that would be placed on the roadway. He stated that this proposal is an improvement but believed the density proposed is too high as the density bonus should be in line with what is actually being conserved. Reid echoed the comments from Williams in regard to the excess bonus being requested by the applicant. She referenced the issue of the septic system and believed the Home Owners Association (HOA) would need to be involved with the ongoing maintenance. She stated that she would like to see Deerhill Road preserved in its current state. She thanked everyone for their participation. Reid briefly recessed the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Reid reconvened the meeting at 8:37 p.m. 4 Excerpt from February 18, 2015 Park Commission Minutes 1) Property Resources Development Corporation — PUD Concept Plan for a Conservation Design subdivision of 42 lots on 170 gross acres located east of Homestead Trail and west of Deerhill Road — Park Dedication Discussion Gallup presented the staff report for Property Resources Development Corporation, which has applied for a PUD Concept Plan for a Conservation Design subdivision of 421ots on 170 gross acres located east of Homestead Trail and west of Deerhill Road. She noted that approximately 40 acres of the site is buildable property and the applicant is proposing to conserve 33% of it. She stated that 50 acres is unbuildable wetlands and buffers, which will also be conserved. Gallup noted that under the Conservation Design subdivision the code permits flexibility and potential density bonuses up to two times the density in order to preserve ecological resources, wildlife corridors, scenic views, and rural character. She noted that the subject site has a large wetland/tamarack swamp on the north end of the site with the remaining property as tilled farmland. The large wetland is identified as moderate quality in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) and the property is identified as a priority area in the Open Space Report. Gallup noted that the plan identifies two trail corridors. One corridor runs east to west from the end of Deerhill Road to the western boundary. The other corridor goes north from the east -west trail to the edge of the wetland. Gallup stated that the Park and Trail Master Plan identifies three turf trail corridors. One corridor from Willow to Homestead approximately along Deerhill. The second corridor along the southern edge of the tamarack swamp and the third corridor along the northern edge of the tamarack swamp. Gallup noted that for park dedication purposes, the city can require 10% of the buildable land, 8% market value or a combination. If the city took the full 10% of the buildable land it would be approximately 13.22 acres. If the city took the full cash fee it would be estimated at $336,000. If a combination, the city only deducts trail easements outside of the right-of-way. No credit would be given for pedestrian ways in the right-of-way which act as sidewalks. Gallup listed the following items for discussion: • Confirm an interest in a trail north of the wetland, because it wasn't shown on the applicants plan. • Determine the type of trails. The master plan calls for turf, but discuss any interest in a multi -use paved trail between Willow Drive and Baker Park Reserve. • Trail locations are proposed immediately adjacent to streets. Is there any interest to have trails in the conservation areas? 1 Excerpt from February 18, 2015 Park Commission Minutes • Concern over ability to build a trail along Deerhill. Is there an alternative eastern connection? • No park proposed by applicant, but property is in the half mile radius of Medina Morningside Park. Is there a need for an internal park or a connection to Medina Morningside Park? Jennifer Haskamp introduced herself as the Planning Consultant here on behalf of the developer and property owner. She noted that they had come up with the existing plan by first looking at the areas on their property that needed to be conserved such as the wetlands, steep slopes and vistas to the tamarack swamp. She stated that they affectionately call the one acre lookout point to the tamarack swamp "the island", noting that this area has quite spectacular views. Haskamp stated that it was the land owner's intent to also show a trail easement on the northeast corner of the site to be able to enjoy the view of the tamarack swamp from the north. Haskamp showed that the Trail Plan's east -west connection is provided by following the right- of-way up and down along the curved road. She noted that the north -south connection is provided in the open space and continues up to the island. She clarified that the trails are being proposed within the right-of-way, but the roads are planned to be narrow which will allow for the trail to be separated from the road by a boulevard. Haskamp stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan has a passive park study area shown right where this property is located. She stated that the island is approximately one acre in size and would be a perfect location for a natural park. Reid observed that the north -south trail connection would run through the back yards of lot 1 and lot 2. She questioned if those future land owners would know about the planned trail? She also questioned if the other future landowners would be aware that horses could be riding through the turf trail in their front yards? Haskamp described the various conservation areas on the site, noting that the center 40 acres will be undergoing some wetland restoration to help the wetlands better function together. The "D" shaped area to the south of the curved road would have low plantings and is envisioned as a communal area for neighborhood gatherings. She noted that the next step in the process would be to create a land stewardship plan, noting that they have initiated conversations with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Scherer stated that there is a need to connect Medina Morningside to Baker Park Reserve and to get the school kids from this development down to the Willow Drive Trail, but the people using these trail connections will want asphalt not turf. 2 Excerpt from February 18, 2015 Park Commission Minutes Lee stated that he would like to see a trail connection from the cul-de-sac in Medina Morningside to the trails in this plan, with the trails running north and then west through the conservation areas. He noted that as a Park Commission, they have been trying to create off road trails. Scherer noted that the city is constrained on Deerhill Road as they are limited to statutory use of the road. He also noted that the lots on Deerhill are small and will not subdivide in the future. Haskamp stated that the land owner and developer are opposed to paved trails through the conservation areas to preserve the character of these areas. Haskamp suggested that the trail connection from Morningside should head straight west through the side yards of lots 39 and 40 and connect to the road instead of going straight north through the conservation area. Meehan asked what the anticipated demographics of the people that will live in this subdivision. She questioned if it would be families and Orono school kids? She asked Haskamp if she saw a benefit to connect this subdivision with Medina Morningside to access the park? Haskamp stated that there absolutely was a benefit to connect this subdivision to the park. She was not sure of the exact demographics of the neighborhood, but imaged there would be families living there with the close proximately to Orono Schools. She stated that they are currently in the process of doing a market study to determine the demographics and what types of amenities should be included in the subdivision, such as a community pool or tot lot. She noted that this subdivision is different than the typical subdivision because the lots are one to one and a half acres in size and are all positioned to be able to enjoy more acreage of protected space. She envisioned that some of the property owners may be empty nesters looking to downsize from a ten acre parcel. These people will have the feeling of a five acre parcel without having to maintain five acres because of the way the lots will be positioned. The Park Commission came to a general consensus and provided the following comments to the applicant: • Would like to see a trail connection to Medina Morningside. • Would like to see turf trails and some bike connection/paved trail from east to west. 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/3/2015 Meeting Minutes Property Resources Development Corporation — PUD Concept Plan for a Conservation Design Subdivision of 42 Lots on 170 Gross Acres Located East of Homestead Trail and West of Deerhill Road (7:23 p.m.) Sparks presented the PUD Concept Plan for a Conservation Design Subdivision on 170 gross acres located east of Homestead Trail and West of Deerhill Road. He reviewed the current zoning and allowed density of the property. He stated that there are 42 lots proposed for the property. He stated that the base density for the property would be 22 homes but explained that under the conservation design ordinance there could be up to a 200 percent density bonus. He identified the proposed access points for the development, noting that the main access point would be through Orono and explained that the applicant also owns that property. He advised that another access point is proposed at Deerhill Road and noted that there are no plans to improve Deerhill Road. He stated that the Park Commission reviewed the plans and recommended some slight modifications to the proposed trails and connections. He provided additional information regarding the conservation easement area. He reviewed the plans for septic treatment proposed by the applicant and advised that the tree preservation plan will need to be addressed by the applicant further along in the process. He stated that the conservation design ordinance outlines specific objectives that need to be met in order to qualify for this type of development. He reported that the Planning Commission reviewed this item at their February meeting and noted that a summary of their comments were included in the Council packet. Mitchell stated that he lives on the east end of Deerhill Road and Willow Drive and noted that his sister lives on the west end of Deerhill Road. He stated that he also knows many of the residents along Deerhill Road and noted that he discussed the possible conflict of interest with City Attorney Batty. He stated that he does not have a financial interest and therefore he does not believe that he has a conflict of interest. Jennifer Haskamp stated that she is present on behalf of the applicant Property Resources Development Corporation (PRDC) and Stonegate Farm. She thanked staff for their cooperation thus far and during the Planning Commission meeting. She referenced the first two objectives of the Conservation Design Ordinance and stated that under the Comprehensive Plan much of the property is identified as moderate to high quality natural resources. She identified resources on the property including the Tamarack swamp, Maple -Basswood trees, 49 acres of wetlands and buffer areas, and 40 acres of upland buildable land that will be protected through this plan. She noted that a total of 53 percent of the site will be preserved under this plan. She identified the third objective of the Ordinance and stated that the plan was careful to identify methods to meet the intent of the north/south corridor. She stated that because of the interest they have heard through this process, from the Planning and Park Commission and the Watershed, they would be willing to relocate lot 12 in order to strengthen that corridor. She referenced the fourth objective of the Ordinance, noting that Homestead Trail is identified as the scenic road and advised that the homes near that road have a setback of at least 300 to 500 feet. She stated that additional landscaping measures will assist in buffering and protecting the view from the road. She referenced objectives five and six of the Ordinance and reviewed the trail plans for the development. She stated that all trails on the site would be proposed as turf trails because of the connection to the regional trail adjacent to the property. She summarized how the property would meet not only the objectives of the Conservation Design Ordinance but also the criteria for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mitchell submitted a written letter from Olivia Munger who objects to the number of lots proposed. 1 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/3/2015 Meeting Minutes Katie Munger, 1272 Homestead Trail, stated that the letter is actually from her daughter who is nine. She stated that her family moved here 18 months ago in order to get away from high density housing and loves living in Medina. She referenced the location of her property and is concerned with the proposed wells and potential runoff that could occur from the steep sloping. She stated that while this is an improvement from the plan submitted one year ago, she would like to see larger lots and fewer homes. Stuart Alger, spoke on behalf of resident Steven Pflaum, stated that the Concept Plan does not call for any improvements to Deerhill Road but stated that it appears under the City requirements that Deerhill Road would need to be widened. He referenced language located in the City Ordinance relating to subdivision requirements and stated that perhaps this application is premature because of the second access proposed for Deerhill Road. He stated that the widening of Deerhill Road would require a taking or condemnation of land, to which the residents object. He suggested that a secondary access be provided elsewhere to avoid this issue. He stated that Mr. Pflaum consulted Westwood for engineering services in order to provide four alternate Concept Plans for the property, which would not access Deerhill Road. He reviewed the first two alternative plans that would use Morningside Road as the secondary access rather than using Deerhill Road while the other two alternative plans would utilize Homestead Trail for both access points. He noted that Deerhill Road could still be used for emergency access, through the use of knockdown posts or an emergency gate. He stated that Mr. Pflaum requests that the City work with the developer to consider these alternative plans and preserve Deerhill Road in its current state. Steven Pflaum, 2725 Deerhill Road, stated that he appreciates that the developer is responsive to the questions that have been brought forward through this process, referencing the comments made in regard to lot 12. He stated that he is comfortable with the general plan with the exception of Deerhill Road. He stated that Deerhill Road is only 19 feet wide at the narrowest point and is an old farm road, which has a steep drop off, and widening of the road would require a substantial amount of tree removal and work because of the sloping. He believed that the subdivision could move forward with an alternate secondary access or with only one access, using Deerhill Road as only an emergency access. Mitchell questioned the amount of land the applicant owns. Haskamp identified the land owned by the applicant including the subject parcel as well as the 23 acres south of the site. She stated that the plans for the land owned in Orono at this time only include the roadway connection while the remaining property would remain in an outlot. Mitchell referenced the minutes of the Planning Commission and asked for clarification. Finke explained that Deerhill Road is a public road and therefore if the road remains public full access should be provided. Mitchell stated that is not the law. Finke stated that is staff's recommendation from a practicality point. Martin asked for additional clarification. Finke explained that Homestead Trail is a County Road and Deerhill Road is the only City street in the area, without traveling at least four miles in another direction. 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/3/2015 Meeting Minutes Martin asked for additional information in regard to the upland areas within the conservation area as to what will be planted and/or how the area will be utilized in order to make that open space in addition to just simply being open. Haskamp stated that the developer has engaged an ecologist to prepare a landscaping and planting plan for the area as well as in consultation with the Watershed. She stated that there will be special attention to the wetland areas in the middle areas, specific to the settlement agreement between the applicant and the City. She stated that there is also discussion as to a possible community gathering area or pool within the development. Martin referenced the main road from Homestead Trail to Deerhill Road and asked and received confirmation that the main road will be public while the cul-de-sacs will be private. She asked for comparisons in the amount of public road for this plan and the plan presented the previous year. Haskamp stated that there was still discussion previously regarding the portion of roadway that would be private versus public as well as a desire for a reduction in the amount of hardcover. She stated that there has been a reduction in hardcover in order to improve water quality. Martin referenced the objectives of the Conservation Design Ordinance, specifically objectives five and six, and asked for additional information regarding the areas that will be available for public access. Haskamp stated that the trail system proposed to be public is consistent with the Parks Trails and Master Plan, which are identified in red in the plans. She referenced the open space area that would be public and stated that the northeastern portion of the site would be public and provided additional information on the private open space areas within the site. Anderson asked for clarification regarding trail 30 referenced in the presentation and whether that would connect to Baker Park. Haskamp provided additional information regarding trails 29 and 30. She stated that the connection would be available should the adjacent property develop which could provide further connection. Anderson questioned if all the septic systems would be private or whether there would be a community septic system as well. Haskamp stated that the site is frozen right now so she could not be 100 percent certain but stated that the objective would be to provide individual septic systems on every lot. She stated that if necessary a community septic system could be used. Pederson stated that if a community septic site were to be used he would like to see the home owners association (HOA) take ownership and control of the site. Haskamp confirmed that if a community septic system were to be used, the HOA would be in possession of the land and maintenance. Pederson stated that the proposed density is at the top of the bonus allowed and noted that it is difficult to know if the property will qualify for that level until further details are known. 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/3/2015 Meeting Minutes Martin clarified that the top density allowed through bonuses would be 44, while this proposal includes 42 homes. She stated that this is a gorgeous piece of property and believed that the City is lucky to have someone that is interested in protecting those natural areas. She agreed that lot 12 should be moved away from the boundary and stated that she would be interested in finding out additional information regarding the septic systems and the conserved areas. She referenced the comments and alternative plans from the residents along Deerhill Road, acknowledging that the plans were just received and desired input from the developer regarding the alternative plans provided which would not access Deerhill Road. Haskamp stated that they also received the alternative plans as late as the Council. She stated that their desire is to minimize the amount of pavement throughout the development and advised that those plans all significantly increase the amount of pavement. She stated that they have considered some of those options during their planning process but again desire the least amount of pavement as necessary. She stated that their plans do not intend to trigger the improvement of Deerhill Road. Cousineau commented that this is a beautiful plan to develop and conserve the area. She asked for additional information regarding the type of resident that would live in the area. She explained that families would most likely utilize the connection through Orono to access the schools while empty nesters may travel along Deerhill Road. She noted that empty nesters may also travel south for the winter and questioned the impact that could have on septic systems. Haskamp stated that a market study would be done to determine the type of resident that would live in the development but believed that mostly families would occupy the homes because of the proximity to the nearby park and Orono school district. She stated that there will be an HOA document that will address individual septic systems and the maintenance programs. Anderson also agreed that this is an attractive plan. He stated that in order to become more comfortable with the bonus density he would need to see more details as the application moves along as the applicant is requesting a density bonus of 190 percent. Mitchell stated that he is thrilled that this is proposed to be developed in this manner rather than plans several years in the past from previous owners for a 24 hour factory. He did express some concern with the septic, referencing a similar plan that failed Medina Morningside prior to their connection to the sewer system. He stated that he was concerned with the through connection to Deerhill Road. He referenced another development in another City that has 190 homes and only has one access point and has not had any concerns. He identified other areas in the City that do not have through roads. He believed a better plan would be to have only one access onto Homestead Trail. He stated that if an emergency gate were to be installed at Deerhill, an electric option could be used. Pederson referenced the issue of road bonding and stated that he would like surety tied to the H OA. Haskamp asked for specific details of what the Council would like to see in the conservation areas. Mitchell stated that there should be further explanation in regard to the tradeoff of the conservation areas to the density bonus. 4 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/3/2015 Meeting Minutes Martin stated that the restoration of prairie land would be an amazing benefit. Mitchell agreed that a restored prairie with a fringe of prairie trees and marsh would be great. Cousineau questioned if the homes would be hidden from each other in some manner. Haskamp stated that the intent is to have a detailed planting plan and covenants in regard to landscape design and the creation of private home sites. Mitchell briefly recessed the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Mitchell reconvened the meeting at 8:57 p.m. Martin stated that she is struggling with a neighborhood group having property on a public right- of-way being able to suggest to the City that the property not be allowed for use by other residents of the City. She stated that she is having a problem with the idea that the proposed road would not be available as a through road, noting that she believed that there was always intent to connect the road as a through road. She stated that she is not set on directing the developer into an emergency gate type access. Mitchell stated that the City has never brought those roads through and noted that there are dead-end roads throughout the City, which contribute to the rural residential character. Martin stated that connection of a roadway does not mean the area is not rural residential. Mitchell stated that his philosophy is dead-end roads. Cousineau stated that she does not see how that connection would not be necessary by the end of the phasing for the development. Anderson stated that for public reasons there must be an emergency entrance and exit utilizing Deerhill Road. Martin stated that the Comprehensive Plan identifies existing and future connections of public roads. She stated that perhaps Mitchell is too close to the issue. Cousineau stated that while Deerhill is a quaint charming road, she believed the connection would be necessary although it is not what she would prefer. Pederson stated that for public safety reasons there should be more than one way in and out of a development. He stated that he would not agree with a padlock emergency gate, if there were an emergency gate it would need to be able to be tripped by the police/fire electronically. Mitchell questioned if this would be a simple majority when this moves forward. Batty confirmed that this would be a simple majority vote. 5 MY SB Associales. Inc. engineering • planning • environmental • construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 July 8, 2015 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: Stonegate Farm CD-PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat WSB Project No. 02712-460 Dear Dusty: We have reviewed the General Plan and Preliminary Plat submittal dated June 19, 2015 for the Stonegate Farm CD-PUD. The plans propose to construct improvements to serve a 42 single family homes. 1. Street design should meet a 30-mph design speed. The horizontal curve on Deer Hill Road shown south of Lot 1, Block 7 does not meet the minimum horizontal radius of 250 feet and should be revised. 2. Primary and alternate septic system locations on several lots encroach into perimeter drainage and utility easements. The perimeter drainage and utility easements are meant for future utilities, if necessary, as well as grading drainage swales to convey stormwater to the street and rear yard without creating drainage problems for neighboring properties. Constructing drain fields that encroach into these easements will limit the use of these easements for their intended purpose and therefore the drainfield should be relocated so as not to encroach into these easements. 3. No primary or alternate septic sites are shown for Outlot D. The plans should clarify what sewage treatment system is proposed for this lot. It appears there is a proposed pool for this Outlot. Discharges from the pool will need to be free of chlorine otherwise the discharges will need to be treated. The pool and any other restrooms and water fixtures should be considered in sizing the proposed treatment facilities. 4. The proposed 50 foot road right-of-way and 22 foot pavement width does not meet the minimum standards of 60 feet of road right-of-way and 24 feet of pavement as set forth in Section 820.29 of the City's Subdivision Design Standards. 5. The plans propose a shared access to Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 1. According to Section 400.11 of the City's Driveway Code the traveled surface must be paved 20 feet in width and a document describing easement rights and maintenance details shall be recorded against the properties. Stonegate Farm CD-PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat July 8, 2015 Page 2 6. The southern end of the proposed Deer Hill Road is proposed to be constructed in Orono. The applicant shall provide to the City of Medina an easement, acceptable to the City, for right-of-way purposes. 7. A drainage and utility easement 20 feet wide centered on the pipe shall be provided between CBMH E5 and FES El. 8. The narrative states all lots will be custom graded. It should be noted that care will need to be taken when building permit surveys are submitted to insure drainage does not adversely impact neighboring properties. It may be necessary for building permit surveys to include abutting properties along with possible grading on these properties to verify that the grading on the building permit survey works. Please contact me at 612-209-5113 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. I Tom Kellogg METRO WEST INSEECTEON SERVICES, ENC. Loren Kohnen, Fres. June 29, 2015 TO: Debra Peterson Mayor and City Council Medina Planning Commission FROM: Loren Kohnen Fire Marshal RE: Stonegate Farms Development Overview East of Homestead Trail City of Medina (763) 479-1720 FAX (763) 479-3090 Mtrowst76@aol.00m I have reviewed the plans and information provided. Both septic sites on each lot must be fenced by the designer. Fencing must be approved before any site work begins, roads, ponds, improvements. Outlot D (pool) no septic is shown, must provide. Restrooms will be required. This must be resolved before final approval. The streets (roads) are very narrow, 24'. No parking on streets or cul-de-sac can be allowed. Signage required by the developer on both sides of streets; spacing to be approved by Medina Police, Public Works, and Fire Marshal. LK:jg Box 248, Loretto, Minnesota 55357 Hennepin County Public Works Transportation Department Phone: 612-596-0300 Public Works Facility Fax: 612-321-3410 1600 Prairie Drive Web: www.hennepin.us Medina, MN 55340-5421 May 22, 2015 Ms. Debra Peterson, Planning Assistant City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Preliminary Plat Review — PRDC Stonegate Farm residential PUD County Road 201 (Homestead Trail) f County Road 6 — NE quadrant Hennepin County Plat Review No. 3343B Dear Ms. Peterson: Minnesota Statutes 505.02, 505.03, and 462.358, Plats and Surveys, allow up to 30 days for county review of preliminary plats abutting county roads. The preliminary plat 1 PUD submission was received on May 15, 2015, which consists of42 single family homes on 170 acres. We also previously reviewed and commented on concepts and proposed comprehensive plan amendments for this development (letters dated February 21, 2014 and March 17, 2015). Below is a summary of our comments: Access Three access points are proposed for the development at the following locations: 1) Deer Hill Road to the north, 2) Morningside Road to the east, and 3) Homestead Trail (County Road 201) to the west. The proposed street access onto Homestead Trail may have limited sight distance due to the hill to the south. As noted in our previous correspondence (March 17, 2015), the desirable entering sight distances for drivers looking to the left is 530 feet (for 40 mph) and the minimum is 400 feet (10 times the posted speed). The developer will need to verify that at least the minimum sight distance is met before the street access is allowed. If needed, we can provide information to the developer or their consultants regarding the procedures for properly measuring the sight distances. The accompanying Trip Generation Statement (Appendix 2) notes that most traffic will likely be oriented towards the south to/from CSAH-6. County Road 201 is relatively narrow with minimal paved shoulders. Therefore as noted in our original correspondence (February 21, 2014), turn lanes are recommended on Homestead Trail for traffic operations and safety purposes. At a minimum, a northbound right turn lane will be required as a condition, for the street access permit. Right-of-way The existing half right-of-way (from centerline) for Homestead Trail is 33 feet along the frontage of this property. This section is a 2-lane rural roadway with minimal shoulders. The county's typical design section for a 2-lane rural roadway ranges from 50-60 feet of half right-of-way needed depending on any additional needs. Homestead Trail is currently shown on the Hennepin County Bicycle System Map as an on -road planned facility. Therefore, the county is recommending an additional 17 feet to be dedicated as either right-of-way or highway easement, to provide 50 total feet from the roadway centerline. This dedication will provide the opportunity for turn lanes and other future needs such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities on this two-lane roadway. An Equal Opporiundy Employer Ms. Debra Peterson, Planning Assistant PRDC Stonegate Farm residential PUD May 22, 2015 Page 2 Permits Please inform the developer that all proposed construction within county right-of-way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Permit questions can be directed to Steve Groen at (612) 596-0337 orsteue.zroet co.hennepimmmus. Please contact Bob Byers (612) 596-0354 or roberr bverstiexo.hennepin.mrr us for any further discussion of these items. 1NGIrgb Attachments • February 21, 2014 Correspondence • March 17, 2015 Correspondence cc: Sincerely, James N. Grube, P.E. Director of Transportation and County Engineer Dusty Fluke, Medina Planning Director Plat Review Committee - Agosto 1 Bruers ! Byers 1 Drager 1 Ellingson 1 Elias 1 Groen 1 Hooper ! Krieg I Nelson 1 Staebell 1 Yemen Mark Larsen, Hennepin County Survey Office Dusty Finke From: Robert H. Byers <Robert.Byers@hennepin.us> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 3:24 PM To: Susan Seeland Cc: Dusty Finke Subject: RE: PRDC"s Stonegate 42 lot Preliminary Plat Proposal Susan: I tried calling Dusty and left him a message, but he has not yet returned the call. I did get your updated submittal to the city today in the mail. My permit folks reviewed the sight distance evaluation from the traffic report and are comfortable with the results. I think we'll contact Three Rivers Parks to see if we can trim some trees on the west side of CR-201 near the curve so that the sight distance could be improved for folks entering the road from your development. Regarding the trail, we would prefer an easement, but I need to confirm that we're on the same page with the city. Thanks! - Bob Bob Byers, P.E. Hennepin County Transportation Planning 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340-5421 (612) 596-0354 Original Message From: Susan Seeland [mailto:susan.seeland@prc.bz] Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 12:10 PM To: Robert H. Byers Cc: Jennifer Haskamp Subject: Re: PRDC"s Stonegate 42 lot Preliminary Plat Proposal Hi Bob, I'm just checking in with you on whether you have been able to speak with Dusty Finke at Medina and if we are going to try and meet regarding the potential trail along Homestead Trail. I stopped into city hall last Friday, June 19th to drop off some additional information the city had requested including the site distance analysis provided by Scott Israelson of Traffic Impact Group. At that time, Dusty indicated he could be available to meet but he thought the city had removed that trail from their plans. As we discussed, we will work together on the trail easement if it is determined that the best location is on the eastern edge of Homestead Trail Road. Also, if you have any comments or concerns regarding the information submitted on the site distance analysis, it would be helpful to have your comments so we can address any issues as soon as possible. The only time I would not be available is Friday morning otherwise my schedule is flexible. Thank you for your assistance with this review. Susan i On Jun 18, 2015, at 2:36 PM, Susan Seeland wrote: > Hi Bob, > Here is the site distance analysis from TRAFFIC IMPACT, Group, LLC. Hopefully we can get a meeting set up for sometime next week. Thank you. > Susan > <Stonegate sightdistance memo.pdf> Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney -client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. 2 Members of the City of Medina Planning Commission And Members of the City of Medina City Council Dear Members: All of us are Medina residents living on Deerhill Road. We are writing to express our support of the Stonegate Farm development plan you are currently reviewing, provided that Deerhill Road will not be widened or improved in any way as a result of your approving the project. Representatives of Stonegate Farms have told us that they likewise do not support the widening or upgrading of Deerhill Road, and will resist any attempt by the City to assess either the developer or the lot owners for the cost of such upgrades. As you know, we residents are already on record that we will resist any condemnation or upgrading of Deerhill Road, and will resist any attempt by the City to assess us for any of the costs of the same. We also support the installation of a gate which would prevent daily automobile traffic from the developer's subdivision to Deerhill Road, but would allow the City's emergency and maintenance vehicles to have access to the Stonegate Farms main access road. The installation of a gate is not a condition to our support of the Stonegate Farms project, so long as Deerhill Road is not widened or otherwise improved. We also strongly support Stonegate Farms' proposal to limit the width of its main access road to 20' of paved surface. This width would conform with the width of existing Deerhill Road, which is 19' at its narrowest point. Stonegate Farms' representatives have informed us that they have asked to meet with Medina city staff in a working session to discuss issues relating to Stonegate's access road, before Stonegate makes its application for a preliminary plat. We would like to encourage the Medina city staff to hold such a meeting. Yours sincerely, Ann S. Pflaum " 4'.-- St phe R. Pflaum / /54 G-.. Bud Nadeau Pauline Nadeau Carol L. Anderson C r"a T} a ' d Nadeau a Nadeau Asy times M. Meyer Gret en Meyer 41,46,4,4P Barbara Burkstrand 12164713v1 Christina Schafer Michael ch e f 2 STINSON LEONARD STREET July 10, 2015 Dusty Finke, Planner City of Medina Medina City Hall 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Hearing on PRDC CD-PUD Preliminary Plat Approval Our File No: 2016183-0009 Dear Mr. Finke: Stuart T. Alger 612.335.1873 DIRECT 612.335.1657 DIRECT FAX stuart.alger@stinsonleonard.com We are writing on behalf of Stephen Pflaum, who resides at 2725 Deerhill Road, in connection with the above -referenced matter. The Medina Planning Commission is considering at its hearing on July 14, 2015, the application of PRDC for approval of a preliminary plat for the Stonegate Farm development ("Stonegate"). We wish to make the following comments on the Stonegate application part of the Planning Commission's record: 1. Mr. Pflaum supports approval of the Stonegate preliminary plat application, provided that existing Deerhill Road is not widened or otherwise improved in connection with the Stonegate development. Mr. Pflaum and other neighbors have submitted a letter separately to that effect, which letter is part of the record here. The dimensions of new Deerhill Road should not extend beyond the border of the Stonegate property. 2. We understand that the City of Medina's practice is that road upgrades are not made unless either (a) residents adjoining the road petition for the same and are prepared to pay for two-thirds of the costs, or (b) a developer petitions and pays for 100% of the cost of the road grade. Neither condition is present in this case, and a widening or upgrade of existing Deerhill Road is not supported. 3. Mr. Pflaum and other residents along Deerhill Road do not support or approve of any special assessments that might be assessed with respect to upgrading Deerhill Road in connection with the Stonegate development project. We understand that the Contingent Settlement Agreement between PRDC and the City does not provide for the imposition of any such special assessments on the Stonegate development for the purposes of widening or improving existing Deerhill Road. Deerhill Road residents, of course, would oppose bearing alone the cost of a road -widening project in connection with the Stonegate development. www.stinsonleonard.com 12293757.1 150 SOUTH FIFTH STREET, SUITE 2300 • MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 612.335.1500 MAIN • 612.335.1657 FAX July 10, 2015 Page 2 4. Existing Deerhill Road is 19 feet in width at certain points, and any widening of the road would in all likelihood require condemnation of residents' land, which Mr. Pflaum and other Deerhill Road residents do not support. 5. Widening or improving existing Deerhill Road is not necessary. As PRDC's traffic engineer reported, the anticipated additional traffic on Deerhill Road does not warrant widening or improving the existing road. 6. Mr. Pflaum met with PRDC representatives to discuss existing Deerhill Road and the planned extension of Deerhill Road through Stonegate. Those discussions were constructive, and Mr. Pflaum endorses the Road Design and Traffic Flow proposals and analyses in the PRDC narrative accompanying its preliminary plat application (see pages 6 and 10). Mr. Pfluam supports PRDC's proposal to limit the right-of-way of the new Deerhill Road to 50 feet and the paved, traveled surface to 22 feet, as is in keeping with the conservation design goals of Medina's zoning code. A 22-foot-wide road is better scaled to existing Deerhill Road and would help retain the rural character of Deerhill Road and the surrounding area. Mr. Plaum asks the City Council to exercise its discretion under Medina Code 820.28, subd. 2(a), and adopt a Stonegate plan with roadways of the dimensions proposed by PRDC. Under Section 820.28, subd. 2(a) of the City Code, the City Council may determine that a narrower dimension of road width is appropriate to accommodate the expected traffic, parking, pedestrian way, and utilities associated with a development. 7. Mr. Pflaum supports the installation of a security gate at the intersection of existing Deerhill Road and the Stonegate property, should the City seek the installation of such a gate. Mr. Pflaum's support of the Stonegate development and preliminary plat, however, is not conditioned on the installation of such a gate. 8. Mr. Pflaum asks that the City post year-round a low speed limit and weight restrictions on existing Deerhill Road. Heavy construction vehicles, which existing Deerhill Road cannot support, should be limited to accessing the Stonegate development at the main entrance at Homestead Trail. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. STINSREET LLP for St ;•hen Pflaum 12293757.1 \ c. f O Loh a6 S- C7) 4- vut' VLS CZ) r-r-) m C S C c)e-k -\-- (-A-ST clq cA2 V e,LX1,(Zt- -L -sot t "k_ t-k cf/ V_ c..:e.- 4-S '502j _± 'L.R.C.t6t:t — L:.7 ri Z t clOc u f s .-ir5'45- u2-) '>-01._" \likl.'- i/s VI-, 41eLe.' '(2_ C_CteCk-C'LLZ a. 0 L/07-- - _ r, 11 , fraViQ- Ct.i7-1 1. ci ut-v—, \r‘c_i_. . 1, LA..3 ,,,,,,,, ---,..6x.3.,,,,,-, ' kl_ Ca.( (..7(nt_ ..inr-IC_Crz `r\S :M_ t,.Y1 n kj,_ '•,,(wp rvisc& -7-231_0, f_67_,(1 u.),&r 4 R-uk,:,,,c, 11,16))v14.4,cc a,„Q).-ep, 'i(ej, c±b/r-lc: 15 41,-tic LS al / k 411- P Ltd, (itlia_sy CO vrih-t-c-S. 5 C:eyl- rktit.,,,j' , _I cvezg_c__)c. =0 V16. WI Cibi-r) rkt.C.,(1-1 CArkL (Q. C2) k-ICe,A Yls 0.143u4- L11-41-4:- (424. k .09,f otekt- cim Q ',A-1-s GT4,4 0 e-3Y-i -b,e5231- 4. a ()Ls ,_,..).E. as,, L\e)Dtas.-±',24,444.0 )y1_62,Q. - A_ -:-A-- _•:e.ek-r-le_(:0 441-0t-c- lbcx. YYQSLC-- C 0_0142M_.-C.. 41 LO:theti-L C''S rYL ce,--tiQ LoCL. CeCLKTQL- U-1-9:.C-k LS al( 4 V .12.7tif tiu ect--ocQ nr,QTA- cii.„,„„ce rozNaQ) atruCA'L Kijj Ltcod 1 r t cir)-Lz rrtsth c2.44_0 u.::;1 ekirt_ tfruiss- C On YL-C)0S) LO r -`) 125e--E1i11.-truz, eL0-1 l cUt"- )Loc2S) LO\W-c9-._ VIcija.:41) okrt \IA1 4c( 4LsCam- YnSZ - Co_ fralcti act_e-s-s, c330,4 v`ymFaz cue, 0 c_c3T-ro. csz> 4-mks cfes,,,,i 1-1,-ccr _ ( 441/4-kIS Cfelk61'1. , of' li,c,' c.,/,,,_g, kr...6 q4 -..1 s 4 Q., %Cog, C4-1-) ..,-1_0_0-? kaij,e_ Luis_ r‘cc:. q s3 hasie- .°C6 0\101 qb Lv arks r2rZ_CLYI b;.-n 6 A r YVI_CU6C2C/ Le..Dour_a- kaijk_ ULLI-Q-3 Ar0 e.ttfge_ Yee -A `----1-LuN Leuf p( rwv_A--1.\3 eV\ 6061_s Vin.-015,‘ f2-c-kbee,(1Q FCct Grp.ar-c_ima \-11-1:Ls F,10 -14 t;v1Z.Qt,,C) Loo44 srrul (174...G.'_S 3 es 0-1522Pc23 carrISO ka-Vgl 02-(20-1&(D 0 ) 'd- Stot‘'is- \Q,21,;LzA.A. 'bcit_xV. uaLoiotar. (3'1 .J2,()66,1V-LQ4ac', ouJ 6 l Vicui,f,_QQ4LL cq-ASQ;)(r r.tuff4, g (..plouL.4 C..ta>_. 0-V ayt_g Qje-e2.-1-G-i02 WOLI-Qg Crr-L c-,2-,arc( matzcttyz_Q )c.0,-o.,,f LA-L: ern' ,)1"Ufse,-.C(29 (20 (,,z_'t) )7j3casQ kAA-12:,0 c2r) 161 _Orra))5,e 4\--Vtut_ neLdt: LCUts0 (.0V JO a/7i c0 0_,&01 ±L± rd--+L_ c„,Lsk (- cd\" 'f2;j1k-L v upkof cbcd-curtkocz Lt._D Lllet.R CIAL \K,2_ ScLda6els *Le,- ez:A,50,1 0 y-t 1\A \De,CLI 0.4,-)SQ10.01-Cc( (2,DtL;., ace,e_si_ri 4'ke-fh -Lo cs.„-Z OL,C 34_Q (3ti 4_64 4:Ls is ct, 13U6(cte- dj; Cr-1 -14-(''u<_ e ykszl___ CS 4-5 (..0,0Tatr -pt.cOs CO-QcZ , _ 0 • Li3 Lo VIrn CD-1 ° 6Ct`--QQ <5-4-1 t-6/4th- VQ-4-Lc_cal _f 4.2:0\ Q-Q-Q n 4La y-wt Ithe&T? -..-t-LOL/__ k_:- a_QA_.(4_z—,i cL__ c• 0 j r,-3 r. c , ----v-ti., ,0,,-„,., LLQ. 0._ ,),..G,D,•-6--„,' 4 ) J314),‘ cSdS CLA'UO c:iLe--tC,) L;-QCQ •J LCJ- • ''''fr''14.-L . b: 0 vOLQ-Q k a - C he-- ' JO 0,-.P'- Sa7-31"1-Q- 4L-OLQ- •reAlQ6-1 -F Muj) i' :K.,' 0i) c;L, 11-CAJL_VS LO6t Wrj-g L1/4/14- -TILL; ec17--> -61 i,--JsLizifte- on acts„ ..rj---EOILL.Lf2,C9 ticC4,-Lea, CPLb s_c3,0-k::le_ Gag 01 esn'tki. 41u._ catkioeski) C1/40(Th (4-. ruitij 4L,'„,“0 A ca.,„„ ac,ev,S LIALQ.k U.)0010 Wit`" uL ")-) tRLe._,) *id th-L" Cz, 4ki Litzlof_015 VAL,Cenn \\) Cu, ,Lbj lasividg \Loaf ---az 4ttd . I CY\ yLO,Lt FLotpsiz, Usisr3 cLs w'dC (qt.417 0-J\ cW-rt14-411sceL\I OECC-SZ . -‘s-be.-Q)1 iak-LV cr-rr‘ ur.32.1131._ <x.(0 aCe..12.SE Waziz L(1.6 wad \-uajiL L Lcutk. t4 c3)) \-tao --be;\-kk cLu, wousLO v\z4- Lo_ j2a. Lo.Q.sw 4acereil tz kw) ‘14-)1;71 `'C.,ZALLS (2-A-9:12) k-41 1 cc_,1 f4s- W Zoo ecOs i-t_c,a0L(0 ‘N 0 f-1.14,4-0 Lrs3.5,s cz_r cz_rk trt r-13 01,-A eLPOt.,2._ ' 44u-Lt cij ca).-c.:64.1 I Yt' felat42_.-t eft-4- I -Lou 2), c9-) k.62AA ba.0 (6 ridLit_v, f\AA1-60Q, LL.J 411„./) L-0 t4A16-, L,Le 0-ArL (41V61 -40 0lc9'"-5st 0 CZ cb--v ns . ea)va-U2_ e-tibki.ICI-9-- Cr)'-) 4L-g-- ' 0, ,L ,,,,,.s.&,1,i \--,..e.)-, ,-.).-,.,,,, ot-h_Q9,e) lc ..,,,5 j CIAL scz:,. r-r-tctrib A QT-r,Scks 8-e-icArk 1)4,S.c. ,k.L1 -isJa_Q„Pin L a-ka t -95‘ k-kt,L. Lc-4f 0,0 - 01-1 t-A/ 144" PLa"i'l )9)1VIAS arc, (3) c}4-ANDIs . • e„ :J-L-C 0 e_git nric a,-,40. _9 3 Ict.C.) • C5 ;V LI b ccAcA.Q.A lS , 44„,..04.1 Lu..) L( Q, rn cf,s o-tc.44- (4,06k-fc- -2.-6-kov1524. C ? O2 ) 7- law 1S: q,ftit`s Lo' kr,syirH ikoict4> 4L-1 dev4- rruua 4 n k 4tuid- cL_ le,„01 ael (1( - 4L-s , . 11.-Q-A-3-&) \-64 AIL Y-1-101_ Yu." -A 61..0 vtd VQ-0-AL Lon._ application Conservation esign Flanned Unit DeveloFment (cD-I uD) General Plan of Development submitted to City of Medina, Minnesota applicant Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. (PRDC) owner Stonegate Farm, Inc. date June 16, 2015 Rev. May 8, 2105 PRDC CD-FUD general Plan of Development Table of Contents Narrative (Revised) 4 - 11 Table 1: Site Tabulation (Revised) 8 Table 2: Lot Count & Size 9 Table 3: Outlot Summary (Revised) 11 Appendices Tamarack Ridge 1st Addition Preliminary Plat (Yield Plan) Traffic Memo, Traffic Impact Group, LLC Site Distance Analysis Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan DRAFT Conservation Easement Concept Plan + Site Design Process Septic Report Stormwater Report Figures (Under separate cover) Existing Conditions Preliminary Plat (Revised to Include Wellhead Protection Area) Grading & Erosion Control Landscape Plan Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Separate Cover Separate Cover n -1,0 V CD D es Q Q D 0 0 CD 0 0 73 3 es m 3 Introduction and Team PRDC is pleased to submit our application for the General Plan of Development stage of a Conservation Design Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) subdivision to be called Stonegate. After the Concept Plan review process, PRDC worked with our Team to further refine our plans in an effort to respond to comments we heard from neighbors, staff, planning commissioners, park commissioners and city council members. We are confident that the following application materials demonstrate our commitment to creating an exceptional conservation subdivision that follows the agreements made within the Contingent Settlement Agreement (CSA) while meeting the objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Report. Project Team Applicant: Attorney: Civil Engineer & Surveyor: Landscape Architect: Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. (PRDC) 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Monroe Moxness Berg 7760 France Avenue S., Ste. 700 Edina, MN 55435 Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Terramark, Inc. Owner: Planner: Ecologist: Septic Design: Stonegate Farm, Inc. 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 SHC, LLC Applied Ecological Services, Inc. Miller's Sewage Treatment Solutions Site Snapshot Subdivision Name: Stonegate Present Zoning RR (Rural Residential) Proposed Zoning CD-PUD (Conservation Design - Planned Unit Development) Present Land Use RR (Rural Residential) Proposed Land Use RR (Rural Residential) Site Size 170.63 Acres (approx.) Location: NE of the CR-6 and Homestead Trail Intersection d v �) D z D Q Q rt� cp 3 4 General Plan of Development Section 827.35 Subd. 3 General Plan of Development Implementation of Concept Plan The foundation for PRDC's General Plan of Development materials is the Concept Plan that was recently reviewed by the City. The materials contained within this submittal build upon the general nature of the Concept Plan CD-PUD stage providing the additional detail necessary to entitle and ultimately develop the Subject property into a conservation subdivision. The site characteristics of the Concept Plan, including lot sizes, road location, access, quantity of open space/conservation area, and unit count are all generally consistent with what is proposed in the Stonegate Preliminary Plat and General Plan of Development materials. PRDC's summary of the ordinance requirements that specifically relate to the General Plan of Development for a CD-PUD are provided below: (a) Zoning The Subject property is zoned Rural Residential and as a part of this process PRDC proposes to rezone the site to CD-PUD. PRDC will respect many of the dimensional standards contained within the underlying RR zoning district including setbacks of principal structures (front yard), coverage standards and access requirements. As stated within the City's zoning ordinance the purpose of the CD-PUD 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..." PRDC believes that developing the site utilizing the CD-PUD designation will meet the City's objectives by protecting, enhancing and restoring key areas of the site supporting the goals as stated within the City's Open Space Report. Areas of Flexibility The City's Conservation Design District ordinance Section 827.55 Intent, Subd. 1, states "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..." PRDC's proposed preliminary plat protects approximately 90 acres in some type of open space, of which approximately 88 acres will be protected by a permanent Conservation Easement (approximately 84 of the 88 acres meets the City's definition of Conservation Area). As stated within the attached Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan, PRDC intends to protect areas of existing ecological significance, and restore areas within the Conservation Area (CA) to conditions that will enhance the natural resources of the area. In exchange, PRDC is requesting flexibility from the City's zoning ordinance in the following (additional detail provided on Pages 11-12) : • Proposed lot sizes range from 1.39 acres to 2.63 acres. (The conventional subdivision standards for RR require a 5.0 acre minimum lot size). • Homes will be custom built, and as such some flexibility from conventional side -yard setbacks may be necessary. However, we will respect the City's standards as set forth in Section 827.61 Subd. 2 (a)(1). d v fu z Q Q 3 5 " Septic sites - while all proposed lots contain adequate area suitable for an Individual Septic Treatment System (ISTS) primary site, some lots may need to place the secondary site in the Conservation Areas. At this time PRDC is requesting that up to 25% of the lots (approximately 10) contained within the subdivision be permitted to site their secondary septic area within the CA. Siting of secondary septic sites in the CA is permitted within the CD Ordinance, but varies from the conventional septic requirements of the RR zoning district. Through the Concept Plan review stage PRDC understood from the Council and Planning Commission that it was important to site as many of the septic sites as possible on private lots, and therefore in order to balance that demand with the quantity of open space, setbacks (particularly on the sites adjacent to the CA) were reduced to help ensure that as many primary and secondary septic sites as possible could be sited and contained on each lot. As currently laid out 41 of 42 lots have both their primary and secondary septic sites located on the individual lots. As individual homes are sited on each lot there may be a need to locate secondary sites into the conservation area. " Road Design - The preliminary plat proposes a 50-foot right-of-way (ROW) for all roadways in the subdivision, with 22-feet of pavement. The city's base standards require a 60-foot ROW, with 24-feet of pavement, but allows reduced ROW and roadway widths at the discretion of the City Council. There are several reasons that PRDC is requesting flexibility with road design, including: 1) the reduction of impervious surface coverage will reduce runoff from the roadway thereby improving the quality of the conservation areas (Low Impact Development Best Management Practices); 2) minimizing the pavement width will have the affect of reducing traffic speeds through the neighborhood, and on the existing graveled portion of Deer Hill Road; 3) reduced ROW and pavement is more appropriately scaled with the existing ROW and traveled surface width of Deer Hill Road east of the site ensuring the existing rural character of the roadway is protected; and 4) the reduced width of both ROW and pavement will make it easier to `blend' into the existing graveled portion of the roadway and reduce the likelihood of future expansion of the roadway. (Further discussion can be found in section h below). Additionally, PRDC is requesting that the first curve from Homestead Trail be permitted to be designed to a slower mph standard to encourage reduced travel speeds through the neighborhood. Ultimately, PRDC's primary goal is to keep traffic speeds slow through the neighborhood and to maintain the rural quality of the area. (b) Preliminary Plat and Phasing The proposed preliminary plat contains eight Blocks that will be phased and final platted in response to market demands. At this time PRDC anticipates that Lots 1 - 4 Block 7, and Lots 1-5 Block 6 will be platted first with platting of subsequent phases to progress from south to north. After the first phase is sold out, PRDC anticipates developing Outlot D, which contains the pool and community area, and will also plat the areas of Outlots A, B, C, and D that correspond roughly to the areas adjacent to Lots contained within Blocks 6, 7 and 8. The preliminary plat identifies conceptual building pads, grading contours and septic sites. All lots within the development will be custom built and graded, and the proposed housing pads and driveways are meant to demonstrate how all 42 lots can comply with the City's standards. At time of construction on a lot the builder/buyer will be required to obtain proper approvals and permitting from the City for building, septic, well, grading, tree removal, etc. Additionally, the septic sites may not be disturbed during site construction, d v 6 so initially only the roadway, and some of the stormwater management areas contained in the ROW and Conservation Areas will be graded in order to protect the septic sites identified on each lot. Private wells will serve each lot, and will be sited once house location and septic areas are determined. PRDC understands that 9 lots are either fully or partially located within the City's Wellhead Protection Area and that the wells and septic sites located on these lots must be sited in compliance with the City's regulations. As depicted on the preliminary plat there are three power line easements that run east -west on the property. Two of the three easements are active and contain overhead power lines, and the third easement runs along the Deer Hill Road right-of-way and currently does not contain any power poles or overhead lines. PRDC has been in contact with Wright -Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association who owns the easement to discuss options for relocating the easement to align with the proposed Deer Hill Road design and ultimately serve the new lots in the development. Wright -Hennepin has agreed to work with us on relocating the easement (or extinguishing the existing easement and identifying a new easement, if necessary) and designing service for the lots. There will be a Homeowners Association (Stonegate HOA) for the subdivision that will be responsible for certain duties associated with the maintenance and management of the development. However, there are no specific covenants related to the preliminary plat proposed at this time. Standard easements, such as drainage and utility easements are shown on the preliminary plat. (c) Preliminary Plans PRDC has worked closely with our Project Team to develop a comprehensive set of plans depicting the proposed Stonegate subdivision. The following summary of the plans are provided for your reference and background: Existing Conditions Survey: Includes existing site conditions such as topography, site boundary, and delineated wetlands from 2011. As noted in the CSA, the 2011 wetland delineation on the northern 80 acres was approved in 2012 and is current. PRDC understands that an updated delineation on the southern 90 acres will need to be completed prior to final plat approval on this portion of the Project site. However, as noted in the CSA, PRDC has prepared the preliminary plat and associated preliminary plans utilizing the 2011 delineation for the site in its entirety. Based upon the 2011 delineation, approximately 15,500 square feet (0.36 acres) of wetland will be impacted by the proposed development, and will be mitigated through restoration efforts in the central wetland complex as identified on the Preliminary Plat. Additionally, the existing conditions survey identifies one significant tree located in the proposed southerly cul-de-sac ROW that will be removed as part of the proposed development. This tree will be surveyed at the same time as the updated wetland delineation is prepared. There are other trees located within the proposed ROWs, however they were planted as part of the CRP contract in 1997, and are part of an active nursery and therefore not subject to the City's significant tree requirements. It is our intent to move the trees throughout the site (where feasible) and use them as part of the landscaping throughout the development. Each lot will be custom graded and custom homes constructed and therefore the extent and location of tree removal is unknown on individual lots. PRDC understands that future owners of the lots will be subject to applicable ordinances for tree removal at time of construction, exclusive of the nursery planting. Yield Plan: A yield plan was prepared in compliance with Section 827.57 Subd 11 of the Conservation Design ordinance for the southern 90 acres of the Subject property and shows 14 lots. As d v 7 agreed to within the CSA, the yield plan for the north 80 acres is derived from the Tamarack Ridge 1st Addition Preliminary Plat which was submitted by the Applicant and Owner in 2012 which shows 8 lots. Both drawings were prepared by Sathre-Berquist and can be found in Appendix 1, with suitable soils calculations contained on both drawings certified by our licensed Professional Engineer in compliance with the terms of the CSA. As supported by the CSA, the total Base Density is 22 Lots (14 Lots on South 90 ac + 8 Lots on North 80 ac). The 421ots proposed in the Stonegate subdivision were calculated by multiplying 22 Lots by 190% (22 x 190% = 42 Lots) as agreed to between the parties in the CSA. Preliminary Plat: The preliminary plat identifies proposed development characteristics such as lot orientation, size, dimension, lot setbacks, proposed roadway design, potential house pad locations, septic r1 site locations and outlots depicting the conservation areas and open space. There is an existing barn located l J on the site that will be removed as part of this project and there are no other existing structures on the site. At this time we are not proposing to construct a model home and therefore only the conceptual house pads are identified, and for purposes of the stormwater calculation a standard 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces was considered for each lot. (See section (e) for site tabulation of uses proposed on the site.) All septic sites shown on the preliminary plat were designed by Miller's Sewage Treatment Solutions (MSTS) in compliance with the State rules commonly referred to as Minnesota Rule 7080. Per the 1 Contingent Settlement Agreement, PRDC agreed to design and locate the septic systems to serve the '--') development in compliance with the State rules. Bernie Miller, Advanced Designer of MSTS has laid out the septic sites on each lot with designs suitable for alternative wastewater treatment technology, which we anticipate will be a Multi -Flow system. Utilizing alternative wastewater technology on each lot is more environmentally friendly than a traditional central system, and reduces the potential for secondary sites to ever be needed. Information regarding the Multi -Flo system was provided to the City for review during the Concept Plan process, and it is our understanding that this system has also been approved by the City in other lots in the community and meets the City's standards for ISTS. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan depicting the streetscape, entrance monument and passive/active recreation areas has been prepared and is included in the plan set. The plan includes depiction of public turf trails through some of the conservation areas located in the northern 80 acres of the site consistent with the City's recently adopted Parks and Trails Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. The landscape plan also includes a parking lot design and layout of Outlot D which contains the pool and pool house area, which will serve as private Open Space for the development. At this time PRDC is proposing to install septic holding tanks to serve the pool house until greater detail about the use of this area is known. MSTS recommended waiting to design a permanent septic system until the level of activity at the pool house is known to ensure the design of the system is adequately matched with the demand of the facilities. PRDC anticipates that once approximately 75% of the lots are developed a design for the septic system at the pool house could be completed and implemented. (d) Accurate Legal Description The legal description of the Subject property can be found on the Preliminary Plat. 8 (e) Site Tabulation Table 1: Use Tabulation (see Preliminary Plat for location) Ownership % of Site 0 Gross Rural Residential Home Sites Private 78.28 45.9% 61.8% Open Space - Community Pool Private 1.86 1.1% 1.5% Open Space (Upland Buildable) Private/ Easement 38.47 22.5% 30.3% Open Space - Unbuildable (Wetlands, wetland buffer, steep slopes >18%) Private Easement 43.93 25.8% --- Subtotal wetlands (CA) ---- 35.95 --- --- Subtotal wetland buffer (CA) ---- 7.98 --- Subtotal wetlands (Lot) * 2.25 Subtotal wetland buffer (Lot) * 1.27 Subtotal steep slopes>18% ---- 1.88 --- Road ROW (Main & Cul-de-sac) Public/Private 8.09 4.7% 6.4% Subtotal Developed Area --- 86.87 47.2% --- Subtotal Open Space --- 83.76 52.8% --- Net BUILDABLE TOTAL 126.7 --- 100% Gross TOTAL 170.63 100% --- *Wetlands and wetland buffers that encroach on private lots will be part of the conservation easement, but the underlying fee will remain with the property owner and is therefore not included in the Open Space Unbuildable calculation, *Acreages calculated by Sathre-Bergquist and correspond to Preliminary Plat and Grading and Erosion Control Drawings provided in this submittal. Percentages calculated by SHC, The following table represents further break down of the number of units, and average lot sizes as proposed on the Concept Plan. Table 2: Lot Count 8c Size Zoning Number of Units Lot Size Acres CD-PUD (North 80) 15 1.39 - 2.63 Acres CD-PUD (South 90 Ac) 27 1.39 -2 .21 Acres Subtotal Lots 42 --- Total Lot Area 78.28 Acres Average Lot Size 1.86 Acres d v 9 (g) Architecture PRDC anticipates all of the lots contained within the Stonegate subdivision will be developed with custom homes. At this time PRDC has not identified a builder(s) or a selected a site for a model home. As such, there are no "typical" architectural plans to share. However, PRDC intends to address architectural standards through the establishment of an Architectural Control Committee that will be charged with design review responsibilities which will be outlined in the HOA's documents. (h) Traffic Flow and Analysis PRDC hired Traffic Impact Group, LLC to review the proposed site plan and analyze the potential impacts of the proposed project on the adjacent road network. In response to Hennepin County's letter dated March 17, 2015, and email correspondence dated May 18, 2015 Traffic Impact Group, LLC prepared a supplemental memo and study addressing sight lines at the intersection of Homestead Trail and Deer Hill Road. Both memos are attached to this submittal as Appendix 2. PRDC offers the following summary based upon the findings of the Traffic Memos: • As stated in the memo, the existing roadways (Homestead Trail and Deer Hill Road) can adequately serve the proposed Stonegate subdivision with no required improvements. • The easterly Deer Hill Road access is anticipated to serve approximately 25% of the daily trips generated from the proposed subdivision which does not generate enough traffic to warrant the upgrade of the graveled roadway to pavement. Additionally, Hennepin County stated in their March 17, 2015 review letter that the proposed access at Deer Hill Road and Willow Drive is adequate to serve the development with no required further study or recommended improvements. d v • PRDC is not proposing any improvements, whether ROW or surface, improvements to the portion of Deer Hill Road east of the Project site, and we believe the existing gravel condition and access (D location is suitable to serve the limited number of trips anticipated to be generated from the Stonegate subdivision as supported by the attached Traffic Memo. From a design and flow perspective, PRDC is proposing to construct the main roadway with 50-feet of ROW and a 22-foot paved driving surface. The proposed design is based on conservation objectives as —C) stated within the Land Stewardship Plan (Appendix 3), and the desire to blend the new roadway into the existing graveled portion of Deer Hill Road. After the Concept Plan review, as directed by the City Council, members of the PRDC Team sat down with the neighboring property owner on Deer Hill Road east of the Stonegate site. After discussing options with the neighbor we believe we came to a consensus that rt� reducing the ROW and pavement width, while feathering the new paved road segment into the existing graveled roadway, would help protect the existing character of Deer Hill Road. PRDC understands that the ROW and pavement width are not consistent with those identified within the CSA, but we are prepared revise our plans to reflect the 60-foot ROW and 24-foot paved surface as agreed to in the CSA if that is the wish of the City Council. However, for the reasons stated above, and those O identified within the Land Stewardship Plan, we respectfully request your consideration to minimize the impact of the new paved Deer Hill Road section on the graveled portion of Deer Hill Road; to reduce the 3 impervious surface coverage associated with the roadway and permit and approve the reduction in ROW and pavement area. - 10 (i) Solid Waste All residents of the Stonegate subdivision will be required to follow the City of Medina's ordinance related to waste removal, recycling and composting. (j) Preliminary grading and site alteration A preliminary grading plan is included in the plan set for review and consideration. As noted above, all lots are anticipated to be custom graded and developed. The grading plan for the roadways is provided, and was designed to ensure grading work does not encroach upon any of the septic sites. A preliminary stormwater management plan is also included to demonstrate how the proposed development will meet the City's requirements. (k) Summary of changes from Concept Plan PRDC worked closely with our Project Team to refine the Concept Plan and add the necessary detail required for the City to review the proposed Project. While the majority of the preliminary plat and preliminary development plans are consistent with the Concept Plan the following changes were made in response to comments heard from neighbors, Park Commissioners, Planning Commissioners and the City Council: • Move lot 12 on the Concept Plan (see Appendix 5) to create a stronger corridor connection on the eastern edge of the site. PRDC has adjusted the lots, and there is now a minimum of a 150-foot corridor running the entire eastern edge of the site. (Recommend by: Staff, Planning Commission, City Council, MCWD) • Reduce the road width and ROW to minimize potential impact to the existing graveled portion of Deer Hill Road. PRDC has proposed a pavement width of 22-feet and a Right of Way width to 50-feet. (Recommended by: Neighboring property owner) • Move public turf trails into the conservation areas and away from roadways. PRDC has moved the majority of the proposed grass/turf trails out of the ROW, and they are now interwoven throughout the Conservation areas on the north 80-acres. (Recommended by: Park Commission, Planning Commission) • While PRDC understands that the Park Commission expressed interest in connecting the Stonegate neighborhood to the Morningside neighborhood with a bituminous trail we are not proposing any public trail connections in the southern 90 acres of the Project as detailed in the CSA. PRDC and MCWD have discussed private turf trails in Outlot B, which may move depending on the year (see draft Conservation Easement) and may or may not connect into the Morningside street system. Further, both parties have expressed their commitment to maintaining the contiguity of this Outlot, and bisecting the area with a trail would be adverse to that objective. Additionally, the City's Park and Trail Plan and Comprehensive Plan do not show any public trails in the southern 90 acres of this site. 4uauadoianad Jo Lipid 11 CD-PUD Specific Items 827.61 Density and Design Flexibility As detailed in the Contingent Settlement Agreement, the Stonegate plat includes 42 single-family lots that was calculated by applying the appropriated density bonus of 190% to the base number of lots (22) which was determined by the Yield Plan. Such density and lot count is consistent with that which is permitted within the City's CD-PUD Ordinance. This section of the ordinance allows for other areas of flexibility within a Rural Residential Conservation Design PUD including: Lot size, lot width and structure setbacks (with some limitation); Housing type; Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of these regulations are met for the site as a whole; and due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when calculating park dedication requirements (See Minnesota State Statute 462.358 Subd. 2 (b) Sec. d) . PRDC is requesting flexibility from the standards of a conventional rural residential subdivision for lot size, lot width and setbacks while still meeting the minimum setbacks designated in this section of the code. We have excluded all wetland buffer areas (Upland buffers) from our calculations for the Conservation Areas as detailed in Table 1, and still meet the City's requirement that minimum of 30% of the Upland Buildable area. However, it should be noted that if the Upland Buffer area were to be included in our calculations then the Upland Buildable acreage would be approximately 46.45 Acres, which is equivalent to nearly 37% of the net acreage on the site which still does not account for steep slopes and the community recreational area. As for park dedication, PRDC believes that the Stonegate plat not only meets but exceeds the City's park dedication requirements. The quantity of open space, passive recreation and active recreation opportunities dedicated in the plat will more than accommodate the demand generated for such uses by the 42 new homes. The following acreages are provided related to park and recreational access: • Publicly dedicated land for trails on the north 80-acres in Compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Parks and Trails Master Plan • 38.47 Acres of Upland Buildable Land dedicated in a Conservation Easements that will be accessible to residents, with an additional 7.98 Acres of "Upland Buffer" for which no credit is provided but is still accessible and part of the Conservation Areas. • Approximately 2.5 acres of passive recreation areas for residents to throw a frisbee, pitch a picnic tent or other low -intensity uses. PRDC is working together with the MCWD to achieve this goal, while still meeting the MCWD's conservation objectives. • 1.86 Acres of Active/Passive recreational area privately held by the HOA and available for use by all residents of the Stonegate Development. PRDC believes that when consideration is given to all of these elements of the plan, that the dedication of these areas for trails, and conservation areas meets, and exceeds, any potential demand which could be generated from 42 homes. Therefore, we believe that we have met the City's Park Dedication ordinance and no further land dedication or fee is warranted. n d v Q cp 3 12 827.63 (b) Designated Conservation Areas PRDC is proposing to place approximately 89 acres of land in the Stonegate subdivision into a conservation easement to be held by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Each Outlot has been specifically designed to achieve a corresponding objective/goal as stated within the Land Stewardship Plan. The following summary of the Outlots associated with the conservation areas is provided for your quick reference: Table 3: Outlot Summary Oudots Outlot A Acreage 2.63 Use Conservation Area: includes stormwater management features, entrance monument, and native vegetation Conservation Area: native tall grass prairie, wetland restoration, stormwater management features Conservation Area: native short grass prairie Outlot B 27.58 Outlot C 3.07 Outlot D 1.86 Private Recreation Area Outlot E 4.35 Conservation Area: Native short grass prairie, grassland, public turf/grass trails and dry creek bed Outlot F 5.25 Conservation Area: Native tall grass prairie, public turf/ grass trail Outlot G 8.82 Conservation Area: Native tall grass prairie, public turf/ grass trail Outlot H 32.75 Conservation Area: Protection of Tamarack swamp, turf/ grass trail at far northeastern corner Private Lot Area 3.52** Conservation Easement: Wetland and buffer areas contained on private lots Total 89.33 Total Area to be held in Conservation Easement *0.5 Acres of Outlot D excluded from calculation due to active park/pool area. **Private Lot Area calculated in Table 1. The PRDC Team has been working collaboratively with the MCWD and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the MCWD to work through the specific expectations and details of the conservation easement(s) and Land Stewardship Plan. We are excited to work with the MCWD, and believe that the partnership will result in an exceptional area of preserved and restored natural resources on the site. A copy of the MOU has been provided for your reference and review. 827.65 Land Stewardship Plan A Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan for the Conservation Area has been prepared by AES and is provided in Appendix 3. The plan areas correspond to the Outlots identified on the Preliminary Plat as well as those identified on the draft Conservation Easement which is provided in Appendix 4. 0 0 0 3 13 ONulnSNN S3Ss01a0 SNOVWVa 903 3leISN.S3a Al1V03l Alatla ao a3Sn .M11103111 ANV OIOH o11H01a 38153.13.8 'ONI'1SI000a38-381-11V5 sIN00.39-38Hlvs Ad1NW3ONl AS3a3H111VHS ONVI 31SNNIVWW0311INVS191111SNO3 N011vzIa0H1nv OIvS 1110H11M 3Sn "N V.01-1111V N31118M SS38.3 ,ONl'151n00838-38N1V5 1110HllM 0311NIHO8d A1131a1S Si lona°. SIHl30 (NOIIVW803NI 303ONVA9ANO0 maw ONIan10w) 3sn l 1333 NI31V3S silos 3iaviinsNn silos 3-iavi(ns i ON3031 HOIVH Oaad 31VO3NOlS NVId 0131A VlOS3NNIW VNI03W 33road u3 000991e (NO 16999 -NW b1VL.VM AtlMOVOaS H1nOS OS, DN `1SH1DJ2J38-allAlVS o 5'99956,0n apo) 419 eulpalN AN pau9ap se Silos algeiloS. .5 T6L9 VT 9005 8595 E[ 900'5 9905 .5 6965 IT OT 90T'S 66[5 6 ET05 9.5 a TOO, ZST9 915 0005 TOS1ENO, Z015 s Val zf0 z 915 [MeV( .1109910vons SOa09111NO3 (i31OV( VRIVIV101 a 101013lA a6,9z oN W 9107,I1060 9100 Mtll 3. a3.0 a33NION31VN01SS330ad 03a31S103a nem V Wtl ID:9110w NOISIA83,111S103810 AWa Vdd SVAA NOI1V31933dS ao Nv-1d S H11VH1 A91.33 AE138 3WVN 0NIM980 D rn D m� r-- n -0 X m X m ° ° zm>m o�Z� vA D �� 0 0 Z 1Vid A2IVNIWI-08d c 0009-9LP (Z36) t6ESS NW'VIVLAVM AVMOVVOMEI H1f1OS OSL 'ONI '1SIfK OHASE1-3ZIHIVS S10 310 340 3103,N1 51N3w1300 ,A.0 033.3 1O Nr_ ZICZZo-L, S1N3 N1N 00 _uo assasanOY z l.ortiz.b Sle a ran eiWN A8 SNOISIA3TJ vnez ON 03b ZIO —. 31V0 �/yJJyslf,/ly /� b10S3NNIW d0 31V13 3111 AO SAWN 3111 b3ONn 83311I033 IVN01333J08d C3831.033 AtnO b VYtl 11441 ONV 3013IA13dn3103310 AH asann 80 3W AS 031Pbd301d SVM 301,013103d3 80 NV, 311411YH1 AJ11830 AS383N 1 No 1e61/1el'ANi.0 61441 . ;mow. _D�wH 04lwa waiver.xrx;�any mmY1°ii=�7 d' P .i1e10.15" roaua 5 6651656,66e5u 210d0321b'd3Hd 1 .19032lVd32JdW 83NNVld' =i i N1 I � I sa oo I "5 oay silos IInSm 33.100 sis Day ssoJp sl s.nD COS 0.1V S143 1103 S3Joo qp^S 034 33010 sasa1955 Day s1i05 Tins/ 61 00 �0q Daly s9wp n9�,+, 8 9 T 'i a y 11 � N 1. a 411 1 a x ml arrt 1 sry upon nouad Jo uone>Yluao sins Soars 0041,004100011.w110 u6M.11m R01.01666W 05 AM 43153310 Fauns No 01 noonol Wu oN p 00N 1y 0.600 m Inunssa etm 11 '040.310n'MN 001 0110e 4Ye= •1.MN 0A000 3uy v10e VI VA-04,101 my 006rms a4l m saloon, I W eou u0NId0 ass V 10048003 Inu>wual; w3 mu,...V R9 W1m01 um40ne4 sW01V,M nu001¢'10400104 a0µ,04100d 10 u0nmusmo slgl SIMMS lobura>p ue411>y10 uwad Rua Rq P0.03000100 NO, 401031 10 4u01H41 a1 n0ueoppow oN M0n001nolomoN 1 mos0 Nuueaq Ws>loopl Om Raung >nldedodw No Novo,. 300s1paaS'Rluo Mmns Rn mw1Nu punageaO of SUMmdn,g4*0 sell sit.. atm S110s 1111A NINO 313V S' VID' 133d0SDIVA 11b31 133i0,3110 313S0/1,1N013 13330,010V319S WWI 133i DOZ' 111d30101 133.100I • 14101. 101 NVI1N3015311 vans•1J111310 ONIO 03s d ad. 1fiLl'oN anJa1au01ml44nimd vas arylewWOt mlpnf R4 paMlew an pWNas>Puyay Wal aNJO scull RnPm09 a41 mod too, ,ou woo, *owe mood Z0006SN•1531011 VD 3.\031V1S 33Hd00 NoN00 l��R'unSluawuunt Noo n0, oop000ngoN dP S00,N .4.31.1014 .1 le>nlmno0,000,12030e3>41 o Li9% 73m7 + A �111 7 f t-- se,.. 90'S oay spog 1!n MOO 081, Daly sswO J K S31,0gls Daa silos'111ns a D q5'L 1V ssoJp sasaao Of'S oay s11oS l!nS 0o yggl oay sswp .ulp,ca33sleulx wNawdd vaumin amain-nv Nitl NV 3A83938d OW 3,001 A110.3 OL 3antlYi 91H i0100 ON511V 33SOMMO 11V OW ANV bOi 313190104838 ASO, 390183380V 3H 1380M 0310 11003b0i3333111111n O 1SIX3 INV OW ANY i0 x01,00110.3 310.3NIW8313011VHS bOLOVb1N00 3HL :ONO AVM 31i41MX08d01Y Nv NI NM0H6 311, NMONS SEWN. 003191X3 i 146`16.55.e se 1551,66L >Sl nu>100 566,'55151101 n61 IR16.31mrPIAAIM 1YNawealp600q,010'•'P.66W >gmSilposmN1 001n1101a14A031110a 41p1m u11001 00103 1 aw.)so110N 1 01 .1111 MV01?S 3atl $1113113 Y3 A11' nmv 30b611a66 o` lIVl30 1 o I I 3's i 23J00 ZO'S Di V silos vs SalSO 131.3 OtalV SS JO o L ;A$D,m 10'S Day sl!DS '1!nSx _� s_ y 55l00 DIY L OUV 9swp - Ti � ZX3 lX3 ON O3SV S10MO6001BLIPA NMOS SV al YOH Z,OZ£O SO wStl NW VNIO3W NOIIIOOV 1SL 30012i NOVHVWVl SNOI11ON00 `JNIlSIX3 3,0 l0 Sl0 AB 3133.11-1 S11,13.1000 A1t9 .435931194Y Z 103.3O11 31N311M1O0 A L1GZti 6 la grvbl3n 03001, SNOISIA321 „,„ ON 0. Z10Z-e0e0 31V0 0+10S3NNIW 30 MVOS 3H1 iOSMbI 3H1 21301011333N10N3 TINOISS330Hd 03,1510a AIfO v WV 11VH1 aM1V NOISNH3d0S lOM+10 AW a39N0 a0 3WAS 032Vd38d SOM NOI1,013I03d6 HO NV, S1H1000.A311ti30 ASI3H3H I 4 samla yu:lad o4 C'anzsa.+es�'spcs xaunN p.e'�'4�Wi papcla sa�Is uez,ze ZI 019'saldluoz h.4100 1gsa0 samis 4 4,0419 Z tr..retx, htllaalp.ss+ny salcls 004,4 9 %Z '000401P'44e0 zrtuy s:a6z yn;lad y of 'xaI41eJ pusl:.lm+anapu,eh saedls 01 I'uco-.40000- F,F000'samis 40004:0 8I 04 ZI '11ue1au veal 191sa- p ola's.dz11100 1ZI04901III6104ve01045a- 1+04010,00,1 f •9 {�I A; Ig 9, ye' I VC ZJI 9Cb' GJL4'i V941 VcZ-i ZLIZL' Z ZZ'I 03F1 I� ^ 0,050.1,11 rms.+10 aogmyu,aaann saS,a M41.0 +an0uwud Aue Agryauo}W>QAewyllaHa to Faunt eryy of sPonelylMui oN ANb3ni1393tld ONb 3lvJOl At10V%3013t1011V3 OH 30 aft09NISI.V 30bWbO 11VONb 1v10 ANtl tlOi 3l51SNOd3tlAT0336 O1 S33a0V 3H'% 00....3,,i pxsuleA\ ryvq eyeyauirtW Rq ypnad aemH 'Z6B6 n uoperol> uleldpooll reaA 07,1 ONLLSI%3 tiv ONtl ANtl iO NOI1tlO0l1Jb%3 30H1\3N1,3 3011VH9 tl010btl1NOJ 3H1 AlNO AVM.31bW1%oaddtl Ntl NINARO,.3aV,OHS 631113100NOSJt3 000006,= 0,10.000 Ha . +ae 19S-0,tl101 lmCnma ayI w 0.1H000, sem uw,wdaalln V S011m'000 10000wonw3 paim0++V.w Mla+w uxq a, sp,am wnuHLY w+ry Oa,. 000v00++o 00:00yiv» HT S°,05:a +o,Gul¢ayI ue,P1VI0 uwvd Rae k 1a00o1u0 aq AVw yapgs+0 Aa+,..n4101+0,00,9,0aw ON 0.00 odaH aH: naeq Saue001000+0,ry0. Aa0,5 aodetlaLn+w e+agRum Supnxa aas'Apo vux,0Puneq a aq w 0+Ha na o,xa Hyy xa Rua +oudspllpnla uapaaw wH++ox!aada0l Z000-6,6,91e 11VL' 0 301031V1s a H»o1 d00 pa1u00 �3 1, Ho ua°mays se W1m!, as,Y aHaoun'uull H, prevus Ave:park: 0+,,0rx P°eylwm u I, O1 P+e'WImIpIn aHH+,00a00:0 swIN018u0m40 pre wP!m w laal SSwaS 33VOS 01ION I 01 :50Nt N,1\ONS 3NV SLN3113SV3 31000 aNb 30VNM10 va++olw 1°enund a. BSILI'aN>NJ 'He1uP+ry,aarynf AS leHmu an paquawp °uwl Pue1w91oau11.(nWnaq ayl aylw Sutlu0aae'li 411.3 I 1 dMn+m01'ILuollaa 3oaa13.wun5llu°+wa.wO SIO1S1011e3Ise3a41 AlHad0lld p TRAFFIC OMPACT GROUP, LLC TO: Jennifer Haskamp, SH Consulting FROM: Scott Israelson DATE: 24 March 2015 FILE: 15-6556-1 RE: Introduction Trip Generation Statement Stonegate Medina, Minnesota This Trip Generation Statement is a preliminary traffic analysis of the proposed Stonegate development. This document reviews the estimated development traffic generation, identifies proposed access points, and quantifies the amount of development trips on the surrounding roadway network. Project Description Stonegate is a proposed single-family residential development. The site as proposed will consist of 42 single family homes on 170 acres. See Figure 1 for the most recent site plan. The site is in Medina, north of 6th Avenue North (CSAH 6) and east of Homestead Trail. The site is proposed to have full access to Homestead Trail, and also Deerhill Road. PRDC I CQnce t Plan PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN STONEGATE FARM MEDINA, MN PROPERTY RESOURCES OEVF_OPMENTCOMPANY ' SATHRE-6ERGQUIST, INC. a t Site Plan Figure 1 Stonegate - Medina Project No: 15-6556-1 Date: 24 March 2015 TRAFFIC OMPUf/fil GRU', LLC Page 3 of 4 Existing Conditions Table 1 presents a summary of the existing roadway conditions near the proposed development. Table 1 - Existing Roadways Street Name Functional Class Typical Section AADT 6th Avenue North (CSAH 6) Minor Arterial Two-lane undivided 4,500 Homestead Trail (CR 201) Major Collector Two-lane undivided 730 Deerhill Road Local road Unpaved 100 (estimated) Willow Drive Local street Two-lane undivided N/A Trip Generation A trip generation estimate has been prepared in accordance with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Table 1 summarizes the estimated trips generated by the development. Table 1 - ITE Trip Generation rpm Peak Hour Hour Land Use Code Size Tips Enter Exit Enter Exit Single Family Detached Housing 210 42 Dwelling Units 404 10 29 30 18 The proposed development is expected to generate 404 new trips per day. Trip Distribution/Assignment Assignment of new development traffic to the surrounding roadways is based on existing traffic patterns, and close examination of the proposed site plan. For this development, most traffic would head to and from the south to CSAH 6. Based on proximity to the access, it is expected that ten of the proposed 42 units (approximately 25%) would use Deerhill Road to access CSAH 6, with the other 32 using Homestead Trail to access CSAH 6. Page 4 of 4 With 402 new daily trips generated by the development, Homestead Trail would see approximately 303 new vehicles per day. Deerhill Road would see 25% of the 404 new trips, or approximately 101 new vehicular trips per day. Deerhill Road is currently an unpaved roadway with an average daily traffic (ADT) total of approximately 100 cars. The resulting ADT after development would be approximately 200 vehicles per day. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Gravel Roads Maintenance and Design Manual provides clear and helpful information to state and local agencies on the design and maintenance of unpaved roads. According to the Manual, "The average daily traffic volumes (ADT) used to justify paving generally range from 400 to 500 vehicles per day. When traffic volumes reach this range, serious consideration should be given to some kind of paving." Based on guidelines provided by the FHWA, Deerhill Road is expected to continue to function acceptably as an unpaved roadway after development. Conclusion The proposed development is expected to generate 48 trips in the highest peak hour, and 404 new daily trips. The low number of new trips is not expected to adversely impact the surrounding roadway network. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at scottCtraffic-impact.com, or by phone at 612.875.2417. Sincerely Scott P. Israelson, P.E., PTOE Traffic Impact Group, LLC TRAFFIC Orv)1fiT C TO: Jennifer Haskamp, SH Consulting FROM: Scott Israelson, P.E., PTOE, Traffic Impact Group DATE: 13 June 2015 FILE: 15-6556-1 RE: Introduction Sight Distance Analysis Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) Et Deer Hill Road (proposed) Stonegate Farm Medina, Minnesota This sight distance analysis is in response to comments received dated 3/17/2015 from Hennepin County Public Works Transportation Department. The County commented that the future project access to Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) may have limited sight distance due to a nearby crest vertical curve. This document summarizes the findings of a site visit and vertical profile analysis of Homestead Trail (CSAH 20). Proposed Access Description Deer Hill Road is proposed to be extended west as part of the Stonegate Farm development. It will wind through the development and ultimately terminate at Homestead Trail (CSAH 20). South of the proposed intersection, Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) has a crest vertical curve. Hennepin County has a desirable sight distance of 530 feet, and a minimum sight distance of 400 feet, for roadways with a posted speed limit of 40 mph. Figure 1 shows the sight lines from the proposed driveway location to the north and south along Homestead Trail (CSAH 20). AASHTO defines the driver's eye as 3.5 feet above the roadway, and the roadway object as 4.25 feet above the roadway. As shown in Figure 1, the intersection of Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) Et Deer Hill Road will not have sight distance concerns as proposed. Sumnsuop Hs - a pow - a1e5auo1S Ddd 'dnnND S 60Z aunt £ 6 :area 6 aan5!.j _LDVdINO DiddVIll l 9559 5 6 oN �aafoad ssaaae a1e5auo1S 13 deal pealsawoH - sisAieud aauelsia lapis uoniasJalui 00+Z OS+Z 00+£ OS+£ 00+1, OS+b 00+9 OS+S 00+9 09+9 00+L OS+L 00+8 0S+8 00+6 09+6 00+0l OS+OL OO+LL OS+LL O N � � OG F O J m - J NO'mOP O p O WN O O ?NIVA O O O O P N oV p O�O N ,i N O V J J m O O N i A W A O V N O a A O N A Qi O� ',O. On O N� N AA W N in 0t 6 N f, W C N� W V OJ W W W E � 9 pp rW O ',3 N W W E. N A W l f N 0W N W 0 OO Ob 0 mm N � 1,1 O O; � N cii fp tJ O W <O OO A tl 111111111111111111-111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ___—____ _ OO O b N �: ::. "- _ 1__—____ ___—____ m 6 .A313 ld MOl w S' 08_L£+Ol :V1S ld MO1 ■__—E�__ __atll•r169WU7�0� m El ___—_ ,69LE60AI �� / I ��■ g �� LICIIC n.".- IMI % v op �.. i _% i �� "I�I // g s �� _1 �;h' - _/ �� r' 761" 6 l __ — — — �11 GS M —loP. �' �' . b9 .A3131d awl ___ �l�' L Hall L0 81+E V1S ld H°JIH €-N \ �____ _� !" 1 I - (1�i�1 V �� 0 - ,4CL9ZOA1 �1 ___—_ rn c�./ ��__ (A _ MMMMM v , C.— .J1.• I o .+. trlly l � yl A ,. calms —1 - C.JI]> Jll.n,l - IN _ 'IA, 11 -+ --1_1. ol`�'' 71 rnl— =1 tnl S C rn 0 Page 3 of 3 Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) £t future Deer Hill Road - looking north Homestead Trail (CSAH 20) Ft future Deer Hill Road - looking south PRELIMINARY LAND STEWARDSHIP PLAN STONEGATE PRELIMINARY PLAT Medina, Minnesota May 8, 2015 Prepared for: Property Resources Development Corporation 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Prepared by: Applied Ecological Services, Inc. 21938 Mushtown Road Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 (952) 447-1919 ■■■wr-FI■ ► 1 ■►., .. .� APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES Table of Contents INTROUCTION 1-3 Conservation Design 1-2 Land Stewardship Plan .2-3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3-8 Compilation of Existing Data 3-4 Field Reconnaissance 4 Findings 4-8 CONSERVATION DESIGN OF STONEGATE 8-10 Development Layout 8 Grading & Ecological Stormwater Management 9 Cultural Amenities 9-10 OWNERSHIP CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES & LAND PROTECTION.. .10-15 Stonegate Land Allocation 10 Development Area 10 Conservation Area 10-15 CONCULSION .15 APPENDIX A: Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Database Report PRELIMINARY LAND STEWARDSHIP PLAN STONEGATE PRELIMINARY PLAT Medina, Minnesota INTRODUCTION Property Resources Development Corporation (PRDC) proposes to develop a 170-acre farm (the "site") owned by Stonegate Farm, Inc. (Owner) in Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota following the City's Conservation Design District (CD) requirements. The Project includes 42 single family sites, and the neighborhood is proposed to be called Stonegate. The site holds unique and important conservation values based on its regional location and variety of wetland habitats. These values are recognized by PRDC, and its goal is to create an exceptional place for the development's residents to live, for the local community to enjoy, and for plants and wildlife to thrive. Conservation Design The proposed development complies with the City of Medina's Conservation Design Development requirements as described in detail in subsequent sections and per City Code 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. Conservation design typically follows a process that begins with the identification of primary conservation areas (i.e., areas that generally should not be affected by development) and secondary conservation areas (i.e., areas that should be avoided or protected where feasible). Primary conservation areas typically contain: • larger blocks of core wildlife habitat Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 1 " ecologically significant natural areas, usually with native plant communities " legally -protected natural areas, such as wetlands and conservation easements " steep slopes (>18% per Medina City Code) " land within the 100-year floodplain " other rare natural features, including rare species Secondary conservation areas often contain: " former wetlands and intermittent drainageways, often with hydric soils, which present challenges for development " steep slopes that may be prone to erosion " semi -natural areas, which are damaged ecosystems or lack native vegetation, but support some wildlife " ecological connections providing movement corridors for wildlife " buffer zones to protect primary conservation areas and sensitive natural resources such as wetlands and aquatic ecosystems " valued cultural/historical features " scenic viewsheds. Site development is focused in the remaining areas, with impingement on primary and secondary conservation areas first avoided, then minimized if impacts cannot be avoided, and lastly mitigated. Mitigation can take the form of regulated wetland mitigation, as well as ecological restoration, enhancement, and management of the site's Conservation Areas. Creating and managing diverse and healthy native plant communities (including those associated with a naturalized stormwater treatment train) provides value to the development and can be enhanced further by incorporating trails and other amenities into the development to educate and engage residents. Conservation developments should also be designed with minimal grading, naturalized stormwater management, and public and private access in mind. Preservation of existing drainage divides and use of existing drainage patterns will reduce grading costs and take advantage of the site's unique landforms. Where feasible, well -drained soils should be identified and incorporated into naturalized infiltration systems to help manage the development's stormwater runoff. Trails and interpretive opportunities will benefit both residents and the local community, if public access is granted. Land Stewardship Plan Per City of Medina Code Section 827.65, a Land Stewardship Plan (LSP) is required for the Stonegate project. An LSP addresses the development, long-term use, maintenance, and insurance of all Conservation Areas associated with a proposed development. More specifically, this Preliminary LSP: (a) Defines ownership and methods of land protection. (b) Establishes necessary regular and periodic operation and maintenance responsibilities. (c) Estimates staffing needs, insurance requirements, and other associated costs associated with plan implementation and defines the means for funding the same on an on -going basis. This includes land management fees necessary to fund monitoring and management of the Stonegate Preliminary Plat Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 2 Conservation Easement by the easement holder. The fees have been estimated and validated by the proposed easement holder. (d) Meets the requirements of the future conservation easement holder. The following Draft Land Stewardship Plan generally applies to the entire site, unless otherwise stated. However, it should be noted that PRDC intends to develop the site in Phases and/or Additions, with final plat of each phase or addition occurring as dictated by the market. Additionally PRDC intends to dedicate the conservation easement areas in conjunction with each Final Plat phase of the subdivision. At this time, PRDC does not know how many phases will be included in the Stonegate subdivision so for purposes of this draft two phases are outlined to simplify this document and the corresponding draft Conservation Easement. PRDC understands that a Final Land Stewardship Plan will be required to be prepared for each Phase (however, the Final LSPs will be substantially similar, just tailored to the quantities of conservation areas in each phase). The following sections address the required elements of a LSP. EXISTING CONDITIONS Compilation of Existing Data The following existing data were compiled and reviewed to assess the natural, cultural, historic, and scenic character of the site and its surroundings: • MnDNR Ecological Classification System • MnDNR Minor Watershed boundaries • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)-listed Impaired Waters • Web Soil Survey (SSURGO Soil Survey data from USDA/NRCS) • Original Vegetation of Minnesota (pre -European vegetation mapping by Marshner/MnDNR) • MnDNR Rare Natural Features (from the Natural Heritage Information System, NHIS) • MnDNR Native Plant Communities (NPC) • MnDNR Sites of Biological Significance (SBS) • Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RSEA) — both original mapping and 2008 update • MnDNR Regional Ecological Corridors — based on 2008 MLCCS data • Metro Conservation Corridors • 2030 Framework Regional Natural Resource Areas • Hennepin County Open Space Corridors and Priority Natural Resources Corridors • Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) wetland mapping • MCWD Key Conservation Area mapping • Restoration Prioritization and Prediction Model (RePP) • Public conservation lands (e.g., public parks, Scientific and Natural Area (SNA), Wildlife Management Area (WMA)) • Historical and current aerial photographs (oldest 1937; most current 2013) Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 3 " Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) mapping (based on discrete datasets from 2001, 2005, and 2008) " Wetlands (including delineated site wetlands, Hennepin County Wetland Inventory, and MCWD Functional Assessment of Wetlands (FAW)) " City of Medina Open Space Plan (2007) " Site parcel boundaries " Topographic contours (2-ft LiDAR data) and digital elevation model (DEM) " Minnesota Historical Society database report Field Reconnaissance On September 19, 2014, Kim Chapman (Principal Ecologist) and Douglas Mensing (Senior Ecologist) of AES conducted a field reconnaissance of the site. Accompanied by members of the development team, they walked the site and documented existing conditions (including landforms, slopes, plant species, wildlife observations, drainage patters, erosion, etc.). In brief, the site was dominated by fallow agricultural fields, with a variety of wetlands generally consistent with the findings of others. Moderate slopes were observed in the southern portion of the site, and steep slopes were observed on the southwestern edge where the site borders Homestead Trail. Findings Ecological Context According to Minnesota's Ecological Classification System, the site is located in Minnesota's Big Woods Subsection of the Minnesota & NE Iowa Morainal Section, of the Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province. The site is within the Painter Creek Minor Watershed, which drains into Lake Minnetonka (several bays of which are listed by the MPCA as "impaired"), then into the Minnehaha Creek and eventually the Mississippi River. Moderate slopes (<18%) exist in the southern portion of the site. Site soils consist of a variety of upland and wetland (i.e., hydric) soils, ranging from well drained to very poorly drained. A large area of poorly drained soil is mapped just south of the site's center. On -site geotechnical investigations (including percolation tests) by others indicate that some of the USDA/NRCS soil mapping of the site may be inaccurate. Prior to European settlement, the majority of the site was dominated by Big Woods (e.g., oak, maple, basswood, hickory, elm). The northern portion of the site contained Tamarack Swamp, and low-lying drainageways likely contained wet prairie, wet meadow, and possibly marsh. Regional Ecological Significance Based on MnDNR Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) records, the only rare natural feature recorded on the site is the Tamarack Swamp (a MnDNR-mapped Native Plant Community). This swamp is a sensitive wetland type, susceptible to degradation resulting from invasive species, stormwater runoff, and hydrologic alterations. Regarding other rare natural features, red -shouldered hawk (State -listed Species of Special Concern) was observed just east of the site as recently as 2007. The site's Tamarack Swamp was identified by multiple sources as a regionally significant ecological feature, habitat, or corridor. Several of these ecological classifications (including several derived from MLCCS data, such as the City of Medina's Open Space Plan "Composite" map) encompass the majority of the site; we believe this is due to the former Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) planting that contained prairie grasses, which was then replaced by cropland after CRP contract Stonegate Preliminary Plat Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 4 expiration in 2007. Baker Park Reserve, managed by Three Rivers Park District, lies immediately southwest of the site. This 2,700 acre Regional Park is one of the largest parks and natural areas in Hennepin County. Cultural/Historical/Scenic Significance The Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) database search did not identify cultural/historical resources on the site. The only structure known to have existed on the site is a barn, which is still present on the southwest edge of the property. The majority of the site has been in agricultural production since at least 1937 (see Aerial Photography Review, below). The Minnesota SHPO database report acquired for the site (Appendix A) identified two records in the site vicinity: 1. House (3050 Highway 6) — located approximately 850 ft southwest of the site 2. Barn (2885 6th Ave. N.) — located approximately 950 ft south of the site The site encompasses part of an elevated landform (a flat-topped ridge), which extends onto the site just south of its center. With slopes falling to the north, south, and west, this plateau provides spectacular scenic views of the Tamarack Swamp (north), wetlands and rural landscapes (south), and the wetlands and parkland of Baker Park Reserve (west). Views of the site from surrounding areas are generally limited due to topography, distance from nearby roads, and vegetative screening. The site is partly visible heading north from CR 6 and Homestead Trail. The proposed entrance road and the first few lots will be visible from this vantage point because the topography rises here. Aerial Photograph Review The earliest available aerial photograph of the site was from 1937. The photo shows the majority of the site in row crop agriculture (not including the Tamarack Swamp). A review of more recent aerial photos from the early 1990s through 2013 indicates that the majority of the site consisted of row crop agricultural fields through at least 1997. The Tamarack Swamp and several apparent lowlands and drainageways were not cultivated. By 2000, the majority of the cropland appeared to consist of grassland, which is consistent with CRP contract records. Then by 2009, these areas appeared to again be in row crop production, which seems to have continued through the 2013 photo. Agricultural Records Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) records indicate that the approximately 107 acres south of the Tamarack Swamp consisted of a CRP grassland planting from October 1997 to September 30, 2007; these records are consistent with the term of the CRP contract and reviewed aerial imagery. According to property records, there was also an Ag Preserve Covenant on approximately 160 acres of the property; this covenant expired on September 15, 2008. Land Cover & Wetlands The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) was developed in the late 1990s but was not released until approximately 2001. The City of Medina was one of the first areas mapped as part of the pilot program, with MLCCS field work conducted in 1999. This initial land cover mapping identified site features such as the Tamarack Swamp in the north, a sliver of Maple Basswood Forest and Lowland Hardwood Forest along the east property line, low-lying areas of non-native vegetation (likely reed canary grass swales and depressions), planted crops, and an area of planted mesic prairie. Since then, MLCCS mapping updates were conducted. The latest update, however, based on 2007 field work, is not representative of the site's current land cover. Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 5 In 2007, an approved wetland delineation of the entire site identified 15 wetlands totaling 41.5 acres. Most of this wetland area consists of the Tamarack Swamp in the northern portion of the site. Several smaller wetlands were delineated at the eastern edge and in the central and southern portions of the site. In 2011, 16 wetlands (totaling approximately 38.3 acres) were identified and delineated on the entire site. However, only the delineation on the north half of the site was approved; the south half of the site will be re -delineated in Spring 2015. CONSERVATION DESIGN OF STONEGATE Development Layout The conservation design approach described in the Introduction was applied to the Stonegate Farm site. The development team (including planner, landscape architect, engineer, and ecologist) worked together to identify and respond to the site's unique attributes and sensitive natural features. AES identified primary and secondary conservation areas, appropriate ecological buffers, and ecological corridors/connections. These conservation areas were avoided to the extent feasible when siting the development's roads and residential lots, and they have been thoughtfully integrated into the development's design, establishing a connected network of native landscapes. The Stonegate site design also followed the Better Site Design/Low Impact Development (LID) practices of the Minnesota Stormwater Manual from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The Stonegate conservation development design incorporated all of the MPCA's "better site design techniques" listed below, except where noted: • Preserve natural areas • Natural area conservation • Site reforestation • Stream and shoreline buffers (the site lacks streams and lakes, but the design incorporates ecological buffers around all wetlands) • Open space design • Disconnect and distribute runoff • Soil compost amendments (these may be incorporated into final design of stormwater management elements) • Disconnect surface impervious cover • Rooftop disconnection • Grass channels • Stormwater landscaping • Narrower streets (to be discussed with the City during preliminary plat review) • Reduce impervious cover in site design • Slimmer sidewalks (no sidewalks are proposed; all trails will be natural surface) • Smaller cul-de-sacs • Shorter driveways (where possible, house pads were generally front loaded on lot) • Smaller parking lots (only one small parking area, at the community pool, is anticipated) The proposed conservation development plan will remove no native forest and preserve and buffer the existing Maple -Basswood Forest at the east edge of the site. Virtually no development is proposed along the entire east edge of the site, which creates and enhances a potential ecological Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 6 corridor between the Tamarack Swamp in the north and the wetland complex to the south. The on - site portion of this corridor will have a minimum width of 150 feet and average over 350 feet along the developed portion of the site. Although small home sites are present off site to the east, the complete corridor is wider still. Three small wetlands and a portion of a fourth wetland will be impacted by the proposed development; these total approximately 15,500 square feet, or 0.36 acres. Today, however, these wetlands are cropland —tilled, temporarily flooded depressions providing limited functions and values. Impacted wetlands will be mitigated on site through the restoration and enhancement of at least three additional acres of high quality wetlands integrated into the site's mosaic of restored/enhanced native plant communities. This exceeds the minimum replacement standards for proposed wetland impacts. Grading and Ecological Stormwater Management Site grading and disturbance has been minimized to the extent feasible, retaining natural drainage patterns. AES worked with the design team to capitalize on opportunities for ecological stormwater management in order to minimize runoff and ensure that any water reaching wetlands or leaving the site is of high quality. Impervious surfaces have been minimized by limiting the development's road widths to 22 feet, reducing the diameter of cul-de-sacs, eliminating sidewalks, using only natural - surface trails, and providing only one small parking area (near the community pool). Private lots will be required to route rooftop, driveway, and parking area runoff to designated stormwater management features or to areas of permanent vegetation. Ecological stormwater management elements incorporated into Stonegate's conservation design include: • restored native landscapes, which infiltrate runoff in the Conservation Area; • treatment wetlands (including forebays and ponds), which remove pollutants and store flood pulses; • infiltration areas, which reduce runoff volume and recharge shallow groundwater, which provides baseflow to downhill water bodies and wetlands; • a dry creek bed, which provides additional pollution removal and aerates the water; and • native -vegetated swales, which filter pollutants out of runoff and also infiltrate to shallow groundwater. Cultural Amenities & Access Trails were designed to provide public and private access to and through the site's Restoration Area. However, trails were excluded from the Tamarack Swamp and other sensitive natural areas that provide refuge for sensitive wildlife. A trail with private access for residents will lead to the "island" in the northwest corner of the development, at the edge of the Tamarack Swamp. This area will provide opportunities for residents to enjoy nature, relax, and convene. It will become a walking destination, as well as possible use by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for education. The site has very little frontage on adjacent scenic roadways, and is not highly visible from adjacent properties, with some limited exceptions. The site does contain significant topographic changes, given the plateau at the center of the site. The plateau slopes downward to the north and south from this high point. Although a slight topographic high bisects the site approximately at the Deer Hill Road ROW, the set back of over 950 feet from adjacent roadways and properties will make Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 7 structures here at most only intermittently visible from the surroundings. Additionally, this area is well buffered by vegetation and other residential home sites on Homestead Trail. Traveling north on Homestead Trail from CR-6, some homes on the site will be visible, but the proposed landscaping will soften the viewshed from the west. OWNERSHIP, CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES & LAND PROTECTION Stonegate Land Allocation The Stonegate Preliminary Plat addresses a 170-acre Conservation Design Subdivision. The proposed development plan calls for a variety of Development Areas and Conservation Areas, as illustrated in Figure 1 below and in Exhibit 1 (attached). Figure 1. Stonegate Land Allocation Stonegate Site (170 ac) m Development Area (86 ac) Roads & ROW (8.09 ac) Private Lots (78.78 ac, 3.52 ac in conservation easement) Development Area Community Recreation Area (0.5 ac) Conservation Area (84 ac) Reserve (37 ac) Wetland Forest Areas not included in the Land Stewardship Plan Restoration Area (47 ac) Prairie Wetland Passive Recreation Area Stonegate's 86 acres of Development Area includes roads, rights -of -way (ROW), a community recreation area, and private lots. The main road through the Stonegate subdivision will be public (owned and maintained by the City of Medina), and the two cul-de-sacs will be privately owned and managed by the Stonegate Homeowners Association ("HOA"). The community recreation area will be owned and maintained by the HOA, and private lots will be owned and maintained by the Developer until the lots are purchased by homeowners. Conservation Area The City of Medina defines Conservation Area as: Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 8 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 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. The 84 acres of Conservation Area ("CA") in the Stonegate subdivision will be protected under a conservation easement that will be held by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ("MCWD"), with the HOA retaining ownership of the CA. In addition, approximately 3.52 acres of wetland and wetland buffers on private lots will also be included in the conservation easements, for a total of approximately 88 acres in the easement held by MCWD. The CA will consist of approximately 37 acres of Reserve Area and approximately 51 acres of Restoration Area, which includes approximately 4 acres of Passive Recreation Area. Each of these areas is discussed below in terms of ownership, objectives, proposed restoration/enhancement, land protection methods, scheduling, funding, and enforcement. The Reserve The Reserve will consist primarily of existing wetlands (including the Tamarack Swamp) and forests (including Maple -Basswood Forest). Ownership & Objectives The areas identified on the Stonegate Preliminary Plat as "Reserve" will be owned by the Stonegate HOA. The edges of these areas will be marked clearly in the field with permanent MCWD conservation signage. The objective for the Reserve is to retain or improve the existing natural resource values and ecosystem functions of these areas. Proposed Landscape Conditions The Reserve areas will remain much as they are today, except that the Stonegate HOA and/or MCWD may conduct ecological enhancement or management activities to improve their ecosystem functions in the future. Land Protection Methods & Schedule The Reserve will be protected by the conservation easement, which will be held by the MCWD prior to initiation of the Phase of site development in which the Reserve area is located. Per the easement requirements, the MCWD will perform, at a minimum, annual monitoring inspections of the easement to ensure compliance with the easement, identify and violations or concerns, and take necessary regulatory action to rectify any issues. No schedule is proposed for ecological enhancement or management activities within the Reserve; however, these wetland and forest areas will benefit from the restoration and management activities that will occur in the Restoration Area. Land Protection Funding Through its holding of the conservation easement, the MCWD has accepted responsibility for funding perpetual monitoring of the easement. Ecological enhancement or ongoing management is not scheduled for the Reserve; therefore, land protection funding is not required for this area. Land Protection Enforcement Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 9 Because the Reserve is covered by the MCWD-held conservation easement, all easement requirements will be ensured by the MCWD's annual monitoring and regulatory authority. Restoration Area Restoration Areas will consist primarily of prairie and wetlands, which will be actively restored or enhanced as diverse native plant communities. Ownership & Objectives The areas identified on the Stonegate Preliminary Plat as "Restoration Area" will be owned by the Stonegate HOA. The edges of these areas will be marked clearly in the field with permanent MCWD conservation signage. The objectives for the site's Restoration Area are: 1. Convert agricultural fields and degraded wetlands to relatively large blocks of native habitat (primarily prairies and wetlands) for their ecosystem services and for the enjoyment of residents. The existing agricultural wetlands near the center of the site will be enlarged, restoring a larger, historical wetland complex. 2. Provide naturalized stormwater treatment of the development's runoff through volume, rate, and water quality management. The proposed restored prairies, native -vegetated swales, dry creek bed, infiltration areas, treatment forebays, and stormwater ponds will promote volume and runoff reduction (through infiltration and other practices, where feasible), rate control, and effective nutrient removal. 3. Provide a limited, passive recreational, natural surface trail system for residents of Stonegate to experience and enjoy the site's Conservation Area. 4. Provide a 2-acre passive park area (consisting of shortgrass prairie or meadow) for residents of Stonegate to experience and enjoy. 5. Provide a 2-acre low -maintenance grass park area for residents of Stonegate to gather and engage in casual recreation, such as Frisbee. Proposed Landscape Conditions The Stonegate Restoration Area (currently dominated by agricultural fields) will be actively restored to a mosaic of regionally -appropriate native landscapes dominated by prairie and interspersed with a variety of wetlands. Ecological restoration of these areas will entail eradication of existing, primarily invasive and weedy vegetation, soil preparation, and seeding and/or planting of appropriate native species. Initial implementation costs to complete this effort are estimated at approximately $125,000. The Restoration Area's ecological restoration and enhancement zones are illustrated in Exhibit 1. Minnesota State Native Seed Mixes (http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/native vegetation/seedmix- summary.pdf) or comparably diverse native seed mixes will be used in restoration areas. Existing erosion features in the site's Restoration Area, such as some of the site's existing drainageways, will be re -graded to blend naturally with the surrounding landscape and will be stabilized during restoration/enhancement activities. Land Protection Methods & Schedule As its owner, the Stonegate HOA will be responsible for the ecological enhancement, restoration, operations and maintenance of the site's Restoration Area. The MCWD will hold a conservation easement over these areas. Consequently, the MCWD may also contribute to restoration and management of the Restoration Area, which will be determined prior to completion of the Final Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 10 Land Stewardship Plan. An Ecological Restoration and Management Plan (ERMP) will be prepared for each Final Plat Phase of the project, and PRDC will share the ERMPs with the MCWD once completed. The ERMPs will outline in detail the steps necessary to enhance, restore, and manage the proposed native landscapes. More specifically, the ERMPs will include an implementation phasing strategy and methods to accomplish: • Removal of invasive species; • Earthwork and grading for restoration and ecological stormwater management areas; • Soil preparation for seeding and planting; • Installation of native vegetation, including seed mixes and live plant schedules for each restoration zone; • Establishment maintenance for the first three years of restoration; and • Long-term management. Native plant communities are low -maintenance —not no -maintenance —landscapes, so restoration and enhancement, initial establishment maintenance, and perpetual stewardship will be required to sustain the conservation values of these areas. Table 1 summarizes the anticipated three years of initial restoration, enhancement, and establishment tasks for the site's Restoration Area in Phase 1. Table 1. Anticipated Tasks and Schedule for Initial Restoration, Enhancement, and Establishment General Task Description/Subtask Year 1 (2015) Year 2 (2016) Year 3 (2017) .-I N M ct r-I N M cr r-I N M Cr Weed Control (site prep and control) Cover crop, spot spray, broadcast herbicide, wick apply herbicide & spot mow Prescribed burn (if used for site prep) Seeding & Planting Install native seed (where site prep complete) Install native trees &shrubs (where site prep complete) Brushing Cut &stump treat invasive woody vegetation Brushing Follow -Up Foliar-spray herbicide for invasive woody vegetation Prescribed Burn Prescribed burn (where fuel is sufficient and burn warranted) Ecological Monitoring & Reporting Assess & document site conditions & prepare summary report Notes: Q = quarter of year Perpetual management will be essential to maintaining the composition, structure, and function of healthy native ecosystems throughout the Restoration Area. Perpetual management typically includes: • Control of weeds and invasive vegetation with spot herbicide treatments; • Prescribed burning of prairie, savanna, and wetland areas; • Remedial or enhancement seeding or planting; and Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 11 " Monitoring and reporting. Table 2 presents the anticipated perpetual management schedule for the site, all phases. Table 2. Perpetual Management Schedule Plant CommunityType Yp Task Frequency (once every X years) Prescribed Burning Weed Control (Spot Herbicide) Remedial Seeding/Planting Monitoring & Reporting Forest 5-10 3-4 5 1 Savanna 3-4 1-2 3-5 1 Shrubland 3-5 2-3 5 1 Prairie 2-3 1-3 3-5 1 i Wetland 2-3 1-2 3-5 1 Notes: Schedule assumes that prescribed burning will be employed as a restoration and management technique. If prescribed burning is not employed, haying should be used in prairie areas to remove accumulating plant material. Land Protection Funding Ecological restoration and enhancement requires a substantial initial investment, followed by significantly reduced, but perpetual, annual stewardship costs to address operations and maintenance needs. PRDC will identify and hire a qualified ecological contractor to complete the initial restoration, enhancement, and establishment tasks proposed for the site's Restoration Area in Phase 1. Initial restoration, enhancement, and establishment is anticipated to take approximately three years (2015-2017) for Phase 1 (see Table 1). Following initial restoration, enhancement, and establishment, the average annual perpetual management cost for the entire site's Restoration Area in Phase 1 is estimated to be $300-450 per acre. Management staffing will be provided by a qualified ecological contractor selected and compensated by the Stonegate HOA, MCWD, or some combination of both. Annual HOA dues (paid by Stonegate residents) will be supplemented by PRDC (as necessary) and the MCWD (if applicable) to ensure that an escrow account to fund perpetual stewardship totals no less than $13,200 at the onset of the perpetual stewardship period (beginning in 2018 for Phase 1). The stewardship account will continue to be funded by annual HOA dues plus a real-estate transaction fee (estimated at $500), which will provide additional funds to the account each time a property within the development is sold. PRDC, with input from MCWD, will complete a Final Land Stewardship Plan for each Phase of the Stonegate development, and the annual stewardship costs will be further refined in each phase to ensure adequate funds are available to fulfill the commitments of the LSP. Land Protection Enforcement Because the Restoration Area will be within the MCWD-held conservation easement, all easement requirements will be enforced by the MCWD's annual monitoring and regulatory authority. MCWD staff will conduct annual inspections of the conservation easement to document site conditions and ensure the conservation values of the easement are being upheld. In the event that issues or a violation are identified, the MCWD will immediately notify the Stonegate HOA, which will take prompt action to resolve any issues. The HOA will be required to maintain a General Liability Stonegate Preliminary Plat Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 12 insurance policy that will cover all Conservation Areas owned by the Stonegate HOA. PRDC and MCWD have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with regard to the conservation easement, and the MCWD is in agreement with this Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan, insurance coverage, and perpetual stewardship and funding of the conservation easement. PRDC recognizes that 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 conservation easement (MCWD), 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. Passive Recreation Area Stonegate's 4-acre Passive Recreation Area consists of a half -moon -shaped area in the northern portion of the development (Exhibit 1). This area, proposed to be divided roughly in half by a natural surface trail, will provide a 2-acre passive park area of shortgrass prairie or meadow on the southwest side of the trail, and a 2-acre low -maintenance grass park area on the northeast side of the trail. These areas will provide opportunities for residents to gather and engage in casual outdoor interactions, including passive recreation. The development's dry creek bed will meander through these areas, providing additional character and interest. Native perennial plantings will buffer the dry creek bed, and native landscaping will further enhance this gathering space. CONCLUSION The proposed Stonegate conservation development complies with the City of Medina's Conservation Design District requirements, and will serve as a model standard for future conservation developments in the City and region. The implementation and perpetual management of the project —as ensured by the MCWD-held conservation easement —will result in a high quality development, in which quality homes, valuable community amenities, and enhanced ecological functions all work together and create a beautiful, livable place. Stonegate Preliminary Plat —Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan 13 i 3o i abed L£0-3110-3H 9£0-01I0-g1-1 Hb-56-xx 0110z0 MS-HN-'HS 8Z £Z 8 i I 'N .0AV 1119 588Z H17-56-xx ioisiaoxg MS-MN-gS 8Z £Z 81I 9 ieMq$?H 050E 5i0Z `bZ AJEroga,3 `Aepsani unq asnoq on010 :cIIHSNMOI/A LI3 IlidauuaH :AINI1103 aagmnN.fao;uannI HOG .3g0 ODIN podag SJSR sJapen6 aos aSneg dAni, SSHIEMV MANNAillad02Id kioluanuI onmoolItio ikiols1H uodau asucirlrQ aag3O 110gUA.13saad apolsm alms mosauum AT wuaddy Exhibit 1. Stonegate Draft Preliminary Land Stewardship Plan Proposed Conditions _ Reserve Restoration Area Road and ROW Community Recreation Area Wetland Boundary -- Wetland Buffer Impacted Wetland Dry Creek Bed Stormwater Management Area Private Lot Line Data Sources: - 2010 FSAAerial Orthophoto AES Job Number: 14-1069 Filename: Stonegate_LSP_draft_2015-05-07 Date: 5/7/15 N^mmir-am � �.. . .2 ■ ■Yli►..lr■ APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES 21938 Mushtown Road Prior Lake, MN 55372 952-447-1919 www.appliedeco.com 0 200 400 800 Feet A CONSERVATION EASEMENT Legal Description of Protected Property: [INSERT] This is a CONSERVATION EASEMENT granted by Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and Stonegate Farm, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation ("Owner"), to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a governmental body created under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D (t "pp,Dayaypp,ppistrict"). 111 � �:RR9R�R!tS. RECITALS: A. OWNER. The Owner is the sole Owner in fee simple of the real property in the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as follows (the "Protected Property"): OUTLOTS A, B, C and D STONEGATE FIRST ADDITION ("Restoration Area A" OUTLOTS E, F, G and H STONEGATE SECOND ADDITION ("Restoration Area B"); OUTLOT I, STONEGATE SECOND ADDITION ("Reserve Area A") The general location of which are shown on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Site Map"). B. PROTECTED PROPERTY. The Protected Property contains approximately 31 acres of a XXX acre Tamarack swamp, a public water under Minnesota Statutes § 103G.005, and contains a wetland, floodplain and mature tree canopy. The remaining approximately 58 acres of the Protected Property is primarily vacant and has been used for agricultural purposes. C. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is a governmental body created and operated exclusively for the purposes of water resource protection, conservation and management, including the 1 protection, conservation, and management of related lands. The District is an organization qualified to hold conservation easements under Minnesota law and Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations. D. CONSERVATION VALUES. The Protected Property will be subject to the following: 1. In conjunction with the phased development of adjoining residential lots ("Lots") and streets (the "Residential Community"), Owner will complete the phased preservation, restoration or expansion of the natural resources of the Protected Property pursuant to the Conservation Design Planned Unit Development ("CD- PUD") Development Agreement dated , 2015 by and between the Owner and the City of Medina; and the Land Stewardship Plan ("LSP") dated , 2015 prepared by Applied Ecological Services, Inc. for the Owner (together, the "Conservation Plan"). Collectively, the natural, scenic and open space qualities of the Protected Property as established in the Conservation Plan constitute its "Conservation Values." The activities identified in the Conservation Plan are summarized as the following: i. Owner will complete the phased restoration and expansion of natural resources in Restoration Area A and Restoration Area B as set forth herein. ii. Owner will protect the existing quality and condition of Reserve Area A. No direct activity will be conducted by the Owner in these areas; however, indirectly the restoration activities of adjacent areas will offer additional protection of the existing natural resources. 2. Owner is obligated to complete the planned restoration and expansion of natural resources in Restoration Areas A and B as detailed in the LSP. 3. Each of the parties has a copy of the LSP. Holder intends to use the Conservation Plan in monitoring subsequent uses and in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement. 4. These Conservation Values have not been and are not likely to be adversely affected to any substantial extent by the continued use of the Protected Property as described above or as authorized below or by the use and maintenance of the existing improvements on the Protected Property or construction of those structures and improvements that are authorized below. E. CONSERVATION POLICY. Preservation of the Protected Property will further those governmental policies established by the following: 1. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 84C, which recognizes the importance of private conservation efforts by authorizing conservation easements for the protection of natural, scenic, or open space values of real property, assuring its availability for agriculture, forest, recreational, or open space use, protecting natural resources, and maintaining or enhancing air or water quality. 2 2. The Metropolitan Surface Water Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 103B, which specifically identifies the importance of protecting the natural surface waters and groundwaters of the Metropolitan Area. 3. Minnesota Statutes Section 103D which provides for the establishment of watershed districts to conserve the natural resources of the State. 4. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Water Management Plan Update (as amended) which includes the following policies, progra and projects implementing the Metropolitan Surface Water Act: [insert] F. CONSERVATION INTENT. The Owner and the District are committed to protecting and preserving the Conservation Values of the Protected Property in perpetuity. Accordingly, it is their intent to create and implement a conservation easement that is binding in perpetuity upon the Owner and all future owners of the Protected Property and that conveys to the District the right to protect and preserve the Conservation Values of the Protected Property for the benefit of this generation and generations to come. CONVEYANCE OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT: Pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota and in particular Minnesota Statutes Chapter 84C and in consideration of the facts recited above and the mutual covenants contained herein and in further consideration of the sum of one dollar and other valuable consideration, the Owner hereby conveys to the District a perpetual conservation easement over that portion of the Protected Property delineated and labeled as "Easement Area A" on the site survey attached hereto as Attachment B and incorporated herein. Further, the Owner intends to convey to the District a perpetual conservation easement over that portion of the Protected Property delineated and labeled as "Easement Area B" at a future date to be determined when the Owner is granted any Final Plat of any phase in the Stonegate Second Addition. It is the intent of the Owner that such conservation easement for Easement Area B will be in the same form as this conservation easement. This conservation easement consists of the following rights, terms and restrictions applicable within Easement Area A (the "Easement"): 1. CONSERVATION PURPOSE. The purpose of this Easement is to preserve and protect in perpetuity the Conservation Values of the Protected Property by confining the development, management and use of the Easement area to activities that are consistent with the preservation of these Conservation Values, by prohibiting activities that significantly impair or interfere with these Conservation Values, and by providing for remedies in the event of any violation of this Easement. The terms of this Easement are specifically intended to provide a significant public benefit, including, but not limited to the protection of water quality, protection of habitat connections and improvement to the surface water bodies, particularly those in the Painter Creek Subwatershed, and the facilitation of public educational and recreational 3 use by the local community consistent therewith, all pursuant to the public policies set forth above. 2. ACTIVITY RESTRICTIONS ON EASEMENT AREA: The Owner and all persons acting under authority or control of the Owner; all lessees, agents, personal representatives, successors and assigns; and all other parties entitled to possess or use the Protected Property are subject to the following terms regarding use of the Easement, except for affirmative rights retained by the District under Section 4 of this Easement for the protection and enhancement of the Conservation Values of the Protected Property. 2.1 Permitted Uses Limited. Permitted uses on the Easement are limited to those uses specifically and explicitly permitted in this conservation Easement and the LSP as identified in Section D. 2.2. Industrial and Commercial Activity. No industrial or commercial use of the Easement is allowed. 2.3. Right of Way. No right of way shall be granted across the Easement area, except the right-of-way shown on Exhibit A which is planned to serve the Lots, in conjunction with any other commercial use or residential development of other land not protected by this Easement or the easement contemplated as Easement Area B. 2.4. Mining. No mining, drilling, exploring for or removing of any minerals from the Easement area is allowed. 2.5. Subdivision. The Easement may not be divided, subdivided, or partitioned. 2.6. Water. No activity shall be conducted on the Easement that would pollute, alter, deplete, or extract surface water or groundwater; cause erosion; or be detrimental to water quality, except as follows: a. Activities approved in writing by District that restore or enhance wildlife habitat or native biological communities or that improve or enhance the function and quality of existing wetlands and surface waters on and off of the property. b. Activities undertaken in the exercise of rights reserved under Section 2 of this Easement, if any, that might cause erosion or impact water quality on a temporary basis, provided that all reasonable erosion and sediment control measures are undertaken to limit the impacts of those activities. All activities permitted hereunder remain subject to the permitting requirements of the District and other governmental bodies. 2.7. Dumping. No trash, non-compostable garbage, hazardous or toxic substances or unsightly material may be dumped or placed on the Easement area. Composting 4 of waste vegetation shall be permitted in a designated compost area for the Residential Community as identified on the Site Plan. 2.8. Storage Tanks. There shall be no placement of underground storage tanks on, in, or under the Easement area. 2.9. Agricultural Use. No agricultural use or cultivation is allowed within the Easement, except as permitted under subsection 2.14, below. 2.10. Utilities. Limited utilities are be permitted within the Easement as subsequently described: a. The Owner reserves the right to use the Easement for siting of Secondary septic areas for individual septic systems associated with the Lots contained within the Residential Community. b. The District understands that active and passive stormwater management and treatment from the Residential Community will be located within the Easement, and are permitted. The Owner reserves the right to use the Easement for these purposes and such plans will be detailed in the CD-PUD. The District acknowledges and accepts that proper maintenance and management of these areas is required, and that the Owner will occasionally perform work on these areas. c. The existing power line and underground pipeline which bisects the Easement is permitted to remain, but may not be expanded. (Note: May need to discuss this with respective easement holders) d. No other utilities are permitted in the Easement. 2.11. Recreational Use. Owner retains the right of the Residential Community to access the Easement areas for recreational use as described: a. Trails. Owner may establish and maintain private turf trails for fire breaks, walking , cross-country skiing and other non -motorized recreational activities on or across the Easement that have been approved by the District. The Districts approval of the trail areas shall not be unreasonably withheld. b. Passive Recreation Areas Owner may establish and maintain an Open Space, identified as Outlots D and E, to be used for community gatherings. Permitted activities associated with the Passive Recreation Area will be approved by the District, and such activities shall not adversely affect the Conservation Values of the Easement. 2.12. Fences. No fence may be located or constructed within the Easement unless agreed to by both parties. 5 2.13. Structures and Improvements. No temporary or permanent building, structure, sign or other improvement of any kind may be placed or constructed in the Easement, except those noted in the approved CD-PUD.. 2.14. Vegetation Management. Vegetation may be altered within the Easement only to maintain, restore or enhance habitat for wildlife and native biological communities; prevent or control insects, noxious weeds, invasive vegetation, or disease; improve the water quality of the Tamarack; or improve the water quality of other surface water bodies or groundwater in the Painter Creek Subwatershed. Any such activity must be in accordance with a plan approved by the District in writing if the activity is not explicitly stated and approved in the LSP. Notwithstanding, in an emergency situation action may be taken as necessary to prevent or abate fire or any other condition causing or threatening injury or substantial property damage. 2.15. Topography and Surface Alteration. No alteration or change in the topography or surface of the Easement is allowed after the activities identified within the LSP are completed. This includes no ditching, draining, diking, filling, excavation, dredging, mining, drilling or removal of soil, sand, gravel, rock, minerals, or other materials. 4mIlwqmP�Bo. 2.16. Vehicles. No motorized vehicle may be operated within the Easement except as required to perform maintenance and management as identified within the LSP. 2.17. Chemicals. Except as authorized pursuant to subsection 2.14, above, within the Easement there shall be no use of pesticides or biocides. This shall not include insecticides or other mosquito control measures. 2.18 Additional Uses. Any additional uses not identified in this Easement shall require the Owner to obtain written approval from the District. This will allow the District to review and study any proposed use and determine if the use is consistent with this conservation Easement. For any such use, the Owner shall submit a request in writing to the District at least sixty (60) days prior to the proposed date of commencement of the use in question. The request shall include a professional report and shall set out the use for which approval is sought, its design and location, the impact of the proposed use on the Conservation Values of the Easement, and other material information in sufficient detail to allow the District to make an informed judgment. The District shall notify the Owner in writing of its decision within thirty (3) days of its receipt of Owner's request. The District may withhold its approval only upon a reasonable determination by it that (a) the proposed use would be inconsistent with this conservation Easement, (b) the proposed use impairs the Conservation Values of the Easement, (c) the proposed use results in violation of an applicable law or regulation or (d) the District lacks information in sufficient detail to reach an informed judgement that the proposed use is or is not consistent with this Easement. The District may condition its approval on Owner's acceptance of reasonable modifications that 6 would make the proposed use, as modified, consistent with the purpose of this Easement and make the proposed use such that it does not impair the Conservation Values. 3. RESERVED RIGHTS. The Owner retains all rights associated with ownership and use of the Protected Property that are not expressly restricted or prohibited by this Easement. However, the Owner may not exercise these rights in a manner that would adversely impact the Conservation Values of the Protected Property. The Owner must give notice to the District before exercising any reserved right that might have an adverse impact on the Conservation Values associated with the Protected Property. 3.1. Right to Convey. The Owner intends to convey fee simple title to the Easement Area to the Stonegate Homeowners Association, Inc., once the duties of the Owner as identified in the LSP are completed, or as mandated by the HOA's Bylaws and Covenants, whichever occurs first. At such time of Conveyance the HOA will assume the duties of the Owner for purposes of this Easement. Such conveyance will include: 900000 b a. Any conveyance or encumbrance of the Protected Property is subject to this Easement. b. The Owner will reference or insert the terms of this Easement in any deed or other document by which the Owner conveys title to all or a portion of the Protected Property. c. The Owner will reference or insert the terms of this Easement within the Homeowners Association documents and Bylaws. d. The Owner will notify the District of any conveyance within fifteen (15) days after closing and will provide the District with the name and address of the new owner and a copy of the deed transferring title. e. The enforceability or validity of this Easement will not be impaired or limited by any failure of the Owner to comply with this subsection. 4. DISTRICT'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. In order to accomplish the purposes of this Easement, the District has the following rights and remedies. The District may not, however, exercise these rights in a manner that would adversely impact the Conservation Values of the Protected Property. 4.1. Preserve and Protect Conservation Values. The right to preserve and protect the conservation values of the Protected Property through the rights and remedies set forth below. 7 4.2. Right to Enter. The District, its agents and authorized representatives may enter the Easement Area at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner for the purpose of, and may engage in, the following activities: a. To inspect the Easement, monitor compliance with the terms of this Easement, and enforce the terms of this Easement. The District shall not unreasonably interfere with the legal and appropriate use and quiet enjoyment of the Easement by the Owner, the owners and occupants of the Residential Community ("Residents"), Stonegate Homeowners Association, or any successor homeowners association ("Association"), and any permitted invitees of those persons, collectively ("Permitted Users") so long as such use is in a manner consistent with the Conservation Values. To further the purposes as set out in this Section, Owner hereby grants to the District a perpetual non- exclusive easement for the purpose of access to the Easement by necessary means, on, over, and across all trails, roads, rights of way and platted drainage and utility easements within the Residential Community. b. To survey or otherwise mark the boundaries of all or part of the Easement. Any survey or boundary demarcation completed under this provision will be at the District's expense. c. To make scientific and educational observations and studies and take samples within the Easement, in such a manner as will not disturb the quiet enjoyment of the Protected Property. d. The right, but not the obligation, to manage the Easement subject to applicable laws and regulations and to undertake on the Easement all actions reasonably necessary or convenient for management purposes. Said management may consist of, but not be limited to: vegetative maintenance and management; hydrologic or soils modifications; land alteration and stabilization; installation of improvements for water quality and flood management purposes, as the District determines to be consistent with the Conservation Values of the Protected Property and in accordance with all reasonable measures to minimize the impact of any temporary disturbance to adjacent wetlands; fencing or other measures to protect the Conservation Values against intentional or unintentional impact; and the installation and maintenance of educational or informational signage. Such activities shall be subject to discussion and negotiations with the Owner, if such activities are different than those identified within the LSP. Any activities beyond those identified in the LSP shall be memorialized in an appropriate agreement between the parties. Nothing in this Section 4 shall be construed as (i) a public dedication; or (ii) a grant to persons other than the District and the Permitted Users for the right to enter or use the Easement as provided in this Conservation Easement. The District shall have no right to authorize any person to enter into the Easement, 8 except for entry for the purpose of monitoring the condition and use for the Easement for the purpose of performing any of the District's rights or obligations under this Easement. 4.3. Right of Enforcement. The District may prevent or remedy a violation of this Easement through judicial action brought against the responsible party in any court of competent jurisdiction. a. Notice. Before initiating judicial action against the Owner of the Protected Property, the District will advise the Owner in writing of the apparent violation or threatened violation and allow a reasonable opportunity to confer and resolve the matter, unless the District determines that immediate judicial action is needed to prevent or mitigate damage to the Easement. b. Remedies. Remedies available to the District include but are not limited to temporary and permanent injunctive relief, restoration of the Easement to the condition established in the LSP, specific performance, declaratory relief and recovery of damages. These remedies are cumulative and are available without requiring the District to prove actual impact to the Conservation Values protected by this Easement. The District and the Owner also recognize that restoration may be the only adequate remedy for certain violations of this Easement. The District may seek expedited relief, ex parte if necessary, and need not post a bond applicable to a petition for such relief. c. Discretionary Enforcement. Enforcement of the terms of this Easement is solely at the District's discretion. The District does not, by any delay or prior failure of the District to discover a violation or initiate enforcement proceedings, waive or forfeit any enforcement right. d. Acts Beyond Owner's Control. The District will not have a remedy against the Owner for any change to the Protected Property: (i) not caused in whole or part by an action of the Owner or a party acting under the Owner's authority, or (ii) to the extent caused by an action of the Owner , or of a party acting under the Owner's authority, taken reasonably and in good faith under emergency conditions to prevent or mitigate substantial damage from such conditions. 5. PUBLIC ACCESS. Nothing in this Easement constitutes a grant of general public access to the Easement. If public access to any portion of the Easement is desired by either the Owner or District, a written agreement addressing the terms of such access shall be executed by both parties. 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 6.1. Assignment. This Easement, and any rights or responsibilities hereunder, may be assigned or transferred by the District to, or shared by the District with, a 9 conservation organization that is a qualified organization under Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations and that is authorized to hold conservation easements under Minnesota law. Any future holder of this Easement shall have all of the rights and obligations conveyed to the District by this Easement. As a condition of any assignment or transfer, the District shall require any future holder of this Easement to continue to carry out the conservation purposes of this Easement in perpetuity. The District agrees not to transfer or assign the easement during the establishment period as identified within the LSP, or until the HOA assumes responsibility for the easement areas, whichever occurs first. Further, the District agrees that the HOA shall have the right to review the assignee and find its own qualified organization if the HOA does not approve of the District's proposed assignee. 6.2. Amendment. Under appropriate circumstances, this Easement may be modified or amended. However, no amendment or modification will be allowed if, in the sole and exclusive judgment of the District, it: (i) does not further the purposes of this Easement, (ii) will adversely impact the Conservation Values protected by this Easement, (iii) affects the perpetual duration of the Easement, or (iv) affects the validity of the Easement under Minnesota law or under Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code. Any amendment or modification must be in writing and recorded in the same manner as this Easement. 6.3. Extinguishment. This Easement may be extinguished only through judicial proceedings and only under the following circumstances: a. This Easement may be extinguished only (i) if unexpected change in the conditions of or surrounding the Protected Property makes the continued use of the Protected Property for the conservation purposes set out above impossible or impractical or (ii) pursuant to the proper exercise of the power of eminent domain. b. The Owner recognizes that uses of the Protected Property prohibited by this Easement may, in the future, become more economically viable than those uses permitted by the Easement. The Owner also recognizes that in the future, neighboring properties may be put entirely to uses not permitted on the Protected Property by this Easement. The Owner and the District believe that such changes will increase the public benefit provided by this Easement. Therefore, such changes are not considered unexpected changes and shall not be deemed to be circumstances justifying the extinguishment of this Easement as otherwise set forth above. 10 6.4. Real Estate Taxes. The Owner shall pay all real estate taxes and assessments levied against the Protected Property. At its discretion, the District may pay any outstanding tax or assessment and shall then be entitled to reimbursement from the Owner. 6.5. Ownership Costs and Liabilities. The Owner retains all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to the ownership, operation, upkeep and maintenance of the Protected Property, including the maintenance of such comprehensive general liability insurance coverage as the Owner deems adequate. The preceding sentence shall not apply to any improvements constructed by the District under subsection 4.2. The Owner agrees to release, hold harmless, defend and indemnify the District from any and all liabilities including, but not limited to, injury, losses, damages, judgments, costs, expenses and fees that the District may suffer or incur, to the extent they result from the activities of Owner on the Protected Property. The District agrees to release, hold harmless, defend and indemnify the Owner from any and all liabilities including, but not limited to, injury, losses, damages, judgments, costs, expenses and fees that the Owner may suffer or incur, to the extent they result from the activities of the District on the Protected Property. Each party shall keep the Protected Property free of any liens arising out of any work performed for, materials furnished to or obligations incurred by that party. Nothing in this paragraph or this Easement creates any right in any third party or diminishes any immunity, defense or liability limitation of the Owner or District as against any third party. 6.6. Notice and Approval. Any notice or request for approval required by this Easement must be written and is subject to the following: a. Delivery. Any required notice or request for approval must be delivered or sent by first class mail or other nationally recognized delivery service to the appropriate party at the following addresses (or other address specified in writing): To the Owner: Stonegate Farm, Inc. 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PRDC 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 To the District: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 15320 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka MN 55345 b. Timing Unless otherwise specified in this Easement, any required notice or request for approval must be delivered at least 30 days prior to the date proposed for initiating the activity in question. 11 c. Content. The notice or request for approval must include sufficient information to allow the District to make an informed decision on whether any proposed activity is consistent with the terms and purposes of this Easement. d. Approval. The District may consent to any activity under this Easement only if it reasonably determines that the activity (1) will not violate the purpose of this Conservation Easement and (2) will either enhance or not impair any significant conservation interest associated with the Protected Property. The District may condition its approval on the Owner's acceptance of modifications that, in the District's reasonable judgment, would allow the proposed activity to meet these criteria. 6.7. Binding Effect. This Easement will run with and burden the Protected Property in perpetuity. The terms of this Easement are binding and enforceable against the Owner, its lessees, agents, personal representatives, successors and assigns, and all other parties entitled to possess or use the Protected Property. This Easement creates a property right immediately vested in the District and its successors and assigns that cannot be terminated or extinguished except as set out herein. 6.8. Merger. The Owner and District agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive any merger of the fee and easement interest in the Protected Property. 6.9. Definitions. Unless the context requires otherwise, the term "Owner" means Stonegate Farm, Inc. and Property Resources Development Corporation collectively and its representatives, successors and assigns in title to the Protected Property. The term "District" means the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and its successors, assigns and partners to any interest it holds in this Easement. 6.10. Termination of Rights and Obligations. A party's rights and obligations under this Easement terminate upon the transfer or termination of that parry's interest in this Easement or the Protected Property, provided, however, that any liability for acts or omissions occurring prior to the transfer or termination will survive that transfer or termination. 6.11. Recording. The District will record or register this Easement in a timely manner in the official records for Hennepin County. The District may re-record or re- register this Easement or any other document necessary to protect its rights under this Easement or to assure the perpetual enforceability of this Easement. The Owner will cooperate as necessary to accomplish and effect acts of recordation. 6.12. Controlling Law and Construction. This Easement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and construed to resolve any ambiguities or questions of validity of specific provisions in favor of giving maximum effect to its 12 conservation purposes and to the policies and purposes of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 84C. 6.13. Permits and Applicable Laws. The Owner and the District acknowledge that the exercise of any reserved right herein or other use of the Protected Property is not by this Easement relieved from complying with or obtaining any permit from any applicable governmental authority, including the District, prior to the exercise thereof. 6.14. Severability. A determination that any provision or specific application of this Easement is invalid shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions or any future application. 6.15. Captions. The captions herein have been inserted solely for convenience of reference and are not a part of this Conservation Easement and shall have no effect upon construction or interpretation. 6.16. Additional Documents. The Owner agrees to execute or provide any additional documents reasonably needed by the District to carry out in perpetuity the provisions and intent of this Easement, including, but not limited to any documents needed to correct any legal description or title matter or to comply with any federal, state, or local law, rule or regulation. 6.17. Entire Agreement. This document states the entire agreement of the parties with respect to this Easement and supersedes all prior discussions or understandings. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, on the basis of mutual valuable consideration, and intending to be legally bound, the Owner and the District voluntarily execute this Conservation Easement on the day of , 2015. STONEGATE FARM, INC. ("OWNER") By: Michael J. Seeland, President PROPERTY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC. ("OWNER") By: Susan H. Seeland, President 13 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2015, by Michael J. Seeland, President as respectively of Stonegate Farm, Inc., and Susan H. Seeland, President as respectively of Property Resources Development Corporation . The Minnehaha Creek Watershed this day of STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ) Notary Public ..- ACC NCE ereby acce foregoing Conservation Easement MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By: Title: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2015, by , as of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 14 Exhibit A Intentionally Left Blank Outlots Identified on Preliminary Plat, to be created for Final Conservation Easement (See Preliminary Plat for Reference) 15 MEMORANDUM of UNDERSTANDING Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Stonegate Farm Inc, and Property Resources development Corporation Conservation Development Planning Medina, Minnesota This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made among the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ("District"); Stonegate Farm Incorporated ("Stonegate Farm"), the owner of an approximately 171-acre tract comprising parcels with parcel identification numbers 2111823310001, 2111823340002, 2111823340003 and 2811823240001 (the "Property"); and Property Resources Development Corporation ("PRDC"), which has a contractual arrangement with Stonegate Farm to develop the Property. Statement of Purpose A. Stonegate Farm and PRDC are parties to a Contingent Settlement Agreement ("CSA") that stipulates development of the Property with approximately 42 single-family home sites utilizing a conservation design planned unit development (CD-PUD) approach. B. The development of the Conservation Areas, as defined in subsequent sections, on the Property is of particular interest to the District because it is located within a key conservation area as designated in the District's watershed management plan, with proximity to Lake Katrina and `three Rivers Park District's Baker Parr. C. As part of the CM, Stonegate Farm and PRDC are required to go through the regulatory process including, but not limited to, submitting to the City of Medina as land use authority a Concept Plan and General Plan of Development for the Project that includes appropriate approvals and public hearing processes, and for rules implementing the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). This process also requires review and approval by the District under its duly adopted rules for protection of water resources, D. Stonegate Farms and PRDC understand that the CD-PUD process requires dedication of Conservation Areas within the development that encompass wetlands, wetland buffers, steep slopes in excess of 18%, and a minimum of 30% of the remaining buildable lands. E. The City of Medina's ordinances further require the developer to create a Land Stewardship Plan for all Conservation Areas associated with the protect to ensure that a long-term steward of these areas is established in perpetuity. F. As initially identified within the Concept Plan submitted to the City for review on January 13, 2015 prepared by Stonegate Farm and PRDC, the Property includes approximately 49 acres of wetlands, wetland buffer areas and steep slopes, and more than 40 acres of upland buildable areas that will be a part of the Conservation Areas. 1 G. The Conservation Areas offer the potential to restore, connect and regionally integrate approximately 90 acres, more or less, of largely drained and degraded farmed wetland, existing tamarack wetlands, and uplands that have the potential to be located within conservation corridors. H. The District, Stonegate Farm and PRDC are interested in working proactively to bring conservation considerations to bear on the intended development of the Conservation Areas on the Property, in order to optimize the water resource and ecologic benefits of the development in a way that also facilitates an efficient and orderly development review process while securing for Stonegate Farms and PRDC their desired economic outcomes, I, The parties acknowledge that their ability to achieve these objectives for the Conservation Areas depends on their working cooperatively in accordance with the terms of this N1OU. THEREFORE this M©U does not state legally binding responsibilities or obligations but documents mutual goals and establishes a cooperative framework within which to explore these goals. Terms of Cooperation 1. In its regulatory capacity under its own rules, the District will work cooperatively with Stonegate Farm and PRDC Both before and after formal application submittal of the General Plan of Development to clarify the District's regulatory requirements, facilitate a Land Stewardship Plan that best achieves conservation and economic goals while meeting regulatory requirements, and integrate District regulatory review with the permitting and approval procedures of the City of Medina and other agencies. 2. Stonegate Farm, PRDC and the District will cooperate to assess conservation values and enhancement opportunities of the Conservation Areas on the Property, and examine feasible conservation development options. The District may contribute technical assistance to this effort. For this purpose the District and its technical advisors may enter the Property at reasonable times to inspect and survey, and may engage in limited disturbance of the Property, but will restore any disturbance materially to its preexisting condition. This paragraph does not give the District any authority to enter any building or structure. If the District finds that the restoration may require the cooperation of a neighboring landowner, the District, Stonegate Farms and the PRDC will consult as to the best way to engage that landowner. 3. Stonegate Farm and PRDC will provide the District any information about the Property that may help in its activity under paragraph 2, except for information that either party considers private. Stonegate Farm and PRDC recognize that data and information in the District's possession is subject to the Minnesota Data Practices Act. Where either party believes that certain data or information is sensitive, it will advise the District and the parties will cooperate to determine whether and how the data or information can be protected from public availability. 4. The District will assist Stonegate Farm and PRDC to understand the relevant programs and requirements of other agencies, including both regulatory and funding functions of such agencies, and will use its good offices to facilitate communications among the parties. The District, Stonegate Farm and the PRDC will explore funding opportunities for mutually agreeable conservation purposes related to the development of the Conservation Areas on the Property. 2 5. The parties may find that it is appropriate for the District to assume a formal responsibility related to the Land Stewardship Plan or conservation stewardship of the Property, which may include its assumption of duties with respect to the management or maintenance of Conservation Areas or the acceptance of a conservation easement or other interest in the Property. In such a case, the roles and responsibilities of the parties would be documented in a legally binding project agreement. 5. The parties will work together in good faith and communicate in a timely fashion to advance the goals of this MOU. Stonegate Farm and PRDC will bring their own technical and legal resources to bear as appropriate to advance the goals of the MOU in a timely way and in such respects as either has need for reliance on technical or legal advice or warranty. Stonegate Farm and PRDC recognize that assistance provided by the District and its technical advisors under this MOU is informal, advisory and without any warranty or duty of care whatsoever. Stonegate Farm and PRDC understand that by its statutory purposes the District's involvement and resources will be directed and limited to the management and enhancement of water resources including but not limited to wetland protection and restoration, upland restoration related to water resource purposes, water quality, ecological benefits, and broader corridor connectivity. 7. Each party will bear the cost of carrying out its tasks and responsibilities under this MOU. Official contacts for all communications under this MOU are as follows: District MCWD 15320 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka MN 55345 Stonegate Farm 6851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PRDC 5851 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite A Eden Prairie, MN 55344 A party rnay change its official contact by written notice to the other parties. 9. This MOU is effective when fully executed by the parties and expires two years thereafter. 3 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT Date: 6, — / 2_015 Sherry White, Pident Approved for Form and Execution: D Counsel STONEGATE FARM, INC. Date: PROPERTY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC. Date: 4 PRDC 1 827.73: Site Design Process Unbuildable (Wetlands, Wetland Buffer, Slopes >18%, Floodplain) Conservation Areas Potentially Buildable QApproximate house site F-40 Potential Roads Potential Trails PRDC I Concept Plan i Lot 31 1.43 ac u Lot 32 1.70 ac Lot 33' 1.58 ac Lot 34 1.33 ac — -- Lot 1.30 c Lot 30 I 1.42 ac Lot 21F 1.96 ac Lot 16 1.63 ac Lot � 2.15 ac 1(] C Lot 42 1.74 ac 8 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN STONEGATE FARM MEDINA, MN PROPERTY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA. MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 `ns I sNo s A3a swor3ar,1 ;13s.;rr.ja , ,�saitis,n TRANSMITTAL LETTER To: From: REMARKS Dusty Finke, City Planner Jennifer Haskamp, SHC Date: RE: June 19, 2015 Stonegate — Response to City Correspondence Dusty — please find the provided updates and/or revisions to the Stonegate General Plan of Development application. PRDC received the following review letters from the City: Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. (NAC) letter dated June 2, 2015; WSB letter dated May 15, 2015; WSB letter dated May 20, 2015; and Hennepin County Ietter dated March 17, 2015 including email dated May 18, 2015. Once you have the chance to review the information please do not hesitate to contact me, or Susan Seeland of PRDC, if you need any additional clarification. PRDC has attempted to respond and provide additional clarification to many of the items identified in the City's review letters; however, there are several items that we believe are policy related decisions that should be discussed with the Planning Commission (PC) and City Council (CC) and therefore we have left the design unchanged (i.e. road and right-of-way width). With respect to the Stormwater Comments contained within the WSB letter dated May 15, 2015, we have not performed any additional updates to the stormwater management plan/calculations at this time. Once we know what changes, if any, will be recommended by the PC and CC regarding site design we will be happy to provide the additional modeling and verifications as requested. However, at this time we believe that the initial stormwater management modeling should be more than adequate to demonstrate that the site can be designed in a way to meet all of the City's stormwater standards. The wetland delineation has not been updated per the Contingent Settlement Agreement (CSA), but will be updated by the time of Final Plat as agreed to within the CSA. Finally, no changes to the septic locations have been submitted because we believe all locations are in compliance with the Minnesota State Rules, as agreed to and detailed within the CSA. The following information summarizes PRDC's updated information and we request the following with respect to our application: ■ Revised Narrative: Please DISCARD the narrative dated May 8, 2015 and REPLACE it with the revised narrative dated June 19, 2015. We have updated the narrative to clarify several of the items identified within the review letters including, but not limited to: ➢ Additional detail regarding septic systems (NAC items #2, 5 and WSB #2, 3) ➢ Response to trail comment at Morningside (NAC #3) ➢ Private Park Facilities and Pool Area (NAC #4 and #5) ➢ Open space calculations and base density (NAC #7) ➢ Wright -Hennepin Easement (NAC #10) ➢ Sight distance at Deer Hill Road and Willow Drive (WSB #10) S E:L ,�r.r�onihaskam,-emsulbng ➢ The typo on page 9 to include the word NOT has been updated (WSB #14) ➢ Traffic Memo regarding sight distance — please ADD this memo to Appendix 2. (Hennepin County regarding Access) ➢ MCWD MOU — Please ADD the executed MOU to Appendix 4 as further clarification of our agreement with MCWD regarding the intent to work together on the conservation easements. (NAC #9) ■ Revised Preliminary Plat: Please DISCARD the previous preliminary plat and REPLACE it with the revised drawings dated June 19, 2015. The following updates to the drawing have been performed: ➢ Trail alignment and easement areas have been updated for consistency. ➢ Parking lot, pool and pool house have been added for consistency with the Landscape Plan. (NAC #5, WSB #3) ■ Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan. Please DISCARD the previous plans and REPLACE them with the revised drawings dated June 19, 2015. The following updates to the drawing have been performed: ➢ Trail alignment and easement areas have been updated for consistency with Preliminary Plat and LA Plan. ➢ Parking lot, pool and pool house have been updated for consistency. (NAC #5, WSB #3) ➢ Street Grades have been added (WSB #11) ➢ Storm sewer alignment modified (WSB #8, 9) ➢ Vertical curve information added (WSB #12) We will provide copies of the updated Landscape Plan by June 23th to reflect the trails on the north 80- acres consistently with the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plans, and will transmit it electronically as soon as is available. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns about the revised information, or if there is anything else that would aid in your review. At this time we have the July 14a' Planning Commission meeting on our calendars and we look forward to working with you and staff over the next couple weeks in preparation for that meeting. Thanks! Dusty Finke From: Jennifer Haskamp <jhaskamp@swansonhaskamp.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 1:34 PM To: Nate Sparks Cc: Dusty Finke; susan.seeland@prc.bz Subject: Re: Stonegate Comments Hi Nate, I've talked to our team about your questions, and hopefully the answers below help you out for the staff report. If you have any questions, please let us know and we will do our best to help answer them. • I spoke to our septic designer, and he said he is not aware of any State Rules/requirements regarding septic system setbacks from wetlands. In the Contingent Settlement Agreement (CSA) we agreed to follow the State Rules for designing the system. However, I did look at the three lots you identified in your email, and I think we could make sure that all the Primary Septic sites meet the City's Ordinance of 75-foot wetland setback. On Lot 2, Block 1, we could swap the Secondary site and the Primary site and meet the City's setback; and then on Lot 1 Block 6, the primary site as designed meets the 75-foot setback. Finally, Lot 1 Block 5 seems to meet the city's standards per my drawings, but again we can make sure the Primary site meets the setback. My understanding of the MultiFlo technology is that it is a slim to -none chance that we will ever need the Secondary site, so in an effort to meet the intent of the City's Ordinance we can make sure the Primary sites all meet the City's setback; while both Primary and Secondary sites will all meet the State's requirements. • In terms of identifying areas within the conservation areas where a secondary site could go, there are several. At this time we don't really want to show it on the drawing as specific sites, because our ultimate goal is to keep as many Primary and Secondary sites as possible on the individual lots. We could create a blob -graphic showing the areas that our septic designer has investigated - would that be helpful? There really is no impact to the Conservation Areas for Secondary sites because the prairie restoration and plantings will occur on the areas that could potentially accommodate the secondary sites initially and for the foreseeable future. On the off chance in the future a secondary site is needed, the area would simply be dug up, septic system installed, and then prairie grasses would again be planted on the system. So, there really isn't an 'impact'. We've talked with the MCWD staff about allowing up to 25% of the secondary sites in the Conservation Areas, and they thought that seemed reasonable (in part because they know that the areas will be prairie grasses regardless). • As far as management/documentation of the Secondary sites it would be fairly easy to document the number of Secondary sites permitted in the Conservation Areas in the Development Agreement, which will be recorded against the property. There are certain types of prairie grasses and species that are suitable cover for septic systems. These native plants will be detailed out in the Final Land Stewardship plan to ensure that if a Secondary site must be used, that the plantings/landscaping of the system blends into the Conservation Areas. In addition to the septic questions, we took a look at Tom's letter/review as well. There are some items in there that we would like to address/have questions about. So, I'm not sure the best way to go about responding, perhaps you could touch base with Tom? Or if you want me to contact him directly, I'm happy to do that as well. We would like to get some of it resolved before his review goes to the PC if possible. So, here's a summary of our concerns/answers/questions with the corresponding item number in Tom's letter - and I'll look for your direction on best way to move forward: #2 - Is WSB reviewing the septic information we provided? Will we be receiving a review memo from Loren? Again, as identified in the first bullet above, we agreed to follow the State Rules per the CSA. Our septic designer has told us that all absorption areas, and drainfield components are outside of all necessary setbacks, including the 10-foot setback from lot lines (which is also a state rule). As designed, the perimeter drainage and utility easements are not in conflict with the septic systems and could co -exist and not disrupt any of the systems. If Tom is reviewing the septic designs, perhaps it would make sense for him to talk directly with our septic designer? If we could get this issue resolved before the PC, I think it would be good. #5 - We shortened the cul-de-sac on the north end at the direction of staff during our pre -application meeting in January. The way this comment is written it suggests that we aren't following something in the City's code, or calls into question whether "shared access is permitted". I believe it was Dusty that suggested that it would be beneficial to reduce the cul-de-sac length (BMPs, reduction of impervious, etc.) and have shared driveways (which is commonplace in the city). We would request some clarification from staff, since Tom's comments seem contrary to Dusty's. #6 and #7 - It is our understanding that this has been resolved, and that the City understands that this would be taken care of by Stonegate Farm granting an easement to PRDC for the roadway, with ultimate maintenance and management by the City of Medina. The way these items are written, it suggests it is not resolved - and that we are supposed to be doing something. So, if it is resolved, then we would 1 respectfully request these items to be re -written; if not, perhaps we need to speak directly with Tom? Or, can you provide some insight/clarification as to what staff is looking for? #8 - I talked to our engineer at Sathre for clarification regarding this item, and his response is as follows: We did not change the storm between FES El that ran up through CBMH E5 because it added an additional structure. E5 is held in its place by the low point in the road, and E4 is in a location to not impact the septic sites while maximizing the pad in lot 4. So, in summary, we did not realign the storm to avoid affecting the septic or pad, while reducing the number of structures. #10 - Please review our submitted drawings. The Street grades were added to our drawings submitted on June 19th. If Tom could update this item to reflect that we responded, we would appreciate it. #11 - The vertical curve information for Deer Hill Road is on the drawings submitted on June 19th. If Tom could update this item to accurately reflect what we submitted, we would appreciate it. Tom states that, "The latest submittal does not address many of comments from our May 20, 2015 memo", and we don't think that is a fair statement. We attempted to address all of his comments that were not policy related questions. Additionally, he seems to have missed a couple of the things that we did submit. So we would respectfully request that this language be removed or re -written, because we did try to answer/address his comments. Hopefully we can work together to resolve some of these items before the PC next week. I look forward to hearing back from you, and thanks for your cooperation in advance. Jennifer Haskamp SHC, LLC (d) 651.341.4193 On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Jennifer Haskamp <jhaskamp@swansonhaskamp.com> wrote: Hi Nate, Thanks for the heads up on your, and Tom's, comments. I will confer with our team and septic designer and circle back with answers to your questions as soon as I can. Jennifer Haskamp SHC, LLC (d) 651.341.4193 On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Nate Sparks <nsparks@nacplanning com> wrote: Jennifer, We reviewed the revised infoll ration that was sent to the City. Attached are engineering comments. We also have a couple of questions about the septic sites: 2 On the plans three lots (L2 B1, Ll B5, L1 B6) are within the 75' setback for septic sites to a wetland. Can this be adjusted? Also, the narrative discusses a certain percentage of lots that may need to use the conservation area for a septic site. It is unclear on the location of these sites or which lots are being considered for this. It is recommended that the location be shown to assist in determining the impact on the conservation areas. There are also concerns about how this would be governed. Thanks, Nate Sparks (763) 231-2555 3 CONTINGENT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Contingent Settlement Agreement (the "Agreement") is made and entered as of the latest date entered on the signature pages of this Agreement (the "Effective Date") by and between Stonegate Farm Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Stonegate"), and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("PRDC"), and the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"). Stonegate and PRDC are referred to collectively as the "Applicants" and the City, Stonegate and PRDC may be referenced individually as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS WIIEREAS, the Applicants, as co -Plaintiffs, brought two separate lawsuits against the City captioned Stonegate Farm Inc, and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. v. City of Medina, Court File No. 13-CV-1899 (D. Minn 2013) (JRT/SER), and Stonegate Farm Inc. and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc, v. City of Medina, Court File No. 27-CV-13-12516 (Hennepin County Dist. Ct. 2013) (Judge Susan Robiner), (collectively, the "Lawsuits"); WHEREAS, among other claims, the Lawsuits allege violations of the United States and Minnesota constitutions and Minnesota statutes in connection with the City's denial of a preliminary plat application for a proposed subdivision known as Tamarack Ridge encompassing property located in the City, specifically, parcels identified as P.I.D. Nos. 2111823310001, 2111823340002, and 2111823340003 (collectively, the "North 80 Acres"), as well as additional claims that relate to P.I.D. No. 2811823240001 (the "South 90 Acres"); WHEREAS, among other litigation activities, the Parties have completed initial disclosures, written discovery and depositions; participated in two settlement conferences with United States Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau; and independently have comprehensively discussed over several weeks various possible avenues of settlement of the Lawsuits; WHEREAS, the Parties desire to stay the Lawsuits in their entirety and pursue settlement on the terms set forth in this Agreement with the goal, if all conditions of settlement are ultimately satisfied, that the Parties would then be required to stipulate to the dismissal of the Lawsuits, with prejudice; WHEREAS, the Parties wish to, and have agreed, on a contingent basis, to settle and resolve their differences, according to the terms and the process set forth more fully in this Agreement, regarding property located in the City of Medina consisting of the North 80 Acres and the South 90 Acres owned by Stonegate (collectively, the "Subject Property"); and WIIEREAS, the Parties each acknowledge and understand that approval of this Agreement by the City must occur at a duly called and noticed public meeting of the, Medina City Council. 1 AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, the mutual covenants set forth below, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Incorporation. The foregoing Recitals are hereby fully incorporated into and made part of this Agreement. 2. Use for Settlement Purposes Only. The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement is subject to Minn R. Evid. 408 and Fed. R. Evid. 408. This Agreement, a Conservation Design Plan Unit Development Application (the "Application"), and the City's actions on either this Agreement or the Application will be inadmissible in evidence in any proceeding between the City and the Applicants. 3. Compliance with City Ordinances and Regulations. Except as otherwise may be stated specifically herein or in a contemplated development agreement between the Applicants and the City (the "Development Agreement"), the Applicants will be subject to and comply with all applicable state laws and City Codes, ordinances, and regulations. 4. The Application Process. The Parties understand that the City's Conservation Design District ("CD") and Planned Unit Development ("PUD") ordinance processes will be followed by the Applicants to seek necessary land use approvals and regulatory approvals for their Application. The CD and PUD ordinances generally require the following steps: a. CD-PUD Concept Plan The CD-PUD Concept Plan phase requires the Applicants to submit a plan demonstrating the intended project (the "Project"). The Applicants agree to submit the materials as may be required by City Code § 827.33, subd. 2 for the Concept Plan of the Project. The City will hold public hearings on the proposal per Code requirements. As identified within the Code, the Concept Plan phase results in a non -binding comments from the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the Project. b. CD PUD General Plan of Development The CD-PUD General Plan of Development phase requires the Applicants to submit materials as may be required .by City Code §§ 820.25, 827.35 subd. 3, 827.65 subd. 2, 828.33, and 828.43. The City will hold public hearings on the General Plan of Development per ordinance requirements. c. Development Agreement and Final Plat The City understands that, if the Application is approved by the Medina City Council, a Development Agreement consistent with this Agreement, the Concept Plan, the General Plan of Development and applicable laws and regulations will be negotiated between the Applicants and the City and that Stonegate, upon final approval of the Application and 2 execution of the Development Agreement, will provide necessary signatures and record the Final Plat. The City understands that the Applicants intend to phase the Project over a period of no longer than 15 years from the approval of the Application and, that most likely, the initial Final Plat will reflect only the lots and blocks contemplated for Phase I of the Project with the subsequent phases to be identified as outlots. 5. Project Development Components. Within 60 calendar days following the Effective Date (the "Initial Application Period"), the Applicants will initiate the application process for the Application by submitting a CD-PUD Concept Plan for the Subject Property. The following development components are identified and will be addressed throughout the review process: a. Wetland Delineation. The Applicants have prepared two wetland delineations for the Subject Property, each of which was used in planning for the Project. The following summary of each wetland delineation conducted to date is provided as background for subsequent sections of this Agreement: L 2007 Wetland Delineation: In 2007, the Applicants prepared and submitted a wetland delineation report for the entirety of the Subject Property. At time of delineation, the Subject Property was planted in a Conservation Reserve Program ("CRP") Cover Practice that included native grasses that had been planted for approximately 10 years. The Technical Evaluation Panel ("TEP") and the City reviewed and approved the 2007 Wetland Delineation and identified approximately 41.5 acres of delineated wetlands (the "2007 Delineation"). it 2011 Wetland Delineation: In 2011, the Applicants prepared and submitted a draft wetland delineation report dated November 17, 2011 encompassing the entirety of the Subject Property and that identified approximately 38.9 acres of delineated wetlands (the "2011 Delineation"). At time of delineation, the Subject Property was in agricultural production, with previous season plantings, including corn and soybeans. Due to concerns of the TEP related to agricultural practices in and around the wetlands identified within the report as Nos. 6, 9, 10 and 13 (see Exhibit A), the Applicants submitted a revised wetland delineation report dated February 3, 2012 encompassing only the North 80 Acres that the TEP and the City reviewed and approved [the "2012 Delineation (North 80 Acres)"]. The Applicants aclnowledge that the 2011 Delineation reflects a net loss of approximately 2.6 acres of wetland on the Subject Property as compared to the 2007 Delineation. Applicants further acknowledge that, as of the Effective Date, based upon available information, the South 90 Acres includes approximately 6.44 acres of wetlands. b. Conservation Area. The Application will include permanent dedication of Conservation Area and Open Space, as defined in City Code § 827.57, subd. 7 and 9, respectively. As required by City Code § 827.59, subd. 2(a), the Conservation Area 3 on the Subject Property will consist of not less than 30% of the total Buildable Land Area, as defined in City Code § 827.57, subd. 2, and such Conservation Area will be placed in one or more Conservation Easements, as defined in City Code § 827.57, subd. 5. The Applicants will use the 2011 Delineation and calculations necessary to determine areas of slopes greater than 18%, required wetland buffers, and land contained within the 100 year floodplain for the purpose of calculating the Buildable Land Area in order to establish the necessary Conservation Areas as set forth in the CD-PUD requirements for purpose of the Application. The Parties agree that the 2012 Delineation (North 80 Acres) is an approved delineation and that it will be accepted by the City for purposes of the City's consideration of the Applicant's calculation of the Buildable Land Area and establishment of Conservation Area and, if approval of the Application occurs, for negotiations and execution of the Development Agreement, provided such Development Agreement is executed within 1 year of the Effective Date, regardless if the approved 2012 Delineation (North 80 Acres) would otherwise expire by operation of law. c. Land Stewardship. The Application will include a Land Stewardship Plan in accordance with City Code § 827.65. The Applicants will use the 2007 Delineation for the wetland areas in question identified as Wetland Nos. 6, 9, 10 and 13 in the 2011 wetland delineation. See Exhibit A. The 2007 Delineation associated with the wetland areas in question contains approximately 3.0 additional acres of wetland that the Applicants agree to include the equivalency in area in restoration and planning efforts that will be detailed within the Land Stewardship Plan. Prior to any application for Final Plat and Final Land Stewardship Plan approval of any phase of the Project, the Applicants will identify and secure a holder, which shall not be the City, for the Conservation Easements pursuant to City Code § 827.63. d. Density Bonus of 190%. Pursuant to City Code § 827.61, the City has discretion to allow additional density above and beyond that which would be allowed in the Rural Residential District in developments using the Conservation Design District ordinance. The Application will include calculations for density on the Subject Property using the following "Density Bonus" formula: the number of individual lots allowed as Base Density for the North 80 Acres plus the number of individual lots allowed as Base Density for the South 90 Acres; the sum of those numbers will be multiplied by 1.90 to determine the number of individual lots allowed for the Project on the Subject Property. Any fractional remainder will be rounded to the nearest whole number. Base Density in the Rural Residential District in the City is governed by a requirement of at least 5 acres of contiguous suitable soils (not including wetland areas or areas within the 100-year flood plain) using the Suitable and Non -Suitable Soils List found in City Code § 820.29, subd. 5 and the current Hennepin County Soil Survey. Base Density for purposes of the Application will be determined as follows: i. North 80 Acres. With regard to the North 80 Acres, the Applicants will use a Base Density count of 8 lots as shown on the Tamarack Ridge Preliminary Plat previously prepared and certified by Sathre-Bergquist, including Satire- 4 Bergquist's certifications as to "Suit. Soils Area" on each of the 8 lots shown on the Tamarack Ridge Preliminary Plat. ii. South 90 Acres. With regard to the South 90 Acres, the Applicants have estimated Base Density using the 2011 Delineation, yielding a Base Density of a minimum of 14 individual lots attributable to the South 90 Acres. Such estimate is consistent with the City's calculations made in connection with the 2013 Willow Drive Improvement Project. As a condition of approval of Applicants' preliminary plat submitted in connection with their CD-PUD General Plan of Development, Applicants will obtain and submit an approved wetland delineation for the South 90 Acres prior to or concurrent with any application for Final Plat approval. ("New Approved Delineation"). Sathre-Bergquist, or some other licensed' professional engineer meeting City approval, will verify the total acreage of suitable soils as defined by City Code on such New Approved Delineation, using the same verification language appearing on the Tamarack Ridge Preliminary Plat Application. If the New Approved Delineation shows an increase of wetland area of 1.6 acres or less as compared to the 2011 Delineation as applied to the South 90 Acres, no change in the calculation of Base Density will be required. If the New Approved Delineation shows an increase of wetland area of more than 1 6 acres as compared to the 2011 Delineation as applied to the South 90 Acres, the calculation of overall Base Density for the South 90 Acres will be based solely on the New Approved Delineation and Applicants will adjust their plans for the Project accordingly. e. Road Networlc. The Application will include a plan and specifications for an internal road network of rural section roadways on the Subject Property. Exhibit B is a preliminary Concept Plan that will be refined prior to the Applicant's formal submittal of its Concept Plan, but is conceptually described herein. i. Specifications. The internal road network will connect to existing public streets in two locations: (a) Homestead Trail and (b) Deer Hill Road (east of the Subject Property). The Main Access Road, as shown and identified generally in Exhibit B, will be dedicated as a public street, and will be constructed in full as part of the first phase of the development. The Main Access Road will be constructed according to City specifications with a 24-foot paved surface within a 60-foot right-of-way. If any portion of the Main Access Road is to be located outside the City limits, the Applicants, with City cooperation, will obtain all necessary approvals and secure permanent easements from all appropriate authorities in such locations for future access and maintenance. The Applicants shall dedicate necessary easements from property in Orono for the public roadway. The remainder of the roads in the internal road network will be constructed according to City specifications with no less than a 22-foot paved surface within an outlot sufficient to contain a 50-foot right-of-way and 5 will be constructed and paid for by the Applicants consistent with the phasing of the Project. ii. Financing and Deferral. (a) Financing. Construction of the Main Access Road, including the full cost of design and constriction, will be financed by the sale of municipal bonds with a fifteen -year tern, carrying an interest rate equal to the City's cost of financing the project, plus 2%, rounded up to the nearest quarter point over such rate, and will be assessed against the Subject Property pursuant to Minn Stat. Chap. 429 (the "Assessments"). The Applicants will execute a waiver of any challenge to the Assessments in a manner acceptable to the City and conforming to Minn. Stat. § 462.3531 for the entire amount of the Assessments, which will be binding on the Subject Property. The Assessments will be reapportioned in accordance with Minn Stat. § 429.071, subd. 3. The remainder of the internal road network and any and all other infrastructure improvements will be paid for by the Applicants, subject to the terns of subsequent development agreements, if any, for subsequent phases of the Project. (b) Deferral. The Assessment for each individual lot will be due and payable at the time of the closing of the sale of each lot or upon and as a condition of the issuance of a building permit for any such lot, whichever is earlier. Any Assessment amounts remaining unpaid 12 years after the Effective Date of this Agreement will be payable in equal installments so as to be fully paid within 3 years. Deferred Assessments will accrue interest at the rate as calculated above on all unpaid amounts during and after the deferral period. f. Sewage Treatment. The Application will include a proposal for individual residential home sites using individual and/or shared septic systems for sewage treatment. Such systems will be designed in accordance with Minnesota law. Applicants will use individual systems for all lots in all locations of the Subject Property where such systems are possible without reducing the overall number of individual lots. l Individual Septic Systems. Pursuant to City Code § 827.71, subd. 1 & 2, lots serviced by individual septic systems will be platted in such a way as to allow for primary drain fields on each lot and secondary drain fields either (i) on each lot or (ii) in proximity to the lot but partially or entirely within the designated Conservation Areas or other Open Spaces on the Subject Property. ii. Shared Septic Systems. City Code § 827.71, subd. 3 states: "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 to identify a primary and secondary drainfield site." If any 6 g• shared septic systems are to be used on the Subject Property, the Subject Property must be platted consistent with Minnesota state law, comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chap. 84C, and meet any restrictions placed on the use of any Conservation Area by the holder or holders of the conservation easements. Use of Conservation Area for Septic Systems. Applicants understand that the City's exercise of discretion to grant a Density Bonus of 190% of Base Density as described and calculated herein is based in substantial part on the expected land area, quality, and character of the Conservation Area in the Project. Use of Conservation Area for individual or shared septic systems, depending on design, location, purpose, or other factors, may affect the quality and character of such areas. With respect to individual septic systems, the design of such systems will comply with the requirements as set out in Section 5(f)(i) of this Agreement. With respect to shared septic systems, the Applicants understand that the City will retain the discretion to determine whether the proposal satisfies the requirements of City Code § 827.71, subd. 3 and comports with the conservation objectives stated in City Code § 827.51. Water. The Applicants intend to provide water to the Subject Property by either (i) individual or community wells or (ii) municipal water service purchased and extended from the City of Orono. In the event the Applicants intend to purchase municipal water service from the City of Orono, the Applicants understand that they are responsible, with City cooperation, for initiating discussion and negotiating any such agreement with the City of Orono. The Applicants will provide a plan acceptable to the City for reimbursing the City for all City costs associated with such discussion and negotiation. The Applicants understand that if water is supplied to the Project by the City of Orono, the City. will incur additional costs for maintenance, service, and administration of supplying that water. The Applicants understand that, in such event, the City will establish a fee to pay the full cost of purchasing water from the City of Orono as well as the full cost of maintenance, service, and administration of the water system serving the Subject Property. In the event the City deems it necessary, the Applicants shall execute a recordable waiver, binding on any lots created within the Subject Property, with respect to the City's determination whether reasonable rates necessary to recover the full cost of providing water to the Subject Property may be different from rates charged by the City for the provision of water service in other locations in the City. h. Trails and Park Dedication. The Application will include a plan for location and construction of trails through the Subject Property, either within street rights -of -way or in other locations secured by permanent easement, in a manner consistent with the City's trail plans. Trail construction will be credited against Park Dedication fees due pursuant to City Code § 820.31. As stated in City Code § 827.61, subd. 2(a)(4), the City "may give due consideration for conservation easements granted when 7 calculating Park Dedication Fees." The Applicants will dedicate permanent easements as necessary for the Trails shown generally on Exhibit B. i. Application and Review Fees. The Application will be accompanied by the appropriate application fee. Applicants will be responsible for all applicable fees and charges on a going -forward basis related to the Project, including City staff time and fees paid to third party consultants, including, without limitation, legal, planning and engineering fees incurred in relation to the processing of the Application, consistent with City ordinances, policies and Minn. Stat. § 462.353, subd. 4. 6. Dismissal. If the City approves the Application, a Development Agreement is executed by the Parties, and any Final Plat for the Subject Property is approved by the City (all, collectively, the "Settlement Closing Conditions"), the Parties will execute and file stipulations of dismissal with prejudice of the Lawsuits in the respective courts in a form substantively consistent with Exhibits C and D attached hereto within 14 calendar days (a) of the satisfaction and completion of all Settlement Closing Conditions or (b) Applicants' failure to submit its Concept Plan for the Subject Property as contemplated by Paragraph 5 within the Initial Application Period or (c) Applicants' failure to apply for the initial final plat approval within 360 calendar days of the date of the approval of the preliminary plat. The Parties agree that any claim or assertion by the City that the Applicant's Concept Plan as initially submitted to the City within the Initial Application Period is incomplete in any respect will not provide any basis to trigger dismissal of the Lawsuits pursuant to this Paragraph. If the City denies the Application, Applicants will withdraw the Application and the City understands that the Lawsuits will not be dismissed and the litigation of the Lawsuits would resume. 7. Mutual Release of Claims. The Parties will execute a mutual release of claims substantially consistent with the form of release attached hereto as Exhibit E within 14 calendar days upon (a) the satisfaction and completion of all Settlement Closing Conditions or (b Applicants' failure to submit its Concept Plan for the Subject Property as contemplated by Paragraph 5 within the Initial Application Period, subject to the provisions of Paragraph 6, or (c) Applicants' failure to apply for the initial final plat approval within 360 calendar days of the date of the approval of the preliminary plat. 8. City Council Approval and Assent Required. The Applicants understand that only the Medina City Council acting as a body can approve this Agreement and that it is necessary for this Agreement to come before the Medina City Council at a duly called public meeting. Except as provided in Paragraph 11 regarding properly executed amendments to this Agreement, the Applicants' execution of this Agreement cannot be revoked or modified in any manner for a period of 30 calendar days following the Effective Date of this Agreement so as to give the Medina City Council sufficient time to meet, consider, and either approve or deny the Agreement. The City agrees to ensure the City Council considers this Agreement within such 30 calendar day period. if the City Council does not approve the execution of this Agreement after considering it, the Agreement will become null and void and have no further binding effect. 9. Action on Application. By entering into this Agreement, the City is not agreeing that it will approve the Application made and retains full discretion to approve or deny any Application 8 filed. The Parties acknowledge that the City must follow all applicable statutory and ordinance processes, including any required public hearings. 10. No Claim in the Event of Denial. The Applicants understand and agree that regardless of the City's decision to approve or deny the Application, the Applicants have no claim of any type or nature against the City or any other party for or related to the City's decision on the Application and will not bring any claim of any type or nature against the City, its agents, consultants, officers, employees, or insurers or any other party challenging the City's decision on the Application or any claim of any nature or description seeking damages or any other relief. Similarly, the City understands and agrees that regardless of the City's decision to approve or deny the Application, the City has no claim of any type or nature against the Applicants or any other party as a result of the City's consideration of the Application and will not bring any claim of any type or nature against the Applicants, their officers, agents, consultants, insurers, employees or any other party. 11. Merger and Modification. This Agreement and the attached exhibits will constitute the entire agreement between the Applicants and the City. This Agreement can only be amended by a writing signed by all Parties and such amendments may occur at any time by agreement of the Parties. The possibility of further amendments to this Agreement does not create any right thereto, and a refusal to amend is at the sole discretion of the Party being asked to modify the agreement once this Agreement is executed by all Parties. 12. Controlling Law; Venue. This Agreement has been made under the laws of the State of Minnesota and the laws of the State of Minnesota will control. its interpretation. Any legal dispute occurring as to the terms or requirements of the Agreement will be venued in a court of competent jurisdiction in the State of Minnesota. 13. Binding Effect. The terms and conditions of this Agreement will be binding on the Parties and their respective successors, assigns, agents, insurers, executors, and members, and the benefits and burdens will run with the Subject Property. The Agreement will not be recorded. Applicants agree that the terms of this Agreement are material to any sale or encumbrance of the Subject Property or any portion of it and further agree to disclose the Agreement's terms and obligations to any prospective or actual purchaser or encumbrancer of the Subject Property prior to any such sale or encumbrance. 14. Acknowledgement of Understanding. Each Party states that it has carefully read this Agreement in its entirety and has conferred with its attorney and knows and understands the contents of this Agreement. [Balance of page intentionally left blank] 9 15. Counterparts. This Agreement, and any amendments thereto, may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original, but all of which will be one and the same document. A copy (including a copy scanned into PDF) or facsimile of a signature will be binding upon the signatory as if it were an original signature, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the dates set forth below. STONEGATE FARM, INC. By: Michael J. Seeland Its: President STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF BEAUFORT ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the 1 fl `- day of December, 2014, by Michael J. Seeland as President of Stonegate Farm, Inc., on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public PROP RTY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC. B Susan Seeland Its: President STA 1'L OF SOUTH CAROLINA s COUNTY OF BEAUFORT ) This instnuent was acknowledged before me on the 1 `Tt"tlay of December, 2014, by Susan Seeland, as President of Properly Resources Development Corporation, Inc., on behalf of the corporation, 10 `ovaJQtp.AR4s G',„ .tpPY P(jB • Q ✓icrt I r. '��OG fXv.00;; �� 41®H cle a�i CITY OF MEDINA By:-JElizabeth Weir Its: C Mayor 1 By: Scott T. Johnson Its: City Administrator -Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on the E day of December, 2014, by Elizabeth Weir and Scott T. Johnson, as Mayor and City Administrator -Clerk, respectively, of the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. MMB; 4830-8858-0128, v. 21 LINDA DIANE LANE NOTARY PUBLIC•MINNESOTA My CommisSlon Expires Jan.31, 2017 11 ryli 6itA: 201 1 6• 2007 Wetdanci Delineations 1l �ti .r�ir��'J 1PJyi'i+{1}.1y. rife .i,. Approximate Parcel Boundary 2011 Delineation 12007 Dalineation 4w-idarrowhead � environmental , Coll is l l a l l II g '1\ 20O7/2O11 Delineation Map Overlaid on 2010Aerial lame 376 760 1,500 'gun from AE Nooem cr 17, OH wetland delineation repon nparedfor PRDC Stonegate Dann, Inc. Peet Property Resources Development Company Medina, MN Exhibit b: Draft Concert Man Conservation Design Subdivision 11.122014 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Stonegate Farm, Inc., a Minnesota corporation and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, v. City of Medina, Plaintiffs, Defendant. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: Condemnation Court File No. 27-CV-13-12516 STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Pursuant to Minn R Civ. P. 41.01(a)(2), IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, by their respective attorneys, that the above - captioned action may be dismissed upon its merits, with prejudice, and without attorneys' fees or costs to any party. Date: Gerald S. Duffy (#24703) Clifford S. Anderson (#227201) Leslie M. Witterschein (#261592) MONROE MOXNESS BERG PA 7760 France Avenue South, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.885.5999 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Stonegate Farm, Inc, and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. EXHIBIT C Date: MMQ: 4844-3311-6960, v. 3 George C. Hoff (#45846) Justin Templin (#0305807) HOFF, BARRY & KOZAR, P.A. 775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 160 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952.941.9220 Attorneys for Defendant City of Medina UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Stonegate Farm, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, City of Medina, Case No. 13-1899 JRT/SER STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL Plaintiffs, WITH PREJUDICE Defendant. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, by their respective attorneys, that the above - captioned action may be dismissed upon its merits, with prejudice, and without attorneys' fees or costs to any party. Date: Date: Gerald S. Duffy (#24703) Clifford S. Anderson (#227201) Leslie M. Witterschein (#261592) MONROE MOXNESS BERG PA 7760 France Avenue South, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.885.5999 Attorneys for Stonegate Farm, Inc. and Properly Resources Development Corporation, Inc. George C. Hoff (#45846) Justin Templin (#0305807) HOFF, BARRY & KOZAR, P.A. 775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 160 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952.941.9220 Attorneys for Defendant City of Medina EXHIBIT D MUTUAL RELEASE OF CLAIMS by and between Stonegate Farm Inc. and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc. and the City of Medina Stonegate Farm Inc. ("Stonegate") and Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc, and all of their respective shareholders, board members, officers, managers, employees, insurers, agents, servants, heirs, executors, assigns, and administrators, as applicable (the "Stonegate/PRDC Parties"), completely release and forever discharge the City of Medina and its insurers, agents, attorneys, servants, officers, managers, employees, successors, heirs, executors, assigns, and administrators, as applicable (the "City Released Parties"), from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, damages, costs, loss of services, expenses, and compensation whatsoever, including court costs, legal expenses, engineering and other consultant or expert fees, and attorneys' fees, whether known of unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, that the Stonegate/PRDC Parties may now or hereafter have, against the City Released Parties on account of or in any way related to the subject matter of, the allegations set forth in, or related to the property owned by Stonegate described in the following matters: Stonegate Farm Inc. and Property Resources Development Corporation v. City of Medina, Court File No. 13-CV=1899 (D. Minn. 2013) (JRT/SER) and Stonegate Farm Inc. and Property Resources Development Corporation v. City of Medina, Court File No. 27-CV-13-12516 (Hennepin County Dist. Ct. 2013) (Judge Susan Robiner) (collectively, the "Lawsuits"). The City and all of its respective Council members, officers, managers, administrators, employees, insurers, agents, and servants, as applicable (the 'City Parties") completely release and forever discharge Stonegate/PRDC and all of their respective shareholders, board members, officers, managers, employees, insurers, agents, attorneys, servants, heirs, executors, assigns, and administrators, as applicable (the "Stonegate/PRDC Released Parties"), from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, damages, costs, loss of services, expenses, and compensation whatsoever, including court costs, legal expenses, engineering and other consultant or expert fees, and attorneys' fees, whether known of milmown, foreseen or unforeseen, that the City Parties may now or hereafter have, against the Stonegate/PRDC Released Parties on account of or in any way related to the subject matter of, the allegations set forth in, or related to the property owned by Stonegate described in the Lawsuits with the EXHIBIT E exception of any fees pursuant to Paragraph 5(i) of the accompanying Contingent Settlement Agreement that are due from Stonegate/PRDC to the City and remain unpaid and have not been waived by the City at the time this Mutual Release of Claims is executed. STONEGATE FARM, INC. By: Michael J. Seeland Its: President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of , 20 , by Michael J. Seeland, the President of Stonegate Farm Inc., on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public PROPERTY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC. By: Susan Seeland Its: President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. This instalment was acknowledged before me on the day of , 20 , by Susan Seeland, the President of Property Resources Development Corporation, Inc., on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public EXHIBIT E CITY OF MEDINA By: Its: Mayor By: Its: City Administrator -Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of December, 20_, by and , as Mayor and City Administrator -Clerk, respectively, of the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. MMB: 4838-2247-0433, v. 2 Notary Public EXI3IBIT E VICINITY MAP MO. EA., (I 200 100 0 100 200 400 SCALE IN FEET —�- o i 1 r--- 7 1 / --� r---�-- / / I-__, , / / / ,_ -, J i / / / I I r 7 �--I 1 I Jk---�/ / I I--1_-7 I r----1 � I I I I I I i I y_J 1 { i---LLB I 1 -, 1 i 1 ( I- - --FT-- I I � ( �\ 1 1 1 I I I 1 � �' r 4�4 SHEET INDEX TABLE SHEET Description T1 Title Sheet 1-4 Boundary Survey/Existing Conditions 1-4 Preliminary Plat 1-9 Grading, Drainage, & Erosion Control 1-3 Existing Conditions 1 Yield Plan 1-8 Landscape Plans PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR ENGINEER X DEVELOPER SATHRE-BERGOUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 6851 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 PHONE: (952) 476-6000 FAX (952)476-0104 PHONE: (612) 991-1823 CONTACT: DANIEL L. SCHMIDT. P.E. EMAIL: SCHMIDT@SATHRE.COM I � II I � I I I I I 13 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 DRAWING NAME Base SGF DRAWN BY DSG CHECKED BY DLS DATE 05/01/15 NO 01 BY DATE DSG 06/19/15 REVISIONS CITY REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 N SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO MEDINA, MINNESOTA TITLE STONEGATE PRDC FILE NO. 7282-010-200 T1 T1 STONEGATE 7282-010-200 STONEGATE Fain A Owner: r: B 9rbrird Steiner + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3 • 3 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +\ +✓. + + + + + + + + +I\ k + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + SI•jRfrF + + + + + + + + + + > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +++++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + CC/ + + +\ A/ + �`> + \k + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + . + + + + + + +++++++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3- +V + + + + + + + + + + + j ( J+ + + + + + + + + + + +3/(/ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + (/+ + + + + + + + + + + + + (,)\ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +r + + + + +t t* + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -±) :147* Owner: viichde : P Reimer Etc]: I rste'e + + + + + + + + + + + ��. Y Y N SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. CO �� PAP + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + l + + + + + + + + + + + +n+" + + + + + + + + + + +� +✓ + + + + + + + + + + + i. v/ + + + + + + + + + + (+ + + + + + + + + + K/4 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + i_+� + + + + + + + + + or, 13.) + + + + + + + + t` s + + + + + + + ‘,\"a + + + + + + + + + + + + SHEET 2 of 4 200 100 0 100 i rs U v 200 V:Yne31: Barb rd Burr:Sil (:nd Tl :i Owner: r: iuc Ih\/ Q I I r- i t 3'i(il 1' L.. ., r;1 c. 1 „C r l IV f l L.. r;1 e; y 400 SCALE IN FEET DESCRIPTION SUBJECT PROPERTY Parcel 1: The East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 3: The Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota except that part thereof which lies Westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees, 07 minutes, 42 seconds West along the West line of said Southeast Quarter of thc Northwcst Quarter, a distance of 925.33 feet to the actual point of bcginning of the line being described; thence South 45 degrees, 52 minutes, 18 seconds East, a distance of 115.25 feet; thence South 11 degrees 56 minutes, 18 seconds East, a distance of 53.92 feet; thence Southwesterly to a point in the West line of said Southeast Quartcr of the Northwest Quarter, distant 1140.18 feet Southerly of the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there ending. Parcel 4: That part of thc Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at thc Northeast corner of said Southwcst Quarter of thc Northwest Quarter; thcncc South along the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 668.33 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said Southwest Quarter of thc Northwest Quarter, a distance of 548.47 feet to thc Easterly line of Dittman Road; thence Northwesterly deflecting to the right 41 degrees, 13 minutes, 16 scconds along Easterly line of said Road, a distance of 60.15 feet; thence Northerly 239.14 feet along the Easterly line of said Road being a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 254.35 feet; thence Northerly 249.7 feet along easterly line of said Road, being tangent to last described curve; thence Northerly 166.62 feet along the Easterly line of said Road to the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; said 166.62 feet being along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 650.97 feet; thence East along North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter 655.43 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 5: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quartcr of Section 28, Township 118, Range 23 lying North of the center line of County Road No. 6 as monumented and platted in the plat of Hennepin County State Aid Highway Number Six, Plat Five, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Ton -ens Property Certificate of Title No(s): 862516 SITE ADDRESS Unassigcd, Medina, MN 55356 2940 Sixth Avenue North, Orono, MN 55356 Cr) Ov r;e; : Stephen R /"'fir;,, IVI P idurn T A 1 1 j,e k:t Q n 1 1 1 n fl(.�,ile.\ ..0 v rl U Ir FF-r Q Er; r9 \ L_ I�rl"�•K3" 1.A rn L_;n r$,.0 I\ Link — 1 rn, v.".'nc r: K v B(..11d wir, RL J L 1v4CC(.he3rt` + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + r •—x%V.VSANA J+ 7 \Ham_ + y.�+— + 1 �`' 6JJJ �i r fl(:iSiei Owner: 11 I r" J.A. IVI U V,- AA. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + V w y;'e�l : J :i U ‘2,C DOIC ri: lA\ V (. n LJn e� Owner: r: —Th re3` d I \\ I A r-r\IIA VI Lill AA vn IVI A Ain R 1'11n1G IDE I \I VII V\7vILlL A r\n Ai tl I_J rALJLJIV I I GENERAL NOTES Flood Zone Information: This property is contained in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) and Zone A (Special flood hazard areas subject to Inundation by the 1 % annual change flood, no base flood elevation determined) per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27053C0165E, effective date of September 2, 2004. The property is also contained in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27053C0301 E, effective date of September 2, 2004. Parcel Area Information: The Gross land area is 7,431,309 +/- square feet or 170.60 +/- acres. Site Elevation: Elevations arc based on MN/DOT Geodetic Station Name: KATE MN053 which has an elevation of: 978.673 feet (NAVD88). Zoning Information: Medina: The current Zoning for the subject property is RR (Rural Residential) per the City of Medina's zoning map dated January 23, 2014. The setback, and height restrictions for said zoning designation were obtained from the City of Medina found on their web site on the date of March 13, 2015 and are as follows: Principal Structure Setbacks - Front: 50 feet Side: 20 feet (less than 5 acres) Rear: 40 feet (less than 5 acres) Height: 30 feet Please note that the general restrictions for the subject property may have been amended through a city process. We could be unaware of such amendments if they arc not in a recorded document provided to us. We recommend that a zoning letter be obtained from the Zoning Administrator for the current restrictions for this site. We have not received the current zoning classification and building setback requirements from the insurer. Utilities: We have shown the location of utilities to the best of our ability based on observed evidence together with evidence from the following sources: plans obtained from utility companies, plans provided by client, markings by utility companies and other appropriate sources. We have used this information to develop a view of the underground utilities for this site. However, lacking excavation, the exact location of underground features cannot be accurately, completely and reliably depicted. Where additional or more detailed information is required, the client is advised that excavation may be necessary. Also, please note that seasonal conditions may inhibit our ability to visibly observe all the utilities located on the subject property. A Gopher State One Call was submitted for this survey. Please reference Ticket No. 150720601 for a list of utility operators in this area. Wetland Delineation: The wetland delineation was preformed by Arrowhead Environmental Consulting (A.E.C.) and was flagged on September 2011. Sathre-Bergquist located the wetland flags. A Ric y n r,�,.� hey —R r Owner: l\r�i e,; er Etd: A lIA 1/�� I r- I V I I V\ 7 S L- nAl LJIV Owner: ^ 1 kr 1 k + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + i i 17255 PRELIMINARY PLAT SHEET 1 OF 4 SHEETS N CU W N W O �▪ z Q� �O 0 o � Y N Q W W �� 2 m ~ z O N U W � I=- W U O= W� zeL J =M � N O0 z� 00 00 C\1 t� CN co* z 4 �Ors a" O NCO suR, o SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC.21, TWP.118, RGE.23 - PER H.C. SECTION BREAKDOWN STONEGATE - - - - S00°24'13"W 2628.77 - - - - 1977.11 \\ i \. \ 4 4 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 f 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4/ � �. �' ' \\4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 _)4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 // 4 *§11§0§1\§4\ EAST LINO OF TIE SOUJHWEST> QUARER 1- 7 > • > / PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158�- � � � � � � � � 4 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � WETLAND 1 � � Q � t � � � � � //� 4 4 Q N I • /� -> -> 4 : 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 �v 4/ °�, LJ_ (----) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ® �/ /� k§: 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -> 4 4 4 4 4 4 -> 4 4 4 4 4 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4-) 4> �Q\c �/ 4 w\• 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 W �\ / cn 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 L3 4 J 4 4 /44 : 4 : 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 .44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 7,4 )_.._ 44.\ 44\ 44 44 44 4 1 �1� til w Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -> 4 4 4 4 -> 4 -> 4 4 -> 4 4 4 -> 4 4 �\ �/44tit 0N a o WETLANh 1 �\ / ham. Z -> 4 -> 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 � 4o 4 4 4 4 ,,- (n pp o W \/ / IV MW .Lo - /� \ J W d \ ,Q �,` /cb ��. �� \ l�;�>�!��1,429,446 �Q. F�. �•-_ _54 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 � o �32.82� ACRS � _ _ - _ _ j z� ., 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 > 4 �-- 4 4` -3-- > 4 ZW/is.3 > 3 > 3 3 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 /i O ��►�Z �� teS ` 4+_- ~ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 I\ 4� 4 4/ 4 �(' �� ! w ix \ / p� 4I 4 4 3 4 3 > > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 > 4 � 4V 4 4 4 -4 4 -4 4 -> 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 j c i • 4 3 3 I 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4(/ 4 4 4 4 I> 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4� --\ J4' 4 4 4 4/ 4 4 > 4 > 4 4 > 4 > > 4 4 4 > 4 4 > 4 4 4 > > 4 > 4 > J�-/ 4 > 4 4 // 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 /4 �_ ,, C 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 WtTLXNDY 1 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 > 4 > > 4 4 4 > 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 / 3 3 kt;: 4 4 4 4 4 4� 4 3 4 4 WETI ANI) 1 •' 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ��/ 4 4 4 4 : : : 4: 4: 4: :4 44 4: ;/ j /\k : /V�\. 4 4 �/ 4 4 4 44 : : : 43 : : : : : :: \. \ \,_ \\ \ \ , \,..,k.y 4 4 /4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4� \\\. 4 4 \ \\ 4 4 \\, \\. \. \\ I�\\ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 - 4 4 W�TLAND�l 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3n 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3\ 3/ 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4/ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 WEST�LINE & THE LAST 1-tALF CO THE 4 4 > 4 4 4 4 SOUTHWEST QUARTER 9F SEC,91, TWF.118, RGE.23 PER H.C. SECTION BREAKDOWN 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 - 4 \ �-) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158 4 4 Edge�of wefiand 4\V ,� i v ♦� �k"N‘kk1�� OUTL • T 106.121 1 1 8 .11 1 2; 63,909 SQ. FT. u1 l 1 -1 (31 1.47 ACRES 1 1 a' 1-).,�1.41 1 1 cp 1 v-ri 1 N00°56'54"E 349.73 9 11 1 88,054 SQ. FT. 1 2.02 ACRES n N. 228,468 SQ. FT. 5.24 ACRES NO2°35'49"E 395.51 229.88 68,936 SQ. FT. 1.58 ACRES c9 165.63 NO3°40'39"E �� 16.77 130.92 N00°17'31 "E 565.35 102.25 1977.13 - - - - NO01542"E 2638.62 - - - - EAST LINE OF QUARTER OF S -P_F_R_EI.� SECT \ 4 4 4 4 �1 \\ �\ \ 3 3 3 3 3 • 3 _> WVLAJ\TD 3 3 3 c5 .& 0 cr oo ..> j u» S00°24'14"W 6' 99 46 i in �� ro 4, 778 02 0 �823 • J 108,269 SQ. FT. 2.49 ACRES NO2°37'00"E 243.70 •9.29 1.44 ACRES N E o z R=210.00 14 8 47.23 0-25°17'20" �. 81.65 1 A=22°22'09" 41.23 p� 87.84 R=200.00 80 40 0 40 80 160 SCALE IN FEET PRELIMINARY PLAT - SHEET 2 OF 4 SHEETS SR•F c9 a 0 Nco I EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC.21, TWP.118, RGE.23 - - _P�R�I.� SECTION BREAKDOWN I - - - - S00°24'13"W 2628.77 - - - - i 654.07 3 .w �I � 4 N O O 3 3 3 3 AT TLANI ItoPO `- o 189,552 SQ. FT. 4.35 ACRES SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. of wetland 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 161.78 634.20 EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER - PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158 S00°24'14"W 354.90 5 90,570 SQ. FT. 2.08 ACRES NO3°55'55"W 388.28 6 96,301 SQ. FT. 2.21 ACRES 0_ 47 1-T 17 DEER HILL R` R=600.00 STONEGATE r' V E; w� co n_ rS W , • ce oe o o COI co III 10 a / 2 // 'I 60,500 SQ. FT/ / ' I � N 1.39 ACRES v- / / / I V Q./ / # / / / o� //i �o • Q �� 0 I // / / co' \), „..'4 QO Q V1 / / /I I e'� w -0")co N � N �rn r 00 i \\ 4 \ \\� \, \\. \ .\\ \ \� \• \\ \.\Ee' - w . \ \\ \ \\\ \ \\ \ \ \\\ \ S00°30'32"W 339.09 -t__4,_-)-4--r_ 1 70,365 SQ. FT. 1.62 ACRES 2 76,992 SQ. FT. 1.77 ACRES 68,799 SQ. FT. 1.58 ACRES 600 00 R� �9 5' 'S2 V\ � �I J / j/pZER SP "5"--) 1 --� 74�.70 -r FND JLM 63,264 SQ. 1.45 ACRES �.y' 244.36 84,193 SQ. FT. 1.93 ACRES 2.93 „ 1115'°9 97.81 C8� 2 60,288 SQ. FT. 1.38 ACRES [7;;;Ei -Aavwiad 208.86 164.87 I - - - - N 00°34'25"E 2678.45 - - - - 1338.66 TWP.118N HO RGE.23PERH.C. SECTrON BREAKDOWN UARTW OF C.28,� 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 \\ V\ \ 3 \ \\. \\ \\\ \\ ,� T \, \\. \\ 3 WEA LAlV D 33 3 \ �\\ \\ \\ 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4\ \. \\ 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 ..‘kkh"Ni\A§Xikt1/4'1:\# \ 4 4 4 4 4 !lam\1�` \ \\ \\\.\ 4 4 4 3 4 %114 ( v.WETLAN) �l EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158 OUTLOT B 1,200,164 SQ. FT. 27.55 ACRES 4 31 3 ttANIDI 6 4 3 3 3 4� �� h4 4 4 4 ��• 4 4 WE41 LAND 4' 4 4 4 4 v•V� y 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 �) 78,711 SQ. FT. 1.81 ACRES fsj) 42.05 I-- Cosh � 3 62,708 SQ. FT. 1.44 ACRES 205.09 co rri 1" 1912 4 65,306 SQ. FT. 1.50 ACRES HE NORTHEAST Q THE c�: QUARTER OF SEC.28, RGE.23 P SECTION BREAKDOWN 191.70 S00°13'17"W 1334.90 i i i i 19 92 1 i 5 87,382 SQ. FT. 2.01 ACRES WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158 80 199.31 J 40 \ \ �\. .per 0 \5 -' �° 2 D'2 -7 - 40 80 R=300.00 204.69 p_42°38 45 6 102,991 SQ. FT. 2.36 ACRES 198.91 160 SCALE IN FEET L_ CAD 0) -• -- CO Z 4 4 ail 0 r= 0 w r X 4 u) o •- PRELIMINARY PLAT - SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS oks So/Y, 2 Q Y SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 03 STONEGATE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC.28, TWP.118, RGE.23 PER H.C. SECTION BREAKDOWN U7 OHU ro N89°02'39"W 654.87 OHU I OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU - -U -EAST-UNE OF THE _SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST _ QUARTER PER TORRENS CASE NO. 17158 S87°37'38"E 457.56 N89°44'42"E 454.48 80 N89°02'04"W 547.55 40 0 40 80 8 98,427 SQ. FT. n 2.26 ACRES U N O OUTLOT 3.07 ACREo 0 i \\ 377., >>> 0 6 sJ c�� 4 • 8 96,974 SQ. FT. 0 2.23 ACRES �(r) o z z� W X F=o W~CC LI- hi LAo0- �,`� Zww I-I- �CLf2C� Cb (naa"' 5 wDD / / 61,436 SQ. FT. I � L _1.41 _ACRES- _S._,. . - �'/ /,•w ��Y� I /,�� 224.46 I / o FND 4JLMI / •� / JLM PE CASE N Or/ LC) / I P / / JLM'RER'TORRENS-CASE / NO. 17158 (NOT FOUND) �_1 FND IP OHU OHU AREA #5 3,000 SF VVt I LAND I -ILL N OHU i OHU OHU 1 OHU WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER PER TORRENS CASE NO.17158 I / DI / 78,155 SQ. FT. Al // 1.79 ACRES I / LOT REARRANGEMENT PER DOC. NO. 6564451 -,-- I___ i (ITEM NO. 21) 1 i 43 E= SAS°51 53.9 0 \ N c9 Oro O 3 160 FND IP i I' .20/(7Ct.' PER TORR JLM c�rtir�t`ITR 'CRM - R=300.00 114,127 SQ. FT. 2.62 ACRES CONCRETE UTLOT L L nt•v, 30.1 30.11 91,592 SQ. FT. 2.10 ACRES Elvr-1��1 N M+ 'irr"• ol:p� 95,001 SQ. FT. 2.18 ACRES --- I I TVVf✓.1T8, - - na-u� J 87°02'05"W-410.59 - 849.75 98,086 SQ. FT. 2.25 ACRES 75,760 SQ. FT. 1.74 ACRES 1273.43 ME --OHU OHU OH ARTER OF 23 3 82,566 SQ. FT. 1.90 ACRES S88°52'.2"r 1270 .\3 OHU OHU OUTLOT B EDGE OF PLOWED FIELD 65,594 SQ. FT. 1.51 ACRES 790.12 ��. •HU 4' w w 00 N r N 0 0 z 1.46 ACRES PRIMARY S87°37'38"W 244.85 0 INFILTRATON BASIN/RAIN TH WEST GARDEN P.118, RGE.23 - - DOWN W 1,SOUTHs,1.INE Of THE.DIORTHWEST W - -d•- -4•- - QUARTiER PER TORRENS CASE NO 17158 a J � � � WETLAND 17 I FND IP is. 0.28r E 0.1 I Do PINES AND (RED OAKS I N N00°34'25"E 2677.33 (NJ U W Z (n W O OCI Y ctQ Liu) w � U � 0 2 Q Oz W O WO_ 1-co i-N �N LJ- ow �‘- �o W� oz Z J Z W W (/7 H (n 0_ I=- U W~ Oz W W Z -- J O H N Q W LEI 0_ 1 FND JLMy ER 'TORT N SCALE IN FEET PRELIMINARY PLAT - SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS VERTICAL CURVE INFORMATION DEER HILL RD No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 PVI Station PVI Elevation Grade In Grade Out A (Grade Change) Profile Curve Type Sub -Entity Type Profile Curve Length K Value Curve Radius 0+00.00' 5+85.08' 8+15.81' 13+67.70' 20+95.65' 29+25.09' 36+91.76' 40+27.32' 43+95.89' 47+90.98' 54+63.05' 57+41.61' 60+91.47' 14 63+05.11' 991.522' 985.671' 992.593' 1036.744' 1052.126' 1060.421' 1052.754' 1025.909' 1029.595' 1005.562' 1012.283' 1034.567' 1052.060' 1054.197' -1.00% 3.00% 8.00% 2.11% 1.00% -1.00% -8.00% 1.00% -6.08% 1.00% 8.00% 5.00% 1.00% -1.00% 3.00% 8.00% 2.11% 1.00% -1.00% -8.00% 1.00% -6.08% 1.00% 8.00% 5.00% 1.00% 4.00% 5.00% 5.89% 1.11% 2.00% 7.00% 9.00% 7.08% 7.08% 7.00% 3.00% 4.00% Sag Sag Crest Crest Crest Crest Sag Crest Sag Sag Crest Crest Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola Symmetric Parabola 160.000' 200.000' 235.477' 44.523' 80.000' 280.000' 360.000' 283.316' 283.316' 280.000' 120.000' 160.000' 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' 4000.000' NORTH CDS No. PVI Station PVI Elevation Grade In Grade Out A (Grade Change) Profile Curve Type Sub -Entity Type Profile Curve Length K Value Curve Radius 1 -0+00.00' 1018.926' -3.33% 2 0+48.95' 1017.296' -3.33% 3.32% 6.65% Sag Symmetric Parabola 25.019' 3.763 376.338' 3 2+05.51' 1022.489' 3.32% -5.21% 8.53% Crest Symmetric Parabola 255.966' 30 3000.000' 4 4+65.79' 1008.916' -5.21% 1.00% 6.21% Sag Symmetric Parabola 223.737' 36 3600.000' 5 5+77.95' 1010.038' 1.00% SOUTH CDS No. PVI Station PVI Elevation Grade In Grade Out A (Grade Change) Profile Curve Type Sub -Entity Type Profile Curve Length K Value Curve Radius 1 -0+00.00' 1046.254' -3.33% 2 0+42.21' 1044.849' -3.33% -4.75% 1.42% 3 1+46.09' 1039.915' -4.75% 1.00% 5.74% Sag Symmetric Parabola 206.810' 36 3600.000' 4 3+74.24' 1042.185' 1.00% -1.00% 2.00% Crest Symmetric Parabola 59.854' 30 3000.000' 5 5+49.96' 1040.428' -1.00% SEPTIC SITE LEGEND PROPOSED SEPTIC LOCATION p PERC BORING m COIL BORING CONTOUR LEGEND - - 2' CONTOUR EXISTING - - 10' CONTOUR EXISTING 2' CONTOUR PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR EXISTING 2' CONTOUR PROPOSED CUSTOM GRADED 10' CONTOUR PROPOSED CUSTOM GRADED C F / m/ / I c, I I 0.11 l EROSION CONTROL LEGEND ROCK ENTRANCE BERM SILT FENCE SILT FENCE (POST CONSTRUCTION) BIO-ROLL CONCRETE WASHOUT INLET PROTECTION CAT.3 STRAW BLANKET 3 3 r - - --' / / I _ --4. 1 J J / \ 1 i 1 C -� -- i I-_� I / / 1 1 N J 11-- I \r � / / I I I' r ' 1 ---T I I-- r--- I I I I I 1 I /- I I I J--J �--- K-{ I -Li_�.1 I r- - v� { 1 -- -1 I _ _. 1 7,-,-" -1,, H I ON -SITE BMPS - (For more detailed information Section 2.2 of the SWPPP) 1. REDUCE IMPERVIOUS AREA - REDUCTION IN STREET WIDTH FROM 24' TO 22'. 2. RIP RAP - RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT ALL APRONS FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AND PROVIDE SEDIMENT CONTROL- (Utility Contractor) 3. INLET PROTECTION - INLET PROTECTION WILL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ALL CATCH BASINS & REAR YARD STRUCTURES. (WIMCO'S OR EQUAL) -(Utility Contractor) 4. SLOPE STABILIZATION - SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG DOWN GRADIENT GRADING LIMITS AND WOODFIBER BLANKET WILL BE UTILIZED ON ALL SLOPES 3:1 OR GREATER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SLOPE STABILIZATION. (Grading Contractor) 5. BIOROLLS - BIOROLLS WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG REAR YARD SWALES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM REACHING THE NURP POND AND ULTIMATELY DOWNSTREAM WETLANDS(Grading Contractor). 6. STREET SWEEPING - STREET SWEEPING WILL BE DONE A MINIMUM OF ONCE PER WEEK OR AS NEEDED TO MINIMIZE DUST CONTROL AND VEHICLE TRACKING.(Grading and Utility Contractor) 10. PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER- PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER WILL ALSO BE USED ON SITE.- 11. ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT WASTE PRODUCED SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. (Utility Contractor) 200 100 0 100 200 400 SCALE IN FEET CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS SHOWN ON PLAN, AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MEDINA, ELM CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT OR DIRECTED BY TH ENGINEER. 2. INSPECT POND, SILT FENCE, AND ROCK ENTRANCE BERM AFTER ALL RAINFALL EVENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. 3. LO & WO PADS 3:1 MAX. 4. RESTORATION -8.6 ACRES PLUS WETLAND RESTORATION AREAS 4.1. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH 4" TO 6" OF TOPSOIL, OR EXISTING ON -SITE ORGANIC MTRL. 4.2. SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH MNDOT MIXTURE #250 AT A RATE OF 100 LBS./ACRE AND FERTILIZE WITH 2O-0-10 AT 100 LBS./ACRE. (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) WETLAND RESTORATION - BWSR SEED MIX FOR WETLANDS (AS NOTED IN THE WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN APPLICATION) 4.3.. ONLY PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER IS TO BE USED ON SITE. 4.4. MULCH WITH TYPE 1 AT A RATE OF 2 TONS/ACRE AND DISC ANCHOR IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLACEMENT. USE WOODFIBER BLANKET ON ALL SLOPES 3:1 (FT) OR GREATER. 4.5. PLACE APPROVED STORM SEWER INLET PROTECTION IN OR AROUND ALL STORM SEWER INLETS AND MAINTAIN UNTIL STREET CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED. 4.6. MAINTAIN ALL SILT FENCE UNTIL TURF HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 4.7. RESTORATION WORK WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 72 HOURS OF GRADING COMPLETION. 5. SILT FENCE, BEFORE GRADING - 19,000 LF 6. SILT FENCE AFTER GRADING-2,400 LF 7. ALL INDIVIDUAL LOTS WILL BE CUSTOM GRADED, INCLUDING POOL AREA. HOUSES AND DRIVEWAYS ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY: THE PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN ARE 1 POSSIBLE GRADING OPTION. AS PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, CUSTOM GRADING x DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS WILL BE PREPARED. I I rr, 1 I 1 1 1 DRAWING NAME DRAWN BY DSG CHECKED BY DLS DATE NO 01 BY DATE DSG 06/19/15 REVISIONS CITY REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 0ER5 S SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 2 � W r 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 N c'yF �2 P P CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS STONEGATE PRDC FILE NO. 7282-010-200 STONEGATE 7282-010-200 05/01/15 i ems' ter' i / w �w ze I Q 1 ! 638 I I I-— -�- - -- -1..-- 633 \ `♦ % Jr � / w w ♦ \ ./,_I \• —w w� w w w w ♦• w w w w w ♦ , ♦ w w w w rw--- w • ♦` w w w wI w \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I / I II I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w/ S I \vw w (' w vw I w w ♦♦Ww W w I ---W I _I 4--/—\ w1 w 1Vvw 1 / ,-� 1: w ` w —\ w A w cu' w W \ / ` — _ , / 1 W w W� 1 / w 1I/ \ _)\ w w w w w • • • • • • 100 SCALE IN FEET DRAWING NAME BY DATE REVISIONS Base SGF DRAWN BY DSG CHECKED BY DLS DATE 05/01/15 01 CITY REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. CITY PROJECT NO. MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS STONEGATE PRDC 7282-010-200 STONEGATE 7282-010-200 / / ---- --- —_` V. `\ / 1 // _/ ��V vv v / // — V \ \ - � , / 3�0 017.3 it ICBM1-1A®(1014) I i ITc1016s- 1 I I —. —BUJ t2o— LL. L LIL L I LI II -I I_ LII_ I 11, I, / 1 / ♦\__1 I 1 / , / I I // /") ♦ I I /' / // \ ♦I I / / , \-1 �I I / // /'�� 1 II I�I / / A ,' / 1 1 I I , / / --1 I I I V N/ / \ \ \ / \ \ I \ I 1 11 II 1 1 I I 1 I \ ♦ 1 I \ \ /♦ I I I \ ` f I _, I / /' LP:4 1 1 I \ / Ele I, II \ I \ )) 1 (INV: 1004.0 E NV. 1008.0 S 9� \626P �P"9 \j \ 625 s v�v�,62 8 ryO .ON 1 y! I 1 \♦'I I A �k9I1, r IF)9q p2 Oi • kitI/ /I I I I / / / / / / / 308.15 RCP 629P r' / INV: 997/.2 E 0 NORTH I I I I I I I' 0002) STMH Al 1 TC: 995 5 BLD: 4.2' g GBMk A2 INV 993.3SW -TC: 1004.0 INV: 993.3 tJ moo BID'105' / / 1NW: 996.5 W ^� -- yN7"993.mrii e7/ep. °. FES A9 INV: �9 869' SILT FENCE --STMHAl2 \,. - TC:994.4 BLD: 4.2' INV: 992.2S INV: 992.2 NW FES B2 ♦ nvi01011.8 \. 9581' SILT FENCE FOREBAY POND 2 l NWL 1010.0 HWL 1011.4 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET FES B4 INV: 1008 w w w _ - \/ w w w w*••� � w w N. • \ • \ \ OUTLQN v1/ w w y w w w w w w w w w w w � 'yw w 3 ` �. N. w w NV w w w w w w w w \ w w w / yr w y y w y y � w w Vl ',A10 4* 5 w w w \,/ w )4/ w y DRAWING NAME Base SGF DRAWN BY DSG CHECKED BY DLS DATE 05/01/15 NO 01 BY DATE REVISIONS DSG 06/19/15 CITY REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 s N SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS STONEGATE PRDC FILE NO. 7282-010-200 STVNEGATE 7282-010-200 1 1 1 1 I I I I / / / / / / / / / / // o? / l // l / N / / O N /l I I l/ / / / % Q o N / // / 1 p % / / i / / / i / I . '0 r I l/ I I I I / I I / / / I / ! I / I / I I I I I I I I I I I ) I I I I I I / / / / ,/ / / /� / / 1 / / j I / I l / / / / I 1 / / I / 1 / 1 i / I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I / 1 / I I l I / II 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 / 41}} OQ 1028 0 ) PR MARY - 6591 SEPTIC i b 594 034 - - C SEPTIC 95 q�EA --(gam) E 9E01. 8B -E•gO Val 0.9401 dD + 1053.0 + 1055.5 NORTH -9 $P ‘SZVe,. 60 + 1035:5 1047.7 + 1047.0 21i // � `I 7•. � I. ♦ \ I' ---- `- - - - - -. 1 1 \ `\s � ` 205 WETLAN OUTLET --ELEV=1053.0 _ O 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 1052.0 (105S.6) (9'Lem) E"9E01 jS E'9ObOL U1 + 10. 5.5 \ rp191LF€ " MENT - FOR HORSE-47' _____ ` / / 9395'SILTFFryC1 `—/7 / • 207 0 m / / • / I I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I DRAWING NAME Base SGF DRAWN BY DSG CHECKED BY DLS DATE 05/01/15 NO 01 BY DATE DSG 06/19/15 REVISIONS CITY REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 s �2 P P N SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO MEDINA, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS STONEGATE PRDC FILE NO. 7282-010-200 STONEGATE7 a / ✓ — =� a �. EPT/C 67 610R- .. ,, WETLAN p5 \\� _ OUTLE We ��. o — E 3.0 � � . ) I III �� ✓ w w � `— 1— � we `� �----- // Ilw w Fes c2 ( (06 INV:1054A I I ' — ENHANCED POND 3 / / / ,o �e i i , i / - ) i �•1 o I 10571 ) I NWL 1054.0 Tc ,0',T �w WETLAND � ♦� //' I HWL1055.9 �NV.1 05NWL 1053.0 3.3 ACRES tt \I , Q1 / 11 (03210 576 1 I O / I.v 1053 .0 CDlJ' - Ji w \q, 808— i vas w\7— I I I 1 I 6 �VL11�;�N#E� w w w w w w w w w w� w w w w w I y w w q/ 1 5 �� \ ,� t l � � ®� \\ � I 6 P w / OUTL,OT B � v �fi I -4o ass v --- ---- 56 j I I F.A �I I 1 I V 1'• 5 7 I A \� \,n41 '`o j�m - �i5 6P RIMS P555® w 41 I 1050 - -- -- 1 L-LLLu I / WE ND FILL v / 1 / 1056. - \ ss 5 P \ Lv—LLLLLLLL EA #4 8,900 / / wOw`o V L �LLLLL/LL / V L LN-LLLLLL &5a V LALLyLL L �5 P A --_ A 5 -4-105 .9 A. 6 O PAP d 10 \V 1 550 --- - --- \ v � sso. v 1 12, WETLAND FILL 300 SF 9 'ase . / --i1 27 ) NORTH 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST,INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. n ,J' �„ ,'/ ✓/ -ff U`-'� �-(r �Eas `' m / I. s�R` _ F� m SATHRE—BERGQUIST, INC. CITY PROJECT NO. PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS STONEGATE P R DC FILE NO. 7262-010-200 Base SGF 01 — DS_G -- 06/19/15 --- _ _ _ _ _ CITY REVISIONS_ _ _ _ _ -________________ — _ DRAWNBY MEDINA, M I N N E SOTA J CHECKED BY `% cNFR3 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 47G6000 'vim P`P�2 DLS DATE Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. V Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 OS/0 5 �� _ 300 SF 211 ��212 1 LLCL 55 25 0 I o _-�� - ! \ \ I 1 - LLL / P IMARY 1 ( a .i ) u�� __ 1�� A L-LOLL 6 1 L `I �� ayes 7 I I \ \ \ \ I 1- �� I II I I \ \ \\ \ \\ \\\ \\ 1 I MAW I��, / i,V ��/ V \ i��' // /// .q /��I\lI I- M-/ _ - -_.I ��_-I',:, Ai1'-.'S��, Q`�1'w`��-," ��-'%..//6. 0J '-��J1 r-+ . .oI / ��wi -OI ��ao ��m`��o��o'o- +?i.o" -V' v^��-.-r_1\��/= IV sA��a��1/$ 1V >-6I/��ool�� T3oC/ a ��sAV ��e/ �� V /?A2A , I I/IO I<��^+.J/, iA\I 2.! / VI 0 oIl��I I I$�� i\I '/O 3AV�� 0 7 A/I.I /I0II��I.I I \ I CI��IA1f.I II II-��I / I ��I .V ( I/ IILI I I 1I��I L��A11I 7 IALI ��I Iv V IAL\iI �� IA 1NI I ��II I�� v cI .\ m I b6\li -10 !��_��L . o\ '�3V-,. tir /a5 -e.'_ _3'.. --YI'II��I��> ,.`GJ\A '��/_v I - -"I I^IA _ ,/vv/+2��_ 0A,8.-v5`_�� -\p,_0_-��)RII .�� '//��Q'��l-9qqg��<VR. c ' cy�� roC��owm/ 'T7 /4 7��I2 -8s ��S 2 \1/.0WETLA D��L6y AREA 3,900 SF 7 , ��) 7 ��wom. A�� 11�� 0 U- Tl _ I I I1LO- TV- �� D-.��y.\I��- �� l_ Q/ "ITLAND FIL AR A #53,00 SF ]LOT LLL LxUT- ..... ;- WETLAND AREA #4 1300 SF 1050.4 / +1o52a a 1054.4+104 6 6 0S :7:��,O zJ ,oa./ / / �� 7 1052.48P m P Cm --------------- is218 5 50 ,0, �� O 0a6.1 p0 / 527 O/' ITC 1039.1 4, nMH ET ALTERNATE 519 1030.0 v:103.ssE 52,5 16 ��s525P 0 1026.0 BMM Ee TC:1036,7 BLD 89 -219 + 39.0 52 2241 521p 0 Y 24 51 I)29ev o29n�� 4 2040��- - - 2,2 'X 7 .�� -' 5 _740 2 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET NORTH A #L LL LAL FAa��r5I ��i! AL \ \,5 \4 \ 1 \ 1 1 \ 1 - - DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. PRELIMINARY GRADING AND FILE NO. Base SGF 01 DS_G 06/19/15 _ _ _ _ _ CITY REVISIONS_ _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT ��Eas s��R` _ AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE `' _ F�� 7262-010-200 DRAWNDSG BY SATHRETHRIZATIO, ICONEXPRES AN ILLEGITIMATE IMATE USEAN N. USE WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. DRAINAGE PLANS SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. m / I. m INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. MEDINA, STONEGATE 6 CHECKED BY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE '/ - 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 DLS - USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING Ur `% 'vim M I N N E SOTA P R DC DATE FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. V cNFRB P`P��2 OS/01/15 Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 24 T�p�9 57� �.� :�� 1 .�• A\� 'RF44 : \� \\ IN ,1029.6N 1 1029.4S 10099ii \\ —_---__ 0.0 + 0 \ 70 10 ec =Y 57 P Y��1\�/�,. \ 221 TC: 10 ago 0 — \ — — ACT \ D: too 43 ._ L \ �704E0_., — -�� \ \ �\ Y > INJ: toza 0p �'� _ i46, INV: 10 0 v \ A'4FA541 TERNATE _k- `v v vv vv vv v �2vv 54 253 v <12, A LLL LLL LLLI LA v A ----� vvv231 \ (uri \ •� mil ` _ ,.. � �, _' A ♦ LL L L � \CIA -. _. --538P _ �Tj \ \ VX2&3,3 ....�0y�g0 AV 034 -"� L LLLL +10 .5-" /PREP 45 _ v \ V A \ _ \ L L �L 1 Vp36o GP1p86 \\ S $1 0 _ \X� LLLLL L 24o �11 �)�\ A 07 A030 V Av A \\v �5---- V 5b7 -GF7 / BLS �—+— 1oa V vim, _ _ TC r10095 K\ \ \ \ 034.0 \ 1v 61 - V BLD: 8.6' < \ \\\ \ - —_ --__ 1 A v 1001.0 N A V v p24 \ \ I \ 1 1 \ IN\iQiQS \ \ \ _ _----- \ \ a ^ y o �� \ as _ �g3" �� - \ 1 \ v y �iq . 110z6. �� \ eI - o �� GF 1022.0 A 1 _I-- \ % V A — TP10223 o y n ---- o + 17.0� V ,.0 V g�14.3 11 Os3\ t \ 1013.6) SEPT IC 235 34 i A \ 9 V A M 8 °..TME2 \ \ \\ \\ \\\ \ \ \ \� --BLD: B.o• \ \ lLa\ \-\ �\ \ ",�� \ \\\~Q 533 �58 -- --- - \ 238 \NgTF ��04 >e--- \544 U FES E1` � ---_ 3fj 9. 238. vv'6p�,v 505 1014'� \ / en: I _ i — 3 c — iFES E12 Mao — V PONDS 1 v v v v vv 50)� Lit" L 2 �� 1 90 \ \ \ / " _ - - - -- - -- -NWL980.0 FESE13 /N ILTRATON�-�INIFINV:979.0BASIN/RAIN WL 9885 GARDEN /,-- -- BoL_ s TC:98 anwaFORE oc a sv D 1 E4 ws tL �� Lea.! 1 L i / ------ INV:`0Ui-iy� /'/_ �/ /— — — — — — -- — — — — — — /FES EI4 I. INV,98 sal 1�d d _ FES O4 g III _._LLLL LLLLLLLL LLLy _ --- / � � INV: 984.0 — LLtELEEtL� tit -- - —��I r� i d� w c•�.: Uo No, o - 25 0 25 50 100 — — �— � LLB/ - .9e.E1r— ��- - N ) BLD: 4.a SCE FE V� iV W V> vV V7 \Y W yV I VZ y I �V ET AND FILL INv981,3NW — ---- ---------- / FFs E1 s- - - / I / /' - - 980.0 1 / EA 1 6,D70 SF DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. PRELIMINARY GRADING AND FILE NO. Base SGF 01 DEG 06/19/15 _ _ _ _ _ CITY REVISIONS_ _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT �Eas s�R` — AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE `' _ F� 7282-010-200 DRDSG BY SATHRETHRIZATIO,ICONEXPRESSWRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. DRAINAGE PLANS SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. m / i. m _________ INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. n MEDINA, STONEGATE 7 CHECKED BY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE ,3' �„ , '/ ✓/ _ �, .Y., 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 DLS — USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING U`-'� �-(r `%'vim M I N N E SOTA P R DC DATE FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. V cNFRP01 05/01/15 Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 nEEEe Mngwm Saaa�. 38B6t MxcarraxE M E9m4'aEavca..aron raom�c�� ro�i4iiio mw�r ro uMrtnnons, wE�'smis snenm� � WElo 5P0a kW� SILT DUTDUT HEAVY Y MEDINA ERO-02 }II o I ---, } r} O ^Z LP 48+�2.64 1 I I ? I u _____________________� / t6 I II II OM I , , ` I , I II 1-1, 1 I ne ee�,n w o, 1 ooII Ol OM o-- 1007 ----------------------- > \ 1 � ,aoxn CONTOUR LEGEND 2' CONTOUR EXISTING 10' CONTOUR EXISTING 2' CONTOUR PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR EXISTING 2' CONTOUR PROPOSED CUSTOM GRADED 10' CONTOUR PROPOSED CUSTOM GRADED O e� " \ p�,� 10 i a } } a } #1 } \\\\ a2 a2 C oIo / l , I ' 2 \� + i I I LLJ E , � m � I R , 1 9 xaA � , F 1 __ EROSION CONTROL LEGEND ROCK ENTRANCE BERM ---- SILT FENCE ---- SILT FENCE (POST CONSTRUCTION) — BIO—ROLL 8D CONCRETE WASHOUT _, INLET PROTECTION WOODFIBER BLANKET n,y I of 0 I li cr i I I I V I I I \ I I I I �I ON -SITE BMPS - (Far more detailed information Section 2.2 of [he SWPPP) CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. REDUCE IMPERVIOUS AREA- REDUCTION IN STREET WIDTH FROM 24' TO 22'. 1. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS SHOWN ON PLAN, AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MEDINA, ELM CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT OR DIRECTED BY TH 2. RIP RAP - RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT ALL APRONS FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AND PROVIDE SEDIMENT ENGINEER. 2. INSPECT POND, SILT FENCE, AND ROCK ENTRANCE BERM AFTER ALL RAINFALL EVENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. CONTROL- (Utility Contractor) 3. LO&WOPADS 1MAX. 3. INLET PROTECTION -INLET PROTECTION WILL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ALL CATCH BASINS &REAR q, RESTORATIONATION -0.6 ACRES PLUS WETLAND RESTORATION AREAS YARD STRUCTURES. (WIMCO'S OR EQUAL) -(Utility Contrectar) 4A, RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH 4" TO 6" OF TOPSOIL, OR EXISTING ON -SITE ORGANIC MTRL. 4. SLOPE STABILIZATION -SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG DOWN GRADIENT GRADING LIMITS AND 4.2. SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH MNDOT MIXTURE #250 AT A RATE OF 100 LBSJACRE AND FERTILIZE WITH 2O-0-10 AT 100 LBS.IACRE. WOO FIBER BLANKET WILL BE UTILIZED ON ALL SLOPES 31 OR GREATER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SLOPE (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) WETLAND RESTORATION - BWSR SEED MIX FOR WETLANDS (AS NOTED IN THE WETLAND STABILIZATION. (Grading Contractor) REPLACEMENT PLAN APPLICATION) 5. BIOROLLS - BIOROLLS WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG REAR YARD SWALES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM 4.3.. ONLY PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER IS TO BE USED ON SITE. REACHING THE NURP POND AND ULTIMATELY DOWNSTREAM WETLANDS(Greding Contractor). 4.4. MULCH WITH TYPE 1 AT A RATE OF 2 TONSIACRE AND DISC ANCHOR IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLACEMENT. USE WOODFIBER BLANKET ON 6. STREET SWEEPING -STREET SWEEPING WILL BE DONE A MINIMUM OF ONCE PER WEEK ORAS NEEDED TO ALL SLOPES 3:1(FT) OR GREATER. MINIMIZEDUST CONTROL AND VEHICLE TRACKING.(Grading and Utility Contractor) 4.5. PLACEAPPROVED STORM SEWER INLET PROTECTION IN OR AROUND ALL STORM SEWER INLETS AND MAINTAIN UNTIL STREET PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER - PHOSPHOROUS FREE FERTILIZER WILL ALSO BE USED ON SITE.- CONSTRUCTION IS COM . 110 1 . ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT WASTE PRODUCED SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. (Utility Contar) rect AINTAIN ALL SILT FENCE UNTIL 46. MT TURF HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 4.7. RESTORATION LL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 72 HOURS OF GRADING COMPLETION. BEFOREWORK GRADI 19,000 LF 5. SILT FENCE,FTERG Z 100 50 0 50 100 200 GRADING- 6. SILT FENCE AFTER GRADING-2,400 LF 7. ALL INDIVIDUAL LOTS WILL BE CUSTOM GRADED, INCLUDING POOL AREA. THE PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN ARE I POSSIBLE GRADING OPTION. AS PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, CUSTOM GRADING & DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS WILL BE PREPARED. z SCALE IN FEET DRAWING NAME I NO. BY I DATE I REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. FILE NO. Base SGF _01 DS_G 06/19/15 _ _ _ _ _ CITY REVISIONS_ _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I ¢Eas `' Sul'? 6� EROSION CONTROL 7282-010-200 DRAWNDSG BY SATHRETHRIZATIO,ICONEXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. m / )-�� m SATHRE—BERGQUIST, INC. CHECKEDBY — -- — — — -________ INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. n 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 47G6000 MEDINA, STONEGATE $ DLS — SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING ,�' �„ , �'/ ✓/ _ U`-'� /�u-(r V `% cNFRS 'vim M I N N E SOTA P R DC DATE FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. P`P02 05/01/15 Date:. 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 wl 5 LLI jW � 3 i — ---__ -- ---- ------------- th Y ) rMn I r s� a, Uzi. LU ON Cq ew d �� ,N o� � o o I :FWO �O WEE ,. nsnGM V6 oW WOE om i \s S i \ I / � a u \ a r \ s i t i 'IOZ. 'ON HtlSO �1 �m tea= 9 T r � +a �rr o / 100 50 0 50 400 200 i ( � S ALE IN FEET ( DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS .R CITY PROJECT NO. FILE NO. Base SGF 01 DS_G 06/19/15 _ _ _ _ _ CITY REVISIONS_ _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT ¢E s SOq� — AMADULYREGISTEREDPROFESSIONALENGINEERUNDERTHE `' 6� EROSION CONTROL 7262-010-200 DRDSGBY SATHRETHRIZATIO,ICON EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT �� INC. SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. m / ) m -- ----_______ INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. MEDINA, STONEGATE 9 CHECKEDBY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE ,�' �„ - ,'/ ✓/ - �, .,., 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 DLS — USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING U`-'� "'a � `% �� M I N N E SOTA P R DC DATE FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. V cNFR3 P`PCa2 05/01/15 Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 i , ,� C —�— / / I F_-------------- LANDSCAPE NOTES 18. PLANT LIST QUANTITIES ARE PROVIDED AS AN AID TO BIDDERS ONLY. THE LANDSCAPE 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE ELEMENTS AND NOTIFY 11. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATIONS OF PLANT MATERIAL QUANTITIES ON LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. SURVEY DATA OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ANY EXISTING BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES ON THE SITE AND SHALL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE PLAN. IMPROPER PLANT COUNTS MADE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE NO WAS SUPPLIED BY OTHERS. FOR ANY DAMAGE CAUSED BY HIS WORK. CAUSE FOR ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE OWNER. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND NOTIFY 12. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE ALL MATERIAL AND LABOR FOR (12) TWELVE 19. SIZE AND GRADING STANDARDS OF PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE CAUTION MONTHS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT FOR MATERIAL EITHER DEAD OR NOT IN ADDITION OF ANSI Z60.1, AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, BY THE AMERICAN WHEN WORKING IN THE VICINITY OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. HEALTHY CONDITION. CONTRACTOR SHALL WATER ALL MATERIAL DURING INITIAL NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION. ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD UNTIL OWNER ACCEPTANCE. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM 2% SLOPE AWAY FROM ALL STRUCTURES. 20. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE COMPLIANCE OF LANDSCAPE PLANS 13. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO PREVENT PLANTS FROM WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL FINE GRADE AREAS TO ACHIEVE FINAL CONTOURS AS INDICATED. FALLING OR BEING BLOWN OVER AND TO STRAIGHTEN OR REPLANT ALL PLANTS WHICH LEAVE AREAS TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL 3" BELOW FINAL FINISHED GRADE IN PLANTING AREAS ARE DAMAGED DUE TO LACK OF GUYING OR STAKING. PLANTS BLOWN OVER BY WIND 21. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROTECTION (WITH AND 1" BELOW FINAL FINISHED GRADE IN LAWN AREAS. SHALL NOT CAUSE ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE OWNER BUT SHALL BE THE FINANCIAL PHYSICAL BARRIERS) AND MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING AND TRANSPLANTED TREES DURING RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. CONSTRUCTION (WHERE APPLICABLE). 5. ALL PLANTING BEDS AND LAWN AREAS TO BE SEPARATED BY STEEL EDGING. NO STEEL EDGING SHALL BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO SIDEWALKS OR CURBS. CUT STEEL EDGING 14. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE AT ANY TIME TO REPLACE OR 22. WRAP ALL SMOOTH -BARKED TREES -FASTEN TO TOP AND BOTTOM. REMOVE BY APRIL AT 45 DEGREE ANGLE WHERE IT INTERSECTS SIDEWALKS AND CURBS. HONOR ANY WARRANTY FOR THE LOSS OF ANY TREE, PLANTS, GROUNDCOVER OR SOD 1, DUE TO FIRES, FLOODS, FREEZING TEMPERATURES, LIGHTNING, WINDS IN EXCESS OF 50 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE MPH, OR ANY NATURAL DISASTER. 23. ALL STREET BOULEVARDS TO BE SEEDED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED: ALL AREAS TO BE PERMITS. PREPARED WITH 4" OF TOPSOIL. 15. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON THESE PLANS, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE "ONE CALL" (651-454-0002) TO VERIFY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINE GRADING OF THE PLANTING OF ANY SODDED AREAS. FINE 24. ALL TREES LOCATED WITHIN TURF AREAS TO BE MULCHED USING 4" OF SHREDDED LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK ON SITE. GRADING SHALL CONSIST OF THE FINAL .10 FOOT OF THE GRADE TO BE ACHIEVED. HARDWOOD BARK MULCH. 8. ALL WORK SHALL BE LAID OUT BY LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR FOR THE OWNER'S 16. TOPSOIL MATERIAL, WHEN CALLED FOR ON THE PLANS, SHALL BE FREE OF HARD CLODS, 25. PLANTINGS SHALL NOT BE PLANTED ON TOP OF UTILITIES. APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. ALL MATERIAL SHALL BE SUBJECT TO OWNER STIFF CLAY, HARD PAN, STONES LARGER THAN 3/4" DIAMETER, OBNOXIOUS WEEDS AND APPROVAL. PLANTS, SOD, PARTIALLY DISINTEGRATED DEBRIS, INSECTS OR ANY OTHER UNDESIRABLE 26. STREET AND BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BE PLANTED A MIN. OF 8 FEET FROM THE BACK MATERIAL, PLANTS OR SEEDS THAT WOULD BE TOXIC OR HARMFUL TO PROPER GROWTH. OF CURB. 9. WRITTEN APPROVAL IS REQUIRED BY THE OWNER FOR ANY SUBSTITUTIONS OR CHANGES IN MATERIAL. 17. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE ADVISED OF THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ON THE SITE. THEIR EXACT LOCATION SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD WITH 10. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE DAILY CLEANUP AND MAINTENANCE THROUGH THE OWNER OR THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY COMPLETION. DIGGING OPERATIONS. IN THE EVENT THEY ARE UNCOVERED, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE OWNER. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES TO UTILITIES. 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET O z LANDSCAPE LEGEND: • DECIDUOUS CANOPY TREE (TYP.) EVERGREEN TREE (TYP.) ®, ORNAMENTAL TREE (TYP.) ORNAMENTAL CRA55/51IRUB5 (TYP.) N OUTCROPPING STONE (TYP.) CD 00 1- a 0 E 0 U a� Y �Q W� u o o> N � U U N 0 a co L/�►u L.L a U U) 0 z J z J a z 2 J W ry n L) C C Q LL. Z LLJ Q z V Q LLJ z O F_- V) Revisions: 6.19.2015 Scale: 1 if = 50'-0" Job No: 2014-0076 Date: 5.7.2015 Sheet No: L=1 mO I � 00 I I I I � I I I I I �o - __-__-_--"--- _______________ter. II I\ ,. `♦ \ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W I I � 1 1 O / o o f o Plant List COMMON DAME BOTANICAL NAME SIZE RANGE CONDITION REMARKS Tree: Deciduous Canopy Autumn Blaze Maple Acer x freeman ii 'Jeffersred' 2 1/2" cal. B&B Littleleaf Linden Tilia cordata 'Glenleven' 2 1/2" cal. B&B Discovery Elm Ulmus davidiana var. japonica 'Discovery' 2 1/2" cal. B&B Swamp White Oak Quercus bicolor 2 1/2" cal. B&B Fred Oak Quercus Rubra 2 1/2" cal. B&B Red Sunset Maple Acer rubrum 'Franksred' 2 1/2" cal. B&B Skyline Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis'Skycole' 2 1/2" cal. B&B Tree: Deciduous Ornamental Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry Amelanchier x grandiflora' Autumn Brilliance' 6' ht. B&B Crabapple Malus varieties 1 1/2" cal. B&B Japanese Tree Lilac Syringa reticulata 'Ivory Silk' 6' ht./1 1/2" cal. B&B Thornless Hawthorn Crataegus crus-galli var. inermis 6' ht./1 1/2" cal. B&B Tree: Evergreen Austrian Pine Pinus nigra 6' ht. B&B Black Hills Spruce Picea glauca densata 6' ht. B&B Colorado Green Spruce Picea pungens 6' ht. B&B I / N F I LTRATO N % 1 �-------------------� I / BASIN/RAIN GARDEN // ' �_—_I`1' 1 00�' YEAR FI�OODrLAM A'S PER ML; WD `STUDY FOREBAY 14/ f� // ; / I ELEVAT M 9,89.2 I Fi Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen Clump, Specimen Standard, Specimen Standard, Specimen Standard, Specimen Straight Straight Straight Shrubs: Deciduous f Annabelle Hydrangea Hydrangea arborescens'Annabelle' 5 gal Arrowood Viburnum Viburnum dentatum - Varieties 5 gal Dwarf Korean Lilac Syringa meyeri 'Palibin' 5 gal Isanti Dogwood Cornus sericea'lsanti' 5 gal Knock Out Rose Rosa 'Knock oUt' 5 gal Shrubs: Evergreen Green Mountain Boxwood Buxus x'Green Mountain' 5 gal Perennials: Russian Sage Perovskia ' Little Spire' 1 gal Black-eyed Susan Rudbeckia fulgida var. sullivantii'Goldsturm' 1 gal Ornamental Grasses: M Feather Reed Grass Calamagrostis'Karl Foerster' 1 gal Hameln Fountain Grass Pennisetum alopecu roid es 'Hameln' 1 gal Prairie Dropseed Schizachyrium heterolepis 1 gal Cont. Full, Even Cont. Full, Even Cont. Full, Even Cont. Full, Even Cont. Full, Even Cont. Cont. Co nt. Cont. Cont. Cont. Full, Even Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen Specimen 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 0 z LANDSCAPE LEGEND: • DECIDUOUS CANOPY TREE (TYP.) EVERGREEN TREE (TYP.) „• ORNAMENTAL TREE (TYP.) ORNAMENTAL GRASS/SHRUBS (TYP.) N OUTCROPPING STONE (TYP.) W J W W I am 00 00 0 E 0 U Q p Y N � Q 3 W� � o U N O 0 111111111� co N Vl OC Q LL z LLJ -- V Q LLJ z O Revisions: 6.19.2015 Scale: lit = 509-0" Job No: 2014-0076 Date: 5.7.2015 Sheet No: L=1 ol Q- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- I / � I � ---------- 1000 // -I- - 1002 ,•� , 1004 -/-- \\\ \ \ l - — — — — — — J J \ \ 1 1016 — i — — � — ;I I 1014 1 ` 1012 10A0 1 , ----- jj \ \ \ / J ' � PASSIVE OPEN SPACE I LOW - MINIMUM MOW NATIVE GRASS (TYP.) DECORATIVE DRY CREEK BED CROSSING / I —-------------I ---------------- �� DRY CREEK BED I I i i I I� II I1 (SEE TYP. CROSS SECTION) 50 25 0 25 50 100 SCALE IN FEET O z LANDSCAPE LEGEND: • DECIDUOUS CANOPY TREE (TYP.) EVERGREEN TREE (TYP.) ORNAMENTAL TREE (TYP.) 49 ORNAMENTAL GRASS/SHRUBS (TYP.) I� OUTCROPPING STONE (TYP.) / CD 00 r- CD 0 � 0 U Q � Y @ a 3 W� o m U L to �o a m V51 L LL Z LLJ V � LLI z O l/1 Revisions: 6.19.2015 Scale: 1 if = 50'-011 Job No: 2014-0076 Date: 5.7.2015 Sheet No: L=1 m2 / / / / \ / / --_/ \ \ I I I I /I I / / / / / / I /' \ 1 / f' 11 1 I I / / / / / I I I I 1 / / l/ __%� '� / 1 / I \ \_ \ / I \ \ /� / / ' ` \ 1I I I I \ 1 I / / ., / / / / i� \ ) -\ / ) \ / / / , \ \ I I I / I I I \ 1 I \ 1 / / / / / / / I I ( \ 1 I I - \ / _ / / ; \ \ I I I I 1 \1 \ 1 , f /i / l 1 / / l \ _ I I /'- i i �i \\r j r \ l/ / \\� i / \ / _ / \ \I I I 1 1 \ \ I I / // , / i ! / I I 1 \ 1 / / � � f J �� I I / / 1 / J _ � / \ / ! / / / I / I 1 \\ ) 1 % / /'/ / /',' __j / \ - , ' ,' ,�_- \ I I I / / / /' /' / / / I I f \\ / `\ 1 / / / / / / / 1 / / // / / / / / / /- 1 - / / --- / -----, i \ I I ) I ( ! / / / , / 1 I / / I ` / / i I / 1/ / 1 I I / I / / / / / ) / / / / r -----\ / ,' ,' --_/ I- \ \ I I 1 / / / 1 I \ \ / / / / / / / / j % /% /// / / \ \ / / i \ I 1 1 I I 1 / / ,/ ,' �� / / I 1 1 I I ,' \ \ \ / / / I \ I ' r-------- \ I / / / / / / / / / / \ \ / _ - I /I I I - \ \ I I I I I I I I r / / I / � ! \_ 1 / / // // / / ' \ 1 1 1 11 I I / ' � r I 1 / / / / /, // // / / / // / / / / / / \ \\_- ' r_ / / / I ' , \ \ \ 1 I I I I / /- - \\ / 1\ 1\ ^\ i / i � � \ l i i li i i i 1 i i \ \ i ; ///, I f i // / / // // // , �, , / / // / / / / \ / 1 \ / / I I I ) I / / / / / , \ I I II I I I / / / / / / / / /' / / / / / / I \_/ / \ / ,- I ; , / / / 1 ) I I I / / / / / J/ _/ / / / / / / / ' j / l /,-\`/ , , , / / \ \ I / Q i /--- -' / / ) I I I I ! / I I I / / / I I I I / �- ,/ // ,' 1 / / / / / / / / l l ' ,- _/ / r \ \ \ ,'/ I /,\ , `, l ! ! l 1 1 / / / / / / / ! I I I I , / / I l / / / , / / / \/ �' / I \ \ r---___-_, 1 \ 'w \ / I l I l 1 1 / / / / / / / ! / / I I , I - / / / / / , / / / / / _ _\ r / / \ / Z \ / / l / l I I lI // / / / 1 / I I I I I / t /- t;'--¢ -\\ \ I \ \ I / - \ / \/ I- ;/. \-- / /` / / / / / / / / I I / / I/NMOINdH�JN N0�1//J3S .1 �H L Id / I \ \ i i i / / ///// j I \\ �I li\ NMOa�b��B��IlOHS 'O'H bHd i % \\\ /, i %: - / / / / / / / / / / I I \ \ L02i `8l l dM `lZ oN HO 2jii2jvno r / `. /' I ' \ \ 1 I i / Q Q \ / / / / / r / l l 1� 021 `8 V dM1/° �Z �� 10 d11Id') 10 I I �� /' /r i r / / / I I \ �\ / \ / 1 / \ �/ / / / / / / I I 11S IH1/ HO --- _ / , / / / / / / t \ \ 1S/NjH11�� HHl 3Q, HNIH 1Sbd `. \- \ / '.`__ __ ,' i \ 1 r / \ / / / / 3�Hl�OS/ 3 INI11S�YA 1�, I 1:1 / /' ' / '/ // / / / I \ I \ --:' �r+\ I }' I \ +\ -- \` I --- ----- -- __ -- --- Y 1 / \ \ ` / i �- -� - / / / / / / I 11 I I 1 / / I jJ I I 11 V ------ - /_ --\-I / I ' I 1 ' �b0°24'13 W 2'631.18 / ' ` -c-' / ! / I 1 / , / , / ` \ \, \ , \,_/ C _\ \> ` " 1 / / 00 // / / I I I I 1 \ ( 1 I \ I I I,' / /r / �- /' 11�\ \� a a a a a a 4---' tea i - a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a/ a / a- a a11 - a F- -- / OIO 214 1\ 631 1 \ I I �T/-� r7 r iu 11 / // % I I I ! `\ \\ 8 Ll ON H bO N��J�J 1 3l 1� / \ -./ / /\ ,' >< ,/ / / / \\' \ ' \• OQ C4'/ I I I I \ \ \\ \ \ \ 1 I 1 1 1 I i '` \\ \ \ \ --\----' �' ( I I 1- \------ ��. a a J;� /a a -� a la -� a a =� a -� a a =� a a =� a a =� a/ a -� a a -\i a / -�, , / / \ \ a ;� a ;� a ;� a ;_ _fit I \ \ \ I I 1 I \ `-- `- \ \ fa a �a 1 �\ . V\; 2�H1�b o �SdMHlfIOS Hl Q HNI 1�d3=/; / i -- , / l \ \ \ O / I I I I \ (vS�\/ �\ 'ON\ J�V' D Si ]d A' A'0� j3 1 I I I \ - \ ell, \\ ;\ 1 _ _\ \\ a_ - a a a a r' � a a _X a _> _ a I a � a a a _> a a a a a a a a a a I az I� a I a a a a a a, a ,, \. \. '\ a a a a a � \ \�. /)a� / Idd00 1S�NFH110 H111 HU HNIH 119bt a 1 I I \ NMOa�lbdd8 NOIlodS 'O'H dHd 2Z• \ \ , > , I r / / '- \ \, !,r° / / / / ) 1 I I 1 I I \ gZ'OHS d0 �IHl2�b 10 1SHM 1\2,)N 3Hl 3 \ _ \ \ �. a ) a a -) a a / a 1 a l a I- a a -> a a �-- a a a a a a a a a a a a a a - I Q� I a a 4 a a,,/ a / / __ \, ' \. ,'> a ,_> a ^ ) / // / 1 I �IA I.' I\ I --_ \-; \ \\�' \ \\ \\ / I 1 \ -- Imo'. 1 / / \ / / , ' \ \. �---( I l`V l ! I I / 1 I I 1 1 1 I---' I \ \.' \ - _ - - _ _ _' ' ` - ` \ -�--,. , a ---> a a ---> Ia 0 - a \� ---> a a -- > a a ) ---> a a ---> _> a -- j a a -- > a a -4 a t 1= ,� +1 a --a a a f -19 \ / / / / - O \ \ a a a / o / / 1 I T "1 j I \ _ �. \ \ a I \i 'I\ I I I I I : � N I.) I A' \ e5 / / / ___---- - \ \ / I / Ch / / / I I I I I I I I \ 1 1 I I `\ \ - `\ �' ^\\ \ I \ \ a a a a 1 a ) a ,'a a / a a a a a a a a aI Q/ a a a a I /3 / / , - -\. \\. ;� _ -) \ ! 1 / ri- ,r l / I I I I I I I 1�1 -� bV1 � 1- I \ \. \ Cv \ \ 1 r - J / � ' / ' °'+ ' ' l `- O \ \. Q( / \. ' \, ) / / ,2: / / / 1 I I I \ I I I \ \ --\\ \\ \ \I 1\ \ a a a j a /' c c>a / a a a a a I a a a a a a a a a / ' ' /o / /, // �'` --- _ J / I I I I I \ \ \, g� \. \ / / l l l / l I I I 1 1 I \ \ I / / .' \ . I , � 6 / / , . \. `. - �___� __'. a' \\ \ / / 1 / ! r7v l l I I I i i 1 I I I 11 I I -� \\\ \\ v z -�� \\ I \I i I it a a =�,/ a\�/ a ;�� a,.)r a -j� a a ---> a a -;�__ �a a =� a =� a a -4 a a ---> a a --->1 \\ � I, ---> a / / �,/ /'//�,' rn \\ \ \ a E- ,� i \ / i i i i mryv l i i i \ 1 1 1 r' \\- F�I =� / a / \ v - a \ / I I 1 l I li , \ 1 I Ill 1 // ; r , \ �_ I Z �j I / -9 I l / ,--\ \\w -- \. \\• \ i ' / \ / / r,- rlV (y� I I I I I I I .> , - I -- I I a a a \ / a\ a a a a a 3 a a a a a a 4 a a a a � -) a i�`-�' a � l L�1,; I I \ \ -- \ \ " 4 i 4 / a / I I I/ / Q� c l 1 I I I I I 1 1� 1 I i- / ° I -' - I I O O , \ \ V I III Ill \ - ,� I ' / / I / I \ \ \ - ; . / \ CD I 1 I I `� 1 I I 1 I / I I O / ) 1 /Il ,\ / / / l \ I I I I M 1 I I I µ I' °4 ,__ p I \ � I Y I I A A I IIL-/ /AA. a a a -\ a a a, a �a a a a a ,' a a 3 a s a a a a a / I vV A? \ % I I I I I I I f I 1 3 `-' j $ a a a \ // I \ /a O rC ) I wQ I I \ I I I.I./11/ \ / / I ., -- a a \ Q \,' / // l I 1 \ \ \' k!l� O ! I I / / / O I I I I I J v I ! I F-wI I I /U lI•I/ \ ) _ �, / / \ \ / I I I I I II ` / ! ( ) ��'/ / \ a =� a -� / ,, , a -) -_> � a --> a � --> a -� a -� a a --> a a I -�/'^\ a \ - -� ) / , / / I I I \---�/ \ - \\. a l 1 I 1 I 1 I `7 (7/ I I 1 I I I 1 I I \ I 111 I I / 9 I I \ , / / / I , \ Q� l / / I l I I � I I d1Gj1--- , I r I / 11 \ a a a( /� / a \ \ �' a a a a a a a a a a a a I a a\ a - J� a // a / ' / / / / \ ;� : a I l I I I I I I m yF I I I I jI II \ I \ \ \ \\_,' / / / II lll/ \ \ \ \ ! /� Q W / \ / / / / \ \ O / 1 / I I I `� / \ ( .- z \ I ( l \ / / / l �___ \ - - . ,� 1 I I I I I H I I --- I I- , 1 I`- \ `\ O \ l/ I I/ II \. a a a ; `-) I a a\ a` a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a I a I> a a a a a /a \/ / ' // / -- \. ' \.'--�-- a� \ 1 I I I I 1 I I I 4� cm 1 I 1--�-- r \ \ / / /l llll \\ \\ \ % ^ - J ' / / / / / /--` \, I \. I I 1 1 V I 1 }\ r \ ' / / ( r--- / / / - \ \ / I I I I I I I I `I \ 'I I I �J I 1 \ T O /" // / / / \ -�' \ \`__tip ---> a _/> a --> 4 -/> a /> -/> $ a " I a a / " a -> a / Y r i / / l l / \ \ 11 I I I I I I I m r� 1 . 1 \ \ _LLj --- I I I I I I I 1 I \\ \ (n W �' �' // /// // \ a a a, a a 1 a a a a a a a a a a a $ a a a\ a / a ) a\ Ia /I ' / ' / / / 1 \\ \ a, \, N I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1% _F `\ / ---------- v v H- a_ -,A' / /' /// A, \ a - a '/ /a a'` a V3 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a '1 a / _''a v a a a I11 mo'/ a / / / // 1 \ _ ` VA j a 4� k\ O I I I I I I I I 1 11 1 y' 1 vv - / -------- --a \ -_-` _ate' ,, �/ \ I Y / I1,/ / / - - / / \ O (p I I l I l ! 41 I I 1 \ / -- \\ `� - - E3'- z J„ ; ,� / �\ a _ a ! /\a ,� a a ,� a a =� a a =� a =� a a =� a a � _�'/ a -� a =�.\ a - / ! / I / --- - �, \ r- a, \ ^ ^ I I 1 / I l ! l ` I Ij \\ `\ / -CD -_____ `�- - Y �vr � �/ , \ \ " �� \ /' / % l ! l I l - \ / \ / / O Q7 1 / I l I l l F \ \ 6- / -- -Zct --� :_- - ' ( a - � ar la a a a y a a a a a a a / aaa a a a a /a a 3 a a - a, a a / I / - \ r4 a \ / ^ / // of$-Ia / �r3 _-a,- 4_ - \ \ I / l 1 / l l l \ '\ \ \ / / p I l l l l / I :1 \ \ _-- --__�_ �ro2_ �, \ / \ l 1 J / / \ / l l / I I \• -- \ '\ r l , I 1 I l l l l I I l r'� _�+fl � \ A a a I a \ a a \� v_r� r-� a � a a a 3 a a a /a I a a a a a a a/ a a � � 4 a �\ a/ / // I / / a � - � � a / / I / I ' l / i / / / l I / l l \ I I Qp /I l -© \ a'' a a\ -� a a -� a a l - a a G" w / , I -,, }j / / I / r l l l r z \ > w a� \ a\ ar a/ a a a a\ a -) a a _�_/ a I a --- 4 ._1a � �, a a a �--\a a a a a a a a 4 a // / / // \. a a \- , // / ! ) I I I \ I I -V, z � O O w �/ \ \ \\ I / \ / �. I , \ / \_ ! / / / / / / / \ - I / / , / l / l l l l l 1 I � I I \ \ `- �' z "�/3 a - a a � \) a a a 4i a a �__�,' a\ 4 g -> a a a a a /'T --�-' a 3 a a 4 a a �/ / / , / / / \ \ \ / / / , / / / / / / ! / I q) � I 1 \ \ - / _- \\ = -- a a -- a a I ---> a a - ,� a a --� -> 4 --4 > a ---> 1 a a. k a a ---> a a ---> a/ p' \. // // \\ / / l I I 1 1 I I I I I \ � L \ \ \ i \ I \ , \ 1 ( \ . / / / / / / / -a \ - / / / / I I I I I 1 I I I \ 1 `\ \ O \ \ a a a a �/ a a a a, a a a -- a a a a a a \a a a\ I I a "� a �4 a a a a a. / // / / / / N------1012-___ w' ; / O, / / I I I I I 1 I N I j\ , , -- z / f \ - \ / / / / / a� _ - / / / I I I I I I a a - a a l a/ 4 a Ia a -) 3 a -a a � a a a a a a a a/ a a a a a a a a 41 // / / n - / / I I I I I Li V - / w 1) �--1 / I ` ---- // / / / / / /-- +�-- W '� - I p / / r I I l 1 1 \ I I I \ 0 VN I \ / `\ 1 r% -> \ / / / / � Q ----_ : / I 1 I 1 p K`I 1 \ ` / az / -- > a a --� a a =� a a ---> ) a a - a a '--> a a ---> � a - - - a a -`� a a =� a a ->j' a a _ - - a / / / / r / \ \ \ \ \ 1 j 1 I I / / ,� '-` -' : / \ , /, \, I. l I / l / 71 a -\ I / / I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ . I / ( / / - \ r' \ - ,/ l l I / / O >, \ , r 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ / -n a 4 a a 4) a � a a a a a >- a a a a a a a a a a �---� a a _> a / > \ a \ // / ! , s-a / / / I v Ld = � // I \__ / \, \ \. '. \ / I / r I l \ ____-1 01 4------ \ I / / I I 1 \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ ` \ \ 0� \\ ,r 11 /- - i a� a a a EL ,a a _\ a a a a/ a a a a I a a a a a a a r)-, a a a a a a 4 a a/ a: \' \. \ '\ `\ \. ` r I I / l I \ \ � -° - `\ ; / I \ I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ j 1 \ 'x \ ,' z i =� a ___� a -11 -,- a a ;� __ ,•> I a --> a a --.> a a ---> a a ---> a a ---> a a 1, � I " \ \ 1 I I \ 1 I \ o •2 - ; -/ I \ I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \z O\ \ I\ �c \____ ---� �� // / I I / \ \ .�k / I I \ \ I \\ Oj o - \ I I \ 1 1 1 \ 1 \ \ \\ \ 0 \ j \\ - � `r52------ a a a > a a > -> -` a, a / a I a _ a a _v 3 a I A I 1 I I A A / : / A I 1 I 1 1 V A V A g 0 I �,, �� `--- --- � / /r I / / \ I 1 \\ - , / j I I I \ \\ \\ \J , a /' i / ) I 1 \ \ 1 \ > I \ 9 u) z I `\ - ---- 8 a a a a a a a a a a r a a a 1 a a a a a a a / �\ a a a a a \a I a a I I, /_--- , I I I \ \ \ ' / I \ 1 \ 1 1 I / / / V Q I j p ,' ----------- a a \A a a -,� a a -,� a a--3''�a � -=� la a ;� a a-->� a /a 1� a a �� a a � a \' // � I \ \\ \ O \ / I I 1 1 1 I I I / / / / ) n I : � I ------ �-2 --____ / ! \ I , /, / ( \11 - / \ _/ 1 \ \\ \ \ � O \I \\ - i i i II III i i II / / / / / /J �I j// �/ / � _ / / \ , ( I I I 1 1 / 1 i (0 a a 4 a a a a a a � a I a a \� a I a a a ->/ oa a \_ a_ a a a, a a a _ 4 � \/ ' / \------------------ / / / / / / / _---1_0 \ 1 a 3 3 a a a a a a a ,3-_., a a a d \a a a a a a a a \ a \ a a a a a a a/ a� / � ` � O \ \ � I I 1 \ 1 � / -`, - \ 06 I ,/ / ,- I \ \ 1 X / I \ ,, \ \ I I I 1 I I II I 1 I (\ 1 % w / ' I % % N ` \ -- N =� a a =� a\_� a =� a a �� a ra` --> / a`' a )-� a a - -> a a =� , a \_� ---> a ) =� a a �� / \ ' 1 O \ \ ___-- I 1 \ \ \ �/ / , \ �, \ \ , / - _ . l /-------- ` O Sl \ `\ \ -`- I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ I / I ! I \ / 0 \ a a a _ a a a- a a I a a\ ' a a $ a a ,� "--> \ a /4 a a _> 4 a a / / \ / \ O \ \ \ I I 1 \ 1 I oL Z / \ I I I \ ' , / \ / \ r? \ \ `- 1 I I i I I 1 \ \ \ \ I / / \ a a 4, a a a \ a \-L-_/a a y a a a \ a a I a a A a/ a \_�, a a � a a //a / \ / \\ \\ \\ \\ \ -- \: I I I I I 1 \ \ I \ 1 I /1 / / N \ \ .__J \ Y / I I 1 I \ -, a a =� a =I a �/ --� a a ;� i s a ,� - a a ,� a a -� a , v�v a a = a a /fib a \- 0 v v v I I 1 1 / v ,� / - I ,/ \ 1 , \ ,- \ `-- \ \ \ 1 ; / I / I I / I I I / / , j I O , , 1\ a a a a a a a / a a a r o f \ a\ - a a/ a\ 3 `� a a a _ a%\ a a a a 'a / a 1\ - \ )' ) I / ) ! ! 1 I I / I / \ r , / / / - \ ' -------_-' \ \ \ \ \ / , / / / I I / ----- - Q6___ / \\ `. I LC)a a a a a a a /a a a a a a l a/ a /a I a. a' a a ar a /'\3 Iac1 a a a /a a/ a l a \ \ / / / / / / ! ! I \ I l / -y- �- / ` / / - 1k._- / . I I I :\ \ I , ✓ / , I \ �`\ \\ \\ \ \ \\ / j / / / / / / / I I I I / / l l / = r- / `\ -- =� =� a 4 =�! \a a ---> a a ---> a a/ --�\ a y =� a i a -i �,/ =� a ,.:� a \ a \ \\'--_- b (9 �O l / / / / / r / 1 I I I / / / ) // CL \ a / - / I 1 - _ - . , (11 9 `�L i9% B z r : / / / / // / / I i I I I / / / \\ �\ z a 3 a a a a! a a a a a a a a/ a a l a a a `_� t-�' 1-�, a a a 3/ a a 10 N. \\ '\ °,' �' 3F 6 �`-- / / I I ! / I o a a a a a a !a a a a a a a a �/a a/ a �`-, a a a /� ate,-3---�- a a - a a a �a a \'\\ `\\ '\\�\ \\ \ i I \\ --- `-- "` ''(� // /' /' // / I I I i 11 i i I i w �` \ \. --- 4 a ___ a a =� aI a =� a a 1, � a a i r a --�a =� a \ a =� a/ _3 -� a - \ ' \ \ \ \ /� \ - - m ' / / \ I I / I r \ �;"\ a a a a a a / al Ia a a a 11 `,;- a a _.1 'a \ \ _\. \ M E\M \ \'�\\\\ \\ \\ \ \\ // ' /' /''- _J')/'_- ///' 7 1/0 C �`�� I I I II I I 1l � i �\ I OL' , a a a a a a a a a �" a a a a a a a v a _.a-'' a a \\ \. \ \. v A\ a a\ \. /� I v v, - a -� a a =a a a ��, a /' \\ -,0 a fa --- a a -`� a /I ------- - \ \ \' \\ / / / / /_- _------ ;� -1 /'// / i ^i N I� Itp 1 j\\ \\\ J I\\ Q \�� / - ,/ / `� // \ --_-_ ---- /� / ' r I \ '- \ / // � I I I Tj dj I CV w \ I a a a a a a a / a 1 a/ a a a \ - /-------- � // / / ' ___ / / 1 ¢ �_ I I \ I \ ------ - ' / I I / '' ) % / i ,'' I 1 1 I I I I I I-' I �Q -- \ \ I a. a a 9 a \3 a\ a \ � a/ a a a ,� - 1 /� k ,_ ,_ ---- -- 3' / I I / / /' / ,/ , t I I \ I I r / I I I / j ' < 1 \ I / 11 ---_ _� l i 1 1 \ I l --- a a =1 a a --3 a \) > --� a\ �' `' � a ---> \_'' --> I e .' __ __ - g o I l r / / / / ' f / / I \ I r l 1 I I 1 I . I I z O \ I j 6 a) _ j / ! I / 1 \ \ I Li I I j a a a a a a a ai a \a I a a a a a a o f — / / ,' -gg / / / / y I I \ I \ I I O / \ I \ \ I I / , , �: _ - -\ - rn / I 1 \ ' / / , I I \ I \ \ \ 1 1 � � I /^ \. I ' , �J Q ' / 1 I I / � ' \\ I a a a \ a a \ �\ a a a a I �,/; // / / , ,' '---- -\','� �' _ - ... � \\ \\ \\ --,� ,\ , /, // I I \ I \ 1\ \ \\ I I i i w I / \ \I \ `` __ ` \\ j I / / � / , r 'r `` / ' , - \- I I \ \ ,--------- ,\ik' /' / i I \ 1, \ I I I I � - (1 I _ \ --; a -� a a ,'a \ ,� ` a a > a -> a a ---> I a/ �, / / / / --- / / / i i i \ \\ I = ` 1 I \\ \I \ / 1 , \I \� \\. I / 3 / / / / '' --- - -___ -_gg8 / II \\ \\ 1\ ,INQ �p ,' i------- 1 I I I I I N � (9 00 F- \ // \ II \ \\ - a a a a a _/a a a a a a a a / a / \ // I r - - ____-- \ -1022 I (0 00 \ \ ^./ / \ \/ -, I / I \ --\ � ----- -- ) \ \\ \\ ,'' NQ � __�" 00 t') P7 P7 d d 0O �O - � � I ( \ `` \\ \ \ a a a a a a_i' a a a \ \'\�. \ __a t- a /� I 1 I f 1 \ -- `\ '' - Q \ \ O ' I 1 N O O O -- - O \ \I \ \ \ I \ \ - _ - \\ \ > /' \y/ \ I 1 O \ -/ \ - , _ >, < \ /\ / I 1 \ QQ -- / / \ \ I / / �/ ; I 1 I I I I I \ \ � N " j \ a 3 -� a a a v a -� 'a 1\. > I 1 I I- v ( 111 \, \`\\ \yam• �J I I \ \ ------ --- -- \ I I / �Q`ti ----- --- - - I 11 I I I \ \ \O .\ \\ I i / I i \ a a a a a a a - -- \. a \ I I v v .-- - 02 ''` D< / I I I I v I v , ,� \ � i I \ / - -' "10 ` O r I / / - I I \ \ _ @ \ / 1 I I \ 1-- \ �. I 1 I - \ / 1 / - I 1 I I I I \ a a a a I a `> I \1 I - \ a I I \ / - --- _ _ O / / / / Q ; . I \ \ \O L, j \ -/ 1 I I \ / �I \ \. 1 - \ I \ I I 1 \ 1 / - 00�- _ \\ ,\ / / ; / / / '\ \ I 1 1 f I \ I \ \ \ �\ 1 I \ \ \ -- a =� a a =� a a =� \a --- B a a I 1 I --- ----10 / / / / / \ I I I \ \ o\ 1 I \ / �- ,� \i. I I C \ - \ \\ ^ I \ \ ' '- ----- p4 ` / / , / / / / / / 6 _ ; \ I I I I \ \ / `-� I ° \ \ \ I \. I I \ I I - \ � / / '' / /' / / / Q% ` \ I I 1 I \ I I \ \ \ 1 \ /�-- / \ ` \-`- a a a a a -,� a I i . I \ \\ ; \ a \ \ I \ ' / / ' / / / / , - I I I \ `\ I \ \ \ \ \ I 1----'1006-------- \v,, / / ' --- `- I 1 1 I 1 \ \ _ � \ I I -/ \ \\ a a a a a a a a a1 l �' ` ` \ a a \ \ \ \ 1 I --------- \ O� /' / / / //__ - I \ \\ N I I \ I \ \ \\ \ � (\ \ 1 / \ \ /^\ II \ \\ 1 �, \\ \� 1 \ \\ \ 1 1 \\ �Q / _ /�_/ /r / / /, --1 0�8•-- \\ \\- I II 1 \I \I \\ \\ \� Q\\ \\ / \\ \> ------------------70 \\ ,' r / I / / \ \ 11 \ m / / \ \ \ \ \ \ I (- O \ / \OQ ,/,//'- // /// // //, I ---'\ \` I I \\ I\ \ \\ \\ \c \\ \\ \> >`\ _ a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \ a / a\ \\ \� /, / \��\ -\3 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ ---' \\ \ \ `\ / ,' / \O��D� ♦ �,�`_ .--' i i/�,%//, ' \\\ `\\\\ I 111 \\ 1\\ 1\\\ \\ \ \\ ` \ \ \ I _/ \ 1,11 ' \_ \ \ I \ \ h , / \ \ \ \• \ \ \ \___ LyOr \-_ \ ,/ / ` (::� \lb� - -i --_ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ J1, I' \ ` J' 1 \ \ \ - --- I � , , / , C ' / : \ \ - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ I _ \ r- \ 'r- ) a a a a a a a a a a \ \ a \ a \. - \ \ I -- ° , / \\ \. \, '\ '-I _ \ \ \ \ \ \ --___ �- '\ \ \ _' , , // / 'NQ / 11 ,, _____ / _--___ �_-__ `\ \ - \ \ \ \ \ I -- \ \ \ �� \ ' \ - \ \ \ \ \ I \ S 1 -� \\ \ \ \ 0� / ---- \ \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \_ --J ____-__ i \ \ \ \ \ � I . s�' \ / a a a a a a a a a j \ 1 \ , \ a) a R-) \\ -2 1\ \ \ �0 \ \ , , / , / / / / / / '' '' --- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 7 \ / \ / / / ` \ \ \\. JO 1MOQ ddb� NO*� ]S tO H d ��'LO , � \ \ \ \ \ \ / / / / / / / / i \ ` \ \ � a ,� a a a a l'dNAl `lZaOdS aJ0�2� dd b S3MHl ®' a -a-- a �a \a \ \ \ \ `\ ` \\ 1 / i i / / / / / / / / \ \\ \ \ NM�\a�db8 NO3S 'O �d\ H��\ `\ \\��j \\ JD 8`-- NMOa�ld32�8 N0110� _ 1 / /--------- \ ` \ r - \ \ a\ - �-V �6,<W�S `--�8'�PAL_BZ ��S �0_ N�ld 00 a i a is a a a a Hl �o �T�H 1S�`d, -4 �o a3Nn �SHM a- ; a -)` ' �iT`,a i �\ \\� \\ \\ ---- , / / / / / \ ` I \ \ \ / I \ \ I / 1 / / / / / / / / / ------ I ` \ \ \ d 111N0 _ /1Sd3 HHl JQ 31\l,I� 1'S\HM --,`\ \ i\ ` -\ O --- HO Jll�JdOo 1Sb HZbfl a a \ -� \ t \. \ \ I I I I I / / / / ' \ I / / ' \i \ \ 1 I \ \ \ \ ` \ _ \ , I / / i \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I `\ . \ \ I N00°15'42"E 2638.9,1 \ \ \ I I i I \ \ - --- _-- _ - ` \ \ \ __�' ; `\ \ I 1 I ` `---------------_�----;--- __ 15 8/ .- \� \ \\ \I\ \ ---- -- ---_ 2 \ --- --• ---• --• - --- ---- - - ----- ' ___- -----1------- / \\ - ` \ \ - - 8� lL l \ 01\J.-��6�\SNHd'd'Ol bad NHl\"f101 ``�♦♦ \ \ \ 1 ,'------\ I / / r \ \ \ \ \ I 1 i I \ \ \ _ ___ j 7 _-_ -- - / I \ \ \ \ I r I / l \ I \ \ \ \ ` ----- ----- 4 +------_-------''�/ '�) y / - \ \ \ ` J � (j a - - - / /^--_/ 1SHMHl00S 3Hl �101 A�VH 1>S-'H dHl LO ]M1 J S�Ll ----- \ \ V_ / -\ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I I \ \ \ `�------ _--- --- g l<t 15,V'O SN3db01 d'Hd �JHl2�vn -\� \ \ \-\ _ --- _�_ ------------- / ) \ \ 11 \ \ Ct\ Q I \`__' _ - - \ \ \ 1 1 1 ` \ --- 1SHMH1Ckf�S /H� d0 bH 1SbH H i�-�E3 �Pd�_ SdM --- - \ ` ` U --- t \ \ \ \ Q3 \ I - \ I r trr -w _ _ - \ '- \ LQ O O do O ^ I I '' ' ---_� \\ �\ \ I` 1 1 \C- 1 / / / \ 1 Z ; J 1 // I - `-- '--------- \ -Q LID � �\ � \ I I __��'� -'-- \ \ I I \cg \ / / / I / i =/ Imo' r'' _ /// ,i'/ \`\ \\- -, - 1028_- `---_-_----- \\ \ \ \ \ \ 1 / //� (/' , -\ \\ - - I--/ _------------------ `- ` / \ '' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 C 1 / / / I I V I \ I 1 I \ - - \ �/ UL - - \ \------_/ - \ \ / r a a r - ,'\ \ \ "11 \ \ \ \ I / / / / \ 1 \ t\ '-/ J I / I \ I-- 22 =--- --------------------`----------\ 1\ i \\ \\ \\ \ ' ', /, \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \ f / / / \\ . \ 1 \\ \\ ( ' - % I -I'. - _ --- / \_/ \`-' \ \ \ \ ---''` / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I // / / \ --- I ` ` \\ \\ \ _'/ / I I --J 7e-_-____ _______ `\ \ / ` \ \ \ ` \\ -------------- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ I 1 / r \ -- i `\ \� \ \ \ (' / 1 I -1` O� '-------- ---_ \ 11 \/ I 1 \ \ ` 100- 5d\ \ 0\ ` DSO ` \ \ \ 1 1 1 I / \ v \ \ \\ \ ' 1 /�- 70 16-- - --__ , " `\ '/_ /' \•---- I \\ \-- '' `- \ \ \ ` \ \ \\ I \ `\ /' k \r' `\ I \\ \\ \ \\ r''`l / // / \ ___ --------- I \ I - / I / \ - , > S6\ALE)1��ET \ \ \ \1\ `-\- > / ,, \ \_{ 1 I / / / / / / 10_-\ _ ---_-_ ---------- 11 � ---I i � ' r-___/r � I / /-\ `\ --, / -- > \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\ - - / \ / ---- / / �O - _ --__= -------------------- \ ' \ 1 \- \ / \ / / 1 / / Q ( ( r _/ I I ----' \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ a \ \ \ \ - ' ' \ 1 / _ i _/ ' / - `\ /-\ ) I �' 1 ` / `_ ,,----\ -- I \`� ✓ 11 \. \ \ \ `1. \ \ `� \\\\ \ \\\�� \\-\ '\., \\ ,/ �- \\ --_ / ,' ,' ' ' ' _ ' �-- ----___'' / / / /' -- ----_ -- \ 7 z _ i^ -. \ DRAWING NAME NO. 1 BY I DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. FILE NO. Base SGF _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I ��Rs s�� EXISTING CONDITIONS 7282-010-200 DRAWN BY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE F� DSG SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY SOTA. uu N ------------------ LAWS OF THE STATE OF CHECKED BY — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. DLS SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE N `^' $ � USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING LZ41 IL_ DATE FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. c�L \�`' -- ------------------- FRS PLP 05/01/15 Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. STONEGATE 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 M E D I NA, MINNESOTA PRDC it 3 O O N O_ O N co N I` w I- (D w z O I - co \ /------1 ; \ I / l I 1 I / I / / / I / / / / __/ �--- / \ I I I \ _--\ \ -\ \\ \ � ,/ I Q : g/__--\ " Y � 11 1 / I I l j / l / l / j I I / Ir_- __--__ 1' \\ 1 `\i'' i'---- �-_-',I 1 \ __� _\ ----- r \`\ \ I\ 1 \ \\ \ r------__/' I j l\♦ I /W \ / j l l l 11 // /� / / / / / 1 I I I ,� I I __� \ \---------__',,1 I, ,/r `\\ /,11 'I ; I I \\ --1 \ \ \ I I / ♦\ Z_ \ / / l l I 1 / / l / I 1 I I / I \\ �`\ `\ \ 1 \ \ \\ \ \\ 1` I / \ 1 J \\ // L l l ! l 111 / / / l l / I II / 1 I I I / 1 1 I `\ \\ // \ \� �� I ♦ -- ' 1 `-'--�J ; 11 \\ I I \ / / / / / / I I I � / \ I I \ \ / - - - - I`—� \ / U U / / / / I / / . --_-_ ----- \ \ \ , I ) I, i \ / / / I I I 1 I I / • - ` / I .' o f rMI m I / \ \\ I / \ \/ F- I 1`'. \-- / //// // 1 I I NMO¢�V82�� N011\S - A H / I \ U J H- W b V l �vld -`7 V V I b N V I I u I \\ I .� I I , \ I / / - Q ILQ 1 / / / / / / / / I 10 / I I / /I `-- / ,------ _--, �__, o I \ W 1 w \`_ �� \ 1 / / I0� 8l V dMl, lZ /O'd2 HO �dJtd� 0 1 -/ N 3SV0 SNd�1�101 2�8d _ _ ------ 1 / / / , `. \ \ � I �\ / / / / l l 1 I 1 I I I / \ _ \ I dJdJ 2�d _ / \ Z ' Z ----- / / �1 1�__ / / / / / / / I I I I I IlS3�Hl�0�/'NH/ d0 d)JI�116dN---\, d ------ /�"\\\;� --- / ,�\_�/ I ,� ,� _ -/ \ J 1 J / 8S �L l 0 / ! / / - _ �00 / / / / / I t 1 \ I .1. 1 I I I I� __ N 1SHMH1dON ]Hi d0 dNl� 1SbH -- r _�' 0 I /` / / / /' -- -- - i i �' / / / 1 b I I \ \ I 1 I I / / -\ / \ �_ I /'---- ' \ m \ F- iP.-- , ---= — ; ---/ Ob 214'1 \ 631 1`� \ I I j j I I /_ I ( 4 \!� a >> ' I / _> \ ,� �� _� l N Q I Q ,------- \` 1 1 - N00'' 25 E 2677.33 ' -- i \ / ` ' �. / / - ----, v I �'� v �- / ` r/ / / \. \ ,� ;I ,I = \ _ ,�� (4 / I I I I \ \ \ I, \ \ \ I I I I I ' \ - \\ \ \. \ \ \ \ / / L' \ \ O / I I I 1 I I I I I I \ \ \ �a 3 a \a� 3 a \,\\\.\\ \\ I a ;a �I \_ ��„- ---3\ -> \ \ / I �SYL� .ON\\HV� S�J32�d10+Hai I I \ \ 4 /i ' / /' \�'' \ � _ \ /10 / ,� I I I IddNI \S H1f10 Hl �� NNI� 11SV -4-' II I I \ NMO(DV8dl8 NOL31S O H 2Jdd �Z d021 `8l l'dMl \� ' �,� _> �-_-� _� \ \ \� \ _ ' / \ \\ �/ I / / ! I I I I \ I I I `\ 8ZOdS d0 2181dVNO 1SdM ld�N HHl J dNl� 1 b8 r' 4 a - 4- \ \ I -�Q -� \ _a \.'\ I /` -) .�� , ////r/ _ \.\\ .\\ ,� 3 ,I Q \• \. / / � l l / l 1 1 I ��I I I \ I I \` . - \ �' 3 \\ \ \ __ \, \ l A I l C r4 / / ! I 1 I I I I I i r 1 \ I I I I ---' I \ \. \\ - \ \. \\ '\\' �- 4 3 -> - - � _* / -> \. I \\ ' ' ' �� _ \3 \ \. / / �C`� / / I I I 1 1 1 I I \ \ \• \-�� -- \ =4 3j 3 �_� - - �//3/ ice/ /// /,_ - o \\\ \ ,� ,� l� �. \�. \ i x� I I I I 1 i I \\\ Ib I a I \ \ \ \ \ ,\ \ J _- / \. \ \ \. ' \ _ \ .\ -\ \ _ ,, ' , \. \. / / I l ,� l i i I II 1 I 11 \ I I � I 1 \ \- � '\�' \ \ \\ .\\\. \\ \ \\\ � �� _ � � \ \ r \\ \ku�\\X\,_x \�\,� 3��I 4 \ I '///,' - 0) \ .------__,Z� / / // / m ryvi ll1 I 1 i 1II �. I \I1 './ o / , -\\ v 1�'// / r/ cV ! / 1 I I II I i 3- '\ ' i 4 [- ,� I I I I , -) -> \ � \ ---S� / / I / / / m (� l I I I I I I I I I / - I . \a\ '\ a l �ff I l I I'�\`\ \`w \\` \\\\\\ -> 1 _ ! \ / l I l 'y- O (�,ITj l 1 I I I I I4 o I \. \\ \ 4 I I \ \ / I l l / / ,7 G� I I I I I I I I I \ /-- _ I _ _ -' \. \ ` \. ,\ / '/ / /I ' l I \\---�/ \\\ --\ \\\ � \ / i i l I i i a cnl i I I I I 1 I I I I 1 \. \ \ __-- \ \' \. \ \-� . 1 I I I I \ \. \ \ � ->. I // / v / l l \ \ \ 1 \, O� I I I/ I I I I 11) I I I I i I I ,, W ) �.\\ -`� to E / // / \\_ \� \ :I I O I i i I I I I I t- "� I I I I I� I 1 \I , 1 I \' - j, i ,'/ / i I /-- \ b--�� \\\ i i i i I I i i i i Q i i 4' II I\ \\\ r 1\I I ----------\ '\ j 1 j�_,\\ 7, -) I 4. // // I / / /'/ -\\ `\\\ \\\' I I '_ Y \\ I I I I I I I I I I \I II' II I'I �1 I \\\ ` - ^/ d1 \ - -----\ � I/ `) \`\ ' / / / / 1 \ \ \ I �r�, -1\' N I I I I I I I I I I LL \ I 1 I `\ - / I --I _ \ \ /.-� I/ i ,-� ` \� \ `\ �' / I/ \ \-- \ .\ I _> 4 \\ O � I I 1 I I I I I I `r \ I I.' I 't I \\ --_ / � ^`------ \�--'' /1 I I � `` / - I / / ,- / 1 I / I I I „I I 1: II \ / I -I I / / l / \ \ \' _ \\-\ : —/ / \ \ O (O / I I I l / / / /1 't III I I \ \\ \\ / /'' v 1 \\ -° I I / l l / \ \ \ 1. / \\. / / O 00 I I l l / / � / m I II \ \ � � ll � 71 F + I I I --I I � . / \ \/ I I I I l I I' l l / \ `\-\ ; \ .\. / O l l l I l l 1 � I I � \\ `-------- I I� \ // i a) I / e -) / / / / I I 1 W w 3. \. / / / I o A - / . (9 \----- I - I� /l l I � � _> \ \\ 1 -) / / / / / l / l I I l l I 1 �Z 4 \ I 1 � ,�`\ \ / / -- F o / ,/ j / / \ i, _> \'\ - % j % l / l l l I I I 1 - I I I \\ l I\\ �'�� '/ \ \`------- -0 - \ \`\ / / \ / / / / I I I I \ l M r 'I LLr / \ \. I I \ (\� __---1012____ w „`.,.1 /e o // / ! I I I I I 1 I I I I I \ \ \. \ \ I r.; i / / j ^n U - `'\_/ / / � � I I I I I I I I II 1 1 \\ I \\\ \\ r �\ \\\ \ a\ a \.\\ \ \\CIO 1 ..1� / / /------I - _JaJ-' 1 ° / / I I 1 I I I U 0 1 \ - I \ \ �\ \ \ ) \\ / / / / d I / i I i I 11 0� 11 \.' \ \ ° >, \ ; / / / I I \ I, \ \ \ \ \\ \ 1 . 1 \ / \`_- \ ( \ \ \ 1 \ / I \ I / \ 'fl)- _____-1014- --___ `\ 1 / / / I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ a_ a \ \\ I O� \ ,/ \\ \ \ \ \ r x / I o \ l\ \ -D�-- --- \ , // I \\ I 11 I \ \\ \ \\ \\ \ ,\ \\� U1 I\1 I Iv \\ ,/' \\. \\ 3 \\ \ \. �'�� Q�`- __ JI I 0 ^ I I \ � 1 ° - ; \-/ I \ 1 I \1 \I 1 \1 \ \ \\ \ \Z O \ \ \.\ - _ _---_� o \\ \ 6 \ \_� _ \ I Lo i I\ \\ O� � o \-\ 1 I 1 I I 1 \ 1 \ \ \\ \ I w 0 I I \\ _ -�- \ \ \ \\ o \'�_-'' �\ . I / I / \ I I I \ \ I \ \ \ q 4�T�:.I0 1 \ \ \ \ \J �\ a / 1 / 1 I I 1 \ 1 1 ) I \ 9 U) Z I \ -\ rn ,-- \ \\ \ `\ 0) I ZO I �JG�---___ \ \ j \ l ,' 1 I 1 1 1 \ 1 1 I / / / J I I ,, _-___ \\_ \ \ \\ W 1 \\\ O \\ / I I I I \ I I I / / / / J N I ,' I ,' / \ '\\ \ \ \ ,� \• \• \ O /r^`\\ I-- I \\ �p \------------ --- I i i I li I I I I / / / i /- �I I / /' / _-- 1-0- - \ \ \\' \\ \ \. \ I " i I I I I I I% / / /� rn / . / / / -- \ \ \ / \ 11 O \ \ I I I I 1 I I I \ I I t / m / , " \\ \ - ,j }j / \ O I O 6' \ 1 I I I I 1 1 / n / J / / \ \ / J O \ \\ \ : I I I \ I I I \ \\ \ \ / WI'(' / I // I _- / / \\ \. \ ) \ Jr I / N j / I \ \ _j a \ \ I , � � . p \ \\ \\ - I I I 1 I 1 \ \ I\ \ 11 I �o / / \ /\ I 6J \ \ \\.\ '4 � \ \ / I // p \ \ \ 1 I I I I I 1 \ \ \ I / \ \ x \ \, I C14 i , \ \ \ \ 1 I I I I I I I \ \ \ I / 1/ \ \ 1 / \ \ \ \ \\ I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I \ \ I \ I I /, / / I r� \ \ I \. ' \ \ I / I ,, I� \\ � j / \ \ \ \ `\ 1 I I I I \ I I I 1 I It, / v , \ \ \ �a� \ I I / I I I r I, l , ) \ I / \ / I \\ \\ \\ \\ \-----'' 1; I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I, L---7 I 0 / r `\ 1\\. �\ I / \/ I \ W \ \ \ 1; I I / I I / I I I / I , / /I / / \ \ �, \ I I \ 1 \\ \ \ \ /; / I / / / / I I I 1 I / / , / / 1 Y �,/ // \ \. \ I 1 \ I \ /'A \\ \ \ `\ / I / / / / / / / I I I I / / / -7--- X- � �- ,/ \ 1 �\ I \\ I, \ /r i \ \', \ ), / I / / / / / / I I 1 / / / / - IV %%Be / 1 / / , / / / / I I I I I / / ! / w f, _,, \ \ [�_ \\ \. ' \ 1�1 \ 4� \ , `\ CP 6' �- 1 / / / / / / / I I I I I / / I / I O � \ \ \ \ \ \ --� c. \• I r\ -. I � \ \\ 9 ' / /' / /' ' / / i I I I 1 I / / / /i --z \ \ �\ 1' \ \. '\\. \ \ \ \ /�'� ,- -. r I \\\ \\\ \\`\ - --_ 1 43,/I i 0� ^C Q/ /r /r/ / I I I I I I I 1 11 i LLJ = cN �i' \\ \\ ( \ 4� : -1 \� \\\ \\ \I, \ ~ L.La \\ 1 I \ \\ `\\ / rn x /n'j / j 1 I I 1 I I I / 1 L �1 \ I' \ T'\ , �' \\ \ /A \ \ rL _ \ \. -\ r hSc� , V � �O I I I I I I 1 r I I L w �}�c I t� / \ �I' \ \ \ . F \\ `\ `\ `\ �� , Y '' / 41j "/` I I 1 I I I r 1 � I\ I ! O k \, �I \\• �, \,� �/ ,� \ \ \ �" - \\ I \ ! --- - ) I / / 1 ,� / ; /' r 7- ( I I I I 1 %( \ w T \p \ I / / \\. \ \ \ �� \ I / I / A � � v / '/ /'/ '� _------- J/ ' e''-_- /'/ I /' /' l I I TIn I I 11 i 1 \ I z O I /-� \/I \ / I L \ \ p _- Ur_ U j / /' /' / / ,�--- I- \ / 1,/ // I I 1 rY� �Xj 1 \\ J w \\ V--I \ t \\. \� 3� :�1� �\� \ // \ O n w I / / / / \ \ 1 ' r I I 7- yl C\ 1 w / / / \ , I�J-j1 0 Q \�/ // I 1. I I I\ I I I °- I 11 Q \ \. \\. +0 1 \_ _ n i / I / 1 I I I \J \ i'' / \.� / / I � \ \ \ ,, V \ _ ,<G I I I / / / / ,f_/ /Y I I \ I I I / I I I I l c� I 1 z O I \\ \ \ I / I / / / / / I I \ I I \ I I I I 1 / W / I I, 1 \ \ ° ) \ \ \\ \ /'/ /'// �- \ \ ., i v _0 N I / I I / / / / 1 11 I \ \\ I I I W / \ \ a) / \ \. ' /, /' ,' \ - > �.\ Q I- _ I I II I\ \\ 0�2 /' /' '/ 1 I I \ I \ 1 \ \ I I I I cn / \ \ I / W a) / / , I I 1 \ I \ l 3 a) ' \I � a \\ L. I / I \ \ -1 / / I \ \ \ I I I I w o5 I / I Y \ 1'1 °, ' ' \ ------' / --- N' / / I I 1 I \ I 1 �- II /I \ 1 I _ \ xe �/ ,, 1 \-,�� 1 \ \ / '\ / , 1 I I I I 1 \ 1 I I \ \ O ,- I I 1 \\ \ I 0 / 1 \ I = I 11 I \ / ___-�8� wl r I w= I I \ \ \, \ \ -� ��° / 1 ____------1022 I I I , 1 (D 00 N't (O 00' 1 / `\ _ 1 \ \, a) .. I 1 / O `L / \ \\ \\ ' -Q� � '__r 1 1 00 IN I� r� n d CD � I I r I \ / \ II \\ \ \\' _0 1 ---- I l � z - I 0 / r / `� _ 1 C\i O O 0O ( 1 \ \ / 1 \\ \ w \ w / / \ I 1 / / �� 1 I I I I I I I I \ \ [ \ \ I \ I I \ \\ \ '- �-JI a) , w = I ODc r/ I I I / /\O-----i--- --- I 11 I I I I I 11 \\ \\ w\� \\ 1 \` /// / 1 I \\ \ \`\_ ^ ° >, O w w i `\O /' I ,I / / \Q� -.\ I 11 I I I I I 1 \ \O W \\ \/ I I \ \ -\ U) \♦ _z O i I I I I \ - -c ,// ,/ // ,' ' / // // \\ I I I 1 I I 1 \\ \\ O\ 1 I \\ \\ \\ \\ `\ W °/ ` , r / // // ,' / , , Q26- I ___ I I I I I \ 1 i'\ I \ ) \ \ � c i = w I ,,' r ,/ /' / / / / / - I -\\- \\\ I I I I 1 I \ \\ \\ J\w � I 1 \ \\ / \\ \\ \\` - 4-- / \\\ / \\ o I ~ ~ w I 1 Op '.11// / / / / /// `\ \� I I I I I \ \ \ � \ I ' \ `\ I / \/ \ � a I O 3 I ---1 p 8 \ \ I \ \ \� � I �/ 0 c� �/ / / / / , \ (\I I I 1 \ \ / \ \ / \ \ I / / / �j 0 / _ / / / ' 1 \ \ I I 1 \ \ v? O \ \ _-' \ \\ I / S\___ ( ( " I n ��// / ,� ,//�S. j / ,' /;\�QO,\l ___ i___i_�- - _ _ �� '��_ __-_ \\\ \`\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\ `\\ \\\ j I'll \`____- I' _ \ ---- \� \ I /r � �, I I I I I I 11 I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , I ( \ f . . I / / / \ I \-" ` \ \ \ \III,\ - I \ I /// /, /, // / /r //' i //' ,/' I `, \\ \\\ `\ I `\\ `\ \\ \\ \\ 1 \ I I \\ \\\\ O-------- ,I\\ \\ I I ------ (S I \ // / / / / / / - \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ ----- \ \ , z I / / / / / / / / / / , , \\ \ \ \ \ I \ \ \\ \ \ \ I \ \ \ 7 I 05 - \ / / / / / / / / / // \ \ 0� - I / \ \\ / , . / / / / / _� 1 \\ `\ `\ \ NM�0>IV�d'8 N0�3S O� �11d �Z ]N `\ \\ I \ \\ 7p ��- NMOCDIVdd'8 NOU33 O � / \ \ - \ I r I / / / / / / \\ \ \ - J'V ,6,� -8 ��Ac�_8Z O3S d0 2131d 10 1SdMH1f10S dHJ I / \ 1 �� / I - \ \ \ dHJ Id0 I �b H /1SV3 2Hl dl� 1 3M -- ,` ` \\ \ \\ O \\------- I / `\ r I / / / / / / / / / '�-------__ ; \ \ \ \ 1 / Q \ \ \ d0 2J31Z1V00 1SV HZ�O _3C1 3�IIH 1SdM - I / \ \ I / / /, ,/ - , \ \ \ \ I I \ \ \ \ I \ \ \ ------ l I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ------ I Y - \ ` \ 1 z' --- ----- \\ I -- `- \ - \ L I / I / /' _ I `\ \ \ \\ \\ 1 \\ `\ `\ \ `\ \\ \ \ J -- -- -- \ d I 1, `\____ - I I, - 05r \ I I I l/ I / l I 1 - ------ _ --- I \ \ - -- -- \ — —__ __— I _— -----� Ik \\ \\ I I I 1 I \ `\ \ `\ ` — --------- --- ___E.. ,,_ -- �d00"15'42"V 26.38 �9,1 `\ `\\ ``I\ `` —---_--- —_,'------- '`\ `\ \\ p�5 00°�3'-1-:7"A 1334.90 ; / ✓` — \`\ I! -y �. __-- - \ \\ I 1 I I I \\ \\ \\\\ ------ -1--- - I I / / / \�- \\ ` \ \ -- - \ \ ___- -- ---- - \ ` _-___ _-______ o 8 I- � I' 8 k�O SN32�2�OJ dad Jdl2�d 0 \\ \\ \\ \\\ �\ '--` . 03� ---''_ _ --- ---\\------- \\ \\ \\ JO 8S lL 1 ON 3S�-D-S,N321b01 2Jdd 21H /O 1SHM 110S \1 \\ \\\ \ 54 \ \\ 1\ I I I I 11 I / / \' -/ (/ �I w -� --- 1SHMH1Ikf�S � Hk NO � VH 1SVd �Iil-df} �P17-J_S�M --,>� \\ .�\ \\ -- j U\3 --- -_ ` __- \ \ -/ \ \ - \ \\ \\ \ I I 11 I\ I / / % \\ \I Z I z I _ '-- 'I, \\\ \ ��- i),5 ------ ---- ------ ^\\\\\ \\\ \`1p - ---__ HO ?JHl2�b l� 1�°d� '8Hl d0 HNI S,�GVr-----'\\\ \\ \" ®� --ice-2 4 ____ O 8 HHl '\ \ \\ \ \ \ 1 \ I / / / 1 / � 1 =/ I r'-' �,-'' _ - ,� \ \ \—_:102g-___ ----_--`\ \\ \\ \7 A�6\-T\-_ - / \`\__.(� -\\ , \\ _�____40 L. \ \ \ \ \ I / / I I /0 I V 1 I ( r' -` ` �- I UL ------------\ --- \ \ \ \ O - ------ \ - --- � vy� 3�--_ __._ 11 \ - - \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ 1 I / ,/, �/ \ I- `\1 \ \ (\ , 1 I I 1- `\\ '�7 --_ ---------------- \\ `\ `�-------------- _____-- \ \\\ - �e 8 _ _ _ -i-- \ \ \ \ I I I / / / / \ \- "I \ \ \ �/ I I 1 \ 7 --___ ____ ^\ \ 7�G �6�`\` _ - \I \ i -- \\ -i-p \ \\ \\ I, \ \\ \\ I I I ,/I/ / \\ --\ 1 \\ \. \\ \\ \\ <-- // I � �`J76/� �\ --- ____------- __, 1 \ - --r- _ - \ I, \ I, \ \ I I I 1 I I I \ \i \ * \ \ \ \ / ,,� / ' -- --/, 16,\ - -------- -_-_ '--_\ \`\\\ . \\ \ ------------------- - \\\^�\ - - ,i // / \ \\ \ \\ \ \\ \ 1 1 I 1 \ i \ 1 \ \ \ \ , _____' , / \ \-\ -____--\\\\\ \%762 `\\\\`\-__----_ =\\------- --' / \\\\I �,. � �� _/ - I- - \ _ I __ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ 1\\\ I\\ \ / ( \` \ 1 ) \ \ \ r- , , / 1 . - \ _ \\- _ `\JJ 2� ` \� ---------- `\\ \\\ / \I I \ � _ >" + I -- \ ,'- ` I / --- � ,_ 1/ / / / ,' /' �' ' / / / '� __7 ___�------------- ___ - `7, \\ \ \` , \ \` \____ --- �_, 1 \\ s' W j \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ - \`\ \ \ \ - �, \ \ \ ,l / , /,- - 1 �� .1, ., "/I/' ,/i,,' -----' �, / /' , I-,' _-_= --` -\ ,� \\` \\` \\` \ ----�'/��---- -\ \`\ \\_ - --^' �,f- I 1 1, � -- �- w I I I f \ \ \ \\ \ ,,'\ \ \ , ,� \ \_ _ , I / , , , , _' __ /---_____- / / ' ______ --_- --_ _ ` \ OJ \\ `\ \ \ \ , \ \ __ ---' ez 1 I^ \ `------''� \ _ \ 1 ----- \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \, \\ --_— --_— --- /: /'// ////'// �'/ \1 _—_',/ / , /' 1 /'' �' — — `\ -\ \ \ \ ') \\ \ \\ \� /\` \\ \\ _ ,/ ,' 1 _`\ ( ~ W �• to (tit i \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ `._/ /I// / / / / / \ ` / / / / / ✓ - \\ \, \ \ - I \ \ n/ t -- - _ , I \ \ w z \m I \ \ \ \ \ \\\ \ \`\°" -- - Y / ' '/ ' I / II _ \\ O ` \ \ Y / 1 I \\ Ode 11 100 50 1Of}- 200 _ \ \ \ I, \ \ \ \\------_ / ,} / / / / ---/ // / , / / /-- ,\ \ \ \ ` O CP \ ` 11 \ \ ---- _ / I I \ \\ \ I- z\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \� \ \ \\�' ---- __-__- ____ -\ // /;,'' / / / I / /' ' /' // I / 1 / \\\ \\\ `\ \ \ J G6, \ \ \\ `\ `\ _ �' I I /-� \ I \ =� O I °) pal \\ \ \\ I, \ \\ \\ \` \-` --- - - // 1 / / / ! I ( . / , / , / \ \ \ � , \ \ \ \\ \ ' , / I 1 n \ \ \ \ - _ - ---- I / / / r'___ , / ,--i- \ \ \ O A \ _ - SCALE IN FEET , I I w o cV \ \ \ \ \\ - - _ I / / / I 1\ -__ / / / / ,, / \ \ \ \ O \ \ \ - -- - - / / I I w\ {. o�oo I -- / / / / \ \ \ -� , / I O \ \ \ \ \\ \ _- \\ ---- -- l , / \ 1 \ , / / / / I! \ \ \ 1P \ ` \ - _ -� _ , / / // /1 / I I Z. \ \ - __ \ ` -- \- _-, \ \ \- �- /' i , / / / \ r -\_/ / / l / / \ \\ \ �� \ \ `\ \ - - -- - _-- -\\ // _\\ _-� / � // // I) 1 I I J w U I Q�00, I , I \I \ I I — _ — _\\� I \\ 1 �111 / I j//'I / I / ,1 I i ,,, \� \ I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I-\ I I I 1 1 / \` \\ I I I I I-\ ---------- I I I _\"" I __ - I: /_ •41- , , , I v v I I �� \---- \. \ ! / / k\," \ �� I 7 _> j � I _> 4 � vI ati / ! I / I _> 4 4I -> I-> -> -> -> \\ I No/ 1 I \ , 1-- ----\ I w I \ \ \ \ I\ I 1 \ \ _: / ; V -I b � 4 4 -) � I I 1- 1 A \ \`�\ \ Z. `i- / -- 9 I I I I I I I / \ \/ 9\--/ / / , '-'G--____e- - � 1 I I \ / ___ / I / \\ I, I �tT o /, Q I ----- - - 1k \ , ' I _ , I I �'_ 1 I I I / '\ + '/ I // I [� I o / �\ \\ /' / 'I I o 1 / \- 3 /�\ // / // -\ \ \ \ \ \ j j " I Iv i / - i V 1/ - --- \ \ \ ii 1 w \ °' b ,' I ° \\ I . �J \r \ \ w -------------- \ ki I i \ �` - _ _ _; \ - \� G I, 11 \\� \\ 1 I -\ I o \ // I / l_ / / d I `ice_ _ o__-- i // V, o a) --I-- I \ I I I 3 1 ---a \ � 0 I I I N ,� I \\ I w o o -`\ ,M� 6- `,0 O 1 / 1 ° i __ ------ b \ V I I\ I o \`4 - 1 p52 \\\ \\ \\ 11 I\ \ \ I i W � 1 � I \ 1 \: \ � I ___"'^\ W i ��/ I \I /II � I \\ � � I / � I I/ W� A � I / 1 I I // , col \ \ \ I In W I 0 / I I j I/ wl ` \ I � I / / I I / -3 z l5) I , I / 1 I I I v�1 I� \ i d I i i I W\Q i I 1 I O I 1 1' 1 I I 11 �zOc�i �\ 1 I I I I I \%// X. CIA\ I� 1 1 ,i'��V I �l / I I / I \ 1 I , \ / I I / \: ,4 - \ 1 1 1 \\ / / I I i ^\ \ .. _ -) \ I I \ \\ / 4 l i i i I I \ / I/ A \ _/ �� I I I I \. I 1 \ 1 / \\ / I 1 1 I \ \ , l \ l I I I . I I \\ I I I / \\ \ I I I + I ,-� - U i / / \ \ \ I Ld I 1 / \ \ \ 1 I \\ I I:j aQ 1 / / \\ \\ \\ I U) -0 \ 1 I � / '/ ' 1 j I \� j 1-� -v , I, I I I/ // // ,/ \I _ -0.° \ / 11 I a W\ - I I // // // // Y I 1 / r /' / �\ I 1 / / / ,, OICn I II 1 `\ 11948 // / // I /,/ / / ,' ,' I , , / , ,, , 11 ` 1, I w / / I I _ - , / -- \, '\ \\\ � r / I I I , � , / ,, ,,' 'I ,' ,, I \ O // 1 1 I I ,' // , ,I ,� y I / a / / / i I M\ W 1f /' I / I \ w/ /'/ /'/ ", ." \ W �U = I / 1 / / / _- j�J_j N � / / w I I I / / i' i � i/ I I' 1 W ,d ,' ' / / / / / / I I I °' Q 1 p` I 4 / / / // / / / z I r-12 r I/ O / / ,ice / / / / / / / I E� I M / 4 !\ / / ,I 1 I I / / / - n I `^ ,J_'� ,/' // I / 89LL l ('N dSVO ,S'N]2j�16 �ldd 211i�dVOO\ 19HMHI AON / I I IV. / -n �,' I ,/ /^ 1 i / 1,4 d0 21d�2JVf1O/1SV3H1f10S dHJ- ,J6 JNI� 1SIM --11 1 \I I .� ,/ / I ;/ / / / / / ,/ ,/ , 1 1 I ,w I / / / / I Y I I / / /----" / I I 1 a I / r--_ / 1 I / / / r / /_ / / / Ii I I / / / / �Ie_l � I r1 4�Yl 8 /A\ " I I / / , // � ) �I I I mj11 m / / / 669�97 r /' / / / ---/ ' // '/ S00°1 3'1 -1_-I 11-�z I a ,,SILl ZN 3S, O SNd j2�61 0,� ,diJ ddP0 is]MHIZON-/-_ / ! l / /I /' (,I 1 I .-----� 1 _j J _14 dCy/dA_LdJVAC) /1SdMHinVs 3Ml d0 dNl�/1Sd8 / / / / / / 11 -- PT-- - - -1_ _' / / / / /' /' /' ' / / / 1 Z - - 8j ` / I ___-__ _ 1 ,;; // // S�_ / / / / // / / / I / --1 --- ---- ,, ' / / / / / r / / . / I / , --- -� - ,// /' I l I l I / '/ /' / ,. / /' /' / .1 I 1 a� - \ 11 -- / ' Iqqv \ \ 1 I \ \ \ I I i /r // / / __ I = w r- \\\ w\\ I ` ,'/ ,// \\ I 11 1\ \\ \\ \ I In /'/ / ,' /// / I I �'\W \ z 0') � O � '^, ''/ // / I / I I = 1 I \� \\I 1 I I % / \\ I zw� wc_ \ �� / I / I I I 11 I I I/ \ w=O �w \-- / I I w I= I I I 1 1 HOW \ 0 � O-----1fl3 11 /'/ // /w ,' z/ � O / I ) I / / I Q�w \\ oOOz 7 J ,' /' ,' /' / // Ua' / O / I / I� i / Li LA zw , , z r / / w/ / / / , - - \w n �' �' /' ,' /' / / 5r dye / / / I / , �� ~� ='LSD—�-- ,' ,' , �/ / Vl/� oo Ir// /////, I W �� = O i ry , ,, , -A ,/ , 11 JLTJ O r�// / / / //, -_L. _ o w , --1 q• _ _ , W / / / / / / / \ \`\ - ` \ \ --/ 1 / / , / , \ 1 \ \ I, -- \ \ \ / __ - / / I I \ w \• -��L__ J LLjO _ 1 --------_ ,' ,' , z / / / / /, / /, / / / / / \ \ \ , \ \ __ q� 1 \ QQw \ p� , , , �J / /, / \ Y \ _ _ 9/ \ \ 7 �I I / / / / / / I \ \\ \ \ \ - /----- / / / I l I / , --- _ I I I i I -I-- i - / / / / r 1 `\ �`\ �\ \ \\ -\-_-__-,,' I // , - , / \ ! 1 \ \ - - \ \ , I I /\ \`•. \ \ w O w ---_ - --- ' ' / '/ '/ J ' - i \ \ I \ _ , , w // / - \\ `\ `\ \\ `\ v / /. _' ,' � i' _--\ \ l I 1 \ ,\ \ \ - - -\ \ - `\ \ I , ,/ I I \ \ \I \ \ \ , _- - r .�' �,' -,' CC / I// I/ / / 1 / �,' DRAWING NAME NO. 1 BY I DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. Base SGF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I ��Rs s/J"� --- - — — — — — — — — — AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE �`� F. DRAWN BY _ — — — — — — — SAID AUTHORIZATION , INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNE �, SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. DSG — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY SOTA. w CHECKED BY DLS DATE 05/01 /15 INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 m `^' 0 N ctiFR S P \-1 �� 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 IVI E D I NAI MINNESOTA FILE NO. EXISTING CONDITIONS 7282-010-200 STONEGATE 2 PRDC 3 O O N , O 0 N co N I,- W f- (D w z 0 I- U) ' `\ / \ i \�, \\ \\ \ \.. \\' \ \ \ ` `Ir\ ". y\ \ °�-°—(N89'09'19" 655.43)—a,,/ I 1 I 1 I Ln t' - -' - �.._.. .._ _.._ / .._.._ �.._. / \- _ \ \ \ \ \ NA \ i \ +I,, I-E-I--��- lu"u-�— aw a,, a i W w °w w. ax 1 / / / \-.._.._.._.. _.. W,._ �.._ .._ .�... _.._.. \.__.. ._. .. r a \ \ .. _.._ _ / -- -'� \ \\\ \,, \ \ � I ��1 1 _. _. �.. / - - - - - -�, - - _ \ \ - �_. _ _ \� __ �� N$9`0 9 ..� .�.1 4 - - - - - - - _ - \', �' nw aw aw aw a. a 1 II \-----/ I Z.. .. .. -� '' .. \ _ - _ - nu.._.._.. � u� ~�_.._ _.. - - . - - ." - -. ...._ - '- - / ` �/ \ °. / a / I/ \ _-J 1 \\\ \\ \'`: ;. E \ \ \ \ 1 I V nnr - 1-e� - _ aw _.._ - _ -.. 2.. - =— °W_.._.._ aw ..,._ / ��/, I I :� \ / / I I s-\-----\"-' °MST am---- axe °O - �-.�— _ �u nw .- _. -.. _. _.._.. �... _.. _.. _.. auk— ja t� _.._..-.._.._.. J / 1 \ I I d 1- FND �P S. 1.8\J(E. 0.14 of comer —ate - - - =6_ - \ 1 _.._.._ _.._.._.._.._..�.._.._.._.._.._ _..-..\. \_ _ `/ \ I 1 / I I'I 1 V / / / -ter- >7- -=1 \ / \ r8. }:. \. \. K I_. 7 _ ._.,_. _. r.._.._ _./-.._.._I._I._� I I _ J / / \ / / / ' / \ ND I l — -' �� -- I / \ \ I I I I NORTA EASy'CORNER 06 THE SdUll TI I I 1 \ \ \ / -- _ _. _.._.._ ._/._.._.._.._. _,. / .�..�/_.,�✓ .._�_.. __ / • • /� \ \ \_--- / \ \ l � - I. / I I 1 \ / / / ._ __ c.._.._.._.. _.._.._ \ / /" s. 0.28/ E� oia of comer \ 1 I I \ I H. H N10,01, I 1 \ i / / l / . . , __.._.._.._.._.\_.._.._.._.._..___..___ _ \------, / \ \/ N 1 - �U4�TER/ OF THE NXTHWEST �U I I 1 \ \ \ / / / ' WETLAND 1 --- / I / "1 \ / _\_I-` F I I / .\ \ I>? _ N , Nc. �78 0 rR I I , \ 5 / / 1 `----FORTH uNE oF_T so W = ---- WETL\AND 13 /I I I \\_i 1 / I I� C� �} I I I i �E �k�RRENS_C��E N0. 1715� N� i I I I \\ �%`% // I ✓ O I I \ ETlkND B / / , Wetland s a e file � QUAD ER OF RT W I / \ 11, \\ 1 ^ I I _ / '�- I l°L17 � 00 I / / I I / / / ,_ / 1 I I I \ \ � � p 7ti / W` / \ \ I I I I \ / I I I / ' / 111 \ Wetland shape file / / provided by\ A.E.C. �\ Q,IJ•ARTIkR / ' / E.23 I ,w x \ '/ \�' � \ I I \ \ \ ,, . I " d c0 / / / I I I I I / / / I I I \ \ / `---/ I / \ / I \ ----'/ <- \' I III II r I I I I 1 / / ; / / / I I I \\ `\ - --' ,'-_, ,.- I I � II / / I I I / , / / I 1 pl'c�vlded b C. \\ / ' � �\11 / ge of wetland / Edge of wetland `-.\ //'.//' - - � 1 \ - 1 / I I d / / / I I EQS11 LINE/ OIF /r�HE SOUTHWEST ,/ / / I\ I I 1 <\ 1056 ' \ /' / /' j \-' / I j \\� I \`\ ' \--/ I I / I I I UA TER IOII H / NORTHWEST QU,aRTER,'- -- / +--I ` \ �__ l \ 1 \ // I i I I i I 1, , I I I I / / 1- . I I� \ V� T LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUAf�-E� OF T iZ-, / / /'/ I / / I I I `� --------1- I 1� 1' / / I I I P R I TORFEI�S I C ISE NO. 1 715$ / / / I I I - ---\ -' - / i ./ / / / / I �. , I ./ /\ I �� \ I \\ \ 1 1 _ _\ U _ / \ - /\ }, ' / I \ I \ < \ � N T A 1� TORR NS CAS N 171 - - / ATC LIN�i 0 �S- �� R-I� R E E 0 58 / MAT HLINE B / I .B / I 1 - / I \ / / I /\ / N \ I f I'' •' � Ji � �' I 1 I I / 1 v \ I rz.rr / /_/ 1 p I F F + 1 t / // / I \ -�I \\ 1 1 / \ \r / �� al 1 \ --/ �-- -- ------ \`_ \ INV=1 I I:iai:: I'I /, / / / I / 1 I I I I I / , I \ / / I ` 1 .1 I I l::..... � ::�K' / / I I I I I / / r I 1`4At\CHNE B �` 1ps2 \\ / �i '�`� i � � MApCHLINE B I I I / \ / \_1 ` 1 � /y r / I / I 1 I l 1 1 \ .. \ _ l I i // � \ \ I I I i:::... / / / / ) I / 1 I / \� / 1 1 \ \ �_ J •__-- ^\ \� \ / / \ - \ I -\ � / / /\ I ' :.: d r / / / / / / ^n / \ \ - ` --_ \ Ed e of wetla,,(d - / ` \ I / -----/ / I \ I / / I J I ill 1 ;( ..': �l / / / / 1 CD / / I \ \ �\ 0 `\ _ g Y' � \ / 1 I � 1 r' 1 r \ I / / // (\ I i I f I �, �I / // // / / I � 1 I '\I l l 11 \ \ - O%` \\ - � / / i I I // \_ _ I l \ I % % / r I I / / / I I I I l l \ °`� �'7 \ �� // \1/ , -\"' ,WI . / / I / 1 — I ` ` / / / / \-I I NI ! I ... / / / / / r l I l 1 CN 1 / I \ \ % \ cn O `. \\ '�--------------- 54` / -i' 1 ' l / — 4_ \ \ \ / / .1 \\ 1111 I 1 ::::J::: C J / ( I i i I / l 1/ I I P'h I \ \\ \\ \ F \____ S!� .� \\ 10 / . 'I' , / 1 / I I `___ ------ I � 1 / � \ \ / \ 1 I I 1/'::,:: / I I / 1 I I I 1 l \ \ \ \w - w I` \ `-- ----- / ,_, Edge of Iwetlan / / \� 1 \ I \ / // /- \\ 1 i I::::'r}'. / 711- I I I 1 I I I 1 1 �\ `\ \ \ g\ \-'----- -\\ ��,T7 v ,1 / I\ Q // j �` 1 \\ I `-----/ / /I i /'----- \ /'�-_ 1 Ill I Y.:.{::: I I \ 1 I I I I I I � \ \ `\ \\ L� Z\\ O 1 \ WETLAND 13 --- w / // � I I 1 \ \ / I i I ...... I I \ \ \ \ W I / I I I \\ I I I I '- l II 1 I I I I I I \ ` P \ \ 1 I / / / / / I \ / / \ \ - �� 1 1 ! ILLI I I \\ 1 I I I I I \ \ \ \w \ O \ 1 I I . /' l / � � I I I \ \ / / I\ \\ -'_\ l I I I C� 1\ I \ \ \ a K `\ w \ I I �!/ I / I I / � /'/ / _ 1 1 I 1 i : :/ 1= Il I I \ I I I I Cj \ \ \ w Q\ \ w In \ 1 I N / 1 \ / >c I I I \ � / / \ - ('� \ 1 1 N I I I 1 I I \ \ \ \ \IWQ 1 \ v, / 1 I 1 (\I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I \ \ \ \ \ � C \ 1\ I p ,' I I , / ` I \ / / �}- / \ \ / I 1 i I I I I I I I 1 1 \ \ ` Q V \\ \ I -\ r C I I , / 1 I I _1 / �— 1 / \ \ / I d / I I I I I \ \ \ `\ � Z <�R \ `\ _ '� \ I \_ I I I I I �� \ / _\ \ I I I I I 1 \ \ w \ � z\ /' \ I � � I- � \ \ \ ' I \ I / 1 l.rf.:'. I I II I 1 I \ I \J \\ \\ \\O W , w ♦\ \\ \\ -i I \ I l I I ('`'L`` -t I I LINE OFI H.CIIH. 0.1\201, 0 \_� ` \ ` w \ <-- ---- \\ II \�\ I I —� I \ \\ \ \ I ( \\ I- r \ \ - / w I w I\ I \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I j Ir::..:: TI BIER C.R,\ NO�145 78 0 \`\`VPAR ��__y \`\\W �— I - Q �\ `\\ \\\-------- - \\ \l � `\_----/'''/ / I� �L -/ \\ - --\\\ I \` \I \\\ \` \\\ \ I I I / I-/-/ I u��" /0 1 \ \ \ \ \ LL _ 7�`\ w \ \ -_ \ � I \ \\ //' \\ I `\l I / \\ \ ,-\ I I / i I l� \ 1 \ \ \ r9 = W \ \ \ / /' I \ \ \ I I I / 1 11 r `., Q I I' 1 \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ w� (� I- w X I / -- I I \ / / 1 1 I \ �I / \ I \\ / / 1 I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ `\ _-' \ �\ w m / / I I \ �/ / I \ / l \ \ l_ \ / / I 1 \\��✓ 1 \ \ _ / 1 I I r' / 1 // 1 1 I ..ik..I I Imo,. I \ \ 1\ \ \\ \ \\ \ \\ \\ \\ \- -_\\ �W `\ \ Y 1�1----__ 1 / I I \ 1 / \' / \\___ -'- \\ __ `\ �`, \\ I \ \, \ \ \ \ \ `w` \-yam / 1 I 1 i '' I \ /- \ \ \\ \\ j 11 \\ // / I I I \ \\ \\,, \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \`\� w `\ \\ �I W - I 1 ( '� / \\ --'_l r \\ \\\ \ \ \ j // 1 j 1 \ \ \ \\ V \\ \ °1\\ \\ \\ `\ \\ \\ \\\\ ~_ <\ \Ind � < \\ `_.__---\\ ,, 1\ \ /- ____ -- /// \� ------ \\ \\ \\ II PARCEL '� _ _ _ I / / / I \\ \ \ ` \\ \ \ \ `\ \ `\ \\\ `\� __ `�\ WO O \\ \ \ , � a \ I 1 / I 11 0� I _ I I / _-------- / \ / / / A. \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 1 J I /'- \ / I \ \ \. \ \ \ \ \ / \ I \ \ \ \ __ \ w w � _ � \ I I I C c' \ 1 I I\ \ - - \ \ W <\ Z � \ S GI1IFFC NT TREE PER AERIAL 1 l -- \ / I , / / I I 1 0 \ \ \ \ ��\N� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Z "i \ \ I I \ I I \ 1 \_ \ \ / I I \ �� \�\ \ \ , \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ ---' < ., '-\ \- \ �_ \ I I \ I \ 1 -------�� \ I I I \\ \ \ f < MAGERY _ _ \ I _ \ \ \ \ S I I 1 I I _s 1 _ \\ I I I \ \ \� \--'--`\E�\ TER1\LY` N\OF\DILdMA R6 D \ \ n 11\ n \ \ \ \ 1 \ /__� 1 / -- I \ \ cP_ \ \ \ W z \ - _ dY \ \ I I 1 _ 1, , I / I I \ \ S o3 \ \ \ \ \ � \ \ < P\ �\ \\ \\Q O \\ td0`\ \\ --- \ \ \ \ �_\ / Ob _, \ I F --, _ �- - I - - I , \ 11 I \ __ 11 ,\ �� ,--\ k � 171 I I \ ,- -/ - � ", '� g"'. oy / \ \k , ____ �� & I I \ y \ J? \ \ \ \ \ \ -------- I , ,Z� I - " � ___ , \ __ \ z �) I \ \ ` \ \ \ \ \ < \ \ \ Z \ \ \ \ \ / -, 11, I , \ \ I \ \ , , I I - �, - ----\ ,'4__ \ __ \ \ \ \ �\\\\\\ \ _' , ! , \\ . \ \\ - *\ \ I \ 1,_--- \ \\\ \,--" - \ ; I'-- / I 11 --,,, '_ / I I \ \ , /, \ \ " - 1'\ , __ - \ - -----\ / I / \ - I I / \ I - \ \ \ \ -, \ \ \ \ 11,1\ N5 \ \ \ I / /I \ \ \ " \ \ I \ , < --- I tj _ ` / \/ \ \ � \ �i<L\ \\ , 'EL G\(I \ NORTH LINE-01------.\ \ ; \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ I \__ 1 / \ \ / -\ \ x \ \ _ \ \ _ _-_ \ / --- I / / `\ \ , \:::..:. ' \\ \\ \\ T `\SOQTH E\\ST\(�U - --, \ \ �?\ \ ---'-� `\ -_ `\ \\ \\ \ \` \<\ `\ -----_ _ \\ ( I I Il / 1\ \ \\-/ \�\ \\ I / \ \ \ w.z''"' 4� T; s \ kZH�(VL\�T QU)ART1•,�_ \ \ ` _ \\ ___\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \_/- __- 70 / /^ I I // //' , / I // \ \ \\ \ \ I / ' `\ `\ `'' __ )� \ \ \ \ \ '/ -\ \ \\ \�` --__` \ \ \ \ \ \ 16`_ \\ 1 ES AND / ' / / \ / /� - \ \ \ - \ \\ - \ \ \ \ \`�`__- _ _�/ / \ EDlbE Of♦ PLOW FIELD—y _ / ' \\ \ \ \ \ \ --_\ / : �.>,� \ \ \ \ \ - J _ \ \ \ - _ 1 \ OAKS , / / \ , `___J 1 \ \ \ \ \ _ \ \ \ \__ / \ / / / \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ �18�°02 04�/V�547.55 \ P TORRENS___� \ \ \ \ \ ` _ _------___-- / \ 1 \ I — � I / 11 / �e \ `- \ \ \ \ \ \\ ` \ \ \ \ \ \ CAS 17158 - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - ------ % -� /\ \ 1 \ _T_ —/ / / \ 1 I /// \ I ` I �� \\.. \ N, \ \ ` \ \ \\ \ \ \ C�$9-09�9"_54_$ 4�� \ �� _ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \-/ 6 / / \ \ \ \ \ _ /'/ /'/ 1I I __ '/ I I / / V� � CO O � \`\ \ � , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ _\ I \ \ \ \ \__ L°1_ \ \\ \ \ \ \ _----_- _-_-_-_____ \ --- -------\ / / / / \ \ - ' --;1 1 / , // ro IN"- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 104 \ \ _- -4 / \, ___11 I \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ ,\ _� \ \ \ \ \ - \_ j \ / \ \ / / \ / / / \ \ \ \ - - `----- I Imo/ / -- -/ 11 --- \ \ \ \ r - r__/ 1 / /' \/� <\ o �; \ < \ < \ \ \ \ \ cn �\ --- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Q3 ��CCC\ \'ll I _ - ,�� \ \ I / / \ \ \ - / // / / \ \ J \ \ , `\\ \ \ \ I \ __^_ \\ \\ \\� 1 \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ` CQ_ \ _ - - '' 6 -' / _ \ \ \ \\ }. N -' / / \ \ \ _--"" \ 3 _ /. \ N / /-\ //// \ 1 \ \ \ \_ \ � A \ \ \ ___ - - - - / \ \ \ - �__ ____ _------- / / /' \------_- --/ '�— . 1 1 ` --- 1 \ \ \ -_ \ \ `\ \ ` ` < \ 5K \S. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _------_ \\ rr�77 / /-\ \ \ \ \ _ O \ __ / .1 / / / �\ \ - , ' /' \ \ r--_l /\ \ 11 `\\`\\ \ \ \\� _ \\ `_ ` \ \ \ `\ `ll \\\ ; \\\ \ `\SS(\ S�j� \\ \\ \ \\\ \\\\\\ \\ \`_-__-_-_ \\__� - __\` ---- 0` Fj' '-// \\ \\ .\ \\ W ---_ \ - // ,' / / // \` \`-- ----/ -/ / // 1 1 \ / r \ \\ \\ \\ \\ ��J,ZS�_ `\ _ 1 I \ 1 1 \ >' , F \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _\ - ___ 1 71 - ' \ \ `\ Q _ __ / / / - .1 / �' II II \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ X \ \ \ -- - \\ \ Y-- / / / / , \ . / / \ \ / I I __ / \�-, `\ \\ \ I I \ \ I �\ \ \� ., J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ __-'- -/ ----_ '- \ \ \`_ \\ W \`\ r-' '/ .' / // /-�`\ /''/�.• \\ 1 \ I I \ - <1 ,\ \\ k � "'� \\ 1 \' `` __ \\ \\ \\ `\ \__ \ - ____ _--- ____ \ \\ -_ `--___--- W \` / '/ '/ / // " \ /'/'/ '-_\ \ \\ a - /( \ I I \ 1 I \ \ \ - - \ \ 1 1 Y 975.'9 1 I \.\ \ < \ \ _ _ - --' __-' - \ _ _ `� `-/ - �� / / _ --___� / ' I --_ I f/.<\ i 11 \ ` ` Lb\T \REAR ANGEMEv�1T\ \ \\ \ ` i \ \ \\ \ \ _ _ - _------------ _'\ \ 1\ -o__ _ i' /' / / / ,/ / / \ \ 1 \ 1 �s ` ROs 65645fi --- \ __ \ 1 1 \ \ \ EFL ®0 \ \ \ \ </_' _ \ / _ i 1 1 � i� ', Al/ll 'h1 \ " \ `c 1 Yr \ ` \ - - - -':4 \ _ n \ \ - -' i / / �F i ` -- \ 1 \ • /,F./ \ I \ \ �\ T\ �\ \ \ \ \ \ -�\\J _ - __ _ -' - '\ \__ --- �_\ --=-- -�- \ -\ - / / / _/ I -\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ;ter \ \ � O \ \ -10 . / / _ \ \ _-- ♦ - / / / \-------- ____A \ -- \ �_ V - _ ---- / \ \ \\ \\ �' 2g \ \` \` \�_ I rr1 N. rr]]��/' \\ \\ \�� 0. \ , \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ q q _ - / / / - _ `------ - - -PI) `\ `\ �� `___--__ -'- ___ - ' // ' / -- --__ {II I I ' \ \ `\ \, Ol7�� \\ \\ _ _ N � r\V `\ \ \C- \�\\�- -�-__ \`\ \` \__\__- __ 101g' '� ' // / ,' _�__.__ _-________ _ N `\�_ ---- ------ ---/' -/ -- \__ \\__ -' 1 7 - - /'_ ' \`--_ _/'/ \ 1 I 11 11 \ �� \, IQ ��yh f3s_______ �� P\\ _\ �_- __ - _- \\``\`\ \�� p1 __'-'- // % // // ____________ _ �� - \` \\ ----- ,__'_ _'-' - --_--- 1 I A\ lJ , _, ,; \, _- \� 4� _ __ _ I r C ----�- \11 \ \ \ _ _ F _ _ _ 7 _ - - _ _ I / \� // / I \\ `\` \ y / / \ \\\ \\ `\\ _-\ - -_\ _\ \\ \\ ♦11 \ \\\ \\ \\ ---- /-' /' /// /s // �- 11 --------------------- ` _-_ -- `\ O w\�-------'' -'--- -'' _ \ 11 / i II-jxI11 I / / / , \ � < ,-9;L \ \�--� TfET \ \ \ \ \ , /' / / - ----®_®__ _ -- -`fib --------_ __-'----- ---- /' / /r , - - _-------- - _ , _, / \\ -' / --/ \ \ V�' • Q \\ /, 4 , ,yam r \ \ \\ ®\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ -- ---' _-�' /-' // -' -- -- _ ®�- _-F---------- -- / `\ \ / / -> \\ / \ \ P .� �� \ / 1.--- of \ \ \ \ ` \ \ \ ' ' - ' _/ _------ ---- / / / \ 0. \ q�e of wetl2xld \ \ \ - - _ . - _ cn� I/ < \\ \ / / I/\ e \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - -- / -- - -' \ / r/ \ \ / / / / /-___ \\ < 6,, / _ �, \ \ \\ \\SOUTi� L E`QF\THE N�RT111QEST��_--'' _ e ____-----___ / / _ _ _ \ \ \ / \ __ / / - - - - 1 / / .'---ttdG\ / 1 t�� -- \\ �, `\ \< \ 0! ARTS\ OF E�.28, T11�'�.1 $,\RGE23 _- -'� /'-- /.1 - - -�\ I\ \ `_ `\ j j // // \ \\ / �. � 1 /' /- _ems, -----_ / / ' / i _ �� < \ \ PER H.C! CION BREAKDOWN \\__-- \\ / / / / i `__9,7�.5�' s. Lzo/w�zss \ \ \ SV \ - blyT >—IigE-.0� THE NORTHWEST -- - -- '� '.' /' 1 \ \\ \\ / / / \ �\ -- - / / PER TOR CA IMIRTHI 1: NF hF THE FAST HN OF THE - it . j\ - / _ \ \ \ II 1 I _ _ I / // / �\ __,_ \' CIGHIT 1 EAU-PRfE�PER TORRENS CAS�ILO 141-5-8- - / \ \ \ \ I / I \ _ / - % r /-- 46_m1_-_ I\ �tYU HWESi C"J F iEw F SE�f IIJ 28. - - - - __ �__ \ \ \ 1 1 I I \ - .L _ / / - � I I __ _ / i. DEC 1 �, . - Tom( .. %P 18:R•,":CF 23, 4ENNE IN 000NIY ---_ _ --' Edge of wetland - \ \ \ 1 I I / / � (_ I \_ -� 1 / // / - / / 0 _ \ \_. _ I \ \ `\ - -- -' -- __ / / / / 1 '� /%`,//Lf \�_\ \`\\ \\\ `__ `\\ \\ 1\ 1 I 1 I I / l / .' / 1 I / O _ J ��----ter- -ty- <�-� `- ` �_\ _�-\ =_ r C/r _ - _ &'�//��'_ ---� - �— \�_ ` �. \ \ \i 1 I I /' 1 I - I / / W N M I�` \ a.l \ r'r�- -_L- --CV v{ 1 / / / \ onu - - -/-- L ER T _ \ \ \ I _ °}.."_�"'r -��aw _ c�/VIR� - S -- --cb 'a---`b----�,��.--�lr II \ \ I I \ I I I / / 1 / / / (5, \ i an, w - \ \ -- ---\ / -I / / '_ (S �-` ♦f K' - --' \i., \L' "/ '\L/ w \L:_-Q' L' W__�IP' - � "' \ \ \\ `\ \ \ 1 \ I I 1 / / \\ IC ON\�LI1yE ��SEME�T-'E-R-QQ . � -� \ —« M �;w / \ \ \ \ 1 \ I I /� \ I I /_ / . - / / / - \ \ / . - / \ - - _ -11 _-, \ \ \\ \ . 1 . I 1 \I \ If \\\ _/ 1 /,/. �/ / / / // _ - �� `\ \ \ \ ® , l" , \ \\ ___- -- ; / q/ 'L' w L" w L" � '\L' \V '\L' � \L' \V ',i; v� L/ , * —1, 1 \i/ I \ \ \ � \ 1 \ I I I / \ \ \ I\ 1 I 1 1 __- _ 1 \ /� \ / /////'/ ----- /// /// // / / /'-� �� D -3L•Ad��YYYY� v v `v v � vv -/ " w \V w � � � '''� --- tom --NORTH LNNE THE SOU�fHWES"'T ` � / � � 1 z A v \V 1 1 / \ \ \ \-------' / 0 \ \ 1 I II I \ \ / \ / /, / -- _/ / / / / I \ ` \ \ � � / -- Edge of wetlsl / o� o \ \ \ 1 1 I I I I -/ / / //i/' / / / / / / \ < \ \ \ 9 _ l'\'' _- .i' �UAUER QF SE-Q28, ZWP.T48, RGE.23'\i,--.j, '\i�' � cl '\i, / `\ \ \ I 1 I I I i I \ / / /// / . _____ _ / / / / ' - \ \ \ \ \ / NC`TPi® `iNE 00' THE' SOU'f`HWEST . w \ \ \ I I I I \ ----✓/ / ///' /'' '''-__-------- i' /' // / ----- -- _Ed9e N \e4tlansi ,/ \ / I =H= \ < <\\ \\ II I I 1 \ I\ \ \ / _ PER H.C. SECTION �REAK�OWN c - Z / \ \ I I I / ,/ _ ___ _ ' / ' / ' N ` ` \ < ja / 4UA1: PAR TC3RREN� CASE N0. 18135 v l v I I I / / / . _ _ . / / / I \ \ \ \ < V, /' ./ w w " " " " I haw \ I I 1 / // /�%�/ �/ /. _ . / / 1 - _ \ \ \ ",6 ' 1' / w I/ " \i'' " L' I J ' L" " L' w L' " L" I 1 ' ! / a , \ \ 1 I I ___ _ \ / W <N /- \ \ 1 1 \ \ \ \ / ,/ /�/� " -----' _ ' / ' / - O \ \\\ \ \\ , \ \ \ / "` "1 \V � .� \L/ \11 .� � "/ "1 w " �- "/ w t % Q a \' O� - / /� /-_ `\ \ I 1 II 1 1\ \\ \\ \ \ // r / - / / - \ \ / < I I 1 \ 1 /// ��i,/ // / --' /___\\\______----- - / / / //./ / // / I ----- \\ ` \ ` \ ` \ ' L ✓ y ' L' v' " L' �' !' L" !' " L' V✓''^�11 ' ' L\ '�' L' ` �I'�/ I- \ \ \ I 1 I I \ 1 \ \ __ \ 1 / - . - ? \\ o.\ \\ \ \\ \\ / -' - / / // / ' __-- - ---' --' - c- I •---_-_ \ \ \ \ \ \j, ", "�'` `-- / - -/ ,- _ wN �\\\ - \ / \ I I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ / / 11 --- -' . "// //• -- �/, }/ ,/ \ \ ® \\ \ \ \\ \ / m- �!' y' �' `Y' " L' _ \ \V' _ "y y' �' �' �R \ i \ _l \ I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / ------ - ' / /� _-_ - _ .� / -_--\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ d -�� o� \ I \_ - 1 I \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ \ / I / / � ' / --' ' - ,L/ /' -'-- \ . /- 00 \ \\ \ \\ \ \\ \ __� \\ 1 I I 1 \ // - -- - .' O \ \ \ \ 1 I \ t\ 1FARdC LLJ -'�/ --i' - \\\ -� \\ /• // / . ' / - �rl I \I \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \`\\ � \ < < \ \ \\ w ``!/ W � ,`/ `I' ,�/ y \j'" \ '`L" �� % �/� IV � "' � � � � .�. � � � 1\i"O � �' /----\ -/I / // / / / / \ /^ \ \ \ \\ IV / /' / / / /., / / - - - _---- / - _ \ _ \ \ \ \ \ w /--� \__l I I I \ \ // // //,, /' /'.'-'--'- - -'- --' - -\ I\ // / ' i /' z wI I \\_ \` �,_\\ \\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ 1 " L' y" v% " y' y' !' = Lh� I / __ / / / \ \ _ / / / / T_ w Q \ \ \ \ \ \ \ w v v " w w w / / _ \ W WEE �N�D 1"7 � NORTH / / / ' / / / / .' ' -' - - '__< / \ 1 - / / / / I n o M Z E I L- --_ - \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \!r' v !,' L' Ir' w \!' Y' " I✓' w 1✓" w `Li- :I? r- Q \ -. / / I \ \ .- \ \ / / / v I� - \ \ I / _ 'r I \ \ \ \ \ EdBe o`f\ v��tland ` cJ < / / / 11 / / / / 11 \ / / z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I /' // / // // // / /' / /''' / _, - le \\ \ / I / W m \\ \ \ \\ l ' � � L' w I ' " L' / - I ' w �' \ a_ 1 I / / / / / ------ / / /, / / , / , / , , / / . �. . - \ \ �. I \ / / / / -- w ?� \\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ v " " " v / I " " ` I \ w 1 11 / I / I / / - _ / / ,// / / / / / / / / / //,/ , / /-__----' ` \ \ I \ / 1 - \ \ \ \ \ \\ 1 I 1 I � / / / / / / _ I- - \ / \ \ \ \ \ / \ / I / 1 / ---- - / / / / / / / / / / 10, / / \ \ \ / l 1 I � = I 'I I In Q \ / \ \ \ \ / I / 1 / w I 100 50 0 50 100 20 1 / - --- --_-__ _ - __��-�/ //////,/ ,' // // // / / /' // // / - `\ \ \\ i \ // / 1 1 / �nZ U Q \\ ____/ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ " ! " L' L' \1✓" " L �- 1 / t \\_l L\�/ \l' 1 �___ I ! l 1 1 / - - - -- , . .,/ / / / / / / / / / / I - \ \ -_ __ \- / / I I / -z \^ W w --- _-- \ \ \ \ \ \ ` \ \ , % - L-- .%Y1. / / _ _ ----- / / / / - / I / _ \ \ \ \ _ // _ O 1 _ -' / / / \ _ - -----_ _-_ v / 1 / \ i \ \ \ \\ \_ L y " y " \ y \/ " y \I✓ w I _ --- I I l l I __ ------ //,' // // i l / \ `\_ _ / I 1 N I . � \ \\ \ \\ \\ \ < \ \ _ _ \ w - SCALE IN//FEET I _-_-- \ / - ''-'i/ -- / / / / l / / _ _ \ _ - I / / __ z / -�. \ \ \ \ \ �\ \ _ / \ �= I / _-------_ _- ,, / / - ___ _ \ 4 -- (n _- - \ \ \ \ \\ \ �_ �' \� ,i \I�- '\✓ '\V' "r '�' "�i' 'J/' '�' Jr ,\/, \li '- l l I ----------=--- __'-' /' / / / / / 1 / _ - `v �- _ (\ z:'a I i a �_- \ V A < A V A vv vv vv v vv w `v - r y w w / w ` � ` w � /.� / / I I / ,' - _ _\ _ \ DRAWING NAME NO. 1 BY I DATE REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AIND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS CITY PROJECT NO. FILE NO. Base SGF _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I ��Rs s�� EXISTING CONDITIONS AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE 1� F4 7282-010-200 DRAWNDSG BY — — — — — — — - SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT � �, SAT H R E-BERGQUIST, INC. SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Tu 4�%kt STON ELATE CHECKED BY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. o $ 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 M E D I NA, 3 SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE Lcc1 DLS USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING N `�� M I N N ESOTA PRDC DATE FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. Daniel L Schmidt, P.E. c✓L 1� -- ------------------- FRS 9\-P 3 05/01/15 Date: 05/01/2015 Lic. No. 26147 O O N O O N OD N r` ui Q CD W Z O U) LKennedy Graven CHARTERED Ronald H. Batty 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9262 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax rbatty@kennedy-graven.com http://www.kennedy-uaven.co MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Bob Mitchell From: Ron Batty, city attorney Date: July 29, 2015 Re: Potential Conflict of Interest You have asked my opinion regarding whether you have a conflict of interest regarding the land use applications under consideration by the city of Medina (the "City") regarding the property owned by Property Resources Development Company ("PRDC"). Based on the facts as I know them, I do not believe you have a disqualifying conflict of interest which would compel your recusal from consideration of this application. However, there are sufficient facts which would suggest that you might abstain from participation in the matter in order to avoid even the appearance of a conflict. PRDC has applied for and the city council will soon be acting on a request to rezone certain property Conservation Design -Planned Unit Development ("CD-PUD") and the approval of a preliminary plat. Rezonings require the affirmative vote of a majority of the full city council. Approval of a preliminary plat requires the vote of a majority of those present. PRDC's proposal involves the development of approximately 170 acres. Access to the property will be gained by constructing a public street intersecting Homestead Trail in the southwest and connecting to existing Deerhill Road in the northeast. Deerhill Road is unpaved and below City standards. No improvements are planned to Deerhill Road. I understand that you own rental property on Deerhill Road some 1,330 feet east of the PRDC site. Under Minnesota law, conflicts of interest are generally analyzed in one of two frameworks. The first involves contractual situations, such as when the city enters into a contract with an elected official. Such arrangements are generally prohibited and the resulting contracts void. The second, and the one that is the focus of this memorandum, is non -contractual situations. 1 464912vl AMB ME230-1PZ The Minnesota Supreme Court has used several criteria in determining whether a disqualifying conflict of interest exists. Those factors include the following: • The nature of the decision; • The nature of the financial interest; • The number of interested officials; • The need for the interested official to make the decision; and • Other means available, such as the opportunity for review. Applying the factors used by the Minnesota Supreme Court to this case, there does not appear to be an absolute duty to abstain. • The nature of the decision; o The proposed action deals only indirectly with multiple parcels owned by a number of people. Therefore, this decision will not affect one person any more than the group as a whole. • The nature of the financial interest; o There is no direct financial impact of the decision currently before the City and any indirect impact is speculative. • The number of interested officials; o There appears to be only one official who may have a conflict and abstention by that member will not prevent the council from acting on the question. • The need for the interested official to make the decision; o The council is able to decide on the matter at hand without the participation of one member. • Other means available, such as the opportunity for review. o As with any conflict question, the action by the council will be eligible for subsequent judicial review. Generally, in non -contractual situations, conflicts of interest are reviewed on a case -by -case basis. As suggested by the above, a key component of the analysis is whether there is a financial aspect in the member's involvement and, even if that is the case, whether the member's participation is necessary to make a decision. Especially in small cities, it is not uncommon for properties involved in land use applications to be located near or even adjacent to land owned by a council member. It is often more difficult to determine whether approval or denial of such an application will have any significant financial effect on the council member. It is ultimately up to the individual member to decide if a conflict of interest is strong enough to disqualify participation. As a safeguard, this decision is reviewable by the courts. In the case at hand, your property lies on the eastern portion of Deerhill Road near its intersection with Willow Drive. The land is not adjacent to the PRDC parcel. Deerhill Road is in poor condition and currently serves only the 13 parcels fronting on it, nine of which are currently developed. If PRDC's project is approved, some of the newly platted lots are likely to use Deerhill for access. This additional traffic may speed deterioration of the road and the need for its repair or reconstruction. The City would likely look to the residents of Deerhill for some of the cost of such work. On the other hand, those PRDC properties which use Deerhill would likely be viewed as benefiting from such an improvement and be required to participate in its 2 464912v1 AMB ME230-1PZ cost, thus spreading the financial burden over a larger number of lots. The net effect of these two considerations is unknown. Based on the facts presented, I do not believe that you have a conflict of interest which would require that you recuse yourself from consideration of PRDC's requests. However, it is certainly within a member's right to abstain from the official action for concern about the appearance of impropriety. In fact, recusal on the possibility of a disqualifying conflict of interest would likely remove any question dealing with the legitimacy of an official council action. In the non -contract setting, disqualifying conflicts of interest are generally not treated as an automatic voiding of the governing body's action. Instead, courts have looked at what impact the member's vote had on the outcome. Specifically, if that member's vote can be ignored without changing the outcome of the vote, (i.e., a unanimous vote), courts have been reluctant to void the action of the body. As a practical matter, there is also some question as to what an abstention means in terms of calculating votes on a particular matter before the body. A council member who has a disqualifying interest in a matter is generally excluded not only when calculating the number of council members necessary for a quorum, but also when calculating the number necessary to approve an action. In other words, the "full council" decreases by the number of disqualified members. PRDC's request for a CD-PUD involves a rezoning and will require a simple majority of the full council while its preliminary plat will require a majority of those present at the meeting. There is no similar adjustment in the size of the council in the case of a voluntary recusal; the council is considered to have five members even if one has voluntarily decided not to participate. Assuming the other four members are present and voting, your recusal, regardless of the reason, is unlikely to affect the number of votes needed for approval. Whenever a member recuses himself or herself from voting on a matter before the city council, I also recommend that he or she take no part in the discussion either. I recommend that he or she announce the intention to abstain and the reason for that action (in order to determine whether it is a mandatory or voluntary action), physically leave the council table and sit in the audience, only resuming participation in the meeting after the item has been concluded. 3 464912v1 AMB ME230-1PZ Agenda Item # 713 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: July 30, 2015 MEETING: August 5, 2015 SUBJECT: Town Line Road North Improvement Project— PUBLIC HEARINGS The Town Line Road North Improvement Project, consisting of an overlay, shouldering and striping, will take place with the cooperation of our neighboring City of Independence. This project was originally in the City of Medina 2016 CIP plan, but was moved up one year to accommodate a larger paving project being done by the City of Independence. The City accepted the Feasibility Report on July 21, 2015. Proper notice was given for two hearings to be held on August 5, 2015; an improvement hearing and an assessment hearing. The hearings were scheduled in order to give the public an opportunity to comment on the project. Recommended Motions: 1. To accept the resolution approving plans according to the feasibility report and ordering the Town Line Road North Improvement Project. 2. To accept the resolution adopting the assessment role for the Town Line Road North Improvement Project. Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item # 7B 1 Member _ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO.2015-xx RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ACCORDING TO FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING TOWN LINE ROAD NORTH IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to previous actions by the city council, city staff has prepared plans and specifications for the overlay, shouldering and striping work for the Town Line Road North Improvement Project and has presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval. WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given and the hearing was held on August 5, 2015, at which hearing all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby adopted. 2. The above -described improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 3. The improvement is hereby ordered as proposed. Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator - 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. 2015-xx August 5, 2015 T Y 1 4 i. A MEDINA Feasibility Report Town Line Road North City of Medina July 2015 Prepared by: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director City of Medina — Town Line Road North Table of Contents Tableof Contents...................................................................................... 2 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................ 3 2.0 Summary and Recommendations................................................................4 3.0 Street Improvements...............................................................................5 5 4.0 Figure 1 — Typical Section — Overlay 5.0 Cost Summary.................................................................................6 Table 1 — Proposed Improvements Cost Summary ..............................7 6.0 Funding Options...............................................................................8 7.0 Project Schedule...............................................................................9 Appendix A — Cost Estimate............................................................... A-1 Appendix B — Project Location and Potential Assessment Area ....................... B-1 Town Line Road North Project Page 2 City of Medina — Town Line Road North 1.0 Introduction City staff has requested this report to determine the feasibility of improvements to Town Line Road North, from County Road 11 to State Highway 55. The location and assessment map for the proposed improvement are shown in Appendix B. The project area consists of both residential and agriculture areas. History Town Line Road is a border street between the City of Independence and the City of Medina, the center line of which lies on the westerly corporate limits of Medina and the easterly corporate limits of Independence, commencing at its intersection with Hennepin County Road No. 11 and extending northerly to its intersection with Minnesota Trunk Highway No. 55. The City of Independence maintains the southerly one-half mile and the City of Medina maintains the northerly one-half mile. Originally the street, which consisted of a 24 foot gravel surface, was divided into two segments to allow each City the flexibility to be able to make improvements at different times. In 1989 Town Line Road North was constructed with grading, base and surfacing as a 7 ton rural road by the City of Medina. The road has a 24 foot wide paved surface with a 3 foot gravel shoulder on either side. In 1994 and 2012 the City of Medina had Town Line Road North seal coated and since that time has had only limited patching and basic maintenance done to preserve the integrity of the road and allow safe travel. A cost analysis is discussed and presented in the Cost Summary section. A detailed cost estimate of the proposed improvements is presented in Appendix A. Town Line Road North Project Page 3 City of Medina — Town Line Road North 2.0 Summary and Recommendations The overlaying of Town Line Road North is feasible from an engineering standpoint. The project is cost effective and necessary to prolong the useful life of the road. The following recommendations are presented for consideration by the Medina City Council: 1) That this report is adopted as the guide for the overlaying of the westerly portion of Town Line Road North located in the City of Independence and the easterly portion located in the City of Medina. 2) That the cost of improvements be allocated to Medina residents in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy throughout the proposed roadway improvement area. 3) That a public hearing be held on August 5, 2015 for the proposed improvements. Town Line Road North Project Page 4 City of Medina — Town Line Road North 3.0 Street Improvements The Town Line Road North, as it stands today, consists of geo-tech fabric, 8 inches of a Class 5 aggregate base, 100% crushed, and 4 inches of asphalt surfacing. The Town Line Road North Project will consist of overlaying 1328 ton of Type SP 9.5 Wear Course Mixture over an area that is approximately 5200' x 24' wide, with 3' shoulders on either side. See Figure 1 for the typical street section. Town Line Road North Project Page 5 Figure 1 TOWN LINE ROAD NORTH R � � Varies 4" 12' 12' 4' Varies 0.029/FT New Bituminous Wear Course (1 1/2') Existing Bituminous Ex. Aggregate Base Course TYPICAL SECTION: OVERLAY MEDINA, MN City of Medina — Town Line Road North 4.0 Cost Summary Detailed cost estimates for the proposed improvements are presented in Appendix A. The costs represent estimated construction costs to overlay all of Town Line Road North, which is shared with the City of Independence. The cost for the work is based on competitive bids received by the City of Independence. A summary of the estimated costs is presented in Table 1 below. TABLE l — PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT COST SUMMARY Project Cost Town Line Road North $92,190.00 Medina Total Independence Total $46,095.00 $46,095.00 Town Line Road North Project Page 6 City of Medina — Town Line Road North 5.0 Funding Options 5.1 ASSESSMENTS The City of Medina has adopted a special assessment policy regarding public improvements. Following the guidelines of this policy, a portion of the construction costs for the project may be funded through special assessments. Properties which may be assessed for a portion of the project are identified in Appendix B. 5.2 CITY FUNDS The remainder of the project costs not assessed to benefitting properties will be funded with City Street funds. Town Line Road North Project Page 7 City of Medina — Town Line Road North 6.0 Project Schedule The schedule that is shown below provides for completion in October 2015. Council accepts Feasibility July 21, 2015 Call for Public Hearing/Assessment Hearing July 21, 2015 Public Hearing/Assessment Hearing August 5, 2015 Begin Construction September 2015 Final Completion October 2015 The schedule assumes that the public hearing and assessment hearing for the project will be held at a single, regularly -scheduled Council meeting. Note that the construction process should occur over a one week period during a September through October timeframe. Town Line Road North Project Page 8 APPENDIX A Cost Estimate Town Line Road North Project Page 9 2015 Street CIP Cost Estimate for Improvements Town Line Road North Units Amount $/Unit Total Mobilization LS 1 500.00 $ 500 Mill Bituminous Surface (Miscellaneous) SY 59 4.00 $ 236 Shoulder Base Aggregate TN 276 25.00 $ 6,900 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat GAL 770 2.40 $ 1,848 Type SP 9.5 Wearing course Mixture (2,B) TN 1,328 57.00 $ 75,696 Striping — 4" Solid Line White -Epoxy LF 10,500 .031 $ 3,255 Striping — 4" Double Solid Line Yellow -Epoxy LF 5,250 .062 $ 3,255 Traffic Control LS 1 500.00 $ 500 Total Estimated Cost $ 929190 Cost Assumptions Tack coat cost is included in the bituminous wear course cost. Town Line Road North Project Page 10 APPENDIX B Project Location and Potential Assessment Area Town Line Road North Project Page 11 Townline Road North Street Improvement Project Location and Potential Assessment Area 0 Q tiiGy 0 ��yss z Z) O U KLAERS HIGHWAY 55 rn 0 Q \ O z EAGLE RID O SUNSET UJ w U r w z_ J � z O p A-1 COUNTY ROAD 11 COUNTY ROAD 11 - �- �i�G��ii■tl�ll�l�■FI! a D 0 e Legend HEM Potential Assessment Area 1.,4 CityBoundary Project Location �■n■I Y Agenda Item # 7B2 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO.2015-xx RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR TOWN LINE ROAD NORTH IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the city administrator -clerk has, with the assistance of the public works director and the city finance director, prepared a proposed roll regarding the assessment of benefited properties for a portion of the cost of the Town Line Road North Improvement project which consists of an overlay, shouldering and striping improvements; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by law, the city council conducted a public hearing on August 5, 2015, with regard to the proposed assessments and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute a special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. The special assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 7 years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2016, and shall bear interest at the rate of 4.00% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2016. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to November 15, 2015, pay the whole of the assessment on such property to the city finance director, with interest accrued to the date of payment, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days of the adoption of the assessment. Thereafter, any owner may pay to the city finance director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 4. The city administrator -clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this resolution to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Resolution No. 2015-xx August 5, 2015 Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -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. 2015-xx August 5, 2015 PID OWNER NAME Total Assessment 1 06-118-23-22-0001 LEON & ROSEMARIE SCHUMACHER $1,161.48 2 06-118-23-32-0001 ROGER & LILLIAN GEORGES $804.16 3 06-118-23-33-0002 ROGER & LILLIAN GEORGES $446.83 $2,412.47 Resolution No. 2015-xx August 5, 2015 Agenda Item # 7C MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: July 29, 2015 MEETING: August 5, 2015 City Council SUBJ: Solar Regulations Background Back in February of this year, the City amended the zoning code in order to allow ground - mounted solar equipment in the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts. This amendment was made following a request from Wright -Hennepin Electric to install a large array on property they own. During these discussions, solar energy advocates attended the hearing and advocated that the City consider allowing ground -mounted solar equipment more broadly, especially on rural residential property. The Planning Commission expressed an interest in considering this allowance, but desired more opportunity for public input. A public hearing to discuss the solar regulation was advertised twice in the City's newsletter, on the City's website, and was also featured in the Medina Living magazine in addition to the required publication in the Crow River News. Attached is the "model solar ordinance" prepared on behalf of the Minnesota Department of Energy. While it was not clear that the Planning Commission and Council were prepared to allow ground -mounted solar equipment on residential property, staff prepared a draft ordinance to help guide the discussion. The ordinance was adapted from the ordinance adopted back in February. This staff report will highlight a number of things in the ordinance. Potential Regulations Districts Allowed The first matter which the Planning Commission and Council will need to discuss is which, if any, districts ground -mounted solar equipment will be permitted. During discussions in February, it appeared that discussion was limited to rural properties. As a result, the draft ordinance would permit ground -mounted solar equipment in the rural residential zoning districts. The draft ordinance also requires a minimum 5 acre in order to install ground mounted solar equipment. Staff also considered 10 acres, which would leave approximately 300 parcels eligible for panels. Reducing the lot size requirement to 5 acres results in approximately 580 eligible parcels. Not including a lot size minimum would result in approximately 850 eligible rural properties (although some of these may not meet the 100 foot setback). Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 2 August 5, 2015 Solar Regulations City Council Meeting As discussed in February, solar equipment which is attached to a structure is currently permitted in every district. Maximum Size The draft ordinance limits the solar equipment to a footprint of 1,000 square feet. Depending on the equipment, staff estimates that this footprint would allow a larger residential -scale solar array capable of producing energy approximately twice the mean annual electricity use of a Minnesota home. Setbacks The draft ordinance includes a minimum setback of 100 feet. This is twice the requirement for homes and other structures, with the exception of animal structures, which require a 150 foot setback. Height The draft ordinance limits height of the solar equipment to 15 feet. The regulations in the business/industrial zoning districts and the model solar ordinance recommends allowing a height of up to 20 feet for ground -mounted solar equipment. This height would be similar to a one- story home with a peaked roof, or a one-story commercial building with a flat roof. Screening/Landscaping The ordinance requires screening to limit the visual impact of the Solar Equipment. Process The draft ordinance requires a conditional use permit (CUP) in order to install ground -mounted solar equipment. A CUP requires a public hearing which provides neighbors with notice and an opportunity to provide feedback on the request. This CUP is a multi -month process which adds cost and uncertainty to property owners who may be interested in installing the solar equipment. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the ordinance at the July 14 meeting. Two people spoke during the hearing, both in favor of allowing ground -mounted solar panels on rural residential property. One of the speakers advocated relaxing some of the restrictions, especially the setback requirements. The Planning Commission discussed the ordinance. Some Commissioners favored relaxing the setback requirements and others favored increasing the requirement. Ultimately, the consensus of the Commission was to leave the setbacks at 100 feet. Following discussion, the Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the ordinance. Attachments 1. DRAFT ordinance 2. Resolution authorizing publication by title and summary 3. Model Solar Ordinance. 4. Excerpt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes from July 14, 2015 Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 2 August 5, 2015 Solar Regulations City Council Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO SOLAR EQUIPMENT; AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 828.09 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by deleting the stfieken language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 828.09. Solar Equipment. Any equipment or device that utilizes, operates or supplies energy derived from the sun shall meet the following standards: Subd. 1. Solar Equipment, if affixed to a structure. The following standards shall apply to Solar Equipment which is affixed to a structure: (a) The equipment or device must be affixed to a structure and meet all setback requirements for principal structures in the zoning district where located. (b) The equipment or device may not exceed the height of the building by more than five feet, and shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed. (c) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (d) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. (e) All solar arrays or panels shall be installed or positioned so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures, or obstruct views. (f) Solar equipment which is mounted to a roof which is not flat, and which is visible from the nearest right-of-way, shall not have a finished pitch more than five percent steeper than the roof. (g) The zoning administrator may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the neighborhood Subd. 2. Solar Equipment, if not affixed to a structure. (a) The following standards shall apply to Solar Equipment which is not affixed to a structure, within the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts: (0Qi Solar Equipment which is not affixed to a structure shall only be permitted in the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts and only following Conditional Use Permit approval. (b)ii Solar Equipment shall be a minimum of 300 feet from residential property. (0 iii Solar Equipment shall meet all setback requirements for principal structures in the zoning district where located. (d) iv The footprint occupied by Solar Equipment shall be considered lot coverage and impervious surface for the purpose of calculating such standards. The Ordinance No. ### DATE footprint shall include all space between pieces of Solar Equipment, unless the pieces are separated by more than 25 feet. (OLv) The footprint occupied by Solar Equipment shall not exceed 20% of the lot. (4) vi The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 20 feet. {0 vii The City may require landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the mounting devices of the Solar Equipment. N viii The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (4) ix The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. fftx All solar arrays or panels shall be installed or positioned so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures, or obstruct views. {l)xi The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. 92) The following standards shall apply to Solar Equipment which is not affixed to a structure, within residential zoning districts: i Solar Equipment which is not affixed to a structure shall only be permitted in the Agricultural Preservation, Rural Residential. Rural Residential -Urban Reserve. Rural Residential-1, and Rural Residential-2 zoning districts and only following Conditional Use Permit approval. ii) Solar Equipment shall only be permitted on parcel which exceeds five acres in area. iii) Solar Equipment shall only be allowed as an accessory use on a parcel with an existing principal structure. (iv) Solar Equipment shall be setback a minimum of 100 feet from all property lines. v) The footprint occupied by Solar Equipment shall not exceed 1000 square feet. vi) The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 15 feet. vii) The City may require landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the Solar Equipment. viii) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (ix) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. (x) All solar arrays or Danels shall be installed or positioned so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures, or obstruct views. (xi) The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE SECTION I1. Section 826.13 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by adding the underlined language as follows: Section 826.13. (AG) Permitted Accessory Uses. Within the agricultural preservation zoning district, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: Subd. 11. Solar eauipment which is not affixed to a structure. subiect to conditional use permit approval and compliance with performance standards of section 828.09 subd. 2(b) of this ordinance. SECTION III. Section 826.23 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by adding the underlined language as follows: Section 826.23. (RR) Permitted Accessory Uses. Within any Rural Residential District the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: Subd. 13. Solar equipment which is not affixed to a structure, subject to conditional use permit approval and compliance with performance standards of section 828.09 subd. 2(b) of this ordinance. SECTION IV. Section 826.25.4 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by adding the underlined language as follows: Section 826.25.4. (RR-UR) Permitted Accessory Uses. Within the Urban Reserve district, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses when used in conjunction with a principal structure: Subd. 9. Solar equipment which is not affixed to a structure, subject to conditional use permit approval and compliance with performance standards of section 828.09 subd. 2(b)of this ordinance. SECTION V. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this day of , 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Ordinance No. ### DATE Published in the Crow River News on the day of____, 2015. Ordinance No. ### DATE Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-## RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. ### BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ### an ordinance related to solar equipment, amending chapter 8 of the city code; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes § 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is three pages in length; and 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 administrator -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 related to solar equipment. The ordinance amends the zoning code in order to allow ground -mounted solar panels as a conditional use in the rural residential, rural residential -urban reserve, rural residential-1, rural residential-2, and agricultural preservation districts. The ordinance also establishes regulations for the solar equipment. The full text of Ordinance No. ### is available from the city administrator -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 administrator -clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in his office at city hall for public inspection and that he post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Resolution No. 2015-## August 5, 2015 Dated: August 5, 2015. Bob Mitchell, Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -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. 2015-## 2 August 5, 2015 Ln O V N ro ro V) A �1 v c w m O l/1 � J d °o C = N d ° L 0 M 0 6 ■ NC - N 0 N d ■ N E y N C = O W a C 0 c U 0� c LU 0 E m a 0 L m O L C LL LL w m O V 78 w W "' N N � � O V 00 � N O � Lrn r z z z A z J n B Rf IN a a a L ,v 5 • •� obi �o s n a ,`'., � o E 1c% N ci o b +' a m ., V. O, � u L. -Ci U O u m -0 ' v - U O ° n sa O 5 C a, - a� U . °42 w `� B -� ° 5 yj � ' b A, +� a °� bA �`� U c�a `� M a�i O x N sa U O¢ y O O b U O A, c U O C bbio X O O x U h by -d UND U" B p U -d u s-4 A, a� 4.�, o� o -d U bow O o4-4 U u S„ cd cn � •� ca O U a� U U U O y cd U OU Q O �, N U buA cUd 0 O � o U s s �; O by O Z b�JJ O +ca U is c� U yCj U U O r, U C O ° O 14 O 44 U d V� Q cd b U s °� M c0 U U v u b�0 N bio u u c� O bbo O o U �" cad ^� O u U s p �O 'Z s ¢ +� U r. a+ u yu bA O U N s-q "d cn o a� sa O O u O U C s� U J 7b .� O ¢ u u o' y O p " •+'7 U w L." sa u r�i� O U °-' sa .� a� b at p O U U O a) A. b O a) sa O U .d U O w C m U 44 .d O ' a� C 0 w .n a� 'id w b0 a� •1 a� s � � O 41, O yj ' U b y a� o `d i"i p H R 4-4U U .� a� v C U it O O � bjo aj R N 'U umi p° p • m u-0 run b �, O ' �' O O O rn ' rn U cd is A I i U L1 •� +�� CIS o m y '� o b -d uo o — a.) ° �4 . ;J "d . -0o m "0Cd N ^ cn U 44 O CISy O b u �p ° v v' aU Co m C. CIS c 0 }+ cd CII "d bbiO a�S In + E N O U p � cd �� m �O A, cn D, O p 4' �N-+ y .0 U U sa o as �"� 0 sa N •u a7p bA m v aU+ y + O s ¢ •r. p . N CIS"d •zl � U u u '� u w L: c �CL4 o � E m 4-44 y y O y ¢ N y cd E cd O «i O v v O� U U U O o y N w o F x c� o 0bjo 4-4b O r u b 44 0 En p ,�r:l �� y -o o it m0 ca -� o ° , � •" � b 4-4 O u. Lo y w �" -O4-4 p A O Cl a�i -- `� O O by .e4 a� r) Ov H H o o .� Rf 0 0 ti � � o � � o �l � � • � 'ti o S `� %) :zt ° as 5 ti o 'v ai .ti � a . it m � S � Zzt '^izt y o o o o coq Cr E6 o a o� o o a U -41 Cd aIs w O to y tap ^ U O bio C(LI O t1. y y M O a U A . N O4 'b O p C v p p O 0 R d Q" y b Qrl ' w a" m by .4 C u by x w O 4-4s u p R Q) I. N U U 0 U O t1. IM Q0�A= O tr A Qp wy bJA v d °O O o �wu noo 4-4 o o a w U -� O lblD U ^� .4-1 0 u � o N u >~ by ° P-4 ' y '4S O 4+ O N Cyr C v c� O C rn 'J c� sa •� cn O c0 r U G 4-1a ¢ ° y 0. o v ° a� W W B o c° b b bbO v I I I I 4-4 b O O O rA bow V. Cd a� O G "d 4-4C A. .� .-� by p 'v w4-4 w C V C p T7 p C a ° P4 �- y O by 0 A" � a� � U � 142 UI � i]. 4 C w y U M Q) bjO bo b sa N y b xbn V O O O U OV 4-4 4" G' a (1) O U O f� N O U 44 U V� bA n O p bA bA '+� p b.Q O U by j 's bb4 sa v� rn Q-I U N Sa U b "" V u U y V p O U O y ti 14 C V cn cd U bQ Q U w (U ° O U U bJJ O a ,'� U a� U s a N N p V +� O Pi O � it � Cl p ° N > U O ✓ U y O 14 u O Q O �p UU m C m bpi d .° � y O O U U y U cn r� O w U ca cd O V °U V O O o OM ya ate+ rn U U O bA m 1,4 W �4 s� z7 c� y U W fir' U ° " xo bio �u a ?yQo Vit , U M bb Ui,7o bA bA O o O O (uU U w U U; O y O _ a� w r G y O. n. O v y, Q b u O ;u u W yA o 4.4 y D, w U 9, u O D U rU+ O V W U X 4-4V�I G� •v, ,�'" V rn b^� 4'� C v V V Y" � cd .,�.� '� .--I U u C'% bC ..Vi W •p ,� -0 W Q, � y U Q u UM U 4-4 °. y WO u •5,Z +u�UO C"•' a_u w � O u 0 O O U u p I Y, ° QU, U O bA 4 O A, w O w bo w y O n o •� O " 4- 4 C w f�, C O A, rp p U 0 ;-4 O O 0 u D � s, a) O s) U a) 3 O .d �� bA cOd bq v p, cd O U -d OU bOA s, ;, ucad -� b 0 ' 0 0 0 M U o a� o U s� o o v -° O O u a� °bio s� = u•° y y M 4-4U -0 0 to O ca s, is s, u'du rd bIJ y M a� O� ° C w y Q.) 0 0 4 U � w vO � �� sb,A to U w '� O 3-1 C"i Chi ° Y Cd �,' w ° �4 (i ° ° O x 0 0 y v bA O bA O 7-I a� cd v t�4 7d a) 0 " u p u O bhp ¢ N u ° �" ° O SU", A, -o w a) M u o o u° U°° v 0� +. o 14 U m u. bQ u o 4.4 o u s, u r ca bA bA b�A u M bA C W U w m U Q, o f 14° a) o° o V n O U bJ U ;� U o A p, ° W W by O '4 o W U w Gr, ° m° x x U N n o° o 4. O o p�0 N TS .Ci C) r, Q, yU O 0 O O p 0 0 O bIJ O 0 0 U O s, O M Cn .� cn u Cn ,A .� V) :� V) u w M O It V) t1,'� (A Cl A, (A 0 V) � a� CO cad OU ti 4-4 ti "I:; -d � O � ° cJl v u n—u by u o o u bA U 0 4 t by M � - U ; b x u A. O O> Q C Z (� O u yV N y49 O u ° .� 4. O O p O In 7s O 'u V bA a) O s, ya 4-4 4-4 N p� L1 fv cd s. vO M 4 � o O bA ° u +� O O Q C w O O cOa � v U y ' '� '� O '� ,`S OU N Z 'b p u w O bhp to O � � 4-' � R � a, ° � s� 2 U � �G U . V O a� rn In 4 0 L" y � , U O a) u O sU + «i u to u O - N� .Q" i, vcd L� O � w O V 'O R d w �° u 0^ O u y u O O J N Ou bb bIJ y u U u E G cd -d bIJ y u �c cyd 'L7 i, (n 5� 6�J `n bb.0 U b.0 C! s-, � �O -C +�-' bbC U D-. p w O U Q Nbio ill, U � i A v .0 .0 O a O O-4 ~O +zl IS � ' U sue, A w140. L. v C i' y u i O av+ al by O � m, 'd O +� O , O W '� 0 U � a� ,� �+ p D3 at u ya aJ ° --' cn — -d 0 U bA ° ' �j v p + D p a+ '� O ��., O L"., �.,' p �,' U L" sue., O m U O 0 C� p 7° CJ � L, + �.� �r bA O O , , vN ram- c� 'O O U" �.� N �.� SC G"- N 4J s"�p N O a� 4. O u O u v v .0 — .II W isa a a' i, x' U 5 !n O, 9)—U Cn N O. ", O N �', bA v O r h O G1 V � � as � � 5 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � •N a � o> a, •-� a� as ti o 12 y° ti s ZZ Z; +� V 5 +� 4p m +Y �Q `� Tt 's, ti� o, ti "� m °4 '�� ti +-Z5., o G m . z zzt o-0 I Rf izz a0 - e y bq � m o w y � o .ti m S � y "•, � `yam -21 •�'Zi�, o m Ci .� o m Ol G y •H4 o •y � � � a, .� .� a ti "4 ti •�, �, S o o 0 0 0, o o � � zi N "O �-4 •ti a 0 w O+ u n s A N O U u '' Cd O cn N p -d O ^� ¢ 'b sa IS sa U s 4 O u O bA 41 wU d E 'o u 42 'd C. ¢ 0� Tuu 3 u V 4-4 U p r0 v O v .O b C 00 U ' n 'O U U U rl U is cd O O —y U q w O p "d �� % U cd ..0 U `" U Cc U b O W U w aJ y U 4-4 ap. -0 y 2 o�" 0 w U O O o U U U -d ° ° U ° v -0 O 'n O 0 u 4• U ^� w o o U o o U 0 U U r v Qr •- S" ° S: ' 14 m�° a H Z x c7 4-1c7 B v� rn bA Ri O N 4-4 U U Lir V M 4-I w =a O u O bA u w 7d pq 4-4 cis O vS p +- r u V 'L7 (+ O 44 U 4-4 w R u v ca Otv� 0 4, o w 4-4 30 bio x O TJ i� �' N U d b v = ^O O "� '! v ': p 20 H ^O 'A o ff dL t. + Q ski w y U Wy] "y�� mo O O ro 4-4 Up m UU ry pVIIp" NLp , by uw m y NO u w x 9 Q m bO Jp Q Zo, u -o o o o �, o o o a H ° o ocn o c_j 14 I cry p. o .� u o t o m° y c� o � O U u O O p 7 C w O uv u W a E o �In i n �' v .� O O W A ¢ + 0 ~�VJN VO O 4 o �u m O o �" d cq m o v u o °° a ac °o 142Zv g � r. E u c� � o o ai o U o4 o o C u' ti o o aA o o -� 1-4 o 0 0 o o u3 -d 7v It U � N w N o o �; o n w° i° O° o n x Q,O A o. [ 0000 o s a o : i.: N cyam,' .� o� 'Zi .�, '�, •�, ti °a a s ti V ti m � , z , - Z "t 1, ate. c s o° �i fi S ti Q (� Iztm a o Y o � 5 5 o a1 ti wK a o o ,a � •� � � � � � o o m oq �, o •� 5 m +°', 2i '� o�.'.� Q Cxi obi 5 y., m '� @ v, Oo .� m •� .N o `' 'N 5 I Y, vN o zt 5 0 ZZ o `� � � � v `' ' � V �, � `� � � o'er., obi � � � v�l • � � o o v o d u E u p s4 O + U A" p p N v V � U C s� O O vi O O 4-444 zs w sue+CII ti + bA O 4-4 O 4-; bA TJ w 44 u ° � •u v rd � by cn cn u bA u '-a In boo u o p o u o � u u o -d o 'C 0 ,� u -d �, U u ao w o M 44 a p u u -d 2-o 'u E4.1 o W O o m o U o 0 0 b o o' by ° V 00 o w O D U o 4 j.., o °' p vr, ca U O O m u cad w O �+ O p •• sa O U" W w ° O bA O c� O U C b1D ` U 4 � -a � � O ° • � ' �° cn O a E o 'C y +r N 44 u ^� r3 , g U r. U rn y U ~ 4o v N 0 A. O u z o o in � �� U u O U O o 4 v P, O O sv U N O Q, '4 +�� O o 4t M O O v, U E 0 U N CIS O O " ILr) bA m +-; W U ti O bbA `d O O �+'U C u bO O O O C a L v O W i I U >" 4 1-4 N cn Q U I o> �Z, o oa., ti-..�� `"" i.' p pal o., d` ��, `�� O v" Zt o o -, e, o a a '" ti e, �� v +�� " '" �� ' ��Y �� o ��; " c . �� tie, �� 'Z; �� 5 �� iz zi zt 211, Izt 114 zt �� " -, N �� . H m ��' �; ao �� a��0 a �� `�� -Izt I Rol" � y 5 y ,Z ,�` '� ,o •ate o o qj V N H ap U � O � O cd �" a O a� O 'e E, O ca bA b O N O a Q y Q� p o O U � O O O Q. p U, O s 0 OCA c� ca O b p U 24 O O C � +7 A. O O y y D b v > a D" «t y 'd a4 a� d a� + v .a O a� a 4 �U 'd O s�. 7 a� U Q. o y O A, O U sa s O w0 m r p � W Q C . O sa U y O p U cy4-4 U 'd U 44 �^ 4-4 bA m u U � m U U� O d o +. a Fq U Ln E O u N (B (B l/1 �1 v LU O V) Am W O V /�0 IL E O L U— -L- • .a ° o O = C T C N d C d E ' N i O d o£ r 00 LL CDQ M ' N cm m NCD 0 CD N p in N V V r> N C p N W c U d) E c Cif = U W � �v E2 C O (� N NCU L � HE U D O E U) LL U o O O 0 O m d C 41 f0 � � C C O t 0) vJ Q C O (n O U c oW O o a � m E o m c � u) 00 O L O U7 N co O T 4 a � c C w N N m 0) a � O- L � U ��i z Z r _ Z A z Q J n w B I m 5 4 'ZI it Zz W -,Z�zt H J�" 1 o v' O 0 b ° . as IS--1 ° c� ' I U V] U c� U m 4-4 ' 0 E b!J sU+ uu U c� p a� cd U �f', U b U a Om '. y c/) p} 0' x ::s b a O O by u ;� -0 B Cd ton o C7 bj° to bz -d • o ° '� ;u u —u u o -� o ° o; �, u U o F� by o 0 U aV. a� n a� o bjD T F4 O a � M O 3 a U c E U O 5 0 0 0 O U � U) °� u � U a � �° cd cd a� a ,U b y a o Q U cd y O p, O N a 9 n O .,'� „ v' 'u N s p a U L� OE —0 .N U O O �o p U U U sUa •cn o ,p U U a p .a . w b�A p Rt 7d O °4 p °Z+, bio Cl.mot". � 46 U cd ya .L1 m u • o U U� u m a "I a a o ;� 5 °' .� 14, a �, �„ w a ° �' ; a bIJ sa O a•• .L N U �. N� �, • v��i r N .� r•., o �v'i, G! b y v a 'i, O +� H O FQ v� U En a J" N M p cad 42 u O 'd 4-4_u '� sa v 3 O O U m 'm A. n .� 0 pD O E p" O O o O O u OU u vn U +' E n c� lul —u tn UN 4 w d b�0 y p� p p —0O U u rd 4. v m U En U Q ski r �..' N 0 0. 0 is vi 4MI. °� s ti uay A' U41 0 �cOa 0 NO . Q, a� to fD, r E N u O Q Q bA �u M r" C "� V U sa N uO r. e4 u L7 v p ca O v O 'd E cn n O N u uO sa v, - ,, •;' � .� .� Ica 0 45 u E u 7d s+ M O N bbD x N .0 U bup . v cd - O O cad O p U R s In D J N E •O u i- O u V O O' v '� O L+ �S" ' n v O Ln � �, O n u u O U a� O GJ u u d v O s. U u s� u p R U u ¢+ u -.0 O `y c� O 4 ;: - u �' O c� x O u � � `� O 'uai +u u O u u bA N +� O 44 i�i u cn u r `�;� %, vv C dO L. O ro O O cad u b Ll (� ya b d U u u A ia" y u u v � . c� O u E O �bA �bA b O � .O u 'd 'a� u a� 81 W ra O y O Ma0i ' Q L Q Cd a aj r-� 4 I I a Z °� a � v o •� 'Zt o •C' v .� ti Ct o> a t V 't ozz `� � coq � � � � � o � aq v Cr y4 c� m O I.,O¢ V N 00 } U ,t-4 t O t i,w O p y i UU 4-4 by C p p p i O ;-4 by - O '~ ` U m � -� `n CU�+ bA U, y w 0 u U a� N O p E I'll u •O D '�It O v v cd ~V B O +� SS ' � ' � u O y bq CIS'�' Cp CIS u ON N U Q"� O D4-4 � ' m U v }� �0 C p a� b�A 0 w NO r. U } U 'O 0 U A, U cOa U u U O U� >, p rd p p w U C v � C N u D O 4 ^� O t �� V, m , p O byA bs,A b -d � U tom. O p U S bA a O N U r' r, Z cad v •� � ,'= s y s U a i w� W G W B r.; o u u O O "d v .- b.� ObA U ^pOCU omsu �U M i. w U U� U y cfy+ U I bpy., b�A R ,� bbk � �y�'7 p v � r 1 yai cd p, O O + .a ° �� s y , bpi ,S"i cC +� Q •., y`n_, cC Q) atev, O ct cd 44 cd 75 45 ° a ' s�"..I � vi N «t • � � b�A � � � � � �, . � ate-+ � bA yi u u AV. R, -a w" cd N O m 50 O� bA cd y N v A, ° m s, w s, u y, O O � U W 0 u w pa� cn fL A, u O 3 y i p y, F p v p In o 7 O yy p w v biD -d � 0 ° bn ° W W C w� r 0 H W o v Q, .� (4' :, , o u b o a� o .. U by d' o w ca C7 a� O .n .a R.r '� a� � o o P! m v A I I N4-4 u ¢ - N �C) s 0 «i A, w v O O u O u ¢ ° by a`�I '� O O y zi w ,� O .� a� n sue, O 0 ou u c�a bhp 3 o 1-4 N y O N a" O o u n C -0 u "�0 4-4 U U bap W rJ �' � � , R, O '� Q I , 2 u u 0 O 4 4 o d Q L", 4, cd �O (� v u u d au, s s, wy° ^^ ° °4-4 �, U �, C. E � o R r 14, ° � ° U -a "d o� ° � 5 gt ° u0 O Qr. u s, y 1 >~ s a, O ¢ U U O U M ° ° bybiD ° o c� r. 4U, . U M b!J as v u 5 C u by 4.4 • y , u �bp O p su-4 =� w ° U O O m U O bo U u v rd y� O u O O cm + C" 0 0 O i� «t d bA y m b rl to V p° p 3 + O A u 'd cn U1-4 u U Ou U :r 4.4 DO U U Lu, bA bA b�A u c� cd b�fJ A, W v by cad s Ucd P, a a� L o v U w p ca a) 0 u v 0 m -d 0 c� ap U ;� U o A u° W W op .5 o a� W 0 x x u ^� u 0 i, a sr 0° u «t +� bhp s. v s su, °OCO O O O 0 u O (�Op4d cO p (n pcp .a ucn (O O (n v� s, -d u 7a o O d bA �c ° MU 0 o o o o°.� u b ca N J u -a +' w u b � E w° -o aA '4-4 14 o ° w° .n au�o� a °42 u II o U U 5, 42 ° IU4 .n -�-1 .bio .n:II 48 u u o u o u g o o .� ou u o � o -o y 'ti u o a u o o ao o s cd 4, CT i +' 'd " 'o y u s ° zbp y bio 1-4 jD m o o .� a u 9 u u� �, u° o 0 u u a o a u o o u W u B o o bq M L40 1-4 CIS ull w c g o ybjz,° o u o� 4-4 Obuu' vo u ;° O m n u u u IU w'�i Iu . U o ° C, N b:jo uo ° u co �o � u O O N C 'd o o N O O o .U4 u o �n x� . a c� .Q N r C7 u _u m o x u C% u N �% N O ° "U u �1 N u U F�1 m o N ,y lzt Zt Y° o °mac 0 o S �' o ,y fi � o It I I N 4-4 o o o � rU 'b -ZU -o w O°. In bio b o -0 o ° 71 O C C) 4- ° w O ob i a'b'O° O to O b � � 1-4 U � a� w G '5' u o.U.N sa U U L'r ° Vi `n DC U w w O 0 0¢ O O O u u4.4 v v rd O y a" bA O .d O O0 °O U x A•C caw M � I bjD 4 O 14 � O '5 U v a c� (, � �••i 61 � � cis 4.4 �04 0 '4 5' O (� W a� a� o Q.) x o 84 ° o 0 o ° o U b 'Q U � N 0 o O w N W i I a� C U o O bib O 4-4 U w O w o -a b w O 'd O U U y L7 U aU O bQ w a� � -d S: bOA «t O O U ¢ O ;� cd b!J a� C 4-1 �, .,q C� d4-4 E O v p d O i O O O U L L b�A D by N U B a� w t w 7j U 'd u O u U O O TuffUp 44 0 -d s bIJ 14 wUCIIy O � CA u C4.1.O y cn m w u U � 'd w y a o bic 7d at N s U v r i U O fd U O rd d v C O U W b�A cd N O p p V W L v7 b (4, v U U UE44 724.1 U M ;4 bO O A .� � W x W 0biD U A O ch U O p 3 +� U �� O aU+ rU U yUj v 4U p j C '� U +�>+ O c� U • -, ° o in in o cOe w U o 'b o U 0+ C U 7g G a�i U v 4 "� cad Q' �' U L7+� N s C L'a U 'd a) EU l] a cd � p p U o D" 17 U +� � O ;-4 U v' s N o . m Z3 ;ztzz o m a zi a ap � Ezzt zt zt Zt w. o 'Qti o m ,� H ,., o L o t o ,o tio a ZL 42 Al °ozs zz m N o I w w v N u u to Y o a o o e, �-, o 0 1, 'z a o zt 5 a o �` � "� +'w � � •Oti' o � oai m � `� . ti 31 `'� .ti � •ti °' � -, '� `' a a a � o o, a, 5 c, o ap . o a, 'ti a `,ti1 a '�' � a' � of •�' � +„ i• � � � o +; �' N � •'� � y � � � +„ p +., � � �` a� O '-d O s, v a� ::I O O v sv-i o O w 2 O ¢+ 0 a-+ O 42 bA .p p O U bA -sl `3 a� O >C + ° p o b any bbA r O 0 O g v Q. o � o U v y U N +' C O rb O O bA m F, U O U O O i" 4o •s"'-+ U ¢i ' b v' '�., p gym., Q" ° •m ate+ �Ui rp vUi O pr 'C O •� rX UN QG U U NO U -w 0 U s� o° Up o A" wo b O c bA y cn ° bo c U ? �° ° o i� = ocn x .� w 7� o w - o v cncli ° a cn Z � 'o ° In N-I 5 FA I ate" U i O i s O 0 wi- y 0 O O U U cd. Q O cn i�-, N 3 U U Ucu D cd 4-4 u O U E U E O 4-4 U p o 7� o o � a� o m 4-4 U d U s ELn p U p iU w � O cd a� w cl p sU sU O y4-4 u 'p u O, ° O O u aQ.)O 0 vvy o o O o U '" cd b cd � o o bjD v �° A cd V 1-4 � U U U C U yy, 41 bA bA t7 � O O U N cd i, byp b-1p b t ,21 v� -0-1 Cd 'b r, 10 u 'u U U O +U N °� p N U O w U C O, b p •0 QUj ) B O •,oCd N O v II O I U O r ci U 'U� � Pa N M 1 U U 0 3-1 O U, •b O U U O p G u bA U 4-4O� U� cd p � � o U '� C. UU 'Aa� O r y O 'd ax7 U +U u ° W O 4-4 0 U M �4 CL4� u � C b u O O U I U a� �, O s O o U ,C5 O p M b pll 4-4 Q o bU�A n U �+ U w � U cd O "d ++ O p CO u u v� d O sa O O O s� U x E E U t' O it C m E O U "d •J� 0 0 o p -o 4-4 on = Q •4 cc U u U C O w O --a p s O pew m m b O y O a0i O O w cd O 0 + O44 O O o U \ U 4a4 O U O a Ob.sa V0 -0 ap U r cd w �M A. cn - D � � U ,& 5 Zt � � � �� •� of � y � � •°'-, Q+ � � �' y +�., � S � � •r °' °i chi I L'i x U o s� 'd Ln w .d 3 u v p 4-4 cd M 3 it O U bA o u p U 4.1 M i � �" u -' v O U p �1 A cd m 'd ¢a 4. p m `n 4-4O u V U u G U Q, � p U 4 O u O O O to A, cU� yA ca b �" O Gp ' -y ' � U L". bA ' in u Dy' v� 4-4 3". a O O «i 'd S" u O U b�A C C� U cd .fl cn° m U u o o o H° H v u U cad 'm pU ti N M ai --a N U cad cad v�i Q" W w r-' a Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT July 14, 2015 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the City Code Related to Solar Equipment Finke stated that the Commission discussed solar equipment in regard to the business park and industrial zoning districts in February and the Code was amended at that time to allow ground mounted solar equipment. He stated that the solar equipment attached to structures is allowed within every zoning district in the City while ground mounted equipment is only allowed in the industrial and business park zoning districts. He stated that there were comments from residents at that time desiring the ability to install ground -mounted equipment within the rural residential zoning district. He stated that the draft ordinance was provided for context and highlighted the different rural residential districts that could in essence allow ground mounted equipment. He stated that the draft ordinance also includes stipulations for properties, such as the property must be at least five acres in size. He stated that staff estimates that there are about 580 properties that would be eligible under this draft ordinance. He noted that if the ten - acre lot size is desired that would cut the eligible lots in half. He stated that the staff proposed a 100-foot setback, which is twice the general setback for properties within the rural residential district, noting that animal structures require a setback of 150 feet for comparison purposes. He reviewed the proposed regulations on height, site lines, visibility and screening. He stated that staff recommends using a conditional use permit (CUP) for those that would desire a ground mounted solar array. White questioned if it would be necessary to state that the installed panels would be only for the primary resident of the property. Finke stated that he believes that the ability to sell back energy is a benefit that the State sets up to economically incentivize homeowners. Nolan stated that he had the same concern. He stated that he likes the idea of allowing solar power for residents but is not sure he wants to make it a commercially viable option. Williams explained that homeowners would still have a Wright Hennepin Electric bill and there would be a credit on the bill. Reid explained there are some days that too much solar energy is generated to use and that is where a credit is earned through the electric company to offset days when it is cloudy and no energy is gained. Finke noted that the credit also helps to offset the cost of installation for the homeowner. He explained that the CUP would allow public input through a public hearing rather than an administrative approval. Nolan stated that he would tend to ease into this more conservatively as it could be a nuisance to a neighbor. He liked the idea of using the CUP and only allowing within the rural residential district. Nolan opened the public hearing at 10:18 p.m. Mindy Rechelbecher, 1242 Hunter Drive, stated that she and her husband purchased raw land on Homestead Trail with the intent of building their dream home on that parcel. She stated that they would like to have ground mounted solar energy on their new parcel and she was disappointed to find out that would not be allowed. She stated that there are difficulties to the roof mounted solar panels as holes would need to be drilled into the house, maintenance is more difficult, it is difficult to clear the snow in the winter, and the panels cannot move with the sun. She stated that ground mounted equipment can move with the sun during the day to collect the most amount of sun possible. She stated that ground mounted equipment is also easier to clean off and repair as they are easily accessible. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT July 14, 2015 Meeting Minutes Chris Peterson, Bloomington resident that is moving to Medina in November, stated that he will not be within the rural residential zoning district so he will not be able to utilize the ground -mounted equipment. He referenced the 100-foot setback noting that in theory that sounds good but in practice that would only allow about 1.5 acres of usable space including the home that is on the lot and other features such as trees. He noted that with that setback the amount of homes that could use the feature would be further limited. He stated that a 50-foot setback would be sufficient. He noted that Tesla is about to release a power wall which is a battery that would attach to a home and would store the solar energy for later use. He stated that it would be difficult to sell solar energy to a neighbor as there is a lot of regulation by the utility company and the State. He stated that the more people get behind solar energy, the more energy costs will go down. He stated that it is very difficult to generate your entire energy supply from solar in Minnesota. Nolan closed the public hearing at 10:28 p.m. Reid stated that she was considering more than a 100-foot setback as sometimes once solar equipment is installed a neighbor wants to construct something that may block the equipment. White echoed the comments of Reid noting that she was thinking of a 150-foot setback similar to animal setbacks. Williams stated that would be comparing apples and oranges explaining that a larger animal structure buffers that use from neighbors and allows additional space if the animals get out before they would reach the neighbor's property. He stated that he would actually be more in favor of a 50-foot setback. Murrin stated that she would support a minimum lot size, noting that five acres would be the minimum that she would support at this time and stated that the restriction could be reduced in the future if everything works well. White stated that if this was adopted with a 100-foot setback could a homeowner then request a variance from the setback. Finke confirmed a variance could be requested but noted that a hardship would need to be proven. Nolan stated that he supports the ordinance as proposed. Williams questioned if the Commission could support a 75-foot setback. Reid stated that she would support 100 feet and Nolan and Albers also supported a 100-foot setback. Motion by Albers, seconded by White, to recommend approval of an Ordinance amendment to Chapter 8 of the City Code related to solar equipment. Motion approved unanimously. (Absent: Foote) 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: July 30, 2015 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates August 5, 2015 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Stonegate Conservation Design Subdivision — west of Deerhill, East of Homestead. The applicant has requested PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat approval for a conservation design subdivision of 42 lots on 170 gross acres. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter at the July 14 meeting and found that the proposed conservation design subdivision does not fully meet the objectives of the CD -district. As a result, the Commission recommended denial. The Park Commission will review on July 15 and the application will be presented to the City Council on August 5. B) Buehler Plat — Robert Buehler has requested approval of a plat to separate 2782 Willow Drive from an adjacent property. The parcels were a single lot and a previous owner sold portions of the lot to two separate buyers. The applicant seeks to subdivide the property to create a buildable lot, and the other portion of the property would be platted as an outlot. Staff is conducting a preliminary review, and the application will be scheduled for a Hearing when deemed complete, potentially at the August 11 Planning Commission meeting. C) Etzel Setback Variance — 2942 Lakeshore Ave. — Brian Etzel has requested a variance to reduce the setback from Balsam Street from 30 feet to 12 feet for expansion of an existing deck. The proposed expansion is proposed to be setback the same distance as the existing deck, continuing the same building line. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to review on August 11. D) Wealshire LLC Comp Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan Review — Wealshire, LLC has requested a site plan review for construction of a 173,000 sf memory care facility. The request also includes a rezoning from RR-UR to Business Park and an Interim Use Permit to permit continued agricultural use of the portion of the property not proposed to be developed. The Met Council has also approved of the previous Comp Plan amendment. The Planning Commission meeting reviewed the rezoning, site plan review and interim use permit at the February 10 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The City Council reviewed at the May 19 meeting and directed staff to prepare approval documents. These will be presented later in the summer. E) St. Peter and Paul Cemetery and Hamel Place —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. F) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll— these preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application G) Hamel Haven subdivisions, Wakefield Valley Farm — These subdivisions have all received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before construction begins. H) Goddard School Site Plan Review — PJ Norman LLC has requested Site Plan Review approval to construct a new building to house a Goddard School at 345 Clydesdale Trail (next to Caribou Coffee). The City Council approved the project on July 21 and staff is working with the applicant on the conditions of approval before construction. I) Wright -Hennepin Solar Panels — WH has requested a conditional use permit for the installation of a solar garden approximately an acre in area at their substation on Willow Drive, south of Highway Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 August 5, 2015 City Council Meeting 55. The Council adopted a resolution of approval at the June 16 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to meet the conditions of approval before construction. Other Projects A) Solar Equipment Regulations — staff will present an ordinance for discussion related to solar equipment on residential property in the City. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 14 meeting and recommended approval. Staff intends to present the ordinance at the August 5 meeting. B) Site Plan Review, Administrative Review — following the feedback at the Business Forum, staff intends to present an ordinance for Planning Commission and City Council review which would allow staff to administratively approve certain improvements on commercial property (parking lot expansions, additions, small accessory structures) without needing to go through formal hearings with the Planning Commission and Council. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 14 meeting and recommended approval. The City Council reviewed on July 21 and asked for a number of changes. Staff will present again at the August 5 meeting. C) Deck Upland Buffer Setbacks — a resident of the Enclave development has requested that the City reconsider the requirement that decks be set back 15 feet from Upland Buffers. The setback limits the size of decks on a number of the lots in the Enclave development. Staff presented the ordinance at the July Planning Commission meeting. The Commission was concerned of the unintended consequences of reducing the required setback and recommended denial. The interested property owners have reduced the reduction that they seek and intend to present to the Planning Commission again on August 11. D) Cable Buildout Analysis — staff has continued to spend substantial time on analyzing the expansion of Mediacom cable within the City. E) Watershed Dues Analysis — Planning staff will provide figures for the City Council's review at the August 18 special session related to establishing different stormwater utility fees for each watershed district so that residents of Elm Creek and Pioneer -Sarah Creek can pay the cost. F) Hennepin County Economic Development programs — staff attended a presentation of two new economic development programs available through Hennepin County. One program is for central business districts to assist with costs of things such as fagade improvements and marketing. Another program assists with the cost of infrastructure improvements when such costs prevent a development from moving forward. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 August 5, 2015 City Council Meeting MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340.9790 p: 763.473-9209 f: 763.473-8858 MEDINA non-cmergenM 763-525-6210 MEMORANDUM Emergency 9-1_1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: July 31, 2015 RE: Department Updates Night to Unite On August 4th we will be holding our annual Night to Unite event. We will have parties throughout the City taking a stand against crime. We will have the police and fire departments participating. Defibrillator Grant Received On July 16th we were notified that we received a grant for a new defibrillator from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community. Officer Boecker had written the grant for our department. This is the second grant we have received this year. The defibrillator will be a stationary unit placed at the community center. The other defibrillator will be at the City Hall in the council chambers. Server Issues As I reported in my last update, our main police server crashed due to a motherboard failure. We found that it was more than just the motherboard. The server was down for almost a week with all the major components being replaced. The repair was covered by the extended warranty. The server is eight years old; it will need to be upgraded in the near future (In the CIP for 2016). Our plan would be to replace this current server with a new server and use the current server for video storage. The current video storage server is over 12 years old. Maple Plain Fire Contract Administrator Johnson and I met with Maple Plain City Administrator Tessia Melvin and Fire Chief Dave Eisinger on the Maple Plain fire contract. There are several small changes and should be coming to the council in September. Officer John Vinck's Resignation Officer John Vinck has turned in his resignation. He was hired by the Minneapolis Police Department. John has done a great job for 10 years for the City and the police department. We are holding a short reception for him on August 6th at 3:30 p.m. If you can make it, please stop by the police department at 600 Clydesdale Trail. Emergency Management Training On July 17th I gave a short training presentation on emergency management for the public works department. In an emergency, they play a large role in the response and recovery of any disaster that would affect the City. Patrol by Sergeant Jason Nelson Patrol Activities For the dates of July 14 to July 29, 2015, our officers issued 68 citations and 99 warnings for various traffic infractions. There were a total of four driving while impaired arrests, three traffic accidents, 14 medicals, and 12 alarms. On July 14, 2015, Officer Boecker was dispatched to a suspicious male in the parking lot of the Hamel Community Center. Upon arrival, Officer Boecker was able to locate the vehicle and an intoxicated male inside. The male was subsequently arrested for DWI. On July 18, 2015, Officer Jessen assisted the West Hennepin Public Safety Department at the Vinland Treatment Center in Independence for a male that was exposing himself to females while they were in a storm shelter during bad weather. Upon arrival, it was discovered that a male resident had exposed and pleasured himself while in a storm shelter during severe weather in front of two females. When confronted, the male did confess and stated that because he has a traumatic brain injury, he is a little twisted. Case was followed up on by West Hennepin Public Safety. On July 19, 2015, Officer Jessen was dispatched to an unconscious male on the side of the road in the Independence Beach area. Caller reported waking up from sleeping to hearing the sounds of someone getting slapped. The caller looked outside and saw a male running away from a male on the ground. Upon Officer Jessen's arrival, he located an unconscious male that appeared to have been assaulted. Paramedics responded and transported the male to the hospital. A search of the area was done with the use of a Minnetonka K-9 and the suspect was located in the basement of his mother's house along with another juvenile male. The male admitted to leaving his unconscious friend in the grass because he passed out and that he tried to drag him back to the house but couldn't. The male also admitted to slapping his friend to try and wake him but he would not wake up. Case forwarded to Investigations. On July 21, 2015, Officers Boecker and Converse located two underage kids while patrolling through the Hamel Lions Park. Both attempted to hide from officers and were located. Where they were hiding, a small amount of marijuana and paraphernalia was located under the mulch in the playground area. A vehicle was also found in the lot that belonged to the kids. Parents were called and both thought that their kids were at home sleeping. On July 21, 2015, I was dispatched to a male who had been badly burned while filling up gas for a riding lawnmower. Upon arrival, a juvenile male, who was working for a landscape company, was located with severe burns on both of his lower legs. His skin was peeling off. Male said that while filling up gas, something caused a spark and the mower caught on fire along with him. He was transported to the hospital. Criminal Investigations by Investigator Charmane Domino Received two reports from Hennepin County Child Protection. Neither case involved any criminal activity. Received a report of some young men outside in the early morning hours and one appeared to have been assaulted. Officers found an unconscious person laying in a yard and he was transported to the hospital. It appears at this time it was a group of friends that were extremely intoxicated and one had passed out and his friends laid him in his front yard. Local business reported a theft by a former employee. The theft was caught on surveillance. Open cases currently under investigation: 17 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: July 29, 2015 MEETING: August 5, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • Public Works has been busy with the following projects: o Independence Beach: Installed two culverts and a storm structure this past week and the grubbing has begun for the Ardmore storm pond. WSB has staked the project for us and we are now ready to start work on the storm water project. o Tower Drive: The asbestos has been removed in the filtration basin and work has begun for the final pond excavation and filtration installation. Next will be installing Tower Drive utilities and preparing Hamel Road for curb. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • Linda has completed our MS-4 permit for 2014. This was a time consuming project with all the changes and updates that were added. We will be looking for some help from our engineering consultant next year. • Public Works has responded to a few storm water complaints in the past few weeks due to the heavy rains. • All the new water and sewer extension projects have kept our water and sewer operator very busy. To add to this, he has been installing a large number of radio readers to the new homes and also working with the Finance Department to add them to the accounting for utilities. • PW hosted the Rural Water Association at 600 Clydesdale last week and conducted training on utility locating. There were around 50 PW employees from around the metro and out state. • I will be reviewing our strategy to complete the well #8 and well house improvement project. PARKS/TRAILS • The Park at Fields of Medina is nearing completion and the playground should be usable by the time you read this. There is a change order in your packet to address the seeding that was not originally in the bid documents. The pavilion will be finished next week and the sport court surface to follow. This park will be a show piece for Medina and is the result of the vision of the Park Commission, City Council, and Staff. MISCELLANEOUS • Public Works has done some brush trimming on Arrowhead Drive in the gravel section. The lack of City right-of-way limits what we can cut, but we did make the sight lines a little bit better for the people who travel that road. ORDER CHECKS July 22, 2015 - August 4, 2015 43122 GEISLER, CHARLES................................................................... $21.16 43123 HALLEN, JACOB...................................................................... $150.00 43124 KHATTOI, MADHUSWAPNA...................................................... $250.00 43125 PONNUSWAMY,JAYARAJ......................................................... $250.00 43126 ASPLUND, KRISTINE...............................................................$150.00 43127 BANK OF MAPLE PLAIN ........................................................ $3,202.50 43128 BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP...........................................$146,841.88 43129 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO ..................................................... $584.32 43130 FLARE HEATING&A/C................................................................$4.00 43131 HENRI GERMAIN................................................................ $10,000.00 43132 US HOME CORP..........................................................................$4.00 43133 MATTAMY MPLS PRTNSHP.........................................................$24.00 43134 MN DEPT OF LABOR/INDUSTRY............................................ $5,695.84 43135 PEMBERTON, LAURA............................................................... $250.00 43136 RYAN COMPANIES............................................................. $39,831.68 43137 SCHULTZ, JANE...................................................................... $250.00 43138 SUBRAMANIAN, SATISH.......................................................... $150.00 43139 TARGET CORPORATION..................................................... $64,249.01 43140 TOLL BROS, INC................................................................ $20,000.00 43141 WELD & SONS PLUMBING...........................................................$8.00 43142 APPLIED CONCEPTS INC...................................................... $2,950.80 43143 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO .................................................... $1,228.70 43144 BIFFS INC............................................................................... $504.00 43145 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS........................................................ $573.86 43146 CAREFREE SERVICES INC..................................................... $6,790.00 43147 CENTURYLINK........................................................................ $644.00 43148 CIRCLE V SPECIALTIES, INC...................................................... $60.00 43149 DITTER INC............................................................................ $883.33 43150 DOBOS................................................................................... $196.65 43151 DPC INDUSTRIES INC.......................................................... $1,216.91 43152 ECM PUBLISHERS INC............................................................. $102.90 43153 FEHN COMPANIES INC......................................................... $3,156.50 43154 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD ............................................... $145.14 43155 HOLIDAY FLEET...................................................................... $412.25 43156 INDOOR AUTO........................................................................ $237.40 43157 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES...................................................... $144.19 43158 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC............................................. $739.39 43159 KELLY'S WRECKER SERVICE INC................................................ $75.00 43160 KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED ........................................ $9,115.56 43161 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR .................................................... $376.00 43162 MADISON NATIONAL LIFE ....................................................... $598.61 43163 MARCOINC..............................................................................$27.56 43164 METRO WEST INSPECTION .................................................. $6,268.26 43165 MINNESOTA PUMP WORKS ................................................. $12,735.00 43166 MINUTEMAN PRESS............................................................. $3,141.76 43167 MN ASSOC OF CEMETARIES...................................................... $60.00 43168 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ......................................... $687.50 43169 MODERN MARKETING............................................................. $165.86 43170 MOTHERS MOTORS/LORETTO TOWING ................................... $143.25 43171 NAPA-GENUINE PARTS CO ...................................................... $310.21 43172 NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR ......................................... $845.00 43173 OFFICE DEPOT....................................................................... $130.73 43174 OVERHEAD DOOR CO OF NORTHLAND .................................... $197.45 43175 PEARSON BROS., INC........................................................$125,848.20 43176 RD] SPECIALTIES, INC............................................................ $325.89 43177 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC...................................... $7,138.62 43178 SPECTER INSTRUMENTS INC................................................... $395.00 43179 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL.............................................................. $504.90 43180 SUPERIOR BROOKDALE FORD ................................................. $627.01 43181 SUPPLY SOLUTIONS LLC......................................................... $307.24 43182 TEGRETE CORP.................................................................... $1,576.51 43183 TIMESAVER OFFSITE.............................................................. $199.00 43184 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICES IN ........................................ $874.01 43185 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE .................................................. $251.59 43186 WSB & ASSOCIATES.......................................................... $76,592.75 Total Checks $561,420.88 Electronic Payments July 16, 2015 — July 30, 2015 003256E PREMIUM WATERS INC .............................................................$69.75 003257E MINNESOTA, STATE OF ........................................................ $3,132.00 003258E PITNEY BOWES................................................................... $1,000.00 003259E PR PERA............................................................................ $13,761.78 003260E PR FED/FICA...................................................................... $14,722.39 003261E PR MN Deferred Comp.......................................................... $1,980.00 003262E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA.................................................... $3,091.95 003263E SELECT ACCOUNT................................................................... $702.00 003264E CITY OF MEDINA......................................................................$18.00 003265E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL.............................................$20.00 003266E DELTA DENTAL.................................................................... $2,348.34 003267E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC........................................................... $355.80 003268E VALVOLINE FLEET SERVICES ................................................... $130.06 003269E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN......................................... $1,721.21 003270E KONICA MINOLTA................................................................... $168.48 Total Electronic Checks $43,221.76 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT July 29. 2015 506557 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L..................................................... $1,269.15 506558 BARNHART, ERIN A.............................................................. $1,868.18 506559 BELLAND, EDGAR J.............................................................. $2,530.20 506560 BOECKER, KEVIN D.............................................................. $2,056.90 506561 CONVERSE, KEITH A ............................................................ $2,205.36 506562 DINGMANN, IVAN W............................................................ $2,099.29 506563 DOMINO, CHARMANE........................................................... $1,771.05 506564 ENDE, JOSEPH..................................................................... $1,367.22 506565 FINKE, DUSTIN D................................................................. $2,136.95 506566 GALLUP, JODI M.................................................................. $1,602.01 506567 GLEASON, JOHN M............................................................... $2,199.68 506568 GREGORY, THOMAS............................................................. $1,806.78 506569 HALL, DAVID M.................................................................... $2,009.10 506570 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S........................................................... $2,147.94 506571 JOHNSON, SCOTT T............................................................. $2,213.93 506572 KLAERS, ANNE M.................................................................... $814.24 506573 LANE, LINDA....................................................................... $1,509.27 506574 LEUER, GREGORYJ.............................................................. $1,905.73 506575 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R.................................................... $1,622.02 506576 NELSON,JASON................................................................... $2,224.62 506577 PETERSON, DEBRA A ........................................................... $1,594.18 506578 REINKING, DEREK M............................................................ $1,544.89 506579 SCHERER, STEVEN T............................................................ $2,273.40 506580 VIEAU, CECILIA M................................................................ $1,188.62 506581 VINCK, JOHNJ.................................................................... $1,801.77 506582 WENANDE, BRANDON 5.......................................................... $474.68 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $46,237.16