HomeMy Public PortalAbout08.15.2017 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 15, 2017
7:00 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
Meeting Rules of Conduct:
• Fill out and turn in white
comment card
• Give name and address
• Indicate if representing a group
• Limit remarks to 3-5 minutes
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the August 2, 2017 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Appoint Andrew Scharf to Police Officer Position
B. Approve Job Description and Authorize Recruitment for Community Service Officer Position
C. Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit Approval to David and Katherine Crosby for a
Second Principal Dwelling at 2402 Hamel Road
VI. PRESENTATIONS
A. Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,235,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series
2017A
VII. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Arrowhead Holdings, LLC — Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination - 4101 Arrowhead Drive
1. Resolution Granting Preliminary and Final Plat Approval for Cavanaughs Meadowwoods
Park Second Addition
2. Resolution Granting Lot Combination Approval for 4101 Arrowhead Drive and Lot 1,
Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition
B. Medina Senior Living Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review
C. Highway 55 Watermain Discussion
D. Resolution to Contract with a Council Member (Hwy 55 Rental for Medina Celebration Day)
IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XII. ADJOURN
Posted 8/11/2017 Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: August 10, 2017
DATE OF MEETING: August 15, 2017
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Appoint Andrew Scharf to Police Officer Position — Based on the final scoring of
applicants, committee interviews, and background/reference checks, staff recommends
the appointment of Andrew Scharf to the position of police officer contingent on him
passing his Minnesota POST Board exam, which he is scheduled to take on August 10,
2017. Mr. Scharf has verbally accepted the position with a starting date of August 16,
2017, contingent on City Council approval.
See attached memo.
B. Approve Job Description and Authorize Recruitment for Community Service Officer
Position — Staff recommends approving the job description and beginning the recruitment
process to replace Community Service Officer Andrew Scharf as he transitions to a
licensed Police Officer position at the City of Medina.
See attached job description.
C. Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit Approval to David and Katherine Crosby for
a Second Principal Dwelling at 2402 Hamel Road — The City Council reviewed this
request at their August 2, 2017 meeting and directed staff to prepare the attached
resolution for approval. Staff recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
VI. PRESENTATIONS
A. Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,235,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 2017A — An Ehler's Representative will be present at the City Council Meeting to
discuss the results of the bond sale for the Deer Hill Road Project.
See attached resolution.
Recommended Motion: Move to adopt the resolution awarding the sale of
general obligation improvement bonds, series 2017A, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $1,235, 000; fixing their form and specifications; directing
their execution and delivery; and providing for their payment
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Arrowhead Holdings, LLC — Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination - 4101 Arrowhead
Drive - Arrowhead Holdings, LLC desires to rearrange the lot line between 4101
Arrowhead Drive (the lot containing the Open Systems International (OSI) headquarters)
and the adjacent vacant outlot to the southeast. This rearrangement would allow for an
expansion of the OSI parking lot to the southeast to accommodate increased parking for
OSI's expanding employment.
See attached report.
Recommended Motion #1: Move to adopt the resolution granting preliminary
and final plat approval of the Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition.
Recommended Motion #2: Move to adopt the resolution granting approval of the
lot combination of 4101 Arrowhead Drive and Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs
Meadowwoods Park Second Addition.
B. Medina Senior Living Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plan, and Site Plan Review —
Lunski, Inc. has made an application for a rezoning, preliminary plat, and site plan review
for development of a three-story 90-unit senior housing building, a two-story medical
office building, and a vacant lot for future development. The property is located north of
Highway 55, west of Mohawk Drive, and south of Chippewa Road. The site is 10.8 acres
in size. There is a 2.6 acre wetland on the lot. Much of the site is wooded.
See attached report.
Potential Motion #1: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution granting
preliminary plat approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
Potential Motion #2: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution granting site
plan review approval, but only upon receipt and review of plans from the
applicant which reduce the wetland impacts and address comments of the Elm
Creek Watershed and City Engineer.
C. Highway 55 Watermain Discussion — In 1985 Medina installed a trunk watermain linking
the well fields on the east side of town to the water tower on the west side. At the time,
the watermain was placed within the ROW on Highway 55 out of the drive lanes for ease
of access, less costly maintenance and repairs. As the years have passed, the highway has
been widened in several areas making access difficult, repairs very costly, and increasing
the potential for high impact to vehicular traffic. Along with the pipe being under the
highway in some places, the pipe is also aging and beginning to break more frequently.
Staff is working with the City Engineer as to options available to address our current
2
situation, including a replacement pipe, pipe lining, pipe bursting, or other viable options.
Staff will provide an update at the City Council meeting.
See attached report.
D. Resolution to Contract with a Council Member (Hwy 55 Rental for Medina Celebration
Day) — The City of Medina rents, as well as purchases, items from Highway 55 Rental
each year for Medina Celebration Day, but because one of the City Council members,
Jeff Pederson, has an interest in Highway 55 Rental, the city needs to pass this resolution.
If competitive bids are not required, the city may do business with a company where a
councilmember has an interest if a resolution is adopted. At the meeting, a non -interested
councilmember makes a motion to adopt the resolution. Before voting, the interested
councilmember should state, and it should be recorded in the minutes, that he is
abstaining from voting on the resolution because he has a financial interest in the
contract. The motion must be passed by a unanimous vote of the remaining council. Staff
recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
Recommended Motion: Adopt resolution to contract with a council member.
XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 004250E-004275E for $55, 778.66,
order check numbers 046195-046253 for $212,218.39, and payroll EFT 0508075-0508105 for
$47, 955.79.
• Planning Department Update
• Police Department Update
• Public Works Department Update
• Claims List
3
DRAFT
2
3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 2, 2017
4
5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on August 2, 2017 at 7:00
6 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided.
7
8 I. ROLL CALL
9
10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Pederson, Martin, and Mitchell.
11
12 Members absent: None.
13
14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer
15 Jim Stremel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief
16 of Police Ed Belland.
17
18 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.)
19
20 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.)
21 The agenda was approved as presented.
22
23 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.)
24
25 A. Approval of the July 18, 2017 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
26 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the July 18, 2017 special City
27 Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
28
29 B. Approval of the July 18, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
30 It was noted on page two, line 18, it should state, "...to solidify confirm..."
31
32 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the July 18, 2017 regular City
33 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously.
34
35 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:02 p.m.)
36
37 A. Resolution No. 2017-57 Accepting Bids and Awarding the Contract for the
38 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project to Hydro-Klean LLC
39 B. Approve Tree Trimming Services Agreement with Emery's Tree Service,
40 Inc.
41 C. Resolution No. 2017-58 Approving Off -Site Gambling Permit for the Hamel
42 Lions Club to Conduct Lawful Charitable Gambling at 3200 Mill Drive
43 D. Resolution No. 2017-59 Granting Preliminary and Final Plat Approval for
44 Hamel Road Thirty Two
45 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the consent agenda. Motion
46 passed unanimously.
47
48 VI. PRESENTATIONS
49
50 A. Resolution No. 2017-60 Recognizing Jeremiah Jessen for 10 Years of
51 Service to the City of Medina (7:03 p.m.)
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
August 2, 2017
1 Mitchell read aloud the draft resolution recognizing Jeremiah Jessen for his 10 years of
2 service to the City of Medina with the police department. He expressed his appreciation
3 for Jessen's continued excellent work.
4
5 Jessen stated that he is very fortunate to work for the City of Medina and he is always
6 proud to say he works for the City of Medina. He thanked the citizens of Medina and
7 noted that the police department appreciates working for the community.
8
9 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-60 recognizing
10 Jeremiah Jessen for 10 years of service to the City of Medina. Motion passed
11 unanimously.
12
13 B. Resolution No. 2017-61 Recognizing Anne Klaers for 10 Years of Service to
14 the City of Medina (7:06 p.m.)
15 Mitchell read aloud the draft resolution recognizing Anne Klaers for her 10 years of
16 service to the City of Medina. He thanked her for her hard work at the City.
17
18 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adopt resolution no. 2017-61 recognizing
19 Anne Klaers for 10 years of service to the City of Medina. Motion passed
20 unanimously.
21
22 Belland stated that he cannot speak highly enough for Jessen and Klaers and could not
23 ask for better employees. He stated that they both continue to work hard and contribute
24 a lot to the police department. He stated that he appreciates the work that they do every
25 day and thanked them for 10 years of service.
26
27 Mitchell stated that the Council and administration appreciates the work the police
28 department does. He stated that they are all in this together and that is how they will
29 continue to make Medina a great place.
30
31 VII. COMMENTS (7:10 p.m.)
32
33 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda
34 There were none.
35
36 B. Park Commission
37 Scherer stated that the parks are in good shape and are being well used this time of
38 year.
39
40 C. Planning Commission
41 Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to consider a
42 PUD Concept Plan from the Excelsior Group which would include 68 single-family
43 homes. He noted that the second hearing would be a proposed plat and lot
44 rearrangement from OSI to expand their parking lot and the third hearing would be a
45 variance request to replace their trash enclosure in order to support the County Road
46 116 project. He stated that the Commission will also once again consider the Lunski
47 project and also an ordinance amendment regarding the Wood Lake Landfill in Medina.
48
49 VIII. NEW BUSINESS
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
August 2, 2017
1 A. Buddy and Kim Snow — Conditional Use Permit for 2nd Principal Dwelling —
2 2402 Hamel Road (7:14 p.m.)
3 Mitchell stated that this is his niece and nephew but he does not have a financial interest
4 in the project and therefore does not believe he has a conflict of interest.
5
6 Finke presented a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) request for a second principal dwelling
7 noting that one of the stipulations is that the second home would only be available for
8 family members, employees or as a guest house and could not be rented out. He stated
9 that there is a home and barn existing on the site and provided an aerial photograph
10 identifying the proposed location of the secondary homes. He also highlighted the
11 proposed locations for the primary and secondary septic sites for both homes. He noted
12 that a ghost plat was also included to show how the property could be divided in the
13 future, should the homes need to be sold separately. He stated that the Planning
14 Commission held a public hearing the previous month and recommended unanimous
15 approval of the request. He stated that staff also recommends approval of the request
16 subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
17
18 Kim Snow stated that she has two older brothers and the agreement they have always
19 had was to keep the property in their family. She stated that the plan was to move there
20 once her parents passed on but with her mother's health conditions they would like to
21 move to the property sooner in order to help and enjoy the property with all three
22 generations.
23
24 Mitchell asked if the application would need to be changed if the use changes from
25 family to a guest house.
26
27 Finke explained that the three allowed uses would be available without changing the
28 CUP.
29
30 Mitchell stated that the applicants are listed as the Snows but the Crosbys are the
31 owners of the property and asked if they would sign the documents as well.
32
33 Finke explained that the owners of the property have also signed the application
34 documents in addition to the Snows.
35
36 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of
37 approval for the Conditional Use Permit request of Buddy and Kim Snow for a second
38 principal dwelling at 2402 Hamel Road, based upon the findings noted in the staff report
39 and subject to the conditions in the report. Motion passed unanimously.
40
41 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:23 p.m.)
42
43 A. Agreement by and between the City of Medina and Process System
44 Integration Regarding Stockpiling on PID 03-118-23-32-0007
45 Johnson presented an agreement for stockpiling for fill at the Medina Senior Living site.
46 He stated that the applicant is requesting to place fill on the site prior to receiving
47 approvals for the site. He noted that a $250,000 letter of credit would also be required
48 that would cover the removal of the fill, should the applicant not receive development
49 approvals and leave the site.
50
51 Pederson asked about the hauling route.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
August 2, 2017
1
2 Finke replied that the hauling would come directly from Highway 55.
3
4 Anderson stated that he spoke with Finke earlier regarding potential noise concerns and
5 was reassured that the hauling would take place during the regular construction hours
6 and there would not be much impact.
7
8 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the agreement by and
9 between the City of Medina and Process System Integration regarding stockpiling on
10 PID 03-118-23-32-0007. Motion passed unanimously.
11
12 B. Recognition
13 Johnson stated that the City's reporter, Susan Van Cleaf, has covered the City of
14 Medina for 15 years and thanked her for the exceptional job she does.
15
16 Susan stated that she has enjoyed the different stories and the people of Medina.
17
18 Mitchell stated that it would be appropriate to have the Council direct staff to prepare a
19 letter thanking Susan for her work.
20
21 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Martin, to direct staff to prepare a letter thanking
22 Susan Van Cleaf for her 15 years of service reporting on the City of Medina. Motion
23 passed unanimously.
24
25 C. Broadband Grant
26 Johnson stated that unfortunately DEED did not agree to modify Mediacom's broadband
27 grant and therefore the grant could not be applied to 2017 and 2018 buildout in Medina.
28 Mediacom will have to submit a new grant application to DEED for the remaining
29 approximately 6 miles of buildout in 2018 in Medina. He asked for approval from the
30 Council on a letter of support for Mediacom's grant application.
31
32 Martin suggested a revision to the first paragraph of the letter.
33
34 Anderson suggested that a sense of urgency be expressed as well.
35
36 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to support Mediacom's grant application.
37 Motion passed unanimously.
38
39 D. Update
40 Johnson stated that he and Finke had a conference call with the Metropolitan Council
41 staff to review the draft Comprehensive Plan.
42
43 Finke stated that this information will be presented to the Steering Committee for further
44 action as questions were raised regarding the staging of high density housing. He
45 stated that the staging would not meet the requirements of the Met Council. He was
46 confident that the comments were not consistent with the policies of the Met Council and
47 believed that an appropriate narrative would clear up the misconception.
48
49 Martin stated that she would like input from the Council. She stated that there is no
50 place else that is right for high density residential that would meet the objectives of the
51 City to minimize the impact on the Wayzata School District and the traffic on Highway
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
August 2, 2017
1 55. She stated that if the property developed between 2018 and 2020 will not qualify as
2 high -density housing, those units simply should not be allowed to develop until 2020.
3
4 Anderson agreed that going out to identify additional land would disrupt the public input
5 process that took place.
6
7 Martin stated that the applications for high density housing are not coming in from
8 Medina residents and therefore delaying that development would not impact Medina
9 residents. She stated that she would also like clarity on the use of senior assisted living
10 as high density.
11
12 Finke stated that there will be a lot of those discussions through the Steering Committee
13 and then back through the City Council.
14
15 Martin stated that she would like to hear the position of the Council because until the
16 discussions are complete with the Met Council, the Council should not be hearing any
17 applications for those properties.
18
19 Anderson asked if there were additional comments on any other topics.
20
21 Finke stated that there were additional comments on the long-term City sewer area, but
22 noted that was to be expected.
23
24 Cousineau stated that there are additional business acres that could be used for senior
25 living and believed that needs to be evaluated as well, since all the commercial along
26 Highway 55 would roll into the business district under the new Comprehensive Plan.
27
28 Martin stated that she is unsure that those units would count as density units.
29
30 Finke stated that the units would not count traditionally but would impact the future
31 forecasts for the City.
32
33 Cousineau stated that she would prefer that the use be taken out of the business zoning
34 district as that would add people that the City did not commit to. She stated that perhaps
35 the business zoning district be amended to only allow housing in a certain portion of it.
36
37 Anderson stated if the Metropolitan Council does not understand that the staging for high
38 density would fulfill their objective, he would support Martin's comment in then delaying
39 that development until 2020.
40
41 X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:43 p.m.)
42 Mitchell stated that Night to Unite took place the night before and thanked staff, police
43 and fire and volunteers that helped to make the night a success. He reviewed a list of
44 places that the Council, police, fire, and staff were able to visit. He stated that the
45 purpose is for people to get to know their neighbors and City staff, police and fire to
46 encourage a sense of community. He appreciated the staff, Council and police that
47 attended parties the previous night and congratulated everyone on a successful event.
48
49 Martin commented on the joyful interaction between the police officers and children of
50 the community. She commended the police for having such a wonderful team that
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
August 2, 2017
1 interacts so well with the community and the youth. She thanked Belland for his great
2 leadership.
3
4 Belland also thanked the Council, noting that leadership begins at the top and he
5 appreciated the participation of the Council in the event as well. He stated that having
6 great leadership makes his job so much easier and noted that City staff is aware of how
7 well they have it with this great leadership team. He stated that for law enforcement, it is
8 important to build relationships in the community to know the people that you are
9 working to protect and serve.
10
11 XI. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:47 p.m.)
12 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the bills, EFT 004231E-004249E
13 for $60, 685.72, order check numbers 046132-046194 for $193, 071.79, and payroll EFT
14 0508049-0508074 for $47,847.16. Motion passed unanimously.
15
16 XII. ADJOURN
17 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to adjourn the meeting at 7:48 p.m.
18 Motion passed unanimously.
19
20
21
22
23 Bob Mitchell, Mayor
24 Attest:
25
26
27 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6
August 2, 2017
Agenda Item # 5A
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Chief Ed Belland and HR Representative Jodi Gallup
DATE OF REPORT: August 8, 2017
DATE OF MEETING: August 15, 2017
SUBJECT: Police Officer Appointment
General Background
With the open Police Officer position after the release of a probationary officer, the City
Council authorized staff to post and conduct a hiring process to fill the position at the
May 2, 2017 City Council meeting. Based on the final scoring of applicants, committee
interviews, and background/reference checks, we are recommending the appointment of
Andrew Scharf to the position of police officer contingent on him passing his Minnesota
POST Board exam, which he is scheduled to take on August 10, 2017. Mr. Scharf has
verbally accepted the position with a starting date of August 16, 2017, contingent on City
Council approval.
Appointee Background
Mr. Scharf currently serves as a Community Service Officer (CSO) with the City of
Medina. He has served as our CSO since September 21, 2016. He previously worked 2 1/2
years as a CSO for the City of Maple Grove and has 3 years of experience as a Reserve
Deputy for Sherburne County Sheriff's Office.
Mr. Scharf is almost finished completing his Bachelor's Degree in Criminal Justice
through St. Cloud State University and will graduate at the end of this summer. He has
completed his Minnesota POST Skills training and is scheduled to take his MN POST
Board exam on August 10, 2017.
The entire department is excited about the opportunity to have Mr. Scharf join our team.
The Police Department has confidence in his abilities, communication, character, and
problem solving skills in law enforcement.
Selection Process
• The City Council approved the job description and directed staff to recruit for a
full-time Police Officer position on May 2, 2017.
• Advertisements for the position were published through the League of Minnesota
Cities, POST website, and the City Website.
• 37 applications were received, reviewed and scored on May 24, 2017 by Assistant
City Administrator Jodi Gallup, Police Sergeant Jason Nelson, and Police
Administrative Assistant Cec Vieau.
• The top 22 applicants were invited to an initial "Meet and greet" oral interview
and written test on June 8th, but 18 candidates showed up. The oral interview was
1
conducted with Chief Belland, Sergeant Nelson, Administrative Assistant Vieau
and Assistant City Administrator Gallup.
• The top 6 candidates (combined test and oral interview scores) were invited back
for an interview with three of our police officers, Council member Cousineau, and
a Medina business owner on June 13th. The interview panel scored the candidates
and recommended the top three return for a final interview.
• Chief Belland and Sergeant Nelson conducted final interviews with the top three
finalists and recommended Andrew Scharf as the top candidate. The other
finalists have been put on an eligibility list in the event we have an opening within
the next year.
• The Medina Police Department conducted an extensive background check on Mr.
Scharf, which he passed. Mr. Scharf also completed the physical and
psychological exams which he also passed.
• Chief Belland tentatively offered the position to Mr. Scharf on August 2, 2017,
and he verbally accepted that same day. His starting date will be August 16, 2017,
with an hourly wage (non-exempt) of $24.06/hr., vacation to begin accruing at 10
days per year with one personal floating holiday, and other benefits to be at the
same rate as other union employees, in accordance with the City Personnel
Policies. Following a one year probationary period, Mr. Scharf s performance will
be reviewed, with a positive review Mr. Scharf will become a non -probationary
employee and move to pay STEP 2 in the union contract on August 16, 2018. Mr.
Scharf has been notified that our recommendation is contingent upon City
Council approval.
Recommendation
We recommend the appointment of Andrew Scharf to the position of full-time Police
Officer, effective August 16, 2017, with an hourly wage (non-exempt) of $24.06/hr.,
vacation to begin accruing at 10 days per year, and other benefits to be at the same
rate as other union employees, in accordance with the City Personnel Policies.
Following a one year probationary period, Mr. Scharf s performance will be
reviewed with a possible raise up to STEP 2 of the union contract on August 16,
2018.
2
MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item # 5B
p: 763-473-9209
f: 763-473-8858
non -emergency: 763-525-6210
Emergency 9-1-1
TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council
FROM: Chief Ed Belland
DATE: August 9, 2017
RE: Filling of the Open CSO Position
With the hiring of Community Service Officer (CSO) Andrew Scharf as our next patrol
officer, I would request permission to post and recruit for applicants to fill the open CSO
position. Attached is the job description for the CSO position.
I would ask the Medina City Council for their permission to move forward with the hiring of
a part-time CSO to fill the open position.
City of Medina Position Description
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER
Position Title: Community Service Officer
Department: Police Department
Supervisor's Title: Patrol Sergeant
Pay Grade: $16.00 to $18.00/hour DOQ
FLSA Status: NON-EXEMPT
Work Status: Part-time, temporary
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF POSITION
To provide a variety of public safety and other municipal services, including, but not limited to, crime
prevention, animal control, packet deliveries, equipment maintenance, property control, limited code
enforcement, investigation, and follow up on nuisance complaints, and other duties not requiring a sworn
police officer.
ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF POSITION
• Patrols City streets and responds to non -emergency calls assigned.
• Works with the City Planning Depaitiiient to observe, report, and enforce the City's nuisance ordinance.
• Impounds at -large dogs and found dogs.
• Assists the public with questions involving community service related topics.
• Investigates and writes reports on animal bites, medical emergencies, found property, and other
miscellaneous complaints.
• Assists the public in the recovery of lost or stolen animals.
• Assists in identifying found animals, notifying owners when necessary.
• Provides emergency medical assistance and life support as a first responder.
• Transports police evidence to appropriate agency for examination.
• Assists in squads upkeep; takes the squads in for scheduled maintenance.
• Performs housekeeping duties, (ie. garage, booking room, evidence room.)
• Performs house checks.
• Assists officers with traffic control.
• Delivers necessary paperwork to the City attorney's office, Ridgedale Court, and City officials.
• Observes and reports violations of the nuisance ordinance.
• Performs other duties as assigned.
OTHER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
• Assists with general office duties, typing and filing reports, entering data, and answering phones.
• Works with the CJIS and NCIC systems.
• Assists the administration as directed.
• Assists public at the front window with report request, burn permits, and hunting permits.
• Assists with inventory of recovered property.
• Maintains the inventory of need forms and equipment.
• Maintains business directories for CAD.
• Coordinates Crime Prevention programs.
• Assists with evidence preparation for court.
• 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, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES
• Knowledge of principles, procedures, techniques and equipment of law enforcement.
• Knowledge of pertinent Federal, State and local laws, codes and regulations.
• Knowledge of City geography.
• Skill to handle animal restraint and care techniques.
• Skill to keep records and file maintenance systems.
• Skill and principles of report preparation.
• Ability to work with operational hazards and standard safety practices.
• Ability to use methods and techniques in conflict resolution.
City Council Approved:
City of Medina Position Description
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER
■ Ability to maintain physical condition necessary for sitting, standing, or walking for prolonged periods;
light to moderately heavy lifting and carrying; may be required to climb, stoop, kneel in performance of
the job responsibilities; general manual dexterity; adequate vision, speech, and hearing required; must be
able to operate assigned equipment.
AUTHORITY: This position is specifically limited to aiding and assisting regular police officers and the
administrative staff in the performance of their duties or acting upon the rights as a citizen of the State of
Minnesota. By ordinance this position has limited authority to issue citation for certain misdemeanor violations.
Conduct and actions are controlled by depai lenient policy.
FIREARMS: The use of a firearm will be limited to the use of a shotgun for the dispatching of injured or sick
animals. Each Community Service Officer will be trained in the use of the shotgun. They will have to qualify
and show proficiency annually.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
■ A minimum of 18 years of age.
■ Enrolled in a post -secondary two or four year criminal justice or law enforcement degree program.
■ Possess a valid Minnesota Driver's License.
■ Possess good judgment and common sense.
■ Must be able to tolerate stress in a multitude of forms, such as taking enforcement action, dealing with
anxious and emotional persons.
■ Work rotating shifts.
■ First responder training.
DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS
Experience with community service, computer maintenance, working with animals, public relations and
public presentations.
WORKING CONDITIONS: Combination of outside environment and office environment. Outside
environment, exposure to inclement weather conditions. Office environment exposure to computers
and working closely with others.
City Council Approved:
Agenda Item # 5C
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2017-##
RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL
TO DAVID AND KATHERINE CROSBY FOR A SECOND PRINCIPAL DWELLING
AT 2402 HAMEL ROAD
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, David P. Crosby and Katherine P. Crosby (the "Owners") own property
located at 2402 Hamel Road (the "Property"), which is 71.5 acres in size and is legally described
in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, Katherine Crosby Snow and Buddy L. Snow (the "Applicants") are the
daughter and son-in-law, respectively, of the Owners and have requested a Conditional Use
Permit on behalf of the Owners to construct and occupy a second principal dwelling on the
Property; and
WHEREAS, a second principal dwelling is permitted on Rural Residential properties
over 40 acres in size, subject to review and approval of a conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the requested
conditional use permit on July 11, 2017, heard testimony from the Applicant, City staff, and
interested parties, and recommended approval subject to certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the request at the August 2, 2017 meeting,
reviewed the testimony and recommendation of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, following such review the City Council made the following findings:
1) The proposed second dwelling is consistent with the specific requirements for the
conditional use as described in 826.98 of the City Code, subject to the conditions noted in
this resolution.
2) The proposed second dwelling is consistent with the general criteria described for
conditional uses in Section 825.39 of the City Code.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
hereby approves the conditional use permit for David and Katherine Crosby at 2402 Hamel
Road, subject to the following terms and conditions:
1) The dwellings may not be conveyed separately and shall be under common ownership,
unless the Property is subdivided to create a conforming lot for each dwelling under then -
Resolution No. 2017-##
August 15, 2017
current regulations. If the Property is subdivided, this conditional use permit shall
become null and void.
2) The second dwelling on the Property shall be only occupied by members of the property
Owners' family, by persons employed on the Property, or as a guest house.
3) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in the amount sufficient to pay for all costs
associated with the review of the application for Conditional Use Permit.
Dated: August 15, 2017.
By:
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
By:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-## 2
August 15, 2017
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of the Property
The East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 9, Township 118, Range 23,
Except that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section
9, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principle Meridian, described
as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter; thence East along the south line of said Southeast Quarter a distance
of 815 feet; thence deflecting left 87 degrees 40 minutes a distance of 520
feet; thence deflecting left 88 degrees a distance of 175 feet; thence deflecting
right 38 degrees c distance of 83 feet; thence deflecting left 19 degrees 30
minutes to the west line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;
thence South to the point of beginning. According to the United States
Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
August 15, 2017
Agenda Item # 6A
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City of
Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Medina, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Tuesday, August 15, 2017,
commencing at 7:00 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
***
The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which
had been received for the purchase of the City's General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2017A,
to be issued in the original aggregate principal amount of $1,235,000.
The City Administrator presented a tabulation of the proposals that had been received in the
manner specified in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds. The proposals were as set forth in EXHIBIT A
attached.
After due consideration of the proposals, Member then introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2017A, IN THE
ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $1,235,000;
FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING
THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR
THEIR PAYMENT
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
Section 1. Sale of Bonds.
1.01 Authority. It is hereby determined that:
(a) Certain assessable public improvements known as the 2017 Deerhill
Improvement Project in the City (collectively, the "Improvements") have been made, duly
ordered or contracts let for the construction thereof pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, as amended (collectively, the "Act").
(b) It is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the affairs of
the City to issue its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2017A (the "Bonds"), in the
original aggregate principal amount of $1,235,000, to provide financing for the Improvements.
(c) The City is authorized by Section 475.60, subdivision 2(9) of the Act to negotiate
the sale of the Bonds, it being determined that the City has retained an independent municipal
advisor in connection with such sale. The actions of the City staff and the City's municipal
advisor in negotiating the sale of the Bonds are ratified and confirmed in all aspects.
1.02. Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. The proposal of (the
"Purchaser") to purchase the Bonds of the City is hereby found and determined to be a reasonable offer
and is hereby accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ (par amount
of $1,235,000, [plus original issue premium of $ ,] [less original issue discount of
$ ,] less underwriter's discount of $ ), plus accrued interest to date of delivery,
if any, for Bonds bearing interest as follows:
Year of Interest Year of Interest
Maturity Rate Maturity Rate
2020 % 2026
2021 2027
2022 2028
2023 2029
2024 2030
2025 2031
True interest cost:
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
2
1.03. Purchase Contract. The sum of $ , being the amount proposed by the
Purchaser in excess of $1,220,180, shall be credited to the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or
deposited in the Construction Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the City's Finance Director in
consultation with the City's municipal advisor. The Finance Director is directed to retain the good faith
check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks
of the unsuccessful proposers. The Mayor and City Administrator are directed to execute a contract with
the Purchaser on behalf of the City.
1.04. Terms and Principal Amounts of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell the
Bonds pursuant to the Act in the total principal amount of $1,235,000, originally dated
September 7, 2017, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-
1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing serially on February 1 in the years and
amounts as follows:
Year of
Maturity
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Amount
* Term Bonds
Year of
Maturity
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Amount
1.05. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on September 8, 2017, and on any day thereafter
to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2020. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at
the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are
called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of
such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such
maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such
maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
[1.06. Mandatory Redemption; Term Bonds. To be completed if Term Bonds are requested by the
Purchaser.]
Section 2. Registration and Payment.
2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest
thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft
issued by the Registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment
date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available
for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been
paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of
authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case
the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on
February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2018, to the registered owners of record
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
3
thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or
not that day is a business day.
2.03. Registration. The City will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent
and paying agent (the "Registrar"). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the
Registrar with respect thereto are as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond
register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the
registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or
exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory
to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized
by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the
designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for
registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment
date and until that interest payment date.
(c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for
exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate
principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in
writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be promptly
cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar
for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the
endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the
requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in
good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether
the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the
principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes and payments so made to
registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the
liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner
thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds, sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee
or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is
destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity
date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in
lieu of and in substitution for a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the
reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
4
Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the
Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the
Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it
and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees.
Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such
cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has
already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to
issue a new Bond prior to payment.
(i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof
identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the
redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be
redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the
notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or
any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds
so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that
the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints Bond Trust Services Corporation,
Roseville, Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Administrator are authorized to
execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of
the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized
by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The
City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The
City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon thirty (30) days' notice and upon the appointment of
a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its
possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or
before each principal or interest due date, without further order of the City Council, the Finance Director
must transmit to the Registrar monies sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due.
2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction
of the Finance Director and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City
Administrator, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the
originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to
be such officer before the delivery of a Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and
sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery.
Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any
security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has
been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates
of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed
certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered
under this resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City
Administrator will deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance
with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the
application of the purchase price.
2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one
or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B such changes as
may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and
delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
5
Section 3. Form of Bond.
3.01. Execution of the Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially the
form as attached hereto as EXHIBIT B.
3.02. Approving Legal Opinion. The City Administrator is directed to obtain a copy of the
proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota, which is to
be complete except as to dating thereof and to cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each
Bond.
Section 4. Payment; Security; Funds; Pledges and Covenants.
4.01. Debt Service Fund. The Bonds are payable from the General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 2017A Debt Service Fund (the "Debt Service Fund") hereby created, and the proceeds of
special assessments levied or to be levied (the "Assessments") for the Improvements described herein are
hereby pledged to the Debt Service Fund. There is appropriated to the Debt Service Fund (i) capitalized
interest financed from Bond proceeds, if any; and (ii) amounts over the minimum purchase price of the
Bonds paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance
with Section 1.03 hereof.
4.02. Construction Fund. The proceeds of the Bonds, less the appropriations made in
Section 4.01 hereof, together with any other funds appropriated for the Improvements and Assessments
collected during the construction of the Improvements, will be deposited in a separate construction fund
(the "Construction Fund") to be used solely to defray expenses of the Improvements and the payment of
principal of and interest on the Bonds prior to the completion and payment of all costs of the
Improvements. Any balance remaining in the Construction Fund after completion of the Improvements
may be used to pay the cost in whole or in part of any other improvement instituted under the Act under
the direction of the City Council. When the Improvements are completed and the cost thereof paid, the
Construction Fund is to be closed and subsequent collections of Assessments for the Improvements are to
be deposited in the Debt Service Fund.
4.03. City Covenants. It is hereby determined that the Improvements will directly and
indirectly benefit abutting property, and the City hereby covenants with the holders from time to time of
the Bonds as follows:
(a) The City has caused or will cause the Assessments for the Improvements to be
promptly levied so that the first installment will be collectible not later than 2019 and will take all
steps necessary to assure prompt collection, and the levy of the Assessments is hereby authorized.
The City Council will cause to be taken with due diligence all further actions that are required for
the construction of each Improvement financed wholly or partly from the proceeds of the Bonds,
and will take all further actions necessary for the final and valid levy of the Assessments and the
appropriation of any other funds needed to pay the Bonds and interest thereon when due.
(b) In the event of any current or anticipated deficiency in Assessments, the City
Council will levy ad valorem taxes in the amount of the current or anticipated deficiency.
(c) The City will keep complete and accurate books and records showing receipts
and disbursements in connection with the Improvements and Assessments levied therefor and
other funds appropriated for their payment, collections thereof and disbursements therefrom,
monies on hand and, the balance of unpaid Assessments.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
6
(d) The City will cause its books and records to be audited at least annually and will
furnish copies of such audit reports to any interested person upon request.
(e) At least twenty percent (20%) of the cost of the assessable Improvements
described herein will be specially assessed against benefited properties.
4.04. General Obligation Pledge. If a payment of principal of or interest on the Bonds becomes
due when there is not sufficient money in the Debt Service Fund to pay the same, the Finance Director is
directed to pay such principal or interest from the general fund of the City, and the general fund will be
reimbursed for those advances out of the proceeds of Assessments when collected.
4.05. Debt Service Coverage. It is hereby determined that the estimated collections of
Assessments will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the
principal and interest payments on the Bonds at that no tax levy is needed at this time.
4.06. Certificate of Taxpayer Services Division Manager as to Registration. The City Clerk is
authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division
Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota and to obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the
Act.
Section 5. Authentication of Transcript.
5.01. City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to
prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of
proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the
City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within
their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to
the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished,
may be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein.
5.02. Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, City Administrator, and Finance
Director are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared
and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their
knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and
representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement.
5.03. Other Certificates. The Mayor, City Administrator, and Finance Director are hereby
authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates as are required as a
condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds or
the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at the closing the Mayor, the City
Administrator, and the Finance Director shall also execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable
certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the Finance Director shall also execute and deliver a
certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Bonds.
5.04. Payment of Costs of Issuance. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount
of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to KleinBank, Chaska, Minnesota, on the
closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's municipal advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
7
Section 6. Tax Covenant.
6.01. Tax -Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of
the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action
which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect
at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all
affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become
subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as
hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds.
6.02. No Rebate Required.
(a) The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish
and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of
the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for
investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and
the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States, if the Bonds (together with other
obligations reasonably expected to be issued in calendar year 2017) exceed the small -issuer
exception amount of $5,000,000.
(b) For purposes of qualifying for the small issuer exception to the federal arbitrage
rebate requirements, the City finds, determines and declares that the aggregate face amount of all
tax-exempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued by the City (and all subordinate
entities of the City) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and outstanding at one
time is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning of
Section 148(f)(4)(D) of the Code.
6.03. Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the
Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be
"private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code.
6.04. Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified
tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the
following factual statements and representations:
(a) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the Code;
(b) the City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for
purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code;
(c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than any
private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the City
(and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2017 will not exceed $10,000,000;
and
(d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year
2017 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code.
6.05. Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal
procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
8
Section 7. Book -Entry System; Limited Obligation of City.
7.01. DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or
printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities of the Bonds as described in Section 1.04 hereof.
Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New
York, and its successors and assigns ("DTC"). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding
Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as
nominee of DTC.
7.02. Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent
will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions from
time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the "Participants") or to any other
person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any
responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any
Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any
other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the
Registrar) of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the
payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount
with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the
Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration
books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with
respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if
any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy
and discharge the City's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest
on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds,
as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the
obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Administrator of a written notice to the
effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words "Cede &
Co." will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Administrator
will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent.
7.03. Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket
Issuer Letter of Representations (the "Representation Letter") which shall govern payment of principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds. Any Paying Agent or
Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action
necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter with respect to the Registrar and
Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times.
7.04. Transfers Outside Book -Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City
Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds
that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the
Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the City will issue,
transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in
accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its
services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its
responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
9
depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in
accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method
of payment thereof.
7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to the
contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with
respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and notices with respect to the Bond will
be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC's Operational Arrangements, as set forth
in the Representation Letter.
Section 8. Continuing Disclosure.
8.01. Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. "Continuing Disclosure Certificate"
means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and City Administrator and
dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended
from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof.
8.02. City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City hereby
covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing
Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of the City to
comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of default with respect
to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate,
including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the City to comply with its
obligations under this section.
Section 9. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged as
provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the
Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full
payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and effect. The City may
discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum
sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be
discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest
accrued to the date of such deposit.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
10
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 the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
11
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSALS
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
A-1
EXHIBIT B
FORM OF BOND
No. R- $
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF MEDINA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND
SERIES 2017A
Date of
Rate Maturity Original Issue
February 1, 20_ September 7, 2017
Registered Owner: Cede & Co.
CUSIP
The City of Medina, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin
County, Minnesota (the "City"), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby
promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of
$ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the
annual rate specified above (calculated on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of twelve 30-day
months), payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1, 2018, to the person in
whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business
day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender
hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft
by Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer
Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For
the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full
faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged.
The City may elect on September 8, 2017, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after
February 1, 2020. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such
manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will
notify The Depository Trust Company ("DTC") of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid.
DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each
participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed.
Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,235,000 all of like original
issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued
pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on August 15, 2017 (the "Resolution"), for the
purpose of providing money to defray the expenses incurred and to be incurred in making local
improvements, pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, as amended, and the principal hereof and
interest hereon are payable primarily from special assessments against property specially benefited by
local improvements, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
B-1
and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment
of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in
the City in the event of any deficiency in special assessments pledged, which taxes may be levied without
limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in
denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities.
The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as "qualified
tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended (the "Code") relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within
the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is
transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered
owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender hereof
together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the
registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other
authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to
be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount,
bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee
or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is
registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving
payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any
notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts,
conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, to be done, to exist,
to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid
and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have
happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the
indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under
the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by
manual signature of one of its authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City
Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the
Mayor and City Administrator and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below.
Dated: September 7, 2017
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
(Facsimile) (Facsimile)
Mayor City Administrator
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
B-2
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
BOND TRUST SERVICES CORPORATION
By
Authorized Representative
ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be
construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM -- as tenants in common
TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in common
UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
Custodian
(Cust) (Minor)
under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors
Act, State of
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does
hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said
Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the
premises.
Dated:
Notice:
Signature Guaranteed:
The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it
appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or
any change whatever.
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
B-3
NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities
Transfer Agent Medallion Program ("STAMP"), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program ("SEMP"), the
New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program ("MSP") or other such "signature
guarantee program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP,
SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the infonnation concerning the
assignee requested below is provided.
Name and Address:
(Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is
held by joint account.)
Please insert social security or other identifying
number of assignee
PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION
The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the
books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below.
Date of Registration
Signature of
Registered Owner Officer of Registrar
Cede & Co.
Federal ID #13-2555119
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
B-4
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF MEDINA
) SS.
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Medina, Minnesota (the
"City"), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on August 15, 2017, with the original minutes on
file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the
issuance and sale of the City's General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2017A, in the original
aggregate principal amount of $1,235,000.
WITNESS My hand officially as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this
day of , 2017.
City Clerk
City of Medina, Minnesota
(SEAL)
505044v2 JAE ME230-635
Agenda Item # 8A
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: August 9, 2017
MEETING: August 15, 2017 City Council
SUBJ: Arrowhead Holdings, LLC — Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination -
4101 Arrowhead Drive
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: July 30, 2017
60-day Review Deadline: September 28, 2017
Summary of Request
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC desires to rearrange the lot line between 4101 Arrowhead Drive (the
lot containing the Open Systems International (OSI) headquarters) and the adjacent vacant outlot
to the southeast. This rearrangement would allow for an expansion of the OSI parking lot to the
southeast to accommodate increased parking for OSI's expanding employment.
Rather than just replatting the lot and outlot to shift the lot line, the applicant has requested a
two-step process which would:
1) Subdivide the vacant 3.4 acre outlot at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and
Arrowhead Drive into a lot and a (reduced size) outlot; and
2) Immediately afterwards combine this small lot to the larger OSI property.
The applicant desires this process for their own real estate and financing reasons.
The subject properties are zoned Commercial -Highway. The property to the north is currently
zoned mixed use, but proposed to be reguided to Business in the draft 2040 Comp Plan.
Property to the northeast is currently rural lots, planned for Low Density Residential in the draft
2040 Comp Plan. An aerial can be found at the top of the next page.
Proposed Lots
The existing OSI lot is 20.02 acres and the existing Outlot is 3.4 acres. The applicant proposes
to shift 1.15 acres from the Outlot into the OSI lot, resulting in the OSI lot being 21.17 acres and
the outlot being 2.23 acres.
Because the application is proposing to subdivide the outlot and then subsequently combine a
portion of the property into the OSI lot, the City has to review the "lots" at each step of the
process. The following tables summarize the requirements of the CH district and the proposed
"lots" following the initial subdivision and then also following the subsequent lot combination.
It appears that the proposed lots meet all dimensional standards following both the initial
subdivision and the subsequent lot combination.
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC
Page 1 of 4 August 15, 2017
Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination City Council Meeting
Initial Subdivision:
CH Requirement
Lot Created, Immediately
Outlot A
Combined with OSI Lot
Min. Lot Size
1 acre
1.15 acre
2.23 acre
Min Lot Width
100 feet
194 feet
350 feet
Min Lot Depth
120 feet
258 feet
345 feet
Subsequent Lot Combination:
CH Requirement
Outlot A
Proposed OSI Lot
After Combination
Min. Lot Size
1 acre
2.23 acre
21.17 acre
Min Lot Width
100 feet
350 feet
596 feet
Min Lot Depth
120 feet
345 feet
1725 feet
Front Setback
25 feet
N/A
587 feet
Rear Setback
25 feet
N/A
345 feet
Side Setback
15 feet
N/A
136 feet
Res. Setback
50 feet
N/A
N/A
Hwy 55 Setback
50 feet
N/A
211 feet
Parking Setbacks
Front
25 feet
N/A
232 feet
Rear/Side
10 feet
N/A
40 feet
Street Setback
25 feet
N/A
25 feet
Res Setback
40 feet
N/A
N/A
Max Hardcover
75%
0%
28.8%
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC
Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination
Page 2 of 4
August 15, 2017
City Council Meeting
The lot line is being adjusted in order to accommodate a future expansion of the OSI parking lot.
No other development is proposed at this time. As a result, development matters such as traffic,
landscaping, and the like are not reviewed at this time in connection with the plat or lot
combination. The parking lot expansion would be reviewed through relevant Site Plan Review
provisions for compliance with code. This would likely be an administrative review because of
the size of the expansion.
Right-of-way and Easements
The property owner dedicated right-of-way for Arrowhead Drive during the original subdivision
of the property in 2009. The City Engineer did not recommend additional right-of-way in
connection with this plat. MnDOT was routed on this request and also did not request additional
right-of-way.
The applicant proposes new drainage and utility easements on each side of the new property line
between the OSI lot and the outlot.
Park Dedication
During the initial subdivision of this property back in 2009, the applicant requested to defer park
dedication for the Outlots until these areas were developed in the future. Now that a portion of
Outlot C is proposed to be added to the OSI lot and developed, staff believes it is appropriate to
impose the deferred fees.
The City is allowed to require up to 10% of the buildable property (.115 acres for the land being
added to the OSI lot) or 8% of the market value. In 2009, the cash -in -lieu fee for the OSI lot was
determined to be $5,124.35 per acre. It is likely that this number is slightly low because land
values have increased since 2009. For example, the current taxable market value of Outlot C is
$345,000, or $102,071 per acre, which would result in a fee of $8,165.68 per acre.
However, staff believes it is reasonable to use the 2009 amount since the property is not
proposed to be further subdivided. The City's subdivision ordinance would permit the City to
utilize the current pre -developed market value. If the City Council determines it is appropriate to
use the 2009 fee calculation, this would result in a park dedication fee of $5,893.00 for the 1.15
acres being combined with the OSI lot and developed.
Review Criteria/Planning Commission Recommendation
According to Subd. 10 of Section 820.21 of the subdivision ordinance, the City shall deny
approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the following finding are made:
(a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city,
or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28.
(b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography,
vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are
such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does
not meet minimum lot size standards.
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC
Page 3 of 4 August 15, 2017
Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination City Council Meeting
(d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause
substantial environmental damage.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious
public health problems.
(f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or
private streets, easements or right-of-way.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the requested plat at the August 8 meeting.
No one spoke at the hearing. Following review, the Planning Commission did not make any of
the findings for denial and recommended approval of the attached resolutions granting approval
of the plat and the lot combination.
Potential Actions
If the City Council finds that the plat does not violate one of the findings noted above, the
following motions would be in order:
Move to adopt the resolution granting preliminary and final plat approval of the
Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition.
Move to adopt the resolution granting approval of the lot combination of
4101 Arrowhead Drive and Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second
Addition.
Attachments
1. Document List
2. Excerpt from DRAFT 8/8/2017 Planning Commission minutes
3. Resolution granting preliminary and final plat approval
4. Resolution granting lot combination approval
5. Preliminary Plat
6. Final Plat
7. Survey showing proposed lot combination
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC
Page 4 of 4 August 15, 2017
Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination City Council Meeting
Project: LR-17-209 — OSI Plat and Lot Combination
The following documents are included in 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
6/28/2017
6/28/2017
3
Y
Y
App from owner received 7/31
Fee
6/28/2017
6/27/2017
1
Y
Y
$5000
Preliminary Plat
6/28/2017
6/19/2017
1
Y
Y
Final Plat
6/28/2017
1
Y
Y
Parking Lot Plans
6/28/2017
6/9/2017
4
Y
Y
Title Commitment
7/31/2017
7/5/2017
9
Y
Y
O&E Report
7/31/2017
7/21/2017
4
Y
Y
Response Letter
7/31/2017
7/30/2017
1
Y
N
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Notes
Legal Comments
7/10/2017
1
Y
MnDOT Comments
7/12/2017
2
Y
Legal Notice
7/28/2017
3
Y
5 pages w/ list and affidavit
Preliminary Review
7/20/2017
2
Y
Planning Commission report
8/3/2017
4
Y
8 pages w/ attachments
City Council report
8/9/2017
4
Y
15 pages / attachments
Public Comments
Document Date
Electronic
Notes
Planning Commission minutes
8/8/2017
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT August 8, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Public Hearing — Arrowhead Holdings LLC — 4101 Arrowhead Drive — Preliminary and Final Plat
for Subdivision and Lot Combination
Finke stated that the applicant is seeking to shift the boundary between the OSI property and
neighboring lot. He noted that the applicant is seeking to do this through a two-step process of a
subdivision and then lot combination. He stated that the purpose of the lot line rearrangement would
accommodate extra parking for the OSI property. He reviewed the zoning of the subject properties
and adjacent properties. He identified the portion of the property that would be combined with the
OSI property and the outlot that would be created. He stated that the new lot and outlot would need
to meet relevant standards and then the lot combination would be considered. He noted that the
required standards would be met through the proposed request. He stated that the park dedication was
deferred in 2009 and therefore one of the conditions was that any subsequent development would
trigger that deferred dedication. He stated that the 2009 fee specified was $5,893 and staff would
support using that fee as the use of the property would not be intensified. He stated that potential
findings for the subdivision request were included in the packet, noting that staff supports the two
requests subject to the conditions noted and the addition of the park dedication.
Reid asked if OSI already owns this property.
Finke reported that the City of Minneapolis owns the OSI property, as it was created through
economic development and Arrowhead Holdings is the technical property owner.
Nester asked if the parking lot was undersized to begin with.
Finke replied that the company has been growing and filling the space more than the zoning code
would have anticipated.
Nester asked if this would solve the under parked situation.
The applicant stated that the sizing would meet the capacity of the building. He stated that there are
plans to expand to the north in the future. He stated that this last piece of parking would ensure that
the occupancy of the building is addressed. He stated that this would be 118 additional stalls. He
stated that often the number of stalls are correlated to the number of employees, but noted that there
are a lot of clients that come into the building for months at a time and also remote employees and
interns that come in for months at a time.
White opened the public hearing at 8:06 p.m.
No comments made.
White closed the public hearing at 8:06 p.m.
Motion by Reid, seconded by DesLauriers, to recommend approval of the Cavanaughs
Meadowwoods Park Second Addition and the subsequent lot combination, subject to the conditions
noted in the staff report, with the additional condition that the deferred park dedication be paid.
Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Albers, Amic and Murrin)
1
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2017-##
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
FOR CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECOND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Arrowhead Holdings, LLC (the "Owner") owns property located at the
northwest corner of Highway 55 and Arrowhead Drive (the "Property"), which is legally
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Owner has requested preliminary and final approval of a plat to
subdivide the Property into a lot and an outlot; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed plat on
August 8, 2017, heard testimony from the Owner, city staff, and interested parties and
recommended approval of the plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the proposed plat at the August 15, 2017
meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has, subject to the terms and conditions contained herein,
made the following findings of fact with regards to the requested plat:
(a) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is not
premature, as defined in City Code Section 820.28.
(b) The physical characteristics of this site appear suitable for the type of development
contemplated and the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause environmental
damage or cause public health problems.
(c) The resulting parcel meets minimum lot size standards and the density of development is
consistent with City regulations.
(d) The design of the subdivision will not conflict with public or private streets, easements or
right-of-way.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina,
Minnesota hereby grants preliminary and final plat approval for the plat received by the City on
August 10, 2017, subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The Owner shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to plat
corrections and title documentation;
Resolution No. 2017-##
August 15, 2017
2. The Owner shall pay a park dedication fee of $5,893.00 in -lieu of dedicating additional
land for parks and trails purposes.
3. The plat shall be filed with Hennepin County within 180 days of the date of the city
council resolution granting final approval or the final plat shall be considered void, unless
a written request for time extension is submitted by the Owner and approved by the City
Council; and
4. The Owner shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the preliminary and final plat and related documents.
Dated: August 15, 2017.
By:
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
By:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-## 2
August 15, 2017
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property
Outlot C, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
August 15, 2017
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2017-##
RESOLUTION GRANTING LOT COMBINATION APPROVAL
FOR 4101 ARROWHEAD DRIVE AND LOT 1, BLOCK 1,
CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECOND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota ("Minneapolis") owns property located
at 4101 Arrowhead Drive ("Parcel 1"), which is legally described as:
Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Arrowhead Holdings, LLC ("Arrowhead Holdings") owns property located
at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and Arrowhead Drive ("Parcel 2"), which is legally
described as:
Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Arrowhead Holdings intends to convey Parcel 2 to Minneapolis, which
intends to combine Parcel 2 with Parcel 1 to create a single, larger parcel; and
WHEREAS, Arrowhead Holdings and Minneapolis (jointly, the "Applicants") have
requested approval for a lot combination of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 into a single parcel; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed lot combination on
August 8, 2017, heard testimony from the Applicants, city staff, and interested parties and
recommended approval of the combination; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the proposed lot combination at the August 15,
2017 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has, subject to the terms and conditions contained herein,
made the following findings of fact with regards to the requested plat:
(a) The proposed combination is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is not
premature, as defined in City Code Section 820.28.
(b) The physical characteristics of this site appear suitable for the type of development
contemplated and the design of the combination is not likely to cause environmental
damage or cause public health problems.
(c) The resulting parcel meets minimum lot size standards and the density of development is
consistent with City regulations.
Resolution No. 2017-##
August 15, 2017
(d) The design of the combination will not conflict with public or private streets, easements
or right-of-way.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina,
Minnesota hereby grants approval for the lot combination of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 subject to the
following terms and conditions:
1. The legal description of the combined lot shall be as displayed in Exhibit A, attached
hereto.
2. Approval of the lot combination is contingent upon recording of the plat of Cavanaughs
Meadowwoods Park Second Addition.
3. The Applicants shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to title
documentation, and recording instructions.
4. The Applicants shall record necessary documents to effectuate the lot combination within
180 days of the date of the city council resolution granting approval or such approval
shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the
Owner and approved by the City Council.
5. The Applicants shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City
for the cost of reviewing the combination and related documents.
Dated: August 15, 2017.
By:
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
By:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-## 2
August 15, 2017
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Lot after Combination
Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota
AND
Lot 1, Block 1, Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
August 15, 2017
A
\/
v
A
n I
\I
I v
A
I
I
ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC
2"
Locust
2" \
Tree
G
----___I-------....-- __ c,
�S
\ -Inv.���::
\ 994�5 � �0 _•.. • �� .�
��. ��
�G �� \:
\G\ --C\ ..
G �C,
� �G
\ �G
\ G�
\ c�
\ G
\ c �<
c�
G\
r
I
I
•
I
�/
I I
f-
I I
/'
Owner: /
1
3"
Locust
3"
Locust
Maple
Birch
8
Top 1005.12
v. 991.15
\ • �96' /
/\ n
•
rs
�1
1\ /
998
/ ' A
c //i / r`�
,,/ V,�
F
2'
Birch
Birch
��010
i
Y/
I A /
//� ^ /
Y I
1
r 1
i `/ i
i
i
l
I L /
I
PP
4
6"
Spruce
i
r
F\FCC
Birch / F�
2 F�
irc
Birch F
Birch
irch
•„
2"
Birch
---. c �
<� -s.c�
\ G\
1
L-
I
A
1
I
Owner:
ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC
/
2„ F\ /
Birch 1F\F l
Birch l "
Birch F
3"
Birch
A ,
3" Hyd.
Birch
8" ,
1"
Birch
3
Birch
c�
MH
Top 9 •. 3
Inv: "-98 15
G\
r, \
CB
Top 996.70
•
99
6
996
E
- E-
N86°10'59"E
L�\ e
s
\
\ E
Drainage and Utility Easement per
CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK
_
990
G
c�
CB
Top 995.64
Sign
Top 989.32
Inv. 975.72
6
66.�2�
�� r
inv�
Inv �
982.90
• M H LL1
Top 99 .0
Inv. 96 .4
1 h
/
Top 988.22
Prelminary Plat of:
CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS
PARK SECOND ADDITION
GV
" s
G A3. 1
* Bearings shown are based on the plat of CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK.
* Contact Gopher State One for utility locations before any construction shall begin. Phone
651-454-0002.
* Zoning: CH (Commercial Highway)
15
30
60
90
Scale in Feet
S Sanitary Sewer
— ST— Storm Sewer
Watermain
Hydrant
Gate Valve
Manhole
Catch Basin
Cleanout
Flared End
Invert Elevation
Power Pole
Light Pole
Electrical Transformer
Telephone Pedestal
Concrete Surface
Bituminous Surface
Buried Gas
— C— Buried Communications
— E— Buried Electric
DEVELOPER
OSI
4101 Arrowhead Drive
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Phone: 763-551-0559
Attention: Adam Schlafke
Arrowhead Holdings, LLC
4101 Arrowhead Drive
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Attention: Ronald Ingram
Rehder & Associates, Inc.
Suite 110
3440 Federal Drive
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Phone: 651-452-5051
Attention: Greg Gentz
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Outlot C, CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
I hereby certify that this preliminary plat was prepared by me or under my direction and that I am a
duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Dated this 19th day of June, 2017
RENDER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5171
Gary C. Huber, Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 22036
Rehder and Associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS
JOB: 174-2445.019
A
/
CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOOD
PARK SECOND ADDITION
n 1
ICI
I �
A
,-�
0 25 50
I 1
I 1
�/
/�
I �
I I
I- -4
I I
o1Z)
0
z
•
•
k 2 /
/ ;,
/ /"._
I
4,4C/
/
/
/
h
/
/
/
/
100 150
Scale in Feet
/
n
I
I
A
\/I
I
r-
L-
7g4 • 0g
The southwesterly line of Outlot C, CAVANAUGHS
MEADOWWOODS PARK has a bearing of N69°58'14"W.
O Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron monument set
and marked by Minnesota License No. 22036
A
,-�
r�
I 1
L �
/
I 1
/
446906,
1
J
/
r r
S;
0
/A� / `v/ �v/ I. /
v v
/,
/,
/,
/
/
/
/
I
/
/
/
I
r�
I I
L
/
/
2
/
/
/
/
0
66 9g
N86°10'59" E
s
OUTLOT
I
A r
I �
s16 8 28_
4
Drainage and Utility Easements are shown
thus:
o
5
_15
5
51_
o
Being 5 feet in width and adjoining lot lines
and being 10 feet in width and adjoining
right of way lines unless otherwise indicated
on the plat.
r�
•••� .
•� ��
218.75
A
<>.
0
a
62.72
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
, AI
r0 •6 n'I V�
----- �° 1 D` /-
S�
N
N
co
N
N
S4°5
a7U 4 J
<
i
I \
C.R. DOC. NO.
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That the Arrowhead Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner of the following described property situated in
the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit:
Outlot C, CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECOND ADDITION and do hereby dedicate to the public for public use the drainage
and utility easements as created by this plat.
In witness whereof said Arrowhead Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liablility company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day
of , 2017.
ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC
By
Ronald J. Ingram, Vice President and Secretary
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 2017, by Ronald J. Ingram, Vice President and Secretary of Arrowhead
Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the coompany.
Notary Printed Name
Notary Public,
My Commission Expires
I, Gary C. Huber do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this
plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have
been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate
are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat.
Dated this
day of , 2017.
Gary C. Huber, Licensed Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 22036
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 2017, by Gary C. Huber.
Notary Printed Name
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
Notary Public, , County, Minnesota
My Commission Expires
This plat of CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS SECOND ADDITION was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota at a regular meeting
thereof held this day of , 2017. If applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the
County Highway Engineer have been received by the City or the prescribed 30-day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations, as provided
by Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2.
City Council, City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
By , Mayor By , Administrator/Clerk
RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that the taxes payable in 2017 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this day of , 2017.
Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor By: , Deputy
SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to MN. STAT. Section 3836.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this
Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor
COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota
day of
By:
, 2017.
I hereby certify that the within plat of CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOOD PARK SECOND ADDITION was filed in this office this
o'clock .M.
Martin McCormick, County Recorder
day of , 2017, at
By: , Deputy
Rehder and Associates, Inc.
/ A 1 / A Al A II /\ 1 1/
I
\/
/‘ I/ / 1 1\ I / 1
/ \ V / 1 1 V / \ \ / \ / 1 1 s..
\
\
\
•9
\
7
\
\
\
CATES RANCH b(
DRIVE I _-
0
\
\
\
\
KATRINKA
ROAD
74
CHIPPEWA
�O
P
�0
i -5
'g()8
o�
PP
N N ���...
. Oo
NCpp
O ���...
\
\
\
ss
ROAD
Vicinity Map
/
/
S88°39'29"E
149.45
N69032
�543 s0S F
z \\ DRAINAGEUTILITY
\ AND
o 0,\ EASEMENT
/
mil▪ \ //g
\\ A/80°11 ' 17 / /k51�•
�1
29.58 W /
\
\
\
\
\
\
/ y / A
/4 /1//A /
y 4 A l/ A
Section 3, Township 118, Range 23
No Scale
\
\
�X C,00
N
\
\
\
\
\
\
/
\ _ / / / A
/
/ V / I i
/ Y
LEGEND
• Iron Monument Found
0 Iron Monument Set
S—Sanitary Sewer
- ST— Storm Sewer
w— Watermain
Hyd. -6-
Gv •
GM
MH0
CB O
CO 0
•
St
PPS
LP
E❑
HH❑
Hydrant
Gate Valve
Gas Meter
Manhole
Catch Basin
Cleanout
Flared End
Guard Post
Sign
Power Pole
Light Pole
Electrical Transformer
Handhole
Concrete Surface
Bituminous Surface
Brick Paver Surface
- G Buried Gas
- E Buried Electric
4. V
A)
332.51
/ `1 -.../.....• I / /-
c;
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
r-
/ / / ,r
\�/�<\ /
\
Z
r�
F�
L /
\ v /1"ky
eh ,...\"
eo \..
o .it-4.
es \.:: ..
\.:: .
\.::. . 13
\... .
\..� .
.
\.::'� .. PP E----.
\
\
,
/
/ / / \ /
l
Y
\
\
,
/ / A
//I /,��
/ / y/ I, •
\
\
0
\
25
\
\
\
A
1/ /
Y Y
/ ;=/ �r
/
50
I
v
Cy
z
_{
A r•
/ 1 1 1 1 1
/ 1 L / \ /
L _ _ A/80°0 1,0g..
W
103.87
\
\
100
\
�s
T
b MH
150
Scale in Feet
Boundary and Location Survey for:
ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC
at 4101 Arrowhead Drive — Medina, Minnesota
1 A / 1 A /
1/1/ I/I/
y V V V
0,53414/4G4-
Hy
LP
76*
UTILITY STATEMENT
The underground utilities shown have been located from field survey
information and existing drawings. The surveyor makes no guarantee
that the underground utilities shown comprise all such utilities in the
area, either in service or abandoned. The surveyor further does not
warrant that the underground utilities shown are in the exact location
indicated, although he does certify that they are shown as accurately
as possible from information available. The surveyor has not physically
located the underground utilities.
GV
LP
16
LP
* Bearings shown are based on the plat of CAVANAUGHS
MEADOWWOODS PARK.
* Utilities shown are from information furnished by the City of
Medina, Minnesota Department of Transportation and Wright —
Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association in response to Gopher
State One Call Ticket No. 112071978.
* Contact Gopher State 1 for utility locations before any construction
shall begin. Phone 651-454-0002.
* Number of parking stalls on site = 301 regular and 7 handicap.
* This property is located in Flood Zone X (area outside .2%
annual chance flood plane) and Flood Zone A (area of 1
annual flood (100—year flood) per Flood Zone Map No.
27053C0165E E dated September 2, 2004. No base flood
elevation have been determined for Flood Zone A.
AND OP EASEMENT
MH
LLI
GV
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
MH
Lot 1, Block 1, CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK and Lot 1, Block 1,
CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECOND ADDITION, according to the
recorded plats thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(NOTE: THE PLAT OF CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECOND ADDITION
IS CURRENTLY IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS AND HAS NOT BEEN RECORDED
AT THIS TIME)
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direction
and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State
of Minnesota.
Dated this 9th day of August, 2017
REHDER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Gary C. Huber, Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 22036
GV
Rehder and Associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS
JOB: 174-2445.013
Agenda Item # 8B
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Nate Sparks
DATE: August 9, 2017
MEETING DATE: August 15, 2017
RE: Medina Senior Living Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review
CITY FILE: LR-17-204
Application Date: June 19, 2017
Review Deadline: August 18, 2017 (120-day extension: October 17, 2017)
BACKGROUND
Lunski, Inc. has made an application for a rezoning, preliminary plat, and site plan review for development of a
three-story 90 unit senior housing building, a two-story medical office building, and a vacant lot for future
development.
This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in February as a Concept Plan. The
Concept was for an 80 unit senior building, a medical/office building, and a commercial building. The Planning
Commission discussed the rezoning as being generally acceptable. However, there were concerns voiced about
the size of the project being too intense for the site. The Council discussed concerns about parking, building
height, and wetland impacts. The applicant removed the commercial building from the site and increased the
amount of parking provided, and increased the number of independent/assisted living units.
PROJECT SITE
The property is located north of Highway 55, west of Mohawk Drive, and south of Chippewa Road. The site is
10.8 acres in size. There is a 2.6 acre wetland on the lot. Much of the site is wooded.
ZONING / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject site is guided for a Commercial land use in the current Comprehensive Plan and Business in the
proposed 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The property is zoned RCH, Rural Commercial Holding which is
an interim designation for land awaiting urban development. This area is identified for urban development, at
this time.
PROPOSED REZONING
The applicant proposes to rezone the property to B, Business District, which would be consistent with the
direction the City is heading in the draft 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan. "Nursing homes, assisted living
facilities, and independent living facilities associated with such uses" are a permitted use within this District. In
the 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which is still in effect until the 2020 - 2040 Plan is adopted, this site is
guided for a Commercial land use which contemplates "commercial, office, and retail uses" that are
"concentrated along the TH 55 corridor." The Business zoning district was designed more to implement the
Business land use in the 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Commercial -Highway district was designed
for the Commercial land use. However, because the City has contemplated changing the land use of the subject
site to Business in the draft 2020 - 2040 Plan, any rezoning would ideally be generally consistent with the 2010 -
2030 Comprehensive Plan and not in conflict with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Commercial and
Business land uses share a similar set of objectives within the 2010-2030 Comp Plan, rather than each having a
unique list. As such, it could be argued that the rezoning to Business is not inconsistent with the 2010 - 2030
Commercial land use, especially within the context of the proposed change to Business in the draft 2020 - 2040
Plan update.
PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT
The applicant is proposing to divide the parcel into three lots and an outlot. The outlot is intended for a private
street. Lot 1 is a 3.39 acre site intended for future development. Lot 2 is a 3.08 acre site that is intended to
house the senior facility. Lot 3 is a 3.81 acre lot for a medical clinic/office building. The minimum lot size is 3
acres in the B District.
The minimum lot width in the B District is 175 feet with a minimum lot depth of 175 feet. It appears that all lots
meet these standards.
Lot Area
Upland Area
Width
Depth
B District Standards
3 acres
N/A
175 feet
175 feet
Lot 1
3.39 acres
2.64 acres
175
566
Lot 2
3.08 acres
2.13 acres
245
457
Lot 3
3.81 acres
2.99 acres
175
705
The Park Commission reviewed the plan and recommended cash -in -lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of
$262,500, less an appropriate credit for the proposed private trails on the site.
SITE & BUILDING PLAN REVIEW
Site Access/Transportation
The site is proposed to be accessed by a 24 foot private street off of Chippewa Road. The street is on the plan
within Outlot A. The entirety of the road would need to be contained within the outlot. The City's Subdivision
Ordinance requires private streets to meet City road standards. The outlot will need to be owned by an
association to which all lots would be members for maintenance of the road.
The proposed private street is not centered in the proposed outlot. The applicant states that this is due to grade
changes towards the western property line and to balance the need for spacing between the access point to the
west and wetlands to the east. Drainage and utility easements should be enlarged along the outlot to a
minimum of 20 feet subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. This also results in the trail along the
drive being on the individual lots. The trail should be placed within an easement to ensure it may be used by all
site users.
The City Engineer requested a traffic study and additional information has been requested. This information will
determine the necessity of any turn lanes or improvements at nearby intersections. The City Engineer believes
the development may necessitate turn lanes at some point in the future, and recommends a petition and waiver to
pay for this improvement when needed. Also, this property will contribute to the need for the future extension of
Chippewa Road to the east. Staff recommends securing future contribution to this project.
Senior Housing Building
The senior facility is proposed with 90 units and about 100,000 square feet. There are 32 one bedroom, 14 two -
bedroom, 29 studio units, 10 memory care, and 5 special care units. The units range from roughly 450 square
feet for the studio, 580 square feet for the one bed room, and 900 for the two -bedroom units with some variation.
The special and memory care units are smaller. There are 48 garage stalls proposed on the lowest level of the
building.
The applicant has indicated that up to forty-five of the units may be utilized for "independent living." The B
District allows for assisted living facilities with independent living "associated" with the use. This would appear
to require 50% of the units, at minimum, to be assisted living with the remaining independent units to be age
restricted. Of the 45 assisted living units, 15 are proposed to be memory/special care.
The proposed building is three stories tall. The average roof height to adjacent grade is 44' 2.5". The B District
allows building heights of 30 feet, 35 feet with sprinklers, and 45 feet with necessary conditions required by the
fire marshal. Required yard setbacks are required to be increased for buildings greater than 35 feet in height by
the amount they exceed 35 feet in height. This would be an additional 9 feet.
In the B District, all exterior building materials are required to meet the following standards:
(a) A minimum of 20 percent of the building exterior shall be brick, natural stone, stucco (not Exterior Insulation
and Finish System or similar product), copper, or glass.
(b) A maximum of 80 percent may be decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or
decorative pre -cast concrete panels. Decorative concrete shall be color impregnated in earth tones (rather than
painted) and shall be patterned to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance.
(c) A maximum of 20 percent may be wood, metal (excluding copper), fiber cement lap siding or Exterior
Insulation and Finish System or similar product, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall
building design.
The proposed building is 19% masonry, 17% stone, 8% lap siding, 26% stucco, and 30% glass. This appears to
meet the requirements for the exterior finish. The lap siding is cement fiber board.
Building modulation is required for every 100 feet of horizontal length. The proposed structure is meeting this
requirement.
Medical Office Building
The proposed medical/office building is two stories in height and about 25,000 square feet. The proposed floor
plan is not very detailed and just shows general space. The plans state that average roof height to adjacent grade
is 35' 6". The building appears to be meeting the building modulation requirements.
The proposed building is 58% masonry, 8% "architectural wood veneer", 12% stucco, and 22% glass. This
appears to be consistent with the required architectural standards.
Skyway
There is a proposed skyway between the two buildings. Existing regulations do not provide a means to allow an
encroachment on required yards for such a structural element, unless the lots were combined as one lot. The
Planning Commission recommended that the skyway be changed in appearance to better match the buildings.
Lot 1
No construction is proposed for Lot 1, at this time. A demonstration building has been placed on the lot for
conceptual review.
Setbacks & Performance Standards
Within the B District, the minimum front yard setback is 40 feet. This may be reduced to 30 feet for a private
street. Setbacks to arterial roads are required to be 50 feet. Side and rear yard setbacks are required to be 25
feet, which may be reduced to 15 feet in order to accommodate shared site improvements.
Yard setbacks are required to be increased for buildings greater than 35 feet in height. This would add slightly
over 9 feet of required setback to the senior building and 6 inches to the setback of the medical/office building.
The building location has been adjusted to meet the 50 foot setback. The senior building appears to be able to
accommodate the extra 9 feet of setback to the private road and side and rear lot lines.
Parking lots are required to have a 25 foot front yard setback, 25 feet to a street side yard, 20 feet for a street side
yard to a private street, and 15 feet to the side and rear yard. The side and rear yard parking setback may be
reduced in cases where the parking is shared, as is proposed in this situation. As proposed, it appears that these
setbacks are generally met.
In Section 832.2.06 it states that there is a 100 foot setback to residential zoned areas for both buildings and
parking lots. The properties across Chippewa Road are zoned residential. The right-of-way is 66 feet in width,
leaving at least 34 feet on the subject site to account for. The 40 foot front yard building setback would be
greater than this distance and the applicant has adjusted the parking area to meet the requirements.
The B District standards state that impervious surfaces are capped at 70% unless utilizing shared improvements
when the limit may be raised to 80%. The applicant is currently proposing to meet this standard by using porous
pavement.
Tree Preservation & Landscaping
Section 828.41 of the Zoning Ordinance states requirements for tree preservation. For a property of this size, the
allowed significant tree (8 caliper inches in diameter) removal related to "initial site development" is 10%.
Initial site development is the "grading and construction of streets, trails, and sidewalks; the installation of
utilities including water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, natural gas, electric, and cable television; or the grading
and construction of drainage ways and storm detention areas."
Activities other than the initial site development are permitted at 15% removal of significant trees for lots of
about 3 acres in size. This would allow for 15% removal of trees on the three lots being created for building
sites.
This results in a required replacement of 320.5 inches of trees for the development on Lots 2 and 3. The
applicant intends to replace as many trees on the property as possible, but it will only be possible to replace a
small portion of the trees on -site around the proposed improvements. In similar cases in the past, the City has
accepted off -site planting as an alternative, or a cash contribution towards future off -site planting. The City has
accepted $100 per inch of replacement in a previous example.
The applicant has provided a landscaping plan that is intended to include replacement trees. The requirements
for landscaping in the B District are 1 overstory tree per 50 feet of lot perimeter, 1 per 100 of ornamental trees,
and 1 shrub per 30 feet on each lot. The site has 2791.18 linear feet of perimeter. Since the northern lot (Lot 1)
is not being developed, its perimeter may be deducted and landscaping provided for at site plan review. This
leaves 1759.89 feet of perimeter to be accounted for requiring 36 overstory trees, 18 ornamental trees, and 59
shrubs. The plan shows 69 overstory trees, 28 ornamental trees, and 128 shrubs. With this methodology, there
would be 13 replacement trees provided. This would allow for 33 overstory trees (99 inches) to be counted
towards replacement. Also, the trees provided are one half inch larger than required, which would allow for 18
additional inches. This results in 117 inches of replacement trees being provided reducing the initial
replacement to 203.5 inches.
All mechanical equipment, trash areas, and loading docks are required to be screened. Also, Section 828.07
requires screening from any commercial use to a residential use which would require screening on preliminary
plat Lot 1.
Lighting
As required by Ordinance, a photometric lighting plan has been submitted for review. The subject site lies
within Lighting Zone E4 which corresponds to areas which exhibit high ambient lighting levels. The zone
generally includes urban areas with primary land uses for commercial, business and industrial activity (including
highway commercial and downtown districts).
According to the lighting plan, a total of 44 exterior fixtures are proposed upon the subject property as
summarized below:
Type
Plan Symbol
Height
Quantity
Arrangement
Parking Lot Fixture (Commercial)
A2
32 feet*
2
Back to back
Parking Lot Fixture (Senior
Residential)
B4 & B5
22 feet*
11
Single
Pedestrian Scale Fixture
C
12 feet
13
Single
Pedestrian Scale Fixture
D
3.5 feet
13
Single
Wall Sconce
WP15
NA
5
Single
* Referenced fixture height includes 2-foot pole base
As shown, all proposed light fixtures meet the maximum pole height requirements of 32' - 6" (30 feet plus a pole
base which does not exceed a height of 30 inches).
Consistent with Ordinance requirements (for E4 zones), all fixtures are proposed to have an output of less than
2,000 lumens and are to be fully shielded such that light sources are not visible from adjacent properties and
rights -of -way.
Within E4 zones, the Ordinance stipulates that maximum lighting levels at the property line must not exceed 1.5
footcandles before curfew and 0.6 footcandles "after curfew." In review of the photometric lighting plan, it
appears that maximum lighting levels at the property line measure 0.1 footcandles which conforms with
Ordinance requirements.
Signage
In Section 815.11, the B District allows for one free standing sign per lot up to 80 square feet of sign area and 20
feet in height. Signs are required to be setback 10 feet from all property lines and outside of a clear vision
triangle for a street or access drive. There are three free standing signs proposed. Sign locations have been
modified to meet City Ordinance requirements.
Off -Street Parking
The plan currently has 216 stalls on the site. The parking areas are proposed to be shared. The City's parking
ordinance states that the required parking is required to be on the parcel with the use generating the parking
demand except in cases of shared or joint parking. This may be deemed acceptable provided there is an
association in place to manage this common element adequately to ensure the proper amount of parking is
provided at all times.
Section 828.51 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that parking stalls be a minimum of 9' x 19' with a two-way
drive aisle width of 22 feet. The City may require that primary drive aisles be increased to 24' in width. The
plan generally shows the primary drive aisles with a 24 foot width and the secondary with a 22' width. The
ordinance states that a maximum of 20% of the required stalls may be provided as compact car spaces, which are
required to be a minimum of 8' x 16' in size.
Section 828.51 Subd. 1 (j) states that "to the extent practicable, dead end drives shall not be permitted." There is
a dead end drive aisle for parking on the east end of the medical/office building. A fire truck turn around and car
turn around have been provided.
The number of stall required for the medical/office building is based on 1 stall per 250 square feet. This results
in a parking requirement of 100 stalls. The applicant is providing 33 stalls on the lowest level of the building
and the remainder in the parking lots to satisfy the 100 stall requirement.
The senior building does not have a specific number designated for required parking. Therefore, the Planning
Commission is to review the parking and make a recommendation to the City Council. It is important to keep in
mind that the required parking is to accommodate residents, guests, and employees. Fluctuations in the number
of independent living units versus the assisted living units could alter the number of needed parking stalls.
Therefore, it is very important that the proper number of stalls be provided on the site. City Staff reviewed the
Institute of Transportation Engineers Standards Manual which recommends 0.4 stalls per unit for senior assisted
living and 0.35 stalls per unit for memory/special care units. The remaining independent living units could defer
to the City's multi -family parking standard for 2.25 stalls per unit. This would result in a parking requirement of
120 stalls. Forty-eight stalls are being provided in the lowest level of the building and the balance of parking are
satisfied.
The Planning Commission felt that the provided parking was sufficient. Some suggested that the applicant
provide some of the parking in a "proof of parking" arrangement to be provided if needed later. However, the
applicant has stated that they would likely need most of the required parking.
Grading & Drainage
In the B District standards, in Section 832.3.03, states that "site improvements shall be designed in a way which
most effectively maintains predevelopment topography, drainage patterns and ecological functions." It also
states that "drainage and stormwater improvements shall be designed with an emphasis on integrated stormwater
management practices such as vegetative swales, filter strips, bioretention, and similar improvements as
approved by the city rather than pipes and retention ponds."
The applicant is using porous pavement for a portion of the parking lot, in order to meet impervious surface
requirements. Specifications on this pavement type should be provided. Water quality modelling components
will need to be identified.
Wetlands
There is a 2.6 acre wetland on the site. This wetland is identified as a "Manage 1" classification. This requires
an upland buffer adjacent to the wetland with an average width of 30 foot. City requirements allow an averaging
of the buffer width by narrowing in some locations and widening in others as long as a minimum of 20 feet in
width is provided. The setback from a principal structure to the buffer is 15 feet and 5 feet for accessory
structures. Private trails, parking areas, and structures are not permitted within the buffer.
The applicant is proposing two areas of wetland impact. One is for the road and utilities to access the site. The
other is to allow for the Senior Building to meet the upland buffer setbacks. The second impact is on the
northwest corner of the Senior Building and could easily be avoided through the design of the building or layout
of the site. Watershed District Staff stated that "additional impacts to meet the buffer are not desired, and the
option of a variance would be difficult for staff to support. We certainly understand the need to for impacts to
bring in the access to the site given access constraints. What is much less clear is why the building footprint and
location cannot be modified to meet the required standards (a matter of 10 feet)." Alternative to this wetland
impact would be to adjust the site arrangement, reduce the footprint of improvements on the lot, or seek a
variance from the setback requirements. Staff believes it would be difficult to justify a variance in this case.
The applicant has indicated that they can shift the building to eliminate (or nearly eliminate) the additional
wetland impacts related to the wetland setback. Doing so will result in the loss of a few parking spaces. The
applicant will present a visual of this shift at the City Council meeting.
There is also a boardwalk proposed over the wetland. The WCA permit regarding the boardwalk and proposed
fill is being reviewed but has not been approved, yet.
Utilities
The site will be serviced by sewer and water. The City Engineer has provided comments and requested
revisions. Easements for utility mains may be required.
Association Documents
Due to the shared parking and the private street, a strong association will be required for this development. Draft
covenants were provided and reviewed by the City Attorney. The Attorney recommended revisions to ensure
that the association and not the developer is the declarant and that the easements be made to continue in
perpetuity to ensure that the easements can't be terminated. Also, is was recommended that there not be clauses
placing restrictions on the reciprocal agreements that would weaken the shared parking concept. The applicant
should work with the City Attorney on making revisions to these documents.
REQUEST REVIEW
The applicant is proposing a rezoning to B, Business which will correspond with the 2010 - 2040
Comprehensive Plan. The 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which is still in effect, identifies this parcel as
Commercial. The General Business designation more directly corresponded with the Business District. The
Comprehensive Plan discusses the two designations as follows:
Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments; can include
commercial, office and retail uses; is concentrated along the TH 55 corridor and are served or will be served by
urban services.
General Business (GB) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including light industrial and retail
uses. This designation identifies larger tracts of land that are suitable for office and business park developments
and are served or will be served by urban services.
The purpose of the Business District is:
"The purpose of the Business (B) district is to provide for a zoning district for a mix of office, high quality light
industrial, and larger -scale retail and service uses with proximity to arterial roadways. Development shall include
high quality and attractive building materials and architectural design as well as extensive landscaping in order
to limit impacts on surrounding land uses, and shall be integrated and coordinated in a way to most efficiently
utilize site improvements and to protect the natural environment."
The rezoning will need to be found to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The site plan has some issues that will need to be corrected in order to meet all zoning requirements.
In the Subdivision Ordinance it is stated that the City shall deny approval of a preliminary plat if one or a
combination of the following finding are made:
(a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the
proposed subdivision is premature.
(b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils,
susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type
of development or use contemplated.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot
size standards.
(d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial
environmental damage.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health
problems.
(f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets,
easements or right-of-way.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The applicant is proposing to develop the property by putting two uses on two lots that share parking and utilize
a private street. The two uses and the associated parking are fully utilizing the site and there appear to be some
issues related to wetlands and tree removal. A third lot is being made available for future development that
would also result in additional tree removal and storm water management issues. It would seem that an easy
way to resolve the remaining issues would be to reduce the size of the senior building to avoid the additional
wetland impacts and lessen the intensity of use on the site. However, if the applicant can resolve all issues to the
satisfaction of the City Council, it may be appropriate for approval, provided the Council has no issue with the
rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission found the project to be generally acceptable provided the applicant can meet the
following conditions of approval:
1. A Mechanism shall be provided to ensure the senior building meets zoning requirements, including
limitations on independent living units and required parking provisions.
2. The entire private road shall be within the Outlot.
3. The applicant shall meet tree replacement requirements
4. The Senior Building shall be adjusted or reduced in size to meet required setbacks.
5. The wetland impacts shall be subject to WCA review and approval. Impacts for the senior building shall
be eliminated by adjusting the building size or location or impacts shall be approved through the WCA
process.
6. The skyway shall be redesigned to match the architecture of the buildings and a mechanism for allowing
such an encroachment shall be considered.
7. The applicant shall enter into a petition and waiver regarding future turn lane construction.
8. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City related to its contribution to the future
extension of Chippewa Road.
9. Association documents shall be provided in the manner requested by the City Attorney and shall
specifically address the parking being provided on the office property for the benefit of the senior
housing building.
10. Park dedication shall be paid as recommended by the Parks Commission.
11. All comments from the Elm Creek Watershed District shall be addressed.
12. All comments from the City Engineer shall be addressed.
13. The preliminary plat shall be updated to provide sufficient right-of-way for Chippewa Road and
appropriate drainage and utility easements.
14. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to title
documentation.
15. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement to the City in a form and of substance
acceptabled to the City Attorney to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval and
relevant City requirements and policies.
16. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit in an amount of 150% of the cost of site
improvements in order to ensure completion.
17. The final plat applicant shall be filed within 180 days of the date of the city council resolution
granting preliminary approval or the approval shall be considered void, unless a written request
for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council.
18. The applciant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the
cost of reviewing the preliminary plat, site plan review, and related documents
POTENTIAL ACTION
As noted above, the application includes three land use requests. The first request which staff recommends be
considered is the rezoning to the Business zoning district. A draft ordinance which would rezone the property is
attached for reference. If the City Council believes the rezoning is appropriate within the context of the current
Commercial land use on the property as well as the proposed Business land use in the DRAFT 2020-2040
comprehensive plan, it would be appropriate to adopt the ordinance. Staff would recommend doing so in
connection with the other applications at a future meeting.
The second request for consideration would be the preliminary plat. If the Council does not make any of the
findings above related to the subdivision ordinance, the following motion would be in order:
Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution granting preliminary plat approval subject to the conditions
noted in the staff report.
As noted above, the applicant is updating plans to reduce wetland impacts in order to eliminate the impacts
which are a result of the building location. The applicant is also addressing comments of the watershed and city
engineer. If the Council finds that the site plan for the senior housing and office building meet relevant
ordinance requirements (taking into consideration the changes to be made), the following motion would be in
order:
Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution granting site plan review approval, but only upon receipt and
review of plans from the applicant which reduce the wetland impacts and address comments of the
Elm Creek Watershed and City Engineer.
Attached:
Aerial Photo
List of Documents
Rezoning Ordinance
Excerpt from DRAFT 8/8/2017 Planning Commission minutes
Excerpt from 7/11/2017 Planning Commission minutes
Excerpt from DRAFT 7/19/2017 Park Commission minutes
Excerpt from minutes of City Council Concept Review (2/21/2017)
Engineer's Comments received 8/9/2017
Elm Creek Watershed District Comments received 7/6/2017
Applicant's Narrative
Preliminary Plat
Plan Set dated 8/4/2017
03/20/2015 - 05/04/2015
Project: LR-17-204 — Lunski Senior Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review
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
5/12/2017
5/12/2017
3
Y
Y
Fee
5/12/2017
5/12/2017
1
Y
Y
$11,000
Narrative
6/19/2017
6/19/2017
4
Y
Y
Narrative — Updated
8/4/2017
8/4/2017
5
Y
Y
Labels
6/19/2017
NA
1
Y
Y
Labels inaccurate; staff updated
Plan Set
5/12/2017
5/12/2017
23
Y
Y
Plan Set — Updated
6/19/2017
6/19/2017
25
Y
Y
Plan Set — Updated
7/24/2017
7/20/2017
25
Y
Y
Plan Set — Updated
8/4/2017
8/4/2017
25
Y
Y
Soils Map
5/12/2017
5/12/2017
3
Y
Y
Traffic Analysis
5/12/2017
5/10/2017
66
Y
Y
Preliminary Plat
5/16/2017
5/12/2017
1
Y
Y
Preliminary Plat— Updated
7/24/2017
Not updated
1
Y
Y
Preliminary Plat— updated
8/4/2017
8/4/2017
1
Y
Y
Draft Covenants
6/19/2017
NA
19
Y
Y
Wetland Replace. App.
6/19/2017
6/19/2017
13
Y
Y
WCA Information
8/4/2017
8/4/2017
23
Y
Y
Stormwater Report
6/19/2017
6/16/2017
142
Y
Y
Stormwater Rep — updated
8/4/2017
8/42017
142
Y
Y
Arch Response
7/24/2017
7/17/2017
2
Y
N
Eng Response — Elm Creek
7/24/2017
7/19/2017
6
Y
N
Eng Response — traffic
7/24/2017
N/A
4
Y
N
Eng Response
7/24/2017
7/19/2017
5
Y
N
GeoTech Info
8/4/2017
2/12/2016
49
Y
Y
(continued on back)
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Notes
Legal Comments
5/25/2017
1
Y
Legal Comments
6/28/2017
1
Y
Building Official Comments
5/26/2017
1
Y
Building Official Comments
6/26/2017
1
Y
MnDOT Comments
6/1/2017
1
Y
No Comments
City Engineer Comments
5/30/2017
3
Y
City Engineer Comments
7/6/2017
4
Y
City Engineer Comments
8/9/2017
5
Y
Elm Creek Watershed Comments
7/6/2017
9
Y
No Recommendation
Incomplete Letter
6/2/2017
2
Y
Legal Notice
6/30/2017
19
Y
Planning Commission Report
7/6/2017
9
53 pages w/ attachments
Planning Commission Report
8/3/2017
8
Y
46 pages w/ attachments
City Council Report
8/10/2017
9
Y
Public Comments
Document Date
Electronic
Notes
Planning Commission minutes
7/11/2017
Y
Planning Commission minutes
8/8/2017
Y
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. ###
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REZONE
PID 03-118-23-32-0007, LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 55 AND
SOUTH OF CHIPPEWA ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The official zoning map of the City of Medina is hereby amended to change
the zoning classification of PID 03-118-23-32-0007 (the "Property) from RCH, Rural
Commercial Holding to B, Business.
Section 2. The Property rezoned is legally described in Exhibit A and displayed in the
map in Exhibit B, attached hereto.
Section 3. The City of Medina Zoning Administrator is hereby directed to publish this
ordinance and make the appropriate changes to the official zoning map of the City of Medina to
reflect the change in zoning classifications as set forth above only upon approval of the final plat
of the Property.
Section 4. A copy of this Ordinance and the updated map shall be kept on file at the
Medina City Hall.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina City Council this day of , 2017.
CITY OF MEDINA
By:
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
By:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News on this day the
Ordinance No. ### 1
DATE
of , 2017.
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property Being Rezoned
THAT FART OF THE WEST 918.12 FEET
OF THE NW Y4 OF THE SW Y4 LYI\G
NORTHERLY OF HIGHWAY 55.
EXCEPT THE WEST 75 F
EXCEPT ROAD
EET THEREOF
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 118 RANGE 23
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN
Ordinance No. ### 2
DATE
EXHIBIT B
Map Displaying Property Being Rezoned
LOCATION OF PROPERTY TO BE
REZONED TO BUSINESS (B)
LOST HORSE RD
PAWNEE 11
CHIPPEWA RD
KATRINKA RD
R4�E DR
Ordinance No. ### 3
DATE
I HACKANIORE RD
RD
—31414WNEE
— f—
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT August 8, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Continued Public Hearing — Dean Lunski — North of Highway 55, South Chippewa Road and West
of Mohawk Drive — Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and Site Plan Review
White asked and received confirmation that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
rezoning request at the last meeting.
Sparks stated that this is a continued public hearing as the Planning Commission thoroughly reviewed this
request at their last meeting. He provided an update on what has been done since the last review. He
stated that this project would include a senior living and medical office space within one development.
He stated that the applicant has addressed some issues while some issues remain. He stated that the tree
preservation issue has been resolved with the plan for offsite replacement. He stated that the plan will be
revised again to provide additional trees onsite. He stated that the landscaping plan was revised to be
consistent throughout all plans. He stated that the lighting plan was adjusted to include signage lighting.
He noted that the private street would still need to be placed within the outlot. He stated that a larger
drainage and utility easement has been provided for the adjacent lots to support the off -center alignment.
He stated that the Park Commission reviewed the request and recommend cash in lieu of land dedication
for this request. He stated that the setback has been adjusted to meet the required setback. He stated that
the proposed siding would be cement fiberboard lap siding and therefore would meet the architectural
standards. He stated that the revised plan adjusted the parking lot location to ensure that it does not fall
within a setback. He stated that sign locations have also been changed to ensure that setbacks are met.
He stated that a fire truck turnaround has been provided and reviewed by the Fire Marshall and has been
found to be acceptable. He noted that a parking stall has also been removed to provide a turnaround for
vehicles. He stated that there are still issues with wetland setbacks and buffers. He stated that the eastern
side of the building setback was measured to the base of the building, but has a large bump -out
encroachment. He stated that the ordinance only allows two feet of encroachment for those bump -outs.
He stated that the northwest corner proposes to fill the wetland in order to meet the buffer setback. He
stated that the watershed is going to further review the request, as typically you do not fill a wetland just
to meet a buffer. He noted that the issue on the eastern side would be an easy fix, but the western side
would not be as easily solved. He stated that the item was continued at the last meeting and the
Commission could either take action tonight or table the item to determine the outcome from the
watershed. He stated that the watershed was not looking favorably at the filling of the wetland. He noted
that approval could also be given contingent upon meeting the upland wetland buffers. He noted that
proposed trails and gazebos have been removed from the upland buffer areas.
Reid stated that the white skyway has not been updated either. She stated that the white skyway would
not be appropriate with Medina and is disappointed that it has not been changed. She noted that it could
be a first level breezeway instead to be less conspicuous.
DesLauriers asked the intent of the skyway.
Reid stated that the skyway is going to be used to move residents from the building to the medical offices.
DesLauriers stated that the skyway would be needed to accommodate parking underneath. He agreed that
the color change could be done.
Reid stated that she would like the color change to be a condition of approval to ensure that is addressed.
White reopened the public hearing at 8:27 p.m.
Jeff Pederson noted that this is another example of how the Chippewa Drive extension to the east will be
needed, as well as the loop for the watermain that will be necessary.
White closed the public hearing at 8:27 p.m.
1
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT August 8, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Reid asked if staff is satisfied that the road and wetland buffer issue would be solved.
White noted that could be part of the conditions of approval.
Sparks stated that staff has been attempting to get that addressed for a while, but it is still not.
Reid stated that the Commission gave the applicant one month to address the concerns of staff. She asked
if the applicant has expressed a willingness to address the problems.
DesLauriers stated that at the last review there were a number of comments that needed to be addressed
before it would be appropriate to move it forward to the Council. He asked if most of the concerns had
been addressed and whether the significant issues have been addressed.
Sparks stated that the wetland buffer issue is a significant item that a lot of the comments resolve around.
He stated that resolution could be easy if the applicant is willing to follow the necessary steps to resolve
it, or could be difficult if the applicant chooses another path.
Finke stated that if the item does not receive approval from the watershed, the item would not move
forward for consideration from the City Council. He stated that the Commission can provide input on the
wetland issue as that is still being considered by the watershed.
Reid asked when the City would expect to hear back from the watershed.
Finke provided a timeline, noting that the response would have to be received before the Council would
consider the request.
Reid stated that it is not the fault of the City that the necessary questions have not been answered.
White asked if the Commission moved the application forward to the Council and the applicant updates
plans to reduce wetland impacts, would it be presented again to the Commission.
Finke stated that would depend on the type of changes that were made. He noted that the building and the
parking lot could be made smaller to provide that additional space, and therefore that would not need to
come back before the Commission.
White stated that the applicant did a lot of what the Commission asked for, although they did not address
everything. She stated that the wetland buffer item could be a stumbling block. She believed that the
Commission could recommend approval with the condition that the wetland buffer criteria be met, as well
as the additional conditions.
Reid noted that she would like to add a condition that the skyway be redesigned to diminish visual impact
and blend into the building architecture.
Finke asked if there is a preference of the Commission as to whether the wetland is filled or setback is
met.
It was the consensus of the Commission that there was no preference.
Motion by Reid, seconded by DesLauriers, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, rezoning,
and Site Plan review for Lunski project, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, with the
additional conditions as detailed tonight. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Albers, Amic and
Muffin)
2
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Public Hearing — Lunski, Inc. — Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review for a
90-Unit Senior Assisted Living/Independent Living Community and Office Building
located North of State Hwv 55, South of Chippewa Road and West of Mohawk Drive
(PID #03-118-23-32-0007)
Sparks provided a summary of the request. He highlighted the changes that had been made to the plan
since the Commission last saw the request in the Concept Plan review phase. He noted that there is some
overlap in the commercial and business districts and therefore the rezoning could be appropriate. He
reviewed some of the comments from the Park Commission in regard to park dedication and trails. He
highlighted the proposed access and private street. He stated that there was a lot of discussion with the
proposed access point at the Concept Plan review and the applicant has then moved the access point as far
to the east as possible to create additional spacing between the neighboring parcel. He explained that an
easement would be required for the trail to allow users of the sites to travel between the sites on the trail.
He noted that larger than typical drainage and utility easements would be required for the private street.
He stated that the private street falls within the outlot and therefore the outlot would need to be owned by
the association to ensure the road would remain safe and up to standards. He stated that the City Engineer
provided comments and requested additional information on the traffic study that was completed. He
stated that a fire truck turnaround would be provided in lieu of a second emergency access. He reviewed
the proposed mix of the units which would include independent living, assisted living and
specialty/memory care units. He noted that the uses would need to be related with a minimum age for the
independent living as regular multi -family housing would not be allowed in this zoning with the mix of
assisted living. He reviewed the proposed parking which would include a mix of underground parking
and surface parking. He reviewed the proposed building materials and design elements. He reviewed the
proposed setbacks and tree removal. He reviewed the landscaping plan proposed, which would restore
some of the trees removed. He noted that ornamental plants and shrubs would not count as replacement
trees. He stated that there are screening requirements and therefore they may want to see that for the
mechanical equipment and parking area. He noted that the landscaping plan would need to be modified in
order to meet the tree replacement, if that is the desire. He reviewed the proposed signage, noting that
you are not able to have a freestanding sign on an otherwise empty lot. He noted that the specifications
for the lights proposed to be used for the signs would need to be known as well. He stated that there are
not different demand times for medical office and assisted living and therefore there should be sufficient
parking for each use and not a shared parking.
Reid stated that she believes the peak time for assisted living would be holidays and weekends and during
the daytime the number of residents and staff would remain static.
Sparks provided additional details on the engineering standard, and noted that because the residents are
retired, they are often home during the day and a higher number of staff is on hand as well. He noted that
there is not an ironclad number for the number of units designated for independent/assisted/specialty
units. He stated that the parking proposed would likely be a workable number.
Reid asked if the office complex and senior living building would have separate owners.
Sparks believed that the developer would own both and have people run each business, but noted that the
applicant could provide that clarification. He provided details concerning the wetland area on the site and
the buffer that would be required. He noted that the Watershed District and City Engineer have requested
additional clarifications and modifications. He stated that because the site is being built up, that would
create additional slope and therefore the Watershed District would require additional buffer. He noted
that an average buffer method could work in this situation, but that methodology would need to be
provided. He stated that the Watershed District has requested revisions to the plan which may cause
changes to the site. He noted that the City Engineer is also requesting additional information for the
1
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
WCA requirements and permitting. He stated that they would like the parking and access drive to be
controlled by the association. He stated that there are three different requests that must be considered in a
specific order. He noted that the rezoning would be the first item to consider, with the Preliminary Plat to
follow and then lastly the Site Plan review with details provided for the Commission to consider for each
step of the request.
DesLauriers asked what can be done to ensure there is an association.
Sparks stated that the City Attorney reviewed the draft association documents and made suggestions for
changes that would make the association strong.
Reid asked and received confirmation that the items recommended to be changed are included in the
proposed conditions.
Albers asked concerning the minimum number of surface parking stalls needed.
White stated that it would seem the City would have to know the ratio of mixed uses in order to determine
the appropriate parking requirements.
Reid noted that could be difficult as residents could begin as independent and transition to assisted living
within the same unit.
Albers stated that he has a lot of confusion with the parking. He asked if the City should review their
zoning requirements to determine a better standard.
Sparks noted that Medina does not have this specific use within their zoning ordinance which can make it
tricky. He explained that staff worked with the applicant using the parking required for independent
living apartments and then using the engineering study for ratios as well. He explained that the parking
requirement is designed to handle peak times.
Albers asked how many units were counted with the 2.2 requirement.
Sparks replied that one half of the senior living building was calculated as that ratio, explaining that the
office building was calculated with its own ratio.
Albers asked if the staff parking is included in the parking requirements. He stated that he did not foresee
more than one car per unit for the senior living facility and therefore it seems like too many stalls.
Sparks explained that the calculation is not based on the residents having those vehicles, but also includes
staff and visitors.
Albers asked if there is a concern with the impervious surface.
Finke provided additional information on parking and proof of parking that could be provided in lieu of
providing the actual additional parking. He explained that the proof of parking would need to be
identified on the site and if additional parking is required, that area could then be built out. He stated that
it is in the best interest of the owner to ensure necessary parking is being provided for the residents and
guests. He noted that the larger assisted living units may require more parking than the .4 slated as well,
which may create a balance between the independent and assisted living parking.
2
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Dean Lunski, Lunski Inc., stated that they did incorporate the comments from the Commission and
Council during the Concept Plan to reduce the number of units from 135 to 90. He noted that a 5,000-
square foot building was removed and the medical office building was scaled down to better fit into the
site.
Craig Hartman, Momentum Design Group and project architect, stated that they have looked extensively
into the parking for this site and with the different ratios, as the ordinance does not address this type of
use. He stated that the ownership has put a lot of time into the issue of parking because he is most
affected if the parking is not adequate. He stated that the independent living units will be half of the
senior living facility. He stated that the goal is for residents to age in place and therefore the assisted
living ratio will increase as time moves on and the independent living residents age into assisted living.
He reviewed the calculations that they used to determine the parking number they believe to be sufficient,
which is 111. He stated that there will be documents through the association which allow the parking to
be shared between lots, but explained that the shared parking does not include a reduction in parking. He
explained that the shared parking would allow visitors to park in the medical office parking area on high
peak times, such as Christmas.
Jay Hill, Hill Engineering and civil engineer for the project, stated that there are some wetland impacts
associated with the project. He stated that this project would be the lowest impact to the wetlands of the
designs that they originally reviewed. He noted that a majority of the wetland impacts would be for the
access road on the west side. He stated that the City and Watershed District have a variety of rules and
regulations, noting that the two sets of regulations do not always agree and therefore they are trying their
best to meet the requirements of both the City and Watershed District. He stated that they are proposing
to use wetland buffer averaging for their methodology.
Lunski stated that they do not believe that any of the comments would substantially impact the project as
designed and therefore they would ask the Commission to approve the project with the recommended
conditions.
Reid referenced the skyway connection, noting that the skyway appears to be white from the south view.
She stated that her concern is the visual integration between the two different styles of buildings and
would like to see the skyway less conspicuous.
Hartman agreed that the skyway materials would be in line with the rest of the development and would be
an approved material. He noted that the same masonry material from the senior building would be used
on the medical office building and the stucco colors would be similar as well in order to integrate the two
concepts together.
Murrin referenced the medical office building and the 100 parking stalls allocated. She noted that a lot of
the customers for the medical office building would be coming from the senior living building and asked
if that was considered in the parking calculations.
Hartman stated that the parking for the office building was designed per ordinance and did not take that
factor into account as the ordinance does not allow that. He stated that this would be unique in that the
two uses would connect through the skyway. He stated that there will be crossover between the uses, but
the medical office building would also see other clients as well. He stated that it would be hard to gauge
the percentage of crossover because of insurance and preferences.
Lunski stated that the crossover design will be trending more now as that provides comfort to the
residents in the senior living portion to have medical clinics close by. He provided additional details on
how residents would be allowed to age in place in their unit as they move away from independent living
and towards assisted living.
3
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Reid asked if there would be communal dining.
Hai lman noted that the residents would have the choice of a full kitchen in their unit and then would also
have the ability to order in meals.
White opened the public hearing at 8:38 p.m.
No comments.
White closed the public hearing at 8:39 p.m.
Albers asked if the Commission felt comfortable pushing this forward to the Council with the number of
changes recommended or whether the applicant should address the changes and come back to the
Commission.
Murrin stated that she is comfortable with the item moving forward with the conditions, as the applicant
could address those items prior to City Council. She stated that she does like the option for proof of
parking.
Reid stated that the revisions should be made prior to going to City Council, as that will be a thorough
review.
DesLauriers stated that he was guessing and there was not a lot of time for the engineering study as that
came back July 6th and there were 43 comments. He stated that there are another 20+ comments from the
Watershed District. He stated that there is a lot of work to do and perhaps the applicant cannot do that
prior to the Council.
White stated that she would like to table the request to see the changes come back before the
Commission. She stated that she thinks it is a great plan and she would like to be able to comment on the
items once the revisions are made, providing an example of the tree preservation ordinance and wetland
setbacks. She stated that there is a lot to preserve in Medina and those are important issues that she would
like to see prior to passing the item to the Council.
Reid agreed that if the changes were made, that would allow the project to move quickly to the City
Council following the next review of the Planning Commission.
Murrin stated that if the applicant could make all the changes prior to the next Council meeting, she
would be in favor of passing this item forward.
Finke stated that these changes would need to be made prior to the Council review.
Albers stated that he would be in favor of tabling the request to allow the applicant to make the changes
as recommended prior to the approval of the Planning Commission.
Finke stated that a lot of the discussion is related to the Site Plan review. He noted that there are three
actions requested and the Commission could discuss the rezoning request tonight. He noted that the
current zoning is commercial and under the draft Comprehensive Plan the zoning would be business. He
stated that there is a reasonable overlap in the two zonings and therefore it could be considered that
business is not a huge jump from commercial. He noted that in the past few months when the Council has
4
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from July 11, 2017 Meeting Minutes
considered rezoning ahead of the draft Comprehensive Plan those requests were drastically different
zoning requests.
Reid stated that she is okay with this request as the senior living would not be clearly visible from
Highway 55.
DesLauriers agreed in support of the rezoning.
Amic also agreed with the rezoning as this will create an opportunity for residents of Medina to age in
place in the community
Murrin and Nester also confirmed their consensus with the rezoning request.
Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the rezoning. Motion carries
unanimously.
Finke noted that a change in notification would take place on August lst and therefore the Commission
taking action on the rezoning will help the application move forward even if the Commission decides to
table the remaining two requests. He stated that staff would tend to link the Preliminary Plat and Site
Plan together.
Murrin stated that if the Commission is going to table the remaining two actions, she would suggest
waiting to discuss in further detail until the additional details are provided by the applicant at the next
meeting.
Reid stated that she likes that the applicant included the comments about the density of the site in their
review between the Concept Plan, and then adjusted their plans accordingly.
Motion by Albers, seconded by Reid, to table the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan review and recommend
that the applicant update plans to be consistent with the staff comments.
Further discussion: Amic noted that he would be in favor of allowing the item to move forward with the
conditions and therefore will be voting against the motion.
Motion carries 6-1. (Opposed: Amic)
5
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/19/2017 Meeting Minutes
Lunski Inc. — Medina Senior Community — Park Dedication Review
Gallup provided a brief staff report. She stated that the applicant is proposing a rezoning,
preliminary plat, and a site plan review to construct a 90-unit assisted/independent living facility
and 25,000 square foot medical/office building.
Gallup stated that the subject site is located north of Highway 55, west of Mohawk Drive, and
south of Chippewa Road, which is near one of the Park Commission's active park study areas.
The Park Commission reviewed a map of the surrounding parcels in the active park study area to
discuss other possible sites for a future active park. It was noted that there would be more land
opportunity to be able to take a larger area for a park in one of the future low density residential
sites just north of Chippewa Road.
Gallup showed a picture of the Medina Senior Community site plan and described the extensive
private trails that are being proposed on the site.
Gallup noted that the Park Commission reviewed a concept plan of this project back in February
and generally thought a trail easement should be acquired along Chippewa Road, the private
internal trails should connect to the city trail system, and to take the remaining park dedication in
cash.
The Park Commission questioned their initial thoughts from February, agreeing that a trail on the
north side of Chippewa Road would be a better option to serve the future low density
developments and connect them to the future planned park.
Gallup explained the park dedication ordinance in terms of this application, noting that the city
could require up to 10% of the buildable land, which would equate to about 0.81 acres, 8% of the
pre -developed value with a minimum of $3,500 per residential unit, which would be
approximately $262,500, or a combination.
Gallup stated that staff agrees with the Park Commission that a trail may be better located along
the north side of Chippewa Road, but the Park Commission could still recommend securing the
trail easement along the south side of Chippewa Road for future flexibility. She stated that staff
would also recommend giving some due consideration for the private trails within the proposed
development. She stated that if the city took a 13,710 square foot trail easement along Chippewa
and reduced the fee by $50,000 for due consideration of private trails, it would leave
approximately $111,437.50 remaining in cash for park dedication.
The Park Commission discussed the possibility of a future trail along the south side of Chippewa
Road, but they did not anticipate it happening. There was a general consensus of the Park
Commission that the future trail along Chippewa Road should be on the north side.
1
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/19/2017 Meeting Minutes
A motion was made by Meehan to recommend that the future trail along Chippewa Road be
secured on the north side of the road as development occurs and to take cash -in -lieu of park
dedication for the Lunski Inc. project and to allow staff to work with the developer to give some
due consideration for their proposed private trail system. Motion seconded by Jacob and passed
unanimously.
2
Medina City Council Excerpt from February 21, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Lunski Senior Housing/Office Concept Plan Review — PID 03-118-23-32-0007 (7:18 p.m.)
Finke noted that this is a concept plan review and therefore the Council will simply provide
comments and no formal action is necessary. He stated that this is a proposed 80-unit
combination of independent and assisted senior living and would also include an office building
and commercial building. He discussed the topography and current state of the site including
trees and wetlands. He stated that a future request may come forward to rezone the parcel
from commercial to business. He noted that the draft Comprehensive Plan designates this land
as business rather than the current designation of business. He identified the zoning and uses
of adjacent properties. He displayed the concept plan which identifies the senior housing
building, the office building, and the commercial building. He stated that the concept plan
designates three lots and provided more details on the proposed access. He reviewed some of
the concerns noted by staff including the need to specify the mix of assisted living and
independent units within the complex. He noted that within the business zoning district,
assisted living would need to be the primary use with independent living as an accessory. He
stated that one item to be considered is whether the Council would be comfortable rezoning the
parcel to business ahead of the adoption of the draft Comprehensive Plan. He noted that staff
has suggested that the building size be reduced slightly to better fit onto the parcel. He
provided additional information on high density housing and how those units are calculated.
Pederson referenced the wetland that would be filled and asked for additional information.
Finke stated that there are wetland impacts for the driveway, which staff views as a necessity as
access will not be supported onto Highway 55.
Anderson referenced lot three, specifically the setback requirement, and asked how much the
applicant is short of meeting that requirement.
Finke replied that the applicant would be about two or three feet short of meeting the setback
requirement.
Pederson asked whether emergency and fire vehicles would have adequate space to navigate
the site. He noted that if this moves forward the Chippewa extension may be needed and the
applicant should be aware of the costs.
Mitchell noted that this is different than the original plan for the area but it could still be a good fit
and asked for the input of the Council.
Pederson stated that this seems to be a good fit for the property but it seems that there is too
much going on with the site.
Cousineau stated that this does not seem like a bad location for the project but the project is too
large and feels like a jump ahead.
Mitchell stated that commercial is not filtered through the same jump ahead as residential
development.
Anderson stated that the real question is regarding the policy. He stated that despite the
similarities between business and commercial zoning, there have been previous applicants that
wanted to come in under the new Comprehensive Plan zoning and the Council has denied
those requests. He stated that if the applicant feels strongly they should request a
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
1
Medina City Council Excerpt from February 21, 2017 Meeting Minutes
Mitchell noted that this would not draw a large amount of traffic to the site, which is in
agreement with what the City wants. He stated that he attended the Planning Commission
meeting and endorsed the comment that the applicant work with the adjacent property owner for
a possible driveway that would avoid the wetland. He stated that the applicant has stated that
they would like flexibility in the unit type so that they can change over time based on the market
demands. He cautioned to ensure that if flexibility is provided, a sufficient amount of parking is
still provided. He stated that this seems to be a lot of development on not so much land.
Cousineau stated that there is real emphasis on the business park zoning that the buildings
should blend into the surroundings and she commented that perhaps the landscaping could be
tweaked to better blend. She noted that the height of the building would stand out a lot
compared to the surrounding uses.
Pederson stated that applicants have complained later in the process about the cost of
underground parking and noted that the applicant should be aware of that cost as the
underground parking would be needed to support this level of development.
Anderson noted the applicant should be aware of the potential cost of expanding Chippewa that
would come along with that road project.
Mitchell stated that this is a terrific use for the property. He stated that the Council is getting into
the design details in order to provide a higher level of comment to the applicant. He stated that
he is in favor of the project with the comments the Council made tonight.
Pederson stated that he is also in agreement with the project as long as the details could be
worked out.
Cousineau stated that she would be willing to rezone to high density if we could ensure our
density is not in excess of our required numbers.
Finke provided additional details on the process that would be necessary to change the zoning
to high density. He stated that at the Planning Commission, the applicant did say that if the
rezoning was done to high density they would not be opposed to that and would then choose
high density rather than senior living.
Cousineau asked if this could create a creep in the increase of residential units that would not
count towards high density requirements.
Finke stated that there are a number of acres available for business development that could be
used for assisted type living.
Dean Lunski, applicant, stated that they purchased the property in 2005 with the intent to
develop in 2005, but a moratorium was placed and therefore they have not been able to
develop. He stated that if they were going to rezone to residential they would go to multi -family
housing rather than independent/assisted living as that use is also highly in demand. He stated
that the aging population of Medina is growing and therefore there is a demand for senior living
in the area.
Mitchell stated that the applicant has sat on this land for many years and the applicant would
like to get moving and not wait until 2020.
2
YY SB
701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 300 I Minneapolis, MN 55416 I (763) 541-480011
August 9, 2017
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Medina Senior Living — Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-17-204
WSB Project No. 03433-140
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed The Medina Senior Living application and plans dated August 4, 2017. The
applicant proposes to construct a 90-unit senior living complex consisting of three stories and
approximately 118,100 square feet. In addition, a separate 40,000 square foot two-story
medical/office building is also proposed for the site.
The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general
engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with
regards to engineering and stormwater management matters.
Site and Grading Plans
1. The utilities shown on the site plan and make it difficult to read, either eliminate these on the
site plan or make the line -types lighter. Complete.
2. The City's comprehensive trail plan shows a future trail extension along Chippewa Road.
The applicant may need to provide additional right of way, easements, and/or construct a trail
along this section of Chippewa Road as a part of the park dedication allocation to the City.
3. Provide an exhibit showing the turning movements of trucks (fire and delivery) within the
site including the delivery entrances along with a detail of the truck dimensions.
4. Correct the symbol for the proposed tree locations on the landscaping sheets; it is also not
clear what types of trees are being planted in relation to the legend. Complete.
5. The City will provide confirmation whether or not additional ROW is required along
Chippewa Road for the trail once the traffic study has been updated as indicated in this
review concerning the turn lanes.
6. In general, plans shall meet the requirements set forth in the City's Design Manual. The
applicant stated they will take this under advisement.
7. Maximize the parking lot bump out at the southeasterly lot to allow for greater turning
movement space during backup maneuvering. Complete.
Building a legacy — your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer l wsbeng.como
Medina Senior Living — Engineering Review
August 9, 2017
Page 2
8. Provide analysis to confirm that the proposed underground parking is feasible given the
underlying soil conditions and water table elevation.
9. Correct hatching for pavement sections. It appears the porous asphalt is mis-labelled. Use a
different hatch for the bituminous trail to differentiate from the bituminous road pavement.
Add an item in the legend for standard duty pavement (un-hatched portion shown).
10. The proposed bump -out for fire truck turning encroaches into the pond. Update the pond
contours and stormwater modelling to address change in pond sizing.
11. With final construction plans please provide the following:
o Details and design information for the proposed boardwalk.
o There are details shown in the plans for retaining wall, show the location and
elevation information more clearly on the site/grading plans. The elevations should
include both the top and bottom of the wall.
o Note that slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in locations where the steep slopes are proposed.
Utility Plan
12. Easements may be required by the City to encompass all or a portion of the sanitary sewer
and watermain into the site.
13. Looping connections may be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections, the
layout provided will require review by the City's Fire Marshall. Extend the watermain south
with the sanitary sewer alignment along w1vlerty line and provide a second
connection to the existing watermain at TH 55 Complete.
14. Extend the wate- sar
Chippewa Road. The sewer and watermain were extended, but add a gate valve to the
watermain stub.
15. Label the building service tely and
for the sanitary services. Add missing invert information to sewer stub proposed for the
future lot.
16. With final construction plans please provide the following:
o Provide dimension labels between watermain and both sanitary sewer and storm
sewer piping.
o Use different line -type for sanitary sewer that includes arrows to denote direction of
flow.
o On Sheet C5.0 under Sanitary Sewer Notes, note 1 needs to be corrected to meet the
requirements of the City of Medina design guidelines in regards to pipe strength
designation and bury depth. Need to add that PVC DR 18 is required for pipe depths
greater than 26'.
o Turn off pavement striping and hatching on utility plan. It is difficult to differentiate
piping with striping in some cases.
o Hydrants should be located 5' behind the back of curb. It appears that some are not
meeting this requirement.
o Add valve symbols to locations where valves are noted on the plan in all instances.
Medina Senior Living — Engineering Review
August 9, 2017
Page 3
17. Based on the current design, it appears the applicant will be required to apply for permits
from DLI and MDH, provide copies to the City.
Traffic & Intersections
The City requested that the applicant's traffic engineer work directly with WSB's traffic engineer to
resolve the comments below. By the date of this memo, a time had not been finalized to discuss and
resolve the comments.
18. Although the Traffic Study does indicate that no turn lanes are required at the Site Entrance,
the updated information and analysis outlined below should be provided to make a final
determination. In addition, in order to provide a recommendation on the need for turn lanes at
Willow Drive or determining the interaction between the adjacent driveways, the additional
information and analysis should be provided. The applicant provided a review of the
warrants requiring turn lanes, but even though the speed is less than 45 MPH, an analysis
showing the volumes do not meet the criteria should be provided in the report.
19. Dependent on the increase on vehicular traffic, the development may contribute to the need
for cxtendin2 Chippewa Road to the east b< give.
Applicant stated that this site does not drive the need for the new roadway extension.
20. The posted speed limit on Chippewa Road is currently 40 mph. There are horizontal curves
on the current roadway west of the proposed site driveway. With this in mind, the proposed
driveway should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns. re oving the site
The applicant provided a figure, but field test data should
also be provided and included with the final report.
21. The intersection analysis only considered Chippewa Road at the site entrance. To document
the area impacts, the intersections of Chippewa Road at Willow Drive and Chippewa Road at
Mohawk Drive should also be analyzed. The applicant stated that the increase in traffic
volumes would not have an impact on nearby intersections, but an analysis was not included
with the traffic study. Include the analysis with the traffic study.
22. The site traffic generation should be revised/updated with the following:
o The text of the project narrative indicates that the Senior Housing part of the site
includes assisted living as well as the senior housing.
o The medical office is now smaller 24,757 sf
o The retail is now larger 4,320 sf. Is it anticipated that this could be a Pharmacy? If so,
that should be used for traffic generation.
23. The majority of the traffic to and from the site will use Willow Drive to TH 55. Additional
analysis showing delay's and queues need to provided, specifically for the left and right turn
movements at:
o Chippewa Road at site driveway;
o Chippewa Road at Willow Road;
o Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive.
24. The site plan should be updated to show the correct location of the proposed uses. The future
phase (commercial) access location to the main driveway is close to Chippewa Road.
;. The applicant stated that the future use of the this
Medina Senior Living — Engineering Review
August 9, 2017
Page 4
site is unknown. An assumption should be provided based on the proposed allowable land
use to document the most conservative condition for the site.
25. The Traffic Study indicates that the interaction between the Site entrance and the property
driveway adjacent to it does not have any issues. Provide the assumption(s) for development
of the adjacent property and additional discussion/analysis, including future traffic generation
and the anticipated left/right turn queues between driveways, to validate whether or not there
will be future impacts and issues. The applicant provided approximate trip generation
information, but will need to include with the report.
Stormwater Management
26. The development will need to meet the City's infiltration requirement. It is not clear in the
submittal how this will be accomplished. One option is to utilize stormwater reuse from the
proposed ponds for irrigation. The ponds are not allowed to be drained completely because
of "aesthetic purposes". A minimum of 2 feet of water must be kept in the ponds at all times.
Volume credit for reuse should be calculated using the RWMWD Stormwater Reuse
Calculator. This method has been accepted by the City for previous developments. Please
resubmit these calculations showing that the volume abstraction requirement has been met.
27. Several ponds are shown on the grading plans. The City requires compliance with the
volume control requirement and it is not clear that any infiltration or filtration volume is
provided. See previous comment above.
28. The development will need to meet the appropriate Elm Creek Watershed standards and
permitting requirements, provide permitting documents to the City when approved.
29. Provide demonstration that the water quality criteria have been met using PondNet, P8, or
other approved water quality modeling method. Once the volume abstraction requirement has
been met, then the water quality requirement has been met. Please address.
30. Specify if future impervious area at the north side of the site has been included for treatment
or if this area is to be treated once constructed. Complete. Future impervious is not included.
31. EOFs must be labeled on the plans for all BMPs. Complete
32. Label the size and type of existing and proposed storm sewer piping, label the invert
information on all catch basins/manholes. Complete
33. Calculations must be submitted indicating the culvert under the proposed entrance road is
sized adequately to convey the offsite tributary area to the wetland. Complete
34. North Pond must have a minimum dead pool depth of 3 feet. Complete
35. North Pond NWL does not match that used in HydroCAD. Confirm the correct NWL and
HWL. Currently, the NWL in HydroCAD for the North Pond is set at 991, but the plans show
992, please correct.
36. Show HWL on the plans for the biofiltration basin. Complete
37. Confirm that the freeboard from the lowest opening of the buildings meets the two feet of
freeboard from the emergency overflow elevations of the BMPs. The two foot free -board
requirement has not been met; either the freeboard requirement is met or the applicant must
demonstrate that the 100-year back to back storm does not affect the adjacent buildings.
Medina Senior Living — Engineering Review
August 9, 2017
Page 5
Wetland Impacts
The wetland impact comments have been addressed.
Temporary Stockpile Plan
38. All silt fence should be heavy duty. Two -rows of silt fence will be required adjacent to the
wetland areas.
39. Provide written permission from property owner concerning right of entry.
40. Based on the proposed "10' maximum height" and the City's understanding that 32,000 cubic
yards are intended to be stockpiled and considering sloped sides, a larger footprint or higher
stockpile height may be necessary.
41. Add a note that the existing driveway is a right -in, right -out condition.
42. An NPDES permit will be required for an area of disturbance or size of stockpile over one
acre.
43. Add a note to the plans to "protect existing culvert" as it appears the entrance to the stockpile
site will be directly over this pipe.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
City Engineer
elm creek
Watershed Management Commission
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
3235 Fernbrook Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
PH: 763.553.1144
E-mail: judie@jass.b¢
www.e Im creekwate rs he d.o rg
TECHNICAL OFFICE
Hennepin County Public Works
Departmentof Environment and Energy
701 Fourth Ave. South, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN55415
PH: 612.596.1171
E-mail: jason.swenson(&bennepin.us
Medina Senior Living Facility
Medina, Project #2017-019
Proiect Overview: The 10.8-acre commercial project site is located north of Highway 55, south
of Chippewa Drive and midway between Willow Drive and Mohawk Drive. The site is currently
vacant and covered by forested lands and a cattail marsh wetland is located in the central portion
of the site running in an east -west direction. The proposed project is 6.00 acres, with 3.77 acres
of impervious surface and will include two new main building structures, an accessory structure,
and paved parking and driveway access to Chippewa Road. The remaining approximately 3.5
acres on the north side of the site will be platted for future development and is not subject to the
Elm Creek Watershed Commission review now. Our review will be for compliance to the
Commission's 3rd generation standards and rules.
Applicant: Lunski Inc. — c/o Dean Lunski, 1416 Main Street, Hopkins, MN 55343. Phone: 952-
929-3400. Email: dlunski@psidb.com
Agent/Engineer: Hill Engineering, Inc. — c/o Jay Hill, P.E., 1585 Dunlap Street North, Saint Paul,
MN 55108. Phone: 612-987-4455. Email: hilleng@gmaiLcom
Exhibits:
1) ECWMC Request for Plan Review and Approval received May 31, 2017 (City authoriza t io n
is June 1, 2017).
2) Project review fee of $2,750 on May 31, 2017.
3) Complete plan was received on June 20, 2017.
4) Medina Senior Living Community Preliminary Plat (dated 5/12/2017)
5) Medina Senior Living Community, Site Plan Review Submittal (dated June 19, 2017)
CS Cover Sheet
A -SITE Architectural Site Plan
C1.0 Existing Conditions
C2.0 Tree Survey
C3.0 Site Plan
C4.0 Grading Plan
C5.0 Utility Plan
C6.0-6.2 Civil Details
C7.0 SWPPP
CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA • PLYMOUTH • ROGERS
S:\EMD\DEMCON\CORR\SWENSON\WATERSHEDS\ELM CREEK\PLAN REVIEWS\2017\2017-019 Medina Senior Community, Medina\2017-019
Review Memo.doo<
Medina Senior Living Community
Medina, Project 2017-019
July 5, 2017
C7.1 Erosion Control Plan
L1.0-2.0Landscaping Plan
6) Stormwater Design Report, dated June 16, 2017 (unsigned).
7) Joint Application Form for Wetland Impacts, Dated 6/19/2017
8) Purchase Agreement for Wetland Bank Credits, 6/16/2017
Page 2
Findings;
9) A complete application was received on June 20, 2017. The initial 60-day review period
expires August 19, 2017.
10) The entire site will be routed to the existing wetland located in the center of the property.
The wetland discharges through a 15" Culvert to the south into the Highway 55 Right of
Way, then south under Highway 55 and through neighboring properties before discharging
into the series of wetlands and ditches south of Highway 55 eventually flowing north into
Rush Creek.
11) Rule F. Floodplain Alteration does not pertain to this project. There are no established
FEMA or ECWMC flood plains within the project corridor.
12)Rule G. Wetland Alteration. City of Medina is the Local Government Unit administering
the Wetland Conservation Act of Minnesota. A wetland delineation has been completed
and approved by the LGU. The applicant proposes impacts to 0.11 acres of wetlands to
complete the project. The applicant is proposing to purchase banking credits to mitigate
the proposed impacts. Credits are proposed to be purchased from the Soberg wetland bank
in Hennepin County, roughly 1 % miles west of the proposed impacts.
In addition, there is a trail crossing of the wetland with no details of what this crossing is
(grading, boardwalk, etc...). Information about this crossing must be added to the project
plans and should be included in any WCA permit applications. These issues should be
addressed by the City of Medina in their role as WCA LGU.
13) Rule I. Buffer requirements. Bi iers are required to be an average of 25 feet wide, with a
minimum width of 10 feet. Several revisions are required to meet the Commission's
requirements as follows:
a. At the proposed wetland impact area, a 10 foot wide minimum buffer is required.
Based on the site improvements as shown, this will require moving several
proposed trails out of the minimum buffer as they are not allowed in the buffer
when constructed as part of other site improvements.
b. The proposed gazebo will also need to be moved out of the 10 foot required
minimum buffer, and we suggest it also meet the recommended structure setback
of 15 feet from the required buffer.
c. There are multiple locations where the proposed buildings encroach into the
reconunended 15 foot structure setback from the wetland buffer.
Medina Senior Living Community
Medina, Project 2017-019
July 5, 2017
Page 3
d. The applicant must provide calculations demonstrating that minimum area is met
for the wetland buffers, taking into account all areas that require additional width
being added for slopes that are steeper than 6H:1V. There are multiple areas where
the minimum slopes are not met.
e. The applicant is proposing including all of the south pond and sloped as part of the
wetland buffer to increase the average buffer width. Staff will accept the pond in
the minimum 25 foot buffer in this area, but will not allow the remainder of the
pond to be include in the buffer width averaging.
14) Rule E. Erosion and Sediment Control will meet the Commission's requirements with
minor revisions:
a) A final plan, dated and signed by a Professional Engineer licensed in Minnesota, must
be submitted to the Commission and the City of Medina.
b) The SWPPP must include a map identifying the receiving waters from the site. The
SWPPP states that the site drains to waters that are impaired. These must be identified
correctly in the SWPPP, not just stated generically. A review of the MPCA impaired
waters map did not identify any impaired waters within 1 mile of the site.
c) Note #6 on Sheet C4.0 need to be changed to state stabilization must occur within 14
days per the current NPDES permit. The language on the plans has not been effective
since August of 2013 when the current NPDES permit was made effective.
d) The SWPPP should identify who prepared the SWPPP and the training received that
qualifies them to prepare the SWPPP to comply with NPDES permit requirements. A
copy of the University of Minnesota Erosion Control Certification is one example.
e) BMP Notes on Sheet 7.0, Item 1 refers to designing all BMPS for 0.5 inches of runoff.
This should be replaced with 1.1 inches, per the current Elm Creek Watershed
Standards (which will also meet the current requirements of the NPDES construction
stormwater permit in effect since August of 2013.
f) The plans should have an actual Statement of Estimated Quantities (SEQ) on the plans
for at a minimum of all erosion control items to comply with NPDES permit
requirements.
The erosion control plans must provide redundant sediment control devices (such as a
second line of silt fence) adjacent to the wetland on site since the required 50 foot buffer
in the NPDES permit will not be maintained.
h) Inlet erosion controls should be shown at all culverts on the site per the detail plate
ERO-9 on Sheet C7.0
i) Details are missing for the proposed filtration basin such as the depth of the facility
above the filtration medium (see the cross section on Sheet C6.2). In addition, these
details appear to conflict with some of the standard plate details on RG-02 and RG-03
on sheet C6.0. Details RG-02 and RG-03 are also largely illegible at the scale they are
currently printed at and should be increased in size.
The Civil details on sheet 6.0 include a porous asphalt detaiUcross section that refers to
a draft specification from MnDOT dating to 2012. The applicant should note that this
specification is now outdated and should be updated to MnDOT's current standard. The
0
j)
Medina Senior Living Community
Medina, Project 2017-019
July 5, 2017
Page 4
last revision from MnDOT is dated 4/3/2017 and may be found in MnDOT Special
Provisions SP 140.
k) No soil borings were provided for review showing the groundwater elevations on the
site. If any of the proposed pervious parking facilities or ram garden do not meet the
required 3 feet of separation from the groundwater elevation, then an impermeable liner
is required. This appears to primarily be an issue for the proposed ram garden facility.
1) The bottom of all infiltration/infiltration features should be scarified (ripped) to a
minimum depth of 12 inches prior to installing the remainder of the infiltration feature.
15) Rule D. Stormwater Management will be provided by two proposed ponds and filtration
feature (ram garden). Per the stormwater reports, runoff from the rooftops is proposed to
be routed directly to the south stormwater pond. However, no details on how this is
proposed to occur are provided for review, and the roof profile of the senior living
community does not support this conclusion as shown on the plans. Runoff from the
parking areas is a routed through pervious parking areas and then also is directed to the
south stormwater pond. Runoff from the entrance access and some trails is proposed to be
directed to the northern stormwater pond. A rain water garden is also proposed for the site
that will provide treatment for runoff from some of the proposed trails only.
Again, it should be noted that the stormwater calculations do not appear to take into account
any further expansion on the north side of the site at this time outside of the proposed access
drive.
16) The southern pond outlet will be equipped with a 12" orifice at 990.0' and discharges
through a 10" outlet pipe at 991.0' in elevation. No details on proposed pipes or outlet
control structures were provided for review in the plan set.
17) The northern pond will be equipped with a 12" orifice at 990.0' and discharges through a
12" outlet pipe at 991.0' in elevation per the HydroCAD model. The project plans call for
a normal water level of 992.0'. This discrepancy must be resolved. No details on proposed
pipes or outlet control structures were provided for review in the plan set.
18) The HydroCAD modeling for the site does not take into account the existing watersurface
or the proposed water surface correctly in the modeling. All open water surfaces, such as
open water in the wetland and open water on each of the proposed ponds should be modeled
using a curve number of 98 (though this is not included in the impervious surfaces
calculation).
19) Storwater rate control.
The post -development stormwater runoff rates for the 2-, 10- and 100-year events meet the
standards as presently modeled and are shown below:
Storm
Event
Existing
Discharge Rate (cfs)
Proposed Discharge
Rate (cfs)
2-year
2.60
0.87
10-year
5.04
1.66
100-year
10.81
3.58
Medina Senior Living Community
Medina, Project 2017-019
July 5, 2017
Page 5
These rates will require verification when modifications are made to the HydroCAD
models.
20) Volume analysis:
The volume abstraction requirement for 1.1" of runoff from 3.37 acres of new impervious
surface is about 13,460 cubic feet.
The applicant notes that soils are not conducive for infiltration. However, a significant
portion of the site appears to contain type C soils that have a higher infiltration rate than
used in the modeling for the project. The applicant is proposing to build three separate
areas of parking with pervious pavement and storage provided under the pavement with
drain tile outlets. Two of these appear to be able to be redesigned to take advantage of the
better soils to increase the volume abstraction.
Without detailed infiltration testing of the soils at the actual elevations where infiltration is
proposed to occur, the applicant is advised to use the infiltration rates from the Minnesota
Stormwater Manual with a factor of safety of 2.0 applied to them (ie: reduce the infiltrat io n
rate in %2).
The applicant proposes using excess wetland buffer areas for additional abstraction credits.
Per the notes above, the area covering the south pond is not acceptable for use in these
calculations.
The applicant will need to provide a better accounting of how the required abstraction will
be met for the site.
21) Water quality and nutrient analysis :
a. The applicant provided a narrative account of water quality and nutrient analysis
from the site, but provided no backup calculations to demonstrate how these
numbers were determined.
b. The applicant also appears to call the existing forested area on the site grassland,
meadow, or open space. The applicant is advised to apply the correct pre -developed
land use of woodland to the water quality calculations.
c. The applicant must provide the calculations from PondNET or other water quality
modeling software (such as the MIDS calculator) to demonstrate the source of the
information provided in the narrative.
22) At the time of writing this report, it was not certain which party (City of Medina or the
applicant) would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the stormwater
management facilities. A responsible party must be established for the O&M Plan.
Medina Senior Living Community
Medina, Project 2017-019
July 5, 2017
Recommendation:
Page 6
None at this time. Significant revisions are still required to the site to bring it into compliance
with ECWMC Rules.
Hennepin County
Department of Environment and Energy
July 5, 2017
Jason Swenson, P.E.
Technical Advisor to the Commission
��p ��I N S 1 4 ��
* . <