HomeMy Public PortalAbout09.19.2017 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, September 19, 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 September 5, 2017 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Final Pay Request to C & L Excavating, Inc. for Sioux Drive Turn Lane Improvement
Project
B. Approve Amended and Restated Contract for Fire Protection between the City of Maple Plain and
the City of Medina
C. Approve Warm-up Pitchers Area Installation Services Agreement
D. Resolution Accepting Donation from the Hamel Athletic Club
E. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Just for Kix Development
F. Resolution Approving Setback Variance from Right -of -Way for McDonald's at 822 Highway 55
G. Call for Special City Council Meeting on October 11, 2017 at 7:30 a.m. for the Fall Business
Tours
H. Call for Special City Council Meeting on November 8, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. to Discuss the
Comprehensive Plan and Public Comments
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. PRESENTATION
A. 2018 Preliminary Budget & Tax Levy
1. Resolution Approving Proposed Tax Levy for 2018
2. Resolution Approving Proposed General Fund Budget for 2018
3. Resolution Reducing Debt Service Tax Levies for 2018
4. Establish Public Discussion Date for Final 2018 Tax Levy and Budget
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Excelsior Group LLC - PUD Concept Plan Review — 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road
IX. OLD BUSINESS
A. Wally and Bridget Marx — Conservation Design Subdivision PUD General Plan and Preliminary
Plat — 2700-2900 Parkview Drive
B. Medina Senior Living Community — Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review
1. Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map to Rezone the Property Being Subdivided
and Developed as the Medina Senior Living Community
2. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Ordinance by Title and Summary
3. Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for a Subdivision to be Known as
"Lunski-Nelson Addition"
4. Resolution Approving a Site Plan Review for the Medina Senior Living Community &
Medical/Office Building
C. Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition — Final Plat and Development Agreement
1. Resolution Granting Final Plat Approval for Reserve of Medina 2.nd Addition
Posted 9/15/2017 Page 1 of 2
2. Development Agreement by and between the City of Medina and Toll MN, L.P.
D. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Deer Hill Preserve Road Improvement Project
X. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
XI. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
XII. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XIII. ADJOURN
Posted 9/15/2017 Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: September 14, 2017
DATE OF MEETING: September 19, 2017
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Final Pay Request to C & L Excavating, Inc. for Sioux Drive Turn Lane
Improvement Project — Approval of the final payment will close out the Sioux Drive
project from 2016. Staff recommends approval.
See attached pay request.
B. Approve Amended and Restated Contract for Fire Protection between the City of Maple
Plain and the City of Medina — Council Member Kathy Martin and staff worked with the
City of Maple Plain on an updated two-year fire contract starting January 1, 2018. Only
the dates of the contract were changed and all other contract provisions stayed consistent
with the previous agreement. Staff recommends approval.
See attached agreement.
C. Approve Warm-up Pitchers Area Installation Services Agreement — The Hamel Athletic
Club has requested to install two warm-up pitchers areas (bullpens) near the quad fields
in Hamel Legion Park, which will be 100% funded by the Hamel Athletic Association.
The Park Commission reviewed the request at their August 16th meeting and
recommended approval. Staff confirmed the locations of the bullpens would not interfere
with the fire lanes. Staff recommends approval.
See attached agreement
D. Resolution Accepting Donation from the Hamel Athletic Club — Staff recommends
accepting the donation from the Hamel Athletic Club and using it to pay for the
installation of the two warm-up pitchers areas as noted in the agenda item above.
See attached resolution.
E. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Just for Kix Development — City
Engineer Jim Stremel included the attached resolution accepting the public utilities for
Just for Kix. Release of the letter of credit for the project is at the discretion of the City
Engineer and requires receipt of the warranty bond for the project. Staff recommends
approval.
See attached resolution.
F. Resolution Approving Setback Variance from Right -of -Way for McDonald's at 822
Highway 55 — Council reviewed this request at the September 5th meeting and directed
staff to bring back the attached resolution for approval. Staff recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
G. Call for Special City Council Meeting on October 11, 2017 at 7:30 a.m. for the Fall
Business Tours — Staff recommends calling for a special meeting on October 1 lth at 7:30
a.m. to conduct the annual fall business tours.
No attachments for this item.
H. Call for Special City Council Meeting on November 8, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. to Discuss the
Comprehensive Plan and Public Comments — Staff recommends calling for a special
meeting on November 8th to discuss the Steering Committees recommended changes and
review comments regarding the draft Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends calling for
a special meeting.
No attachments for this item.
VII. PRESENTATION
A. 2018 Preliminary Budget & Tax Levy — Staff will provide a brief presentation on the
proposed tax levy and general fund budget at the Regular Council meeting. A full
presentation will be provided at the 6 PM Work Session. Attached is the proposed
2018 General Fund budget.
See attached resolutions.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt the resolution approving the 2018
preliminary tax levy.
Recommended Motion # 2: Adopt the resolution approving the 2018
preliminary general fund budget.
Recommended Motion # 3: Adopt the resolution reducing debt service tax
levies for 2018.
Recommended Motion # 4: Establish the 2018 final tax levy and budget
discussion for December 5, 2017 at 7: 00 p.m. in City Hall.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Excelsior Group LLC - PUD Concept Plan Review — 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road —
The Excelsior Group, LLC has requested review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Concept Plan for a 68-lot residential development north of Chippewa Road and west of
Mohawk Drive. The subject site is a total of 37 acres (31.3 net acres). The subject site is
2
guided for Low Density Residential development in the current Comprehensive Plan
within the 2021-2025 staging period. The Comprehensive Plan would permit a property
to develop up to two years early through an incentive -based point system. As such, the
property would not be permitted to be developed until 2019 under the existing
Comprehensive Plan, even with the "jump ahead" provision.
See attached report.
IX. OLD BUSINESS
A. Wally and Bridget Marx — Conservation Design Subdivision PUD General Plan and
Preliminary Plat — 2700-2900 Parkview Drive — Wally and Bridget Marx have requested
review of a PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat for a Conservation Design
subdivision at their property at 2700-2900 Parkview Drive. The applicant proposes to
divide three lots totaling 89.75 acres into six single-family residential lots and proposes to
place 69.61 (11.76 acres buildable) into conservation easements.
See attached report.
Potential Motion: If the City Council finds that the proposal meets the
conservation objectives noted in the CD-PUD district to an extent justifying the
flexibility requested, the following motion would be in order:
Motion to direct staff to prepare documents granting PUD General Plan of
Development and Preliminary Plat approval to Wally and Bridget Marx for the
requested CD-PUD subdivision, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
B. Medina Senior Living Community — Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review —
At the August 15, 2017 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed a rezoning,
preliminary plat, and site plan from Lunski, Inc. for the Medina Senior Living
Community project. Concerns were expressed regarding wetland impacts to allow for the
construction of the building. Some Council members also questioned whether the
proposed rezoning is appropriate at this time, prior to the Comprehensive Plan update
being in effect. The Council requested that the applicant revise the plan to reduce the
impacts to the wetlands and, on a 3-2 vote, directed Staff to bring back resolutions and an
ordinance related to the approvals for the project.
See attached report.
Recommended Motion # 1: Move to adopt the ordinance to rezone the subject
property to the Business zoning district.
Recommended Motion # 2: Move to adopt the resolution authorizing publication
of the ordinance by title and summary
3
Recommended Motion # 3: Move to approve the resolution granting preliminary
plat approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
Recommended Motion # 4: Move to approve the resolution granting site plan
review approval, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
C. Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition — Final Plat and Development Agreement — The subject
property is located east of County Road 116 and south of Hackamore. Toll Brothers, the
applicant, has now requested Final Plat approval for the 2nd addition of the development
to include 44 single family lots. Streets and utilities are proposed to be constructed this
fall for this phase, along with required tree planting from the initial site development.
The 2nd addition is located in the southeast corner of the development. Future phases will
extend north to Hackamore Road, but until that time, the additional 44 lots within the 2nd
addition are proposed to access County Road 116 via Aster Road.
See attached report.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt resolution granting final plat approval for
Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition
Recommended Motion # 2: Approve Development Agreement by and between the
City of Medina and Toll MN, L.P. for the Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition
D. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Deer Hill Preserve Road Improvement Project
— In 2016, the City of Medina initiated a public improvement project consisting of
constructing a road from %2 mile west of Willow Drive to Homestead Trail and a
dedicated turn lane on Homestead Trail onto the newly constructed Deer Hill Road. The
owners of the benefited land, Stonegate Farm, Inc. and Property Resources Development
Corporation, petitioned for the construction of the improvement project and the special
assessment of their respective properties for 100% of the cost.
See attached resolution.
Recommended Motion: Adopt resolution adopting assessment roll for Deer Hill
Preserve road improvement project
XII. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 004294E-004313E for $42,425.13,
order check numbers 046323-046372 for $186, 710.33, and payroll EFT 0508133-0508163 for
$49,080.74 and payroll manual check 0020437for $64.28.
• Planning Depai liuent Update
• Police Department Update
• Public Works Department Update
• Claims List
4
1 DRAFT
2
3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2017
4
5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on September 5, 2017 at
6 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Acting Mayor Pederson presided.
7
8 I. ROLL CALL
9
10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Pederson, and Martin
11
12 Members absent: Mitchell.
13
14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer
15 Jim 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 Johnson noted that Commissioner Liz Weir from the Elm Creek Watershed Commission
22 is present to provide an update and suggested that occur as the first item under
23 comments.
24
25 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda as amended.
26 Motion passed unanimously.
27
28 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.)
29
30 A. Approval of the August 15, 2017 6:00 p.m. Special City Council Meeting
31 Minutes
32 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the August 15, 2017 6:00 p.m.
33 special City Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
34
35 B. Approval of the August 15, 2017 6:30 p.m. Special City Council Meeting
36 Minutes
37 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the August 15, 2017 6:30 p.m.
38 special City Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
39
40 C. Approval of the August 15, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
41 It was noted on page two, line five, it should state, "...is was..." On page two, line 43, it
42 should state, "...City's permitted hours. He stated that they Medina LP LLC wants..."
43 On page two, line 45, it should state, "...they the contractors..." On page three, line four,
44 it should state, "...asked if both men to could give their contact..." On page three, line
45 two, it should state, "...City permitted hours..." On page three, line eight, it should state,
46 "...so that the City does not have to cnforcc punishments take action to enforce the
47 ordinances." On page three, line 21, it should state, "...stipulations requirements of the
48 ordinances." On page three, line 24, it should state, "...their its trash..." It was noted
49 that mentions of the watershed should be changed to Watershed Commission. On page
50 three, line 43, it should state, "...Commissioners for the great job..." On page four, line
51 one, it should state, "...would take one of the newly created parcels..." On page four,
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
September 5, 2017
1 line 15, it should state, "...fen or..." On page four, line 36, it should state, "...in the
2 spelling of a word name on the Preliminary Plat, which staff confirmed will be cleared
3 up." On page four, line 39, it should state, "...this construction of the lot..." On page
4 five, line 36, it should state, "...first lowest..." On page five, line 44, it should state,
5 "...allowcd rcmoval allowance for tree removal..." On page five, line 46, it should state,
6 "...above and beyond the minimum requirements." On page five, line 51, it should state,
7 "...site although most of the demand is for the senior assisted living building." On page
8 five, line 21, it should state, "...in..." On page five, line 23, it should state, "...association}
9 that all three lots would be members of an association in which all three lots would be
10 members." On page five, line 38, it should state, "...they the applicant..." On page six,
11 line 15, it should state, "...does did..." On page six, line 33, it should state, "...she was
12 not seeing did not see..." On page six, line 34, it should state, "...measures as on the
13 plans, and it appears..." On page six, line two, it should state, "...parking noting that the
14 City ordinance currently does not have a formula for this type of use." On page eight,
15 line 17, it should state, "...October 4-St-h 17th." On page ten, line eight, it should state,
16 "...their its..." On page 12, line 20, it should state, "...run the pipe te-and-frem."
17
18 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the August 15, 2017 regular
19 City Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously.
20
21 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:11 p.m.)
22
23 A. Approve Right of Entry Agreement between the City of Medina and the
24 Wilfred J. Cavanaugh Family Limited Partnership
25 B. Approve Right of Entry Agreement between the City of Medina and Elaine
26 H. Roy, Trustee
27 C. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for Medina Senior Housing
28 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the consent agenda. Motion
29 passed unanimously.
30
31 VI. COMMENTS (7:12 p.m.)
32
33 A. Update from Liz Weir on the Elm Creek Watershed Commission
34 Liz Weir provided an annual update on the Elm Creek Watershed Commission. She
35 provided background on the organization and its mission. She stated that the Third-
36 Generation Plan and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) has been approved and the
37 Commission has asked to make an amendment to the Third -Generation Plan. She
38 noted that both Champlin and Corcoran have recently taken over responsibility as their
39 own Local Government Units (LGUs), which has relieved the Commission of that
40 responsibility. She reviewed some of the restoration projects that the Commission is a
41 part of and the cost for participation. She stated that preventing pollution is much more
42 cost effective than cleaning up after the fact. She provided additional information on
43 weather trends.
44
45 Pederson thanked Commissioner Weir for her continued work as water will continue to
46 be an important issue for the community.
47
48 B. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda
49 Ken Ferguson, 307 Cherry Hill Bay, stated that he was present to discuss the City's
50 policy on trash cans. He stated that for years he kept his trash cans outside, as his
51 neighbors do, but he then received a letter stating that he needed to put the trash cans
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
September 5, 2017
1 inside. He stated that he did comply and place his trash cans inside the garage. He
2 stated that 20 percent of the homes in his neighborhood are not in compliance with the
3 ordinance. He stated that he is okay with following the rules, but believed that everyone
4 then should be following the rules. He stated that he would like to see the ordinance
5 changed, noting that he placed his trash cans outside to prevent mice from coming
6 inside.
7
8 Pederson stated that the item can be placed on a worksession agenda for further
9 discussion. He agreed that about 20 percent of the homes in that neighborhood do not
10 comply with the ordinance.
11
12 Johnson stated that staff can alert Mr. Ferguson as to when the item will appear on the
13 worksession agenda. He provided more information on the timetable for review.
14
15 Mr. Ferguson stated that he would like to have an answer to see what can be done to
16 change the policy. He stated that he would like to be able to place his trash cans
17 outside to prevent the mice from coming inside.
18
19 Anderson asked if there is ample space for the trash cans to be placed in his garage.
20
21 Mr. Ferguson replied that they are only parking one vehicle in the garage now, which
22 leaves ample room, but explained that if there were two vehicles in the garage there
23 would not be adequate space. He noted that his main concern is with the rodents that
24 the trash attracts.
25
26 C. Park Commission
27 Scherer stated that the Park Commission discussed the Excelsior Concept Plan, the
28 Capital Improvement Plan and ball field lights, and considered baseball association
29 requests.
30
31 D. Planning Commission
32 Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to hold five
33 public hearings. He stated that the Commission will consider the Weston Woods PUD
34 Concept Plan, the closed sanitary landfill zoning district and potential rezoning of
35 property to that new zoning district, a request from a property owner for the City to
36 amend the zoning code to allow additional ground mounted solar equipment, and a CUP
37 from the property owners at 2705 Willow Drive.
38
39 VII. NEW BUSINESS
40
41 A. McDonalds — Setback Variance for Trash Enclosure Replacement — 822
42 Highway 55 — Public Hearing (7:26 p.m.)
43 Finke presented a variance request to reduce the required setback for a trash enclosure
44 and storage building. He stated that Hennepin County is purchasing additional right-of-
45 way property for the CR 116 project and the proposed location would meet the required
46 setback, but for Hennepin County purchasing the additional right-of-way. He stated that
47 the remaining setbacks would be met. He noted that the trash enclosure and storage
48 building would be shifted slightly to the south from the previous location. He reviewed
49 the criteria which apply when an applicant requests a variance. He stated that the
50 Planning Commission reviewed the request at their meeting in August, determined that
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
September 5, 2017
1 the practical difficulties test was met and the use was reasonable and therefore
2 recommended unanimous approval.
3
4 Anderson referenced the property to the west and asked if that property is owned by
5 Hennepin County.
6
7 Finke identified the areas purchased by Hennepin County. He noted that the right-of-
8 way terminates half way down the tail and therefore that property would not be subject to
9 the right-of-way. He believed that the right-of-way would eventually be owned by the
10 City after the acquisition and project are complete.
11
12 Pederson opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m.
13
14 Kendra Lindal, Landform, asked for approval of the variance.
15
16 Cousineau asked if landscaping will be done around the structure.
17
18 Ms. Lindal replied that they would be proposing nine new trees around the structure,
19 noting that staff will work with the applicant on the landscaping details.
20
21 Pederson closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m.
22
23 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to direct staff to prepare a resolution
24 granting variance approval to McDonalds based upon the findings noted in the staff
25 report and subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
26 Motion passed unanimously.
27
28 VIII. OLD BUSINESS
29
30 A. Personnel Policy Amendments (7:33 p.m.)
31 Johnson stated that Jodi Gallup worked closely with Martin to update the policy as
32 directed by the Council through the last worksession discussion. He expressed
33 appreciation for Gallup's time and excellent work.
34
35 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the changes to the Personnel
36 Policy as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
37
38 IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:34 p.m.)
39 Johnson stated that staff is requesting the Council call for a special meeting on
40 September 19th for attorney client privilege discussion regarding ongoing litigation with
41 Ellis and Nancy Olkon.
42
43 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to call for a special City Council meeting on
44 September 19, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. for attorney client privilege discussion regarding
45 ongoing litigation. Motion passed unanimously.
46
47 Johnson reminded the Council that the budget open house will also occur on September
48 19th at 6:00 p.m. He stated that the water tower rehab project started today.
49
50 Scherer reported that the first day of the project went well. He stated that they drained
51 the tower and there was an excessive amount of sediment that will need to be removed.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
September 5, 2017
1 He provided information on backup connections that have been made and will be made
2 soon.
3
4 Johnson noted that Fred Webber has submitted comments on the recent CR 101 speed
5 study results that Johnson will be sharing with the Council members and Hennepin
6 County.
7
8 X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:37 p.m.)
9 Cousineau noted that Medina Celebration Day will occur on September 16tn
10
11 XI. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:37 p.m.)
12 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to approve the bills, EFT 004276E-004293E
13 for $65, 037.93, order check numbers 046254-046322 for $163, 003.28, and payroll EFT
14 0508106-0508132 for $47, 081.60. Motion passed unanimously.
15
16 XII. ADJOURN
17 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 7:38 p.m.
18 Motion passed unanimously.
19
20
21
22
23
24 Jeff Pederson, Acting Mayor
25 Attest:
26
27
28 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
September 5, 2017
Approved By
County/City/Project Engineer
May 3, 2017
Date
?-3/
Date
WSB
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project 02712-61 - MDNA - Sioux Drive Turn Lane Improvement Project
Final Pay Voucher No. 3
Contractor:
C & L Excavating, Inc.
7939 Ridgewood Road
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Contract Amounts
Original Contract
Contract Changes
Revised Contract
Work Certified To Date
$136,501.61
$60, 560.60
$197, 062.21
Base Bid Items
Backsheet
Change Order
Supplemental Agreement
Work Order
Material On Hand
Total
$131,661.13
$0.00
$52,488.12
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$184,149.25
Contract No.
Vendor No.
For Period:
Warrant #
8/31 /2016 - 5/3/2017
Date
Funds Encumbered
Original
Additional
Total
$136,501.61
N/A
$136,501.61
Work Certified
This Pay Voucher
Work Certified
To Date
Less Amount
Retained
Less Previous
Payments
Amount Paid
This Pay Voucher
Total Amount
Paid To Date
02712-61
$54,011.00
$184,149,25
$0.00
$123,631.34
$60,517.91
$184,149.25
Percent Retained: 0%
Amount Paid This Final Pay Voucher
$60,517.91
I hereby certify that a Final Examination has been made of the noted Contract, that the Contract has been completed,
that the entire amount of Work Shown in this Final Voucher has been performed d the Total Value of the Work Performed
in accordance with, and pursuant to, the terms of the Contract is s s own in this Final Voucher.
Apprd cc L xcavating, Inc.
Con
rr for
Date
Page 1
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project No. 02712-61
Final Pay Voucher No. 3
02712-61 Payment Summary
No. From Date To Date Work Certified Amount Retained Amount Paid
F'er Pay Voucher Per Pay Voucher Per Pay Voucher
1 06/01/2016 07/14/2016 $103,891.35 $5,194.57 S98,696.78
2 07/15/2016 08/30/2016 $26,246.90 $1,312.34 $24,934.56
3 08/31/2016 05/03/2017 $54,011.00 ($6,506.91) $60,517.91
Totals: $184,149.25 $0.00 $184,149.25
02712-61 Funding Category Report
Funding Work Less Less Amount Paid Total
Category Certified Amount Previous This Amount Paid
No. To Date Retained Payments Pay Voucher To Date
UNF 184,149.25 0 00 123,631.34 60,517.91 184,149.25
Totals: $184,149.25 $0.00 $123,631.34 $60,517.91 $184,149.25
02712-61 Funding Source Report
Accounting Funding
No. Source
Amount Paid Revised Funds Paid To
This Contract Encumbered Contractor
Pay Voucher Amount To Date To Date
UNF Unfunded 60,517.91 197,062.21 136,501.61 184,149.25
Totals:
$60,517.91 $197,062.21
$136,501.61 $184,149.25
Pace 2
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project No. 02712-61
Final Pa v Voucher No. 3
02712-61 Project Material Status
Line
Item
Description
Units
Unit
Price
Contract
Quantity
Quantity
This
Pay
Voucher
Amount
This
Pay
Voucher
Quantity
To Date
Amount
To Date
SCHEDULE A. STREET & STORM IMPROVEMENTS
1
2021.501
MOBILIZATION
LS
$6,200.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$6,200.00
2
2102'501
PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL
S F
$2.50
472
0
$0.00
96
$240.00
3
2102'502
PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL
L F
$0.85
540
0
$0.00
601
$510.85
4
2104'501
REMOVE CURB & GUTTER
L F
$4.25
830
0
$0.00
700
$2,975.00
5
2104'503
REMOVE CONCRETE WALK
S F
$1.50
1250
0
$0.00
940
$1.410.00
6
2104.505
REMOVE
BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
S Y
$5.75
230
0
$0.00
230
$1,322.50
7
2104'505
REMOVE
BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY
PAVEMENT
S Y
$7.40
150
0
$0.00
165
$1,221.00
8
2104'509
REMOVE CATCH BASIN
EACH
$550.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$550.00
9
2104.509
REMOVE SIGN
EACH
$50.00
5
0
$0.00
5
$250.00
10
2104'509
REMOVE SIGN PANEL TYPE C
EACH
$50.00
5
0
$0.00
5
$250.00
11
2104.511
SAWING CONCRETE
PAVEMENT (FULL
DEPTH)
L F
$10.00
20
0
$0.00
20
$200.00
12
2104.513
SAWING BIT
PAVEMENT (FULL
DEPTH)
L F
$3.50
910
0
$0.00
910
$3,185.00
13
2104'523
SALVAGE HYDRANT & VALVE
EACH
$3,000.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$3,000.00
14
2104'523
SALVAGE AND INSTALL SIGN
EACH
$180.00
2
0
$0.00
2
$360.00
15
2104'602
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAIL BOX
EACH
$200.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$200.00
16
2105'501
COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (P)
CU YD
$45.00
300
0
$0.00
300
$13,500.00
17
2105'522
SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV)
C Y
$16.50
220
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
18
2105.601
DEWATERING
LS
$0.01
1
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
19
2105'604
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V
S Y
$3.50
550
0
$0.00
353
$1.235.50
20
2105.607
1 1/2" CLEAR ROCK
CU YD
$40.00
20
0
$0.00
15
$600.00
21
2112'501
SUBGRADE
PREPAR
PREPARATION
RDST
$450.00
4
0
$0.00
4
$1,800.00
22
2123.610
STREET SWEEPER
(WITH PICKUP
BROOM)
HOUR
$125.00
20
0
$0.00
9
$1,125.00
23
2130.501
WATER (DUST
CONTROL)
M
GALLONS
$40.00
20
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
Page 3
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project No. 02712-61
Final Pay Voucher No. 3
02712-61 Project Material Status
Line
Item
Description
Units
Unit
Price
Contract
Quantity
Quantity
This
Pay
Voucher
Amount
This
Pay
Voucher
Quantity
To Date
Amount
To Date
24
2211'501
AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5
TON
$20.00
330
0
$0.00
338.77
$6,775.40
25
2357.502
BITUMINOUS
MATERIAL FOR TACK
COAT
GAL
$3.70
20
20
$74.00
45
$166.50
26
2360.501
TYPE SP 12.5
WEARING COURSE
MIX (3,B)
TON
$131.00
50
0
$0.00
58.35
$7,643.85
27
2360.502
TYPE SP 12.5 NON
WEAR COURSE MIX
(3,B)
TON
$145.00
90
0
$0.00
117.92
$17,098.40
28
2360.503
TYPE SP 9.5
WEARING COURSE
MIX (2,B), 3.0" THICK
S Y
$25.00
100
0
$0.00
165
$4,125.00
29
2503'541
15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V
L F
$75.00
20
0
$0.00
10
$750.00
30
2503.602
CONNECT INTO
EXISTING DRAINAGE
STRUCTURE
EACH
$975.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$975.00
31
2504.602
CONNECT TO
EXISTING WATER
MAIN
EACH
$1,500.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$1,500.00
32
2504'602
INSTALL HYDRANT & VALVE
EACH
$1,500.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$1,500.00
33
2504'602
ADJUST GATE VALVE & BOX
EACH
$300.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$300.00
34
2504'603
6" WA
DUCTILE LE IRON CL 52 N IRO
L F
$57.00
10
0
$0.00
10
$570.00
35
2505'601
UTILITY
COORDINATION
LUMP
SUM
$500.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$500.00
36
2506'516
CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM)
EACH
$650.00
2
0
$0.00
2
$1.300.00
37
2506'602
CONSTRUCT
DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN
SPECIAL 1
EACH
$2,750.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$2,750.00
38
2521.501
4" CONCRETE WALK
S F
$6.00
1230
60
$360.00
1000
$6,000.00
39
2531.501
CONCRETE CURB &
GUTTER DESIGN
B618
L F
$18.50
720
50
$925.00
770
$14.245.00
40
2563.601
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
$9,000.00
1
0
$0.00
1
$9.000.00
41
2564.531
SIGN PANELS TYPE C
S F
$29.00
110.69
0
$0.00
110.69
$3,210.01
42
2564.602
SIGN POST SUPPORT
EACH
$125.00
8
0
$0.00
8
$1.000.00
43
2573.502
SILT FENCE, TYPE HI
L F
$3.00
200
0
$0.00
160
$480.00
44
2573'530
STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION
EACH
$200.00
6
0
$0.00
6
$1,200.00
45
2575.540
FILTER LOG TYPE
WOOD FIBER
BIOROLL
LIN FT
$4.40
100
0
$0.00
60
$264.00
46
2574.508
FERTILIZER TYPE 3
LB
$1.00
40
0
$0.00
40
$40.00
Page 4
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project No. 02712-61
Final Pay Voucher No. 3
02712-61 Project Material Status
Line
Item
Description
Units
Unit
Price
Contract
Quantity
Quantity
This
Pay
Voucher
Amount
This
Pay
Voucher
Quantity
To Date
Amount
To Date
47
2574'525
COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW
C Y
$34.00
80
2
$68.00
38
$1,292.00
48
2575.501
SEEDING
ACRE
$1,500.00
0.1
0
$0.00
0.1
$150.00
49
2575'502
12 SEED MIXTURE 25-
LB
$7.00
10
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
50
2575.505
SODDING, TYPE
LAWN (INCL. TOPSOIL
& FERT.)
SQ YD
$6.00
360
0
$0.00
250
$1,500.00
51
2575.523
EROSION CONTROL
BLANKETS
CATEGORY
S Y
$2.00
360
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
52
2575'535
WATER (TURF ESTABLISHMENT)
MGAL
$100.00
20
0
$0.00
17
$1,700.00
53
2582.501
PAVT MSSG EPDXY
S F
$8.00
183.48
0
$0.00
183.48
$1,467.84
54
2582.502
4" SOLID LINE EPDXY
L F
$0.55
215
0
$0.00
530
$291.50
55
2582.502
8" SOLID LINE EPDXY
L F
$1.10
50
0
$0.00
64
$70.40
56
2582'502
EPDXY DOTTED LINE
E
L F
$0.55
50
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
57
2582'502
4" DBLE SOLID LINE EPDXY
L F
$1.25
400
0
$0.00
1184
$1,480.00
58
2564'603
24" SOLID LINE WHITE -EPDXY
LIN FT
$14.75
40
6.5
$95.88
40.5
$597.38
59
2582.503
CROSSWALK EPDXY
S F
$8.00
180
0
$0.00
198
$1,584.00
Totals For Section SCHEDULE A. STREET & STORM IMPROVEMENTS:
$1,522.88
$131,661.13
Change Order 1
60
2021.501
MOBILIZATION
LS
$6,200.00
1
1
$6,200.00
1
$6,200.00
61
2104'501
REMOVE CURB & GUTTER
L F
$4.25
160
95
$403.75
95
$403.75
62
2104'503
REMOVE CONCRETE WALK
S F
$1.50
420
475
$712.50
475
$712.50
63
2104.505
REMOVE
BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
S Y
$5.75
310
307
$1,765.25
307
$1,765.25
64
2104.511
SAWING CONCRETE
PAVEMENT (FULL
DEPTH)
L F
$10.00
10
10
$100.00
10
$100.00
65
2104.513
SAWING BIT
PAVEMENT (FULL
DEPTH)
L F
$3.50
300
242
$847.00
242
$847.00
66
2104'523
SALVAGE AND INSTALL SIGN
EACH
$180.00
1
1
$180.00
1
$180.00
67
2105'501
COMMON EXCAVATION
C Y
$45.00
180
72
$3,240.00
72
$3,240.00
68
2105'604
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V
S Y
$3.50
300
307
$1,074.50
307
$1,074.50
69
2211.501
AGGREGATE BASE
CLASS 5
TON
$20.00
240
64.4
$1,288.00
64.4
$1.288.00
BITUMINOUS
Page 5
CITY OF MEDINA
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Project No. 02712-61
Final Pay Voucher No. 3
02712-61 Project Material Status
Line
Item
Description
Units
Unit
Price
Contract
Quantity
Quantity
This
Pay
Voucher
Amount
This
Pay
Voucher
Quantity
To Date
Amount
To Date
70
2357.502
MATERIAL FOR TACK
COAT
GAL
$3.70
38
80
$296.00
80
$296.00
70
2232.501
MILL BITUMINOUS
SURFACE (EDGE)
S Y
$50.00
55
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
71
2360.501
TYPE SP 12.5
WEARING COURSE
MIX (3,B)
TON
$131.00
65
95.28
$12,481.68
95.28
$12,481.68
72
2360.502
TYPE SP 12.5 NON
WEAR COURSE MIX
(3,B)
TON
$145.00
80
55.7
$8,076.50
55.7
$8,076.50
73
2504'602
ADJUST GATE VALVE & BOX
EACH
$300.00
1
1
$300.00
1
$300.00
74
2521.501
4" CONCRETE WALK
S F
$6.00
420
475
$2,850.00
475
$2,850.00
75
2531.501
CONCRETE CURB &
GUTTER DESIGN
B618
L F
$45.65
90
95
$4.336.75
95
$4,336.75
76
2563.601
TRAFFIC CONTROL
STAGE 1
LUMP
SUM
$2,050.00
1
2.26585
$4,644.99
2.26585
$4.644.99
77
2563.601
TRAFFIC CONTROL
STAGE 2
LUMP
SUM
$2,950.00
1
1
$2,950.00
1
$2,950.00
78
2575.505
SODDING, TYPE
LAWN (INCL. TOPSOIL
& FERT.)
SQ YD
$6.00
60
60
$360.00
60
$360.00
79
2575.535
WATER (TURF
ESTABLISHMENT)
MGAL
$100.00
4
0
$0.00
0
$0.00
80
2582.501
PAVT MSSG EPDXY
S F
$8.00
15
15
$120.00
15
$120.00
81
2582.502
4" SOLID LINE EPDXY
L F
$0.55
110
195
$107.25
195
$107.25
82
2582.502
4" DOTTED LINE
EPDXY
L F
$0.55
70
14
$7.70
14
$7.70
83
2582.502
4" DOUBLE SOLID
LINE - EPDXY
LIN FT
$1.25
60
117
$146.25
117
$146.25
Totals
For Change Order 1:
$52,488.12
$52,488.12
Project Totals:
$54,011.00
$184,149.25
02712-61 Contract Changes
No.
Type
Date
Explanation
Estimated
Amount
Amount
Paid
To Date
CO1
Change
Order
11/29/2016
Change Order No. 1 (see change order document for detailed
description)
$60,560.60
$52,488.12
Contract Change Totals:
$60,560.60
$52,488.12
Page 6
AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR FIRE PROTECTION
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN
AND
THE CITY OF MEDINA
THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT, effective , January 1 , 2018, by and
between the City of Maple Plain, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Maple Plain"), and the
City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Medina");
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Maple Plain has the capability to provide fire protection and emergency
medical and rescue services to Medina through the personnel, facilities, and equipment of its
Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department; and
WHEREAS, Medina desires to contract with Maple Plain to provide such services to a
portion of Medina, subject to the terms hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the other mutual covenants
and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
DEFINITIONS
1.01 Fire Protection Services. The protection of life and property from damage or
destruction by fire, together with such emergency medical and rescue operations as may be
authorized by Maple Plain, acting through its duly appointed Fire Chief or designee.
1.02 Fire Protection Services Area. The land area in Medina described in Exhibit A
attached hereto to which Maple Plain shall provide Fire Protection Services during the term of
this Contract.
1.03 Service Fee. The amount of consideration payable annually by Medina to Maple
Plain for Fire Protection Services.
1
1.04 Call Hour — is the time from when the call is dispatched to the time the last truck is
out of service. If the call is less than an hour in length, it is counted as a one hour call.
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
2.01 In accordance with the terms and conditions hereof, Maple Plain shall provide Fire
Protection Services within the Fire Protection Services Area or shall arrange for such services to
be provided pursuant to mutual aid. For each call, the Fire Chief shall dispatch such fire fighting
personnel and equipment or emergency personnel and equipment as the Chief determines to be
necessary. The Fire Chief may also call for such other assistance under any mutual aid agreement
as the Chief may deem necessary.
2.02 Maple Plain agrees to keep and maintain in good order and at its expense the fire
and emergency equipment necessary to provide Fire Protection Services. Maple Plain shall also
arrange for suitable personnel to provide Fire Protection Services.
2.03 Maple Plain shall provide to Medina an Annual Fire Services Report to include a
recent five-year history of fire calls (and hours) in the service area, a recent three-year history of
the Maple Plain line -item budget of all actual revenues and expenditures, a current list of all fixed
assets and equipment, a 10-year Capital Improvement Plan, and any other information that Maple
Plain deems appropriate.
ANNUAL CONSIDERATION
3.01 In consideration of rendition of Fire Protection Services to the Fire Protection
Services Area under this Contract, Medina shall pay to Maple Plain an annual Base Compensation
Service Fee, without further notice, in two equal semi-annual installments payable on March 15
and September 15; and, an Hourly Rate Compensation Service Fee, payable within 30 days upon
Medina receipt of an annual call hour report from Maple Plain as follows:
2
2018
• Base Compensation: An annual amount equal to $5,557.82 plus the 2017
annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) percent increase for the Minneapolis -
St. Paul Metro area as published by the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau
of Labor Statistics, but not less than a 2% increase and not to exceed a 5%
increase; plus,
• Hourly Rate Compensation: An hourly rate equal to $160.00 for each call hour
serviced in Medina by Maple Plain which exceeds 100 call hours in each
calendar year.
2019
• Base Compensation: An annual amount equal to the 2018 Base Compensation
plus the 2018 annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) percent increase for the
Minneapolis -St. Paul Metro area as published by the U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics, but not less than a 2% increase and not to exceed a
5% increase; plus,
• Hourly Rate Compensation: An hourly rate equal to $160.00 for each call hour
serviced in Medina by Maple Plain which exceeds 100 call hours in each
calendar year.
TERM AND TERMINATION
4.01 This Agreement covers the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2019.
The term of this agreement will be extended for a period of two years unless this Agreement is
terminated as provided in Section 4.02 of the Agreement.
3
4.02 This Agreement shall be terminable only as follows:
1. Medina or Maple Plain may choose to terminate its participation
in the Agreement provided that such termination be effective on
January 1 of the subsequent year preceded by a minimum six-
month written notice.
2. Immediate termination may occur for breach of contract following
written notice;
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
5.01 Calls for Fire Protection Services shall generally be answered in the order of their
receipt. In case of concurrent fires or calls for emergency medical or rescue services, either
within the several areas served by Maple Plain or under any mutual aid agreement, the Fire Chief
shall weigh the relative risk of loss to life and property posed by the concurrent calls and shall
make a final determination on the advisability of committing equipment and fire fighters to the
concurrent calls. In making this determination, and in making the same determination in the case
of single fires, the Fire Chief shall also consider the feasibility of making the run in light of road
conditions, weather conditions and all other conditions which shall affect the safety of fire
fighters and equipment.
502 Neither Maple Plain nor the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department shall have any
claim against Medina for damage to their property or equipment. Maple Plain shall indemnify
and hold Medina, its officers, employees, agents and representatives harmless for all claims
arising out of injuries or death to fire fighters or others or for damage to property occurring in the
provision of Fire Protection Services. Maple Plain agrees to obtain at its expense such public
liability or other insurance as it deems necessary in an amount no less than $1,000,000 protecting
itself and Medina against damage claims of its fire fighters for personal injury sustained while in
service within the said limits of the Fire Service Area as hereto set forth. Nothing in this
Contract shall be deemed to be a waiver of any limitation of public liability available to Maple
4
Plain under state law.
5.03 At no time shall Medina have any claim on any assets of the City of Maple Plain,
the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department, or any joint powers or mutual aid agreements to
which Maple Plain may be a party.
5.04 By adoption of a resolution authorizing Maple Plain to enter into this Contract,
Maple Plain also has authorized the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department to respond to fires or
calls for other emergency medical or rescue services outside the city limits of Maple Plain in the
manner contemplated by Minn. Statutes, Secs. 438.08 through 438.11, inclusive.
5.05 This Contract shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties and
supersedes any other written or oral agreement between Maple Plain and Medina. This Contract
may only be modified in writing signed by both parties.
5.06 This Contract may be assigned by Maple Plain to a joint powers entity established
by Maple Plain and the City of Independence for the purpose of providing Fire Protection
Services within those cities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands effective at the date
first above written.
THE CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN THE CITY OF MEDINA
By:
ayor
Julie Maas-Kusske
By:
Mayor
Bob Mitchell
City Administrator City Administrator
Scott Johnson
Robert Schoen
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
5
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _day of , 2017 by Bob Mitchell
and Scott Johnson, the Mayor and City Administrator, respectively, of the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
4)17
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this �% day of •21J<9by Julie Maas-
Kusske and Bobby Schoen, the Mayor and City Administrator, respectively, of the ity of Maple Plain, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of the City.
Q1LOY1
Notary Public
SHARON CELESTE SPICER
Notary Public -Minnesota
'•My Commission Pamirs. Jan 31, 2021
6
AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR FIRE PROTECTION
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN
AND
THE CITY OF MEDINA
THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT, effective , January 'August ,
20185, by and between the City of Maple Plain, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Maple
Plain"), and the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Medina");
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Maple Plain has the capability to provide fire protection and emergency
medical and rescue services to Medina through the personnel, facilities, and equipment of its
Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department; and
WHEREAS, Medina desires to contract with Maple Plain to provide such services to a
portion of Medina, subject to the terms hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the other mutual covenants
and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
DEFINITIONS
1.01 Fire Protection Services. The protection of life and property from damage or
destruction by fire, together with such emergency medical and rescue operations as may be
authorized by Maple Plain, acting through its duly appointed Fire Chief or designee.
1.02 Fire Protection Services Area. The land area in Medina described in Exhibit A
attached hereto to which Maple Plain shall provide Fire Protection Services during the term of
this Contract.
1.03 Service Fee. The amount of consideration payable annually by Medina to Maple
Plain for Fire Protection Services.
1
1.04 Call Hour — is the time from when the call is dispatched to the time the last truck is
out of service. If the call is less than an hour in length, it is counted as a one hour call.
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
2.01 In accordance with the terms and conditions hereof, Maple Plain shall provide Fire
Protection Services within the Fire Protection Services Area or shall arrange for such services to
be provided pursuant to mutual aid. For each call, the Fire Chief shall dispatch such fire fighting
personnel and equipment or emergency personnel and equipment as the Chief determines to be
necessary. The Fire Chief may also call for such other assistance under any mutual aid agreement
as the Chief may deem necessary.
2.02 Maple Plain agrees to keep and maintain in good order and at its expense the fire
and emergency equipment necessary to provide Fire Protection Services. Maple Plain shall also
arrange for suitable personnel to provide Fire Protection Services.
2.03 Maple Plain shall provide to Medina an Annual Fire Services Report to include a
recent five-year history of fire calls (and hours) in the service area, a recent three-year history of
the Maple Plain line -item budget of all actual revenues and expenditures, a current list of all fixed
assets and equipment, a 10-year Capital Improvement Plan, and any other information that Maple
Plain deems appropriate.
ANNUAL CONSIDERATION
3.01 In consideration of rendition of Fire Protection Services to the Fire Protection
Services Area under this Contract, Medina shall pay to Maple Plain an annual Base Compensation
Service Fee, without further notice, in two equal semi-annual installments payable on March 15
and September 15; and, an Hourly Rate Compensation Service Fee, payable within 30 days upon
Medina receipt of an annual call hour report from Maple Plain as follows:
2
20186
• Base Compensation: An annual amount equal to $5,557.82 $5,342p1us the
20176 annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) percent increase for the
Minneapolis -St. Paul Metro area as published by the U.S. Department of
Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, but not less than a 2% increase and not to
exceed a 5% increase; plus,
• Hourly Rate Compensation: An hourly rate equal to $1640.00_for each call
hour serviced in Medina by Maple Plain which exceeds 100 call hours in each
calendar year.
20197
• Base Compensation: An annual amount equal to the 20186 Base Compensation
plus the 20186 annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) percent increase for the
Minneapolis -St. Paul Metro area as published by the U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics, but not less than a 2% increase and not to exceed a
5% increase; plus,
• Hourly Rate Compensation: An hourly rate equal to $160.00for each call hour
serviced in Medina by Maple Plain which exceeds 100 call hours in each
calendar year.
TERM AND TERMINATION
4.01 This Agreement covers the period January 1, 20186 through December 31, 20197.
The term of this agreement will be extended for a period of two years unless this Agreement is
terminated as provided in Section 4.02 of the Agreement.
3
4.02 This Agreement shall be terminable only as follows:
1. Medina or Maple Plain may choose to terminate its participation
in the Agreement provided that such termination be effective on
January 1 of the subsequent year preceded by a minimum six-
month written notice.
2. Immediate termination may occur for breach of contract following
written notice;
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
5.01 Calls for Fire Protection Services shall generally be answered in the order of their
receipt. In case of concurrent fires or calls for emergency medical or rescue services, either
within the several areas served by Maple Plain or under any mutual aid agreement, the Fire Chief
shall weigh the relative risk of loss to life and property posed by the concurrent calls and shall
make a final determination on the advisability of committing equipment and fire fighters to the
concurrent calls. In making this determination, and in making the same determination in the case
of single fires, the Fire Chief shall also consider the feasibility of making the run in light of road
conditions, weather conditions and all other conditions which shall affect the safety of fire
fighters and equipment.
5.02 Neither Maple Plain nor the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department shall have any
claim against Medina for damage to their property or equipment. Maple Plain shall indemnify
and hold Medina, its officers, employees, agents and representatives harmless for all claims
arising out of injuries or death to fire fighters or others or for damage to property occurring in the
provision of Fire Protection Services. Maple Plain agrees to obtain at its expense such public
liability or other insurance as it deems necessary in an amount no less than $1,000,000 protecting
itself and Medina against damage claims of its fire fighters for personal injury sustained while in
service within the said limits of the Fire Service Area as hereto set forth. Nothing in this
Contract shall be deemed to be a waiver of any limitation of public liability available to Maple
4
Plain under state law.
5.03 At no time shall Medina have any claim on any assets of the City of Maple Plain,
the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department, or any joint powers or mutual aid agreements to
which Maple Plain may be a party.
5.04 By adoption of a resolution authorizing Maple Plain to enter into this Contract,
Maple Plain also has authorized the Maple Plain Volunteer Fire Department to respond to fires or
calls for other emergency medical or rescue services outside the city limits of Maple Plain in the
manner contemplated by Minn. Statutes, Secs. 438.08 through 438.11, inclusive.
5.05 This Contract shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties and
supersedes any other written or oral agreement between Maple Plain and Medina. This Contract
may only be modified in writing signed by both parties.
5.06 This Contract may be assigned by Maple Plain to a joint powers entity established
by Maple Plain and the City of Independence for the purpose of providing Fire Protection
Services within those cities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands effective at the date
first above written.
THE CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN THE CITY OF MEDINA
By: By:
Mayor
Julie Maas-KusskeJerry Young
Mayor
Bob Mitchell
City Administrator City Administrator
Bobby SchoenTessia Melvin Scott Johnson
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
5
i
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20175 by Bob Mitchell
and Scott Johnson, the Mayor and City Administrator, respectively, of the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2015 by Julie Maas-
KusskeJerry Young and Bobby SchoenTessia Melvin, the Mayor and City Administrator, respectively, of the City
of Maple Plain, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
6
Agenda Item # 5C
WARM-UP PITCHERS AREAS INSTALLATION SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made this 19th day of September 2017, by and between Sam's Lawn
Landscaping & Property Maintenance, P.O. Box 848, Wayzata, MN 55391, a Minnesota
corporation (the "Contractor") and the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the
"City").
Recitals
1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for warm-up pitchers areas
installation services; and
2. The City has approved the contract for warm-up pitchers areas installation services with
the Contractor; and
3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows:
Terms
1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform warm-up pitchers areas installation
services for the City in Hamel Legion Park in the location identified on Exhibit A. "Warm-up
pitchers areas installation services" will consist of the mobilization of the Contractor's equipment,
project layout, sub cut two areas for installation of 8 inch ball field lime, install 8 inch ball field lime
in the two areas, install four bury type home plates, install two pitcher's mounds per Little League
regulation, install four adult 4-way pitcher's rubbers, export excess soils, and install four mesh net
backstops with sleeves installed for removal during non-use as shown and detailed on Exhibit B.
2.0. TERM. The term and prices of this contract shall remain in effect from September 19, 2017
until December 1, 2017, or until such later date as may be mutually agreed upon.
3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor upon completion of the work
and submitting an invoice for services. The City shall compensate the Contractor a total of
$5,920 to furnish material and labor to complete the warm-up pitchers areas installation services
as shown on Exhibit B.
3.01 The Contractor shall pay for all licenses and permits. These costs shall be
included in the bid cost. The City is exempt from sales tax.
4.0 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
4.01 Both the Contractor and the City acknowledge and agree that the Contractor
is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Any employee or
subcontractor who may perform services for the Contractor in connection with this
Agreement is also not an employee of the City. The Contractor understands that the City
will not provide any benefits of any type in connection with this Agreement, including but
not limited to health or medical insurance, worker's compensation insurance and
1
unemployment insurance, nor will the City withhold any state or federal taxes, including
income or payroll taxes, which may be payable by the Contractor.
4.02 The Contractor will supply and use its own equipment and tools to complete
the services under this Agreement.
4.03 The Contractor acknowledges that any general instruction it receives from
the City has no effect on its status as an independent contractor.
4.04 The Contractor will be responsible to coordinate all utility locations, private
and public, on the site before excavation begins.
5.0 INSURANCE. The Contractor will maintain adequate insurance to protect itself and the
City from claims and liability for injury or damage to persons or property for all work performed by
the Contractor and its respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Contractor shall
name the City as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy in limits
acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall
provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective.
6.0 WORKER'S COMPENSATION.
6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker's
compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this
Agreement.
6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker's compensation insurance and will
provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this
Agreement.
7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its
officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and
expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney's fees) for claims as a result of
bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor's
performance under this Agreement.
8.0 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement
will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota.
9.0 ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement or procure the services of
another individual or company to provide services under this Agreement without first obtaining the
express written consent of the City.
10.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement constitutes the entire
Agreement between the parties, and no other agreement prior to or contemporaneous with this
Agreement shall be effective, except as expressly set forth or incorporated herein. Any purported
amendment to this Agreement is not effective unless it is in writing and executed by both parties.
2
11.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its
entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law.
12.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason.
If the contract is terminated early, the City will pay a prorated fee for the services performed to date
in that calendar year.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year
written above.
CITY OF MEDINA
By
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
By
Scott Johnson, City Administrator
SAM'S LAWN LANDSCAPING & PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
(CONTRACTOR)
By
Print Name:
3
Hamel Legion Park
Home to Hamel Basebal
Legend
I ri
Parking
No Parking
Indoor Bathrooms
ill Port -a -Potty
MHandicapAccessible Port -a -Pot ty
1
147
N.€ arkinglislylowedanEthelliamel
Copal ' nity[ll ildingWarkingaot
Rik
'iIll 1■111 la711111111111
Exhibit B
Landscaping
propertyanteance
P.O. Box 848 Wayzata, MN 55391
Office 763-478-0200
Fax 763-478-0300
www.samslandscape.com
Project Quote
Date: 0/22/2017
Project: Hamel Baseball Association: Warm Up Pitchers Areas
Submitted To: Andy c/o: Hamel Baseball Association
Addenda:
Inclusions:
We have included the following items in our quote,
1: Mobilization of our equipment
2: Layout of project
3: Subcut 2 areas for installation of 8" ballfield lime
4: Install 8" Ballfield Lime, compacted
5: Install 4 bury type Home Plates
6: Install 2 pitcher's mounds, Little league regulation
7: Install 4 Adult: 4-way pitcher's rubbers
8: Export excess soils
9: Install 4 mesh net backstops: sleeves installed for removal during non-use
Total Bid: $5,920.00
Notes:
1: Above pricing includes all applicable taxes.
Pricing good for 30 days.
Ben Vandeputte
Project Manager / Estimator
-_ F'I�T+aj_ H,
'"fir ■
Agenda Item # 5D
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM HAMEL ATHLETIC CLUB
WHEREAS, The Hamel Athletic Club has generously offered to donate a check in the
amount of $5,920 (the "Donation") to the city of Medina (the "City"); and
WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to the City's Municipal Park Fund to install
two warm-up pitcher areas in Hamel Legion Park; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to the
Hamel Athletic Club for their generosity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks the Hamel Athletic Club.
Dated: September 19, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2017-
September 19, 2017
Agenda Item # 5E
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2017-##
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC UTILITIES WITHIN
THE JUST FOR KIX DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Clough Properties, LLC (the "Developer") is constructing improvements
within the platted development known as Just for Kix for the purpose of constructing a multi -
tenant commercial building; and
WHEREAS, the Developer and the City have previously entered into an agreement
dated August 5, 2016 (the "Development Agreement") related to the development of the
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, consistent with the terms of the Agreement, the Developer has completed
construction of parking and access drives, watermain, and stormwater infrastructure
improvements (the "Improvements"), to serve the units within the Development; and
WHEREAS, the city engineer has inspected the Improvements and determined that they
have been constructed in accordance with the plans incorporated in the Development Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, as required by the Development Agreement, the Developer or the
Developer's contractor will be required to submit a warranty bond regarding repair or
replacement of any defects in the Improvements for one year from the date of this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
as follows:
1. The City hereby accepts the Improvements as public improvements and shall maintain
them, except as provided for herein.
2. The Developer shall remain responsible to repair or replace defective portions of the
Improvements if they show signs of failure for one year from the date of this resolution,
normal wear and tear excepted.
3. If the Developer shall fail to repair or replace defective portions of the Improvements as
required herein and pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City shall utilize the
warranty bond for such purpose.
Resolution No. 2017-##
September 19, 2017
4. Upon receipt of the warranty bond and at the discretion of the City Engineer, the City
authorizes the release of the letter of credit for the Subdivision Improvements.
5. The terms and conditions of the letter from the city engineer dated September 13, 2017
attached hereto as Exhibit A are hereby incorporated into this resolution and made a part
hereof.
6. City staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take all steps necessary or
convenient to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution.
Dated: September 19, 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
September 19, 2017
Exhibit A
WSB
September 13, 2017
Mr. Steven Clough
Clough Properties, LLC
7842 College Read
Baxter, MN 56425
701 Xenia Avenue South I Surte 341C1 I !Anneapdm. MN 55416 {783)541-4.800
Re: Just for Kix — Warranty Bond Request
City Project No_ Sb-16-191, WSB Project No. 3433-040
Dear Mr. Clough:
The City of Medina's engineering consultant {Engineer) has completed the construction observation and
testing of the watermain, sanitary sewer, street and storm sewer utilities (Improvements) for the Just
for Kix development as required by the Development Agreement_ The City Council must formally accept
the Subdivision Improvements by resolution at a regularly scheduled council meeting_
Prior to acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council, the developer is rewired to submit a one
year warranty bond for 100r% of the construction costs of the Improvements. for this project, the
warranty band shall be In the amount of S40,000.00 based on the construction ctsst estimates previously
provided by the developer's engineer_ The warranty bond shall carver watermain utility repairs, Including
any street disturbances necessary to facilitate the utility repairs, required within the warranty period_
City staff and the Engineer will consider a reduction In the Letter of Credit (LOC) after the City Council
formally accepts the Subdivision Improvements_
Please submit the warranty bond effective for one calendar year to the attention of City Administrator
Scott Johnson at Medina City Hall. The approval of the LOC reduction will be contingent upon receipt of
the warranty band.
Sincerely,
WSB $ Associates, lot.
Jim Strome!, P.E_
City Engineer
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
September 19, 2017
Agenda Item # 5F
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-##
RESOLUTION APPROVING SETBACK VARIANCE FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY
FOR MCDONALD'S AT 822 HIGHWAY 55
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, McDonald's Corporation (the "Applicant"), owns property located at
822 Highway 55 (the "Property"), which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County desires to acquire right-of-way from the Applicant for
construction of a public street upon the northern portion of the Property; and
WHEREAS, construction of this street will necessitate removal of an existing trash
enclosure and storage building on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a variance to reduce the required structure
setback for replacement of the trash enclosure and storage building from 25 feet to 1.34 feet from
the right-of-way being acquired; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested variance at a duly noticed
public meeting on August 8, 2017 and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the requested variance at the
September 5, 2017 meeting, reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation, and heard
testimony from City staff, the Applicant and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, based on the written and oral record before the Planning Commission and
City Council on the above dates as well as all additional testimony submitted to the City, the City
Council makes the following findings of facts in regards to the variance request:
1. The proposed variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in harmony
with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, because the proposed
location of the trash enclosure and storage building would comply with relevant
regulations but for the acquisition of right-of-way upon the Property.
2. The principal use is a reasonable use which is permitted in the district and the trash
enclosure and storage building are reasonable accessory uses.
3. The plight of the Applicant was created by acquisition of right-of-way from the
Property and removal of the existing trash enclosure and storage building for
Resolution No. 2017-##
September 19, 2017
construction of a public street on the Property. This plight was not created by the
landowner and is unique to the Property.
4. The proposed variance does not confer special privileges which are not afforded to
owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district and will not alter
the essential character of the neighborhood.
5. The Applicant has established that there are practical difficulties in complying with
the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
hereby approves a variance to reduce the required setback from 25 feet to 1.34 feet, subject to the
following terms and conditions:
1) Except as modified by this approval, the Applicant shall construct the trash enclosure and
storage structure and install the landscaping as shown on the plans received by the City
on 8/22/2017.
2) The Applicant shall meet the recommendation of the City Engineer.
3) The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within one calendar year of the date of
approval or the variance approval shall be null and void, unless the Applicant requests
and the City Council grants an extension.
Dated: September 19, 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
September 19, 2017
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property
PARCEL I:
THAT OF THE SOUTHEAST .4 OF THE NORTHEAST 4 OF SECTION II, TOWNSHIP 118 NORTH,
RANGE 23 WEST OF THE 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID QUARTER —QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH
ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 1E, DISTANCE 164 FEET TO THE ACTUAL
POINT OF BEGINNING; 7HENGE CONTINUING SOUTH 262J FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE
CENTERLINE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 116 AND STATE HIGHWAY NO. 55; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 55, DISTANT NO FEET;
THENCE NORTH PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 1r, DISTANT 7R,7
FEET; THENCE DEFLECT TO THE RIGHT 17 DEGREES 45 MNUTES, DISTANT 105 FEET; THENCE
EASTERLY, 240.55 FEET TO THE ACTUAL POINT OF BEGNNING, EXCEPT THE EASTERLY
40.00 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF 'HENNEPIN FOR ROADWAY.
PARCEL 2:
THAT PART OF THE EAST OF THE NORTHEAST is SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 118 NORTH,
RANGE 23 WEST OF THE 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 55, DISTANT 290
FEET NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE EAST ONE OF 5AV NORTHEAST 4; THENCE NORTH
PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 7613 FEET; THENCE DEFLECTING TO THE
RIGHT 17 DECREES 45 MINUTES, A DISTANCE OF 105 FEET TO THE ACTUAL POINT OF
BEGINNING OF THE LAND TO BE DESCRIBED. THENCE EAST TO A POINT IN THE EAST ONE
OF SAID NORTHEAST & DISTANT 164 FEET SOUTH FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
SOUTHEAST 4 OF THE NORTHEAST & THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT
DISTANT 70 FEET NORTH FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST & OF THE
NORTHEAST & THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LNE OF THE NORTHEAST y OF
THE NORTHEAST & A DISTANCE OF 33 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, A DISTANCE OF
336.5 FEET TO A POINT A DISTANT 115 FEET NORTH FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
NORTHEAST Y4 OF THE NORTHEAST 4; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, A DISTANCE OF 203.8
FEET ALONG A LINE OF WHICH iF EXTENDED WOULD NTERSECT THE WEST LINE OF SAID
NORTHEAST y OF THE NORTHEAST 4 AT A POINT DISTANT 503 FEET NORTH OF THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH TO A POINT A DISTANT 60 FEET NORTH
FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 4 OF THE NORTHEAST & THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTER LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY NO. 55, A
DISTANCE OF 236.35 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY A DISTANCE OF P13.65 FEET TO A POINT
DISTANT 123.5 FEET NORTH OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH TO THE PONT OF
BEGINNING.
Resolution No. 2017-## 3
September 19, 2017
Agenda Item # 7A 1
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED TAX LEVY FOR 2018
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has adopted legislation, which requires all
municipalities to pass a resolution adopting a preliminary budget and certifying the total proposed
tax levy amount to the County Auditor prior to September 30, 2017; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Medina, Minnesota, to comply with this law and
submit a proposed property tax levy including general operating and debt levies; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Medina,
County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be proposed for 2018 upon the
taxable property in the City of Medina, for the following purposes: To raise $3,229,026 as adequate
revenue for the general fund operating budget, $541,291 as adequate revenue for debt service, and
$134,500 for capital equipment.
General Fund $3,229,026
Capital Equipment $ 134,500
Debt Service:
2010A G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 29,500
2011A G.O. Bonds $ 14,000
2011B Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 58,000
2012A G.O. CIP Bonds $ 243,915
2013A G.O. Refunding Bonds $ 133,917
2015A G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 61,959
Total Levy: $3,904,817
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk, Jodi Gallup, is hereby instructed to transmit
a certified copy of this resolution to the county auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Date: September 19, 2017.
Bob Mitchell., Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi Gallup, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2017-
September 19, 2017
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
September 19, 2017
Agenda Item # 7A2
Member _ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO.2017-xx
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR 2018
BE IT RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Medina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota,
that the following sums of money be proposed for the 2017 General Fund budget:
Revenues Expenditures
General Fund $4,426,643 $4,426,643
Date: September 19, 2017
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi 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.
Agenda Item # 7A3
Member _ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO.2017-xx
RESOLUTION REDUCING DEBT SERVICE TAX LEVIES FOR 2018
WHEREAS, Hennepin County maintains a bond register with the City's scheduled bonded
debt levies for taxes payable in 2018, and requests a City resolution canceling the debt levy if the
City does not levy the scheduled amounts; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that specific debt levies may be partially reduced due
to the accumulation and projection of other revenue sources, including previously collected tax
levies, previously collected and future projected special assessments, and utility fund contributions;
and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Medina,
County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following reductions of debt service levies be made for
taxes payable in 2018:
Scheduled Proposed Reduction
Levy Levy To Levy
Debt Service:
2010A G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 29,576 $ 29,500 $ 76
2011A G.O. Bonds $ 21,567 $ 14,000 $ 7,567
2011B Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 87,092 $ 58,000 $ 29,092
2012A G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds $ 304,894 $ 243,915 $ 60,979
2013A G.O. Refunding Bonds $ 167,396 $ 133,917 $ 33,479
2015A G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 61,959 $ 61,959 $
2016A G.O. Refunding Bonds $ 95,213 $ - $ 95,213
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk Jodi Gallup, is hereby instructed to transmit a
certified copy of this resolution to the county auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Date: September 6, 2017
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jodi 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.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: September 13, 2017
MEETING: September 19, 2017 City Council
SUBJ: Excelsior Group LLC — PUD Concept Plan Review —
2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: July 28, 2017
60-day Review Deadline: September 26, 2017
Summary of Request
The Excelsior Group, LLC has requested review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept
Plan for a 68-lot residential development north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive.
The subject site is a total of 37 acres (31.3 net acres), with two single family homes. Much of
the property is pasture with some tilled farmland. The applicant's concept also identifies five
wetlands located throughout the site and two additional potential wetland areas.
The subject site is guided for Low Density Residential development in the current
Comprehensive Plan within the 2021-2025 staging period. The Comp Plan would permit a
property to develop up to two years early through an incentive -based point system. As such, the
property would not be permitted to be developed until 2019 under the existing Comprehensive
Plan, even with the "jump ahead" provision. The applicant seeks approval for this jump ahead
provision to permit construction during 2018 and they propose homes to be occupied in 2019.
The properties are zoned Rural Residential -Urban Reserve, which is an interim zoning
designation for property until development occurs consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Property to the north and west are currently rural residential lots, planned for future low density
development in the Comp Plan after 2021. Polaris is located to the southeast of the subject
property and the Wealshire is under construction to the east. The property south of Chippewa
Road is planned for future commercial development. An aerial of the site and surrounding
property can be found at the top of the following page.
The purpose of a PUD Concept Plan is to provide feedback to the applicant prior to a formal
application. The Planning Commission and City Council will not take any action and the
feedback is purely advisory.
The applicant had provided two concept plans on the same property for review during the
summer and fall of 2016.
Excelsior Group
Page 1 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
ar".1
et Site
�'/Vea,ysahir'e Future Lo
l� 1�1 fi` .,�� e rl
nstN� Resideril
Purpose of a Planned Unit Development
According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive
procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of
neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing
for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this
Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is
intended to encourage:
1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of
economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of
structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments.
2. Higher standards of site and building design.
3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high
quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic
features and the prevention of soil erosion.
Excelsior Group
Page 2 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development practices
which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard
requirements of the City.
5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to
surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and
lower intensity uses.
6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and
orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of
development and service facilities.
7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower
development costs and public investments.
8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan.
(PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.)
9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict
application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City.
City Code requires the flexibility permitted under the Staging Plan to be considered within the
context of a PUD.
Comprehensive Plan
As noted above, the subject properties are guided Low Density Residential (LDR) in the current
Comp Plan, which would anticipate development with a net density of 2-3.5 units per acre. The
properties were part of the Staging Plan amendment completed in 2015, which changed the
properties from the 2016-2020 staging period to the 2021-2025 staging period. The amendment
also reduced the amount of flexibility permitted for developing prior to the staging period. A
residential development can occur two years prior to the staging period (rather than up to 5 years
early). As such, the properties could not be developed until 2019 without a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. The applicant argues that they would not occupy houses until 2019, which they
argue could be consistent with the staging, even if construction were to begin in 2018.
The City is currently in the midst of its decennial Comprehensive Plan update. The Steering
Committee has completed a draft of the Plan, which has been out for public and jurisdictional
feedback for almost a year. The City anticipates that the Plan update will be in effect before the
subject sites could be developed in 2019.
The draft 2040 Comp Plan update designates the subject property as Low Density Residential,
but delays the staging of the property to 2025. Property to the west, north, and northeast of the
site has been guided as Rural Residential within the draft Plan update, no longer being included
within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA).
The DRAFT Comprehensive Plan is available on the City's website, and the Draft Future Land
Use map is attached for reference.
Because the DRAFT Comprehensive Plan update is within the review process, staff believes it is
relevant to consider in connection with a proposed development, even if it is not yet in effect.
Excelsior Group
Page 3 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Proposed Site Layout
The applicant proposes 68 single family lots. 40 of the lots, predominantly in the western
portion of the site and along the northern boundary, are proposed to be 90-feet in width and
11,000 s.f. in area. These lots would generally align with the R1 zoning district standards, which
is the district utilized by the City to implement the LDR land use. The concept plan identifies 28
"villa" style lots which are 65-feet wide and 7,000 s.f. in area. The applicant has not explicitly
requested setback flexibility beyond the lot size consideration.
R1 Requirement
90-foot lots
Villa lots
Minimum Lot Size
11,000 s.f.
7,000 s.f.
Minimum Lot Width
90 feet
65 feet
Minimum Lot Depth
100 feet
100 feet
Front Yard Setback
25 feet
25 feet
Front Yard Setback (garage)
30 feet
30 feet
Side Yard Setback (combined)
25 feet (15
&
10)
15 feet (7.5
& 7.5)
Side Yard (corner)
25 feet
25 feet
Rear Yard Setback
30 feet
25 feet
Max. Hardcover
40%
50%
The concept plan shows a 1.37 acre park near the center of the development.
The proposed density appears to be 2.3 units/acre, compared to the 2.0-3.5 units/acre
requirement of the LDR land use. There is a discrepancy between this number and the
applicant's calculations on their plans because they did not subtract wetland buffer areas. This
would need to be confirmed following completion of a wetland delineation and final plans,
because there is another approximately .88 area of potential wetland/buffer shown on their
concept which they do not believe is wetland.
The applicant proposes a single access point off of Chippewa Road, at the location of the
existing 2212 Chippewa Road driveway.
Tree Preservation and Buffer Yards
Few trees are located on the subject properties. Any application would be subject to the City's
tree preservation and replacement requirements.
Staff believes it is extremely important for any development to provide a substantial landscaped
buffer yards adjacent to rural properties to the west and north.
Wetlands and Floodplain
The subject properties appear to contain five wetlands, which most of the wetland areas being in
the southern portion of the site. The applicant proposes impacts to the southwestern wetland in
order to construct a street to serve lots in this portion of the site and also to impact a small
wetland in the eastern portion of the site. The concept plan identifies the City's minimum upland
buffers around remaining wetland areas.
FEMA maps identify no floodplains on the subject properties.
Excelsior Group Page 4 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Staff would recommend considering removing the three lots in the southwest corner of the
property. This would allow a reduction of wetland impacts for the street connection to the
southeast. These lots would have a higher potential of impacts to adjacent rural property because
of the location of improvements on neighboring property. This property could either be
preserved as open space or potentially for development when and if the MUSA is ever extended
to property to the west during a future Comp Plan process.
Transportation
The applicant proposes a single access point at Chippewa Road, located where the 2212
Chippewa driveway is today. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, information
should be provided to determine if improvements should be required for Chippewa Road.
Mohawk Drive has limited right-in/right-out access to the east of the site. As a result, eastbound
traffic would be required to go west on Chippewa Road to Willow Drive in order to turn left onto
Highway 55. The City has identified a future connection of Chippewa Road east of Mohawk
Drive to connect with Arrowhead Drive. Staff believes this connection is important to support
development in the area of Chippewa Road/Mohawk Drive and for public safety. This road
connection is not yet in place and staff believes that it is important that provisions are made for
construction of this street before any property is allowed to jump ahead pursuant to the staging
plan flexibility.
The concept plan shows a connection between the neighborhood and the property to the west. If
the surrounding property is guided as rural residential, these connections may not be advisable.
As noted above, staff would recommend against development in their corner of the site because
of the adjacent rural land use.
Sewer/Water
If development were to occur at the subject site, sewer and water infrastructure would be
required to be extended from Mohawk Drive to the property. The applicant would also be
required to loop the water main to connect to the main north of the Wealshire project.
A preliminary review indicates that the subject site could be served through gravity sewer lines
to the existing system.
As proposed, the subject property would be served by a single water main along Highway 55 (to
Mohawk) without any looping. The City Engineer and Public Works state that having a second
means to route water to this neighborhood would be important. The City's water plan identifies
a second water main along new Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive east to Arrrowhead Drive.
This water main connection is not yet in place and staff believes that it is important that
provisions are made for construction of this connection before any property is allowed to jump
ahead pursuant to the staging plan flexibility.
Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review
The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans. Any development proposal
would ultimately be subject to relevant stormwater standards.
Excelsior Group
Page 5 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Park Dedication
The City's subdivision regulations requires up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated
for park purposes. The City may also choose to accept cash in -lieu of all or a portion of this land
dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre -developed market value, up to a maximum of
$8000 per home. Staff does not believe the fee would reach the maximum in this case, but it will
be determined more precisely during the preliminary plat review if the applicant proceeds with a
formal application.
The concept plan identifies an approximately 1.37 acre park area. The concept plan also
identifies trail connections through the neighborhood connecting to Chippewa Road and to
Wealshire. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, the connection to Wealshire,
which is private property, would need to be discussed with the property owner.
The nearest City Park is fairly distant from the subject site. The City's draft Park Plan has
identified the need for a neighborhood City park in this area to support residential development
on the subject site and other nearby parcels. A neighborhood park is likely between 4-10 acres in
area, depending on the anticipated nearby population and improvements desired. Staff believes
it is important for this park to be provided if property is to develop earlier than the staging plan
suggests.
The Park Commission reviewed the concept plan at their August 16 meeting. An excerpt from
their draft meeting minutes is attached for reference. The consensus of the Commission was that
a public park should be required within this development if it were to move ahead and that the
park should be much larger to accommodate recreational activities. There was discussion about
providing field space which can be multi -purpose, but large enough to accommodate different
uses, including baseball, which needs the most space. Commissioners also saw the park as
serving as a destination, and emphasized the importance of adequate parking.
Staging Plan Flexibility
As noted above, the draft 2040 Comp Plan update stages the subject property for development
after 2025. The current Comprehensive Plan stages the property for development after 2021, and
would permit flexibility to development up to 2 years sooner. The applicant desires to construct
the neighborhood in 2018, with the first home being occupied in 2019.
Section 825.34 of the City Code states that "the city council, following consultation of the
planning commission, may consider requests for flexibility to the date which city water and
sanitary sewer utility services are available according to the Phasing Plan, as permitted within
the Comprehensive Plan. Properties shall only be prioritized for early development when it is
determined by the city that a proposed project significantly achieves the criteria described
below..."
The subsection continues: "The city council shall deny a request for flexibility to the Phasing
Plan, except upon a finding that the proposed project significantly achieves the criteria
identified...below. The following represents the minimum standard which must be met in order
for the city council to consider flexibility to the Phasing Plan. The city council shall have the
discretion to require achievement of additional city objectives during the review process.
Excelsior Group
Page 6 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
(1) The crucial factor described... shall be determined to be achieved; and
(2) Fifty or more points shall be achieved amongst the various primary and secondary
factors...."
Following are the criteria for reviewing requests for Phasing Plan Flexibility. The applicant
has provided a description within their narrative on how they believe these factors are
achieved.
Staff has provided some comments behind a number of the criteria in italics for consideration by
the Planning Commission and Council.
(a) Crucial factor: Infrastructure Capacity.
The city shall review existing sanitary sewer, water, and street infrastructure to determine
if sufficient capacity exists to support all three of the following: 1) existing development
previously approved by the City; 2) the proposed project; and 3) all other development
which has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan for the current Phasing period. If
existing capacity is determined to be insufficient for the proposed project, but the project
proposes to make necessary improvements, the city may give consideration to such
proposal, provided the improvements are constructed at no cost to the city or other
property owners. The improvements shall also be consistent with city infrastructure plans
and policies and be designed to serve other future development when appropriate.
In terms of the crucial factors, staff raised questions above related to both transportation
and domestic water supply for the subject site. A future road connection for Chippewa
Road east of Mohawk Drive was identified in the Comprehensive Plan to support
development in this area and has not been constructed. The need to loop the water system
has also been identified and not yet provided.
Staff believes the water main connection is a fairly time sensitive improvement necessary
for consideration with any flexibility to the staging plan. Provisions also need to be made
for the construction of Chippewa Road to the east of Mohawk Drive. Staff recognizes that
this project will be complicated and may take a longer time period to implement. As such,
a means for a significant contribution towards the construction of Chippewa Road could
be considered in connection with a request for Staging Plan flexibility.
Staff has also identified park infrastructure as a need in order to support development. 1.3
acres of parkland is inadequate to support development in the area. A minimum of 3 acres
would be required under standard park dedication calculations.
(b) Primary factors (maximum of 10 points per item):
(1) Sustainability. To achieve this objective, the project shall incorporate sustainable
practices such as high energy efficiency, responsible construction materials and processes,
site design which supports multiple transportation options, and other sustainable practices.
The proposed site layout does appear to provide good opportunities for non -motorized
transportation.
Excelsior Group
Page 7 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
(2) Natural resource protection and low impact development. To achieve this objective,
the project shall incorporate low impact development practices and exceptional natural
resource and ecological preservation. Meeting the minimum tree preservation and wetland
protection regulations shall be equivalent to one point, with additional points granted for
additional preservation.
The applicant proposes to reuse stormwater for irrigation and provide two trees per lot,
which essentially abide by the City's minimum standards for any development. The
removal of the lots in the southeast corner of the site would contribute towards additional
natural resource protection.
(3) Proximity to existing development. To achieve this objective, the project shall be
adjacent to or a short distance from existing development which is served by city utility
services. Property which is immediately adjacent to existing development shall be granted
the most points, with fewer points granted with increased distance.
The subject site is adjacent to the Wealshire project currently under construction and
across the street from Polaris's headquarters. The property south of Chippewa Road is
within the current staging period. Property to the north and west is planned for rural uses
under the draft 2040 Comp Plan.
(4) Open Space Protection. To achieve this objective, the project shall permanently
protect open space from development. The number of points granted shall be based on the
relative size of the open space area protected and the ecological value of the open space.
The applicant proposes additional open space to the south of the narrow wetland in the
southeastern portion of the site. The applicant proposes a 1.3 acre park, which is less than
would be anticipated with standard park dedication requirements. The removal of the lots
in the southeast corner of the site would contribute towards additional open space
protection.
(5) Limited impacts on city services. Points for this objective shall be based upon the
expected need for city services, with fewer points granted for projects which have a
higher potential impact. For example:
(i) Projects which can access regional roadways with limited distance on city
streets may be granted additional points.
(ii) Commercial uses which create lower levels of traffic, particularly truck
traffic, may be granted additional points.
(iii) Commercial uses with lower water usage may be granted additional points.
The City has identified the need for Chippewa Road to be extended to serve development in
this area. A means to provide this connection should be secured in connection with any
discussion related to staging plan flexibility.
(c) Secondary factors (maximum of 5 points per item):
(1) High quality architectural design and materials. Points may be granted for this
objective for a number of different elements. Meeting the minimum requirements of the
Excelsior Group
Page 8 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
underlying zoning district with regards to building materials, modulation, and other
relevant standards would be equivalent to one point. Additional elements may include:
(i) Varying types of home within a single-family development.
(ii) Utilization of more high quality building materials, such as brick and stone,
than is required by the underlying zoning district.
(iii) Four-sided architecture.
The applicant has suggested that it would be high quality. No architectural guidelines or
examples have been provided.
(2) Community amenities. Points may be granted for this objective based on a number
of different amenities, examples of which include:
(i) Private trails, recreational, or gathering areas beyond which is required as part
of park dedication requirements.
(ii) High quality signage and lighting fixtures, to be maintained by the property
owner(s).
The concept plan includes a fairly substantial network of trails within the neighborhood. A
1.3 acre park is proposed, which would be smaller than expected to support the area.
(3) Affordable housing (residential development only). To achieve this objective,
affordability shall be guaranteed by a covenant or similar means approved by the city.
The amount of points granted shall be based on the level of affordability as well as the
proportion of units which are affordable.
The applicant does not propose to guarantee affordability, but does believe the villa
product on the east portion of the site would provide some diversification of housing style.
(4) Employment opportunities (commercial/business development only). Points for this
objective shall be based on the number of employees, especially new positions which will
be filled after the user begins operations within the city.
Not relevant.
(5) Other factors. The City may grant additional points to projects that meet objectives
which are not specifically described above.
Review Criteria
The purpose of the PUD Concept Plan is to provide purely advisory comments to the applicant
for their consideration whether and how to continue with a formal application. The City has a
great deal of discretion when reviewing a PUD because it is a rezoning, which is a legislative
action. A PUD should only be approved if it achieves the purposes of the PUD district
(described on pages 2-3), the Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. In this case the
request is also required to meet the staging plan flexibility criteria. The Planning Commission
and City Council should consider the request within this context.
Planning Commission Comments
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the concept plan at the August 8 meeting.
An excerpt from the meeting minutes is attached for reference. Generally, Commissioners raised
questions whether existing infrastructure is in place to support the development, specifically
Excelsior Group
Page 9 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
related to the single water main serving this area of the City and the lack of the eastern street
connection to Arrowhead. Commissioners also generally did not find that the proposed
subdivision met the higher standards required for development under the staging plan flexibility
or the purposes of the PUD.
Staff Comments
Staff believes that it is best to consider the concept plan within the broader context of the draft
Comprehensive Plan update in addition to the current Comprehensive Plan and the criteria for
the staging plan flexibility. The draft proposes to delay development upon the subject site until
2025 and also re -guides property to the west, north, and northeast as rural residential.
It is interesting to note that each of the parcels included in the concept plan is located within a
different school district; the western parcel within Wayzata, and the eastern parcel within
Rockford.
If the applicant proceeds with a formal application after receiving the comments from the
Planning Commission and City Council about whether this proposal meets the purposes of a
PUD and the criteria for Staging Plan flexibility, staff has provided comments throughout the
report, which are summarized below:
1) Any future application shall be subject to all relevant City regulations and policies.
2) The applicant shall provide information necessary to confirm that gravity sewer service is
practical.
3) Any proposed development proposal should include provisions for substantial vegetative
buffers to rural properties to the north and west.
4) Land dedication should be considered for a neighborhood park.
5) Provisions should be made for the extension of a water main to provide a second means
of providing water to the subject site
6) Provisions should be made for the future extension of Chippewa Road east of Mohawk
Drive.
7) The applicant shall provide information requested by the City Engineer to determine
whether street improvements are necessary to support the development.
8) The street alignment should be updated to remove the street connection to the west in
order to reduce wetland impacts and development adjacent to rural property.
Attachments
1. Document List
2. Excerpt from August 8, 2017 Planning Commission minutes
3. Excerpt from DRAFT August 16, 2017 Park Commission minutes
4. Email from Brian Stephenson
5. Engineering Comments dated 7-11-2017
6. DRAFT Comp Plan Information (Vision, Goals, Future Land Use)
7. Applicant Narrative
8. Concept Plan
Excelsior Group
Page 10 of 10 September 19, 2017
PUD Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Project: LR-17-211— Excelsior Group PUD Concept Plan
The following documents are all part of 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
6/30/2017
6/30/2017
5
Y
Y
Updated 7/14/2017 (3 pages)
Fee
6/30/2017
6/29/2017
1
Y
Y
$3000
Narrative
6/30/2017
NA
4
Y
Y
Concept Plan
6/30/2017
4/14/2017
1
Y
Y
Plans
7/27/2017
N/A
4
Y
Y
Eng Response
7/27/2017
7/27/2017
2
Y
Y
Planning response
7/27/2017
7/27/2017
3
Y
Y
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Notes
Legal Comments
7/17/2017
1
Y
Engineer Comments
7/11/2017
2
Y
Building Official Comments
7/7/2017
1
Y
Elm Creek Watershed Comments
7/20/2017
1
Y
Legal Notice
7/28/2017
6
Y
9 pages w/ list and affidavit
Preliminary Review
7/20/2017
2
Y
Planning Commission Report
8/4/2017
10
Y
33 pages w/ attachments
City Council Report
9/14/2017
10
Y
45 pages w/attachments
(continued on back)
9/14/2017
Public Comments
Document Date
Electronic
Notes
Planning Commission minutes
8/8/2017
Y
Email from Brian Stephenson
8/8/2017
Y
9/14/2017
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 8/8/2017 Meeting Minutes
Public Hearing — Excelsior Group LLC — 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road — PUD
Concept Plan with Staging Plan Flexibility
Finke presented a PUD Concept Plan from the Excelsior Group at 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road.
He noted that this is an informal review at which the Planning Commission, Park Commission and
City Council provide feedback before the applicant brings forth a formal application. He stated that
this would be a 68-lot subdivision on 38 acres, 36 of which are buildable. He stated that the City has
been working on the draft Comprehensive Plan for the 2020-2040 time period, which is anticipated to
be submitted to the Metropolitan Council at the end of the year. He noted that the draft plan would
delay the staging for the low density residential property. He stated that the City is still working
under the existing Comprehensive Plan until the new plan is adopted. He noted that the City has
considered two previous Concept Plans for this property in the previous year. He identified the
subject site and adjacent uses as well as current guiding and proposed guiding under the draft
Comprehensive Plan. He identified the proposed access for the site, which would have 68 lots, noting
that 20 of the lots would be villa style, while the remaining 48 lots would meet the requirements of
the R-1 district. He noted that a 1.5-acre park parcel would be proposed for the center of the
development. He noted that a PUD would be required to obtain the staging flexibility desired. He
stated that the requests should be reviewed against the draft Comprehensive Plan as if something
contradictory is approved that would conflict with the approval of the draft plan. He stated that the
property is similarly guided in both plans, but the staging differs. He reviewed staff
recommendations to buffer against neighboring rural residential properties and from wetlands. He
stated that there is limited access at Mohawk and Highway 55, which means that eastbound traffic
would need to utilize Chippewa to Willow. He stated that the Park Commission had done a previous
park study and would be looking for as much parkland in this area for the first development that
comes through to provide a park to those residents. He noted that the property would be split between
two school districts. He stated that in order to continue through, the applicant would need flexibility
to the staging plan, and he then reviewed the elements under the current Comprehensive Plan. He
noted that something similar would most likely come into play under the draft plan as well. He
reviewed the elements that must be considered for staging flexibility. He stated that this property is
served by a single -loop watermain. He noted that the City used a lot of City resources this year to
repair a watermain break. He noted that the watermain connection is identified as a need in order to
support future development. He advised that a future traffic connection would also be needed in the
future to support development. He noted that these two elements are important to consider and a
provision should be made to ensure that these elements are addressed prior to the development being
up and running, should this move forward. He noted that the provisions regarding a park would also
need to be addressed to consider flexibility in staging. He stated that if those crucial factors are
addressed, the applicant would then need to meet 50 points to qualify for the jump ahead staging.
Reid asked for information on the difference in size specified by the applicant and staff.
Finke explained that the applicant included the wetlands in their calculation.
DesLauriers asked for more information on the traffic connection.
Finke provided additional details.
DesLauriers asked for more information on how the points system is setup, should the crucial factors
be met.
Finke explained that the Planning Commission would provide input to the City Council.
1
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 8/8/2017 Meeting Minutes
Ben Schmidt, Excelsior Group, stated that Finke did a good job presenting the information. He stated
that they were here in 2016 with two Concept Plans and at that time the idea of the draft
Comprehensive Plan was in the beginning stages and they were told to begin with the Steering
Committee. He stated that they attended some of the Steering Committee meetings and at that time
the discussion was for the properties to remain as rural residential and not low density residential. He
stated that the Steering Committee agreed that the parcels should be guided as low density residential
rather than rural residential, which suits this request. He stated that the staging did not turn out as
they had desired under the draft plan, as the staging states 2025 under that plan. He stated that based
on the rationale that was heard through the Steering Committee and City Council, they believed that
these parcels would be developed in a similar staging to the Wealshire and Lunski properties rather
than leaving the parcel orphaned. He stated that if it makes sense, he did not see anything that would
change in the few years of difference in staging and that is why they are present tonight, to gauge the
temperate of the City. He stated that the plan was always to split the property into two products,
single-family lots and villa style lots to provide products to empty nesters as well. He noted that the
villa products would not back-up to rural residential properties. He stated that a big reason for the
villa product would support the current needs of the market and the neighboring Wealshire and
Lunski developments. He noted that the villas would be a great feeder into the neighboring senior
developments as those residents age and would also be a great fit for family members of Wealshire
and Lunski residents. He stated that in terms of points for the jump ahead, they feel comfortable that
the site can be served by gravity sewer. He stated that he understands the need for the City to extend
Chippewa Road, but did not feel that the extension to the east would benefit this development. He
noted that it would only be a short length that residents would need to travel west to Willow in order
to head east on Highway 55. He stated that this would become the loop that would loop the
watermain together and therefore this would be part of the solution rather than the problem. He stated
that they are willing to listen to the desire for a park, as they would like the park to be used not only
by residents of this development, but other residents in the area. He stated that there is a significant
amount of open space proposed and perhaps that is lessened to add to the park. He stated that they
would also be open to losing a few lots in order to accommodate additional park space. He stated that
they are open to suggestion where the wetland is located as well, in order to minimize impacts. He
stated that they feel like they would have the 50 points necessary to jump ahead and the crucial factor
test could also be met. He stated that as you travel north and west there would not be any other
development in the draft Comprehensive Plan and therefore they feel that the timing now would be a
good fit. He stated that they believe that this development would solve some problems, such as the
watermain issue, and would also provide a desired product that would fit well with the senior
developments surrounding the site.
Reid asked if the villas would be single story.
Schmidt stated that would be the intent, but noted that villas are often unpredictable as some could
have a loft. He noted that the intent would be for empty nesters.
Reid asked the price point.
Schmidt estimated high $300,000s to mid $400,000s. He noted that the villas would be association
maintained and some could support a three -car garage. He noted that 25 percent of their villa sales
have three -car garages to support the desires of the buyers to store additional items such as vehicles
and golf carts.
White stated that some of the villa's lots would not meet the zoning standards for the lot size and
asked if the homes built on the smaller lots would be smaller as well. She stated that it does not
appear that the setback variances would be needed if that is the intent.
2
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 8/8/2017 Meeting Minutes
Schmidt stated that the variances would provide the building pad they think they need. He
acknowledged that there would be less space between the homes on those smaller lots. He stated that
people are asking for a smaller lot with less yard for those products. He provided the average square
footage of a villa at 1,400 to 1,500 square feet on one level.
White opened the public hearing at 7:42 p.m.
Corey Wiskow, VP of Wealshire Bloomington, expressed full -support for the project as he believes
that it would blend well with the surrounding development.
Jeff Pederson spoke of the pressure that is being put onto Mohawk Drive. He stated that they do not
know how much traffic the Wealshire project will bring to the community He stated that the
developments to the west have already paid for the Willow stoplight, which would have additional
pressure. He referenced the watermain break that occurred and noted that if that occurred in the
winter, the road would have needed to be shut down. He believed that the staging time should not be
reduced in order to allow the City to get the plan in place for the road. He stated that the neighbors to
the north and west would need to be screened appropriately as they are zoned rural residential. He
hoped that the City would not ask for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as the Steering Committee
and Council have worked hard on the draft plan which is currently out for jurisdictional review.
Finke submitted a written comment from Brian Stephenson that will become a part of the record and
has been provided to the Commission.
White closed the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.
Reid stated that there would be two requests for the PUD and jump ahead. She did not believe that
the criteria for the PUD would be met as she did not feel this would be an innovative development
and the site plan is fairly ordinary. She stated that the wetland protection, tree planting, and
stormwater reuses are already required. She did not believe this is a creative use of land or is
efficient. She stated that the main goal seems to be approval for the smaller lots and she does not feel
that is an adequate use of a PUD. She stated that the PUD and jump ahead are meant for special
development with special criteria to be met. She did not feel that the criteria were met as the
development only meets the minimum requirements and does not go above and beyond. She stated
that there would be an impact on City infrastructure and roads. She did not feel that the project meets
the requirements for the PUD or jump ahead.
DesLauriers stated that his concerns were regarding the crucial factors that must be met. He stated
that the draft plan identifies the staging as such because of the crucial factors that need to be
addressed. He asked for clarification on when construction could begin.
Finke stated that there is a grey area on when construction can begin and occupation can occur. He
stated that it is not unprecedented for the review and construction process to begin prior to the staging
period year.
Nester noted that it is unprecedented to begin three years before the staging.
Finke stated that the other commercial case that he was speaking of began construction the summer
before the staging year.
3
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 8/8/2017 Meeting Minutes
White stated that the jump ahead would not serve the City, as the infrastructure is not in place. She
stated that the City has not yet been able to determine the impact that Wealshire and perhaps Lunski
would place on the roadways. She noted that the watermain is also an issue. She believed that the
identified staging for the property would be appropriate in order to allow the infrastructure time to
develop.
Finke stated that if there are provisions for the infrastructure improvements, the staging jump ahead
could make sense. He explained that if a developer provides for the infrastructure improvements, a
jump ahead would be an option.
White stated that she appreciates the thought and effort, but agrees that the project is not unique and
would not meet the objectives for the jump ahead. She appreciated the different housing products,
but noted that the property does not have unique features to preserve, which makes it difficult to
achieve those objectives.
DesLauriers stated that the developer commented that the road would be adequate and the watermain
would not be an issue. He asked if a traffic study has been done.
Finke stated that ultimately a traffic study would not take into effect that this would not be the
transportation network that the City has identified. He stated that it is a bigger study than simply
being a capacity issue.
Nester agreed with the comments of Reid.
Finke noted that the Park Commission will tentatively review this on August 16th and the City
Council will tentatively review this request on September 5th or 19th
4
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 8/16/2017 Meeting Minutes
The Excelsior Group, LLC — PUD Concept Plan Review — 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road —
Park Dedication Review
Gallup provided a brief staff report. She stated that the applicant has requested a PUD concept plan
review for a 68-lot residential development on 37 acres. She stated that the property is guided as Low
Density Residential (LDR) within the 2021-2025 Staging Period. The staging plan has a point system to
allow applicants to jump ahead up to two years by earning certain points for going above and beyond the
minimum requirements.
Gallup stated that the updated draft Comprehensive Plan that is currently out for area jurisdictional review
identifies the property as LDR, within the 2025-2030 Staging Period.
Gallup stated that the Park Commission reviewed two concept plans of this site back in the summer and
fall of 2016, which the Park Commission indicated that they would like to see a future park planned on
this site. She stated that the subject site is located north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive,
which is in one of the Park Commission's active park study areas. She showed the Park Commission a
map of the surrounding parcels in the active park study area and described each parcel's proposed land
use.
Gallup showed a picture of the concept plan, which included a proposed 1.37-acre park and a few trails.
She noted that the 68-lots would be a mix of 28 villa lots and 40 R1 lots with a net density of 2.3 units per
acre.
Gallup listed the crucial, primary, and secondary factors for the staging plan flexibility; noting that a park
was a crucial factor.
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 3.1 acres, 8% of the pre -developed
value, potentially $300,000-$450,0000, or a combination.
Gallup stated that the Park and Trail Plan shows a proposed east -west trail between Mohawk Drive and
Willow Drive. She also noted the plan identifies a future neighborhood park in this area to be
approximately 4-10 acres in size.
Gallup reiterated that points could be provided within the Staging Plan Flexibility for additional park land
and improvements that are above and beyond the minimum requirement of 3.1 acres.
Ben Schmidt, with Excelsior Group, addressed the Park Commission stating that he in visions the
proposed park to be a hub that connects the surrounding developments. He stated that their wetland
delineation report came back today showing less impact than they originally thought. He said that he
would like to see the park bigger and is here tonight to find out what the Park Commission wants. He
stated that he wants the City to be proud of this park and realizes the need for a park in this area.
Gallup described the size of three existing neighborhood parks and the features each park possessed:
— Fields of Medina = 10 acres (7 acres active after removing future water tower and pond)
• Soccer field (1.1 acre)
• Playground/Basketball Court (0.75 acre)
• Tennis Court (0.25 acre)
• Volleyball Court (0.15 acre)
• Parking Lot (0.45 acre)
- Hunter Lions Park = 4.25 acres active; 2.7 acre passive
1
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 8/16/2017 Meeting Minutes
• Baseball field (2.0 acre)
• Playground (0.2 acre)
• Tennis/Basketball Courts (0.26 acre)
• Volleyball Court (0.15 acre)
• Parking lot (0.6 acre)
— Morningside Park = 2.3 acres
• Baseball field (1.16 acre)
• Playground (0.35 acre)
Gallup noted that parks tend to be at least two times or more the size of the improvements to allow for
space between improvements, trails, utility space, etc.
Lee polled the Park Commissioners asking them what their initial thoughts are for this proposed park
area.
Rumsey stated that he thought the proposed park should be similar in size to Hunter Lions Park and
should include baseball, basketball, and a playground.
Beddor stated she would like to see baseball or soccer and a playground.
Jacob stated that he would like to see some consideration given on the site selection to make sure the park
is being placed on quality land and not in swamp land.
Cole questioned the size of a baseball field and stated that some open space should be reserved for a
possible future soccer or baseball field, depending on the needs of the neighborhood.
Cousineau asked if she could add that a gazebo would be nice to create a gathering area. Schmidt
confirmed a gazebo was shown in the original concept plan.
Lee stated that there was a consensus of the Park Commission that there should be a park planned in this
development. He also stated that the Park Commission would like this park to be a destination point that
people will get excited about visiting. He stated that some parking would be needed, which will take up
additional acres. He stated that a playground should be built first and leave some open field space to
provide flexibility to create a soccer or baseball field in the future. He stated that a pavilion should be in
the public space.
Jacob stated that the specific features of the park should be data driven when the time comes to develop
the park.
Schmidt thanked the Park Commission for their comments and said that he will make the park better. He
stated that he understands that the community would be better off having one bigger more dynamic park
in this area instead of more smaller parks to maintain
2
Dusty Finke
From: BrianStephenson <bstephconst@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 1:52 PM
To: Dusty Finke
Subject: Brindle Path
Dusty, This Brian Stephenson, I will not be able to Attend the meeting in regards to Brindle Path tonight. We spoke last
week about it. I would like this to be public record that I am against the project to be bumped forward on the time line
unless my property Is included. I will not be rural as you guys call it with 68 houses right behind me and the Wealshire
building.
Thanks, Brian Stephenson
i
WSB
Associates. Inc. engineering • planning • environmental • construction
July 11, 2017
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: The Excelsior Group Concept Plan III — Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-17-211
WSB Project No. 010387-000
Dear Mr. Finke:
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
We have reviewed The Excelsior Group Concept plan submittal dated June 30, 2017. The plans
propose to construct a total of 68 lots with 40 of them being customary single family lots and the
other 28 being single family "villa" lots.
The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general
engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with
regards to engineering and stormwater management matters.
Site Plan & Civil
1. Verify structure builds and the feasibility of serving the area with a gravity sewer system as
proposed. Show where the proposed connection points would be located to the existing
system. The applicant did provide confirmation of this with a previous concept plan, please
verify this is still the case with the current concept.
2. Looping connections will be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. The
adjacent property to the east has constructed a watermain that provides a stub to the very
northeast corner of The Excelsior Group site.
3. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water.
4. The concept plan shows a trail connection to the neighboring property to the east. The site
plan for the adjacent property does not include a trail connection to this location. The
applicant will need to work with the adjacent property owner to provide trail connections.
Traffic
1. The concept plan shows future roadway connections to the west of the proposed
development. The applicant should provide an estimate of the ultimate traffic volume that
would utilize the proposed roadways to reach this future expansion.
111
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
10010387-000\Admin\Docs\2017-06-30 Submittal\_2017-07-12 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Commcnts.docx
The Excelsior Group Concept Plan III — Engineering Review
July 11, 2017
Page 2
2. The intersections should be analyzed to determine if turn lanes are required on Chippewa
Road or nearby intersections for either capacity or safety.
3. The proposed intersections and trail crossings at Chippewa Road should be analyzed for sight
distance issues or concerns.
4. Dependent on the increase on vehicular traffic, the development may contribute to the need
for extending Chippewa Road to the east between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Dive.
Stormwater & Wetlands
5. The development will need to meet the City's infiltration requirement, which can be met by
reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation.
6. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards.
7. A wetland delineation report and replacement plan is required prior to any wetland impact.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
47.=L•L-
Jim Stremel, P.E.
K:\010387-000\Admin\Does\2017-06-30 Submittal\ 2017-07-12 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Comments.docx
Chapter 2: VISION & COMMUNITY GOALS
The Vision and Community Goals chapter is the heart of the Comprehensive Plan and provides
the foundation from which City officials make consistent and supporting land use decisions.
This chapter includes a set of general community goals that guided the creation of this Plan.
The concepts in this chapter are some of the few static elements of the Comprehensive Plan. If
land uses change or other infrastructure varies from the Plan, decisions will be founded in the
goals set forth below. The Vision and Goals were created with the involvement of the
Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee (the "Steering Committee'), City officials, and
residents of Medina and are broadly supported.
Land use designations are subject to strong social and economic pressures to change.
Accordingly, it is appropriate that such systems be periodically evaluated in light of changing
social and economic conditions. As development evolves, the Vision and Goals will provide the
guidance for accomplishing the vision for the future of the community even when changes are
necessary to the land use plan.
Detailed objectives and recommendations are contained within each of the subject chapters of
this plan.
Creating the Vision and Goals
The residents, the Steering Committee, City officials and staff participated in the planning
process for the Plan. A series of public participation meetings were conducted to introduce and
solicit information from the residents of Medina. The Steering Committee held work sessions
that focused on integrating the concerns and desires of the community together with
accommodating growth and regional impacts. An online forum provided additional
opportunity for residents to impact the Vision and Community Goals as they were formulated.
In addition to land use and growth planning, the City implemented open space, natural
resources, and infrastructure planning. The goals which guided this process are integrated into
this chapter.
Each element of this plan was developed with assistance from city officials and a diverse group
of community stakeholders producing a truly representative plan. The City made a conscious
decision to emphasize natural resources and open space conservation.
Community Vision
The following statement provides a vision of the community for the future and the resultant
goals and strategies.
Medina is a community united by a common goal: to sustain and enhance the quality
of life of its residents. Medina will protect its significant natural resources and open
space throughout the City, while honoring its rural heritage and fostering safe and well -
Chapter 2 - Vision and Community Goals
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
IVIEDINA
Page 2 - 1
designed neighborhoods, places of recreation and destinations for citizens to gather.
Development within the City will be commensurate with available transportation
systems, municipal services and school capacity.
Community Goals
The following Community Goals are derived from the Vision Statement and inform
objectives and strategies throughout the various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of the community to
promote the rural character of Medina.
Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources throughout the community.
Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly approaches to planning,
engineering and development.
Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate regionally forecasted
residential growth, desired business opportunities and achievement of other
Community Goals. Such development and growth shall be at a sustainable pace
proportionate with capacity of schools and transportation, water supply and
wastewater infrastructure available to the City.
Spread development so that it is not geographically concentrated during particular
timeframes.
Promote public and private gathering places and civic events that serve the entire
community.
Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community recreational facilities,
connect neighborhoods, and encourage healthy lifestyles of its residents.
Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents
at all stages of their lives.
Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that complements the residential
areas of the City.
Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of the City's police
department and coordination with its contracted volunteer fire departments.
Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes, retaining a skilled and efficient
staff and long-range planning and financial management.
Chapter 2 - Vision and Community Goals
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
f. T Y 6 fi
1VI EDI NAB
Page 2 - 2
The Guide Plan
Medina's Future Land Use Plan, Map 5-2, maintains Medina's rural character and protects the
City's natural resources while accommodating limited growth and development which is
consistent with the City's Vision, Community Goals and Land Use Principles.
Table 5-2 below demonstrates the expected 2040 land uses in the community.
TABLE 5-2
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
i Future Land Use (2040)
Gross
Acreage
0/0Net
Acreage
oh
Rural Residential
8,734.5
51.1%
6,476.4
37.9%
Agriculture
265.5
1.6 /
204.9
1.2
Future Development Area
396.2
2.3 %
366.7
2.1
Low Density Residential
1,103.7
6.4 %
879.2
5.1
Medium Density Residential
58.3
0.3 %
44.9
0.3
High Density Residential
29.3
0.2 /
26.3
0.2
Mixed Residential
137.0
0.8 /
97.1
0.6
Uptown Hamel
45.0
0.3 /
39.0
0.2
Commercial
247.1
1.4 /
196.0
1.1
Business
716.9
4.2 /
503.0
2.9
Rural Commercial
87.4
0.5 /
59.4
0.3
Institutional
270.0
1.5 /
199.0
1.1
Parks, Recreation, Open Space
3,106.5
18.1 %
2,054.0
12.0
Private Recreation
294.7
1,7/
260.5
1.5/
Closed Sanitary Landfill
192.1
1.1 /
124.3
0.7/
Right -of -Way_
673.1
3.9 /
672.4
3.9
Total Acres
16,356.5
12,202.6
Lakes and Open Water
763.5
4.5 /
763.5
4.5
Wetlands and Floodplain
4,153.9
24.3
Total City
17,120.5
17,120.5
The Growth and Development Map (May 5-3) highlights areas within the City in which a change
of land use is contemplated by the Future Land Use plan. The map also highlights wetland areas
within Medina which significantly affect land planning, development, and infrastructure
decisions.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 6
Future Land Use Designations
Rural Residential (RR) identifies areas for low -intensity uses, such as rural residential, hobby
farms, agricultural, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and
passive recreation. Density within the RR land use shall be no more than one lot per 10 acres
and the area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by this
Plan.
Agricultural (AG) identifies areas which are planned for long-term agricultural uses. Density
within the land use can be no more than one lot per 40 acres which will not be served by urban
services. Property within this land use is eligible to be part of the Metropolitan Agricultural
Preserves Program.
Future Development Area (FDA) identifies areas which could potentially be planned for future
urban development in the City that will be provided municipal sewer and water services. This
area will remain rural unless and until designated for urban services in a future Comprehensive
Plan update. The purpose of the FDA designation is to communicate the future planning
intentions to the community. This designation is tentative and depends greatly on future
infrastructure improvements, including to regional highway capacity.
Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units
per acre and 3.0.units per acre which are served, or are intended to be served, by urban
services. The primary use in this area is single- and two-family residential development.
Medium Density Residential (MDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 5.0
and 7.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The
primary uses in this designation will be a mix of housing such as single family residential, twin
homes, town homes, row homes, and small multiple family buildings.
High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 and
15.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary
uses will include town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should
incorporate some open space or an active park.
Mixed Residential (MR) identifies residential land uses developed between 3.5 and 4.0 units
per net acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The land use
provides flexibility for the type of housing developed, including detached single family, twin
homes, townhomes and multiple family buildings, provided the overall density of a project
falls within the range noted above and provides some higher density housing. Some portion of
each site shall be developed at densities over 8.0 units per net acre. At a minimum, each
development in the land use shall include one higher density housing unit per net acre, which
shall be complemented with open space and recreational activities.
Uptown Hamel (UH) the Uptown Hamel land use allows residential and commercial to be
mixed on adjacent sites and to be mixed within the same building or property. Residential
development in this designation may be between 4.0 and 15.0 units per acre. The mixed -use
business areas will be served by urban services.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 7
Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments
including commercial, office and retail uses. These uses are concentrated along the arterial
corridors and are served or will be served by urban services.
Business (B) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including office, warehouse,
and light industrial. 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.
Rural Commercial (RC) identifies commercial land uses which are not served by urban services,
but rather by individual wells and septic systems. The scale of development in this land use shall
be limited in order to protect water resources.
Institutional (INST) identifies existing public, semi-public, and non-profit uses such as
governmental, cemeteries, religious, educational and utilities.
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) identifies publicly owned or permanently conserved
land which is used for park, recreational, or open space purposes.
Private Recreation (PREC) identifies areas that are currently used for outdoor recreational uses
which are held under private ownership but are not publicly maintained. Limited numbers of
residential uses may be included or have previously been developed within this land use
designation.
Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) identifies an existing closed sanitary landfill. The land is owned
by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) which also has jurisdiction over land use
regulations.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 8
Average Net Residential Density
The Metropolitan Council has designated the portion of the City within the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area as Emerging Suburban Edge. Residential development within the Emerging
Surburban Edge designation is required to be planned for new development and redevelopment
at average net density of at least 3-5 units per acre.
The average net density for planned residential development in Medina is 3.15 units per acre as
described in Table 5-3.
TABLE 5-3
NET RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
Future Land Use
Planned
Net Acreage
Minimum
Density
Minimum
Number of
Units
Low Density Residential
171.0
2.0
342.0
Medium Density Residential
21.3
5.0
106.5
High Density Residential
13.9
12.0
166.8
Mixed Residential
97.1
3.5
339.9
Total Planned Residential
303.3
955.2
Average Net Residential Density
3.15
Redevelopment is anticipated within the Uptown Hamel area and is likely to include additional
residential units. The intent of the Uptown Hamel land use is to permit flexibility in the amount
of residential and commercial development and is therefore not projected in Table 5-3. However,
residential development within Uptown Hamel is required to exceed 4 units per net acre, which
would further compliance with Metropolitan Council minimum net density requirements.
Employment Intensity Forecasts
The Metropolitan Council requires that communities provide a measurement of forecasted
employment. Acceptable measures include floor area ratios, building footprint percentages or
impervious surface percentages. Medina anticipates that new development in the Commercial
and Business land uses will tend to result in 50-65 impervious surface coverage.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA
Page 5- 9
Land Use Policies by Area
The following section provides policies for land use designations and is categorized into
generalized subsections. The policies for each category as provided below directly support the
Community Goals and Land Use Principles.
These designations are generalized land uses and are not specific zoning districts. The City will
update the zoning ordinance and applicable codes to be consistent with the land use plan and
designations identified in this section.
The planning process revealed a strong interest in promoting high quality, sustainable
development in the City. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for large scale or master
plan types of development, regardless of whether they are residential, commercial or mixed -uses
will be available and will be supported through zoning.
Rural Designations
The rural designations include Agricultural, Rural Residential and Future Development Area.
A large percentage of the community falls into these categories. The purpose of these
designations is to provide low -intensity land uses, such as rural residential, farming, hobby
farms, horticulture, conservation of natural and ecologically significant natural resources and
passive recreation. This area will not be provided with water or sewer service during the
timeframe covered by this Plan.
The City's goal is to maintain the rural character of this area. The Metropolitan Council System
Statement shows the majority of this area as Diversified Rural, and the City utilizes the Rural
Residential designation to be consistent with the System Statement.
A significant segment of this area consists of large, rural parcels with single-family homes. The
City recognizes that such low -density, development will continue to be a desired housing
alternative.
The City's Open Space Report proposes several different implementation techniques for
allowing open space development and planning to maintain rural character and
simultaneously preserve significant natural resources. This result may take the form of
innovative developments that clusters smaller lots on larger parcels with permanently
conserved open space. Such innovative arrangements can help preserve the City's natural
resources, open space and rural character, while still maintaining an average overall density of
ten acres per unit. Medina's wetlands, lakes, scattered woodlands and soil conditions prevent
smaller, unsewered lot development, but are ideal for low -density rural housing.
Medina's policy in the permanent rural area is to keep strict soil requirements for septic sites, but
allow flexibility for Open Space design developments and to ensure that the permanent rural area
will remain rural by eliminating the need for future extension of a sanitary sewer service to
replace failing systems.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA
Page 5- 10
Objectives:
1. Allow low -density development in the Rural Residential Area including innovative
arrangements of homes that preserve open space and natural resources.
2. Encourage conservation of open space, farms and ecologically significant natural
resources in the rural areas.
3. Enforce stringent standards for the installation and maintenance of permanent, on -site
sewage disposal systems.
4. Allow public facilities and services, such as parks and trail systems, if compatible with
rural service area development.
5. Allow land uses, such as home -based businesses, hobby farms, horse stables, nurseries
and other smaller -scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining residential
development.
6. Regulate noise, illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and
safety.
7. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per forty acres for property in the Agricultural
land use.
8. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for new development in the Rural
Residential and Future Development Area land use.
9. Consider exceptions to maximum density standards for open space developments that
protect natural features and put land into permanent conservation.
10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Future
Development Area land uses during this planning cycle.
11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant
natural characteristics.
12. Require that lots contain adequate soil types and conditions as defined in the City's
on -site septic system requirements.
13. Protect property within the Future Development Area designation from subdivision and
development by requiring ghost plats for subdivisions so that future urban expansion is
not compromised.
14. Reduce impervious surfaces where possible by applying low impact design standards
and encourage innovative materials and plans that reduce runoff.
15. Encourage and incentivize landowners to participate in the protection and conservation
of significant natural resources.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 11
Urban Service Designations
The Urban Service Area includes the residential and commercial areas of the City that are
currently or will be served by municipal water and sewer services.
Residential Uses
Objectives:
1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant
natural characteristics of the property.
2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that
protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district.
3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary.
4. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low
impact development design standards.
5. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public
facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth
strategies.
6. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan.
7. Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to the
provision of urban services that will hinder future division.
8. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes,
conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City's open
space and natural features.
9. Promote attractive, well -maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with
adequate facilities and open space.
10. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety.
11. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot
sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land
use, market demands, and development standards.
12. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible
with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of
ecologically significant natural resources.
13. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development
is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking,
green space, landscape buffering and height limitations.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 12
14. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic
enhancement and safety.
15. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to
reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required.
16. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new
development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space.
17. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD's in
exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi -family
units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources.
18. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development
characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood.
19. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods
and to maintain public health and safety.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 13
Staging Plan
The staging plan is tied to infrastructure plans, including water, wastewater and transportation,
to ensure that growth and development are commensurate with services necessary to support
new residents and businesses in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
The staging plan, Map 5-4, utilizes flexible staging boundaries to direct where and when
development should proceed within the City and is built on the following principles:
• Growth should encompass a balance of land uses to provide residential and business
areas for development throughout the planning period. The staging plan also is
intended to reduce concentration of development within a location during a particular
timeframe.
• The staging plan identifies staged increments of 5-year periods and provides some
flexibility between adjacent staging periods. Development shall be limited to a
maximum of two years prior to the existing staging period, and will be tied to an
incentive based points system.
Table 5-5, located on the following page, describes the net acreage of the various land
uses by Staging Period.
The following table describes the corresponding number of residential units which
could be developed upon property within each Staging Period. Although most of the
property staged for development is available in earlier timeframes, the City anticipates
that actual growth will be more linear as described in the forecasts in Chapter 3.
TABLE 5-4
STAGING PLAN — RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
Time Period
Total Residential
A Units
High Density
Residential Units
2018-2020
343
161
2020-2025
94
2025-2030
469
95
2030-2035
0
2035-2040
48
Total
955
256
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT - February 7, 2017
C.Y 0M
MEDINA►
Page 5- 17
81 -S abod
VNICIMAI
O A 1 4
L 1OZ 'L /uonagad — ldb?Ja
1-11nA0a0 8 ash puo1 - S aaIdpy3
t'ZL9
0'0
t'ZL9
0'0
t'ZL9
0'0
t'ZL9
0'0
t'ZL9
0'0
t'ZL9
kem-3o-N2IN
£'17ZI
0'0
£'tZZ
0'0
£'tZI
0'0
£'tZI
0'0
£'tZI
0'0
£'tZI
IIT3pur7 klulTurs pasoD
S'09Z
0'0
S'09Z
0'0
S'09Z
0'0
S'09Z
0'0
S'09Z
0'0
S'09Z
uoRraaaag alexpd
O'f7SO`Z
0'0
0'17SO`Z
0'0
0'17SO`Z
0'0
O'f7SO'Z
0'0
O'f7SO'Z
0'0
O'f7SO'Z
aaeds uadp 'Dag 'sved
f t6I
0'0
f t6l
0'0
t'176I
0'0
f t6I
0'0
f t6I
0'0
f t6I
TruoRnmsui
f 6S
0'0
f 6S
0'0
f 6S
0'0
f 6S
0'0
f 6S
0'0
f 6S
maaauzuzoD rang
O'EOS
0'0
0'£OS
0'0
O'EOS
0'0
O'EOS
Z'ZE
8'0St
STOZ
0'9tZ
ssauTsng
0'96I
0'0
0'961
0'0
0'96I
0'0
0'96I
0'0
0'96I
I'eg
6'ZtI
T piaultuoD
0'6£
0'0
0.6E
0'0
0'6£
0•0
0'6£
0'0
0'6£
0'0
0'6£
pump' umoldn
I'L6
0'0
I'L6
0'0
I'L6
I.L6
0'0
0'0
0'0
0.0
0'0
irguapTsag paxm
E'9Z
0'0
£'9Z
0'0
E'9Z
0'0
£'9Z
0'0
£'9Z
6.£'I
t'ZI
repuapTsag klTsuaa OTH
6'tt
0'0
6'tt
0'0
6'tt
0'0
6'tt
0'0
6'tt
''IZ
9'£Z
'sag klTsuaa unmpaw
Z'6L8
6'CZ
E'SS8
0'0
£'SS8
I'5'9
Z'06L
S'LP
67T7L
L.ff'
Z'80L
IuTluaPIsag X-Tsuaa MOZ
L'99£
6TZ-
9'06£
0'0
9.06E
Z'Z9I-
87SS
9'66-
£799
8'LZ£-
I'086
raw •doianaa aanind
6TOZ
0'0
6'170Z
0'0
6'T7OZ
0'0
6'T7OZ
0'0
6'T7OZ
0'0
6'tOZ
aiminDp2v
0'I8t`9
0'0
0'I8f`9
0'0
0'I8t`9
0'0
0'I8t'9
0'0
0'I8f'9
0'0
0'I8T`9
irguapTsag rang
ObOZ
OPOZ-SsoZ
axunu�
5£0Z
SCOZ-OCH
axuvio
0£OZ
OCOZ-STOZ
axunto
SZOZ
sZOZ-OZN
axunu�
OZOZ
�OZOZ-LLOZ
axunto
LIOZ $
upsIx3
asn purl azn}n3
3 V3110V 13N - NVld JNI VIS
S-S 318V1
ACKAMORE RD
01■IMI .4110
ur/, ,anml: -_
1..„.
40...
---4'flaw
707.0
r
Y
• ir ` • dat
fil
1 `-',, -
sir a
MY II 1113--; Zara
iii,NAmiM_IZI111:: il,
— - .■ �ahR -.9/ INA _ `.4rf MUM � il�lift
rrIi
I ajar L K.
wz+1 t-INOIL ...FA r!.
MEDINA
Map 5-1
2016 Existing
Land Uses
DRAFT 01 /2 6/2 017
Legend
Agricultural
Rural Residential
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached
- Multifamily
- Mixed Use Residential
_ Retail and Other Commercial
Office
J Industrial and Utility
Institutitional
Park, Recreational, or Preserve
Golf Course
A Major Highway
Railway
Open Water
Undeveloped
Wetland Locations
Map Date: January 26, 2017
0 0.25 0.5
1
Miles
MEDINA
Map 5-2
Future Land Use Plan
DRAFT 1 /31 /2017
Legend
Future Land Use
Rural Residential
- Agricultural
Future Development Area
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
- High Density Residential
Mixed Residential
Uptown Hamel
Commercial
Business
Rural Commercial
Institutional
Private Recreational
Park, Recreational, and Open Space
Closed Sanitary Landfill
A
Map Date: January 31, 2017
0 0.25 0.5
1
Miles
r-
MEDINA
Map 5-3
Development and
Growth Plan
DRAFT 12/8/2016
Legend
Future Land Use
Rural Residential
Agricultural
Future Development Area
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Residential
Uptown Hamel
Commercial
Business
Rural Commercial
Institutional
Private Recreational
Park, Recreational, and Open Space
Closed Sanitary Landfill
Wetland Locations
Wetland Locations
Map Date: January 20, 2016
0 0.25 0.5
1
Miles
F rdmor=
Half Moon
Independence
Academy Marsh
Katrina
Unnamed
re
-Thas=1.11.11
�uu uMu�u��uu�n•1uu�u•uMuM�uu�uM1ui1MnMu�u�
O
Winterhalter
�c<‘
Peter
Unnamed
Unnamed
School
J
J
7—\ CHIPPEWA RD
Unnamed
0
Thies
O
J
J
Medina
° I 1 ry, I
Q■
HAMEL RD�
Wolsfeld Nr
i
11§
ACKAMORE RD
named
Holy Name
UNTER
uumumnmtt \,miumummic- amumu= NIIMI iuMnNIuM1n•u•non•u•u•u•uv1•u•u111u•u•u11•u•u`u•uMumumumumumumuMuMI
101
G t T Y � A
Y �
MEDINA
Map 5-4
Staging and Growth
DRAFT 11 /15/2016
Urban Services Phasing Plan
Existing Service Area (2017)
- 2018
2020
2025
2030
2035
Future Development Area (post 2040)
Long-term Sewer Service Area
/A
The Staging and Growth Plan allows potential
flexibility for urban services up to two years prior to
the indicated staging period. Such flexiblity will be
considered through a evaluation system based on
the extent to which a proposal exceeds general
City standards.
The Future Development Area identifies areas which
may potentially be planned for urban services in the
future beyond the term of this plan (post-2040).
The Long-term Sewer Service Area is a long-term
planning designation of the Metropolitan Council. It
identifies areas which may be considered for potential
sanitary sewer service in the future beyond the term
of this Plan.
Map Date: January 20, 2017
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Brindle Path
Project Narrative
The Excelsior Group proposes Brindle Path, a 40-acre Single Family Low Density Residential
subdivision for the City of Medina. The thoughtful development creates a community that is
mindful of the vision and goals of the city Medina, and creates a thoughtful transition between
more intensive uses to the south and east and rural residential to the north and west.
Location
The Site is located on Chippewa Road, West of Mohawk Drive. The project is directly west of the
Wealshire memory care facility, directly north of Polaris Headquarters, and northeast of the
proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development.
General Description of Request
The 2 properties that comprise Brindle Path are designated as Low Density Residential (LDR) in the
current Comprehensive Plan and the same on the draft Comprehensive Plan. Originally the
properties were included in the 2016-2020 Phasing Plan. This Phasing Plan was amended in early
2015 pushing these properties to the 2021-2025 Phasing Plan. This request is for the council to
exercise the Phasing Plan flexibility provided in chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan. This
flexibility allows the Phasing Plan to be pulled forward 2 years. In this instance, Certificates of
Occupancy can be granted in 2019, allowing development in 2018.
Housing
The proposed Brindle Path contains 68 total lots. 40 lots will be customary single family lots that
meet the Rl zoning (minimum 90 feet wide and 11,000 se. The remaining 28 lots are proposed as
single family "Villa" lots. The homes on these lots will be single level living geared towards empty
nesters. The developer is requesting lot size flexibility (minimum 65 feet wide and 7,000 sfl so that
these lots will conform to the expectations of the target market of the villa homes. However, in
keeping with comments regarding previous submittals, the 28 villa lots are internal to the
development or adjacent to the Wealshire. Therefore none of the villa lots will abut any rural
residential lot, but instead all of the lots adjacent to rural residential meet the R1 zoning standards.
Parks, Trails & Open Spaces
Brindle Path will include sidewalks on all streets. These sidewalks will link to the trail system that
runs throughout the development. The trails will connect to the centrally located park and provide
opportunities for passive recreation among the wetlands and open space within the development.
The trails are planned to provide opportunities to connect to the Wealshire, Polaris and the planned
Lunski Senior Housing Development. The park at the center of the development is planned as a
city park and is large enough to provide an area for playground equipment, open play and walking,
and a multi -use soccer/football field. This field can become the "home" field for Brindle Path and
the existing neighborhoods to the northeast.
Infrastructure
Sewer
All of Brindle Path can be served via gravity to the existing sewer at the intersection of Chippewa
Road and Mohawk Drive
Water
Brindle Path will utilize existing watermain in Chippewa Road. The development of Brindle Path
will allow the watermain serving the Wealshire to be looped to the watermain on Chippewa Road.
Further looping of the watermain can be accomplished by connecting to the watermain serving the
proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development that comes from the south.
Streets
Brindle Path will access Chippewa Road approximately at the location of the existing driveway.
Vehicles from Brindle Path will travel a short distance on the city streets (Chippewa Road and
Mohawk Drive), before accessing State Highway 55.
Phasing Plan Flexibility Specifics
The Brindle Path concept plan has been in front of the Planning Commission, City Council and
Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee several times over the past 18 months. Although there has been
lively discussion over various components of the plan there seems to be consensus that development in the
proposed location makes sense. The steering committee recommended, and the Council accepted, that the
property be guided Low Density Residential (LDR) in the new 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The rationale for
keeping the property designated as LDR in the future Comprehensive Plan was the area was easily served by
existing infrastructure and created a nice transition from more intensive uses (Wealshire and Polaris) to the
less intensive rural residential uses to the north and west. This reasoning is even more appropriate considering
the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development. Brindle Path now fills the hole between these 3 projects
not only in terms of transitional uses, but also linking infrastructure (watermain, trails, parks, etc.).
The proposed project meets or exceeds the factors necessary to allow Staging Plan Flexibility.
1. Crucial Factor: Infrastructure Capacity — The entirety of the project can be served with existing
infrastructure located in Chippewa Road. Perhaps more importantly, the project can serve as a
bridge between the newly constructed Wealshire on the east side of the property and the proposed
Lunski Senior Housing Development to the southwest. This will allow important watermain and
trail connections.
2. Primary Factors (10 points per item) —
a. Sustainability — Houses within Brindle Path will incorporate sustainable practices including
high energy efficient, and environmentally responsible construction materials. The location
of Brindle Path creates possibilities for a live/work environment to be created with Polaris
headquarters to the south, the Wealshire memory care facility to the east, and the proposed
Lunski Senior Housing Development to the southwest. With 240+ senior housing units on
the adjacent properties, the Villas at Brindle Path will create opportunities for elderly
residents who are healthy and active to live very near a more frail spouse who requires the
services of either of the adjacent senior housing facilities. The synergy between the 3 projects
will allow active Medina residents to stay in Medina, as they will have a senior campus
environment. Historically seniors looking to move to an active adult community desire that
future housing with services options are located very nearby so they don't have to reacclimate
to a new community as they become more frail and require housing with services. In
addition, it will provide opportunities for Medina families to relocate more frail
parents/grandparents nearby.
b. Natural resource protection and low impact development — Brindle Path will use a storm
water re -use infiltration system to re -use storm water runoff to irrigate. This reduces
groundwater use while also providing superior stormwater treatment. The Project will
exceed the tree preservation ordinance by adding at least 2 trees to each finished lot. The
project will meet all wetland protection regulations, with very little wetland impacts, with
plans to put conservation easements over wetlands to ensure their protection and
preservation in the future.
c. Proximity to existing development — Brindle Path is directly adjacent to the Wealshire
memory care facility, and northeast of the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development.
It is also directly north of Polaris Headquarters. All three of these developments utilize city
services.
d. Open Space Protection — Wetlands and open space within Brindle Path will be preserved in
perpetuity by use of a conservation easement. This includes the addition of 40,000 sf of new
wetlands. The proposed development includes a 5-acre city park and trail network that will
act as a bridge between the Wealshire, Polaris, and Lunski projects, providing
intergenerational recreational opportunities and connectivity.
e. Limited impacts on city services - Residents of Brindle Path will use approximately i/z mile of
city streets to access State Highway 55. This is very limited impact to the city roadways.
Furthermore, the storm water re -use for irrigation of the development will limit the impact
on the amount of city water consumed by the development.
3. Secondary Factors (maximum of 5 points per item)
a. High quality architectural design and materials — Brindle Path is proposed to have 2-3 local
builders to ensure a variety of housing styles and designs. To maintain neighborhood
consistency, a Homeowners Association(HOA) and Architectural Review Committee (ARC)
will be implemented. The ARC will oversee and enforce high quality of design and materials.
The ARC will ensure varying types of home design throughout the community and the use
of quality materials including brick and stone.
b. Community amenities — Brindle Path will include a park and a trail system, which will
connect residents both inside and outside of the neighborhood, and take advantage of the
natural environment. As discussed previously, the development will include a 5+ acre city
park, big enough to include playground equipment and a soccer/football field, providing a
"home" field for Brindle Path and the existing neighborhoods in the northeast. The trail
system provides connectivity to the Wealshire, Polaris, and Lunski projects and the city park.
c. Affordable Housing — the two different product types, while they may not necessarily meet
the Metropolitan Council's definitions of affordable, do meet the City's Housing Objective
of "providing opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents
at all stages of their lives."
4. Employment Opportunities — Brindle Path is a single family residential development; thus, there will
not necessarily be jobs created by the homes, but this community has the potential to provide a
live/work environment for employees of the neighboring senior housing facilities and Polaris
Headquarters.
_.
1 r-
\1
DRAWING NAME NO.
V6.0
DRAWN BY
RSM
CHECKED BY
DATE
07/27/17
\
I
1
- \ PROPOSED II
` . WATERMAIN I
CONNECTION\
`\II
\\1
1 I
PROPOSED MEDINA,6ENI0R
I LIVI�JG COMMUNILY ;
PROPOSED
ATERMAY
CONNECT!
I
1
1\\ I
I -'I
Parcel Data -
Address 2212 Chippewa Road
PID 03-118-23-23-0005
Area: 19.53 acres (850,549 sf)
SroRn wATVZ
IRFArn€n+r
PONO,1
/-20,60.05P)
CHIPPEWA )RVAD
Description: The East 655.53 ft of the SW a of the NW 1/4
USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF
INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT
SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY
INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE
USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING
FROM ILLEGITMATE USE.
PAO: /
OVFIJ,,PIKF
05/ '
Purr 1 L-o
wdlandc,Edion
l /-400000
1-
IVA'
11 C
f
SJU
ArrA
I
'O s
;ern-y
ri, Rlrg "\,
Ale
WATERMAIN
STUB \
RLISEX BASEMENT
PARNI SE.ACn
nvI
\._ _ _ _ _ \I
__.__
10 '
//1 1
/ i
/ 1 ;I
trEa O BOUNDARY
/
tUTURE DEVELOPMENT
TAL
Iw,� •I 1
I
N II -
lY�-i / Ri v ln.lM4Nl
•
\ f
--
CllIPPEW4 ROAD ------'
Parcel Data -
Address 2120 Chippewa Road
PID 03-118-23-24-0002
Area: 17.62 acres (767,549 sf)
Description:
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I
AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Name, P.E.
Date:
___,- \
1 `
I
ND
200 100 0 100 200 400
41`1i `J���
SCALE IN FEET
150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000
CITY PROJECT NO.
MEDINA,
MINNESOTA
Proposed Design Data: 40 Lots
R1 Zoning
Min Width - 90 ft
Min Area - 11,000 sf
Fysb - 251/30'g
Sysb - 10' min/25' total
Crnr - 25'
Rysb - 20' open/30'
50' ROW
28' B-B Streets
Concept Plan - R1 / PUD
BRINDLE PATH
THE EXCELSIOR GROUP
Proposed Design Data: 28 Lots
PUD Zoning
Min Width - 65 ft
Min Area - 7,000 sf
Fysb - 25'I/30'g
Sysb - 7' min/14' total
Crnr - 20'
Rysb - 20'
FILE NO.
24958-002
PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER
WETLAND :7
��z s( zooEg
e(') (I( ( w
OPEN d 7
SPACE
+/-41,278 SF y1
W (0.95 acres) J V
(�I
WETLAND#'
\ w +/-36,680 SF
(0.84 acres)
OPEN
SPACE
4/ 48,899 SF
(1.12 acres)
��,
90' LOTS
+/-556,255 SF
(12.77 acres)
5TOVI W1TC2'I
7RPitrrirnir
POW, ki
I
L/ / ROW938 +/ SF
/ (4-201,.64 acres)
0
65' LOTS
+/-292,427 SF
(6.71 acres)
r
1 OPEN /
SPACE
SF
W w w W + 3.69 acres)
s)
I/ w - (369 e )
../G UPLAND
\ (111, PARK
W�, +/-59,4815E P
�' W W ,( W (1.37 acres)
I� 6W � +WETLAND#2 W
' �v,,VI V l39 888 9F W W
�� \ C � W W (092 acre) PARKING
' ' W / /-2,2aer81 SF
W/ (0.05 es)
�',���IID����� �jr------
n\r/-trevrTORfi
// �Np xIF
le
��yi/Oiiii\ r
/�����
�Q
7 /' i
�` -``/ OACE / `
+/-230,022 SF /�//`�\
Y1 `` (5.28 acres) �\`\``````
• r
WETLAND
-1,008 SF
(0.02 acres)
CHIPPEWA ROAD
to
WETLAND
418,700 SE
(0.43 acres)
T
z
r-
7`
.70
.we. we
WAX CONNECMON
r•'
4'00\'
200 100 0 100 200 400
SCALE IN FEET
AREAS
ROW - +/- 201,938 SF (4.64 ACRES)
///
65' RESIDENTIAL LOTS - +/- 292,427 SF (6.71 ACRES)
90' RESIDENTIAL LOTS - +/- 556,255 SF (12.77 ACRES)
OPEN SPACE - +/- 507,995 SF (11.66 ACRES)
(27,017+41,278+48,899+160,779+230,022)
UPLAND PARK - +/- 59,481 SF (1.37 ACRES)
WETLAND - +/- 109,326 SF (2.51 ACRES)
(36,680+39,888+14,058+18,700)
PARKING - +/- 2,281 SF (0.05 ACRES)
TOTAL SITE AREA - +/- 1,618,098 SF (37.15 ACRES)
GROSS DENSITY
68 lots / 37.15 acres = 1.83 lots/acre
NET DENSITY
(total area - wetland area - upland park)
37.15 - 2.51 - 1.37 = 33.27 acres
68 lots / 33.27 acres = 2.04 lots/acre
DRAWING NAME NO.
BY DATE
REVISIONS
V6.0
DRAWN BY
RSM
CHECKED BY
XXX
DATE
01/13/16
USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF
INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT
SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY
INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE
USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING
FROM ILLEGITMATE USE.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I
AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Name, P.E.
Date:
Lic. No
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000
CITY PROJECT NO.
MEDINA,
MINNESOTA
AREA EXHIBIT
BRINDLE PATH
THE EXCELSIOR GROUP
FILE NO.
24958-002
X
\
\'10
_ - 1006
- -1002-
/
/
1
I
1
0
I
/
8" PVC SDR 35
57.0 Lq®0.53%
1
/
/
\
PROPOSED II
WATERMAIN \
CONNECTIONvv
ILI II-
-- m MH Structure - (64)
1
/ RIM: 10109
/ INV: 999.4
17 BLD: 166'
/I \
/ I III
/
I\9
y/e ion \\\ I\lo
/ \
/ MH Structur -(45) -
RIM:1009.0
NV: 998.8
i \ BLD:102'
\ 1
\ ,.7
MH Structure - (46)
RIM: 1009.0
V 999 3
BLD10 7
�7 MH Structure - (75)
RIM: 1009.0
l 70O0 INV: 993.3 \ I
/ \\ BLD: 15.T \�. /
\ so
\ mo,rr
MH Structure - (50)
RIM: 10040
INV: 994.0
BLD: 12 I0'
1 --
•
MH SVucture (51) \
RIM: 1007,0 \
INV: 993.7
BLD: 13.3'
[PEAT l7rNT
PONO #1
C+/20,669 5P)
99a:
--
.
* * r�l� / \ \v�l/ \I/ \I/
\ \�
sV ,I, W vI/ V/
MH Structure -(47)
RIM: 92 9.6 ▪ y
INV: 926
/
MH SNtVructure -0 62)
RM1011.
f BLD: 11.0'
- -
I
1
1
�C
MH Structure - (74)
RIM: 9921
INV: 992\ UOD MH Structure - (73)
. RIM: 1003.0
BLD: 15.9' INV:930' `
BLD_ 9 0' _
\ \ / MH Structure - (48) /
RIM: 1006.0
\ / INV: 989,2
99.
l
SF01:71W,97-E.
'EA'(P7ENTP0N.
:7_ I
74-75F I
MH Structure - (59
RIM 1004,0
INV: 989.5
BLD: 14.5'
MH Structure - (95)
RIM: 1001.2
BLD: 19.2'
CHIPPEWA'PO
\ /-
\\o ) ' \
\ %/ \\ \
\ \
\ �\
\ \ \ I
1 \
\ MH Structure - (49) I
\ RIM: 1004.0
\ INV:988.8 I / -
BLD, 15.2' /
o I I /
ill 1
II 1'
s5.o 1 ' I /
o
/ /
•ema 1 _
� PAP( / //
PLAY Fl LD
/
1
MH Structure - (58)
RIM: 1002.0
INV: 991.0
\ BLD: 11.0'
MH Structure - (55)
RIM: 1005.0
INV: 994.4
BLD: 10.6'
/
MIT shuEture-(56). V
RIM: 1004.0
INV: 992.0
BLD: 12.0'
OPEN5PAC1=
5,05 40Pf
/
/
MH Structure -(57)
RIM: 1002.0
INV: 991.5
BLD: 0.5'
/_-_--�
/ \ \
/ \
/
// I
�o` 1
/
/ 1
/
/ 1
/
/ „-.996-__\
/ '
/ /
/ / I
/ / I
/ / I
- - 1 / \
4'0 RIO'
200 100 0 100 200 400
411`1i �11III
SCALE IN FEET
HYD
MH Structure (541
RIM 1006.0 1I
INV: 994,9 I �
BLD. 111 ro / ----
\ 1 "--1 /
i.1 I\'
\
\\
/ \ a
\ / \ me
'5 1
>1
5TOPl7
WATEP
7TPATPeNT
POND #lr
5V)
MH Structure.(37)
RIM: 991.8
INV: 979.4
BLD: 12.4'
1
II
ST, �rMH
-I9921 -II
25
POSSIBLE FUTURE
TRAIL CONNECTION
gg01- I
I
r1 /
II
�I
10' DRAAAGE
UTILITY EASE!.
0.00' `/
DRAWING NAME
NO.
BY DATE REVISIONS.
V6.0
DRAWN BY
RSM
CHECKED BY
MO(
DATE
k 01/13/16
USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF
INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT
SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY
INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE
USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING
FROM ILLEGITMATE USE.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I
AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Name, P.E.
Date:
Lis. No.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000
CITY PROJECT NO.
MEDINA,
MINNESOTA
Concept Plan - UTILITY
BRINDLE PATH
THE EXCELSIOR GROUP
FILE NO.
24958-002
UP1
X
PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER
/
/
1016- - - - -
/
\
a
\ \-
I°70
i
- - 1006
_ - -1002-
nIy
W V✓/ \iv
V �9
%
/ u
/• a MH Structure - (42)
/ RIM:1013.0
INV:1001.0
BLD: 12.0'
/ \\ / MH Structure - (43) //Q
x \ RIM: 1012.0 //rS'
\ INV: 1000.5 ,
/ \BLD: 11.5'
/ //
/
MH Structure - (44)
RIM:1011.0 /
INV: 1000.0 /
BLD: 11.0' I /
I
I I \
I I \m
MH Structure - (64)
RIM: 1010.0
/ / INV: 999.4
/ BLD: 10.6'
// I.
/
/' I \(Ir
i \-
/ \ I
// \/ / \\
/ � MH Structure--(45) -
/ RIM:1009.0 \ -
NV:998.8
/ , BLD: 10.2' \,V 'i --
\
/�/Af
Air (.4,...-
MH Structure- (46) ket.\\N
\\\` ` 6 p991j93\
DRAWING NAME NO.
V6.0
DRAWN BY
BY
RSM
CHECKED BY
100(
DATE
01/13/16
\ I
\ // - \\
\- I s.
/ - -\
/
\
\
1
I
I
I
--�
----
/
\ \ ,4m� /
\ w,.,„v \
\,., /
\ /
\ \ -
\'
--00
T
\\ice -MRM1tu0re4-.(41\-
imp INV:5
�i \ BLD: 12.5
„,,,,,
\
\
- /10/6_ - -
,C4 \\
MH Structure - (76) 1
_
89.9 \ RIM:1014.5 1/
\ INV:1002.5 p
BLD: 12.0'
/I
\
--� \ 10 \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \
\\/ \ \ \\ \ \\ \�
\\\ \ \\ \
\ \ \\ \ \\
\ \. - -------------
\
l I �- \ \
0/6,1 \ \ 1
11 / ) I
\ \ \ \
/ I v v, v
\ \
I 1 ▪ \\ \ \ \
I_ "... a v :ha 7 v
\
11
11 _
MH SW lure - (72) �' /
RIM: 1014.0
/ INV: 998.4
BLD: 75.6' \
/ I
90.0
90
} A-
I /
I
It
/
\MH Structure - (67) /
RIM:1010.0 /
INV: 997.4
BLD: 12.6' }- c
\
1 /
STOR 9 WATE1'
7WEATIMENT
POND #/ -
i+/-Z0,669 5F%
/T. sP
st! 4/ 4 `st.
\4- \
/4-.
USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF
INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT
SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY
INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE
USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING
FROM ILLEGITMATE USE.
MH Structure - (61)
RIM:1012.3
INV: 999.2
BLD: 13.1'
\
1 // //\r
/`' / )s\ / /
9/ I / \ /
11/1H Structure - (62)
RIM: 1011.0
INV:1000.0 _�_
BLD: 11.0'
/
000 - OPDNSpACf
/ /'
/ / /
/ //
/
PLAY rr%LD / •
/ / •
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I
AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Name, P.E.
Date:
Lis. No.
200 100 0 100 200 400
��`�i �EIONEi
SCALE IN FEET
�EFiS SR4
w°N SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
�� M1
150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000
c?"
01
/
/
_1 i'\\I -
' \
-IMH9Vucture-(53)\ N/ RIM: 10090 \� ,,\
INV: 996.6 `,e \ - - - -
BLD:12.4' \ zamed \ \\
\ \
\\ \ \
\\ \ \
\ \
\\ \ \
/ I
I-
- -
10.00'
MH Structure - (55)
RIM: 1005.0
INV: 994.4
BLD: 10.6'
4.141
MH St�VEture-(56). v°
RIM: 1004..0
�+� INV: 892.0
��� eLD:1a.9•-
CITY PROJECT NO.
MEDINA,
MINNESOTA
MH Structure - (54)
RIM: 1006.0
INV: 994.9
BLD: 11.1'
ro
C ▪ Lom
/
//WATEf3MAI-ro
STUB-
\
o \
o \
\
11. �\
v /1
\` -�/
11
---_� l
T----
/' 7101-I --
/
t
ISB-17
t
111
w
A ��
I
STMW
N
- -- 19921
25'
I
POSSIBLE FUTURE
TRAIL CONNECTION
Concept Plan - UTILITY
BRINDLE PATH
THE EXCELSIOR GROUP
FILE NO.
24958-002
U P2
X
PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: September 14, 2017
MEETING: September 19, 2017 City Council
SUBJ: Wally and Bridget Marx — 2700-2900 Parkview Drive — Conservation Design
Subdivision PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat
Review Deadline
Application Received: May 12, 2017
Review Deadline (extended by applicant): October 31, 2017
Overview
Wally and Bridget Marx have requested review of a PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat for
a Conservation Design subdivision at their property at 2700-2900 Parkview Drive. The applicant
proposes to divide three lots totaling 89.75 acres into six single-family residential lots and
proposes to place 69.61 (11.76 acres buildable) into conservation easements.
The subject properties are located on Parkview Drive, southwest of School Lake and east of the
Baker National Golf Course. A significant portion of the property is either wetlands or located
under the high-water level of School Lake. The large wetland in the southwest portion of the site
is identified as a moderate quality tamarack swamp and black ash swamp in the City's Minnesota
Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) data. The MLCCS identifies a moderate quality
maple -basswood forest between this wetland and Parkview Drive, and then extending though the
center of the site. Another portion of moderate -quality maple -basswood forest extends onto the
property on the southeast of the site. An aerial of the site can be found on the following page.
The Conservation Design Planned Unit Development (CD-PUD) district is an overlay district
which provides an applicant an option to permanently preserve portions of a property in by
providing incentives to develop the property consistent with the conservation objectives of the
City rather than conventional development following the standard zoning regulations. The
ordinance allows the City to grant flexibility to the underlying zoning regulations in order to
encourage property owners to protect natural resources and open space with conservation
easements. Flexibility can include density bonuses, reduced setbacks and lot size requirements,
and flexibility to park dedication or septic regulations. Flexibility can also be considered for
upland buffer and tree preservation regulations on specific lots in the interests of protecting
natural resources more broadly on the site.
The City recently adopted an amendment to the CD-PUD ordinance, which is attached for
reference. Most notably, the ordinance now requires a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres for rural
CD-PUD requests. The applicant needed to adjust Lot 3 in order to meet this standard (reducing
the adjacent conservation area). The applicant reduced the size of a few of the other lots in the
proposal (and increased the size of the adjacent conservation area) to keep the area of
conservation the same as reviewed by the Planning Commission.
Wally Marx
Page 1 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
The City reviewed the applicant's PUD Concept Plan earlier in the year. Excerpts from the
Planning Commission and City Council review are attached for reference. The primary changes
from the Concept Plan are:
1) Lot 4 driveway was shifted to reduce wetland impacts
2) A looped public trail is proposed along private road, into the maple -basswood forest and
providing a view of School Lake. This trail is kept separate from the private horse trail.
3) Potential house locations were adjusted to meet setbacks from exterior of the site.
4) Applicant is proposing for individual owners to own the Outlots containing the
Conservation Area (rather than an association of owners).
5) The applicant is proposing to remove some existing invasive and pioneer tree species
with native tree species.
School Lake
ap sswood forest
(moderate quality
amarack and black ash
swamp (good quality)
Legend
°posed Driveway
Proposed Trail
Type
Homesite
Septic Site
Buildable Conservation Area
Proposed Conservation Area
The aerial above identifies the proposed location for homesites, septic systems, and driveways.
Staff believes it is helpful to see these items in connection with the aerial. The proposed
conservation areas are shown in purple.
In addition to comments from the Commission and City Council, staff had provided the
following comments on the Concept Plan. A brief summary of whether the comment has been
addressed follows in italics:
Wally Marx
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat
Page 2 of 11 September 19, 2017
City Council Meeting
1) Consider relocating some of the septic sites for lots 3 and 4 in order to provide improved
connectivity and to preserve wooded area.
No changes were made to the proposed septic location for lots 3 and 4. The applicant
did remove the driveway for Lot 3 in order to preserve more of the wooded area.
2) Include conservation areas within outlots in order to ensure improved long term
enforcement of conservation easements.
Conservation areas are included within outlots, but the outlots are proposed to be owned
by individual lot owners rather than an association.
3) Consider adding secondary septic site locations to conservation areas, even if left within the
private lots.
All septic locations are proposed within lots.
4) Maintain minimum setback distances from development site perimeter. The potential house
site of Lot 2 would need to be adjusted to meet this requirement.
The potential location was adjusted.
5) Provide trail connection to conservation areas available to the public.
A trail is proposed along the driveway and to loop in the conservation area, and a second
corridor is proposed along the south edge of the development to connect between
Parkview Drive and the eastern edge of property.
6) Any future submittal should address the comments of the City Engineer, City Fire Marshal,
Hennepin County, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed.
Comments will be provided for this review as well.
Site Design Process
The CD-PUD ordinance describes a four -step "Site Design Process" which is supposed to
influence the site plan. The process is described within the ordinance attached, but is
summarized as follows. Also following is a summary from the applicant's site design process,
which is described more in-depth within the narrative. This summary helps explain the various
colors on the applicant's concept plan.
Step 1 — Identify Conservation Areas. This step includes first identifying "unbuildable areas"
(shown in green, and dark and light blue in the applicant's plans) and then identifying
Conservation Areas which are buildable (shown in yellow in the applicant's plans). The
remaining land is potentially buildable land area (shown in grey in the applicant's plans).
Step 2 — Locate Housing Sites. Sites should be located in relation to views and buildable land
areas. The sites are shown as boxes with an "X" on the applicant's plans.
Step 3 — Align streets and trails. Streets are shown in brown on the applicant's plans. Trails are
shown but further discussion is needed with the applicant for access from Parkview Drive to the
trails and possible realignment of proposed trail.
Step 4 — Draw lot lines. Proposed lot lines provide for the six lots, outlots, and conservation
areas.
Wally Marx
Page 3 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
Conservation Obiectives and Determining Flexibility
The CD-PUD process allows the City to grant flexibility to the underlying zoning regulations as
an incentive to permanently conserve natural resources and open space. According to the CD-
PUD ordinance, the City has the full discretion to determine how much flexibility to grant based
"the amount and quality of Conservation Area protected, the public access to or enjoyment
thereof, and how well the project achieves the following conservation objectives over and above
that achievable under conventional development:
a) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following primary conservation objectives will
be given higher consideration for flexibility from performance standards.
(1) The protection and/or restoration of the ecological function of native hardwood
forests (e.g. Maple -Basswood Forest).
(2) The protection and preservation of lakes, streams and wetlands beyond existing
regulatory requirements.
(3) The protection, restoration, and/or creation of moderate to high quality ecological
resources including the sensitive ecological resources identified as priority areas
on the Composite Map of the Open Space Report as updated from time to time.
(4) The reservation of land connecting aquatic and terrestrial ecological resources to
restore and/or create new ecological resources suitable for habitat movement
corridors.
(5) The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order to
create connections to existing or planned trails as identified in the current Parks,
Trails, and Open Space Plan.
(b) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following secondary conservation objectives
may be given consideration for flexibility from performance standards:
(1) The protection of scenic views and viewsheds including the views from roads
identified as "Scenic Roads" on the Scenic Roads Map of the Open Space Report
as updated from time to time.
(2) The reservation of land for incorporating public and /or private Open Space in
order to achieve goals as identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant describes in their narrative how they believe these objectives are met. The
applicant proposes 70 acres of conservation area, 11.84 acres of which is classified as buildable
under the ordinance. An additional 3-acres of steep slopes are included in the Conservation
Area which are not considered buildable. However, staff believes these areas deserve more
consideration than wetlands because steep slopes are not protected under existing regulations.
The primary area of preservation which is beyond that required by standard wetland regulations
and setback requirements is a 10-acre area east and west of Lot 3. The area west of Lot 3
includes the maple -basswood forest remnant referenced in the applicant's forester's report. In
addition, two acres of the School Lake lakeshore are conserved which is beyond the general
regulations. Approximately 50 acres of the Conservation Area includes wetland areas, areas
within School Lake or within the setback of Parkview Drive.
As previously noted, the property does include a moderate quality maple -basswood remnant and
good quality tamarack swamp. The forester's report from Hennepin County stated that
maintenance of the maple -basswood forest could raise the quality of the area, and the applicant
Wally Marx Page 4 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
has indicated that they intend to propose some removal of invasive/pioneering trees and
replacement with native species.
The proposed conservation area provides a corridor connection between School Lake and the
tamarack swamp in the southern portion of the property. This corridor is located east and west
of Lot 3. The corridor is interrupted in narrow locations by the shared driveway for lots 3-6 and
the driveway for Lot 4. The septic sites for Lot 4 are also within this corridor. During concept
plan review, staff had recommended finding alternative locations for some of these
improvements, potentially within Lot 5. The City's natural resource specialist also emphasized
attempting to reduce impacts in this area, and suggested the removal of the driveway for Lot 3,
and instead having a shared driveway for Lots 3 and 4. The applicant followed this suggestion
and how includes a shared driveway.
Parkview Drive is not identified as a "Scenic Road", although it appears that the proposed
development would generally protect the viewshed from the road nonetheless. Staff believes
that only one of the lots would be visible from the road.
The applicant proposes a public trail along the shared driveway from Parkview Drive which
would loop into the wooded area and provide a view of School Lake. The applicant has also
identified an extension of this trail to the east, along the northern side of the large wetland. This
corridor would allow for the potential of a future connection if a trail easement is obtained from
the property to the east. Staff has raised concerns related to the ability to access the trail as
proposed. Staff would recommend some sort or trailhead or other access to the trail. Staff has
suggested various options to the applicant. In addition, staff has had discussions with Three
Rivers Park about potential connections and trailheads east of the site.
The applicant has also shown a private trail along School Lake. The applicant has indicated that
they are open to providing access to this trail for property owners around School Lake, but not
to the general public. Neighbors along School Lake expressed concern during the concept plan
review that opening the existing private trail up to the public will cause significant trespass
concerns. The applicant has attempted to address these concerns by leaving it private.
The applicant is working with Minnehaha Creek Watershed to potentially hold and enforce the
Conservation Easement. Minnehaha Creek holds the easement in the Deer Hill Preserve CD-
PUD and the draft easement is fairly similar. The applicant has provided a draft Land
Stewardship Plan and Conservation Easement for review. Generally speaking, the Land
Stewardship plan calls for very limited restoration or active management on an on -going basis.
The Plan describes some removal of invasive trees and replacement with native species.
The applicant is proposing that individual homeowners own the Conservation Area adjacent to
their property rather than the Conservation Area being held in common by an association. City
staff is concerned that this may lead to enforcement and administrative difficulties in the long
term. The applicant believes individual ownership will provide more "pride in ownership" and
will improve enforcement in the long-term. They suggest it may be difficult to ensure that the
owners of Lots 1 and 2, for example, take part in the management of the property on the far east
or south of the subdivision, even if they were part of an association that owned the entire
conservation area.
Wally Marx
Page 5 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
General Performance Standards
Minimum Size of Subdivision
A CD-PUD subdivision within the Rural Residential zoning district is required to be a minimum
of 40 acres in size. The proposed subdivision is approximately 89.75 acres.
Required Conservation Area
A minimum of 30% of the total Buildable Land Area, or higher depending on the land and
opportunities to achieve the City's conservation objectives, is required to be included in the
Conservation Area.
The applicant proposes 68.48 acres within the conservation area, or 77.3% of the site. Most of
this area (staff estimates 49 acres) is wetland or would be within wetland buffers required to be
protected by easement under a standard development. Buildable areas consist of 11.85 acres
(40.7% of the total buildable area on the property), which exceeds the minimum requirement.
Density and Design Flexibility
The CD-PUD ordinance allows the City to
grant flexibility from standard City
requirements.
Density/Lot Size/Width
The applicant proposes six residential lots.
Existing rural residential regulations would not
allow further subdivision of the existing three
parcels. The CD-PUD ordinance allows the
City to grant additional density as an incentive,
with the maximum number of lots limited to 2x
the base density. During recent discussions,
the City Council added a clause stating that
"the maximum density bonus will only be
granted in exceptional circumstances."
5.48
1.55
32
�r
1611323320002
alb
1611823230005
1-1 I
1.32
.40
1.11823310062
The base density is determined by the standard underlying zoning designation (in this case, 5-
acres of contiguous suitable soils per lot). According to Hennepin County Soils data, it appears
that there is a six acre contiguous area of suitable soils in the northwest corner of the site and a
twelve acre contiguous area of suitable soils in the center of the property (see insert at right).
This results in a base density of three parcels. Two times of the base density would equate to a
maximum of six lots.
The property is currently included in three PIDs. If these three lots
are separate lots of record and are buildable, the applicant could not
further subdivide the property under current requirements. As such,
City wetland buffer and other similar requirements would unlikely be
triggered upon the property.
A summary of the proposed lot sizes in the subdivision is to the right:
Lot Area
Lot 1
2.53 acres
Lot 2
2.53 acres
Lot 3
2.50 acres
Lot 4
2.76 acres
Lot 5
6.28 acres
Lot 6
3.51 acres
Wally Mark Page 6 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
Setbacks
The following table summarizes the setback requirements of the proposed CD-PUD district:
Proposed
RR Standard
CD-PUD Requirement
Setback from Parkview Dr.
440 feet
50 feet
100 feet
Setback from Perimeter
50 feet
50 feet
50 feet
Interior structure setback
30 feet
50 feet
30 feet
School Lake
172 feet
150 feet
150 feet
Subdivision Review
Primary/Alternate septic sites
Standard City regulations require a primary and alternate septic site to serve each lot. The CD-
PUD ordinance permits flexibility for the alternate site to be located within conservation areas.
The concept plan shows two septic sites within each proposed lot (although lot 4 requires a good
deal of gerrymandering), and none within conservation areas. Staff noted that the septic sites for
Lots 3 and 4 are located within the wooded portion of the property, although this portion of the
woods does not appear to be part of the maple -basswood forest but is lower quality compared to
much of the woods. These sites do interrupt the corridor between School Lake and the tamarack
swamp to the south, and it would appear preferable if alternative locations could be found,
especially for Lot 4.
Shoreland Lot Width Requirement
The City's Shoreland ordinance requires a minimum lot width of 200 feet at the ordinary high
water level at the 150' structure setback. As proposed, none of the lots are actually adjacent to
the lake. The entire lakeshore is included within outlots which would be subject to the
conservation area. However, Lots 1-4 each are each proposed to individually own an outlot
which is adjacent to the lake. Outlot B does not meet the minimum 200' lot width adjacent to the
lake. In discussions with DNR staff, it is possible for the City to submit a PUD with reduced lot
width from review to the DNR. The DNR would consider, similar to the consideration the City
is making on the CD-PUD, if the proposed PUD protects more of the shoreline than the standard
200 foot width would protect.
Staff is awaiting comment from the DNR related to the proposal. Staff s impression is that the
lakeshore being entirely subject to a Conservation Easement (although with some allowance for
lots 1-4 to access the lake) will likely be seen as positive and doubts the DNR will raise
concerns. The subject site has over 1200 feet of lakeshore, so the applicant is proposing fewer
lots to front the lake than would be permitted through the standard 200 foot lot width.
Woodlands
The subject property includes remnants of Maple -Basswood forest which were ranked as
moderate quality in the City's natural resources inventory. These areas are identified within the
Composite map of the City's Open Space report and protecting the area would be consistent with
the first conservation objectives.
Wally Marx
Page 7 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
The septic sites and driveways for Lots 3 and 4 as currently proposed, would result in tree
removal over an area of approximately 1.6 acres. This area is of a lower quality and includes
predominantly boxelder. Preserving more of the area would have benefits in terms of corridor
connectivity. These impacts would account for just over 7% of the wooded area of the site.
However, these areas tend to be less dense, and the applicant has submitted a tree sample which
quantifies the removal necessary for the driveways, which appears to be 0.5%. Removal for
septic systems will need to be added to this amount, but appears to be well under 10% of the
trees.
Wetlands and Floodplains
The applicant shifted the driveway location for Lot 4 in order to minimize wetland impacts. The
driveway proposes to use an existing field road, so some minimum impacts may occur to widen
the driveway. Otherwise, no wetland impacts are proposed.
The applicant has shown wetland buffers adjacent to the wetlands on the property which
generally exceed City requirements (in order to meet Minnehaha Creek standards). The
exception is for the buffer along the wetland south of the proposed shared driveway for lots 3-6.
The existing driveway location prevents establishing a buffer with the minimum required width.
Staff recommends that the applicant average the width of the buffer along the driveway in order
to meet the required average width. Staff would recommend a condition that requisite
easements, signage, and vegetation are provided for the buffers.
The applicant has also identified floodplain locations adjacent to School Lake and within the
Tamarack swamp. No impacts are proposed.
Septic setbacks from wetlands
All septic sites appear to meet the minimum setback requirement of 75 feet from wetlands and
150 feet from the ordinary high water level of the lake. Staff recommends a condition that the
applicant verify the setback for the septic location for Lot 6, as it is close to the required setback.
Stormwater
The applicant proposes stormwater improvements to be constructed in connection with the
expansion of the shared driveway for lots 3-6. It is not practical to construct a stormwater
system for the construction on the lots within the subdivision. As such, each lot will be required
to incorporate stormwater improvements in connection with construction in the future.
Transportation/Access
Lots 1 and 2 are proposed to share a driveway which would access Parkview Drive in the
location of the existing orchard driveway at 2900 Parkview Drive.
Lots 3-6 are proposed to share a driveway in the location of the existing driveway for 2700
Parkview Drive. This driveway is proposed to be widened to 20 feet in width and paved in order
to provide emergency access. The shared driveway would be 20 feet in wide to the point where
it splits into two shared driveways (one driveway for lots 3 and 4 and one driveway for lots 5 and
6). The City Engineer has provided comments related to the design of the shared driveway for
lots 3-6, and staff also recommends a condition requiring the applicant to abide by the
requirements of Hennepin County.
Wally Marx
Page 8 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
Easements
Staff recommends a condition requiring the preliminary plat to dedicate drainage and utility
easements around the perimeter of each lot, over the outlot containing the shared driveway, and
over all wetland areas.
Park Dedication
According to the subdivision ordinance, the City can require the following for park dedication
1) Up to 10% of the buildable (non -wetland) land — approximately 4 acres in this case
2) Cash -in -lieu — 8% of the pre -developed market value subject to a minimum of $3500 per unit
and maximum of $8000 per unit - $24,000 in this case
3) Combination of the above.
Staff estimates that the area of the proposed trail easement is approximately 1/2 acre and the trail
easement to the eastern property line will likely account for another 3/4 acre. This would account
for approximately 31.25% of the required dedication.
The Park Commission reviewed at their June 21 meeting. An excerpt from the meeting minutes
is attached for reference. The Commission made the following recommendation:
1. The public trail be created now at the applicant's expense
2. The public trail easement be secured for the future trail connecting Parkview Drive with
Willow Drive.
3. The City look at moving the public trail access point closer to the parking lot driveway of
Baker National Golf Course.
4. A sign be created to mark the access point for the public trail.
5. Staff reviews the feasibility of putting some parking by the side of the road for at least a
couple cars.
6. Create walkway alongside of Parkview from the trail parking or golf course entrance to
make it safer for people that want to walk to the public trail.
The CD-PUD ordinance does permit the City to provide flexibility with regards to park
dedication requirements as an incentive for conservation design. The Park Commission
recommended requiring improvements (clearing and limited preparation/seeding) of the looped
trail. The cost of such preparation would be appropriate to credit. This would likely consume
the remaining required park dedication, especially with creation of a trailhead.
Review Criteria/Discretion
Ultimately, the Planning Commission and City Council have full discretion to determine if a
proposed CD-PUD subdivision better serves the conservation objectives of the City than would
conventional development. The Planning Commission and City Council have complete
discretion to determine the extent to which the flexibility described in the CD-PUD district,
including density bonuses, is justified by the proposed conservation.
Staff believes that the proposed site is a good candidate for consideration of a conservation
design subdivision and staff has suggested some potential alterations to the plan which would
seem to better serve the conservation objectives of the CD-PUD district. The primary question
would be how much flexibility, especially bonus density, is appropriate as an incentive for the
permanent conservation.
Wally Mark
Page 9 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at the June 13, 2017 meeting. An
excerpt from the meeting minutes is attached for reference. One neighboring resident spoke at
the hearing, and stated that they did not believe the conservation proposed justified the density
bonus requested.
Planning Commissioners generally found that the proposal met the conservation objectives to an
extent which they would support the development. The Commission did not raise any concerns
and unanimously recommended approval.
If the City Council determines that the proposal is consistent with the conservation objectives of
the City and supports flexibility, staff would recommend the following conditions for
consideration:
1. The Applicant shall submit final construction plans in connection with the final plat
application for review and approval by the City Engineer.
2. The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall be in a
form and of substance acceptable to the City and which shall include the conditions
described in this approval as well as other requirements of City ordinance or policy.
3. The Applicant shall provide to the City a letter of credit prior to any site construction in an
amount recommended by the City Engineer to ensure completion of the required
improvements.
4. Except as explicitly authorized by City resolution or ordinance, all aspects of this
subdivision shall comply with all applicable state laws, city codes, ordinances and
regulations.
5. The Applicant shall submit a preliminary plat which dedicates drainage and utility
easement as recommended by the City Engineer.
6. The Applicant shall obtain wetland replacement plan approval prior to approval of the
final plat.
7. The Applicant shall abide by the requirements of the wetland protection ordinance,
including easement, signage, and vegetation requirements.
8. The Applicant shall submit covenants for review and approval of the City. Such
documents shall ensure maintenance of conservation areas, stormwater facilities, shared
driveway(s), and other common elements.
9. Shared driveways shall meet relevant standards and include a reciprocal easement and
maintenance agreement satisfactory to the City, which shall be recorded against the
properties.
10. The Applicant shall grant trail easements in the locations shown on the plans received by
the City on September 1, 2017. The Applicant shall also prepare the looped trail and the
extension to Parkview Trail.
11. Conservation easements shall be granted over all conservation areas and shall be in a form
and of substance acceptable to the City. The easement shall include enforcement and
collection methods by which the easement holder can ensure payment of ongoing annual
maintenance costs of the conservation areas by the homeowners within the subdivision.
The easement holder for the conservation area shall be secured prior to application for
final plat and be willing to accept the easement in the manner required by the CD-PUD
District Ordinance.
Wally Marx
Page 10 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
12. Details on any significant tree removal and compliance with the tree preservation
ordinance shall be provided.
13. Final land stewardship plan shall be provided in connection with the application for final
plat for review and approval by the City.
14. The Applicant shall address all comments from the City Attorney, City Engineer,
Hennepin County, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed.
15. The Applicant shall submit title evidence satisfactory to the City Attorney at the time of
submission of the final plat application.
16. The Developer shall obtain necessary approvals and permits from the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the
Minnesota Department of Health, and other relevant agencies.
17. The application for final plat shall be submitted to the City within 360 days of preliminary
approval or the preliminary plat shall be considered null and void.
18. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat, construction plans,
and other relevant documents.
Attachments
1. Document List
2. Conservation Design-PUD Ordinance
3. Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Planning Commission minutes
4. Excerpt from draft 6/21/2017 Park Commission minutes
5. Excerpt from 2/7/2017 City Council minutes
6. Letter from Charles and Pamela Schroeder
7. Letter from Cindy and Addison Piper
8. Comments from City Engineer dated 6/8/2017
9. Comments from Building Official dated 5/26/2017
10. Applicant Narrative
11. Applicant Conservation Objective Presentation
12. Forest Analysis
13. Land Stewardship Plan
14. Plat received by the City 9/1/2017
15. Plans received by the City 5/12/2017
Wally Marx
Page 11 of 11 September 19, 2017
CD-PUD General Plan/Preliminary Plat City Council Meeting
Project: LR-17-205 — Marx CD-PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat
The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only
attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall.
Documents Submitted by Applicant:
Document
Received
Date
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Paper
Copy?
Notes
Application
5/12/2017
5/12/2017
3
Application
Y
Fee
Narrative
5/12/2017
N/A
7
Narrative
Y
Labels
5/12/2017
N/A
1
Labels
Y
Land Stewardship Plan
5/12/2017
5/10/2017
15
Land Stewardship Plan
Y
Land Stewardship Plan
9/5/2017
8/4/2017
23
Land Steward Plan-9-5-17
Y
Conservation Easement
5/12/2017
N/A
17
Conservation Easement
Y
Conservation Easement
9/5/2017
N/A
14
Easement — 9-5-2017
Plans
5/12/2017
5/8/2017
6
Plans
Y
Lot size calculation
5/12/2017
5/8/2017
1
Lot Size Summary
Y
Lot Summary
8/31/2017
8/31/2017
1
Lot Summary — 8-31-2017
Preliminary Plat
6/16/2017
6/15/2017
1
Plat-6-16-2017
Y
Site Plan — updated
6/16/2017
6/15/2017
1
Site Plan — 6-16-2017
Y
Driveway 4 Exhibit
6/16/2017
6/15/2017
1
Driveway Exhibit
Y
Site Plan — updated
7/7/2017
7/5/2017
1
Site Plan — 7-5-2017
Y
Site Plan — updated
9/1/2017
9/1/2017
1
Site Plan — 9-1-2017
Y
Narrative — updated
7/7/2017
N/A
8
Narrative — 7-7-2017
Y
CD Presentation
7/7/2017
6/18/2017
14
Presentation 7-7-2017
Y
CD Presentation
9/14/2017
Tree Sample
9/1/2017
8/22/2017
12
Tree Info
Y
Extension
7/13/2017
7/13/2017
1
Extension
Y
October 31, 2017
(continued on back)
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic
Notes
Legal Comments
5/25/2017
1
Legal Comments
Engineering Comments
6/8/2017
2
Engineering Comments
Building official comments
5/26/2017
1
Building Comments
Preliminary Review/Schedule
6/9/2017
2
120day Letter
Legal Notice
6/1/2017
12
Notice
Prelim Review/120 day review letter
6/9/2017
2
120 day letter
Natural Resource comments
6/20/2017
2
Natural Resource comments
Natural Resource comments
7/13/2017
2
Nat Res comments-7-13-17
Planning Commission Report
6/8/2017
11
Y
69 pages with attachments
Park Commission Report
6/15/2017
8
Y
54 pages with attachments
City Council Report
9/19/2017
11
Y
83 pages with attachments
Public Comments
Document Date
Electronic
Notes
Letter from Charles and Pamela Schroeder
6/9/2017
Schroeder
Planning Commission minutes
6/13/2017
PC minutes-06-13-2017
Park Commission minutes
6/21/2017
Park minutes-06-21-2017
Letter from Cindy and Addison Piper
9/12/2017
Piper
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. 615
AN ORDINANCE REGARDING CONSERVATION DESIGN;
AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I. Section 827.51 eq. seq. of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended
by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows:
CONSERVATION DESIGN DISTRICT (CD)
Section 827.51. Conservation Design (CD) — Purpose.
The purpose of this district is to preserve the City's ecological resources, wildlife corridors,
scenic views, and rural character while allowing residential development consistent with the
goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Report as updated
from time to time. The specific conservation objectives of this district are to:
1. Protect the ecological function of native hardwood forests, lakes, streams, and
wetlands.
2. Protect moderate to high quality ecologically significant natural areas.
3. Protect opportunities to make ecological connections between parks and other
protected lands and ecologically significant natural areas.
4. Protect important viewsheds including scenic road segments.
5. Create public and private trails for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space resources.
6. Create public and private Open Space for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space
resources.
Section 827.53 Applicability.
Subd. 1. Conservation design is an option that a property owner is encouraged to consider
as an alternative to Conventional Development, as defined herein. The City will give
heightened consideration to conservation design applications that achieve significantsuel}
requests where the opportunities to achieve conservation objectives are significantly higher
than that availablenot otherwise attainable through conventional development.
Conservation design may be considered on qualifying parcels lying in the Rural
Residential District} and all sewered residential districts, and commercial or business
districts.
Section 827.55 Intent.
Subd. 1. It is the intent of the City to accomplish the stated purpose of this District by
approving a Planned Unit Development. In exchange for achieving the conservation
Ordinance No. 615 1
July 5, 2017
objectives, it is the intent of the City to provide permit additional density and to provide
design flexibility and to encourage development review through a Collaborative Process.
Subd. 2. The permitted, conditional and accessory uses and other regulations set forth in
the existing zoning districts shall apply unless specifically addressed in this District, the
PUD District, or, if determined by the City Council to be inconsistent with the purpose and
intent of this District} as part of the final PUD documents.
Subd. 3. The procedures and regulations set forth in the PUD District shall apply unless
specifically addressed in this District. If a final PUD plan is approved by the City, the
subject property shall be rezoned to Conservation Design-PUD District (CD-PUD). The
permitted uses and all other regulations governing uses on the subject land shall then be
those found in the CD-PUD zoning district and documented by the PUD plans and
agreements. The following subsections are requirements for all CD-PUDs unless
exceptions, as part of a PUD, are otherwise approved by the City Council.
Section 827.57. Definitions.
Subd. 1. Base Density. The maximum number of units or lots that are allowed on a parcel
in accordance with the standards of the existing zoning district and the Zoning and
Subdivision Codes.
Subd. 2. Buildable Land Area. The total land area in a proposed Conservation Design
Subdivision less the amount of land that includes: slopes greater than 18%, wetlands,
required wetland buffers, lakes, and land contained within the 100 year floodplain.
Subd. 3. Collaborative Process. A development review process that results in a
development plan in which clearly defined conservation objectives are achieved in
exchange for greater flexibility from the requirements of the base zoning district and the
Zoning and Subdivision Codes.
Subd. 4. Conventional Development. Development that meets the standard minimum
requirements of the City's ordinances regulating development.
Subd. 5. Conservation Easement. As defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 84C: A
nonpossessory interest of a holder in real property imposing limitations or affirmative
obligations the purposes of which include retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -
space values of real property, assuring its availability for agricultural, forest, recreational,
or open -space use, protecting natural resources, maintaining or enhancing air or water
quality, or preserving the historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural aspects of
real property.
Subd. 6. Conservation Design Subdivision. Any development of land that incorporates
the concepts of designated Conservation Areas and clustering of dwelling units.
Ordinance No. 615 2
July 5, 2017
Subd. 7. Conservation Area. Designated land within a Conservation Design Subdivision
that contributes towards achievement of one or more of the conservation objectives. A
Conservation Easement is placed on Conservation Areas to permanently restrict the
Conservation Area from future development. Conservation Areas may be used for
preservation of ecological resources, habitat corridors, passive recreation, and for pasture,
hay cropping and other low impact agricultural uses.
Subd. 8. Homeowners Association. A formally constituted non-profit association or
corporation made up of the property owners and/or residents of a development for the
purpose of owning, operating and maintaining common Conservation Areas and/or other
commonly owned facilities and Open Space.
Subd. 9. Open Space. Land that is not designated as a Conservation Area that is used for
parks, trails or other uses. Open Space may be owned and managed by the City,
homeowner's association or other entity.
Subd. 10. Viewshed. The landscape or topography visible from a geographic point,
especially that having aesthetic value.
Subd. 11. Yield Plan. A conceptual layout that shows the maximum number of lots that
could be placed on a parcel in accordance with the standards of the existing zoning district
and the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. The Yield Plan shows proposed lots, streets,
rights -of -way, and other pertinent features. Yield Plans shall be drawn to scale. The layout
shall be realistic and reflect a development pattern that could reasonably be expected to be
implemented, taking into account the presence of wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, and
existing easements.
Section 827.59. General Performance Standards.
Subd. 1. Minimum Size of Subdivision.
(a) The minimum land area required for development shall be:
(1) 40 contiguous acres in the Rural Residential District
(2) 20 contiguous acres in sewered residential districts
(3) 10 contiguous acres in commercial or business districts
(b) A subdivision in the Rural Residential District of over 20 contiguous acres but less than
40 contiguous acres may apply for approval if they -it meets all the requirements for of
the CD-PUD District, and the visual impact of the subdivision from existing adjacent
roadways is mitigated by existing topography, existing vegetation, and/or acceptable
vegetative buffers.
Subd 2. Required Conservation Area. The minimum required Conservation Area within
the CD development shall be:
(a) At least 30% of the total Buildable Land Area in the Rural Residential District, or
higher depending on the land and opportunities to achieve the City's conservation
objectives.
(b) At least 20% of the total Buildable Land Area in sewered residential, commercial,
Ordinance No. 615 3
July 5, 2017
or business districts, or higher depending on the land and opportunities to achieve
the City's conservation objectives.
(a) The required amount of Conservation Area shall be designated and located to
maximize achievement of the City's conservation objectives. Opportunities for
achieving these objectives will vary depending on the location, size and specific
achieve the following primary and secondary conservation objectives over and above
that achievable under conventional development:
(1) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following primary conservation
objectives will be given higher consideration for flexibility from performance
standards.
hardwood forests (e.g. Maple Basswood Forest), lakes, streams and
wetlands.
(2) The protection, restoration, and/or creation of moderate to high quality
iegi-,,,i . i„dif . Oho s sitive o iegi-,,,i r
ident f;oa ,.:t.> „ too r,,,..,p s:to M-ap f41,o Opel S,, ee
Report as updated from time to time.
(3) The reservation of land connecting these aquatic and terrestrial
resources suitable for habitat movement corridors.
(2) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following secondary conservation
i. The protection of scenic views and viewsheds including the views from
roads identified as "Scenic Roads" on the Scenic Roads Map of the Open
Space Report as updated from time to time.
ii. The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order
current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan.
ii. The reservation of land for incorporating public and /or private Open
Space in order to achieve goals as identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 4. Pcrimctcr Setbacks. Structure setbacks from the perimeter of the subdivision
shall be-the—saide-as-the existii3-wing-d is-tfie
applicant is not in agreement with the Composite Map of the Open Space Report or the data
an appeal to the city.
Subd. 1. The applicant shall put the appeal in writing, accompanied by the fee as described
by the City's Fee Schedule, and is responsible to provide documentation supporting their
appeal.
Ordinance No. 615 4
July 5, 2017
Subd. 2. The appeal shall be reviewed by city staff, with the assistance of any technical
consultants which city staff shall determine are appropriate. Such consultants may
include, but are not limited to, environmental engineers, wetland scientists, arborists and
other similar experts. City staff shall make a determination on the appeal within sixty
days of receipt of a complete appeal application.
Subd 3. The applicant may appeal city staff s decision to the city council. The appeal must
be filed within thirty days of staffs determination.
Subd. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs accrued by the City in review of the
appeals described above, including the costs of technical consultants hired by the City.
Section 827.61. Density and Design Flexibility.
Flexibility from the requirements of the existing zoning district or other requirements of this
code may be granted at the discretion of the City Council. In considering the amount, if any, of
such flexibility, the City will evaluate the amount and quality of Conservation Area protected,
the public access to or enjoyment thereof, and how well the project achieves the following
conservation objectives over and above that achievable under conventional development and
the amount and quality of conservation area protected.
Subd. 1. Conservation Objectives and Determining Flexibility. Conservation Area(s)
shall be designated and located to maximize achievement of the City's conservation
objectives. Opportunities for achieving these objectives will vary depending on the
location, size and specific qualities of the subject parcel. Each parcel will be evaluated for
opportunities to achieve the following primary and secondary conservation objectives over
and above that achievable under conventional development.
(a) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following primary conservation
objectives will be given higher consideration for flexibility from performance
standards.
(1) The protection and/or restoration of the ecological function of native
hardwood forests (e.g. Maple -Basswood Forest).
(2) The protection and preservation of, lakes, streams and wetlands beyond
existing regulatory requirements.
(3) The protection, restoration, and/or creation of moderate to high quality
ecological resources including the sensitive ecological resources
identified as priority areas on the Composite Map of the Open Space
Report as updated from time to time.
(4) The reservation of land connecting these aquatic and terrestrial
ecological resources in order to restore and/or create new ecological
resources suitable for habitat movement corridors.
Ordinance No. 615 5
July 5, 2017
(5) The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order
to create connections to existing or planned trails as identified in the
current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan.
(b) Parcels with opportunities to achieve the following secondary conservation
objectives may be given consideration for flexibility from performance standards:
(1) The protection of scenic views and viewsheds including the views from
roads identified as "Scenic Roads" on the Scenic Roads Map of the Open
Space Report as updated from time to time.
The reservation of land for incorporating public and private trails in order
to create connections to existing or planned trails as identified in the
current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan.
(1)(2) The reservation of land for incorporating public and /or private
Open Space in order to achieve goals as identified in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Subd.12. Additional Density.
(a) Density, in addition to the Base Density, may be granted at the discretion of the City
Council. Any additional density or additional number of dwelling units shall be
calculated as a percentage of Base Density. The Base Density shall be that established
by regulations in the relevant existing zoning district. The granting of additional
density shall be at the full and complete discretion of the City based upon the amount
and quality of the Conservation Area protected, public access to or enjoyment thereof,
and the extent to which the proposal meets the objectives over and above that
achievable through Conventional Development.
(1) In the Rural Residential District, Base Density shall be determined by calculating
the number of 5-acre areas of contiguous soils suitable for a standard sewage
disposal system that are located on the subject property.
(2) In sewered residential districts, a Yield Plan shall be developed to determine Base
Density. Regulations of the base district and all other relevant land use
regulations of this Code shall be used for completing the Yield Plan.
(b) The total number of dwelling units in a CD-PUD development shall be guided by the
density limitations contained in the Comprehensive Plan and may be:
(1) Up to 200% ofA maximum of twice the amount of the calculated Base Density in
the Rural Residential District, provided that the maximum density bonus will only
be granted in exceptional circumstances.
(2) Up to 120% ofA maximum of 1.2 times the calculated Base Density in all
sewered residential districts.
Ordinance No. 615 6
July 5, 2017
Subd. 21 Other areas of flexibility
(a) In the Rural Residential District, flexibility may include:
(1) Lot size, lot width and structure setbacks provided setbacks comply with the
following minimums:
i. Minimum Lot Area: 2 Y2 acres
ii. Setback from local streets: 35 feet.
Setback from Arterial and Collector Streets: 100 feet.
iv. Interior structure setbacks: 30 feet.
Perimeter setbacks: Minimum structure setbacks from the
perimeter of the subdivision shall be 50 feet.
(2) Housing type.
(3) Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of
these regulations are met for the site as a whole.
(4) Due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when
calculating park dedication requirements.
(5) Variations to City regulations regarding septic systems.
(b) In all sewered residential districts, flexibility may include:
(1) Lot size, lot width, and structure setbacks, except that setbacks from the
perimeter of the subdivision shall be equal to or greater than that required in the
underlying zoning district.
(2) Housing type.
(3) Landscaping.
(4) Screening.
(5) Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of
these regulations are met for the site as a whole.
(6) Buffer yard.
(7) Due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when
calculating park dedication requirements.
(c) In commercial or business districts, flexibility may include:
(1) Lot size, lot width, and structure setbacks.
(2) Building height limitations, provided that the City determines that adequate
emergency and fire access are provided in consultation with the fire department.
(3) Landscaping.
(4) Screening.
(5) Loading dock and outside storage requirements.
(6) Upland buffers and tree preservation regulations provided that the objectives of
these regulations are met for the site as a whole.
(7) Buffer yard.
(8) Due consideration may be given for conservation easements granted when
calculating park dedication requirements.
Section 827.63. Conservation Area Protection and Ownership.
Subd. 1. Land and improvements in areas designated as Conservation Areas in a CD-PUD
shall be established, protected and owned in accordance with the following guidelines:
Ordinance No. 615 7
July 5, 2017
(a) Designated Conservation Areas shall be surveyed and subdivided as separate outlots.
(b) Designated Conservation Areas must be restricted from further development by a
permanent Conservation Easement (in accordance with Minnesota Statute Chapter
84C.01-05) running with the land. The Conservation Easement must be submitted with
the General Plan of Development and approved by the City Attorney.
(1) The permanent Conservation Easement may be held by any combination of the
entities defined by Minnesota Statute Chapter 84C, but in no case may the
holder of the Conservation Easement be the same as the owner of the
underlying fee.
(2) The permanent Conservation Easement shall be recorded with Hennepin County
and must specify:
i. The entity that will maintain the designated Conservation Area.
ii. The purposes of the Conservation Easement, that the easement is
permanent, and the conservation values of the property.
iii. The legal description of the land under the easement.
iv. The restrictions on the use of the land and from future development.
v. To what standards the Conservation Areas will be maintained through
reference to an approved land stewardship plan.
vi. Who will have access to the Conservation Area.
(3) Ownership of the underlying fee of each designated Conservation Area parcel,
may be held by any combination of the following entities:
i. A common ownership association, subject to the provisions in the PUD
District.
ii. An individual who will use the land in accordance with the permanent
Conservation Easement.
iii. A private nonprofit organization, specializing in land conservation and
stewardship, that has been designated by the Internal Revenue Service as
qualifying under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
iv. A government agency (e.g. park and/or natural resource agency or
division).
v. The City of Medina, in rare situations when there are no other viable
options.
(c) Open Space areas that do not achieve the City's conservation objectives may be
established under a homeowner's association without protection by a Conservation
Easement. Such areas shall be regulated according to provisions of the PUD District.
Section 827.65. Land Stewardship Plan.
Subd. 1. Plan Objectives. Where a CD-PUD has designated Conservation Areas, a plan
for the development, long-term use, maintenance, and insurance of all Conservation Areas,
may be required. The plan shall:
(a) Define ownership and methods of land protection.
(b) Establish necessary regular and periodic operation and maintenance responsibilities.
(c) Estimate staffing needs, insurance requirements, and other associated costs associated
with plan implementation and define the means for funding the same on an on -going
basis. This shall include land management fees necessary to fund monitoring and
Ordinance No. 615 8
July 5, 2017
management of the Conservation Easement by the easement holder. The fees shall be
estimated and validated by the proposed easement holder.
(d) Meet the requirements of the future conservation easement holder.
Subd. 2. Plan Submittal Requirements. A preliminary Land Stewardship Plan shall be
submitted with the General Plan of Development. A Final Land Stewardship Plan shall be
submitted with the Final Plan Stage of PUD development. The plan shall contain a
narrative describing:
(a) Existing conditions, including all natural, cultural, historic, and scenic elements in the
landscape;
(b) Objectives for each Conservation Area, including:
(1) The proposed permanent or maintained landscape condition for each area.
(2) Any restoration measures needed to achieve the proposed permanent condition,
including:
i. Measures for correcting increasingly destructive conditions, such as
erosion and intrusion of invasive plant species.
ii. Measures for restoring historic features (if applicable).
iii. Measures for restoring existing or establishing new landscape types.
A maintenance plan, including:
i. Activities needed to maintain the stability of the resources, including
mowing and burning schedules, weed control measures, planting
schedules, and clearing and cleanup measures and schedules.
ii. An estimate of the annual on -going (post restoration) operating and
maintenance costs.
(3)
Subd. 3. Funding of Operation and Maintenance. At the discretion of the City, the
applicant may be required to escrow sufficient funds for the maintenance and operation
costs of Conservation Areas for up to four years depending on restoration measures.
Subd. 4. Enforcement. In the event that the fee holder of the Conservation Areas,
common areas and facilities, or any successor organization thereto, fails to properly
maintain all or any portion of the aforesaid common areas or facilities, the City in
coordination with the holder of the easement, may serve written notice upon such fee
holder setting forth the manner in which the fee holder has failed to maintain the aforesaid
common areas and facilities. Such notice shall set forth the nature of corrections required
and the time within which the corrections shall be made. Upon failure to comply within the
time specified, the fee holder-, or any successor organization, shall be considered in
violation of this Ordinance, in which case the City shall have the right to enter the
premises and take the needed corrective actions. The costs of corrective actions by the City
shall be assessed against the properties that have the right of enjoyment of the common
areas and facilities.
Ordinance No. 615 9
July 5, 2017
Section 827.67. Conservation Area Design Standards.
The following Conservation Area design standards shall also be considered in designing the
CD-PUD:
Subd. 1. Conservation Areas should be interconnected wherever possible to provide a
continuous network of Open Space within the PUD and throughout the City. It should
coordinate and maximize boundaries with Conservation Areas and Open Space on adjacent
tracts.
Subd. 2. Incorporate public and private trails with connections to existing or planned
regional trails as identified in the most recent Park, Trail and Open Space Plan.
Subd. 3. Designated public access trails shall be protected by an access easement owned
by the City.
Subd. 4. Incorporate public and/or private Open Space as designated in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 5. Views of new dwellings from exterior roads and abutting properties should be
minimized by the use of existing topography, existing vegetation, or additional
landscaping. Ridge and hilltops should be contained within designated Conservation Areas
wherever possible. Trees should not be removed from ridges and hilltops.
Subd. 6. The boundaries of designated conservation areas shall be clearly delineated and
labeled on CD-PUD plans. These areas shall be delineated in the field with signage or
other measures approved by the city.
Subd. 7. Stormwater management facilities may be located in designated conservation
areas.
Subd. 8. Existing land in row -cropping use shall be converted to a use that supports the
achievement of the City's conservation objectives.
Section 827.69. Landscape Design Standards.
Subd. 1. Street trees may be planted, but are not required, along internal streets passing
through common Conservation Areas or Open Space.
Subd. 2. Irregular spacing is encouraged for street trees, to avoid the urban appearance
that regular spacing may invoke.
Subd. 3. The selection of vegetation should be guided by the natural community types
identified in the City's 2008 Natural Resources Inventory.
Ordinance No. 615 10
July 5, 2017
Subd. 4. Planted buffers between clusters of residential lots are encouraged to enhance
privacy and a rural appearance between lots.
Subd. 5. Buffers consisting of an informal arrangement of native plant species combined
with infrequent mowing are strongly encouraged, to create a low -maintenance, natural
landscape.
Subd. 6. Planted buffers are also encouraged along natural drainage areas to minimize
erosion.
Subd. 7. Grading for Conservation Areas and other common landscaped areas and
stormwater management areas shall be avoided to reduce compaction and impacting water
infiltration rates. Soil testing and decompaction may be required if site construction
activities negatively impact soil permeability.
Subd. 8. Better Site Design/Low Impact Development practices as identified in the
Minnesota Stormwater Manual published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency shall
be used to design sites and meet the performance standards.
Section 827.71. Subsurface Sewage Treatment Facilities.
Subd. 1. Where city services are not available, CD PUD developments may be platted to
accommodate home site lots with either ildiN:a,,,,' septic tank-s afi a r- roa
drainfields/mound systems located on the lot, or individual septic tanks and primary
afair fteki/V etti * �• �* m-lec- ted on the lot and secondary drainfields/mound system
located in the designated Conservation Area or other Open Space.
Subd. 21. Where city sanitary sewer service is not available, Aall septic systems shall
conform to the current performance standards of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and its
appendices, or the amended Rules in effect at the time of installation. Except in instances
where flexibility has been explicitly granted by the City, septic systems shall also conform
to relevant City regulations, including the requirement to identify a primary and secondary
drainfield site.
Subd. 32. The City may consider shared sewage treatment systems which are consistent
with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) regulations and relevant City
ordinances, provided adequate agreements are in place related to monitoring and
maintenance procedures and replacement of the system in case of a failure.
Subd. 43. Lots within CD-PUD developments may be designed so that individual septic
tanks and all required treatment and dispersal areas are located within the lot, or so that
individual septic tanks and the primary treatment and dispersal area is located within the
lot and the secondary treatment and dispersal area located in the designated Conservation
Area or other Open Space. Secondary drain ;eldsi.,,,,un systems treatment and dispersal
areas may only be located in designated Conservation Areas and other Open Space
provided that:
Ordinance No. 615 11
July 5, 2017
(a) They -The treatment and dispersal area isare located within a limited distance of the lots
they -it serves.
(b) Construction of treatment and dispersal area drainfields/mound systems do not result in
the destruction of ecological resources.
(c) The Conservation Area or Open Space parcel containing the treatment and dispersal
area dfai fieldi.,,eun syste„. is owned in fee by a common ownership association
which owns non -Conservation Area land within the subdivision and in which
membership in the association by all property owners in the subdivision is mandatory.
(d) The individual lot owner is responsible for maintenance and repair of the treatment and
dispersal areadrainfield/mound system.
(e) The ground cover over the treatment and dispersal area drainfield/mound system is
maintained according to the Land Stewardship Plan.
(f) Recreational uses are prohibited within 50 feet of the treatment and dispersal
areadrainfields/mound systems.
(g) The Conservation Easement for the dedicated Conservation Area parcel describes the
location of individual drainfields/mound systems treatment and dispersal areas.
(g)(h) The City may consider the impact of the future construction of the treatment
and dispersal area(s) when determining the value of the Conservation Area, the extent
to which the Conservation ob'ectives have been met, and the amount of density and
design flexibility which is granted.
Section 827.72 Open Space Report Composite Map Appeal Process. In the event that an
applicant is not in agreement with the Composite Map of the Open Space Report or the data
contained within a report on which the Composite Map is based upon, the applicant may present
an appeal to the city.
Subd. 1. The applicant shall put the appeal in writing, accompanied by the fee as described
by the City's Fee Schedule, and is responsible to provide documentation supporting their
appeal.
Subd. 2. The appeal shall be reviewed by city staff, with the assistance of any technical
consultants which city staff shall determine are appropriate. Such consultants may
include, but are not limited to, environmental engineers, wetland scientists, arborists and
other similar experts. City staff shall make a determination on the appeal within sixty
days of receipt of a complete appeal application.
Subd 3. The applicant may appeal city staff s decision to the city council. The appeal must
be filed within thirty days of staff s determination.
Subd. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs accrued by the City in review of the
appeals described above, including the costs of technical consultants hired by the City.
Section 827.73. Site Design Process.
At the time of PUD Concept Plan development and review, applicants shall demonstrate that
the following design process was performed and influenced the design of the concept site plan.
Ordinance No. 615 12
July 5, 2017
Subd. 1. Step 1—Identify Conservation Areas. Identify preservation land in two steps.
First identify "unbuildable" areas which include: slopes greater than 18%, wetlands,
wetland buffers, lakes, and land within the 100 year floodplain. Next, identify
Conservation Areas which include those areas designated as Conservation Areas (Section
827.59 Subd. 3.) The remaining land shall be identified as the potentially Buildable Land
Area. The applicant shall identify the quantity of land designated as unbuildable,
Conservation Area, and potentially Buildable Land Area.
Subd. 2. Step 2—Locate Housing Sites. Locate the approximate sites of individual
houses in regard to protected views and the potentially buildable land areas.
Subd. 3. Step 3—Align Streets and Trails. Align streets in order to access the lots.
New trails and connections to regional trail systems, if any, should be laid out to create
internal and external connections to existing and/or potential future streets, sidewalks, and
trails.
Subd. 4. Step 4—Lot Lines. Draw in the lot lines.
Section 827.75. CD-PUD Application Processing.
The review and approval procedures of the PUD District shall be used to review and approve
CD-PUDs. Prior to the Concept Plan Stage PUD application, the City encourages applicants to
engage in an informal collaborative project goal setting process with the City. The purpose of
this process is to jointly develop site design and conservation objectives and assess areas of
regulatory flexibility for achieving developer and City objectives for the specific parcel of land.
The Collaborative Process may include council members, city commission members, land
owners, developers, city staff, other governmental jurisdiction staff, the potential future
Conservation Easement holder, and other participants as appropriate. The outcome of the process
is a Project Guidance Report prepared by city staff. The report will summarize the project
concept, project objectives, and preliminary understanding of regulatory flexibility needed to
achieve the objectives.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina city council this 5th day of July, 2017.
Bob Mitchell, Mayor
Attest:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News on the 20th day of July, 2017
Ordinance No. 615 13
July 5, 2017
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Meeting Minutes
Public Hearing — Wallace and Bridget Marx — 2700-2900 Parkview Dr. — Preliminary Plat and
Planned Unit Development (PUD) General Plan for Conservation Design Subdivision
Finke presented a request for a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for the property at 270-2900
Parkview Drive. He stated that earlier this year the Commission and Council reviewed a concept plan
review for this proposed development. He stated that the applicant is proposing to have 70 acres of land
placed into conservation, while 11.75 acres of the conserved area would be buildable. He provided
details on the looped public trail and that individual homeowners would own the adjacent lots that would
fall under the easement. He provided an aerial photograph of the site with an overlay of the applicant's
plan. He stated that there are wetlands throughout the property, the largest on the southwest portion of the
site and has been rated as a good quality natural resource. He identified other resources which have also
been identified as good quality. He displayed the proposed plan, noting the proposed conservation areas.
He stated that the land is guided for agricultural or rural residential similar to the adjacent parcels. He
stated the conservation design ordinance allows a property to develop in a more flexible manner in order
to preserve property through permanent conservation. He stated that the primary piece of flexibility that
is provided through the ordinance is the bonus density that would allow up to double the base density of
the site. He stated that ultimately the flexibility is fully at the discretion of the City and provided details
on the criteria that are used to determine the value of the conserved areas. He stated that the applicant is
proposing 40 percent of the buildable area to be conserved, while that encompasses more than 77 percent
of the entire site. He noted that staff would give more consideration to the steep slope wooded area that is
not as protected under City regulations. He noted that wetland buffer and buffer areas would already be
conserved in the standard ordinance. He stated that there are six lots proposed and displayed the different
lot sizes, which range up to 6.5 acres in size. He noted that all sites proposed would incorporate primary
and secondary septic sites within the lots. He provided additional details on the proposed access and
rankings for the conserved areas within the natural resources report. He stated that the applicant has
proposed a public trail throughout the conservation area on the site. He noted that the Park Commission
had mentioned providing a connection to the property to the east. He stated that the applicant seems to be
in agreement with providing that connection. He stated that staff does believe that this parcel would be a
good opportunity for conservation design, noting that some level of flexibility is required if the City is
going to provide this option to developers. He stated that the main discussion would be to weigh the
conservation value being provided against the flexibility requested. He stated that staff has supplied a
number of conditions that they would recommend should the Commission be in agreement with the
conservation design.
Reid asked if the City is obtaining 11.75 acres in land that they would not have received in exchange for
the three bonus homes. She noted that the wetlands and swamp would be protected under current
regulations.
Finke replied that the 11.75 acres are shown in yellow and three additional acres of wooded steep slope
areas would also be protected. He noted that the other areas are pockets near wetlands or laying within
setbacks. He noted that a total of 20 acres additional would be provided outside of the wetland and
buffers. He noted that the City would also be given the permanent conservation of those areas, regardless
of buildable/unbuildable and protected/unprotected.
Kent Williams addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant and introduced the members of the
team that are present including Wally Marx. He identified the proposed locations for the lots and the
criteria that are used to evaluate requests under the conservation design ordinance. He provided a
comparison of this request to the only approved conservation design development, Stonegate (Deerhill
Preserve). He identified the different natural resource elements that would be included in the
conservation area that are ranked as good quality. He noted that School Lake is a hidden lake and views
of the lake and other resources would be given to the public through the looped trail. He noted that an
1
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Meeting Minutes
east/west connection would also be provided and there would be public access to each of the conserved
elements on the property. He noted that there is not a high percentage of buildable land on the property,
but this request would conserve 40 percent of the buildable land.
Albers asked if there are plans to provide access to the lake, such as a boat landing or dock.
Williams replied that it would simply be viewing access.
Michael Pressman, Conservation Solutions, stated that he was introduced to the Marx property 13 years
ago when he was working with a local watershed. He noted that the natural resources report of the City
of Medina also identified elements on this property. He identified the amount and quality of the natural
resources on the property, noting that conventional development would protect 49 acres, while this
request would provide 70 acres of conserved land. He referenced the old growth maple -basswood forest,
noting that many of the trees exceed 40 inches in diameter. He stated that this type of asset is rare and
would be protected, and the public would also be given access to that resource. He stated that this
tamarack bog resource was also identified as a rare element that should be protected under the City's
natural resources report and also by Hennepin County. He described the protections along the lakeshore
that would be included through this request compared to the typical clearing of trees and maintenance of
turf grass that typically occurs for lakeshore property. He stated that this property is a great combination
of elements that come together for a great opportunity to conserve land and provide habitat for wildlife
and vegetation. He noted that the location next to Baker Park also provides an opportunity for
connectivity. He stated that in western Hennepin County, large complexes of natural resources are the
best that they have to offer in terms of opportunities for preservation. He referenced different reports that
identify this area as a high priority for conservation, including the City, County, DNR, and local
Watershed. He stated that a lot of communities pay landowners for conservation easements. He stated
that the leaders in Medina created this conservation easement ordinance to allow the City to obtain these
conservation easements for free in return for flexibility with development.
White referenced the water quality of School Lake, noting that many lakes in Medina are impaired.
Laura Domyancich, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, stated that School Lake has not been
considered impaired. She noted that water quality testing and aquatic invasive species testing has recently
occurred. She stated that Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) was approached as a proposed
easement holder for the property. She stated that in a practical sense MCWD would do periodic
inspection of the site and a land stewardship plan would maintain the conservation areas over time. She
noted that there are techniques for restoration and additional options for homeowners to improve the
value of the conservation elements. She stated that the development team engaged the MCWD early in
the process to ensure that the necessary elements would be addressed and protected. She stated that the
MCWD has a history of holding easements.
Williams stated that there is an existing bridle path that goes around School Lake, noting that it is a quasi -
private trail open to School Lake residents and their guests and could be ended at any time. He stated that
some of the neighboring properties along School Lake have stated that they would pull out from the bridle
path if it were made public. He noted that they took great pain to keep the public trail loop separate from
the private bridle path. He reviewed the different criteria found within the ordinance, comparing the
criteria to each of the resources protected under the conservation (high quality/old growth forest,
wetlands, etc.) and to what would occur under conventional development. He stated that rather than
having an HOA for six homes, the landowners would become responsible for maintaining the easement
which would be easier to enforce. He noted that under normal development you could remove trees and
fill wetlands, and the level of protection required is less than what would be provided in the proposal. He
noted that the site currently has habitat corridors that would be protected, which would not be protected
2
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Meeting Minutes
under normal development. He noted that the impacts proposed for the driveway and mound system
would be minimal to wildlife. He noted that the private bridle path would be preserved and two public
trails that currently do not exit would be added to the site which would provide public access to the
elements conserved. He stated that 70 acres of property would be conserved and public trails would be
provided. He provided pictures of existing homes along School Lake that have cleared trees and installed
turf grass that is mowed right up to the shoreline. He noted that this proposal would preserve that
shoreline and would also provide public access to view areas of the property that contain valuable assets.
He stated that this property is within the 2040 long-term sewer area for the Metropolitan Council and if
that happens, the density for the property will increase to up to 1401ots and the lakeshore density could
increase to 7 to 14 lots. He stated that under this proposal, this land would remain with only 61ots. He
stated that the density is not out of character with the neighboring properties. He compared the proposal
to the only approved conservation design subdivision, noting that this request exceeds all elements of that
development in terms of conservation and natural resource value. He stated that this property is
exceptional and the circumstances are exceptional; and he is asking that the Commission approve the
request with the full density bonus.
Albers asked if there is duck hunting allowed on School Lake.
Wally Marx replied that no one duck hunts on School Lake.
White asked if any of the home construction would impact the lake.
Williams replied that they would take steps to prevent that from occurring.
White asked if there are currently erosion issues on the shoreline. It was replied that there were not any
known issues.
White asked if the looped public trail would be woodchipped.
Williams stated that while it would not be a paved trail, the materials for the trail were not specified. He
noted that they would be open to suggestion. He noted that the Park Commission wanted a nature trail for
the east/west connection and provided information on the possible location, which would run along the
southside of the driveway and woods. He stated that the east/west trail could be placed in the north, but
they wanted to avoid the private property and bridle path. He noted that the southern trail connection
would not be constructed at this time because there is nothing to connect to. He noted that
Councilmember Martin suggested a looped trail and advised that the trail connection could be constructed
in the beginning to provide that connection. He noted that signage would be installed to keep people on
the trail. He stated that parking was mentioned and would be an issue, as he was unsure of how the trail
would be used. He noted that even if just a few people drive to the trail, the only place for parking would
be across the street at Baker Park and they would have to cross Parkview.
White asked if that would be an appropriate use of the Baker Park parking lot.
Williams stated that they could look into it. He noted that it is a public use lot. He noted that people
could also ride their bicycles, but noted that the trail is meant for walking and not biking.
DesLauriers asked the logic for waiving the park fees.
Williams stated that this is not a conventional development and they will be preserving 70 acres through
conservation easement and providing public access through trails, and therefore that should perhaps
justify the waiving of park dedication.
3
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Meeting Minutes
White opened the public hearing at 8:52 p.m.
Charlie Schroder, 2910 Parkview, stated that he is the immediate property owner to the north. He
appreciated the work that Wally Marx and his team have invested in a great project. He stated that they
moved to the area because it is zoned rural residential. He acknowledged that this would be similar
density to the area he lives. He stated that for the trail, it would be difficult for public members to access
the trail. He did not believe it was practical for people to park at Baker Park. He stated that a large
portion of his property is under conservation easement and likes that element. He stated that his main
concern was the density.
Reid asked if the resident would be satisfied with additional screening between his property and lot one.
Schroder stated that his preference would be for one lot rather than two, but agreed that screening would
be helpful.
DesLauriers asked the setback of the homes.
Schroder stated that he is probably 50 feet from the lot line on his side and the proposed home on lot one
would be setback 50 feet as well.
Williams stated that under conventional development that is where a home on lot one would be built. He
noted that under any scenario the Schroders will see a home in that location. He noted that the Schroders
would most likely not even be able to see the home on lot two.
White closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
Murrin stated that she liked the presentation and found it helpful that the parameters were all laid out.
She stated that for all the reasons mentioned she is in favor of the request as it is a beautiful property that
is worth preserving. She did not think that adding three homes would be a huge detriment for the area in
return for what the City will receive.
Reid stated that she was on the Open Space Committee and there was a map of what they theoretically
wanted to protect. She stated that the odds of being able to obtain the private properties was slim to none.
She agreed that this property is of high value and is worth protecting. She stated that additional screening
could assist with buffering the neighboring property owner. She stated that because of the greenway
corridor and assets that would be preserved, she will be supporting the request.
DesLauriers stated that his dad built the original home on the property 40 years ago and appreciates the
history of the property. He referenced the staff comment regarding enforcement difficulties and asked
what those concerns were.
Finke stated that from an enforcement standpoint there are two sides, one is a homeowner that would
understand the easement and the other that would violate terms of an easement because they own the
property and feel like they can do what they want. He noted that details of the ongoing maintenance for
the easements are still being determined.
DesLauriers stated that in regard to the park fees he could see that there is ongoing maintenance of the
trails that would be needed for the public trail.
Albers stated that this request seems to make a lot of sense.
4
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 6/13/2017 Meeting Minutes
Nester stated that to ask for only five future homes would be a multiplier of 1.66 and that would not
justify what the City is receiving in return. She believed this to be a reasonable request that she would
support.
White stated that this request meets the objectives of the ordinance and the amount of quality of the
resources conserved would equate to the full density bonus and would still provide a rural residential
feeling. She stated that she fully supports the full density bonus.
Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the Marx proposal with the conditions
listed by City staff. Motion carries unanimously.
White stated that she would have liked to see what the lake view would be from the looped trail and
perhaps that would be helpful for the City Council presentation.
Finke noted that the City Council will consider this application on July 5th.
5
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 6/21/2017 Meeting Minutes
Wally and Bridget Marx — 2700-2900 Parkview Drive — Conservation Design Subdivision
PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat — Park Dedication Review
Scherer provided a brief staff report. He stated that the applicant is proposing a Conservation
Design Planned Unit Development subdivision of three existing lots into six lots at 2700-2900
Parkview Drive. He noted that the City reviewed the concept plan this past winter. He stated that
the primary changes in this plan from the concept plan were 1) moved lot 4's driveway to reduce
impacts; 2) created a looped public trail; 3) proposed that individual owners would own the
conservation outlots; 4) removal of some invasive/pioneering and replacement with native
plantings.
Scherer stated that the applicant identified a trail from Parkview north of the driveway through
the woods to provide a view of School Lake. The updated plan identifies an extension of this trail
along the north of the large wetland to the eastern property line.
Scherer stated that staff has concerns with the ability for the public to access the proposed looped
trail. He stated that a potential alternative would be to create a small trailhead on lots 1-2, which
would allow for parking at Baker Park Reserve. He also noted that staff would need to confirm
the usability of the east -west trail connection.
Scherer showed the future facility planning map and noted that although there are no parks or
trails identified in the area, the CD-PUD places a high importance on public access.
Scherer 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 four acres, 8% of the
pre -developed value, which would be approximately $24,000, or a combination.
Scherer stated that staff does not recommend additional land dedication beyond the proposed
trails. He recommended providing park dedication credit for trails and taking the remainder in
cash -in -lieu.
Jacob mentioned the need for a sign at the entrance of the trail.
There was a general consensus by the Park Commission that the applicant should pay for the new
public trail.
Discussion took place about how to create a safe entrance point along Parkview Drive.
Beddor asked if hikers could use Baker National Golf Course's parking lot.
1
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 6/21/2017 Meeting Minutes
The Park Commission directed staff to look into ways in which two cars could park along
Parkview safely so the passengers could walk safely walk along the road from their cars to the
trail access point (trailhead).
Scherer noted that if the city asks the applicant to build the public trail and grant trail easements
that may likely exhaust most of the remaining cash -in -lieu of park dedication.
Scherer stated that he would look at the property to see what the best entry point for the public
trail from the standpoint of user safety.
Park Commission agreed with staff s recommendations with the following conditions:
1. The public trail be created now at the applicant's expense
2. The public trail easement be secured for the future trail connecting Parkview Drive with
Willow Drive.
3. The City look at moving the public trail access point closer to the parking lot driveway
of Baker National Golf Course.
4. A sign be created to mark the access point for the public trail.
5. Staff reviews the feasibility of putting some parking by the side of the road for at least a
couple cars.
6. Create walkway alongside of Parkview from the trail parking or golf course entrance to
make it safer for people that want to walk to the public trail.
2
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
Wally Marx — Conservation Design Subdivision PUD Concept Plan — 2500-2900 Parkview
Drive (7:46 p.m.)
Johnson noted that this was first brought forward to the Council in 2010/2011 but the property
was found to be in agricultural preserve and therefore had to wait until 2016.
Sparks stated that the property is currently three parcels that would be proposed to be
developed into six lots. He stated that of the 90 acres, about 70 acres would be in easement
and of that 40 percent would qualify for the buildable acre clause. He stated that this property is
currently zoned and guided for rural residential use. He stated that the property includes two
areas of moderate quality maple basswood forest and a good quality tamarack swamp land that
were identified in the open space report. He noted that those elements would be proposed to
be conserved. He explained the purpose of the ordinance, which creates and protects the
conservation ordinance. He stated that the base density of the three parcels would allow three
lots, and therefore this would be a 200 percent density bonus. He noted that they are proposing
conservation of 77.6 percent of the site. He provided additional details on the lot layouts,
access, and septic locations. He stated that the purpose of a concept plan is for the applicant to
gain input from the Commissions and Council in regard to what they would be expecting when
the applicant submits their actual application. He noted that the staff conditions were included
in the packet along with the comments of the Planning and Park Commissions. He stated that a
neighboring property owner submitted a letter stating that they did not like the number of units
proposed for the property.
Martin referenced the applicant's concept plan and the four septic sites, asking for clarification
on locations and the types of trees in those areas.
Sparks noted that the specific area had boxelder trees.
Cousineau asked if the trees could be restored to create a corridor.
Sparks agreed that the area is lower quality but could be restored to a higher quality with some
work. He noted that restoration of some of the woodlands would improve the quality.
Martin referenced the staff concept plan and asked where on the property homes could be
placed. She asked for, and received, clarification on certain elements of the plans. She
referenced a man-made wetland on the property and asked if there is a difference in protection.
Mark Gronberg, Gronberg and Associates, replied that the wetland has been delineated as a
wetland and therefore there is no difference.
Laura Domyancich, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, stated that if there is a wetland on the
plan that has been delineated as a wetland but does not have a classification it would not have
the same protection as a wetland. She stated that if preservation of the wetland is desired a
MnRam would need to be done for the wetland to determine a management plan and
classification.
Kent Williams, 1632 Homestead Trail, stated that he is speaking on behalf of the applicants at
their request. He stated that the applicant submitted a narrative with the concept plan, noting
that this is the third time Mr. Marx has come to the Council with an attempted project. He stated
that under any measure this project is one that provides significant value to the City. He stated
that the Marx family purchased the land in 1998 and spent 20 years restoring the property, as it
1
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
was previously a pig farm. He stated this is one of the last few groves of trees left and would be
protected. He stated that the Marx family has proposed to put 40 percent of buildable land into
conservation easement, noting that there has not been a request that has come before the City
with that high of a percentage. He noted that the percentage of buildable land is quite low
already for this property and therefore this is a significant sacrifice. He stated that the
conservation elements that are being protected through the easements should justify the density
bonus itself. He noted that it is important to note that on top of the buildable land, the Marx
family would be conserving another 60 acres of unbuildable land. He noted that they are not
asking for a large number of homes in return for this conservation, they simply believe in the
conservation of the land. He highlighted the conservation benefits that would be provided
through this proposal. He highlighted what would happen under normal development of this
property, which would create three lots and the future landowners could do a lot of things with
their land, outside of building, that could be detrimental to the natural features. He stated that
this is a harmonious plan with a single easement holder and would provide a benefit to the City.
He stated that this provides more conserved land and less buildable homes than any application
before. He referenced the park dedication requirement for the horse trail around the lake. He
stated that the lake is entirely private at this time, along with the horse trail, and is used by
invitation only and not used by the public. He stated that there has been pushback from the
neighbors on the lake that they do not want that path open to the public at large and those
neighbors would close their segments of the trail. He also noted that there would be issues with
parking for people attempting to access the trail. He noted that there was a lengthy discussion
at the Park Commission meeting. He noted that an alternate trail location was discussed in the
southern portion of the property, which would keep the trail away from the homes. He noted
that the intent then would be for it to be a nature trail. He stated that the Park Commission
wanted the ability to provide trail connection to the properties east and west. He noted that
there are not currently trails to the east or west. He noted that the applicant is conserving not
only the required buildable land but also 60 additional acres of non -buildable land and therefore
asked that the Council waive the requirement for park dedication. He stated that a lot of thought
went into this concept plan.
Martin referenced a gravel drive and asked if the existing configuration would continue or
whether there would be a relocation. It was noted this is the existing horse trail. She stated that
on the applicant's proposal she noticed buildable area that is going into conservation and
compared that to the staff plan. She also noted what seemed to be a straight line of trees and
asked for more information.
Wally Marx replied that the line of trees is very straight because they purchased the land in
1998 and there were 400 hogs on the property before they purchased the property. He noted
that the pigs devastated the land. He stated that in order to create more conserved land they
have limited the housing footprint to one acre each.
Charlie Schroder, 2910 Parkview, stated that they are the neighbor immediately to the north and
are present to understand what is going on. He stated that they are new neighbors and have
found this background information to be helpful. He asked how the PUD is superior to the
conventional development, as he did not quite see how the land would be better under the PUD.
He stated that having the trail open to the public would be problematic with parking. He stated
that a north/south trail on Parkview would be objectional. He stated that this seems like a lot of
density relative to a conventional development plan.
Pederson stated that he was on the Council in 2011 and stated that this request is considerably
better than that request. He stated that he has concerns with the proximity to the lake. He
2
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
stated that the trail would be problematic because the other property owners do not want that.
He stated that with the trails at Baker Park he was unsure why additional trails would be needed
here. He stated that it would be difficult to give up park dedication, noting that he does not have
any interest in dropping park dedication.
Mitchell provided background information on the Long Lake Hounds.
Anderson agreed that this is a substantially better plan than what was presented in 2011. He
stated that he does have concerns with the closeness of lots one and two. He stated that it
seems that the buildable acreage is in pieces rather than one contiguous piece and therefore
could not find how it would benefit the City. He agreed that the park dedication should not be
waived.
Williams stated that they attempted to not make the conservation areas fragmented. He noted
that the green and yellow areas are proposed for preservation, identifying corridors.
Martin stated that lots one and two seem close together and would also need a variance. She
stated that other than that she likes the fragmentation of the lots as it seems more rural and less
planned. She stated that there was conscious thought from the applicant to preserve land in
corridors. She stated that she would want the conservation areas to be placed in outlots to
minimize the amount of conserved areas within the lots. She asked which areas were the
highest value in terms on conservation, noting that the tamarack swamp is high quality but
would be protected as a wetland. She stated that the maple basswood forest would protect the
tree line and view shed from the road. She stated that perhaps there could be a trail that would
provide a vista of the lake. She stated that she would avoid the horse trail. She stated that she
would preserve a trail further east that could be built out at a further time. She stated that she
would give park dedication for trails that are built. She stated that she would like to see
protection of the wooded areas more and would recommend the staff suggestion for layout with
a trail that could overlook the lake. She stated that she would like to see the setbacks met and
would keep the roads out of the middle woodland area to loop around a bit more as staff
recommended.
Cousineau stated that she appreciates that staff moved lot three to the southern part, but noted
that it seems that may be crowded. She stated that she would support a trail becoming public
overlooking a vista of the lake but would not support the horse trail. She stated that park
dedication is important.
Mitchell stated that he just does not understand it, as it seems that this is attempting to get ten
pounds of flour into a five -pound sack. He stated that in the rural area the effort is for less
houses. He stated that he does not see any public benefit to this land. He stated that he does
not understand how the little bits of yellow on the map would be justification for double density.
He stated that three homes would preserve the most trees, the animal corridor, the marshes,
and wetlands. He stated that he does not see that this meets the minimum ordinance
standards.
Williams stated that there seems to be a misunderstanding of what could be done and what
could not be done under conservation or regular ownership. He stated that the property owner
could buy wetland mitigation credits and fill wetlands. He stated that the natural elements could
be left to the whim of a future land owner or they could choose to protect and conserve the rare
and disappearing elements that exist on the land. He stated that you would not get the same
3
Medina City Council Excerpt from 2/7/2017 Meeting Minutes
level of land stewardship and management under this request compared to traditional
development.
Cousineau stated that if you go to five homes, there is already one home and you would only be
adding four homes. She stated that this is a large area of land and therefore would be
comfortable with some additional homes.
Anderson asked if the applicant feels that they received feedback from the Council.
Williams stated that it seems that there is some antagonism towards the ordinance itself rather
than the project. He stated that if you hate the ordinance you can say no to every request,
noting that there will not be a lot of these requests. He stated that it does not seem that this
should rise or fall on five or six homes when the applicants would be conserving 70 acres of
land. He stated that the conservation aspects on this request far exceed what was gained
through Stonegate, and this request is only asking for three additional homes. He appreciated
the honest feedback but felt that the Council is providing negative comments against the
ordinance itself.
Cousineau stated that lots one and two do not conform to the DNR shoreline regulations. She
agreed that this was a hot topic tonight but noted that there would have to be some conformity
in order to discuss the 200 percent density bonus.
Williams stated that if the parcels should be expanded, it would make them more saleable as
they would gain more shoreland. He explained that the lots are smaller because of the
conserved shoreline. He did not feel they would have trouble presenting the case to the DNR.
Mitchell stated that it seems that they could just do a PUD to approve additional lots.
Batty stated that is not what the applicant has requested and would have different standards for
review.
Mitchell stated that he did not understand how this would meet the objectives of the
conservation design ordinance.
Michael Pressman stated that he has spent about 25 years on conservation development, as
this is his career. He stated that he began looking at this property when he was working with
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and he made an offer at that time to purchase a
conservation easement to secure what is proposed to the City for free. He stated that he
secured an easement to the north. He stated that he was attracted to this property because of
the natural features of the site. He noted that while the yellow area may seem small that is
connected to the green areas that would also be preserved. He stated that he joined his
profession to look ahead and ensure conservation when changes come in the future. He stated
that this project has come before the Council three times now. He stated that this site contains
areas identified in the City's open space plan and meet the requirements of the ordinance.
Martin asked how many homes could be built on this property if this property were rezoned in
the future as single family detached or attached.
4
Subject: Conservation Design- PUD 2700-2900 Parkview Drive
Medina Planning Commission, City Council and Staff:
Pamela and I, the owners of 2910 Parkview Drive, neighbors immediately to the north of the
Marx property, have reviewed the PUD General Plan as well as the previous Concept Plan
and have the following observations.
On a personal level, our decision to move into this area was based on a desire to have
more privacy and quiet. The current Rural Residential (RR -Rural Residential) zoning was a
factor in this decision. We suspect our neighbors felt the same way when they moved here.
We agree with Medina's approach to land use planning, conservation and water quality.
Having served on and chaired the Orono Planning Commission, I understand the
importance of these decisions.
The proposal to change the zoning of these parcels to a Conservation District-PUD to
increase lot density to the maximum in exchange for certain conservation allowances does
not fully address the critical issues.
First, the current RR zoning and the difficult nature of those parcels with respect to
development effectively maintains the conservation aspects of the area. This is a good
example of how thoughtful prior ordinance construction and zoning can work. No action
needs to be taken to retain the area's unique qualities.
The argument that this area is within the MUSA boundary and will be sewered with resulting
very large increases in density is probably overstated. This area is very unlikely to be the
target of Met Council development, for the very reasons outlined in the various development
proposals and by observation: presence of Old Growth Woods, Tamarack Swamp and the
pairs of nesting swans, the egrets and herons.
The proposal of a public trail near the Old Growth Woods seems problematic. There is no
parking along Parkview Drive, meaning that an interested party will park at Baker Golf and
walk on the road. Anyone driving on Parkview witnessing golfers late for tee times will
consider this a risky undertaking. The sight lines for walkers (or bikers) on Parkview are not
great. The walking trail does not show as crossing the horse trail, however it is very close,
such that a path to the horse trail will likely develop soon. The School Lake property owners'
informal understanding regarding the horse trail access will likely be altered to avoid the
liability of increased traffic. Baker Park Reserve's 2,700 acres provides ample public access
to lakes, walking, biking and horse trails, golf, skiing and a host of other year round activities
with plenty of parking.
The addition of Lots 1 and 2, where Pamela and I are most affected, and the lot width
variances that may still be required (with the perimeter setback reset) is another indication
that this plan is aggressive. We were gratified that the earlier January concept discussion of
this plan generally discouraged two lots in that area as too intense for the rural residential
nature of the area.
The disturbance of the soils of lots close to the lake, especially Lots 3 and 4, may have
unknown consequences, given their historical agricultural usage. This probably needs
further study.
We understand property owners have rights and there is a balance between those rights
and planning. School Lake is a unique area. The tradeoff between increasing density and
protection of ecologically valuable land seems difficult here because the land in question is
basically protected by virtue of its inability to be built upon. Subdivision would be currently
limited to three lots, one already built on, as we understand it. This makes for significant
land protection, based on existing ordinances.
We appreciate the work that has gone into this by the applicant, the Staff, the Commission,
and the Council.
Respectfully,
Charles and Pamela Schroeder
2910 Parkview Drive, Medina
CYNTHIA PIPER
2905 Willowood Farm Road
Hamel, MN 55340
763 478-9900
Cell 612 868-2190
cindypiper46r�gmail.com
September 11, 2017
To: Medina City Councii;
Re: School Lake Nature Preserve/Wally & Bridget Marx
Dear Council,
I have been in discussion with Wally Marx for the last several years regarding his
intention to subdivide his property on School Lake. My husband and I are owners of
property on School Lake.
Mr. Marx has shared with me the Land Stewardship Plan prepared by the Minnehaha
Watershed District and the Conservation Easement documentation. Here are my
comments.
Some history;
There currently is a trail that fourteen landowners properties abut the shoreline and have
agreed to allow local access to walkers and horse riders. The trail has been in existence
since the early 1960's. Each time a property has been sold, I have contacted the new
owners and requested permission. It has always been granted.
The Marx proposal to continue the trail with the proposed plan is much desired by those
who use it. The adjoining landowners appreciate the language on page 10 of the Land
Stewardship Plan.
"an existing private horse trail, that extends through the property along the
shoreline of School Lake and continues around the lake through neighboring
properties, will be retained for private use with dedicated private easements for
access and maintenance".
"The public access trail shall be configured so that it does not interfere with
existing private house trail".
Thanks to the Marx plan and hopefully to a positive vote by the Council, Medina will
continue to preserve its rural character. The adjoining neighbors and those who use the
trail truly appreciate this proposal. Hopefully there will be more plans like this that allow
the beloved trails to continue to exist.
Most sincerely,
Cindy Piper
cc. Wally & Bridget Marx.
YY SB
701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 300 I Minneapolis, MN 55416 I (763) 541-480011
June 8, 2017
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Marx PUD Concept — Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-17-205
WSB Project No. 03433-170
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed the Marx PUD Concept application and plans dated May 12, 2017. The applicant
proposes to construct a six single family parcels.
The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general
engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with
regards to engineering and stormwater management matters.
Site Plan & Civil
1. Note proposed driveway grades.
2. Show the location of the public access trail referenced in the narrative.
3. With future submittals, please provide the following:
a. A drawing showing or exhibit showing fire truck turning movements and access
through site.
b. Soil borings or hand augers shall be provided to confirm that 12-inches of class 5 and
a geotextile fabric exist.
c. Show a proposed street typical section detail on the plans. With future submittals
submit cross sections along the roadway at least every 50 feet to confirm the
construction limits of the proposed road widening.
d. Add curve data and roadway grades to the proposed road profile on Sheet 5.
Stormwater
4. Show stormwater treatment locations within each lot and consider grading implications.
Building a legacy — your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.como
Marx PUD Concept — Engineering Review
June 8, 2017
Page 2
5. With future submittals, please provide the following:
a. Stormwater calculations showing compliance with the City's rate control, water
quality, infiltration and freeboard requirements.
b. Documentation that a permit application has been sent to Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District. Provide the final permitting documents prior to the start of
construction.
c. Indicate existing high water levels and overflow routes of School Lake and the large
wetland complexes on the plans in order to evaluate compliance with the freeboard
requirement.
d. The development is proposed on what appears to be the overflow route for School
Lake to the south, labeled Outlot A and I. Verify adequate freeboard is provided to
future development and that the capacity of the EOF is not impacted.
Wetlands
6. Wetland C is shown entirely within Lot 5. Provide an easement to fully encompass this
wetland area including the appropriate buffers.
7. It appears wetland impacts are being avoided to a great extent, but provide a more detailed
plan showing the roadway to Lot 4 as that passes through a very narrow area between
Wetlands E and F.
8. Provide appropriate documentation of compliance with WCA for any proposed wetland
impacts.
9. Wetland H should be connected to Wetland F — the final approved delineation did not include
Wetland H, simply one connected wetland named F.
10. It does not appear the applicant will meet the minimum 30' buffer width required on the
north side of Wetland B.
11. The applicant is proposing wetland management classifications that differ from those shown
City of Medina's Wetland Management Classification map. The applicant provided a
document outlining the proposed classifications on June 6, 2017. Following a review of the
document, the City agrees with the proposed wetland management classifications.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
City Engineer
METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES, INC.
Loren Kohnen, Pres.
Metro West Inspection Services, Inc.
Box 248
Loretto, MN 55357
May 26, 2017
To: Debra Peterson
From: Loren Kohnen
Item: School Lake Nature Preserve
Wallace Marx
Six lot proposal
East of Parkview Drive, SW side of School Lake
(763) 479-1720
FAX (7 63) 479-3090
Mtrowst76@aol.corn
have reviewed the proposal and checked the septic design and locations. All will meet
code and must be protected before any road or driveway construction begins.
The design of the driveways must be submitted and approved by the Fire Chief and Fire
Marshal (Loretto Fire Department) before final approval of the plat by Medina City
Council. Most driveways are very long and though poor soil.
Respectfully,
Loren Kohnen
Fire Marshal
Box 248, Loretto, Minnesota 55357
SCHOOL LAKE NATURE PRESERVE CD-PUD
AMENDED GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Wallace and Bridget Marx ("the Applicants") respectfully submit the following
Amended General Plan of Development in compliance with Medina City Code § 827.35,
General Plan of Development. This Amended General Plan of Development is intended
to amend and supplement the General Plan of Development previously submitted on May
12, 2017. This Amended General Plan of Development is supplemented by and should
be read in conjunction with the Project Narrative and Concept Plan previously submitted
on December 9, 2016, and the General Plan of Development, preliminary plat, and other
materials previously submitted on May 12, 2017, which are incorporated by reference (to
the extent not modified by this Amended Application). The relevant documents were
amended to reflect compliance with the amendments to the CD-PUD ordinance passed on
July 5, 2017, after the original documents were submitted to the City.
The Applicants propose to place approximately 70 acres of the subject property,
including 11.76 acres of buildable land, into a permanent conservation easement. This
represents 40.1 percent of the buildable land, and about 78 percent of the total land on the
property. The easement area will include 21.22 acres (out of a total of approximately 25
acres) of the tamarack swamp and Maple -Basswood Old Growth Big Woods fragments
found significant by Hennepin County.l The easement will also include large swaths of
land to preserve wildlife corridors to School Lake. A well -placed public access trail will
allow members of the community to enter and enjoy some of the most valuable and
unique parts of the property, all of which have been restricted to private access until now.
As an incentive for the above, and to help alleviate the economic loss from committing
1 The remaining acreage of these conservation assets lies within a separate parcel that is not part of this
Application.
40% of their limited buildable land to conservation, the Applicants ask for a full density
bonus of three additional lots.
Although much of the proposed conservation area currently is covered by city and
state wetland buffer rules, stricter Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ("MCWD")
regulations will provide even greater protection, and will include land that currently is
unprotected by wetland buffer rules. The conservation areas will be protected by a Land
Stewardship Plan and Conservation Easement Agreement. The MCWD will own the
easement, and will have the right to periodically inspect the property and ensure that
conservation areas are being properly maintained. Individual lot owners will own the
conservation areas in fee, and will be signatories to the easement agreement with the
MCWD. Funds for restoration and maintenance of the conservation areas will be
obtained from the proceeds of sales of individual lots, and will be supplemented with
annual dues to be paid by individual lot owners into an escrow account controlled by the
MCWD. The applicants strongly believe that "pride of ownership" and individual legal
responsibility imposed by the easement agreements will help ensure that the standards
imposed by the conservation agreements will be maintained.
The Applicants have met with the MCWD regarding the necessary permits and
will file applications for same once approval for the project has been granted. Any storm
water management and other required improvements required by the City will be
implemented prior to the sale of any lots. No grading or other improvements are
anticipated to be required prior to the sale of the lots, other than possible driveway
installation and box elder removal. The Applicants anticipate that expansion of the
2
existing driveway to the Marx house will take place after Lots 3 and 4 are sold, with the
funds required to complete the expansion obtained from the proceeds of such sales.
1. Property Address. 2700-2900 Parkview Drive, Medina, MN.
2. Zoning Classifications. The property is presently zoned as Rural
Residential (RR -Rural Residential). The Applicants request a zoning change to
Conservation Design-PUD District ("CD-PUD"). When the project is completed, the
zoning classification most comparable to the proposed development will continue to be
Rural Residential. The primary modification needed from the comparable zoning
classification is flexibility with respect to the requirement of five acres of contiguous
suitable soils pursuant to § 826.25 subd. 2(a).
3. Property Owners:
Wallace A. and Bridget A. Marx
2700 Parkview Drive
Medina, MN 55340
Mr. and Mrs. Marx jointly own the subject property in fee simple absolute, as
husband and wife.
4. Preliminary Plat. See attached amended preliminary plat prepared by
Gronberg & Associates.
5. Preliminary plans: see attached amended preliminary plans prepared by
Gronberg & Associates.
6. Legal descriptions: This property is composed of three separate parcels:
a. PID 16 118 23 32 0002
2700 Parkview Drive
Medina, MN 55340
3
Legal description: Commencing at the NE corner of the NW 1/4
of the SW 1/4, thence South to the SE corner thereof, thence West
to the SW corner thereof, thence North to the SW corner of
Priscilla's Addition, thence easterly along the southerly line of said
Addition to the SE corner thereof, thence North to the NE corner
thereof, thence East to the beginning, except road. Section 16,
Township 118, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
b. PID 16 118 23 31 0002
2702 Parkview Drive
Medina, MN 55340
Legal description: The South 500 feet east of that part of the NE
1/4 of SW 1/4 lying West of the East 520 feet thereof. Section 16,
Township 118, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
c. PID 16 118 23 23 0005
2900 Parkview Drive
Medina, MN 55340
Legal description: That part of the S 1/2 of the NW 1/4 lying south
of the North 845 feet thereof, except the West 417.42 feet of the
North 208.71 feet of the South 213.71 feet thereof; also that part of
the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 lying West of the East 520 feet thereof
and North of the South 500 feet thereof, except road. Section 16,
Township 118, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
7. Tabulation of residential dwellings and expected population: This
proposal provides for a total of six (6) residential dwellings, with an expected population
of around eighteen (18), assuming an average of three (3) persons per household. See
City of Medina 2030 Comprehensive Plan at 3-3 & Table 3-A (citing 2000 census
information showing an average of 3.06 persons per household in Medina). The proposal
adds only three houses and approximately nine (9) people compared to conventional
development under existing regulations.
4
Because the property is within the Metropolitan Council's long term -sewer
service area, it likely will receive sewer service at some point in the future. When this
occurs, the property probably will not keep its low -density "Rural Residential"
classification. With 29 acres of buildable land, and assuming a low density residential
classification of 2-3.5 units per acre, conventional sewered development would result in
58-102 residential dwellings, or 174-306 people (again, based on an assumption of three
(3) persons per household). If the property were rezoned to Residential Mid -Density
(R3), which has a minimum lot size of 8,750 feet and a maximum lot size of 12,500 feet,
the range would be from 99-141 residential dwellings, or 297-423 people.
8. Preliminary grading and site alteration plan: see attached plans prepared
by Mark Gronberg & Associates.
9. Timeline for development:
12/9/16 Application filed
1/9/17 Planning Commission Concept Plan Presentation
2/7/17 City Council Concept Plan Presentation
5/12/17 Application for Preliminary Approval filed
6/13/17 Planning Commission Meeting (CD-PUD)
7/18/17 City Council Meeting (CD-PUD)
8/1/17 Final City Approvals
8/15/17 MCWD Permits granted
8/15/19 Estimated residential occupancy of Lots 1-4
10. A statement summarizing all changes made to previously -submitted
documents: Since their application was filed last December, the Applicants have made a
5
number of changes based on suggestions they received from the Planning Commission,
the Park Commission, the City Council, the City Planner, and the anticipated easement
holder, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ("MCWD"). These changes include the
following:
a. Conservation area ownership. The Applicants propose that all of
the conservation easement area be owned in fee by the individual residential
homeowners, rather than landowners plus one or more homeowner associations.
The Applicants and the MCWD agree that this will simplify administration of the
conservation easement agreement. The Applicants submit that landowners will
take their conservation obligations more seriously if they are held directly
responsible as signatories to the easement agreement. Appropriate signage and
effective enforcement by the MCWD will help ensure that landowners do not
conduct impermissible activities in protected areas.
b. Tree replacement program. Although the MCWD does not believe
significant restoration of the property is needed, the Land Stewardship Plan
includes a program for replacing box elder trees and other invasive species with
higher -quality trees, and dedicates funds for this purpose.
c. Escrow. An escrow account controlled by the MCWD will be
established and maintained with funds paid by landowners both at closing and on
an annual basis, to pay for the tree replacement program and any needed
maintenance.
d. Public trail. A public access trail is proposed, with an entrance just
north of the road near the Maple -Basswood Old Growth Big Woods, heading
6
east-northeast along the road and then northeast into Outlot C and heading on
toward School Lake, circling in a loop, and then connecting back to the original
trail. This trail will allow the public to view the Maple -Basswood Old Growth
Big Woods, the Tamarack Swamp, and School Lake, none of which are currently
available to the public. The public trail is configured so that it does not interfere
with the existing horse trail.
The public trail is offered in addition to the general east -west easement in
the southern part of the property that was requested by the Park Commission.
One possible route for a southern trail is indicated on the amended preliminary
plat.
e. Lot 1 Perimeter setback. The perimeter setback for Lot 1 now
complies with existing regulations.
f. Outlots. All conservation areas are included as Outlots A-K on the
concept plan (the green and yellow areas).
g•
Lot 4 driveway and septic line. The driveway and septic line for
Lot 4 has been re -drawn to avoid Wetland F. Rusty Olson has confirmed that the
new location does not present any difficulties.
h. Minimum lot size. To comply with the amended CD-PUD
ordinance passed by the City Council on July 5, 2017 requiring that each lot be a
minimum of 2.5 square acres in size, and assuming (based on discussion with the
City Planner) that "lot" means "fee simple absolute lot unencumbered by a
conservation easement," the lot lines have been re -drawn so that every such lot
meets the new 2.5-acre minimum. Because we were able to subtract acreage from
7
lots in excess of the 2.5-acre minimum to make up for the acreage that was added
to the lot that did not meet the 2-5-acre minimum, the reorientation of lot lines did
not result in a net decrease of the percent or actual acres of buildable land donated
for conservation purposes, or the percent or actual acres of land covered by the
conservation easement, as described in the original application.
The requisite number of copies of maps showing existing conditions, a soils
overlay, amended preliminary plat, preliminary road plan, and simplified ownership map,
along with copies of a draft Land Stewardship Plan and draft Conservation Easement
Agreement, are submitted (or previously have been submitted) with this Amended
General Plan of Development.
8
9/14/2017
SCHOOL LAKE NATURE PRESERVE
Wally and Bridget Marx — September 19, 2017
MEDINA CD-PUD DISTRICT
Design flexibility depends upon the amount and quality of conservation area and
how well the project achieves the following conservation objectives over
conventional development:
Objective One
Protect/restore ecological
function of native hardwood
forests (e.g. Maple -Basswood)
Objective Four
Reserve connections between
land and water ecological
resources for habitat corridors
Objective Two
Protect/preserve lakes,
streams, & wetlands beyond
existing regulations
Objective Five
Reserve land for public/private
trails to create connections to
existing or planned trails
Objective Three
Protect/restore ecological
resources, including priority
areas on the Composite Open
Space map
Objectives Six & Seven
(secondary)
Protect scenic views and reserve
land for public/private Open
Space
1
9/14/2017
AMOUNT AND QUALITY OF CONSERVATION AREA
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
ACRES
CONSERVATION ASSETS
BUILDABLE DONATED
Deer Hill Preserve School Lake Nature Preserve
89 (55% of total) 70 (78% of total)
Tamarack/black ash wetland complex
Tamarack bog Maple -Basswood Old -Growth remnants
School Lake and shore line
35.6
40.7
AMOUNT AND QUALITY OF CONSERVATION AREA
• Hennepin County foresters: the tamarack
wetland complex and Maple -Basswood Old -
Growth Big Woods are high priority
conservation areas
• School Lake -- a key MCWD conservation
area and important animal habitat
• Current regs protect about 49 acres
• Conservation easement will protect nearly 70
acres — 42% more land than current regs
• More restrictive MCWD buffer rules will apply
to all wetlands
2
9/14/2017
AMOUNT AND QUALITY OF CONSERVATION AREA
• "Old -Growth Big Woods" -- natural forest developed
>/= 120 years w/o severe disturbance
• Better animal habitat, resiliency, scientific value, &
aesthetic/spiritual appeal
• MNRI: privately -owned old -growth fragments "are
likely the highest priority sites to consider [for]
acquisition and protection in the near future"
• Only 4% remain in MN
• Only 8 publicly accessible sites in MN
• All 3 Marx old -growth fragments will be publicly
accessible
OBJECTIVE ONE
Protect/restore the ecological
function of native hardwood
forests (e.g. Maple -Basswood)
Conventional Development:
• 15% of "Significant Trees," including Old -
Growth trees, can be cut w/o a tree
placement plan
• Even more trees can be cut with a plan
CD-PUD:
• No cutting without prior MCWD approval
• Invasive box elder trees replaced with
higher -quality trees
3
9/14/2017
OBJECTIVE TWO
Protect/preserve lakes, streams &
wetlands beyond existing
regulations
Conventional Development:
• Less restrictive Medina wetland buffers
• Wetlands can be reduced with mitigation credits
• Cutting & other activity allowed outside "shore
impact zone"
CD-PUD:
• More restrictive MCWD buffers
• No wetland reduction
• All areas protected by the conservation easement
OBJECTIVE THREE
Protect/restore ecological resources,
including priority areas on the
Composite Open Space map
Conventional Development:
• Fencing, mowing, etc. relatively unrestricted
• Old -Growth trees can be cut w/o replacement, up to
15% of all "Significant Trees" on property
CD-PUD:
• No fencing w/o MCWD approval
• No mowing w/o MCWD approval
• No cutting w/o MCWD approval
4
9/14/2017
OBJECTIVE FOUR
Reserve ecological connections between land and water
ecological resources for habitat corridors
Conventional Development:
• Ecological connections not preserved
• Less restrictive Medina wetland buffer rules
• Areas outside "shore impact zone" unprotected
CD-PUD:
• Existing ecological connections preserved
• More restrictive MCWD wetland buffer rules
• Areas between wetlands and shore protected by
conservation easement
OBJECTIVE FIVE
Reserve land for public/private trails
to create connections to existing
or planned trails
Conventional Development:
• No public trails
• No connection to planned or existing trails
• Existing bridle path can be eliminated
CD-PUD:
• Two public trails
• One east -west connection to planned trails
• Existing bridle path is protected
5
9/14/2017
OBJECTIVES SIX & SEVEN (SECONDARY)
Protect scenic views and viewsheds,
and reserve land for public/private
Open Space
Conventional Development:
• Cutting is relatively unrestricted
• Fencing, structures, etc. can obstruct views
CD-PUD:
• No cutting or other activity w/o MCWD approval
• Public trails will allow scenic views
• 70 acres of Open Space, in perpetuity
FUTURE CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Met Council Long Term Water Service Area map - 20+ acres open for
conventional sewer development by 2040
Conventional Development:
• Low -Density Residential -- 2-3.5/acre, or 40-70+
lots
• Mid -Density Residential -- 3-5/acre, or 60-100+
lots
CD-PUD:
• 0.3/acre, for a total of 6 lots, in perpetuity
6
9/14/2017
The Marx property is "exceptional" and merits a full density
bonus
Deer Hill Preserve School Lake Nature Preserve
CONSERVATION ACRES
DONATED
NATIVE CONSERVATION
ASSETS
89 (55% of total)
Tamarack bog
70 (78% of total)
Tamarack/black ash wetland complex
Maple -Basswood Old -Growth remnants
School Lake and shore line
% BUILDABLE DONATED 35.6 40.7
PUBLIC TRAIL Yes Yes
CONSERVATION
RESTORATION Yes Yes
UNMOLESTED WETLANDS No Yes
BASE LOTS
BONUS LOTS
DENSITY BONUS
TOTAL LOTS
22
19
1.86x
41
3
3
2x
6
7
Marx Woods Forest Analysis
Authors: Mike Reinikainen and Dave Thill
Introduction
A small proportion of the original Maple -Basswood forest cover -type remains in Hennepin County, and
some of the best opportunities to preserve remnants of this forest type from future development exist
in western portions of the county. The importance of preserving these stands of trees lies in the fact
they offer ecological, economic, and social benefits to Hennepin county citizens that are nearly
impossible to replace without significant input of resources and time. Benefits of mature stands of trees
include, carbon and nutrient storage, oxygen production, stormwater management and erosion control,
recreational opportunities, and critical habitat for native flora and fauna.
Hennepin County has identified 25.23 acres of the 37.42 acre parcel (PID# 1611823320002) owned by
Wally Marx at 2700 Parkview Drive, Medina, MN as being ecologically significant and within a state and
county -identified natural resource corridor. The parcel harbors three stands of interest; an 11 acre
tamarack wetland complex, a nearly pure one acre silver maple stand, and a 14 acre maple -basswood
remnant. The tamarack wetland complex has previously been identified as ecologically significant as we
are at the southern edge of that species range and there are only a handful of similar native plant
communities in the county. The silver maple stand is quite rare locally and unique given the topography
and hydrology of the site. The 14 acre Maple -basswood stand, hereafter referred to as Marx Woods, is
classified as a southern rnesic sugar maple — basswood — (bitternut hickory) forest (MHs39a) using the
MN DNR Ecological Classification System for Native Plant Communities (MNDNR 2003). This was a once
common and extensive forest -type that has been Fragmented and is now underrepresented on the
landscape, especially in the mature or old -growth stages of development.
Methods
Hennepin County Forestry and Natural Resource Staff collected data from Marx Woods on May 24th
2016 to determine the quality and growth stage of the forest. Data were collected from four prism plots
systematically installed ever 132 feet from a random start. Within the prism plot, live and dead tree size
and species were collected to estimate tree density and basal area. At three of the plots downed
deadwood data were collected using the line -intercept method and converted to a volume per acre
value. Species presence and cover was estimated at all four plots. Data were summarized in the office
and compared to available benchmarks from regional forest research literature.
Findings
Hale et al. (1999) examined old -growth and mature Maple -Basswood forests from around Minnesota to
better describe what elements of these forests set them apart from disturbed and early successional
Maple -Basswood forests. Examination of 21 regional Maple -Basswood forests, including stands at
nearby Baker Park Reserve and Wolsfeld Woods SNA, revealed that mature and old -growth maple -
basswood stands have a significantly higher area occupied by trees (or live tree basal area) and a higher
level of accumulated deadwood (downed as well as standing dead or "snags").
Table 1 is a comparison for key compositional and structural forest traits identified by Hale et al. as
indicative of mature and old -growth forests of this type in the region. We have included Marx Woods for
comparison. The data indicates that on 3 out of 6 measures of forest composition and structure, Marx
woods compares really well with the old -growth stands from the Hale et al. (1999) study. Floral diversity
approximates mature and old -growth conditions. Live tree basal area, representing the area occupied by
trees, is significantly greater than mature and old -growth forests. Similarly, the proportion of large
diameter trees (>24" diameter at breast height, or DBH) is substantially greater than that observed in
regional old growth. These measures all indicate that this stand is indeed unique, and taken with the
fact the property lies within an ecological corridor identified by the county, this stand is a strong
candidate for preservation. Further, given bark and growth form characteristics of the large diameter
trees present, we would estimate the oldest trees in this stand to be in excess of 150 years old; this is a
forest condition not easily replicated.
Table 1. Comparison of forest measures used to distinguish mature and old -growth forest stages
including field collected data from Marx Woods. Those characteristics at Marx Woods that are similar to
Measure
Species diversity (evenness)
Standing deadwood (snags)
Downed deadwood (logs)
Coarse deadwood (snags+logs)
Live tree basal area
Proportion of trees > 30' DBH
Density of trees
Variable
Shannon's H' index
cu. ft. per acre
cu. ft. per acre
cu. ft. per acre
sq. ft. per acre
percent
trees per acre
Stand -type
Mature Old -growth Marx Woods
0.79 0.87 0.83
114 386 62
572 786 64
700 1258 126
109 135 160
3 6 15
144 137 100
mature and old -growth forests are in bold.
Recommendations
This stand is no doubt unique and worth protecting, but it is not untrammeled and is in need of some
forest management and restoration. Table 1 reveals that this stand is lacking in deadwood, a hallmark
and the strongest predictor of mature and old -growth forest. Deadwood is important for floral and
faunal habitat as well as water retention and nutrient cycling. Large diameter stumps were located on
site, indicating trees were harvested in the past. Wally Marx noted that removals did take place to
reduce fire risk following a blow -down event in the late 1990s. Deadwood is now significantly lacking in
this stand.
Figure 1 further demonstrates how Marx Woods differs from regional mature and old -growth forest in
that it lacks trees in the middle diameter classes (i.e. 12-19.9") when compared to regional mature or
old -growth. Grazing likely occurred on site as floral diversity is lower than expected. Only 21 native
ground layer plants were identified on the site, and those plants were present in rather low abundance
or cover. Potential grazing in the early- to mid -twentieth century may have halted forest development
as ground cover and hardwoods seedlings were consumed by livestock. The lack of floral diversity could
also be explained by the presence of invasive earthworms. This, however, would not explain the lack of
trees in mid -diameter classes.
Regardless of the stand history, Marx Woods displays important characteristics of mature and old -
growth forests that takes hundreds of growing seasons to reproduce. This stand is worth preserving for
the established canopy, the high number of large trees present per acre, the floral diversity that does
exist, and the manageable number and cover of invasive species present. If preservation is achieved on
this property, steps should be taken to maintain and enhance deadwood pools, control buckthorn and
garlic mustard, and increase floral diversity in both richness (i.e., number of species) and abundance
(i.e., cover) in the ground cover layer.
5CP/
45%
tri
v 40%
m
35%
0 30•i
O 25%
c
O 20%
O 15%
a
2 1o°0
a.
5°0
0%
1-
A -7.9
II
8-11.9 12-15.9
�1
16-19.9 20-2'
Diameter at breast height (4.5 ft. in inches)
Figure 1. Diameter distribution comparing forest structure of Marx Woods to average regional mature
and old -growth maple basswood forests.
Table 2. Species observed with tree species in bold.
Species observed
Avens
Bitternut hickory
Black cherry
Buckthorn
Bur oak
Cleavers
Common nightshade
Cutleaf toothwort
Dutchmen's breeches
False rue anemone
Garlic mustard
Green ash
Green briar
Hackberry
Ironwood
Jack in the pulpit
Large white trillium
Moonseed
Nannyberry
Penn sedge
Prickly gooseberry
Wild leek
Red cedar
Red oak
Solomon's seal
Spring beauty
Sugar maple
Tartarian honeysuckle
Virginia creeper
Virginia waterleaf
White oak
Wild geranium
Wild grape
References
Hale, C.M., J. Pastor, and K.A. Rusterholz. 1999. Comparison of structural and compositional
characteristics in old -growth and mature, managed hardwood forests of Minnesota, U.S.A. Canadian
Journal of Forest Research. 29: 1479-1489.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2003. Field guide to the native plant communities of
Minnesota: the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota
County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, MNDNR, St. Paul,
Minnesota.
LAND STEWARDSHIP PLAN
School Lake Nature Preserve
Medina, Minnesota
DRAFT 4 August 25, 2017
Prepared for: Wally Marx
2700 Parkview Drive
Medina, MN 55340
Prepared by: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka, MN 55345
1'Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS (to be updated)
INTRODUCTION 3-5
Conservation Design 3-4
Land Stewardship Plan 4-6
EXISTING CONDITIONS 6-8
Compilation of Existing Data 6
Field Reconnaissance 7
Findings 7-8
CONSERVATION DESIGN OF SCHOOL LAKE
PRESERVE 8-9
Development Layout 8-9
Grading & Ecological Stormwater Management 10
Cultural Amenities 10
OWNERSHIP, CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES & LAND PROTECTION 11-18
School Lake Preserve Land Allocation 11
Development Area 11
City Park Land Dedication 12
Conservation Area 17-18
21Page
LAND STEWARDSHIP PLAN
SCHOOL LAKE NATURE PRESERVE FINAL PLAT
Medina, Minnesota
INTRODUCTION
Wally Marx proposes to develop 89.75 acres of land contained within three contiguous parcels
in Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota following the City's Conservation Design — Planned
Unit Development (CD-PUD) requirements. The project includes 6 single family sites and holds
unique and important conservation values based on its regional location and variety of wetland,
woodland, and shoreline habitats. These values are recognized by a number of local agencies,
and Mr. Marx's goal is to create unique lots that preserve the natural resource values of the
site, integrate the home sites into the landscape, and provide guidance for future management,
and elective enhancement of the conservation areas by the fee owners or Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD).
Conservation Design
The proposed development complies with the City of Medina's Conservation Design
Development requirements as described in detail in subsequent sections and per City Code
Section 827.51. Conservation Design (CD) — Purpose, which states:
The purpose of this district is to preserve the City's ecological resources, wildlife corridors,
scenic views, and rural character while allowing residential development consistent with the
goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Plan as updated
from time to time. The specific conservation objectives of this district are to:
1. Protect the ecological function of native hardwood forests, lakes, streams, and
wetlands.
2. Protect moderate to high quality ecologically significant natural areas.
3. Protect opportunities to make ecological connections between parks and other
protected lands and ecologically significant natural areas.
4. Protect important viewsheds including scenic road segments.
5. Create public and private trails for citizens to access and enjoy Open Space resources.
6. Create public and private Open Space for citizens to access and enjoy.
The proposed development also complies with City Code Section 827.57, Subd. 5 and 7, which
define Conservation Area and Conservation Easement for purposes of the CD-PUD ordinance.
3'Page
Land Stewardship Plan
Per City of Medina Code Section 827.65, a Land Stewardship Plan (LSP) is required for the
project. An LSP addresses the development, long-term use, maintenance, and insurance of the
Conservation Area associated with a proposed development. More specifically, this Final LSP:
(a) Defines ownership and methods of land protection.
(b) Establishes necessary regular and periodic operation and maintenance responsibilities.
(c) Estimates staffing needs, insurance requirements, and other costs associated with plan
implementation and defines the means for funding the same on an on -going basis. This
includes land management fees necessary to fund monitoring and management of the
Conservation Easement by the easement holder. The fees have been found reasonable
by the proposed easement holder.
(d) Addresses the requirements of the future Conservation Easement holder.
The following Land Stewardship Plan applies to the entire area contained within the
Conservation Easement, unless otherwise stated. Mr. Marx intends to develop all residential
lots at once.
Restoration after Construction Related Activities
Construction activities in development of the private lots may temporarily impact portions of
the Conservation Area. The following summary generally describes how the fee owner
anticipates coordinating site development and restoration activities concurrently:
• The fee owner anticipates commencing site development in Fall 2017, weather
permitting.
• Staging areas in pre -determined locations will be constructed to accommodate
construction and other activities and may temporarily impact portions of the
Conservation Area. Once a staging area is no longer needed, the fee owner will remove
the staging area and correct any damage in the Conservation Area to achieve conditions
similar to those at the time of easement recording.
• Utilities, including secondary septic sites, may be constructed as part of the
development of the residential lots. Any construction activities that damage a
Conservation Area will be corrected to achieve conditions similar to those at the time of
easement recording.
Any other land disturbance, not identified above, occurring with the development will be
corrected to achieve conditions that mimic the cover type and density of cover present at the
time of easement recording.
The following sections address the City -required elements of the LSP.
4'Page
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Compilation of Existing Data
The following existing data were compiled and reviewed to assess the natural, cultural, historic,
and scenic character of the site and its surroundings:
• MnDNR Ecological Classification System
• MnDNR Minor Watershed boundaries
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)-listed Impaired Waters
• Web Soil Survey (SSURGO Soil Survey data from USDA/NRCS)
• Original Vegetation of Minnesota (pre -European vegetation mapping by
Marshner/MnDNR)
• MnDNR Rare Natural Features (from the Natural Heritage Information System, NHIS)
• MnDNR Native Plant Communities (NPC)
• MnDNR Sites of Biological Significance (SBS)
• Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RSEA) — both original mapping and 2008 update
• MnDNR Regional Ecological Corridors — based on 2008 MLCCS data
• Metro Conservation Corridors
• Hennepin County Open Space Corridors and Priority Natural Resources Corridors
• Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) wetland mapping
• MCWD Key Conservation Area mapping
• Restoration Prioritization and Prediction Model (RePP)
• Public conservation lands (e.g., public parks, Scientific and Natural Area (SNA), Wildlife
Management Area (WMA))
• Historical and current aerial photographs (1937, 1957, 1960, 1962, 1967, 1969, 1971,
2000, 2015)
• Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) mapping (based on discrete
datasets from 2001, 2005, and 2008)
• Wetlands (including delineated site wetlands, Hennepin County Wetland Inventory, and
MCWD Functional Assessment of Wetlands (FAW))
• City of Medina Open Space Plan (2007)
• Site parcel boundaries
• Topographic contours (2-ft LiDAR data) and digital elevation model (DEM)
• Minnesota Historical Society database report
5'Page
Field Reconnaissance
On December 5, 2016, Laura Domyancich (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District) conducted a
field reconnaissance of the development area accompanied by David Thill of Hennepin County
Natural Resources, Michael Pressman of Conservation Solutions, and the property owner, Wally
Marx. Existing conditions (including landforms, slopes, wetland boundaries, drainage patters,
erosion, etc.) were noted. In brief, the site is dominated by several small wetlands, moderate to
high quality woodlands, restored prairie, and maintained formal gardens. Steep slopes were
observed along the western edge of the site and in the northern portion of the site to the west
of School Lake.
Findings
Ecological Context
According to Minnesota's Ecological Classification System, the site is located in Minnesota's Big
Woods Subsection of the Minnesota & NE Iowa Morainal Section, of the Eastern Broadleaf
Forest Province. The site is within the Long Lake Creek sub -watershed, which drains into Lake
Minnetonka (several bays of which are listed by the MPCA as "impaired"), then into the
Minnehaha Creek and eventually the Mississippi River. Moderate slopes (<18%) exist in the
northern portion of the site. Site soils consist of a variety of upland and wetland (i.e., hydric)
soils, ranging from well drained to very poorly drained. Pockets of poorly drained soil are
mapped throughout the site and are associated with the wetland areas. Prior to European
settlement, the majority of the site was dominated by Big Woods (e.g., oak, maple, basswood,
hickory, elm). Some of this original land cover type remains on the site. The southwestern
portion of the site contains a 6-acre tamarack swamp, fringed by 12-acres of black ash swamp.
The other 6 acres of wetland on site are dominated by narrow -leaf cattail and reed canary
grass. The northern and western portions of the site include nearly 22-acres of maple -
basswood forest.
Regional Ecological Significance
Remnant tamarack and black ash swamps and maple -basswood forests have been noted on the
site and create a resource corridor between Minnesota County Biological Survey -identified
mesic oak forest and maple -basswood forest to the northeast and a large minerotrophic
tamarack swamp complex to the south. A Hennepin County Environmental Services report
identified a one -acre nearly pure silver maple stand, a 14-acre maple basswood remnant, and
an 11-acre tamarack wetland complex. Conifer swamps are a sensitive wetland type,
susceptible to degradation resulting from invasive species, stormwater runoff, and hydrologic
alterations.
The property has been identified as a conservation priority in numerous plans and studies,
including the following:
1. City of Medina Natural Resources Inventory: most of the property is identified as an
Ecologically Significant Natural Area.
Wage
2. Medina Open Space Plan: property and it natural areas are called out as Priority Areas
3. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Regionally Significant Terrestrial and
Wetland Ecological Areas: property is part of a large complex identified as "Regionally
Significant" by the MN DNR. Along with Baker Park and areas to the immediate north, it
is one of a few large terrestrial and wetland complexes remaining in Hennepin County.
4. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Comprehensive Water Resources Management
Plan: property is identified as part of a District Conservation Priority of the Long Lake
Subwatershed Plan, which is part of an important conservation corridor extending to
the Wolsfeld Woods Scientific and Natural Area.
5. Hennepin Environmental Services: property is part of a conceptual greenway corridor
system proposed by Hennepin County in 2008.
The broader landscape includes a significant natural resource corridor that includes School Lake
to the northeast and Baker Park Reserve to the west and southwest, and a larger tamarack
swamp complex to the south.
Cultural/Historical/Scenic Significance
The Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) database search did not identify
cultural/historical resources on the site. Currently, there is only one home on the site, the
residence of the property owner at 2700 Parkview Drive. Approximately 8 acres of the property
has been developed into extensive formal gardens maintained by the property owner. Prior to
Mr. Marx purchasing the property, the northernmost parcel was the site of a hog farm, which
caused significant soil disturbance. Mr. Marx has completed restoration of this area, which is
now the site of an apple orchard and restored prairie.
Aerial Photograph Review
The earliest available aerial photograph of the site is from September 1937. The photo shows
an area on the northern portion of the site in row crop agriculture. The wetland complex
around Miller Lake at the southern extent of the property is a mix of herbaceous vegetation
with presumably tamarack and black ash in the center. School Lake appears to have no open
water. A photo from 1957 shows that the area was likely dredged to create open water.
Between the aerial photo year of 1937 and 1960, the farm site on the northern portion of the
site was established. A review of more recent aerial photos from the early 1960s indicates that
portions of the site consisted of row crop agricultural fields until around 1960-1962. The
tamarack swamp and several apparent lowlands and drainageways were not cultivated. A
wetland in the center of the site appears to have been expanded and deepened around 1967
and again in 2000, but has begun to fill in with cattails over the last 17 years. The formal
gardens were installed in the early 2000s.
Agricultural Records
Prior to the Marx's purchase of the property in 1998-1999, the northern portions of the
property served as a 400 animal hog farm, which caused significant soil disturbance, damage to
School Lake's vegetative buffer, and significant pollution to School Lake. In 2000, the Marx's
contracted with Ron Bowen, former president of Prairie Restorations, and restored
7'Page
approximately seven acres of prairie at a cost of $20,000 plus annual maintenance. There is
also a 130-tree apple orchard the Marx's planted on the northern end of the property.
In 2000, Mr. Marx put the entire 43 acre north parcel into the status of Agricultural Preserve.
The initial mandatory term was eight years, and Mr. Marx renewed its status for an additional
eight years after that expired in 2016. During that time Mr. Marx continued to improve the
quality of the land by extensive cleaning up debris from the previous forty-five years of animal
farming, quality planting and maintenance. The land produced forage and crops of apples.
Land Cover & Wetlands
The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) was developed in the late 1990s but
was not released until approximately 2001. The City of Medina was one of the first areas
mapped as part of the pilot program, with MLCCS field work conducted in 1999 and updated in
2008. This land cover mapping identified existing site features such as the maple -basswood
forest dominating the western portion of the site, the tamarack and black ash swamp in the
south, box elder -green ash forest, areas of seasonally and permanently flooded non-native
dominated emergent vegetation, palustrine open water, and mesic prairie. This mapping is
reflective of the site's current land cover classifications.
In 2016, an approved wetland delineation of the entire site identified 9 wetlands totaling 41.58
acres. Of this wetland area, the tamarack swamp, the surrounding black ash and willow swamp,
and the temporarily flooded emergent wetlands containing hybrid and narrow -leaf cattail and
reed canary grass combine for 15.75 acres total. All of these wetlands are in the southern
portion of the site. Another 14.13 acres of wetland are adjacent to School Lake. Several smaller
wetlands were delineated in the eastern portion of the site, south of School Lake.
The remaining acreage of the property includes 18.25 acres of steep slopes or non -buildable
land and 29.09 acres of buildable land, 11.47 acres of which will be placed in conservation
easement. In total, 71.3 acres of natural resource lands will be placed in conservation easement
(79.4% of the entire property).
CONSERVATION DESIGN OF MARX PROPERTY
Development Layout
The conservation design approach described in the Introduction was applied to the Marx site.
The development team (including Mark Gronberg, Michael Pressman, Kent Williams, and Wally
Marx) worked together to identify and respond to the site's unique attributes and sensitive
natural features. Primary and secondary Conservation Areas were identified along with
appropriate ecological buffers, and ecological corridors/connections. These Conservation Areas
were avoided to the extent feasible when siting roads and residential lots, and they have been
thoughtfully integrated into the development's design, establishing a connected network of
predominantly native landscapes. Buffer averaging to allow minor impacts to buffers of low
Wage
quality, small wetlands were favored over disturbance to high quality oak stands, a forest
condition that is not quickly or easily replicated.
The Marx site design also followed the Better Site Design/Low Impact Development (LID)
practices of the Minnesota Stormwater Manual from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA). The Marx conservation development design incorporated all of the MPCA's "better
site design techniques" listed below, except where noted:
• Preserve natural areas
• Natural area conservation
• Site reforestation
• Wetland and shoreline buffers
• Open space design
• Disconnect and distribute runoff
• Soil compost amendments (these may be incorporated into final design of stormwater
management elements)
• Disconnect surface impervious cover
• Grass channels
• Stormwater landscaping
• Narrower roadways where possible
• Reduce impervious cover in site design
• Narrower sidewalks (no sidewalks are proposed; all trails will be natural surface)
Construction of the driveways and home areas of the proposed conservation development plan
will remove 22 "significant trees" (as defined by the City of Medina's tree preservation
ordinance)out of an estimated 4,136 "significant trees" on the property. Additional limited
tree clearing is provided for below pursuant to Section XX infra, to allow views of the lake from
the homes while keeping the shoreline integrity and providing visual screening of the homes
from other parts of School Lake. The plan strives to preserve and buffer the existing maple -
basswood forest at the west edge of the site. Development is clustered on the perimeter of the
property away from the sensitive ecological features of the tamarack and black ash swamps.
Grading and Ecological Stormwater Management
Site grading and disturbance has been minimized to the extent feasible, retaining natural
drainage patterns. The design team has capitalized on opportunities for ecological stormwater
management in order to minimize runoff.
Because of the siting of homes on Lots 1&2 on the plateau off of County Road 201, any impact
of stormwater drainage from that which currently exists should be minimal. Also, with only 2.5
acres allotted to each of the building lots, and given their locations, any impact of stormwater
drainage from that which currently exists should also be minimal. Necessary stormwater
management will be addressed through stormwater ponds, rain gardens, and infiltration or
filtration areas.
9'Page
Cultural Amenities & Access
A public access trail is proposed to be built, and an easement granted to the City for walking
use only, with an entrance just north of the existing Marx driveway near the Old Growth
Woods, heading east-northeast along the driveway and then northeast into Outlot C and
heading on toward School Lake, circling in a loop, and then connecting back to the original trail.
The public access trail shall be configured so that it does not interfere with the existing private
horse trail. In addition, the City shall be granted a general east -west easement for a second
public access trail linking trails to the east and west, with one possible route indicated on the
final plat.
An existing private horse trail, that extends through the property along the shoreline of School
Lake and continues around the lake through neighboring properties, will be retained for private
use with dedicated private easements for access and maintenance.
The site has very little frontage on the adjacent scenic roadway to the west (Parkview Drive),
and is not highly visible from adjacent properties. Planned lots have been positioned to provide
screening between homes on the site and existing homes on Parkview Drive and on School
Lake. The site does contain significant topographic changes, given the slopes above School Lake
and on the western edge of the site. Siting and existing tree cover on the property will make
structures, at most, only intermittently visible from the surroundings.
OWNERSHIP, CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES & LAND PROTECTION
Marx Property Land Allocation
The Marx Property Final Plat addresses an 89.75-acre Conservation Design Subdivision. The
proposed development plan calls for Development Areas including the private lots and
roadways and Conservation Areas, as illustrated in Figure X below.
10'Page
Figure 1. School Lake Preserve Land Allocation (acres to be updated in final draft)
Conservation
Area
71.3 acres
Marx Property
89.75 acres
Development
Area
17.37 acres
Development Area
Wetlands
41.58 acres
Uplands
11.76 acres
Steep Slopes or
Unbuildable
18.25 acres
Private Lots
XX acres
Roads and ROW
XX acres
Park Dedication
XX acres
Areas not included in the Land Stewardship Plan
The Marx Property's approximately 17.37 acres of Development Area includes roads, rights -of -
way (ROW), park dedication, and private lots. Mr. Marx shall retain ownership of all private
roads with necessary rights -of -way provided to the homeowners, the District, and the City, as
appropriate. Private lots will be owned and maintained by Mr. Marx until the lots are purchased
by homeowners.
City Park Land Dedication
The City will be granted easements to construct and maintain two pedestrian public trails
within the Conservation Area and the corresponding acreage is included within the
Conservation Area identified in Figure X.
Conservation Area
The City of Medina defines Conservation Area as:
Designated land within a Conservation Design Subdivision that contributes
towards achievement of one or more of the conservation objectives. A
11'Page
Conservation Easement is placed on Conservation Areas to permanently restrict
the Conservation Area from future development. Conservation Areas may be
used for preservation of ecological resources, habitat corridors, passive
recreation, and for pasture, hay cropping and other low impact agricultural uses.
And, the City of Medina defines Conservation Easement as:
As defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 84C: A nonpossessory interest of a
holder in real property imposing limitations or affirmative obligations the
purposes of which include retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -space
values of real property, assuring its availability for agricultural, forest,
recreational, or open space use, protecting natural resources, maintaining or
enhancing air or water quality, or preserving the historical, architectural,
archaeological, or cultural aspects of real property.
The approximately 71.3 acres of Conservation Area (CA) in the subdivision will be protected
under a Conservation Easement that will be held by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
(MCWD), with individual lot owners retaining underlying fee ownership of specific outlots in the
CA. This area is discussed below in terms of ownership, objectives, proposed
restoration/enhancement, land protection methods, scheduling, funding, and enforcement.
Ownership & Objectives
The Conservation Areas will be transferred to future lot owners as individual outlots with
conservation easements. The boundaries of these areas will be marked clearly in the field with
permanent MCWD conservation easement signage. Adjoining easement outlots will be marked
with permanent MCWD conservation easement signage along their shared boundaries. The
overarching objective for the CA is to retain or improve the existing natural resource values and
ecosystem functions of these areas.
Land Protection Methods & Schedule
The conservation easement ("Easement") protects the CA. The MCWD is the Easement holder.
The MCWD, at its own cost, will inspect the CA at least annually for compliance. Fee owners
will be responsible for the reasonable cost of additional MCWD inspection activity prompted by
compliance issues.
The Easement includes a Property Report, which documents CA conditions at the time of
Easement recording. The MCWD will document conditions observed during annual inspections
such as natural disturbance, spread of invasive species, and areas of erosion, and will detail
both required and recommended corrections. The MCWD will provide inspection reports to the
fee owners.
121Page
Fee owner disturbance of the CA is as allowed by the Easement. A fee owner must restore any
area of disturbance by decompacting and/or amending soils to restore prior soil structure and
seeding with an appropriate seed mix (Attachment X) to reproduce preexisting cover type and
density. A fee owner will maintain seeded area with mowing during the first growing season,
early and late season mowing with targeted spot herbicide applications during the second
growing season, and targeted spot herbicide applications during the third growing season. All
fee owner actions under this paragraph are at the fee owner's cost.
In addition to disturbance allowed under the Easement, in conjunction with initial house
construction, the fee owners of Lots 1-4 may remove trees in accordance with a tree removal
and site stabilization plan approved by the MCWD and the City. The purpose of tree removal is
to provide for a reasonable lake view from the house and lake access, while preserving as much
of the existing extent of naturalized shoreline view from the lake as possible. The fee owner
will timely contact the MCWD during house design for an on -site meeting to develop this plan.
The plan will conform to the constraints contained in the following table. The MCWD may
prescribe such other reasonable conditions to protect slope and riparian edge stability, water
quality buffering function and riparian habitat.
Tree Type
Allowable Actions
Replacement Required
Invasive Species (buckthorn,
Japanese honeysuckle)
Remove all anywhere on the
property
No, unless threat of erosion
is present
Trees under 8" DBH
Remove up to 30% to provide
lake view and access
No, unless threat of erosion
is present
Trees over 8" DBH
Remove up to 10% to provide
lake view and access
Yes, elsewhere in the
shoreline area. Replacement
trees to be of at least #10 pot
size.
After initial removal, non -lethal trimming of remaining trees and removal of new tree growth
are permitted to maintain the established view and access.
Docks and aquatic vegetation management will be allowed subject to City and State regulations
and permitting requirements.
Perpetual Management
This section describes CA management by fee owners after initial construction and restoration.
Perpetual management is essential to maintain the composition, structure, and function of
healthy ecosystems throughout the CA. The guiding principle in response to alterations due to
natural events is not to restore to the initial condition but to maintain the CA in a condition that
preserves a healthy ecological condition consistent with the Conservation Values but reflecting
natural adaptation. Perpetual management activities will include:
131Page
" A r e a s o f s i g n i f i c a n t e r o s i o n c a u s i n g o r t h a t m a y c a u s e s o i l l o s s , v e g e t a t i o n l o s s ,
d e s t a b i l i z e d s l o p e s , w a t e r q u a l i t y i s s u e s , o r s o i l m o v e m e n t w i l l b e s t a b i l i z e d . T h e
f o l l o w i n g t a b l e i d e n t i f i e s f a v o r e d c o r r e c t i v e a p p r o a c h e s .
E r o s i o n T y p e
P o t e n t i a l C o r r e c t i o n s
S h e e t e r o s i o n o n r e l a t i v e l y f l a t a r e a
E r o s i o n c o n t r o l b l a n k e t , s e e d , h y d r o s e e d , s i l t
s o c k s
R i l l e r o s i o n o n f l a t o r s l o p e d a r e a
B i o - r o l l s o r c o i r l o g s , c h e c k d a m s , p l a n t i n g b y
s e e d , h y d r o s e e d , p o t t e d p l a n t s , l i v e s t a k e s
S l o p e e r o s i o n
E r o s i o n c o n t r o l b l a n k e t o r c o i r b l a n k e t ,
p l a n t i n g b y s e e d , p l a n t s , l i v e s t a k e s
S h o r e l i n e e r o s i o n
B i o - r o l l s o r c o i r l o g s , p l a n t i n g b y p o t t e d p l a n t s ,
l i v e s t a k e s
" B l o w d o w n o r w i n d t h r o w i n w o o d l a n d a r e a s i s t o b e e v a l u a t e d b a s e d o n t h e s p e c i f i c
a r e a , e x t e n t , a n d d e n s i t y o f d o w n e d t r e e s a n d t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n v a l u e s o f t h e a f f e c t e d
a r e a . R e t e n t i o n o f d e a d , d y i n g , a n d d o w n e d t r e e s a n d l i m b s p r o v i d e i m p o r t a n t h a b i t a t
f e a t u r e s a n d c o a r s e w o o d y d e b r i s t h a t i s e s s e n t i a l t o t h e h e a l t h o f f o r e s t e c o s y s t e m s .
A l l o w i n g d e a d w o o d t o a c c u m u l a t e w i t h t h e f o r e s t e d a r e a s s u p p o r t s f l o r a l a n d f a u n a l
h a b i t a t , w a t e r r e t e n t i o n , a n d n u t r i e n t c y c l i n g . D o w n e d t r e e s w i l l b e r e m o v e d i f t h e y
p o s e a s a f e t y r i s k . W o o d l a n d a r e a s w i l l b e i n s p e c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e n e e d f o r r e m o v a l f o r
f i r e p r e v e n t i o n a n d n e e d f o r r e s t o r a t i o n . S e l e c t e d r e m o v a l o f s p e c i f i c d o w n e d t r e e s a n d
l i m b s , w h i l e c o n t i n u i n g t o a l l o w f o r d e a d w o o d a c c u m u l a t i o n , r e q u i r e s p r i o r a p p r o v a l .
" A r e a s w i t h v e g e t a t i o n l o s s d u e t o w i l d f i r e w i l l b e e v a l u a t e d f o r r e g e n e r a t i o n p o t e n t i a l
a n d n e e d f o r r e m e d i a t i o n . W o o d l a n d a r e a s w i t h d e n s e s h a d e a n d s t e e p s l o p e s w i l l b e
r e - s e e d e d w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e s e e d m i x e s ( s e e A t t a c h m e n t X ) a n d p r o t e c t e d w i t h e r o s i o n
c o n t r o l m a t e r i a l s .
" R e s t o r e d p r a i r i e a s d e l i n e a t e d o n E x h i b i t X : a n n u a l c o n t r o l o f h e r b a c e o u s i n v a s i v e
v e g e t a t i o n w i t h s p o t m o w i n g a n d s p o t h e r b i c i d e t r e a t m e n t s , p r e s c r i b e d b u r n i n g , o r
h a y i n g .
" W o o d l a n d s a s d e l i n e a t e d o n E x h i b i t X : t a r g e t e d m a n a g e m e n t o f w o o d l a n d a r e a s w h e r e
i n v a s i v e w o o d y p l a n t s h a v e b e e n p r e v i o u s l y m a n a g e d a s o f t h e d a t e o f t h e e a s e m e n t ;
c o n t r o l o f w o o d y i n v a s i v e p l a n t s b y c u t t i n g a n d h e r b i c i d e t r e a t m e n t s i n t h e s e s p e c i f i c
a r e a s .
" W o o d l a n d s a n d w e t l a n d s : r e m e d i a l o r e n h a n c e m e n t s e e d i n g o r p l a n t i n g i n a r e a s w h e r e
i n v a s i v e p l a n t s h a v e p r e v i o u s l y b e e n c o n t r o l l e d a s o f t h e d a t e o f t h e e a s e m e n t a s
d e l i n e a t e d o n E x h i b i t X . R e m e d i a l o r e n h a n c e m e n t p l a n t i n g s a l o n g t h e S c h o o l L a k e
s h o r e l i n e w h e r e l e s s d e s i r a b l e t r e e s a n d s h r u b s a r e t h i n n e d .
1 4 1 P a g e
" M o n i t o r i n g a n d r e p o r t i n g : l a n d o w n e r ( s ) o r t h e i r e c o l o g i s t s a n d l a n d m a n a g e m e n t
c o n t r a c t o r s t o s u p p l y m a n a g e m e n t a c t i v i t y r e p o r t s t o e a s e m e n t h o l d e r .
B y J u n e 1 5 o f e a c h y e a r , t h e M C W D w i l l p r o v i d e e a c h f e e o w n e r w i t h a r e p o r t t h a t , o n t h e b a s i s
o f M C W D i n s p e c t i o n , d e s c r i b e s a n n u a l f e e o w n e r m a n a g e m e n t p u r s u a n t t o t h i s s e c t i o n . B y J u l y
3 0 , f e e o w n e r s , i n d i v i d u a l l y o r c o l l e c t i v e l y , w i l l s u p p l y a p r o p o s e d w o r k s c o p e f o r M C W D
c o n c u r r e n c e , w h i c h t h e M C W D w i l l n o t u n r e a s o n a b l y w i t h h o l d . I f w o r k u n d e r a n a p p r o v e d
s c o p e h a s n o t b e e n c o m p l e t e d b y [ i n s e r t d a t e i n a d v a n c e o f d e a d l i n e f o r C i t y c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f
a s s e s s m e n t t o C o u n t y ] , t h e M C W D m a y r e q u e s t t h a t t h e C i t y a s s e s s t h e s c o p e c o s t [ p r o r a t a ? ]
a s p r o v i d e d i n t h e E a s e m e n t , m a y r e t a i n a c o n t r a c t o r t o p e r f o r m t h e w o r k a t a n a p p r o p r i a t e
t i m e , a n d m a y r e c e i v e t h e a s s e s s e d f u n d s f r o m t h e C i t y . I f t h e f e e o w n e r s h a v e n o t e s t a b l i s h e d
o n e o r m o r e a p p r o v e d s c o p e s e n c o m p a s s i n g t h e e n t i r e C A , t h e M C W D m a y r e t a i n a c o n t r a c t o r
t o p e r f o r m a s c o p e f o r t h e e n t i r e C A b a s e d o n i t s r e p o r t a n d m a y r e q u e s t t h a t t h e C i t y a s s e s s
t h e r e a s o n a b l e c o s t o f t h a t s c o p e .
L a n d P r o t e c t i o n E n f o r c e m e n t
B e c a u s e t h e C A w i l l b e p r o t e c t e d b y t h e E a s e m e n t , t h e M C W D w i l l m o n i t o r c o n f o r m a n c e t o t h e
E a s e m e n t a n d i n f o r m t h e f e e o w n e r o f a l l m a t e r i a l v i o l a t i o n s a n d a n y r e q u i r e d a c t i o n s t o
r e s o l v e a n y m a t e r i a l i s s u e s . I f , a f t e r b e i n g s o i n f o r m e d , t h e f e e o w n e r f a i l s t o c o n f o r m t o t h e
E a s e m e n t w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e p e r i o d o f t i m e , t h e C i t y o r t h e M C W D , i n d e p e n d e n t l y o r
t o g e t h e r , m a y s e r v e w r i t t e n n o t i c e o n t h e f e e o w n e r s t a t i n g t h e a l l e g e d v i o l a t i o n , t h e
c o r r e c t i o n s r e q u i r e d a n d a r e a s o n a b l e t i m e w i t h i n w h i c h t h e c o r r e c t i o n s s h a l l b e m a d e . I f t h e
f e e o w n e r f a i l s t o c o m p l y w i t h i n t h e t i m e s p e c i f i e d , o r s u c h o t h e r t i m e a s t h e M C W D , C i t y a n d
f e e o w n e r m a y a g r e e , t h e C i t y a n d / o r t h e M C W D m a y e n t e r t h e p r e m i s e s a n d t a k e c o r r e c t i v e
a c t i o n a s n e e d e d t o a t t a i n c o m p l i a n c e . T h e r e a s o n a b l e c o s t s o f e n f o r c e m e n t a n d c o r r e c t i v e
a c t i o n b y t h e C i t y a n d t h e M C W D , i n c l u d i n g r e a s o n a b l e a t t o r n e y c o s t s , m a y b e a s s e s s e d a g a i n s t
t h e r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e a f f e c t e d C A i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e E a s e m e n t . A n y
a s s e s s m e n t ( i n c l u d i n g a n y p o r t i o n o f a n a s s e s s m e n t ) m a d e h e r e u n d e r m a y b e c h a l l e n g e d i n a
l e g a l a c t i o n , w i t h t h e a t t o r n e y '