Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
10.03.2017 City Council Meeting Packet
MEDINA AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, October 3, 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 19, 2017 5 PM Special Council Meeting B. Minutes of the September 19, 2017 6 PM Special Council Meeting C. Minutes of the September 19, 2017 Regular Council Meeting V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Appoint Melissa Robbins to Community Service Officer Position B. Resolution Recognizing Volunteers and Contributors to Medina Celebration Day C. Resolution Accepting Donations for Medina Celebration Day VI. COMMENTS A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda B. Park Commission C. Planning Commission VII. NEW BUSINESS A. JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment related to Solar Equipment 1. Ordinance Regarding Solar Equipment; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code 2. Resolution Authorizing Publication of the Ordinance by Title and Summary B. JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Conditional Use Permit for Two Accessory Buildings and Solar Equipment VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS XI. CLOSED SESSION: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW XII. ADJOURN Posted 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Medina City Council FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator DATE OF REPORT: September 27, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: October 3, 2017 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Appoint Melissa Robbins to Community Service Officer Position — Staff is requesting Council's permission to offer the part-time CSO position to Melissa Robbins pending a successful background investigation with a starting date the week of October 16, 2017. Robbins would have a starting pay of $18.00 per hour, working 24 hours per week. Staff recommends approval. See attached memo. B. Resolution Recognizing Volunteers and Contributors to Medina Celebration Day — Staff recommends approval of the resolution recognizing volunteers and contributors who made Medina Celebration Day a success again this year. See attached resolution. C. Resolution Accepting Donations for Medina Celebration Day — Staff recommends approval of the resolution recognizing and accepting all the generous donations from residents and businesses for Medina Celebration Day. See attached resolution. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment related to Solar Equipment — The JEGM Revocable Trust has requested a zoning ordinance text amendment and a conditional use permit related to solar panels. The applicant desires to install a 79 kW solar array on property at 2705 Willow Drive. An array of this capacity would occupy a footprint of just under 4000 s.f. Current City regulations limit Solar Equipment to occupy a footprint of 2500 square feet. The applicant requests that the City consider amending its zoning code to allow larger solar arrays. The applicant has also requested a conditional use permit for installation of the Solar Equipment. See attached report. Recommended Motion # 1: Move to adopt ordinance regarding solar equipment; amending chapter 8 of the city code Recommended Motion # 2: Move to adopt the resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by title and summary B. JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Conditional Use Permit for Two Accessory Buildings and Solar Equipment — JEGM Revocable Trust has requested Conditional Use Permits for a 79-kw solar field, greenhouse and warming shed at 2705 Willow Drive as accessory structures. The applicant also proposes to construct an underground storm water management device to treat run-off. The subject site is approximately 16.55 acres in size and is zoned Rural Residential. The property is located west of Willow Drive and south of the intersection of Willow Drive and Chestnut Road. The surrounding property to the south and west is zoned as Agricultural Preserve and the property to the north and east is zoned as Rural Residential. Currently the subject site is mainly pasture grass along with wetlands in the southwest area of the property. The property contains a home (currently under construction), barn, tennis court, gazebo, playhouse, pool and four sheds. See attached report. Recommended Motion: Motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit for JEGM Revocable Trust. X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 004314E-004332E for $71,221.63, order check numbers 046373-046416 for $156,386.02, and payroll EFT 0508164-0508189 for $48, 758.33. • Planning Department Update • Police Department Update • Public Works Department Update • Claims List XI. CLOSED SESSION: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2 SPECIAL MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on September 19, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided. I. ROLL CALL Members present: Anderson, Pederson, Martin, Cousineau, and Mitchell. Members absent: Also present: City Planner Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Police Sergeant Jason Nelson, Finance Director Erin Barnhart and City Administrator Scott Johnson. II. 2018 CITY OF MEDINA PROPOSED TAXES AND EXPENDITURES Barnhart provided the City Council with the 2018 proposed budget and levy. The proposed 2018 tax levy was $3,904,817 with a tax levy rate of 21.594%. The preliminary estimates show the City's property tax rate would decrease from 22.269% in pay 2017 to 21.594% in pay 2018, or a 3% decrease in the rate. The proposed budget includes a 3% increase to the General Fund property tax levy for 2018. The General Fund Budget was proposed at $4,426,643. The $116,902 proposed increase will be utilized for increased insurance costs, general maintenance, and a proposed 3% cost of living increase for staff. Council reviewed the long-term needs for fire, monetary reserves, bonding debt, equipment, road pavement management planning, utilities, neighboring cities tax rates, business tax comparisons, health insurance costs and the financial management plan. The financial management plan will be updated and posted on the website. Robert Franklin, 2819 Lakeshore Avenue, commended the City Council for keeping costs manageable for residents. Doug Dickerson, 2625 Pioneer Trail, suggested Medina consider a cost per resident methodology for department comparisons with other cities. IV. ADJOURN Mayor Mitchell adjourned the Work Session at 6:55 p.m. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1 September 19, 2017 Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2 September 19, 2017 1 DRAFT 2 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 4 5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on September 19, 2017 at 6 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Mitchell presided. 7 8 I. ROLL CALL 9 10 Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Pederson, Martin, and Mitchell. 11 12 Members absent: None. 13 14 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer 15 Jim Stremel, City Planner Dusty Finke, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, Planning 16 Consultant Nate Sparks, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Police Sergeant 17 Jason Nelson. 18 19 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 20 21 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 22 The agenda was approved as presented. 23 24 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.) 25 26 A. Approval of the September 5, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 27 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the September 5, 2017 28 regular City Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 29 30 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 31 32 A. Approve Final Pay Request to C & L Excavating, Inc. for Sioux Drive Turn 33 Lane Improvement Project 34 B. Approve Amended and Restated Contract for Fire Protection between the 35 City of Maple Plain and the City of Medina 36 C. Approve Warm -Up Pitchers Area Installation Services Agreement 37 D. Resolution No. 2017-67 Accepting Donation from the Hamel Athletic Club 38 E. Resolution No. 2017-68 Accepting Public Utilities within the Just for Kix 39 Development 40 F. Resolution No. 2017-69 Approving Setback Variance from Right -of -Way for 41 McDonald's at 822 Highway 55 42 G. Call for Special City Council Meeting on October 11, 2017 at 7:30 a.m. for 43 the Fall Business Tours 44 H. Call for Special City Council Meeting on November 8, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. to 45 Discuss the Comprehensive Plan and Public Comments 46 Johnson provided a summary of the items included on the consent agenda. 47 48 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 49 passed unanimously. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 September 19, 2017 I VI. COMMENTS (7:03 p.m.) 2 3 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 4 There were none. 5 6 B. Park Commission 7 Scherer reported that the Park Commission will meet the following night to consider the 8 park dedication aspect of the Mark of Excellence Homes Concept Plan, the 2040 9 Comprehensive Plan and the Friends of the Park Program. 10 11 C. Planning Commission 12 Planning Commissioner DesLauriers reported that the Planning Commission met the 13 previous week to consider a Concept Plan from Mark of Excellence for 94 twin homes. 14 He stated that the major topic of discussion was the timing for the development as the 15 staging period is different under the existing Comprehensive Plan and draft 16 Comprehensive Plan. He stated that while the Commission is not opposed to the twin 17 homes, the Commission would recommend less density and did not feel that the 18 proposal met the qualifications for a PUD. He reported that the Commission also 19 considered the requests related to the Woodlake Landfill, which has been on the agenda 20 for the past two meetings. He stated that there has been a considerable amount of 21 discussion regarding the proposed language that would change the zoning from an 22 operating landfill to a closed landfill and regarding the areas of concern. He noted that 23 direction was given to staff to contact the MPCA to gather more information on the 24 groundwater and methane gas areas of concern and therefore the item was again 25 tabled. He stated that the Commission also reviewed a proposal to increase the 26 maximum allowed area for ground mounted solar equipment and noted that the 27 Commission did support the increase. He stated that the Commission then also 28 recommended approval of a residential CUP request for ground mounted solar 29 equipment and two accessory buildings. 30 31 VII. PRESENTATIONS 32 33 A. 2018 Preliminary Budget & Tax Levy (7:08 p.m.) 34 Johnson noted that the City must adopt a preliminary budget and levy by September 30tn 35 of each year. 36 37 Barnhart stated that the budget open house occurred prior to the regular Council 38 meeting tonight. She stated that staff is proposing a balanced budget for the general 39 fund with an increase of $116,902 from 2017. She reviewed the proposed increases for 40 the general fund and debt levies and reviewed the items that would account for those 41 increases. She reviewed the proposed staffing changes and cost of living increases, 42 noting that staff would continue to review comparable information from other 43 municipalities. She provided additional details on the payment schedules for the debt 44 services levies. She stated that the preliminary market value information from Hennepin 45 County shows an increase of 5.6 percent to the market values and 5.6 percent change in 46 the tax capacity for the City. She stated that the overall tax rate would decrease 3.4 47 percent from the 2017 rate, which is directly related to the market value increases. She 48 stated that the City continues to operate with healthy fund balances and noted that it is 49 anticipated that the City will again have a budget surplus at the end of 2017 because of 50 the permit revenue. She stated that the City continues to operate with the five-year 51 Capital Improvement Plan, which allows the City to budget for upcoming needs. She Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 September 19, 2017 I stated that the City does not receive local government aid but does receive some funds 2 from the State for police and fire, recycling, and Municipal State Aid (MSA) road 3 maintenance. She stated that there are three road projects proposed for 2018. 4 5 Scherer provided a summary of the proposed road projects, noting that some additional 6 dead-end projects may be added before the final budget is adopted in December. 7 8 Barnhart noted that because those projects are not funded through the general fund, 9 those additional projects would not have an impact on the figures adopted tonight. 10 11 Mitchell noted that once this budget is adopted, staff will continue to gather information 12 and the budget can be lowered prior to final adoption but cannot be raised. 13 14 1. Resolution No. 2017-70 Approving Proposed Tax Levy for 2018 15 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-70 approving 16 the 2018 preliminary tax levy. Motion passed unanimously. 17 18 2. Resolution No. 2017-71 Approving Proposed General Fund Budget 19 for 2018 20 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Pederson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-71 approving 21 the 2018 preliminary general fund budget. Motion passed unanimously. 22 23 3. Resolution No. 2017-72 Reducing Debt Service Tax Levies for 2018 24 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Pederson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-72 reducing 25 debt service tax levies for 2018. Motion passed unanimously. 26 27 4. Establish Public Discussion Date for Final 2018 Tax Levy and 28 Budget 29 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to establish the 2018 final tax levy and 30 budget discussion for December 5, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall. Motion passed 31 unanimously. 32 33 Mitchell noted that there was a public open house prior to the regular meeting tonight. 34 He welcomed additional comments that residents may have and noted that the final 35 budget is scheduled to be presented at the December 5, 2017 City Council Meeting. 36 37 VIII. NEW BUSINESS 38 39 A. Excelsior Group LLC — PUD Concept Plan Review — 2120 and 2212 40 Chippewa Road (7:17 p.m.) 41 Martin recused herself from the discussion. 42 43 Finke stated that this is a PUD Concept Plan review and therefore only comments are 44 requested and no formal action is required. He reviewed the proposed project location, 45 which is guided for low density residential within the 2021-2025 staging period of the 46 current Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the staging period allows for some flexibility 47 to jump ahead two years of the staging period if enough points are gained through the 48 review criteria. He stated that information was provided in the staff report regarding the 49 current Comprehensive Plan as well as the draft Comprehensive Plan to provide the 50 Council with the information necessary to review the request under both the existing and 51 draft plans. He stated that the draft plan is out for formal review. He stated that the City Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 September 19, 2017 1 has reviewed Concept Plans from this applicant a few times previously in the past year. 2 He reviewed the adjacent property uses and zoning. He stated that there are two 3 housing products proposed, one similar to the typical low -density zoning district on the 4 western portion of the property and more narrow lots proposed for the eastern portion of 5 the property which provides additional space for open space and park property. He 6 stated that if the narrow lots were going to be used, staff would recommend lowering the 7 number of narrow lots to still meet the requirements of the R-1 zoning district. He 8 reviewed the purpose of the PUD ordinance, noting that the Council would need to 9 ensure that the application would meet those requirements in order to grant the PUD. 10 He stated that the draft Comprehensive Plan is expected to be in place prior to the 2021 11 staging period and therefore staff believes that the Council should consider those 12 elements when reviewing this request. He noted that two-year flexibility would be 13 allowed to the staging period, which could move the development to 2019. He stated 14 that the applicant would propose to begin construction prior to that time but not issue 15 certificates of occupancy until 2019. He noted that the draft Comprehensive Plan would 16 actually delay the staging period further to the 2025 staging period. He stated that staff 17 estimates the net density to be 2.3 units per acre, which falls within the allowed density 18 range for the R-1 district. He stated that the standard R-1 development would fall closer 19 to two units per acre and that is why the Planning Commission recommended lower 20 density. He highlighted an area where the Planning Commission recommended lower 21 density because of the neighboring rural residential zoning. He stated that the primary 22 elements of discussion fall to transportation and infrastructure, as those elements would 23 need to be in place in order to consider flexibility to the staging plan. He stated that 24 there is only a single watermain connection east of Arrowhead Drive, which is a concern. 25 He provided additional information on a watermain break that occurred this past 26 summer. He stated that the City's water plan identifies a second connection which is not 27 yet in place. He stated that the transportation plan identifies a future connection of 28 Chippewa Drive which is also not in place at this time. He reviewed the other elements 29 that are also considered when determining if a PUD would be appropriate. He stated 30 that the Planning Commission held a public hearing the previous month and ultimately 31 did not feel that the PUD criteria were met by this request and that the staging plan 32 criteria were not met to allow for a jump ahead. He stated that if the developer is willing 33 to make the infrastructure and transportation connections, that could qualify to meet the 34 criteria. He stated that the applicant submitted a new Concept Plan today, which staff 35 has not had the opportunity to review, in an attempt to meet the comments of the 36 Planning Commission. 37 38 Ben Schmidt, Excelsior Group, apologized for the late submission of the updated 39 Concept Plan and recognized that they would not receive a full review of that submission 40 but noted that they were attempting to show that they are willing to incorporate the 41 comments they have received thus far from the Planning and Park Commissions. He 42 stated that they recognize that the critical factors must be met and believe that they have 43 been. He stated that one comment that was heard from both Commissions was that the 44 development would need a larger park, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, and 45 noted that revisions were made to the plan to include a larger park. He stated that they 46 also heard concern with the lack of a second watermain and the future connection for 47 Chippewa. He stated that this project would fill in the gaps between the Wealshire and 48 Lunski projects for the watermain to loop that between those properties and back to 49 Highway 55. He stated that the engineers for this project believe that the property could 50 be served with existing gravity sewer and would appear to be the last project that could 51 be fed by gravity. He stated that they therefore believe that the critical factors would be Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4 September 19, 2017 I met and they would provide benefit from the park that would be provided and the 2 contributions they would make the watermain service. He stated that the Planning 3 Commission requested to see what the development would look like with all 90-foot lots 4 and provided an example of what the development could look like, which would create 5 63 lots. He stated that they then used the 63 lots with the layout they would prefer which 6 includes both 90-foot lots and smaller villa style lots. He believed that the smaller villa 7 style lots would provide a good transition from the neighboring Lunski and Wealshire 8 developments. He stated that with the inclusion of a larger park, they further reduced 9 the number of lots to 60. He provided additional details on the proposed park, which he 10 would see as a hub for this side of Medina and incorporates the comments they received 11 from the Park Commission along with trail connections to the neighboring developments. 12 He provided additional details on the wetland mitigation and a wetland complex that 13 could be created in conjunction with Wealshire. He provided additional details on the 14 proposed layout of the development, noting that the proposed park would be easily 15 accessed from Chippewa for those outside of the development. He provided additional 16 information on the streetscape. He stated that they listened to the comments they heard 17 thus far and attempted to incorporate those comments to make the proposed project 18 better. 19 20 Anderson stated that the original park is 1.3 acres and asked the size of the new park. 21 22 Schmidt estimated about four and five acres but was unsure. 23 24 Finke stated that the buildable area appears to be 3.5 acres. 25 26 Mitchell asked the number of homes that feed into the park for Fields of Medina. 27 28 Finke replied that there are 120 homes and 150 planned townhomes to the south for the 29 7.5 usable acres the park resides on. 30 31 Mitchell stated that there is not enough land at the Fields of Medina to have a regulation 32 size soccer field and that is why he was happy to hear this soccer field would be 33 regulation size. 34 35 Pederson stated that he likes that the larger park was included and the lots were made 36 larger but noted that he still struggles with the staging. 37 38 Cousineau agreed that she struggles with the staging and which version of the 39 Comprehensive Plan the Council should be reviewing this request under. She stated 40 that if the current Comprehensive Plan is used she then questioned the definition of 41 development and whether that includes construction and disturbance of the land or 42 whether that means occupancy. 43 44 Finke stated that the current Comprehensive Plan is in place until the draft plan is 45 formally adopted by the City Council. He anticipated that the City would formally adopt 46 the draft plan early 2018. He stated that once the update is underway and the public 47 hearing has been held, the statute allows the City to enact a moratorium in order to 48 protect the planning process. He stated that staff would only suggest the use of 49 moratorium if major changes are made to the Comprehensive Plan and therefore the 50 planning process could be upset contrary to what is planned for. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5 September 19, 2017 1 Batty stated that now that the 60-day review period is in place for applications, the City 2 must act on applications and therefore if there is an application that the City is forced to 3 act on while it is considering major changes to the Comprehensive Plan, the moratorium 4 could be enacted to protect the planning process. He noted that this is a concept plan 5 and therefore the 60-day review period would not apply to this request. 6 7 Finke provided an example of when the City allowed construction to begin earlier than 8 the staging plan with the agreement that the building would not be occupied until the 9 allowed staging plan. He noted that example is of a commercial building and therefore is 10 not an exact comparison. 11 12 Anderson asked and received confirmation that both the staging jump ahead and PUD 13 are merit based. He stated that he struggles with the design and does not believe that 14 this is the type of innovative design that would qualify for a PUD and does not appear to 15 have enough merit to qualify for the jump ahead either. 16 17 Pederson stated that without the watermain and road connection for Chippewa he would 18 not be interested as he believed that those infrastructure improvements would be 19 needed for public safety. 20 21 Mitchell stated that the watermain issue was discovered more recently and needs to be 22 solved. He agreed that the extension of Chippewa would need to be solved as well. He 23 stated that in terms of the development plan, it appears to be getting better under each 24 review. He stated that he appreciates the increased size of the park and the placement 25 which would allow use for people outside of the development. He stated that he 26 continues to struggle with the timing. 27 28 Cousineau stated that she prefers the plan submitted today but continues to struggle 29 with the timing. 30 31 Mitchell reassured the applicant that these comments regarding timing are not unique to 32 this applicant as the City has given the same comments to other requests that have 33 come before the Council recently. 34 35 Pederson agreed that he likes the improvements that have been made to the plan. He 36 urged the applicant to give special consideration to the areas that would buffer the 37 properties to the north to ensure that appropriate screening and buffering are provided to 38 those R-1 properties. 39 40 Finke noted that because the updated plan was submitted today, staff was not able to 41 provide full review and could provide additional comments if the Council and applicant 42 desire. 43 44 Martin rejoined the Council. 45 46 IX. OLD BUSINESS 47 48 A. Wally and Bridget Marx — Conservation Design Subdivision PUD General 49 Plan and Preliminary Plat — 2700-2900 Parkview Drive (7:52 p.m.) 50 Finke presented a request for a Conservation Design PUD (CD-PUD) for the 51 development of six lots on the property located between 2700 and 2900 Parkview Drive. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6 September 19, 2017 1 He stated that the City did review a Concept Plan earlier in the year and provided 2 comments. He noted that since that review, staff summarized the primary changes that 3 have been made to the plan and highlighted those changes. He stated that the applicant 4 proposes that the property owners would own the outlots subject to conservation rather 5 than having an easement holder. He provided an overview of the proposed subdivision 6 for the six lots on the subject property, approximately 90 acres in size. He stated that 7 the proposed conservation areas are highlighted and split between buildable and 8 unbuildable acreage. He stated that the ordinance requires at least 30 percent of the 9 buildable acreage to be included in conservation. He highlighted the wetland and 10 wetland buffer locations, which are protected by other regulations in City Code and 11 therefore should be removed from the conservation calculation. He noted that while the 12 steep slopes are removed from buildable acreage under the conservation design 13 ordinance, staff would argue that would have higher value than the conservation of 14 wetland and wetland buffers as those areas are already protected under City Code. He 15 reviewed the intent of the CD-PUD ordinance, noting that the primary flexibility that is 16 provided is the bonus density which would allow a property owner to double the number 17 of lots as an incentive to conserve property within conservation areas. He stated that 18 ultimately the discretion for the bonus density falls to the City Council to determine 19 based on the applicant meeting the purposes and intent of the ordinance criteria. He 20 stated that the six lots vary from 2.5 acres to 6.25 acres while the remaining property 21 would be put into permanent conservation outlots that would be owned by the adjacent 22 homeowner. He stated that the applicant identifies primary and secondary septic sites 23 within each of the lots. He stated that much of the wooded areas of the site would 24 remain within conservation areas. He highlighted a shared driveway proposed which 25 allows a preservation corridor and protection of the wooded areas. He stated that during 26 the concept review staff suggesting moving the septic sites proposed for lots three and 27 four to provide additional conservation but noted that the sites remain the same. He 28 stated that staff anticipates that the tree removal for the septic sites and driveway would 29 be minimal and would not come close to the allowed removal rate. He stated that the 30 applicant is proposing a public trail within the conservation easement and staff 31 anticipates that the trail corridors would meet the requirements for park dedication. He 32 stated that the Council would need to determine if the flexibility requested by the 33 applicant meets the ordinance criteria. He stated that staff believes that this property is 34 a good candidate for CD-PUD. He stated that the Planning commission held a public 35 hearing and recommended unanimous approval as presented subject to the conditions 36 noted in the staff report. He stated that staff has received several letters in support of 37 the project which have been provided to the Council. 38 39 Pederson asked the number of buildable acres under normal development. 40 41 Finke replied that conservation would not be required under normal development and 42 estimated 30 buildable acres. He noted that 40 percent of that, 11.7 buildable acres is 43 proposed for conservation. He provided additional details on what may or may not be 44 required under normal development in terms of wetland protection that would or would 45 not be required. 46 47 Mitchell asked if the buildable acres are contiguous. 48 49 Finke replied that the buildable acres are highlighted in yellow and grey. 50 51 Mitchell asked if the conservation acres are contiguous or scattered throughout the site. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7 September 19, 2017 1 2 Finke replied that the most significant portion of contiguous buildable acres proposed for 3 conservation is the wooded areas west of lot three. 4 5 Martin asked the thought process to suggest that the individual owners own the outlots 6 rather than placing them into third party ownership. She asked the applicable setback 7 for a home under normal development. 8 9 Finke stated that the exterior setbacks for a conservation design would remain the same 10 as the underlying zoning district and confirmed the location where a home could be built. 11 12 Martin stated that it was her recollection that the wooded area is extremely high quality, 13 although marked as moderate. 14 15 Finke provided additional details noting that this would be the highest quality ranking you 16 would be able to find within Medina. 17 18 Martin stated that because of the zoning, the property owners could request a building 19 permit and the City would have no means to infuse any additional protection on the 20 woodlands. 21 22 Finke confirmed that 20 percent removal could occur on each lot upon development. He 23 stated that the wetland preservation ordinance would be triggered on two of the lots 24 under normal development. 25 26 Martin asked for additional details on the trail alignment and potential connection from 27 Parkview Drive. 28 29 Finke explained that the staff concern is to provide safe access to the trail system as 30 there is nowhere to park to access the trails because of the private roadways and narrow 31 width of Parkview. He stated that there has been discussion of providing a trailhead to 32 this site near Parkview. He noted that another possibility would be for the City to work 33 with Three Rivers Park District to provide a connection from the existing Three Rivers 34 Park site across the street. He noted that another option would be to share parking with 35 the golf course and provide a connection from that route. 36 37 Martin stated that when the City seeks to preserve and protect the wetlands, there is 38 often signage posted as purchasers do not often understand the restrictions. She asked 39 if the wetland buffers and protected areas would be posted and signed with clarity. 40 41 Finke stated that he did not recall if there was language included in the land stewardship 42 plan but noted that language could be included. 43 44 Cousineau asked if there is any restoration planned outside of tree replacement. 45 46 Finke replied that there would be limited invasive species removal and planting. He 47 noted that the land stewardship plan is in draft form and additional restoration can be 48 added if desired. 49 50 Kent Williams, representing the applicant, identified the members of the team present 51 tonight and thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak tonight. He stated that Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8 September 19, 2017 1 there are two components to consider for CD-PUD which are design flexibility and how 2 well the conservation objectives are met. He noted recent changes to the ordinance 3 which affect this project including making the public access of conservation areas to 4 explicit rather than implicit; the two -acre size minimum (which this request meets); and 5 the maximum density bonus can only be provided in exceptional instances. He stated 6 that the Chair of the Planning Commission found that this project meets the criteria and 7 finds this property to be an exceptional instance. He noted that some resources are 8 moderate quality because they are not large enough in size. He stated that the only CD- 9 PUD that has been approved is the Stonegate Deerhill Preserve project. He compared 10 this project to the only approved project comparing the number of conserved acres and 11 buildable land included in conservation areas. He stated that each of the conserved 12 areas are high quality resources, although ranked as moderate because of the size. He 13 noted that although some aspects are protected under other elements, such as the 14 Tamarack Swamp, this proposal would provide public access to the resources that are 15 currently only available to Mr. Marx because he owns all the land surrounding that 16 resource. 17 18 Michael Pressman, Conservation Solutions, stated that he was first introduced to this 19 property 13 years ago, when he started the Minnehaha Creek's conservation project. 20 He stated that this property is identified as a priority for conservation. He stated that 21 Hennepin County foresters visited the property and talked about certain features as 22 high -quality areas. He noted that under current regulations, about 49 acres would be 23 protected but under this proposal nearly 70 acres would be protected, which is a 42 24 percent increase. He noted that with this type of development, the more restrictive 25 Minnehaha wetland buffer regulations would apply although that may not be the case 26 under regular development. He stated that the big woods remnant is one of the highest 27 quality resources on the property. He noted that the big woods are the habitat that was 28 here before the area was developed. He stated that the City's Natural Resources 29 Inventory stated that the old growth forests are probably one of the highest quality 30 resources in Medina. He noted that with this plan portions of the big woods would not be 31 cleared for swimming pools and lawns. He stated that the large wetland complex and 32 forest which includes the Tamarack Swamp will also be protected, which is a high value 33 resource that was identified as one of three in the City that is called out in the City's 34 Natural Resources Inventory that should be protected. He noted that School Lake would 35 also be preserved through the creation of outlots with protection, unlike typical lakeshore 36 property development that would include mowing up to the lakeshore to create a better 37 viewshed for the individual property owner and not for the benefit of the lake and fish 38 and animal habitat. He also spoke of the important wildlife corridors that would be 39 preserved through this subdivision. He noted that the plan would limit the building sites, 40 the areas that could be cut and mowed, and preserved the connections and interplay for 41 wildlife. He noted that the location to nearby Baker Park is also an important element 42 that would allow for further ecological connections. He stated that in this case the full 43 density bonus would equate to three lots. He stated that the natural resource elements 44 on this property are of the highest quality within Medina, within Hennepin County and he 45 would argue, within the seven -county metro area. He stated that this property is 46 identified within not only the City's natural resource maps but also by the DNR, 47 Minnehaha Creek, and Hennepin County. He stated that the interconnection of the 48 conservation elements is both within this property and outside of this property. He noted 49 that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would hold the easements and govern the 50 activity. He noted that other municipalities and counties in the metro are willing to pay 51 money for these conservation easements to protect these areas from development. He Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 9 September 19, 2017 I noted that even when bonding is requested to fund these conservation measures, these 2 actions pass all over the country to protect these areas. He noted that Medina had the 3 forethought to create this ordinance which would allow the City to gain these 4 conservation areas at no cost to the tax payers. 5 6 7 Laura Domyancich, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), stated that Mr. Marx 8 and his team approached the Watershed District in November of 2016 and for the past 9 ten months the Watershed District has been working with Mr. Marx and his team to draft 10 the documents for the proposed conservation easements. She stated that MCWD staff, 11 with the support of its Board, has moved forward in the roll of potential easement holder 12 because of the high quality of the features. She stated that MCWD currently holds 13 easements on the north side of School Lake and this would further contribute to the 14 protection of this feature. She stated that this project aligns with the goals of the MCWD. 15 She referenced the comments of Martin regarding signage and noted that part of the 16 conservation easement language stipulates that the areas must be signed and noted 17 that MCWD would supply and fund the cost of the signage. 18 19 Mr. Williams compared the objectives of the ordinance and how those would be met 20 under this proposal to what would occur under normal development. He stated that Mr. 21 Marx's arborist identified 4,000 significant trees, noting that under normal development 22 up to 15 percent of those trees (about 600) could be removed under normal 23 development without replacement. He noted that there would be no stipulation that 24 would protect the old growth woods. He stated that under this proposal prior approval 25 would be needed from the MCWD before conducted any cutting, which would ensure 26 protection. He noted that approximately 22 trees would be removed for the driveways 27 and was unsure of the number of trees that would be removed for the septic sites, noting 28 that the trees removed would not be of high quality. He estimated that about half of one 29 percent of the trees would be removed through this request compared to the 15 percent 30 that could be removed without replacement under normal development. He referenced 31 the debate with the location of the septic sites, noting that they do not believe that the 32 proposed locations would interrupt the trail connections and would like to keep the sites 33 outside of the conservation easement areas but noted that they would be agreeable if 34 the City desires that action. He noted that even though there is existing protection for 35 wetlands, this would provide even more protection for the wetlands. He noted that while 36 the large wetland complex is protected by the MCWD, the smaller wetlands would not be 37 protected under normal development but would be protected under this proposal. He 38 noted that under normal development wetlands can be filled for development and 39 mitigation can be provided through the purchase of wetland credits. He noted that this 40 area is also identified within the Met Council's future water and sewer area and therefore 41 the time to act to conserve this property is now. He stated that virtually the entire 42 property is on the composite open space map, noting that the Stonegate property had 43 only small portions of the northeast and to the south of the property located on the open 44 space map. He spoke of the value of this property as a wildlife corridor not only 45 internally connecting the features within the site but also connecting this site to other 46 adjacent properties. He stated that the steep slopes are not currently protected and 47 under conventional development a property owner could do what they like whereas 48 under this proposal those areas would be protected. He stated that the increased 49 density does not essentially mean an additional burden on the land, noting that under 50 conventional development the property owners can mow, cut, burn, hunt, trap, and build 51 within the conventional lot areas that those activities would be protected under this Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 10 September 19, 2017 1 proposal. He stated that the original proposal included only a semi-public trail around 2 School Lake but the Park Commission expressed a desire for an easement on the south 3 part of the property for future connection. He noted that the trail would not have been 4 constructed until a future time. He stated that because there were comments that the 5 desire would be for a trail now, they changed the plan to create a looping trail which 6 would allow the public to see all of the important conservation features on the property. 7 He stated that the location of the public trail would remain off the private horse trail and 8 keep those elements separate. He noted that signage would also be provided to keep 9 the public off of the private areas and on the public trail. He stated that while they would 10 be agreeable to putting in a trail head, that would come at some cost because that could 11 jeopardize some of the old growth woods. He stated that they would be amenable to the 12 desire of the City in regard to the trail head. He noted that there are elements that the 13 City will need to discuss in regard to the public trail including the easement holder for the 14 public trail, which would fall to the City noting that the City would then maintain that trail 15 easement and enforcement of that trail activity. He stated that they are agnostic on the 16 public trail issue. He stated that they believe that the public trail would be a feature for 17 the public to be able to see the resources that are being preserved and the other issues 18 that have arisen in regard to that element can be managed. He reviewed the secondary 19 elements of the ordinance comparing how this proposal would protect aspects that 20 would not be protected under conventional density. He stated that the density requested 21 would add three additional homes over a 90-acre area. He stated that lot one would 22 have a home built on it regardless of this request and doubted that any of the homes 23 would even be seen from off of the property. He stated that the setback from Parkview 24 will be exceeded to ensure that homes will not be seen from that roadway. He stated 25 that the density proposed is consistent with the density adjacent to the project. He 26 stated that the ordinance requires them to compare this proposal to future conventional 27 development, noting that the Met Council's future sewer service areas map identifies this 28 property as within the boundaries of property that would be served by sewer and water 29 by 2040. He noted that it is not then speculation that someday this property will be 30 sewered and this proposal would prevent that from happening. He stated that means 31 that the City would not have to count on the decisions of future members of the Met 32 Council, City Council, and landowners in terms of a higher density development 33 someday occurring on this property. He noted that he provided a summary of the 34 components of the approved CD-PUD Stonegate development and comparing those to 35 this proposal and provided a highlight of that. He provided additional information on the 36 proposal for the homeowners to own the outlot areas. He noted that the easement 37 agreement would include annual inspections by the MCWD that would include ongoing 38 maintenance activities. He stated that homeowners would be responsible for 39 maintaining the outlots and would have to go into the purchase with their eyes wide open 40 to those responsibilities, noting that Mr. Marx would also not be able to charge a higher 41 rate for those outlots because of the ongoing maintenance that would be required. He 42 stated that Mr. Marx is not a big developer, noting that every other CD-PUD proposal 43 that has come from the City has come from a big developer. He stated that Mr. Marx is 44 a longtime Medina resident that has lived on his property for years and has worked to 45 restore the property using a large amount of time and money to bring the property to this 46 state and this is the manner that he would like to use to preserve the work that he has 47 done and to protect the resources that exist on this property for future generations. He 48 asked that the Council use the facts to review this request. He stated that based on 49 what he has seen through this process and how complicated and expensive it is, he did 50 not believe that there would be many residents that have the necessary base density 51 and upfront funds to go through this process and therefore approving this application Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 11 September 19, 2017 I would not "open the floodgates" for future requests. He mentioned the comment that 2 this proposal has not been thoroughly vetted and reviewed the numerous meetings and 3 people that have been involved in the review of this application. He noted that the 4 Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the request as proposed. 5 He stated that they believe that the public trail would be a great feature but stated that 6 they would be open to the final plat including the trail or not including the trail. He stated 7 that this is the best deal that the Council will see for this property noting that many 8 municipalities and counties have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for conservation 9 elements of this quality. He asked the Council to approve this request. 10 11 Liz Letner stated that she opposes the looped trail which comes close (25 feet as 12 mentioned) to the horse trail. She stated that her property is the second one closest to 13 the trail and would not want to track enforcement of the use of the horse trail. She 14 stated that potential trespassing is a serious issue for her. She stated that she would not 15 oppose the south trail. 16 17 Cindy Piper, 2905 Willowwood Farm Road, stated that she is one of the 14 landowners 18 that surrounds School Lake. She stated that they have heard wonderful things about the 19 conservation easement and noted that while she is not opposed to that, she is worried 20 about the contiguous landowners. She stated that the public trail would be very hard to 21 maintain. She stated that the private landowners that use the horse trail would be 22 worried about impact to the neighborhood and would then build fences which would 23 eliminate the horse trail for the existing property owners. She stated that the 24 conservation easement will do wonderful things for the land but acknowledged that this 25 property would be difficult to develop. She highlighted the proposed looped trail and 26 noted that would only tell you that people will keep going straight to use the private horse 27 trail. She stated that she is not opposed to the south trail but would not like to see the 28 looped trail as that will make a huge difference to the residents that live there. 29 30 Richard Haverman read aloud the email that he sent to the City Council which states 31 that he owns 2782 Parkview Drive, which is the first property north of Mr. Marx's 32 driveway off Parkview Drive. He stated that he supports the comments expressed in a 33 letter submitted by his neighbor. He expressed concern with the proposed looped trail 34 and the potential of people parking along Parkview Drive as he believed that it would be 35 absurd and would be dangerous for those parking along the roadway and for 36 pedestrians. He stated that Parkview Drive can best be described as a rollercoaster. 37 He noted that there are sufficient trails within Baker Park Reserve for the public to use. 38 He stated that they do not want to lose the quiet enjoyment of their property because of 39 an unwanted and unneeded public trail. He asked who would police the public trail and 40 clean up garbage and debris from the public trail. He stated that he has a major concern 41 that people would feel embolden to stray onto private property and the vehicles parked 42 along Parkview would cause pedestrians to walk into the road to go around the vehicles. 43 He asked how his privacy would be preserved and did not believe that this development 44 would increase the property values of the existing homeowners. 45 46 Liz Weir, 1262 Hunter Drive, stated that this project is very dear to her as she and 47 previous Mayor Crosby worked hard to create this CD-PUD ordinance to protect the 48 beautiful natural elements in the City before the sewered area spreads and dense 49 development continues. She stated that cities like Hopkins once looked like Medina as 50 well before it was fully developed. She asked the Council to think of future Medina and 51 future generations. She stated that this is an opportunity to preserve unspoiled natural Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 12 September 19, 2017 1 beauty for future generations to enjoy and asked the Council to use the ordinance as it 2 was designed. 3 4 Charlie Schroder, 2910 Parkview, stated that he is the property owner immediately to the 5 north. He stated that this is a terrific property and commended Mr. Marx for the effort 6 that he has put into the property. He asked for less density and noted that the public 7 trails really are unworkable. He stated that the public cannot access the trail safely and 8 people would jump to the private horse trail. 9 10 Pederson stated that he struggles with not having an HOA to possess the conservation 11 easements and asked for input from Batty. 12 13 Batty stated that he was struck early on by that element, noting that his initial reaction 14 was not positive partly because he had not seen that before. He stated that one 15 challenge is that there would be a multiplicity of owners rather than a single party. He 16 stated that he would be interested in seeing examples in which what they are proposing 17 has been accomplished and worked. He stated that one of the challenges of small 18 HOA's is that they tend to become dysfunctional and dissolve. He noted that large 19 HOA's that have a lot of activity tend to be more successful. He stated that one risk in 20 forcing them to create an HOA would be that they would create an HOA simply to solve 21 the common ownership but then it could become nonfunctional and that could be worse 22 than not having one. 23 24 Pederson stated that if someone starts up a chainsaw, the other property owners would 25 probably investigate. He stated that if the HOA is going to become dysfunctional, then 26 perhaps that would not be worth creating. 27 28 Batty stated that people tend to have a higher interest on their property and therefore 29 perhaps they would only be interested in what happens on their property and not other 30 properties, because of the distance between properties. 31 32 Cousineau asked if it could become conditional. 33 34 Batty stated that the HOA should not be a deciding factor tonight, noting the actions that 35 are requested tonight for the rezoning and preliminary plat. He stated that there would 36 still be a lot of work on the other documents and noted that if this progresses he would 37 like to see examples of how this model works and would be open to hearing that 38 information. 39 40 Martin stated that she struggled with that same issue, noting that her experience has 41 been that common ownership of an outlot creates the thought of community asset. She 42 stated that if someone owns the entire area, they often assume they have the right to do 43 what they want. She stated that she would also be open to hearing more as it appears 44 the MCWD endorsed this option. She stated that she would also be interested in seeing 45 a marketing prospective for conservation design outlots as she did not believe that the 46 closing process would thoroughly convey that information about the outlots to 47 homeowners. 48 49 Anderson asked if anyone has experience with two easement holders. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 13 September 19, 2017 1 Martin noted that would be micromanagement. She stated that she looked at the 2 watershed documents from the last conservation easement process and they are very 3 thorough 4 5 Mitchell stated that there are a lot of details up in the air. He stated that the map tells 6 him all the information he needs, identifying the preserved areas and areas that would 7 already be protected to some degree. Mitchell referenced the elements that were 8 preserved within Stonegate and believed that there were more elements preserved than 9 was mentioned on the comparison sheet. 10 11 Martin noted that the prairie was restored and additional elements were preserved. 12 13 Mitchell stated that he did not believe that the areas highlighted in yellow were important 14 features that would meet this level of CD-PUD. He stated that the applicant's team has 15 stated that private land ownership can spoil the land but noted that there are many 16 parcels of land owned by Medina residents that have been maintained very well. He 17 stated that if the property owner feels so strongly about conservation, perhaps he should 18 just donate the conservation easement and build the three houses that would be allowed 19 under normal development. He stated that he feels strongly that increasing the density 20 would turn the City more into a city like Hopkins. He stated that if there is a piece of land 21 that is fairly wild and has three houses, that seems wonderful. 22 23 Martin stated that if there are three lots that would be buildable, there would be building 24 permitted and those requests would never come before the Council and therefore there 25 is no opportunity to protect resources on the property such as the old growth forest. She 26 stated that this is the most beautiful stand of trees in the City and within Hennepin 27 County. She stated that she would not want to lose that element and the connectivity of 28 the elements (the forest and Tamarack Swamp) would benefit the entire watershed and 29 the minimization of building sites within those areas. She believed that this is a 30 magnificent piece of property that she has walked two or three times. She stated that 31 this property is beyond comprehension and is the highest quality that the City has. She 32 stated that this is an opportunity to not only protect these resources but also use 33 protective zoning. She stated that if the sewer system goes through here, which would 34 occur before 2040, this could be designated as high -density and that could devastate 35 this property. She stated that while some property owners have big swaths of land, 36 future generations would not have that opportunity because the land costs would 37 continue to raise. She stated that this is a magnificent opportunity to protect Medina for 38 future generations. She stated that she is a firm advocate of this property that has 39 enormous value for conservation. 40 41 Mitchell stated that if the Marx family feels strongly, they can dedicate the conservation 42 easement and three families can live in the lots that would be allowed. 43 44 Martin stated that to suggest that someone give away their land without some benefit is 45 an unfair assessment to the assumption of someone's financial resources. 46 47 Mitchell stated that the City is giving away money by allowing six homes instead of three. 48 49 Martin stated that the City would not be giving away money. 50 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 14 September 19, 2017 1 Anderson stated that he became aware of this project six or seven years ago, noting that 2 the original proposal included nine or ten lots. He commended the property owner for 3 his willingness to work with staff and reduce the density and create a plan that is 4 immensely better. He stated that the applicant has done a lot and worked cooperatively 5 to improve the plan. He stated that he agrees with the high value of the resources on 6 this property. He stated that he believes that lots one and two are too close but because 7 of the high value of the resources he could be convinced that those lots would be okay. 8 He believed that the trailhead would be imperative for the property, noting that the 9 comments made about Parkview were correct and parking cannot occur on the street. 10 He stated that most people would park across the street at Baker Park Reserve but the 11 trailhead would allow for two parking spots. 12 13 Martin stated that perhaps rather than the trailhead, which cut into the forest, the 14 applicant could provide proof of parking in the case that shared parking cannot be 15 worked out with Hennepin County or Three Rivers Park. He stated that perhaps the 16 applicant shows where potential parking could occur should the shared parking not be 17 worked out. 18 19 Finke confirmed that could be done. 20 21 Pederson stated that this is a beautiful piece of land. He stated that he began on the 22 Council in 2011 and Mr. Marx has reduced his proposal during the time that he has been 23 on the Council. 24 25 Mitchell stated that there are trails at Baker Park and was not sure why additional trails 26 would be needed on this property. He stated that the private horse trail has been 27 voluntarily agreed on by the existing property owners for years and he did not want to 28 see that jeopardized by this action. 29 30 Cousineau asked if the loop could be eliminated. 31 32 Finke agreed that could be done. He noted developments such as Wild Meadows and 33 the lost opportunity that the City had to receive trails. 34 35 Martin stated that all the trail would need to be signed for persons to stay on the trail and 36 to safeguard private property. She stated that the easement can be dedicated and the 37 trail would not have to be constructed until a future time when connections are available 38 and the path is better known. She stated that perhaps it would make sense to allow the 39 landowner to gate the entrance to the property during public hours, which would only 40 allow the property owners to access the six lots outside of park hours. 41 42 Anderson stated that would seem contrary to the conservation and use of the property. 43 44 Martin stated that perhaps the public access is made separate from the property 45 entrance. 46 47 Anderson noted that detail could be worked out in the future. He agreed that the 48 trailhead could be gated. 49 50 Cousineau stated that if they receive trail easement they would be missing out on 51 potential park dedication fees. Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 15 September 19, 2017 1 2 Finke suggested that the whole trail easement be taken at this time, whether or not it is 3 used. 4 5 Batty agreed, noting that the City would never have another opportunity to gain the trail 6 easement. 7 8 Pederson asked if additional screening could occur for the Schroders, which is the first 9 property owner to the north. 10 11 Martin stated that the developer offered that during the presentation. 12 13 Cindy Piper stated that if the goal was to provide access from Parkview, that would 14 mean the Johnsons would be the next property and perhaps the City will gain the 15 easement when the day arises to connect the two, the trail would then be built. 16 17 Martin confirmed that is what the Council is saying for the looped trail. She noted that 18 the east west trail would be provided. 19 20 Finke stated that there may be some trail immediately and the future easement would be 21 given for the looped trail to the eastern wetland. 22 23 Mitchell asked if the existing horse trail crosses lots three and four. 24 25 Cindy Piper identified the existing horse trail. 26 27 Mitchell asked and received confirmation that the horse trail could remain even if homes 28 are built on lots three and four. He stated that those neighbors that use the trail would 29 simply have to approach the new homeowners for those lots to confirm that they would 30 not be opposed to the continued use, noting that is common practice as there are plenty 31 of similar private trails that exist in Medina and Wayzata. 32 33 Moved by Martin, seconded by Pederson, to direct staff to prepare documents granting 34 PUD General Plan of Development and Preliminary Plat approval to Wally and Bridget 35 Marx for the requested CD-PUD subdivision, subject to the conditions noted in the staff 36 report and adding the following conditions:, an additional condition will be added to make 37 clear that there is protective signage to protect the conserved areas in a manner 38 acceptable to staff and MCWD; a condition would be added that marketing materials for 39 the sale of these lots must include the easement and land stewardship plan 40 documentation, and any brochures have to clarify the parameters of the conservation 41 requirements imposed on the landowners, which would be approved by City staff; a 42 condition would require staff to work with the landowner to develop a proof of parking 43 within the property; the trail signage would be clearly marked delineating the trail and 44 private property; the trail loop would not be built out initially but would be dedicated 45 through easement; there would be some flexibility presented in the plan documents to 46 permit a gate/locked gate to create security and prevent intrusion onto the private 47 property; the developer would install a landscaping buffer along the northerly border or 48 lot one and similarly to lot two to shield the property immediately to the north for visibility 49 of the home constructed on lot one; and additional discussion is to occur regarding the 50 use of an HOA or other private system for ownership of the conservation easements. 51 Motion passed 4-1 (Mitchell opposed). Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 16 September 19, 2017 1 2 Mitchell briefly recessed the meeting at 9:47 p.m. 3 4 Mitchell reconvened the meeting at 9:52 p.m. 5 6 B. Medina Senior Living Community — Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site 7 Plan Review (9:52 p.m.) 8 Johnson stated that the Council reviewed this item at the August 15th meeting and 9 highlighted the few changes that were made since that time. He noted that staff has 10 worked with the applicant since that time. 11 12 Sparks stated that the Council requested that the applicant move the building to 13 minimize the wetland impact near the structure. He stated that documents related to the 14 approval were directed to come back to the Council along with the successful completion 15 of minimizing the wetland impacts. He provided additional information on the wetland 16 impacts, noting that a portion of the building was moved away from the wetland to 17 minimize that impact. He noted that there would still be an impact for the entrance to the 18 site but the impact near the building has been minimized. He stated that the parking has 19 been reduced and a proof of parking was provided in the case that the additional parking 20 is needed. He stated that the number of units were reduced by seven units and 21 therefore the parking reduction relates to the reduction in units. He stated that the 22 Planning Commission recommended that the building materials for the skyway be 23 changed and noted that has been done. He noted that the landscaping plan was slightly 24 altered because of the building location change. He stated that a few replacement trees 25 will not make it into the new plan because of the shifted building location. He displayed 26 the plan that was discussed on August 15th and then compared that to the plan that 27 incorporates the directed changes. He provided additional information on park 28 dedication and the tree removal and replacement, which could include funds for offsite 29 planting. He stated that the Planning Commission felt comfortable with the proposing 30 rezoning because of the similar uses allowed within the zoning districts. 31 32 Pederson stated that he recalled reading something that there is a question regarding 33 the underground parking and asked for additional information. 34 35 Stremel stated that staff would like confirmation that the underground parking would not 36 be interfered with by the underground water levels, providing an example of the situation 37 that arose with the Wealshire project. 38 39 Batty reviewed the actions before the Council tonight, noting that the rezoning request 40 would be made contingent upon approval of the final plat. He stated that the Council is 41 also considering the Preliminary Plat approval, which would be subject to a number of 42 conditions. He stated that if they could not meet the conditions outlined, the applicant 43 would not move forward to Final Plat and the rezoning then would also not occur. 44 45 Mitchell confirmed that the applicant would work with staff to ensure that the readings 46 and elevations are correct to support the underground parking. 47 48 1. Ordinance No. 617 Amending the Official Zoning Map to Rezone the 49 Property Being Subdivided and Developed as the Medina Senior 50 Living Community Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 17 September 19, 2017 I Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to adopt ordinance no. 617 to rezone the 2 subject property to the Business zoning district. Motion passed 4-1 (Cousineau 3 opposed). 4 5 2. Resolution No. 2017-73 Authorizing Publication of Ordinance No. 6 617 by Title and Summary 7 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-73 authorizing 8 publication of ordinance no. 617 by title and summary. Motion passed 4-1 (Cousineau 9 opposed). 10 11 3. Resolution No. 2017-74 Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for a 12 Subdivision to be Known as "Lunski-Nelson Addition" 13 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve resolution no. 2017-74 granting 14 preliminary plat approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion 15 passed 4-1 (Cousineau opposed). 16 17 4. Resolution No. 2017-75 Approving a Site Plan Review for the Medina 18 Senior Living Community and Medical/Office Building 19 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve resolution no. 2017-75 granting 20 site plan review approval, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion 21 passed 4-1 (Cousineau opposed). 22 23 Martin left the meeting at 10:08 p.m. 24 25 C. Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition — Final Plat and Development Agreement 26 (10:09 p.m.) 27 Pederson noted that he has recused himself in the past but does not believe he has any 28 conflict of interest at this point. He asked if he should recuse himself now because he 29 has in the past. 30 31 Batty asked what has changed from past situations that would change the belief of a 32 conflict of interest. 33 34 Pederson stated that in the past the property bordered his property to the north. He 35 noted that this parcel of land is past his property and therefore he no longer borders the 36 subject property. He stated that he has never had a financial interest in the matter. 37 38 Finke stated that in the past they stubbed a street to a common property line and there 39 were common utilities and therefore there was more direct of a tie for previous phases. 40 41 Batty stated that ultimately it would be Pederson's decision. He stated that what is done 42 is done, and whatever conflict may have been was with regard to the first addition and 43 perhaps there was benefit from the connection but as the subdivision moves on, those 44 benefits or issues have been resolved. 45 46 Pederson confirmed the consensus of the Council that he does not need to recuse 47 himself. 48 49 Finke stated that the original plat was approved in 2013 for a total of 126 lots. He stated 50 that Phase I began that year and included 51 homes and this Phase II would include an 51 additional 44 single-family lots. He stated that the applicant also provides an outlot for Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 18 September 19, 2017 I access to the southeast corner of the site, which is owned by the City. He stated that 2 there is another outlot on the north end which is identified for future phasing of the 3 project. He displayed the approved Preliminary Plat and identified the location of Phase 4 II. He stated that the purpose of the Final Plat is to ensure consistency with the 5 Preliminary Plat and confirm that all conditions have been met. He stated that the plat is 6 consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat and staff believes that all conditions have 7 been with the inclusion of the conditions included in this proposed resolution. He noted 8 that staff is working with the applicant to finalize two blanks on the Development 9 Agreement related to the numbers for the letter of credit and construction escrow. He 10 stated that the numbers have been provided by the applicant, which are then reviewed 11 by staff and will then be inserted into the Development Agreement as agreed upon by 12 staff. 13 14 Batty explained that standard procedure is for the developer to provide cost estimates 15 which are reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure those figures are accurate and 16 determine the maximum exposure of the City. 17 18 1. Resolution No. 2017-76 Granting Final Plat Approval for Reserve of 19 Medina 2nd Addition 20 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-76 granting 21 final plat approval for Reserve of Medina 2nd Addition. Motion passed unanimously. 22 23 2. Development Agreement by and between the City of Medina and Toll 24 MN, L.P. 25 Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve Development Agreement by 26 and between the City of Medina and Toll MN, L.P. for the Reserve of Medina 2nd 27 Addition with the dollar amounts as shown in the staff memorandum. Motion passed 28 unanimously. 29 30 D. Resolution No. 2017-77 Adopting Assessment Roll for Deer Hill Preserve 31 Road Improvement Project (10:27 p.m.) 32 Johnson stated that this is for the public improvement project for the new portion of Deer 33 Hill Road and Homestead Trail. He stated that the project was requested by the 34 developer and therefore 100 percent of the cost would be assessed to the developer. 35 36 Batty stated that this does not require a public hearing because this is a result of a 37 petition and waiver. 38 39 Moved by Cousineau, seconded by Anderson, to adopt resolution no. 2017-77 adopting 40 assessment roll for Deer Hill Preserve road improvement project. Motion passed 41 unanimously. 42 43 X. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (10:30 p.m.) 44 Johnson noted the memorandum from Be!land regarding Wayzata Police Officer William 45 Matthews' Funeral and highlighted the excellent job done by Sergeant Nelson and 46 thanked him for his great work. Johnson also thanked the Police force for the excellent 47 job they did with funeral and the job they continue to do. 48 49 Pederson commented that it speaks highly of the department that they were chosen to 50 be in command. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 19 September 19, 2017 1 Anderson commented that the note from Mitchell to Wayzata Mayor Wilcox was 2 elegantly written. 3 4 Johnson thanked Anne Klaers for the excellent job she did with Medina Celebration Day, 5 as well as the Public Works Department and other Staff who made the event possible. 6 He also thanked Shorty Dorweiler for his help with the event. 7 8 XI. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (10:32 p.m.) 9 No comments. 10 11 XII. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (10:32 p.m.) 12 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the bills, EFT 004294E- 13 004313E for $42,425.13, order check numbers 046323-046372 for $186,710.33, and 14 payroll EFT 0508133-0508163 for $49,080.74 and payroll manual check 0020437 for 15 $64.28. Motion passed unanimously. 16 17 XIII. ADJOURN 18 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to adjourn the meeting at 10:32 p.m. 19 Motion passed unanimously. 20 21 22 23 Bob Mitchell, Mayor 24 Attest: 25 26 27 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 20 September 19, 2017 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on September 19, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Medina City Hall. I. Call to Order Members present: Anderson, Cousineau, Martin, Mitchell, and Pederson Members absent: None Also present: City Planner Dusty Finke, City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Ron Batty, and League of Minnesota Cities Appointed Attorney Justin Templin II. Closed Session: Anderson made a motion to adjourn to closed session at 5:02 p.m. to discuss ongoing litigation matter specifically Ellis Olkon and Nancy Olkon V. City of Medina, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 13d.05, Subd. 3(b). The motion was seconded by Cousineau and approved unanimously. Anderson made a motion to for the Council to return to open session at 5:23 p.m. The motion was seconded by Cousineau and approved unanimously. III. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5:24 p.m. 1.1141‘ 1‘, Attest: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk ‘`r Bob Mitchell, Mayor Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 19, 2017 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 19, 2017 MEDiNA POLICE DEPA MEMORANDUM Agenda Item # 5A 600 Clydesdale Trail: Medina, MN 55340.9790 p:763-473.9209 f: 763-473-8858 non -emergency: 763.5 25.6210 Emergency 94-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Chief Ed Belland and Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup DATE: September 27, 2017 RE: Conditional Job Offer for Melissa Robbins for CSO Position On August 15, 2017, the City Council appointed our previous Community Service Officer (CSO), Andrew Scharf, to fill the vacant full-time Police Officer position in our department. This appointment left our CSO position vacant, which Council authorized staff to begin the recruitment process at that same meeting. An interview panel interviewed the top three candidates on September 15th and recommended the appointment of our top candidate Melissa Robbins. We believe that Robbins possesses the skills and character we are looking for in a CSO. Robbins has been a Reserve Officer for the Medina Police Department since December 2015. She has recently completed her Minnesota POST Skills training and is currently pursuing her Bachelor's degree in Laws Enforcement and Criminal Justice from Metropolitan State University. We would ask for Council's permission to offer the part-time CSO position to Melissa Robbins pending a successful background investigation with a starting date the week of October 16, 2017. Robbins would have a starting pay of $18.00 per hour, working 24 hours per week. Agenda Item # 5B Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO.2017- A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING VOLUNTEERS AND CONTRIBUTORS TO MEDINA CELEBRATION DAY WHEREAS, the Medina City Staff contributed time, effort and thoughtfulness in the coordination and planning of Medina Celebration Day; and WHEREAS, the event volunteers and committee members worked diligently to plan, raise funds, advertise, setup, and final cleanup, which made for a very successful event; and WHEREAS, the City relies on local business support and donations to conduct the fireworks display as well as add special activities of interest to make Medina Celebration Day an educational, social and entertaining event for Medina residents and area attendees; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Medina that the Council expresses its deep gratitude and appreciation to all the City Staff, volunteers, civic organizations and businesses for their service and contributions toward Medina Celebration Day. Dated: October 3, 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- October 3, 2017 Agenda Item # 5C Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR MEDINA CELEBRATION DAY WHEREAS, The donors listed on Exhibit A (the "Donors") have generously offered to donate money, as well as other resources, listed on Exhibit A (the "Donation") to the City of Medina (the "City"); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to the City's Community Event Fund to pay for the annual Celebration Day activities; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to the Donors 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 Donors. Dated: October 3, 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- October 3, 2017 Exhibit A Donations BUSINESSES/INDIVIDUALS DONATION 3121 Pizza Food Vendor / fliers on pizza boxes 9 Rounds $100 Adam's Pest Control Bee and wasp control / $50 Bhaysar, Niharika Bee Pollination Exhibit Boy Scout Troop 570 S'mores/Firepit display Buzzella Massage $100 Celebration Day Committee - Linda Lane, Carrie Leadens, Molly Hasek, Janet White, Lorie Cousineau, Chris Pederson, Mario Fabrizio, Melissa Burns, Ed Belland, Rick Traut Volunteer / Event Planning City of Loretto Barrel train ride Complete Eye Care of Medina $100 Contemporary Images Signage / shirts Countryside Cafe/Peg's Catering Free ice cream Dobo's (Danny's Catering) Food Vendor DoJo Karate Inflatable / $200 Edward Jones - Brandon Prell $100 Fabrizio, Mario Drone display / Restaurant signs Farmers State Bank of Hamel $600 Fortin Consulting $100 Fortin Health & Wellness Clinic $100 Friends of Wolfsfeld Woods $200 Goddard School $100 Green Family Volunteer Kids Games Gregor's Farm & Greenhouse Farmers Market / $100 Hamel Family Popcorn poppers & kid's activities Hamel Fire Department Antique Fire Truck/Grass Rig Ride / Display Hamel Lions Bingo / $1,000 Highway 55 Rental & Sales Donated expo chairs & tables / discount on rental items Intercomp $500 John Day Company $50 Kalla Lily Salon and Spa $100 KD Landscape Supply $150 Kumon Math and Reading Center $100 Lake Independence Citizens Assn Lake Conservation Display Leuer, Leonard Honey Sales Medina Entertainment Center $100 Medina Police Department Vehicle display / Reserves / Set Up Medina Public Works Department Vehicle display / Setup and cleanup Metro Mosquito Control Mosquito control My Town Fitness $100 Resolution No. 2017- October 3, 2017 2 North Star Search & Rescue Search & rescue dog demonstration OAK Eatery Free Freeze Pops Pilates Advantage $100 Scherer Pumpkin Patch Pumpkin donation / Farmers Market Target - Medina Volunteer for kids' games Thrivent - Brent Henkelman $100 Uptown Hamel Business Group $200 Urban Eve Salon and Boutique $100 Resolution No. 2017- 3 October 3, 2017 Agenda Item # 7A MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: September 22, 2017 MEETING: October 3, 2017 City Council SUBJ: JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment related to Solar Equipment Summary of Request The JEGM Revocable Trust has requested a zoning ordinance text amendment and a conditional use permit related to solar panels. The applicants desire to install a 79 kW solar array on property at 2705 Willow Drive. An array of this capacity would occupy a footprint of just under 4000 s.f. Current City regulations limit Solar Equipment to occupy a footprint of 2500 square feet. The applicants request that the City consider amending its zoning code in order to allow larger solar arrays. The applicant has also requested a conditional use permit for installation of the Solar Equipment. Solar Equipment Regulations Current City regulations generally permit solar panels which are attached to structures in every zoning district, subject to certain standards. Regulations also permit ground -mounted solar equipment in the Rural Residential zoning district and the Agricultural Preservation district through a conditional use permit. These arrays are limited in size to a footprint of 1500 square feet as a permitted use and up to 2500 square feet with a conditional use permit. Larger ground -mounted arrays (with a footprint up to 43,560 s.£) are permitted in the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts. The ordinance was amended to allow ground -mounted solar equipment as a conditional use in 2015. Previously, solar equipment had only been permitted if affixed to a structure. When originally adopted in 2015, ground mounted solar equipment on residential property was limited to 1000 square feet. The City amended the ordinance to increase the permitted footprint this summer at the request of another property owner. The Planning Commission and Council had a good deal of discussion related to how much to increase the maximum footprint size and ultimately determined 2500 square feet. Generally, this size would accommodate a 49 kW solar array, which was used as a guidepost because it matches Minnesota's "net metering" regulations. State law require energy companies to purchase solar energy from property owners at retail prices up to 49 kW. Since ground mount solar equipment has been permitted, one property in the Business district has installed a 20,000 s.f. array (Wright -Hennepin at Willow Drive, south of Highway 55). The JEGM Revocable Trust Page 1 of 4 October 3, 2017 Solar Equipment Zoning Amendment City Council Meeting property owner who requested that the City increase the footprint size earlier in the year recently applied for a permit to install a 1450 square foot array. A number of solar arrays have also been installed in the City affixed to a structure. Examples include the Hennepin County Public Works building, OSI, JT Miller Company, and Medina Mini Storage. Currently in rural residential districts, ground -mounted solar equipment is subject to the following conditions: • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted on a parcel which is five acres or greater in area. • Solar Equipment shall only be allowed as an accessory use on a parcel with an existing principal structure. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from all property lines. • The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 15 feet. • Landscaping or other means of screening shall be installed adjacent to the rear and sides of the Solar Equipment to limit visual impacts of the structural supports. A minimum of one shrub per 10 linear feet or one tree per 30 linear feet shall be required. Landscaping or screening shall have an anticipated mature height of at least 75% of the height of the Solar Equipment, but shall not be required in front of solar panels. This requirement may alternatively be achieved through fencing, existing vegetation, or similar measures. • The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. • The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet shall only be permitted upon conditional use permit review and approval, subject to the conditions noted below: o Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet shall only be permitted on parcels which are 10 acres or greater in area; o The footprint occupied by the Solar Equipment shall not exceed 2500 square feet; o The City may require additional landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the Solar Equipment; and o The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, to protect the rural viewsheds and the natural environment, and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. The applicant requests that the City consider increasing the allowed footprint via a CUP from 2500 square feet up to 4000 in order to accommodate a 79 kW solar array. They estimate that this would produce approximately their expected annual energy consumption. The attached ordinance would provide for the increase. The applicant's representative has indicated that if the City does not increase the allowed footprint of ground mounted solar equipment, they may install a combination of ground -mounted and building -mounted in order to provide the production they are seeking. JEGM Revocable Trust Page 2 of 4 October 3, 2017 Solar Equipment Zoning Amendment City Council Meeting Policy Discussion When the City adopted the ordinance allowing ground -mounted solar panels, there was a fair amount of discussion related to the footprint limitation. There was additional discussion during review of the proposed amendment to increase the footprint earlier in the year. The limitation related primarily to lot coverage and also limiting production so that it is accessory to a residential use, rather than a more commercial production of power. As mentioned earlier in this report, the 2500 square feet limitation was chosen because it was thought to safely accommodate a 49 kW array, matching Minnesota's net metering rules. The applicant advocates an increase in the maximum footprint in order to allow production above 49 kW. The applicant estimates that the 79 kW array would produce their expected electric consumption, so the intent is for the equipment to be accessory to the residential use and not to be producing additional energy. In terms of lot coverage limitations, the rural area of the City includes a couple of provisions which apply to other improvements in addition to the 2500 square foot limitation for ground mounted solar equipment. The code limits hardcover to 40% of a rural parcel. On a large parcel, the hardcover limitation has very little practical effect. The existing code permits up to two accessory structures with an aggregate footprint of 5000 square feet on parcels over 5 acres in size. Additional structure and larger structures are permitted through a conditional use permit process. During previous discussions related to ground mounted solar equipment, Commissioners and Council members have opted to limit the size of ground mounted solar equipment beyond the existing limitations noted above. Some of the conditions for ground mounted solar equipment are similar to those for larger accessory structures, such as landscaping requirements. Accessory structures are required to incorporate architectural elements, which really are not possible for solar equipment. It should be noted that the City's comprehensive plan states: "Medina is committed to encouraging and promoting solar energy as a clean, alternative form of energy production and reducing carbon -based emissions." In determining whether to increase the allowed size of solar equipment, the Planning Commission and Council are balancing this support for solar energy against the potential impacts of the solar equipment on other properties. If the Planning Commission and City Council desire to have a limitation on the size of ground mounted solar equipment for the reasons discussed above, a number of options have been discussed previously by the Commission and Council. • As previously noted, the 2500 square foot limitation is related to the 49.9 kW net metering standard. • It had been suggested to require an applicant to provide information on their expected energy consumption if larger arrays are permitted. Staff believes this condition may not be the most reliable. • Larger minimum lot sizes could be required for larger arrays. The requirements of the Business district, for example, limit the solar equipment to a percentage of the lot. JEGM Revocable Trust Page 3 of 4 October 3, 2017 Solar Equipment Zoning Amendment City Council Meeting Staff does not necessarily oppose the requested ordinance amendment to increase the size permitted for ground mounted solar equipment, but does note that the 49.9 kW net metering rule does provide a good rationale for the size limitation. If the City desires to limit the size at a larger amount, an alternative rationale would need to be determined. Planning Commission Recommendation The City has a great deal of discretion when considering requests to amend the zoning ordinance. The action is fully legislative and the City has a good deal of latitude in determining regulations in order to achieve the goals, objectives, and policies consistent with the City's comprehensive plan. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the proposed ordinance amendment at the September 12 meeting. An excerpt from the DRAFT meeting minutes is attached for reference. Generally, Commissioners supported increasing the maximum footprint for solar equipment. Commissioner had a good deal of discussion related to the fact that size of a parcel would seem to have an impact on how large of a solar array should be permitted. As a result, Commissioners discussed relating the maximum footprint to the lot area of the property. Commissioners still supported a maximum footprint even on very large properties. Ultimately, the Planning Commission recommended allowing solar equipment with a footprint not to exceed 1% of a lot, but in no cases greater than 4000 square feet. For the sake of context, the following table summarizes what this limitation would translate to on different sized lots: Size of Property 5 acres 7 acres 9 acres 9.18 or greater Maximum Footprint 2178 s.f. 3049.2 s.f. 3920.4 s.f. 4000 s.f. For the sake of context, the solar panels proposed by the current applicant would occupy approximately 0.54% of the 2705 Willow Drive property. The ordinance previously had required a minimum of 10 acres in order for solar equipment to exceed 1,500 square feet in footprint. The ordinance had also limited properties greater than 10 acres to a maximum footprint of 2,500 square feet. Potential Action If the City Council finds that the attached ordinance is consistent with relevant City goals, objectives, and policies, the following motions would be in order: • Motion to adopt the ordinance regarding solar equipment • Motion to adopt the resolution authorizing publication by title and summary Attachments 1) DRAFT ordinance 2) Resolution Authorizing Publication of the ordinance by title and summary 3) Excerpt from DRAFT 9/12/2017 meeting minutes 4) Applicant Narrative JEGM Revocable Trust Page 4 of 4 October 3, 2017 Solar Equipment Zoning Amendment City Council Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE REGARDING SOLAR EQUIPMENT; AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 828.09 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 828.09. Solar Equipment. Any equipment or device that utilizes, operates or supplies energy derived from the sun shall meet the following standards: Subd.1. Solar Equipment, if affixed to a structure. The following standards shall apply to Solar Equipment which is affixed to a structure: (a) The equipment or device must be affixed to a structure and meet all setback requirements for principal structures in the zoning district where located. (b) The equipment or device may not exceed the height of the building by more than five feet, and shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed. (c) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (d) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. (e) All solar arrays or panels shall be installed or positioned so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures. (f) Solar equipment which is mounted to a roof which is not flat, and which is visible from the nearest right-of-way, shall not have a finished pitch more than five percent steeper than the roof. Subd. 2. Ground -mounted Solar Equipment. (a) The following standards shall apply to Ground -mounted Solar Equipment within the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts: (i) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted in the Business and Industrial Park zoning districts and only following Conditional Use Permit approval. (ii) Solar Equipment shall be set back a minimum of 300 feet from residential property. (iii) Solar Equipment shall meet all setback requirements for principal structures in the zoning district where located. (iv) The footprint occupied by Solar Equipment shall be considered lot coverage and impervious surface for the purpose of calculating such standards. The footprint shall include all space between pieces of Solar Equipment, unless the pieces are separated by more than 25 feet. Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE (v) The footprint occupied by Solar Equipment shall not exceed 20% of the lot. (vi) The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 20 feet. (vii) The City may require landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the mounting devices of the Solar Equipment. (viii) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (ix) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. (x) All solar arrays or panels shall be installed or positioned so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures, or obstruct views. (xi) The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. (b) The following standards shall apply to Ground -mounted Solar Equipment within residential zoning districts in which such Equipment is permitted: (i) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted in the Agricultural Preservation, Rural Residential, Rural Residential -Urban Reserve, Rural Residential- 1, and Rural Residential-2 zoning districts. (ii) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted on a parcel which is five acres or greater in area. (iii) Solar Equipment shall only be allowed as an accessory use on a parcel with an existing principal structure. (iv) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from all property lines. (v) The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 15 feet. (vi) Landscaping or other means of screening shall be installed adjacent to the rear and sides of the Solar Equipment to limit visual impacts of the structural supports. A minimum of one shrub per 10 linear feet or one tree per 30 linear feet shall be required. Landscaping or screening shall have an anticipated mature height of at least 75% of the height of the Solar Equipment, but shall not be required in front of solar panels. This requirement may alternatively be achieved through fencing, existing vegetation, or similar measures. (vii) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. (ix) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. (x) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet shall only be permitted upon conditional use permit review and approval, subject to the conditions noted below: (1) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet shall only be permitted on parcels which are 10 acres or greater in areashall not occupy a footprint exceeding the lesser of the following amounts: (A) One percent of the area of the property on which it is located; or (B) The footprint occupied by the Solar Equipment shall not exceed 2500 4000 square feet; Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE (1)(2) The City may require additional landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the Solar Equipment; and (2)(3) The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, to protect the rural viewsheds and the natural environment, and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this day of , 2017. Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on the day of ,2017. Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-## RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. ### BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ### an regarding solar equipment; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes § 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is three pages in length; and WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 1111 # to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the ordinance in its entirety: Public Notice The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ###, an ordinance regarding solar equipment. The ordinance amends existing regulations to increase the maximum footprint which may be occupied by solar equipment in the rural residential and agricultural preservation districts to the lesser of the following amounts: a) 1 % of the area of a lot; or 2) 4,000 square feet. A conditional use permit is required for solar equipment exceeding a footprint of 1,500 square feet. The full text of Ordinance No. ### is available from the city clerk at Medina city hall during regular business hours. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the city clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection and that she post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Resolution No. 2017-## October 3, 2017 Dated: October 3, 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-## 2 October 3, 2017 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/26/2017 Meeting Minutes JEGM Revocable Trust — Zoning Text Amendment Chapter 8 Related to Solar Equipment, Including Maximum Permitted Footprint Size Finke presented a request for a text amendment to the zoning code related to solar equipment for the rural residential and residential agricultural zoning districts to increase the footprint of ground mounted solar equipment. He stated that ground mounted solar equipment is allowed and was actually expanded earlier this year through a similar request. He stated that building mounted solar equipment is allowed within every district in the City as a permitted use. He stated that there is one ground mounted solar equipment installation currently, over 20,000 square feet in size owned by the Wright -Hennepin energy company. He noted that a permit was recently received from the property owner which brought forward the request earlier this year. He reviewed the current requirements for ground mounted solar equipment. He stated that the applicant is requesting to increase the footprint from 2,500 to 4,000 square feet. He explained how the 2,500 square feet calculation was created and provided additional background information. He stated that staff does not oppose the request and does see the solar panels in a similar way to an accessory building, which would require a CUP. Reid asked if the CUP could be approved without approving the zoning ordinance. Finke explained that the CUP would then be inconsistent with the zoning code. He noted that the CUP can only go up to the limit set by the zoning code. Murrin asked and confirmed that one acre is approximately $43,500 square feet. She asked the size of the Wright -Hennepin property. Finke stated that the property is five acres. Murrin asked the size of the property that was approved previously. Finke explained that the Commission previously approved up to 1,500 square feet as a permitted use and because the previous resident was under that limit it was allowed as a permitted use. He stated that subject property was 80 acres in size. Murrin stated that if the amendment is not approved it states that the applicant would use a mixture of ground and solar equipment to meet their desires. She asked why the applicant prefers ground mounted equipment. The applicant replied that he would like to avoid putting holes in his roof tiles and noted that the roof mounted equipment would be move visible from the road than the ground mounted equipment. He stated that this proposed size would still not cover 100 percent of the energy his home would use and therefore he is attempting to do as much as possible to cover the use his home would require. Murrin stated that she was calculated the percentage of space the ground mounted equipment would take up of his property, which would be about half a percentage of the subject property. Nestor stated that the ratio would be .55 percent, which is less than the previous application the Commission considered. Finke stated that there is a lot coverage percentage in different zoning districts, noting that a percentage of lot coverage could be specified for this zoning district as well. He stated that up to 20 percent is allowed in business and industrial districts. 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/26/2017 Meeting Minutes Reid stated that this is so dependent on the property size and layout. She stated that she would prefer to continue to review requests over 1,5000 square feet as a CUP. White opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m. A resident asked if there is a distinction between private use and for sale use. Finke replied that could be difficult because there is usually buyback from the energy company even for residential use but noted that the specification of a contract could be used. White closed the public hearing at 8:49 p.m. DesLauriers stated that this is what Medina wants, self-sustaining energy that is hidden from the roadway. He believed that the Commission should find a way to make it happen. White asked what would happen with the next request if this is changed. She stated that she did not think that the Commission is helping itself to just change the ordinance. She felt that the Commission had good justification for what was developed at the last amendment. She stated that perhaps a different justification should be stated. Reid stated that would be her concern, that someone else could come in with this size but less property. She suggested creating a ratio, which would solve that problem. Murrin stated that she believes that this should be revisited as the City continues to learn about solar. She stated that as the Commission builds experience they need to keep reevaluating and considering the requests. She felt that putting this amount of solar on this amount of land would be okay. She suggested keeping up to 1,500 square feet for ten acres, 1,500 to 2,500 on ten to 15 acres, and if you have more than 16 acres you could request a CUP for up to 4,000 square feet of ground mounted equipment. She stated that she is not a fan of the percentage as that is difficult to calculate and the Commission would need to review the proposed location of the equipment. Reid stated that she likes setting a percentage as it is self-adjusting rather than creating arbitrary levels. She noted that the CUP review would still be considered for requests over 1,500 square feet. She stated that staff can do the math. Amic asked and received confirmation that the ground mounted equipment would still max out at 4,000 square feet. White stated that this is an accessory structure and asked if existing accessory structures would be included in the calculation as well. Murrin stated that she did not see any mention of accessory structures in the staff report. Finke reviewed the limitations for accessory structures, noting that you are limited to two accessory structures under a total of 5,000 square feet but noted that additional square footage is allowed through a CUP. He stated that a tie could be made treating ground mounted solar equipment as an accessory structure. Murrin asked what the percentage rate would be. Nestor suggested using .7 as a percentage not to exceed 5,000 square feet. 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/26/2017 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that there are not as many 80 acres tracts of land in the City and therefore as you increase in property size, the number of properties decrease. White stated that she has concerns because this size property wants 4,000 square feet of solar panels which will almost meet their needs. She stated that there could be a property the same size with less energy needs and asked if the same size would be allowed. Amic stated that he is comfortable with that as it reduces the use of coal energy. DesLauriers agreed that it is a goal of the City to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. A resident stated that the cost would be prohibitive to generate more power than you need because of the cost of the equipment. The Commission discussed the percentage that should be used to limit the ground mounted solar equipment. Murrin suggested using one percent with a cap of 4,000 square feet and confirmed the consensus of the Commission. Motion by Murrin, seconded by Reid, to recommend approval of the zoning text amendment to Chapter 8 related to solar equipment, to allow one percent of the property for ground mounted solar equipment with a maximum of 4,000 square feet in the rural residential zoning district, opening the ability for properties five acres in size. Motion carries with a vote of 5-1 (White opposed). (Absent: Albers) 3 August 28, 2017 City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Text Change Request for City Ordinance JEGM Revocable Trust 11710 Plaza American Drive, Suite 1010 Reston, VA 20190 Dear Planning Commission and City Council, We ask that the text in Ordinance 828.09 Subd. 2 be changed from 2,500 square feet to read 4,000 square feet with the conditional use permit. We believe we will be able to do a better job covering with landscaping than having 1,500 square feet on the ground and 2,000 square feet on the roof. Regards, Agenda Item # 7B MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the Council FROM: Nick Kieser, Planning and GIS Intern and Dusty Finke, City Planner through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: September 21, 2017 MEETING: October 3, 2017 City Council SUBJ: JEGM Revocable Trust — Conditional Use Permit for Two Accessory Buildings and Solar Equipment — 2705 Willow Drive Review Deadline: Complete Application Received: August 28, 2017 60-day Review Deadline: October 26, 2017 Summary of Request: JEGM Revocable Trust has requested Conditional Use Permits for a 79-kw solar field, greenhouse and warming shed at 2705 Willow Drive as accessory structures. The applicant also proposes to construct an underground storm water management device to treat run-off. The subject site is approximately 16.55 acres in size and is zoned Rural Residential. The property is located west of Willow Drive and south of the intersection of Willow Drive and Chestnut Road. The surrounding property to the south and west is zoned as Agricultural Preserve and the property to the north and east is zoned as Rural Residential. Currently the subject site is mainly pasture grass along with wetlands in the southwest area of the property. The property contains a home (currently under construction), barn, tennis court, gazebo, playhouse, pool and four sheds. Solar Field: The applicant has requested a CUP to install five ground -mounted solar arrays, each occupying a footprint of 768.71 square feet, for a total of just under 3,850 square feet. Current City regulations only permit JEGM Revocable Trust Page 1 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting ground -mounted solar equipment with a maximum footprint of 2,500 square feet. The applicant has requested that the City consider a zoning text amendment of Section 828.09 Subd. 2 to increase this amount to 4,000 square feet. The text amendment will need to be considered first before the proposed CUP for the solar field. If the proposed zoning text amendment is not approved, the proposed CUP for the solar equipment could not be approved. The applicant would need to reduce the size of the proposed solar field. The following specific requirements apply to ground -mounted solar equipment. Staff has provided potential findings which could be utilized, contingent on the approval of the zoning text amendment. Requirements: The following standards shall apply to Ground -mounted Solar Equipment within residential zoning districts in which such Equipment is permitted: (i) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted in the Agricultural Preservation, Rural Residential, Rural Residential -Urban Reserve, Rural Residential-1, and Rural Residential-2 zoning districts. The applicant's property is in the Rural Residential district. (ii) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted on a parcel which is five acres or greater in area. The property is approximately 16.55 acres. (iii) Solar Equipment shall only be allowed as an accessory use on a parcel with an existing principal structure. The applicant has an existing principal structure that is currently under construction. (iv) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from all property lines. The solar field is closest to the western property line at approximately 102 feet. (v) The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 15 feet. The solar equipment is proposed to be at a height of 7 feet 9 inches. (vi) Landscaping or other means of screening shall be installed adjacent to the rear and sides of the Solar Equipment to limit visual impacts of the structural supports. A minimum of one shrub per 10 linear feet or one tree per 30 linear feet shall be required. Landscaping or screening shall have an anticipated mature height of at least 75% of the height of the Solar Equipment, but shall not be required in front of solar panels. This requirement may alternatively be achieved through fencing, existing vegetation, or similar measures. The proposed site plan has arborvitae trees on the sides of the solar field and existing tree coverage fully on the front and partially on the rear. The applicant is proposing 50 arborvitae JEGM Revocable Trust Page 2 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting trees located approximately every 8 feet on the east and west sides of the proposed solar field. The trees will mature to a height of 14-16 feet which exceeds the solar panel height of 7 feet 9 inches. (vii) The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. This information will be confirmed upon building permit review. (viii) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. This information will be confirmed upon building permit review. (ix) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1,500 square feet shall only be permitted upon conditional use permit review and approval, subject to the conditions noted below: (1) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1,500 square feet shall only be permitted on parcels which are 10 acres or greater in area; The property is approximately 16.55 acres. (2) The footprint occupied by the Solar Equipment shall not exceed 2,500 square feet; The Solar Equipment footprint proposed is 3,844 square feet. A zoning text amendment has been applied for by applicant. (3) The City may require additional landscaping or other means of screening to limit visual impacts of the Solar Equipment; and The applicant has proposed landscaping as described above which has proposed arborvitae trees on the sides and existing trees on the front and rear. (4) The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, to protect the rural viewsheds and the natural environment, and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. The Planning Commission and Council can discuss whether additional conditions are warranted. Accessory Structures - Greenhouse/Warming Shed: The greenhouse is 2,304 square feet and is located west of the existing barn and east of the pond just below a retaining wall. The materials are predominately transparent. The warming shed is 360 square feet and is located north of the home and alongside the tennis court. The tennis court will be turned into a hockey rink during the winter so the shed will be used as a warming JEGM Revocable Trust Page 3 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting shed during the winter and storage shed during the remaining months. The materials will match the home under construction, red with white accent. CUP for Accessory Structures in Excess of 5000 Square Feet According to Section 825.19 of the City Code, properties over 5 acres in size are permitted to include a maximum of two accessory structures with a maximum aggregate footprint of 5,000 square feet. Accessory structures which exceed these limitations are conditional uses subject to the following additional standards described in Section 826.98: (I) The accessory building's design shall include architectural interest through the appropriate use of the following elements: cupolas, dormers, windows, porches, overhangs, varied building foundation, or other design treatments which the city council determines create a quality architectural design that enhances the appearance of the accessory building and complements the principal dwelling and the rural residential character or residential neighborhood in which the building is to be constructed; (ii) At least two colors or textures shall be used in the accessory building's exterior design, including contrasting trim or fascia; (iii) Any metal exterior materials on the accessory building shall be warranted to resist fading for a period of at least 15 years; and (iv) The accessory building shall have an infiltration basin, rain garden, rain barrel or other similar best management practice used to capture storm water runoff from the building and to improve water quality. Said best management practice must be reviewed and approved by the city council. It should be taken under consideration that this property was granted approval for a CUP on March 20, 2007 for the existing barn since the property exceeded the 3,000 square feet maximum at that time for accessory buildings. Existing Accessory Structures (in square feet): Building 7,830 Shed 240 Shed 146 Gazebo 136 Playhouse 84 Shed 157 Building 460 Shed 168 Total 9,221 sf Proposed Accessory Structures (in square feet): Greenhouse 2,304 JEGM Revocable Trust Page 4 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting Warming Shed 360 Total 2,664 sf It is important to note that the existing 157 square foot shed will be replaced by the 360-square foot proposed warming shed. The total for the existing structures and the proposed would then be 11,728 square feet. Photos of the proposed storage shed and completed house are attached. Staff believes that the proposed storage shed is consistent with the architectural standards since it has the same design as the house once completed. The storage shed will be red with a white trim. The materials that will be used are cedar shake roof, red shake siding, white trim, white band board and red metal skirt. There is an existing tile that will capture storm water runoff. General Conditional Use Permit Standards Section 825.39. Conditional Use Permits; Criteria for Granting Conditional Use Permits. In granting a conditional use permit, the Medina City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of occupants or surrounding lands. Among other things, the City Council shall consider the following: Subd. 1. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. Staff does not believe that the conditional uses will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity or diminish property values. Subd. 2. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. Staff does not believe the establishments will impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding vacant property. Subd. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Staff believes adequate utilities, roads, drainage and other facilities are provided. Subd. 4. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. Staff believes the uses will not affect parking needs and that adequate parking exists. Subd. 5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. Staff does not believe accessory structures would bring up these concerns, as they are more relevant for commercial uses. JEGM Revocable Trust Page 5 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting Subd. 6. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The proposed uses are listed as allowed conditional uses. Subd. 7. The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. Staff believes accessory structures are consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the RR zoning district. Subd. 8. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. Staff does not believe the proposed uses conflict with the policies of the City. Subd. 9. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. Staff does not believe the CUPS would cause traffic or congestion concerns. Subd. 10. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. Staff does not believe the uses would cause these concerns. Subd. 11. The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project. The applicant intends to start construction of the greenhouse and warming shed in October and to be completed in January. Subd. 12. The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Zoning Officer. The City Attorney has not requested additional documentation with regards to ownership at this time. Planning Commission Recommendation When reviewing a conditional use permit request, the Planning Commission and City Council should review the specific and general criteria described above. If the criteria are met, the CUP should be approved. As described in Section 825.41 of the City Code: "In permitting a new conditional use or the alteration of an existing conditional use, the City Council may impose, in addition to those standards and requirements expressly specified in this Ordinance, additional conditions which the City Council considers necessary to protect the best interests of the surrounding area or the community as a whole. These conditions may include, but are not limited, to the following: 1. Increasing the required lot size or yard dimensions. 2. Limiting the height, size or location of buildings. 3. Controlling the location and number of vehicle access points. 4. Increasing the street width. 5. Increasing the number of required off-street parking spaces. 6. Limiting the number, size, location or lighting of signs. JEGM Revocable Trust Page 6 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting 7. Required diking, fencing, screening, landscaping or other facilities to protect adjacent or nearby property. 8. Designating sites for open space." Staff has provided potential findings for the criteria throughout the report. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the application at their September 12th meeting. An excerpt from the draft meeting minutes is attached for reference. No members of the public provided comment during the public hearing, but there is a letter attached. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the CUP for the solar field, warming shed and greenhouse more than 5,000 square feet subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall comply with all the comments provided by the City Engineer on 9/6/2017. 2) The property owner shall abide by all conditions of Medina City Code Section 826.98, Subd. 2(p). 3) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in the amount sufficient to pay for all costs associated with the review of the application for Conditional Use Permit. Potential Council Action: If the City Council approves the rezoning amendment and finds that the CUP standards have been met, the following motion would be appropriate: Motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit for JEGM Revocable Trust. Attachments: 1. Document List 2. Excerpt from DRAFT 9/12/2017 Planning Commission Minutes 3. Letter from Bill, Stacy and Charlie Nunn 4. Applicant Narrative (2) 5. Comments from Metro West Inspections dated 8/18/2017 6. Comments from the City Engineer, WSB dated 9/6/2017 7. Picture of Completed House 8. Picture of Proposed Shed 9. Greenhouse Picture and Information (5) 10. Solar Panel Pictures and Information (4) 11. Warming House Information (2) 12. Site Plan JEGM Revocable Trust Page 7 of 7 October 3, 2017 CUP for Accessory Structures and Solar Field City Council Meeting Project: LR-17-214 — 2705 Willow CUP and Zoning Text Amendment The following documents are all part of the official 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 08/11/2017 08/11/2017 3 Y Y Fee 08/11/2017 08/11/2017 1 Y Y $2000 Mailing Labels 08/29/2017 NA 1 Y Y Narrative 08/28/2017 08/28/2017 2 Y Y Existing Survey 08/11/2017 08/02/2017 1 Y Y Proposed Survey 08/11/2017 08/11/2017 1 Y Y Survey - Updated 08/28/2017 08/28/2017 1 Y Y Greenhouse Information 08/11/2017 NA 5 Y Y Solar Field Information 08/11/2017 06/19/2017 4 Y Y Warming Shed Information 08/11/2017 NA 2 Y Y House Annotated 08/25/2017 NA 1 Y N Warming Shed Annotated 08/25/2017 NA 1 Y N City Ordinance Text Change Request 08/28/2017 08/28/2017 1 Y Y Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineering Comments 08/28/2017 2 Y Engineering Comments — Updated 09/06/2017 2 Y Incomplete Application Notice 08/21/2017 2 Y MetroWest Comments 08/18/2017 1 Y Legal Notice 09/01/2017 15 Y Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/12/2017 Meeting Minutes 2. JEGM Revocable Trust — 2705 Willow Drive — Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Construction of a Ground Mounted Solar Equipment and to Increase the Number and Square Footage of Accessory Structures in the RR Zoning District Finke stated that in addition to the discussion, this CUP would include two additional accessory structures. He stated that the proposal would add the ground mounted equipment, a greenhouse and small warming house near the tennis court in addition to the existing accessory structure on the property which is already allowed under a CUP. He stated that should the Commission recommend approval, that would be contingent upon the Council adoption of the zoning amendment. He highlighted the proposed locations of the accessory structures and solar equipment. He reviewed the architectural requirements for accessory structures. He reviewed the criteria for reviewing CUP for accessory structures and solar equipment. He stated that staff recommends approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. Murrin referenced the totals for the accessory structures allowed and asked if only 5,000 square feet of accessory structures are allowed. Finke replied that up to 5,000 is permitted and additional can be requested through a CUP. The applicant stated that it may look like a lot of buildings and recognized that the Commission could be concerned but noted that one is a screened in gazebo with a sandbox for kids and two are sheds for horses and are not on cement. He stated that although it looks like a large number, it would like to be able to have a self-sustaining property with the solar and greenhouse for his family. He stated that the greenhouse and solar equipment would not be visible from the road. He stated that he is hoping to create this for his family so they learn to be self-reliant in the future. It was also stated that there are wooded areas on two sides of the solar equipment and additional screening would be created on the other sides to ensure the solar equipment is not visible from the roadway. He stated that the shed would be increased as the tennis court is going to be transformed into a skating rink and they would need a place to store that equipment in the summer time. He stated that there already were nine structures on the site, one large structure and eight little ones. Murrin asked if the shade from the trees has been considered. It was noted that the solar equipment company has given them the necessary information to place the trees to ensure that the trees would not cast shadow on the equipment. White opened the public hearing at 9:16 p.m. White noted that a written letter was received and will be submitted into the record. White closed the public hearing at 9:17 p.m. DesLauriers stated that this is a great project and he supports self-sustaining energy. Motion by Murrin, seconded by DesLauriers, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit amendment for 2705 Willow Drive, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Albers) 9/10/2017 To: Medina Planning Commission We are out of town and unable to attend this meeting but we would like our wishes known. We are neighbors of , We have no issues with the updates and construction they would like to accomplish on their property. We applaud them for being proactive with the solar project. Also for the green house that will be used to produce healthy food for their family. As a community we need to look forward to innovations and have plans in place that are encouraging for such projects. I hope the City of Medina will grant the necessary permits to allow this to happen. Bill, Stacy and arlie Nun 2825 Willow Drive Medina, MN 55340 August 28, 2017 City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Narrative for Conditional Use Permit JEGM Revocable Trust 11710 Plaza American Drive, Suite 1010 Reston, VA 20190 Dear Planning Commission and City Council, We would like to ask for a conditional use permit for the items listed below. To Have: 1. 24' x 96' green house 2. Upgrade old 9' x 18' shed to new 18' x 20' warming shed 3. 20' 80' batting cage 4. 3,900 square foot 80-kw solar field Item 1. The green house will be a full self-contained green house to be used for growing year-round fresh vegetables for a family of 6. Item 2. We are going to be flooding the current tennis court for hockey and the new larger shed will be used as a warming house during winter months. It will also store the Zamboni attachment for a small yard tractor year-round. In the summer, it will become storage for the hockey boards and Styrofoam for the rink. The new warming house/storage shed will be built out of matching materials to the new home and have the same architectural features. Item 3. We will be putting up a fenced area for a batting cage and pitching practice. This area is connected next to the tennis court and is in a sunken area with large, mature trees blocking the area from street view. Item 4. We would like to install an 80-kw ground -mounted solar field. We have plans for putting in 8' tall arborvitae approximately 8' on center on the East and West sides for about 50 total. These arborvitaes will provide full coverage of the solar field at first install and grow to 14' to 16' tall at maturity. There is a large existing grove of trees on the North and South ends that will serve as coverage from the street view and neighboring homes. Page 1 There will be no significant trees cut or impacted by the granting of this conditional use permit. Also, we have currently planted over 70 new trees for screening from the road, we will be planting 50 new arborvitaes for screening of the solar field and we have more trees being planted to complete the landscaping of the home. We feel the lighting on the existing tennis court is adequate for the hockey rink. There are currently two lights on each side. We would like to start this project after the October city council approval and be completed by early January. Regards, Page 2 August 28, 2017 City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Text Change Request for City Ordinance JEGM Revocable Trust 11710 Plaza American Drive, Suite 1010 Reston, VA 20190 Dear Planning Commission and City Council, We ask that the text in Ordinance 828.09 Subd. 2 be changed from 2,500 square feet to read 4,000 square feet with the conditional use permit. We believe we will be able to do a better job covering with landscaping than having 1,500 square feet on the ground and 2,000 square feet on the roof. Regards, �% �% �% �% M e t r o W e s t I n s p e c t i o n S e r v i c e s , I n c . M e t r o W e s t I n s p e c t i o n S e r v i c e s , I n c . B o x 2 4 8 L o r e t t o , M N 5 5 3 5 7 A u g u s t 1 8 , 2 0 1 7 T o : D e b r a P e t e r s o n F r o m : L o r e n K o h n e n I t e m : 2 7 0 5 W i l l o w D r C . U . P . F o r S o l a r F i e l d , G r e e n H o u s e a n d S t o r a g e S h e d I h a v e r e v i e w e d t h e p l a n s f o r t h e p r o p o s e d C . U , P . T h e S o l a r F i e l d i s f o r t h e r e s i d e n c e , n o t a l a r g e c o m m e r c i a l u s e . T h e a p p l i c a n t i s s h o w i n g s c r e e n i n g t o p r o t e c t t h e n e i g h b o r s a n d t o m a i n t a i n t h e r e s i d e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e a r e a . A B u i l d i n g P e r m i t w i l l b e r e q u i r e d . T h e p r o p o s e d G r e e n H o u s e i n f o r m a t i o n s h o w s a d e s i g n f o r t h e U . B . C . w h i c h h a s n ' t e x i s t e d s i n c e 2 0 0 2 . A B u i l d i n g P e r m i t w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d . T h e p l a n w i l l h a v e t o b e d e s i g n e d b y a S t a t e L i c e n s e d E n g i n e e r u s i n g t h e c o r r e c t b u i l d i n g c o d e . T h e S m a l l S t o r a g e B u i l d i n g i s 3 6 0 f t a n d w i l l r e q u i r e a B u i l d i n g P e r m i t . R e s p e c t f u l l y , a z 4 4 ) 7 4 < / O Z e - 1 4 / ' L o r e n K o h n e n B u i l d i n g O f f i c i a l C e r t i f i c a t e # 5 8 9 M P C A C e r t i f i c a t e # 7 5 6 7 6 3 . 4 7 9 . 1 7 2 0 " F a x 7 6 3 . 4 7 9 . 3 0 9 0 " P . O . B o x 2 4 8 , L o r e t t o , M i n n e s o t a 5 5 3 5 7 WSB && Associates, Inc. engineering • planning • environmental • construction September 6, 2017 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: 2705 Willow Drive Solar CUP — Engineering Review City Project No. LR-17-214 WSB Project No. 010652-000 Dear Mr. Finke: 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed 2705 Willow Solar CUP submittal dated August 11, 2017. The plans propose to construct a solar garden at an existing property located at 2705 Willow Drive. 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. Show proposed contouring, spot elevations, drainage arrows, and grade percentages on plan. If retaining walls are needed, please show the elevation at the top and bottom of the wall. 2. Show silt fence as perimeter control around the areas where surface disturbances are proposed. The applicant may want to consider placing silt fence, or other protection fencing, around the future septic location to avoid disturbance during construction. 3. Show construction limits and hatching to denote areas of disturbance and proposed turf establishment methods on the plans. The applicant may want to consider showing a dedicated construction entrance to minimize disturbance areas. 4. The existing survey does not show the tile line that drains to the pond however the proposed survey shows it as an existing tile line. It should be cleared up whether this is an existing or proposed tile line. 5. The plans should state the type and size of the proposed evergreens. 6. Add City standard detail plates where applicable and include a typical section of the proposed concrete pad or other exterior paving work proposed. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\010654-000\Admin\Docs\2017-08-21 Submittal\ 2017-08-28 2705 Willow Solar CUP - WSB Comments.docz 2705 Willow Drive Solar CUP — Engineering Review September 6, 2017 Page 2 Stormwater & Wetlands 1. Based on the information provided, it appears that the project will add approximately 4,512 of impervious surface from the solar panel installation; the applicant will need to provide calculations to confirm this area. 2. The application provided a filtration basin onsite sized to treat the new impervious surfaces. This meets the City's stormwater management requirements from the City's Stormwater Design Manual. 3. If the project disturbs more than 50 CY of soil, upland buffers and setbacks will need to be met. The wetland south of the proposed solar panels will require an average buffer width of 20' (minimum 15') and the accessory structure setback is 5'. It appears that this buffer is met, but should be shown on the plans and managed and demarcated in the field according to the City Code requirements. The wetland north of the proposed solar panels (denoted as "pond" on the plan) will need the same buffers as described above. Based on a quick historic aerial photo review, it looks like this pond was excavated out of a wetland; the "pond" boundary does not accurately reflect the actual boundary of the wetland. Based on aerials it looks like the 1014 ft contour is more accurate. The homeowner could either obtain a formal delineation of this area, or have the City approximate the boundary for the purpose of setting the upland buffer. Again, it appears that the buffers would be met, although the applicant would not be able to mow right up to the edge of the pond anymore. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer KA010654-000\Admin\Does\2017-08-21 Submittal\ 2017-08-28 2705 Willow Solar CUP - WSB Comments.docx " L J . O O r i , ��4 �� 1 " . , I O W ' , n , 1 �% a ! - l u l l / - a F ` 1 h . 4 1 A y a m . i n E L T H J H W . 1 1 1 1 4 , , 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 CEDAR SHAKE ROOF WHITE TRIM RED PAINTED SHAKE SIDING WHITE BAND BOARD RED METAL SKIRT ��. , ��- - I n a n o n g o i n g e f f o r t t o p r o v i d e y o u . . , _ i f w i t h a l l t h e r e s o u r c e s y o u n e e d t o �� x s - - 1 m a k e a p u r c h a s i n g d e c i s i o n , w e h a v e i n c l u d e d t h e o p t i o n t o v i e w , �� _ : : : : ' ' ' - - ��1 _ _ G r e e n h o u s e D r a w i n g s a n d P l a n s = - _ r r n ��� : t e r : t h a t w i l l a l l o w y o u t o s e e w h a t s o r t s o f b u i l d i n g o p t i o n s a n d l a y o u t s a r e p o s s i b l e . I f y o u w o u l d l i k e t o v i e w e q u i p m e n t , e l e c t r i c a l , a n d p l u m b i n g p l a n s f o r t h i s g r e e n h o u s e , p l e a s e f i l l o u t t h e f o l l o w i n g r e q u e s t f o r m . R e q u e s t D r a w i n g s D u r a b i l i t y A l l c o m m e r c i a l G a b l e 7 5 0 0 G r e e n h o u s e s a r e e n g i n e e r e d t o m e e t 8 5 m p h w i n d a n d 1 2 p o u n d l i v e l o a d p e r t h e U B C B u i l d i n g C o d e . E v e n h i g h e r l o a d r a t i n g s a n d s t a m p e d e n g i n e e r e d p l a n s a r e a v a i l a b l e a t e x t r a c o s t . A l l g a l v a n i z e d s t e e l f r a m e i n s u r e s m a x i m u m s t r e n g t h a n d l i f e . D y n a G l a s c o r r u g a t e d p o l y c a r b o n a t e c o v e r i n g i s U V r e s i s t a n t a n d c a r r i e s a 1 0 y e a r w a r r a n t y a g a i n s t d i s c o l o r a t i o n . A s s e m b l y O p t i o n s 1 . B u i l d t h e g r e e n h o u s e w i t h y o u r s t u d e n t s a n d b o o s t e r s w h o h a v e c o n s t r u c t i o n e x p e r i e n c e o r h i r e a l o c a l c o n t r a c t o r t o e r e c t t h e s t r u c t u r e . C o m p o n e n t s s u p p l i e d a r e p r e - c u t a n d d r i l l e d . S t e p - b y - s t e p i n s t a l l a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s a r e i n c l u d e d . I G C p r o v i d e s o n l i n e a n d t e l e p h o n e s u p p o r t t o a n s w e r a n y q u e s t i o n s y o u m a y h a v e . 2 . I G C h a s a n e x p e r i e n c e d g r e e n h o u s e c o n s t r u c t i o n t e a m t o a s s e m b l e t h e g r e e n h o u s e a n d i n s t a l l a l l w o r k i n g c o m p o n e n t s . T u r n k e y G r e e n h o u s e C o n s t r u c t i o n b y I n t e r n a t i o n a l G r e e n h o u s e C o m p a n y a l l o w s y o u t o s p e n d t i m e m a n a g i n g y o u r b u s i n e s s i n s t e a d o f r u n n i n g a c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t . 3 . A c o m b i n a t i o n o f ( 1 ) a n d ( 2 ) . I G C c a n b e g i n t h e p r o j e c t b y s e t t i n g t h e c o l u m n p o s t s a n d y o u r s t u d e n t s , b o o s t e r s , o r c o n t r a c t o r c a n c o m p l e t e t h e r e s t o f t h e s t r u c t u r e w i t h I G C s u p e r v i s i o n . F o r i n f o r m a t i o n o n h o w b e s t t o p l a n y o u r g r e e n h o u s e a s s e m b l y a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n p r i c e s , c a l l o u r C u s t o m e r S e r v i c e R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s t o l l - f r e e a t 1 - 8 8 8 - 2 8 1 - 9 3 3 7 . A d d i t i o n a l A c c e s s o r i e s A d d i t i o n a l a c c e s s o r i e s i n c l u d i n g e v a p o r a t i v e c o o l e r s , b e n c h e s , g r o w l i g h t s , s h a d e c l o t h a n d i r r i g a t i o n s y s t e m s h a v e b e e n d e s i g n e d t o f i t p e r f e c t l y w i t h t h e G a b l e G r e e n h o u s e . T o v i e w o r p u r c h a s e a d d i t i o n a l a c c e s s o r i e s , b r o w s e t h e G r e e n h o u s e M e g a s t o r e o r c o n t a c t a n I G C S a l e s R e p r e s e n t a t i v e T o l l - F r e e a t 1 - 8 8 8 - 2 8 1 - 9 3 3 7 . G a b l e S e r i e s 7 5 0 0 3 0 x 6 0 T e a c h i n g G r e e n h o u s e C o r r u g a t e d C o v e r i n g C l e a r a s g l a s s w i t h 1 0 y e a r w a r r a n t y . C o r r u g a t e d C o v e r i n g I l l P l y c o D o o r s H e a v y d u t y i n s u l a t e d E n e m y S a v i n g . ��1 �� 6 ' w i d e 6 ' 8 " t a l l d o u b l e P l y c o D o o r ( 1 ) 3 ' w i d e x 6 ' 8 " t a l l s i n g l e P l y c o D o o r E x h a u s t F a n s ( w i t h S l o p e w a l l H o u s i n g , i G u a r d a n d S h u t t e r ) l i r F o r v e n t i l a t i o n a n d c o o l i n g , M o t o r i z e d I n l e t S h u t t e r s F o r m a x i m u m c o o l i n g , 3 3 ' x 2 5 ' E v a p o r a t i v e C o n l i n W a l l g L o w e r s t e m p e r a t u r e s 1 0 - 2 5 d e g r e e s . 1 F o r e a s y a u t o m a t i o n _ 3 s t a g e s o f c o o l i n g a n d 2 s t a g e s o f h e a t i n g r o w m a t e C o n t r o l l e r G a s U n i t H e a t e r s p p 1 V l o d i n e h i g h E f f i c i e n c y F o r m i n i m u m h e a t l o s s . ( . 1 ) N a t u r a l G a s o r P r o p a n e H o r i z o n t a l A i r F l o w F a n s - F o r a i r c i r c u l a t i o n a n d p l a n t h e a l t h . 4 , / j , ! ` C o m p l e t e A s s e m b l y I n s t r u c t i o n s G r e e n h o u s e A s s e m b l y i f y o u w o u l d l i k e t o a d d c o n s t r u c t i o n t o y o u r p a c k a g e - C a l l t o l l - f r e e 1 - 8 8 8 - 2 8 1 - ' 9 3 3 7 1 E l e c t r i c a l w i r i n g d i a g r a m s h o v i M g d e t a i l s o f a l l e q u i p m e n t e l e c t r i c a l c o n n e c t i o n s F r e e t e l e p h o n e s u p p o r t . i f y o u w o u l d l i k e t o a d d c o n t r a c t i n g t o y o u r p a c k a g e C a l l t o l l - f r e e 1 - 8 8 8 - 2 8 1 - 9 3 3 7 1 " 2*-m' GREENHOUSE ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' n l -111= Tu l =iT1 J l uTl Tl ui_i=il II -a-_ ulllll Ii, ul lul,lr_L-_III m II -lu lu nl I, -II m ul li_L--lu III =1i1 II -uetil lull L iTi m II _II lu nl —u m—II ul =luul u=III—n1 _ui_lul a u11 Iu=Iu1 ul -III In=I uil—II ui III�iI=I it II TUI II —11— II m-lill �ll a=1. a III —a I[ uu11 nl II 11 71 I=u lu=ul III un-ul ul a I:_u II a I—=u1d11 a L;-1i ul a n=1T ul nl a=III a In -1lnu Iu=1Ti III ol- -1I Trn1 a m=Ilan Tul TL �I-lu_ " — ii -u1_n 1 111 Ll- a uluur_ u ul -n1 11_n1 a ni u1—u11 n 1 -u1 i111n Ilul ul-lU 11 nl ui lu ul 11 111m lulu lulu��, glu )u li —" I I �J lug. III C Ii IIu11 ill 11 �I II lu'. hull IH -III III - - - - GREENHOUSE ELEVATION SCALE: V4' • I'-O' ALL ENERGY ©2017 Europa?echnoing;es ^2'47,17 Goo gle 45°01'38.92" N 93°35'15.60" C! :elegy: 1077 tt eye.alt 1476 ft 0 COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1642 CARROLL AVE ST PAUL, MN 55104 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION JGEM TRUST 2705 WILLOW DR N HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 18125 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: 1. (200) LG 395W MODULES = 79.00kW 2. MOUNTING TYPE: GROUND MOUNT 3. (10) SOLAREDGE SE7600A-US INVERTER(S) 4. ARRAYS 1-5: 30° TILT, 180° AZIMUTH REVISIONS LAST: 06/19/17 MG AZIMUTH N PROJECT -PAGE TITLE COVER PAGE PAGE NUMBER AO ALL ENERGY 45°01'38.93" N 93°35'18.56" 4V elev 1020 it eye pit 1341 ft COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1642 CARROLL AVE ST PAUL, MN 55104 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION JGEM TRUST 2705 WILLOW DR N HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 18125 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: 1. (200) LG 395W MODULES = 79.00kW 2. MOUNTING TYPE: GROUND MOUNT 3. (10) SOLAREDGE SE7600A-US INVERTER(S) 4. ARRAYS 1-5: 30° TILT, 180° AZIMUTH REVISIONS LAST: 06/19/17 MG AZIMUTH N PROJECT -PAGE TITLE COVER PAGE PAGE NUMBER A2 SOUTH ELEVATION rn 68'-4" Ift_ 7 1' OF CONCRETE AT BOTTOM OF 10' HOLE L 4 .I, ALL ENERGY COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1642 CARROLL AVE ST PAUL, MN 55104 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION JGEM TRUST 2705 WILLOW DR N HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 18125 SYSTEM DETAILS ow o< wr U C7 Q J a0 � J Qw w m CO WEST ELEVATION Z3, GRADE 1' OF CONCRETE AT BOTTOM OF 10' HOLE BEAM PLACED 10' BELOW GRADE NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS MAY VARY DEPENDING ON GROUND ELEVATION BUT ARE DRAWN TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY ELEVATION DRAWING IS NOT DRAWN TO SCALE AND SHOULD NOT BE USED AS CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS REVISIONS LAST: 06/19/17 MG AZIMUTH PROJECT -PAGE TITLE ELEVATION DRAWINGS PAGE NUMBER A6 NAME DESCRIPTION QTY PICKED ORDER NAME DESCRIPTION QTY PICKED ORDER MOUNTINGELECTRICAL/BOS POLAR RACKING PRU-D 2x20 PRU-D Table 5 METER SOCKET MILBANK 200A W/BYPASS METER SOCKET 2 CONCRETE CONCRETE FOR POST HOLES 30 AC DISCONNECT EATON 200A/2P FUSIBLE DISCONNECT WITH FUSES 2 ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING PER AHJ REQUIREMENTS 1 PANEL BOARD EATON 200A COMBINER PANEL - OUTDOOR RATED 2 MONITORING SOLAREDGE MONITORING GSM-CELLULAR-12YR 10 INVERTERS SOLAREDGE INVERTER SE7600A-US 10 SOLAREDGE OPTIMIZER P400 200 SOLAR PANELS LG LG395N2W-A5 200 ADDITIONAL MATERIALS HARDWARE ALL NECESSARY HARDWARE FOR ATTACHING BOS EQUIPMENT TO RACKING AND BUILDINGS. TBD CONDUIT &WIRE ALL NECESSARY CONDUIT AND WIRE FOR THE 5 ARRAY GROUND MOUNT AND 400' WIRE RUN TBD 1, ALL ENERGY COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1642 CARROLL AVE ST PAUL, MN 55104 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION JGEM TRUST 2705 WILLOW DR N HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 18125 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: REVISIONS LAST: 06/19/17 MG AZIMUTH PROJECT -PAGE TITLE EQUIPMENT PICK LIST PAGE NUMBER A22 AES v17.06.06 i i i i i i f— �UJARMING HOUSE/STORAGE 51-1ED ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" D D� a SWARMING HOUSE/STORAGE 51-1ED ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = I'-m" CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR / / / / \ \ i / // / i� \ \ \ ,� // / i 1p30. \ � // / N / \ \ �/ ///�i // / /// '_--_1p34 Z .../ /--'-- / // ^ \� \ / / / / � — 7- 1036 \ \ 0 CA CD J� \7� �\ UIOXISG / / /� / \ \�XISTING Q' I J � WEST LINE OF NEVI /4 OF \ SE 1/4 OF SEC. 16-1t8-23 \ \\ �\ \ �. m I l l r \ \ / i 76, 7 i / / / / i _ /02- \ \ \ `7O40S\ SHED EPTIC \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \$ \ 1 \ \\ \ \ \ \ � -1038_ 1036 \ \ \ _..4).. EXISTING) l PL Y ?USE N. \ i \\,\ -\`\ i N BBQ \ �\I t 3 � b1 'os \ ,,tH5,'!,\..:,\\ ,, ,s ,° 070,5 10 \ \ \ \ = _1pzoV \ , AA \\ \ 1032-- 10 m24 �- cl f(ia 1 \ 15. CHARLES CUDD IN THE NE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC. 16-118-23 S 89°09' 21" E MOO. UMW. 1' — -1016- 5 / \ \ 15,I� N / Y \ I POND 8 oo N rn \ //' /` \ � — 1016 i / / \ \ � \ \ _— 1014—, +- / — 1010--1- APPROXIMATE EDGE OF WETLAND N CD CO N 89°03' 21" E 17271 REvismsCJ DATE REMARKS 315.39 018 \ \ \N V A A \\ \G`hj `V 00364; \ \� \ \ \ \ \ 136' NSF N. \ \ \ \ EDGE of PROPOSED UNDERG620UND \ \ \ \\ \ � cA \ \ \ ROCK WATER TREATMENT \ \ \ \ \ SYSTEM FOR 4512 S.F. OF_NEy1(T-p�gRDCOVER \ \ \ \ \ \ 1" RUNOFF = 376 C.F. \ \ \ \ ' \ '°,� 376 C.F./40% VOIDS =940 C.F. \ \ \ `, \ 15 FT.X 21 FT.X 3 FT. DEEP =-945-C.F. \ ".�°`' °�d \ \ \ o a, 10A4� \ \ \ oo� o?�\�\THPCR 1 7 OVFF�R SOUTH LINE OF NE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC. 16-118-23 8-2-17 ADDED FUTURE SEPTIC SITES 8-11-17 ADDL HENN CO TOPOG, ADDITIONS 8-28-17 DESIGNEE' DRAWN CHECKE7 LINE \ HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA \, \ 867.47 \• '°g+-- -1038 M4 \ (1034A) (1031.3) ••,NORTH LINE OF NE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC. 16-1 18-23 -- -1038- CHAIN- (+O3,e) LMK -- / AVER DRIVEWA / I / °� aP <+'LO�6aa) �s \ 1o3,p1 1038 \ —c'` aie.') EXISTING BUILDING 7830'- SF --1034- COWIRETE DRIVEWAY 240` SF PR' TIC .),e, OF SOLAR x 68.33 = 350.71 ....... / ,1 / 0 / 1 7, / ,Cka ;;1/41 CHAIN - LINK F r METAL ,oxA)l • \_ — FUTURE SEPTIC 0031.e MOM w... MM 0(.0 (,axe 0 0 0 o/ (10363) --1030- -i19-*11 / (1034.3) l (1035.1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Cn O (10343) PROPOSED GREENHOUSE PROPOSED BUILDING /6. ‘‘ 4)45D(A) 9221! SQ. FT. OF EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 2304! SF 360! SF 2664t SQ. FT. OF PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES the Northeast Quarter of the Sout described line and its southerly of said Northeast Quarter of the ine thereof 471.5 feet to the poi thence deflecting left 51 degrees of curve; thence along a tangenti t and central angle of 22 degree ce tangent to last said curve a d hence along a tangential curve to central angle of 5 degrees 36 min herly tangent to last said curve of the Southeast Quarter and sa o : denotes iron marker (908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, 917 : denotes : denotes OF SE 1/4 OF SEC. 16-118-23 heast Quarter of Section 16, ipal Meridian, lying westerly extension; Commencing at the Southeast Quarter; thence West nt of beginning of the line al curve to the left having a the right having a radius to the South line of said id line there endin g. mean sea level datum proposed spot elevation, rrean sea level datum existing contour line, mean sea level datum proposed contour line, rrean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, to be removed, building, trees, spot elevations topography, and the proposed location of a proposed house, driveway and grades thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. DATE r'.2 cr./ 7 MINN. LICENSE NUMBER a7S'S DATE 7-28-17 SCALE JoBtsia 17-271 SHEET OF SHEETS GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, LAND PLANNERS 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MN 55356 PHONE: 952-473-4141 FAX: 952-473-4435 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: September 27, 2017 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates — September 19, 2017 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) JEGMRevoc Trust Solar Text Amendment and CUP — 2705 Willow Drive — The JEGM Revocable Trust has requested that the City consider amending its zoning code to increase the maximum footprint of ground mounted solar panels permitted on a rural property from 2500 square feet to 4000 square feet. The applicant has also requested a conditional use permit for construction of a 4000 square foot ground mounted solar array, a 2304 square foot greenhouse and 360 square foot warming shed. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 12 and recommended increasing the maximum footprint for solar equipment and also recommended approval of the CUP. The City Council is scheduled to review on October 3. B) Weston Woods of Medina PUD Concept Plan — 1952 Chippewa Road — Mark of Excellence Homes has requested review of a PUD concept plan for the development of 94 twinhomes on 80 acres (-30 buildable) east of Mohawk Drive, and north of Chippewa Road. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 12. The Park Commission reviewed the concept on September 20. The City Council will review the concept on October 17. C) Mark Smith Concept Plan and PUD Concept Plan — NE corner of Highway 55 and Mohawk Drive — Mark Smith of Mark of Excellence Homes has also requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Concept Plan related to a 48-lot subdivision immediately south of the Weston Woods project. The project also proposes a 7 acre City Park. The Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing at the October 10 meeting, and the City Council will review both requests on October 17. D) School Lake Nature Preserve CD-PUD — Wally and Bridget Marx have requested review of a PUD General Plan of development and preliminary plat for a conservation design subdivision to include 6 lots and conservation of 70 acres (11.76 buildable). The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the June 13 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The applicant has adjusted plans in light of recent City Council direction to include a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres in rural CD-PUD projects. The City Council reviewed on September 19 and directed staff to prepare approval documents. Staff intends to present at the October 17 meeting. E) Lunski Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, Site Plan Review — Lunski, Inc. has applied for approvals for a development of 90 units of mixed senior housing, 24,767 s.£ of office, and 4,100 s.f. commercial north of Highway 55 and west of Mohawk Drive. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 11 Planning Commission meeting. The Commission tabled the request in order to allow the applicant to update plans to meet comments from the Elm Creek Watershed and City Engineer. Staff presented the request to the Commission on August 8 and the Commission recommended approval. The City Council adopted approval documents on September 19. Staff will work with the developer related to the conditions of approval. F) McDonald's Variance — McDonald's has requested a variance to reduce the required setback for a replacement trash enclosure. The existing enclosure is being removed by Hennepin County in connection with the County Road 116 improvement project and needs to be relocated. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at the August 8 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 October 3, 2017 City Council Meeting The City Council adopted a resolution of approval on September 19. This project will now be closed. G) Excelsior Group PUD Concept Plan — The Excelsior Group has requested a comprehensive plan amendment for the City to amend the staging of development for property located north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive for a 68-lot single-family subdivision. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 8 and generally did not find that the request met the criteria for developing earlier than the staging plan dictates. The Park Commission reviewed on August 16 and the Council on September 19. The project will now be closed. H) Reserve of Medina Second Addition — Toll Brothers has requested approval of the second phase of the Reserve of Medina project. The City Council adopted approval documents on September 19. Staff will work with the developer related to the conditions of approval. I) Crosby/Snow CUP, Johnson ADU CUP, Dykhoff Septic Variance, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery — The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. J) Woods of Medina — This preliminary plat has been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application K) Hamel Road Thirty Two, Hamel Haven subdivisions — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded Other Proiects A) Comprehensive Plan — The Steering Committee met Monday, September 18 at 7:00 a.m. to review the comments received from jurisdictions to date. The next (and possibly, final) meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 26 at 7:00 a.m. B) Closed Landfill regulations — staff has drafted an ordinance related to the Woodlake Landfill as required by the MPCA in connection with the state's closed landfill program. The ordinance includes requirements which extend onto adjacent property. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the ordinance at the August 8 meeting and tabled the ordinance. Neighboring property owners raised concerns related to the impact of the ordinance on their property values. The Planning Commission directed staff to evaluate the ordinance to determine how the impacts of the ordinance could be reduced on property owners while still meeting state mandates. Staff drafted the ordinance and presented it at the September 12 meeting. The Planning Commission has requested additional information from the MPCA related to the Methane Gas and Groundwater areas of concern, which are scheduled to be presented at the October 10 meeting. C) Planning Conference —I will be attending the Minnesota Planning Conference September 27-29. I would like to thank the City Council for your support of continuing education for staff!! Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 October 3, 2017 City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340.9790 p:763.473.9209 f: 763.473-8858 non -emergency: 763.525.6210 Emergency 9-1-1 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor Robert Mitchell and City Council Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety, Through City Administrator Scott Johnson September 28, 2017 Department Updates Medina Celebration Day Medina Celebration Day was well attended and enjoyed by all even though the weather was questionable. Our assistant, Anne Klaers, planned the event and everything went well. We thank everyone who helped with the planning, set up, operations and teardown. There were many moving parts; it all came together to make it a great day. Death of My Father I want to thank everyone for all the kind words, thoughts and prayers for my family and me. I was in Alabama and Florida for a week dealing with the funeral arrangements and his estate. It appears it could be an ongoing issue for me for a while. Thank you for your support. CSO Hiring We held our interviews for the open community service officer position on Friday, September 16th. Our top candidate, Melissa Robbins, is in the background process. Melissa is currently one of our reserve officers. In 2016, she also completed an internship for her Criminal Justice Degree program at Metro State with our department. If successful in the background process, I will make the recommendation to hire Melissa with a start date in the middle of October. Patrol by Sergeant Nelson On September 27, 2017, we held a department meeting and training for the officers. Part of the training was working with the fire departments on active shooter table top scenarios. We took new department photographs and received updated training on a new Livescan fingerprint machine. Patrol Activities For the dates of September 13 to September 28, 2017, our officers issued 51 citations and 123 warnings for various traffic infractions. There was a total of seven traffic accidents, 15 medicals and 14 alarms. On September 27, 2017, Officer McKinley took a theft of liquor from Highway 55 Liquor. Caller reported that a couple came into the store and a male distracted the employee while a female concealed multiple bottles of liquor and left the store. This is the second time in a week that we have taken similar reports. This is going on all over the metro at this time. On September 27, 2017, Officer Hall took a theft report. A construction trailer at Highway 55 and Pinto Drive was broken into and items were stolen from inside. Case forwarded to Investigations. On September 23, 2017, Officer Gregory took an unauthorized use of credit card report. Caller stated that someone had made two $500 withdrawals from her checking account in a different state. We have taken numerous reports of this over the past two weeks. It has been learned that victims have had their ATM cards compromised after using a certain ATM in Plymouth. There was found to be a skimmer attached and victim information was obtained including account and PIN numbers. Case forwarded to Investigations. On September 18, 2017, Officer Converse responded to an unwanted person at the Inn Kahoots Bar. There was an intoxicated male who was threating to beat up customers and refused to leave when asked. Officer Converse ended up arresting the male for Disorderly Conduct and he was booked into the Hennepin County Jail. On September 17, 2017, Officer McGill took a forgery/fraud report. Caller stated that someone had used his name and account to attempt to purchase something off iTunes. After checking, the caller was one of the many who had their information stolen from Equifax. Caller was not out any money and a freeze was put on his information. Investigations by Investigator Kevin Boecker Theft by swindle case by a home contractor has been sent to the Hennepin County Attorney's Office for possible charges. Continued investigation of employee theft case. Additional records were received from banks after warrants were served. Investigated two hit and run property damage accidents. Both drivers were identified. One was issued a citation and the other was forwarded to the Medina Prosecuting Attorney for charging. A violation of an order for protection was forwarded to the Medina Prosecuting Attorney. Suspect finally contacted our department and upon further investigation it was determined that the order was never served and; therefore, not valid. A request was sent to the prosecuting attorney for dismissal of charges. Investigating a suspect possibly involved with stolen property in a neighboring city. Investigation continuing. There are currently 11 open cases assigned to Investigations. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: September 26, 2017 MEETING: October 3, 2017 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • The 55/116 project is moving along slowly. The curb has been poured on the east side and the RJR crossing has been replaced. Next will be paving on the east side and switching to the west side for more road construction and utility work. The substantial completion date is November 15th. I think it is going to take all that time to get there. • We are set to start our Clydesdale Project the second week of October, or as soon as the curb company can make it. This project will only take a week or so once it gets started. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • The Water Tower Project is in full swing. If I had to guess, it is going to be a little behind schedule. So far all is going well with the pumps and our backup system. • Fall flushing on the Hamel system will be put off until after the tower project is done. • The inter -connect with Corcoran is now complete and available for emergency water needs for either City. PARKS/TRAILS • The trail along Hamel Rd extending from Rainwater Park to the west across Elm Creek has been installed by Public Works. This was a widening of the shoulder and a railing near the culvert for safety reasons. We will also be adding a few sections of split rail fencing near the creek. • We are still hoping to get to the volley ball court at Fields of Medina done this year but time is limited and we have a lot of things to complete. MISCELLANEOUS • The brush pile has been chipped and over 30 semi loads of material hauled out. I was able to get the pile chipped at a very minimal cost of just mobilization. Staff also hauled out around 301oads of compost to a local farmer to make room for this upcoming leaf season. ORDER CHECKS SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 - OCTOBER 3, 2017 046373 CHEVALIER, LYNN $250.00 046374 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. $1,162.33 046375 JUST FOR KIX $250.00 046376 MEDINA ENTERTAINMENT CTR $1,000.00 046377 PALM, LARRY $3,000.00 046378 PEARSON BROS., INC $43,801.25 046379 RECHELBACHER, PETER $1,000.00 046380 EBERT, SUSAN & CHUCK $250.00 046381 KRISHNA, UDAV $150.00 046382 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL $34,442.10 046383 THOMAS, MICHAEL & NICOLLE $500.00 046384 BIFFS INC $782.31 046385 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC $72.72 046386 BUDGET PRINTING $12.78 046387 CIRCLE V SPECIALTIES, INC $3,098.00 046388 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES $690.05 046389 COUNTRYSIDE CAFE $98.00 046390 CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC $233.50 046391 DEERWOOD BANK $125.00 046392 ECM PUBLISHERS INC $1,241.40 046393 EHLERS & ASSOC INC. $3,800.00 046394 EMERY'S TREE SERVICE $2,472.50 046395 ENGEL WATER TESTING INC $400.00 046396 HIGHWAY 55 RENTAL $1,539.70 046397 KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED $11,902.20 046398 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR $392.00 046399 MADISON NATIONAL LIFE $611.35 046400 MARCO INC $30.97 046401 METRO ALARM CONTRACTORS INC $180.00 046402 MOTLEY AUTO SERVICE LLC $153.00 046403 OFFICE DEPOT $141.59 046404 PITNEY BOWES $47.63 046405 RANDY'S SANITATION INC $100.00 046406 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC $7,487.62 046407 SCHERERS PUMPKIN PATCH $110.00 046408 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC $22.41 046409 STREICHER'S $317.94 046410 TEGRETE CORP $1,314.00 046411 TIMESAVER OFFSITE $402.13 046412 TITAN MACHINERY $112.56 046413 TWIN CITY STRIPING $4,742.10 046414 ULINE $252.13 046415 UPTOWN HAMEL INC $65.00 046416 WSB & ASSOCIATES $27,629.75 Total Checks $156,386.02 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 - OCTOBER 3, 2017 004314E PREMIUM WATERS INC $52.09 004315E PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE BY PHONE $1,000.00 004316E CITY OF PLYMOUTH $767.86 004317E PR PERA $15,056.24 004318E PR FED/FICA $16,859.74 004319E PR MN Deferred Comp $2,320.00 004320E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA $3,570.30 004321E SELECT ACCOUNT $736.07 004322E CITY OF MEDINA $20.00 004323E SELECT ACCOUNT $417.42 004324E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC. $1,153.30 004325E MINNESOTA, STATE OF $1,849.00 004326E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC $205.29 004327E KONICA MINOLTA $168.48 004328E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN $1,958.79 004329E XCEL ENERGY $17,286.42 004330E DELTA DENTAL $2,581.85 004331E SELECT ACCOUNT $2,271.83 004332E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE $2,946.95 Total Electronic Checks $71,221.63 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT SEPTEMBER 20t 2017 508164 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L $1,332.97 508165 BARNHART, ERIN A. $2,099.87 508166 BELLAND, EDGAR J $2,570.18 508167 BOECKER, KEVIN D. $2,745.35 508168 CONVERSE, KEITH A $2,452.93 508169 DINGMANN, IVAN W $1,793.98 508170 ENDE, JOSEPH $1,677.11 508171 FINKE, DUSTIN D. $2,178.55 508172 GALLUP, JODI M $1,752.05 508173 GLEASON, JOHN M. $2,132.29 508174 GREGORY, THOMAS $2,014.53 508175 HALL, DAVID M. $2,259.30 508176 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S $2,225.06 508177 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. $2,242.53 508178 KIESER, NICHOLAS $448.40 508179 KLAERS, ANNE M $1,154.57 508180 LANE, LINDA $1,492.97 508181 LEUER, GREGORY J. $2,143.47 508182 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R $1,597.77 508183 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D $1,665.18 508184 NELSON, JASON $2,599.87 508185 PETERSON, DEBRA A $1,684.69 508186 REINKING, DEREK M $1,591.50 508187 SCHARF, ANDREW $1,475.51 508188 SCHERER, STEVEN T. $2,289.30 508189 VIEAU, CECILIA M. $1,138.40 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $48,758.33