Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout11.01.2016 City Council Meeting PacketMEDINA AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, November 1, 2016 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 October 18, 2016 Regular Council Meeting V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Final Pay Request to Barber Construction for Arrowhead Drive Trail Project B. Approve LMCIT Liability Waiver Form for 2017 C. Approve Embedded Systems, Inc. Contract Renewal VI. PRESENTATIONS A. Hennepin County Sheriff Richard Stanek VII. COMMENTS A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda B. Park Commission C. Planning Commission VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. AutoMotorPlex - PUD General Plan of Development; Plat; Site Plan Review — East of Arrowhead Drive, North of Hamel Road B. Ellis and Nancy Olkon — Lot Size Variance — 2362 Willow Drive — Public Hearing C. Deerhill Preserve Improvement Project Change Order/Policy Discussion IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS XII. ADJOURN Posted 10/28/2016 Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Medina City Council FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator DATE OF REPORT: October 28, 2016 DATE OF MEETING: November 1, 2016 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Final Pay Request to Barber Construction for Arrowhead Drive Trail Project — The Arrowhead Drive Trail project is now complete. Staff recommends approval of the final pay request to Barber Construction. See attached pay request. B. Approve LMCIT Liability Waiver Form for 2017 — The City is required to approve the LMCIT form each year. For the past several years the City has chosen not to waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability as established by State Statute. The City Council approved the same action at their March 19, 2013 meeting after staff reviewed the options with our Insurance Agent Susan Lipscomb from Martin/Ahmann. Staff recommends approval. See attached. form. C. Approve Embedded Systems, Inc. Contract Renewal — The attached agreement with Embedded Systems, Inc. renews the tornado siren maintenance agreement for 2017. Staff recommends approval. See attached contract. VI. PRESENTATIONS A. Hennepin County Sheriff Richard Stanek — Sheriff Stanek will be at the meeting to update the City Council on what is happening at the Sheriff's office. No attachments for this item. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. AutoMotor Plex — Developer has requested review of a PUD General Plan, Plat, and Site Plan Review for development of an "Automotorplex," a series of finished garages designed for motorsports enthusiasts. The City reviewed a Concept Plan for the development back during the summer. The applicant operates a similar facility in Chanhassen. The proposed plat would rearrange the lot line between the two parcels to result in a 6 acre parcel along Hamel Road containing the existing Loram Warehouse and the 19 acre development site along Arrowhead Drive. The proposed development includes 12 buildings to contain approximately 212,540 s.f. of private garage space and 26,125 s.f. of retail space. The developer anticipates that the garages would be divided via condominium plat into approximately 162 individually owned units. See attached report. Possible Motion: Move to direct staff to prepare documents granting PUD General Plan of Development, Plat, and Site Plan Review approval for the AutoMotorPlex development and a development agreement related to the same. B. Ellis and Nancy Olkon — Lot Size Variance — 2362 Willow Drive — Public Hearing — Ellis and Nancy Olkon have requested a lot size variance to allow the subdivision of their approximately 21 acre parcel into two parcels. The applicant would also need to request a preliminary plat in order to carry through with the subdivision. There are a number of technical matters which are not completed yet for their subdivision application which will require additional costs in order to carry through. Since the subdivision is contingent upon the variance, staff thought it would be worthwhile to consider the variance before the applicant accrues extra costs to complete the subdivision request. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Willow Drive and County Road 24. The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) and is guided Rural Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. Surrounding properties are all Rural Residential as well. The property contains a home and three outbuildings on the northern portion of the property on the top of the hill. See attached report. Possible Motion: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the variance request based upon the findings noted by the Planning Commission. C. Deerhill Preserve Improvement Project Change Order/Policy Discussion — During the developer's mass grading operations and work to prepare the road subgrade, sandvanes with significant groundwater flow were encountered in a number of areas. The wet weather has also contributed to higher levels of moisture in the subgrade. Under the City's contract, the scope of the original work included placement of geotextile fabric, aggregate base, and paving. The proposed improvements did not include the placement of a sand subgrade layer to the extent proposed by the developer. The developer has requested that the City's contractor include the sand placement with their work scope; the proposed construction techniques to place the sand as proposed would require one contractor to place the fabric, sand, and aggregate base as one continuous operation. The original bid did include a relatively small quantity of sand for minor corrective work. The additional sand placement can be completed under the current contract and specifications as designed. However, due to the quantity of sand proposed and the cost implications, a change order has been prepared for approval. The amount of sand in the original bid was 500 cubic yards, but the amount recommended with the current request is an additional 2 8,600 cubic yards. The change would add an additional $215,000 to the project with the possibility of future change orders. All costs will be assessed to the property owner(s) at the end of the project. See attached report. Possible Motion: Move to approve the change order for the Deerhill Preserve Improvement Project in the amount of $215,000 XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 003869E-003892E for $58, 776.76, order check numbers 044992-045050 for $196,485.75, and payroll EFT 507482-507507 for $45,208.59 and payroll check 20436 for $1,205.02. INFORMATION PACKET • Planning Department Update • Police Department Update • Public Works Department Update • Claims List 3 DRAFT 2 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 2016 4 5 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on October 18, 2016 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 Planner 15 Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Police Sergeant Jason Nelson. 16 17 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 18 19 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 20 The agenda was approved as presented. 21 22 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.) 23 24 A. Approval of the October 4, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 25 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the October 4, 2016 regular City 26 Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 27 28 B. Approval of the October 13, 2016 Special City Council Meeting Minutes 29 Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the October 13, 2016 special City 30 Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 31 32 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:03 p.m.) 33 34 A. Appoint Craig Swalchick to Police Officer Position 35 B. Resolution Certifying Delinquent Storm Water Utility Charges to the 36 Hennepin County Auditor for Collection in 2017 37 C. Resolution Certifying Delinquent Utility Charges to the Hennepin County 38 Auditor for Collection in 2017 39 D. Resolution Requesting Conveyance of Tax -Forfeited Land 40 Moved by Martin, seconded by Pederson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 41 passed unanimously. 42 43 VI. PRESENTATIONS 44 45 A. Martha Van de Ven — Orono School Referendum Questions (7:05 p.m.) 46 Martha Van de Ven stated that two questions will go before the voters. She stated that 47 the first is for an operating levy referendum. She explained that three years ago the 48 School District did not ask for the maximum amount allowed and are now attempting to 49 move to the full amount allowed by the State. She noted that the second item is a bond 50 referendum that would be used to build an activity center. She stated that there has 51 been a lot of public input throughout the process. She stated that the School District Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 October 18, 2016 1 works hard to educate the whole child including the mind, character, and physical 2 wellbeing. She played a short video that has been created to educate voters. She 3 explained that the legislature is not keeping up with the rate of inflation in terms of 4 funding for schools and noted that special education services that are required are also 5 not funded by the State. She stated that the School District faces a $900,000 deficit in 6 the 2017-2018 school year. She provided additional information on the needs of the 7 School District and the funding that could be provided through these questions that will 8 be on the ballot. She noted that the activity center would be used by students as well as 9 other members of the community. 10 11 Mitchell referenced the number of school children that was given in the presentation of 12 2,800 and asked how many of those children are high school aged. 13 14 Ms. Van de Ven stated that there are approximately 225 children in each grade so 15 approximately 800-1,000 in the high school. 16 17 Mitchell commented that he lived in the Orono school district growing up and stated that 18 the community was so proud to have its own high school when that was built. He stated 19 that the people that have been on the Orono School Board for all these years know the 20 community and its needs and therefore he trusts that the schools do need that money. 21 He stated that it is a terrific school district. 22 23 VII. COMMENTS (7:23 p.m.) 24 25 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 26 There were none. 27 28 B. Park Commission 29 Scherer reported that the Park Commission will meet the following night to consider park 30 dedication for the AutoMotorPlex and will also hear a request for the Hawks' baseball 31 fields. 32 33 C. Planning Commission 34 White reported that the Planning Commission met the previous week and held a public 35 hearing for the AutoMotorPlex requests. She stated that Finke provided a presentation 36 along with brief comments from the applicant. She stated that there was a fair amount of 37 discussion regarding landscaping and parking. She reported that ultimately the Planning 38 Commission recommended approval with a vote of five to one, noting that she was the 39 dissenting vote. 40 41 Pederson asked if there were a lot of residents present for the public hearing. 42 43 White commented that most of the seats were filled, noting that some comments were in 44 favor of the request while others were not. 45 46 Mitchell asked the pros and cons regarding the use of a PUD both for the City and 47 developer. 48 49 White stated that the building standards seemed to exceed the standards for that area 50 and would be a better transition from business to rural residential. She noted that there 51 were a number of other items agreed upon by the Commission that she could not recall Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 October 18, 2016 1 at the moment. She stated that she was concerned with the amount of drainage from 2 the property to the neighboring property and whether that would fully be addressed. 3 4 Mitchell asked if the minutes were available from the meeting. 5 6 Finke stated that he does have the draft minutes and could provide them to the Council. 7 8 White stated that the special events will be the cause of the parking concerns, noting 9 that staff recommends using special events permits to better regulate the activity. 10 11 VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:29 p.m.) 12 Johnson provided an update on the 2016 Mediacom buildout, noting that progress is 13 being made and estimated that residents in that area should have access by December 14 31st. He noted upcoming fire training and watershed workshop meetings. He stated that 15 if residents have issues or concerns with Mediacom, they should contact staff. 16 17 IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:31 p.m.) 18 Anderson commented that each of the businesses visited during the business tour were 19 creative and unique and it was great to see the innovative ideas the businesses had. 20 21 Pederson stated that the overall theme that continued was that the businesses did not 22 have any concerns with the City or issues with the City. He stated that he attended the 23 Loretto Fire Department open house the previous weekend which was well attended. 24 25 Cousineau stated that she attended the Mayors meeting and provided a brief update 26 noting that some of the adjacent communities want to work together to update maps. 27 28 X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:34 p.m.) 29 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Cousineau, to approve the bills, EFT 003852E- 30 003868E for $42,214.65, order check numbers 044937-044991 for $314,152.19, and 31 payroll EFT 507450-507481 for $47,699.37. Motion passed unanimously. 32 33 Xl. ADJOURN 34 Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adjourn the meeting at 7:34 p.m. Motion 35 passed unanimously. 36 37 38 Bob Mitchell, Mayor 39 Attest: 40 41 42 Scott Johnson, City Administrator Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 October 18, 2016 LYSB CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project 02712-71 - MDNA - Arrowhead Drive Trail Project Final Pay Voucher No. 3 Contractor: Barber Construction Co., Inc. 4350 Main Street St. Bonifacious, MN 55375 Contract Amounts Original Contract Contract Changes Revised Contract Work Certified To Date Base Bid Items Backsheet Change Order Supplemental Agreement Work Order Material On Hand Total $174,572.00 $0.00 $174,572.00 $151,130.66 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $151,130.66 Contract No. Vendor No. na For Period: 9/14/2016 - 10/7/2016 Warrant # Date Funds Encumbered Original Additional Total $174,572.00 N/A $174,572.00 Work Certified This Pay Voucher Work Certified To Date Less Amount Retained Less Previous Payments Amount Paid This Pay Voucher Total Amount Paid To Date 02712-71 $0.00 $151,130.66 $0.00 $143,574.13 $7,556.53 $151,130.66 Percent Retained: 0% Amount Paid This Final Pay Voucher $7,556.53 I hereby certify that a Final Examination has been made of the noted Contract, that the Contract has been completed, that the entire amount of Work Shown in this Final Voucher has been performed and the Total Value of the Work Performed in accordance with, and pursuant to, the terms of the Contract is as shown in this Final Voucher. Approved By Approved By Barber Construction Co., Inc. County/City/Project Engineer Date October 7, 2016 Date City of Medina Date Page 1 CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project No. 02712-71 Final Pay Voucher No. 3 02712-71 Payment Summary No. From Date To Date Work Certified Per Pay Voucher Amount Retained Amount Paid Per Pay Voucher Per Pay Voucher 1 06/22/2016 07/18/2016 2 07/19/2016 09/13/2016 3 09/14/2016 10/07/2016 $134,455.25 $16,675.41 $0.00 $6,722.76 $833.77 ($7,556.53) $127,732.49 $15,841.64 $7,556.53 Totals: $151,130.66 $0.00 $151,130.66 02712-71 Funding Category Report Funding Work Less Less Amount Paid Total Category Certified Amount Previous This Amount Paid No. To Date Retained Payments Pay Voucher To Date U N F 151,130.66 0.00 143, 574.13 7,556.53 151,130.66 Totals: $151,130.66 $0.00 $143,574.13 $7,556.53 $151,130.66 02712-71 Funding Source Report Accounting Funding No. Source Amount Paid Revised Funds Paid To This Contract Encumbered Contractor Pay Voucher Amount To Date To Date UNF Unfunded 7,556.53 174,572.00 174,572.00 151,130.66 Totals: $7,556.53 $174,572.00 $174,572.00 $151,130.66 Page 2 CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project No. 02712-71 Final Pay Voucher No. 3 02712-71 Project Material Status Line Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Pay Voucher Amount This Pay Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date Schedule A. Surface Improvements- South of Station 20+00 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS $5,000.00 0.6 0 $0.00 0.6 $3,000.00 2 2101.502 CLEARING TREE $50.00 17 0 $0.00 9 $450.00 3 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE $50.00 17 0 $0.00 9 $450.00 4 2101.610 TREE TRIMMING HOUR $25.00 5 0 $0.00 3 $75.00 5 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y $4.00 110 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 6 2104.505 REMOVE GRAVEL (DRIVEWAY) SQ YD $5.00 110 0 $0.00 110 $550.00 7 2104.509 REMOVE PIPE APRON EACH $500.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $500.00 8 2104.513 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F $24.00 130 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 9 2104.523 SALVAGE & REINSTALL SIGN EACH $200.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $200.00 10 2104.601 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL LANDSCAPING LUMP SUM $2,500.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $2,500.00 11 2104.602 SALVAGE AND INSTALL 15" RC APRON EACH $900.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $900.00 12 2104.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOX EACH $200.00 3 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 13 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (P) C Y $12.00 111 0 $0.00 111 $1,332.00 14 2105.507 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) CU YD $10.00 220 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 15 2105.523 COMMON BORROW (CV) C Y $20.00 380 0 $0.00 200 $4,000.00 16 2105.601 DEWATERING LS $3,000.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 17 2105.604 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y $2.00 840 0 $0.00 4033 $8,066.00 18 2105.607 1 1/2" CLEAR ROCK C Y $100.00 10 0 $0.00 10 $1,000.00 19 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR $100.00 5 0 $0.00 5 $500.00 20 2130.501 WATER (DUST CONTROL) M GALLONS $100.00 10 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 21 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON $20.00 700 0 $0.00 1067.5 $21,350.00 22 2221.501 SHOULDER BASE AGGREGATE TON $21.00 230 0 $0.00 51.21 $1,075.41 Page 3 CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project No. 02712-71 Final Pay Voucher No. 3 02712-71 Project Material Status Line Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Pay Voucher Amount This Pay Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date CLASS 5 23 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON $85.00 320 0 $0.00 308.75 $26,243.75 24 2360.503 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B), 3.0" THICK S Y $16.00 110 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 25 2501.511 15" RC PIPE CULVERT CLASS V L F $100.00 16 0 $0.00 8 $800.00 26 2501.515 15" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH $1,800.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 27 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH $1,200.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $1,200.00 28 2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $400.00 1 0 $0.00 2 $800.00 29 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS $2,000.00 0.6 0 $0.00 0.6 $1,200.00 30 2511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y $100.00 10 0 $0.00 12.39 $1,239.00 31 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $5,000.00 0.6 0 $0.00 0.6 $3,000.00 32 2564.602 FURNISH SIGN POSTS EACH $450.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 33 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED LIN FT $2.50 1800 0 $0.00 1800 $4,500.00 34 2573.533 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F $3.50 650 0 $0.00 650 $2,275.00 35 2573.535 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS $1,000.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 36 2574'508 3ERTILIZER TYPE LB $2.00 100 0 $0.00 100 $200.00 37 2574.525 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW C Y $28.00 360 0 $0.00 310 $8,680.00 38 2575.501 SEEDING ACRE $2,000.00 0.5 0 $0.00 0.5 $1,000.00 39 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 35-241 LB $20.00 10 0 $0.00 10 $200.00 40 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25-121 LB $15.00 20 0 $0.00 35 $525.00 EROSION Page 4 CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project No. 02712-71 Final Pay Voucher No. 3 02712-71 Project Material Status Line Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Pay Voucher Amount This Pay Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 41 2575.523 CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y $3.00 570 0 $0.00 1700 $5,100.00 42 2575.535 WATER (TURF ESTABLISHMENT) MGAL $10.00 130 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 43 2575.562 HYDRAULIC MATRIX TYPE MULCH LB $4.00 680 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 44 2575.570 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 1 ACRE $2,000.00 0.3 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 45 2575.572 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y $2.00 810 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Totals For Section Schedule A. Surface Improvements- South of Station 20+00: $0.00 $102,911.16 Schedule B. Surface Improvements - North of Station 20+00 46 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS $5,000.00 0.4 0 $0.00 0.4 $2,000.00 47 2101.610 TREE TRIMMING HOUR $100.00 5 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 48 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (P) C Y $10.00 365 0 $0.00 365 $3,650.00 49 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR $100.00 5 0 $0.00 5 $500.00 50 2130.501 WATER (DUST CONTROL) M GALLONS $100.00 10 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 51 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON $22.00 320 0 $0.00 533 $11,726.00 52 2221.501 SHOULDER BASE AGGREGATE CLASS 5 TON $26.00 40 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 53 2360.501 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON $90.00 170 0 $0.00 169.15 $15,223.50 54 2502.521 6" TP PIPE DRAIN L F $5.00 60 0 $0.00 250 $1,250.00 55 2504.601 IRRIGATION REPAIR LUMP SUM $2,000.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS $2,000.00 0.4 0 $0.00 0.4 $800.00 57 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SPECIAL S F $50.00 20 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 58 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $5,000.00 0.4 0 $0.00 0.4 $2,000.00 59 2573.530 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH $400.00 3 0 $0.00 3 $1,200.00 Page 5 CITY OF MEDINA 2052 County Rd 24 Medina, MN 55340 Project No. 02712-71 Final Pay Voucher No. 3 02712-71 Project Material Status Line Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Pay Voucher Amount This Pay Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 60 2573.533 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F $3.50 1340 0 $0.00 1340 $4,690.00 61 2574'508 3ERTILIZER TYPE LB $2.00 40 0 $0.00 40 $80.00 62 2574.525 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW C Y $28.00 150 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 63 2575.501 SEEDING ACRE $4,000.00 0.2 0 $0.00 0.4 $1,600.00 64 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25-121 LB $20.00 20 0 $0.00 40 $800.00 65 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y $3.00 240 0 $0.00 900 $2,700.00 66 2575.535 WATER (TURF ESTABLISHMENT) MGAL $50.00 60 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 67 2575.560 HYDRAULIC MULCH MATRIX LB $10.00 250 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 68 2575.570 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 1 ACRE $2,000.00 0.1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 69 2575.572 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y $2.00 880 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Totals For Schedule B. Surface Improvements - North of Station 20+00: $0.00 $48,219.50 Project Totals: $0.00 $151,130.66 Page 6 LEAGUE of MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 LIABILITY COVERAGE - WAIVER FORM LMCIT members purchasing coverage must complete and return this form to LMCIT before the effective date of the coverage. Please return the completed form to your underwriter or email to pstech@Imc.org This decision must be made by the member's governing body every year. You may also wish to discuss these issues with your attorney. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) members that obtain liability coverage from LMCIT must decide whether to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. The decision has the following effects: If the member does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to $1,500,000. These statutory tort limits apply regardless of whether the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage. If the member waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to $2,000,000 for a single occurrence. (Under this option, the tort cap liability limits are waived to the extent of the member's liability coverage limits, and the LMCIT per occurrence limit is $2 million.) The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to $2,000,000, regardless of the number of claimants. If the member waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants. Claims to which the statutory municipal tort limits do not apply are not affected by this decision. -f M fP1.( LMCI Member Name ck one: The member DOES NOT WAIVE the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. ❑ The member WAIVES the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04 to the extent of the limits of the liability coverage obtained from LMCIT. Date of city council/governing body meeting Signature Position 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST ST. PAUL, MN 55103-2044 PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAx: (651) 281-1299 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG E./4E CUE d �Sµ�.EEm1, 012C. Tel. (763) 757-3696 11931 Hwy 65 NE, Minneapolis, MN 55434 Fax: (763) 767-2817 www.embedsys.com jburgett'q)embedsys.com Contract Renewal October 14, 2016 City of Medina Ed Belland 2052 Cty. Road 24 Hamel, MN 55340 We are at the end of another tornado season. Embedded Systems, Inc. has provided our best service toward maintaining the tornado sirens for your city for the past several years. We would be very pleased to continue to provide Tornado Siren Maintenance for your city. The Monthly Siren Maintenance Fee for 2017 will be $43.93 per siren, per month. The decoder batteries for your city are scheduled to be replaced in 2017 for preventive maintenance. Battery replacement will occur once every 2 years for Hennepin and Ramsey County and once every three years for Anoka County for all units maintained by Embedded Systems under the original maintenance agreement, including those batteries which may have been replaced since the last scheduled replacement because of failure. We are asking that you please sign and return this contract renewal to us before November 16h, 2016 to enable us to continue to provide our best service through the end of 2017. Feel free to fax the signed contract renevval to (763) 767-2817 or email it to iburgettr&embedsys.com. Thank you for your business and we look forward to servicing your needs through the next year. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. Thank you, Julie Burgett Embedded Systems, Inc. Contract terms accepted: Signature Date Phone Email For continuation of services through the end of the year 2017 Tornado Sirens Master List Siren # Location M Medina 1 170 County Road 24 2 2522 Bobolink 3 2985 Lakeshore Ave. 4 92 Hamel Road 5 620 Shawnee Woods Dr 6 1800 Prairie Drive Updated 10/10/2016 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: October 27, 2016 MEETING: November 1, 2016 City Council SUBJ: AutoMotorPlex — PUD General Plan of Development; Plat; Site Plan Review East of Arrowhead Dr., N. of Hamel Road Review Deadline Complete Application Received: September 2, 2016 120-day Review Deadline: December 31, 2016 Summary of Request Bruno Silikowski has requested review of a PUD General Plan, Plat, and Site Plan Review for development of an "Automotorplex," a series of finished garages designed for motorsports enthusiasts. The City reviewed a Concept Plan for the development back during the summer. The applicant operates a similar facility in Chanhassen. The plat includes two existing lots with a total of approximately 25.2 acres, a 3 acre lot at the corner of Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road and a 22 acre parcel with frontage on both Arrowhead and Hamel. The proposed plat would rearrange the lot line between the two parcels to result in a 6 acre parcel along Hamel Road containing the existing warehouse and the 19 acre development site along Arrowhead Drive. The proposed development includes 12 buildings to contain approximately 212,540 s.f. of private garage space and 26,125 s.f. of retail space. The developer anticipates that the garages would be divided via condominium plat into approximately 162 individually owned units. The properties are guided for Business development and zoned Business Park. There is an existing warehouse on the southwestern parcel and the remaining site is currently tilled farmland. A wetland is located north of the existing warehouse, bisecting the subject site west to east. There is also a small wetland in the middle of the proposed development site. Property to the south and west of the subject site is guided and zoned rural residential. Property to the north is guided business and currently farmed. Property to the east is guided business and currently a rural lot. Loram operates the warehouse on the proposed southern lot. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found at the top of the following page. The dashed blue line shows the proposed property lines. The applicant has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in order to allow flexibility in the development because it is not a standard business use and to allow a more residential feel to the building construction. AutoMotorPlex Page 1 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting During concept plan review, comments were generally supportive of the flexibility being considered related to architectural standards, such as building materials and the amount of garage doors, because these were related to providing a more unique development plan and use for the property. In addition, the applicant indicated that they would enhance the architectural elements through the use of decorative garage doors, substantial modulation and use of architectural elements, as well as significant berming and landscaping. On the other hand, comments were less supportive of flexibility related to landscaping within the development and especially urged the developer to meet or exceed minimum setback requirements. Comments requested additional landscaping internal to the site and additional setbacks towards the outside. The developer was encouraged to provide benefits consistent with the purpose of the PUD District when putting together a formal plan submission in order to support the use of PUD zoning. AutoMotorPlex PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review Page 2 of 13 November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting Comprehensive Plan As noted above, the subject property is guided Business (B) in the current Comp Plan and is planned for development in the current staging period. The objectives of the Commercial and Business land uses are attached for reference. The City is currently in the midst of its decennial Comprehensive Plan update and a draft of the Plan has been prepared by the Steering Committee. No substantial changes are currently proposed for the subject or surrounding properties. Proposed Site Layout The site plan shows buildings north and south of the wetland on the site, with the buildings separated by approximately 50 feet. Buildings vary in size from 16,000 square feet to 34,150 square feet. Two access points are proposed off of Arrowhead Drive. The site was generally laid out according to the BP standards. The applicant originally sought flexibility to reduce the front parking setback from 35 feet to 30 feet, but increased to 35 feet following Planning Commission direction. Although the minimum BP setbacks would be met, the proposed site plan generally fills most of the building envelope of the site, abutting the minimum setback requirement for nearly the entire length of the north and eastern property lines, and over half of the length of the south and western property lines. The following table summarizes the proposed site plan, lot dimensions, and the requirements of the underlying BP district. The applicant has requested rezoning to a PUD, which would permit flexibility if it serves the broader purpose of the PUD and other city objectives. As noted above, the property to the east is guided Business, but currently contains a home. This fact likely warrants discussion when considering appropriate setbacks under a PUD. BP Requirement Proposed AutoMotorPlex Warehouse Parcel Minimum Lot Size 3 acres 19.17 acres 5.9 acres Minimum Lot Width 200 feet 1200 feet 392 feet Minimum Lot Depth 200 feet 690 feet 690 feet Front Yard Setback 50 feet 50 feet 110 feet Rear Yard Setback 30 feet 30 feet 434 feet Side Yard Setback 30 feet 30 feet 115 feet Residential Setback 100 feet 90 feet (west + V2 ROW) Residential Setback (w/ buffer) 75 feet 90 feet Parking Setbacks Front 35 feet 35 feet Rear/Side 20 feet 20 feet Residential 100 feet 70 feet Residential (w/ buffer) 60 feet 75 feet (west + V2 ROW) Max. Hardcover 70% 63% AutoMotorPlex PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review Page 3 of 13 November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting The proposed use is fairly unique and is not explicitly listed in the city's zoning regulations. The garages are privately owned and store non-commercial items. The recreational and social/"club" aspects of the use differentiate it from typical storage garages. The applicant also proposes ancillary uses (retail, repair, conference spaces). These unique uses may be best addressed through a PUD. Architectural Design Building Materials The applicant proposes LP SmartBoard wood lap siding as a primary building material. This material is not permitted in the BP district. The applicant seeks flexibility via the PUD in order to support a less industrial architectural finish. The applicant proposes pitched shingled roofs. The BP district requires "a minimum of 20 percent of the building exterior shall be brick, natural stone, stucco (not Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product), copper, or glass." The applicant has submitted "typical" elevations for the garage buildings, identifying approximately 9% of the exterior materials being stone and 5% windows, for a total of 14%. The applicant has requested flexibility from the 20% higher -quality material requirement, and instead proposes to utilize higher quality, decorative garage doors as an architectural element. The proposed retail building is proposed to include 9% stone and 17% glass, along with LP SmartBoard wood lap siding as a primary material. The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss whether the flexibility in exterior building materials serves the purposes of the PUD district. Modulation The BP code requires that "buildings shall be designed to avoid long, monotonous building walls. Modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or building materials/design. Generally, a particular building elevation shall include a minimum of one element of modulation per 100 feet of horizontal length, or portion thereof." The proposed "typical" garage building and the proposed retail building include various aspects of modulations, including the middle section of the building being set horizontally forward and taller. Additional architectural elements along the roofline are proposed which also serve to screen mechanical equipment. Canopies over the entry doors and decks on the ends of buildings add additional modulation. Windows and Fenestration The BP code requires that "building elevations which face a public street shall include generous window coverage." The applicant aligned most of the garage buildings so that they will not face a public street. The retail building facing the street includes windows on approximately 30% of the area of the fagade. Building Height Building height in the BP district is limited to 35 feet in sprinkled building. The proposed buildings are 32.75 feet in height. AutoMotorPlex Page 4 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting Garage Doors The proposed buildings include a substantial amount of garage doors to access the garages, which are considered loading docks under city code. The BP zoning ordinance limits loading docks to 20% of the building perimeter. Docks which are screened by buildings do not count in this amount. The BP district also requires docks within 300 feet of residential property to be screened by a building. The applicant has attempted to screen as many of the doors as practical with buildings, but the remaining elevations would far exceed 20%. The applicant seeks flexibility under the PUD. It should be noted that the garage doors would not look like typical loading docks, which would often have trucks backed up to them. During Concept Plan review, the Planning Commission and Council indicated that they may be open to such flexibility, provided the garage doors are more architecturally attractive if facing the exterior of the site. Tree Preservation and Landscaping The subject property is predominantly tilled farmland. There are a number of existing trees within the wetland south of the proposed AutoMotorPlex development. There are also existing large coniferous trees around the warehouse building on the southern site. The applicant has not proposed to remove any trees on the site. The BP district requires planting based on the perimeter of the site. In this case, a minimum of 76 overstory, 38 ornamental trees and 126 shrubs would be required. In addition, the BP zoning district requires a 100 foot setback from residential property, but permits a reduction if a 70% opaque landscaping screen is installed. Staff would recommend requiring a similar landscaping screen along the western property, where residential property is located across Arrowhead Drive. The applicant has submitted an updated landscaping plan which does provide additional landscaping. Staff recommends a condition to update the plan in a way to increase the screening in the winter season and also to provide more diversity in plant material. The proposed landscaping plan appears to meet the minimum requirement for overstory trees and shrubs. However, the plan appears to be lacking ornamental trees and is far short of a 70% opaque landscaping screen along the western property line. The BP district also requires 8% of the area within the parking lot and loading docks to be landscaped and requires landscaping adjacent to buildings. The site plan includes a fairly continuous arrangement of buildings and drive aisles. Depending on how the stormwater improvements are calculated, these areas would exceed the 8% interior area. In addition, the district requires landscaping islands to break up rows of parking over 20 spaces. The BP zoning district also requires that 12-feet adjacent to buildings is landscaped, with the exception of access locations. The proposed site plan does not incorporate this required landscaping. The applicant has argued that the landscaping along the sides of buildings between garages would make snow removal extremely difficult. However, a similar rationale has not been provided for the ends of each building. Staff recommends that landscaping be incorporated AutoMotorPlex Page 5 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting adjacent to the ends of buildings at a minimum. In fact, this may be an opportunity to provide wider landscaping areas which could include more plantings. Wetlands and Floodplain There are two wetlands shown on the subject site. One wetland is located along the south of the proposed AutoMotorPlex development. The other wetland is located in the center of the site. The site plan identifies required upland buffers adjacent to both wetlands. The applicant proposes to locate their main stormwater improvement adjacent to the central wetland. FEMA maps identify no floodplains on the subject properties. Transportation The applicant proposes two accesses to Arrowhead Drive. An existing stoplight at Highway 55 would support traffic from the west, north, and east. Southbound traffic would likely wind through Hamel Road, and Willow Drive. Neither the City Engineer nor Hennepin County have raised capacity concerns related to nearby roadways based on expected traffic generation. Both Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road are county roads and the applicant will need to follow any recommendations by Hennepin County related to necessary improvements to support the development. The applicant has indicated that they hope to host occasional large events, approximately once per month, generally April -October. In their Chanhassen facility, these events can bring in over 1000 people during a 4-hour window. Such events will require additional management and are discussed further below. Parking and Events The applicant proposes 64 formal parking spaces in front of the retail spaces. The applicant has identified 26,125 square feet of retail space in the northwestern two buildings. City code would require 105 parking spaces for this space. The zoning code does not specify a requirement for the private garages. In such cases, the applicant is required to provide parking based upon minimums established by the City Council based on available information. In terms of the retail area, the applicant believes the parking need will be much lower because the intention is for this space to be filled with more specialty shops which largely will serve the owners of the garages. With the amount of pavement proposed internally, staff believes there is an opportunity to identify more areas which could be striped for parking to support the retail space if necessary, similar to a proof -of -parking arrangement. Providing these spaces should be relatively easy, except the fact there is a gate between the retail buildings that will restrict access to the rest of the site. In order to be used by the retail uses, this gate would need to be opened or moved. There is sufficient space for 57 additional parking spaces immediately to the east and north of Building 5 (within the gated area). The applicant has stated that they intend to utilize these spaces for employees (and to provide them access through the gate) in order to save parking spaces in front of the building for customers. Staff recommends a condition requiring the developer to enter into an agreement which can require these spaces to be established and accessible if deemed necessary by the City in the future. The applicant has also referenced potential uses in the retail space such as a museum or conference area. Staff recommends that AutoMotorPlex Page 6 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting the agreement mentioned above include a provision which provides additional parking if deemed necessary by the City based on the proposed use. Staff is concerned with the lack of circulation for the retail parking areas. Both are long dead- end rows of parking. Staff recommends that the plans be updated to provide a turn -around for each row (likely resulting in the loss of a parking space), or a connection to adjacent drive aisles. The applicant claims that they experience very little parking need on a day-to-day basis for the private garages. Staff believes this seems reasonable. The applicant proposes 40-50 foot wide pavement areas between and around most buildings. This amount of pavement will offer substantial opportunities for informal parking for the garages. In the areas of more common parking (especially in the area to the east and south of Building 5), staff recommends "no parking" signage on one side of the drive aisle in order to maintain an adequate width. The applicant has indicated that they intend to hold large monthly car show events at the site similar to the facility in Chanhassen. Such events in Chanhassen have brought in 500 display cars and large crowds of over 1000 spectators. The Carver County Sheriff's office has estimated some of the crowds between 2000-3000 people. Staff calculates that, in addition to the 64 parking spaces in front of the retail buildings, there is space to accommodate informal parking area for an additional 507 vehicles while still allowing for 20 foot drive aisles. Approximately 100 of these spaces would be located in front of private garage doors. The applicant has indicated that they have an agreement with Loram to utilize 350 parking spaces at their facility and is trying to work with Hennepin County for an additional 300 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated that they intend to utilize special city services for these large events. This would include police resources for traffic control and would also require special consideration if parking is permitted along Arrowhead Drive, since the street is not designed for street parking. As a result, staff recommends that the events over 700 people only be permitted through the City's special event permit process, which shall be restricted to a limited number of times per year. Parking along Prairie Drive for events does not appear to be a concern, as the roadway is fairly wide and is lightly traveled on weekends. This provides room for 40 vehicles prior to the Hennepin County Public Works driveway. Arrowhead Drive is not as wide and if parking is allowed, it would have to be closely monitored through the special event permit process. If such parking becomes a concern, it could be disallowed by working with Hennepin County. In terms of intensity of use on the site, staff believes it is important to consider the totality of the situation in comparison to other uses which could reasonably be expected to be developed on the site. With the exception of large events, the proposed development will be fairly low intensity for most of the week. The Business Park zoning district permits various office, warehouse/distributor, and light manufacturing uses which would tend to be more intense during most weekdays. AutoMotorPlex Page 7 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water to the site from the north, keeping the sewer main as deep as possible to serve the site and surrounding lands. The applicant proposes to stub water service to both the east and south line of the property. The applicant also proposes to extend sewer service to the property to the east. With the exception of the sewer and water main along the northern property line, remaining improvements interior to the site are proposed to be privately maintained. The City Engineer has provided recommendation for technical changes to the plan, and staff recommends a condition requiring the applicant to address these comments. Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review The applicant proposes a filtration basin and stormwater pond with filtration basin in order to treat stormwater on the site. Stormwater would be discharged via a pipe through the property to the north to the large wetland on the property to the east. The City Engineer and Watershed have provided review comments for a number of changes, and staff recommends a condition requiring the applicant to address these comments. The site currently slopes from Arrowhead Drive to the east. The applicant proposes to grade the site fairly flat in order to accommodate the buildings and drive aisle. This will result in a steeper slope from the eastern property line up to the improvements along the east side of the development. For example, the floors of the northeastern and southeastern buildings will sit 4-5 feet above the existing grade. Plat The applicant proposes to plat the property into two lots and will subsequently subdivide the garage units via a condominium plat. The AutoMotorPlex development will be located on one of the lots on the plat, while the southern property containing the existing warehouse building will be increased in size and retained by Loram. The dimensional standards of the BP zoning district were described on page 3 of this report. It appears that the proposed lots exceed the minimum requirements. Staff had recommended that the applicant align the lot line of the plat with the wetland between the AutoMotorPlex and warehouse property. As proposed, the plat leaves approximately % acre of the warehouse property to the north of the wetland, effectively landlocked. The property owner has indicated that they do not intend to access this portion of the site, but may utilize it for future stormwater improvements, wetland mitigation, or landscaping. Staff recommends a document on which the property owner acknowledges that they have platted the lot in a way which causes access difficulties which does not provide justification for a variance or wetland impacts. Staff recommends a condition that the plat be updated after the utility plan is finalized to ensure that water shut -offs, hydrants and hydrant leads are contained within utility easements. Staff also recommends an agreement which requires that the property owner keeps hydrants in working order. AutoMotorPlex Page 8 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting Park Dedication According to the City's subdivision ordinance, the City can require the following dedication for parks and trails purposes: 1) Up to 10% of the buildable land (2.33 acres) 2) Cash -in -lieu of land dedication up to 8% of the pre -development market value of the land (approximately $132,325). 3) Combination of land and cash. In this case, the subject property includes approximately 23.3 buildable acres and staff estimated the pre -development market value, which would need to be confirmed by the City Assessor. The City's park plan does not identify a need for parkland in the area. The trail plan identifies a trail along Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road. The Applicant proposes to dedicate an easement along the east side of Arrowhead Drive and the north side of Hamel Road and to construct approximately 1,600 linear feet of trail along Arrowhead Drive in order to fulfill park dedication requirements. The trail easement accounts for approximately 23% of the required park dedication. Staff believes the proposed construction would reasonably account for the remaining cash dedication. The applicant proposes to construct the trail along the AutoMotorPlex property south to Hamel Road. City staff believes the trail would be more advantageous for the City and the developer if it were along the east side of Arrowhead Drive heading north of the property. This would allow pedestrian traffic to Loram's parking lot to the north. Without a trail or sidewalk, staff will recommend that Arrowhead Drive be signed "No Parking." The applicant and the City have been in discussions with Loram, who owns the property to the north, to determine if this would be a viable option. In addition to being consistent with the trail plan, staff believes the trail along Arrowhead is necessary to support the parking the applicant proposes for large events on the site. Review Criteria As noted at the beginning of the report, the development includes three land use approvals: 1) General Plan of Development for a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development district; 2) plat; and 3) Site Plan Review. Staff recommends that the requests be considered in that order because the plat and Site Plan are contingent upon the PUD zoning, and the Site Plan Review is contingent upon the plat. The City has a great deal of discretion in the Planned Unit Development. The purpose of the PUD district is described below. A PUD should meet these objectives in order to be approved. "Section 827.25. PUD - Planned Unit Development Regulations - Purpose. PUD - Planned Unit Development provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and AutoMotorPlex Page 9 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: Subd. 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. Subd. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. Subd. 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. Subd. 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. Subd. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. Subd. 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. Subd. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. Subd. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) Subd. 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City." Plat Section 820.21, Subd. 10 establishes criteria for review of a plat, which is described below. The City has a relatively low level of discretion in the review of plats. Section 820.21, Subd. 10. "In the case of all subdivisions, the City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the following finding are made: (a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28. (b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. (d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way." Staff believes that, subject to the conditions recommended below, the plat would not trigger the findings above and would therefore recommend approval. AutoMotorPlex Page 10 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting Site Plan Review The purpose of the site plan review is to review compliance with relevant City ordinances and to determine what conditions are necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. The City has a relatively low level of discretion in such a review. If the proposal meets relevant requirements, it should be approved. In this case, various aspects of the development require flexibility from the existing Business Park zoning through the PUD process. As such, the Site Plan Review is contingent upon the approval of the PUD. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 11, and an excerpt from the DRAFT minutes is attached. Two residents of the City spoke at the hearing, one letter was received into the record. Commissioners also discussed comments which were received related to whether the uses supported the objectives of the comprehensive plan, especially related to rural character. Commissioner discussion surrounded how the proposed use would not impact these objectives much more than other business uses which were permitted in the BP zoning district. The Commission found that the request, subject to the changes and conditions, was consistent with the purpose of the PUD ordinance. Following the hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of the requests, subject to some changes and conditions. Specifically, the Planning Commission requested: 1) Increased landscaping adjacent to buildings within the development and a reduction of pavement where possible. 2) Increased setback along Arrowhead Drive and increased screening and plantings. 3) Enhancements to the stormwater management system. 4) Increased screening along the southern property line. Since the Planning Commission review, the applicant has updated the plans. The plan increased the parking setback to 35 feet and narrowed the drive aisle around the wetland and added approximately 10,000 square feet to the pond. In addition, the plan reduced the retail by approximately 2000 s.f. and increased the garages by approximately 4000 square feet. A new landscaping plan was also submitted which added a shrub hedge to the west of the proposed parking lot and more plantings along the southern property line. In addition, the landscaping areas between the retail buildings was widened from 4 feet to 12 feet. Staff believes that a PUD provides a good means to allow for the type of development proposed. The mix of uses on the site is fairly unique. The Planning Commission and Council will need to determine whether the various aspects of flexibility sought serve the purpose of the PUD. In addition to determining how much of this flexibility is appropriate based upon the criteria, staff would recommend the following conditions: 1) The Applicant shall construct the improvements as displayed on the plans received by the City on 10/3/2016 and 10/24/2016, except as modified herein. 2) The Owner shall enter into a development agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City to ensure compliance with the conditions noted herein as well as other relevant requirements of City ordinance and policy. AutoMotorPlex Page 11 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting 3) The Owner shall submit a letter of credit to ensure completion of required site improvements. 4) This approval shall be valid for three calendar year for Phase I and seven calendar years for Phase II. The Applicant may request a permit to construct Phase II within this time frame without obtaining Site Plan Review approval. 5) The Applicant shall grant easements and right-of-way as recommended by the City Engineer and County Engineer. 6) The Applicant shall meet the recommendations of the City Engineer dated 10/25/2016. 7) The Applicant shall update plans to increase landscaping within the site and reduce paved areas. 8) The landscaping plan shall be updated as recommended by the City Engineer in order to provide year-round opaque screening along Arrowhead Drive, to improve species diversification, and to lower potential conflict with adjacent trail and powerlines. 9) The Applicant shall provide a plan identifying the location of additional parking areas and documentation that will provide such parking for the retail uses upon the request of the City. 10) Uses in the "retail" buildings shall be limited to the uses described below. No use requiring more parking than a retail use shall be permitted unless provisions are made to provide additional parking. a. Retail and showrooms b. Automobile or motorsports repair, service shops, and auto body shops c. Automobile detailing d. Automobile or motorsports sales (interior showroom only) e. Office f. Museum g. Fitness Center h. Coffeeshop/Sandwich shop i. Meeting and assembly space (provided adequate parking is provided) 11) Car shows and other exterior assemblies and events with greater than 400 people are not a permitted use as of right under the planned unit development. Such events may be permitted by the City through the City's special event permit process a maximum of sixteen times per calendar year. Review and approval/denial of such events shall be subject to the provisions of the Special Event ordinance and such additional conditions as the City deems necessary to protect the public health and safety. Such events shall be subject to the following limitations in addition to others determined appropriate by the City during review of the special event permit: a. Events with greater than 700 people on -site shall occur no more than one time per month. b. Parking provisions on other property shall be memorialized in a manner acceptable to the City. c. Events with 400 people or fewer shall be permitted without a special event permit, provided such events do not require Special Services as defined in the Special Event Permit ordinance. 12) Garages shall be limited to personal use and no commercial activity may be permitted within the garage. 13) The garages shall never be occupied for residential purposes. A caretaker dwelling may be permitted on the property if meeting relevant building code requirements. AutoMotorPlex Page 12 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting 14) Garage doors which are visible from the exterior of the site shall be decorative in nature and incorporate architectural elements such as windows, and shall be subject to approval by City staff. 15) The Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City related to maintenance of the private hydrants within the site. 16) Upland buffers shall be established fully around all wetland areas on Lot 1, including required vegetation, signage and easements. 17) No development is proposed for Lot 2. Any construction on this property shall be reviewed if proposed in the future. 18) Emergency vehicle circulation, fire lane construction, and "no parking — fire lane" signage shall meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal and City Engineer. 19) The Applicant shall obtain necessary approvals and permits from the Elm Creek Watershed, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, Hennepin County Engineer, and other relevant agencies. 20) The Applicant shall address all comments of the City Attorney and abide by the City Attorney's recommendations related to title issues and recording procedures. 21) The Owner acknowledges that the plat creates a portion of lot 2 which is not accessible from the remainder of the lot and that such situation is based on their own action and will not create justification for future wetland impacts or variances. 22) The plat shall be recorded within 120 days of the date of approval or such approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for a time extension is submitted by the Applicants and approved by the City Council for good cause. 23) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the PUD, plant, site plan and other relevant documents. Potential Council Action If the City Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation and finds that the purpose of the PUD district have been met, the following motion would be in order: Move to direct staff to prepare documents granting PUD General Plan of Development, Plat, and Site Plan Review approval for the AutoMotorPlex development and a development agreement related to the same. Attachments 1. List of Documents 2. Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Planning Commission minutes 3. Public comments received 4. Commercial land use objectives 5. Engineer Comments dated 10/24/2016 6. Hennepin County comments dated 10/9/2016 7. Narrative 8. Plans dated 10/24/2016 (architectural dated 9/23/2016). 9. Plat AutoMotorPlex Page 13 of 13 November 1, 2016 PUD General Plan, Plat, Site Plan Review City Council Meeting asuodsa8 JalemwJ01S A £ 910Z/6T/OT 910Z/61/01 asuodsa8 #ueallddy A A T 9TOZ/£/OT 9TOZ/£/OT asuodsa8 #ueallddy A L 9TOZ/£Z/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 asuodsa8 lueallddy A S 910Z/9/6 9TOZ/9/6 asuodsa8 #ueallddy A Z 9TOZ/17/0T 9TOZ/17/0T suo!lena131empal!gi1V A Z 9TOZ/£Z/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 Hela8 — op' Ian-maw-10JV N A S£ 910Z/0£/8 9TOZ/0£/8 °Jullempamp-IV N A L 9TOZ/OZ/L 910Z/9/6 luawl!wwoO all!' A A T 9TOZ/VZ/OT 9TOZ/17Z/OT pa#ePO — ueld 8u!deaspuel A T 9TOZ/OZ/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 pa}epdf) — ueld 2u!deaspuel A T6Z 9TOZ/VZ/OT 9TOZ/VZ/OT ueld 'a8eueiAl JalemiwolS A A TS£ 9TOZ/£/OT 9TOZ/£/OT ueld •a2euelN JalemuJJolS A SSZ 9TOZ/£Z/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 veld •aeuel/l JalemuJJolS A -EST 910Z/9/6 910Z/9/6 ueld •aSeuetAl JalemaudlS A A £ZT 9TOZ/61/8 9TOZ/61/8 ueld •aSeuelN JaleAnwAolS N A Z 9TOZ/£/OT palepdn — leld A A Z 9TOZ/9/6 pa#epdn - leld A A Z 9TOZ/61/8 leld A A OZ 9TOZ/bZ/OT 9TOZ/17Z/OT palepdN — sueld HAD A A 6T 9TOZ/£/OT 9TOZ/£/OT pa#epdN — sueld HAD N A 8T 9TOZ/ZZ/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 palepdN — sueld HAD N A LT 9TOZ/9/6 9TOZ/9/6 pa#epdN — sueld HAD A A LT 9TOZ/81/8 9TOZ/61/8 sueld HAD A A ZT 9TOZ/ZZ/6 9TOZ/£Z/6 luawalddnS — anneJJeN A A IL 910Z/9/6 910Z/9/6 luawalddnS - an!leJJeN A A £L 910Z/61/8 910Z/61/8 annaneN slagel 2u!l!eW 000‘0T$ A A T 9TOZ/81/8 910Z/61/8 aa3 palepdN — uo!lea!lddy A saA £ 910Z/6T/8 910Z/6T/8 uoqea!lddy saloN zAdoo Jaded DRicupa13 sa8ed }o ## a;ea wawnpoa alea pamapab wauanpoa luemddd Aq pawwgnS sluauamoa 'IIeH Al!0 #e #sanbaJ uodn ma!naJ Jo# algel!ene aJe sluawnaop Ild punoO Alp pue uo!ss!wwo0 2u!uueld 'Lied ul payaelle Aluo aJe Jo 'pauDelle lou aJe sluawnaop awos #1 uana '1.sanbaJ paauaJa#aJ anoge aye #o pJoaaJ alaldwoa aye alm.!.suo3 sluawnaop 2u!mollo# ayl nna!na8 Ueld al!S';eld'Ueld IeJaua9 and xakpo;oWo;nt/-88T-91-H1 :pafoJd Geotechnical Report 9/23/2016 9/22/2016 49 Y Phasing Plan 9/23/2016 9/23/2016 1 Y Trail Information 9/23/2016 9/21/2016 2 Y Parking Information 9/23/2016 9/23/2016 5 Y Parking Information 10/3/2016 10/3/2016 3 Y Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes City Engineer Comments 9/2/2016 5 Y City Engineer Comments 9/6/2016 5 Y City Engineer Comments 9/29/2016 5 Y City Engineer Comments 10/7/2016 2 Y Stormwater Only Updated City Engineer Comments 10/25/2016 5 Legal Comments 10/4/2016 1 Y Plat Opinion 9/21/2016 5 Y Hennepin County comments 10/6/2016 4 Y Elm Creek Watershed comments 10/6/2016 2 Y Legal Notice 9/2/2016 7 Legal Notice —Reschedule 9/13/2016 1 Y Planning Commission report 10/4/2016 12 Y 108 pages w/ attachments Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Letter from Dellcroft attorney 10/11/2016 Y Letter from Jeanne Corwin 10/24/2016 Y Email from Becky Lietzau 10/24/2016 Y Letter from Schafers 10/27/2016 Y Letter from Borg attorney 10/27/2016 Y Letter from Dellcroft attorney 10/27/2016 Y Letter from Dellcroft engineer 10/27/2016 Y Planning Commission minutes 10/11/2016 Y 9 pages Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — AutoMotorPlex — PUD General Plan, Site Plan Review, and Plat to Construct 237,500 Square Feet of Private Garage Condominiums and Accessory Retail, Service, and Meeting Space on 19.17 Acres East of Arrowhead Drive, North of Hamel Road Finke stated that the request from AutoMotorPlex which would include various land use requests and the proposed development includes 208,000 square feet of private garages that would be condominiumized and sold to individual owners. He stated that the site would also include 28,000 square feet of retail area related to the garage areas. He stated that the applicant owns a similar site in Chanhassen and has invited the Commission to visit that site following the concept review earlier this summer. He reviewed the current zoning and noted that the applicant is requesting a PUD which would allow flexibility to the underlying standards to provide more flexibility for a better development. He stated that the applicant has suggested this PUD zoning because of the relatively unique use. He noted that staff attempted to summarize the comments from the concept review within the staff report. He described the proposed layout of the site noted that most of the garage doors will face the interior of the site. He noted that the City is underway in the process to update the Comprehensive Plan and advised that the subject property is still proposed to remain as business while the neighboring properties are proposed to remain as rural residential. He reviewed the setback requirements and the setbacks proposed by the applicant. He noted that staff has spoken with the applicant to advise that additional landscaping would be needed to buffer between the neighboring residential property. He reviewed the proposed building materials and architectural design proposed. He reviewed the proposed parking, noting that typically this amount of retail space would require additional parking spaces. He stated that the applicant believes the parking proposed would be sufficient as the area is gated and noted that there would be additional space that could be converted to parking if needed. He noted that the Chanhassen site hosts large events, which tend to require on -street parking and shared parking with neighboring uses. He stated that the applicant has worked with Loram and has an agreement that the large events could use their parking. He noted that the applicant also proposed parking on two roadways. He noted that staff believes these large events would be better governed through special events permits rather than attempting to place conditions through this request. He noted that the events are limited and therefore the property is typically very quiet in use. He stated that a trail is proposed to the Loram site which would provide a connection if that area is used for shared parking. He stated that the Commission should begin discussion with the PUD request as the Site Plan is contingent upon that PUD. He stated that in regards to the phasing of the construction, staff had originally recommended that phase on be constructed within one year and three years for the second phase. He explained that because of the numbers of buildings in phase one, the applicant is requesting three years for all he structures in phase one and up to seven years for phase two. He stated that in regards to the retail, the applicant would like to add a fitness center and to broaden the description of auto sales to include other types of motor sports as well as the availability of a coffee/sandwich shop. He stated that the applicant would like to increase the number of special events from once per month to 16 times per year. Rengel asked for more information on what is included in phases one and two. Finke reviewed the phasing plan as proposed, noting that the phasing as proposed by the applicant would better match what they experienced in Chanhassen. He noted that staff does not see a problem with allowing additional timing for the construction of the buildings. Barry asked how many parking stalls the applicant needs for the large events. V. Reid asked if each special event would require a permit of whether all the special events would be handled under one permit. 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that the special events permits are reviewed administratively and can be denied. V. Reid asked if it is hard or easy for the City to deny a special events permit. Finke stated that the City would have the option to approve or deny. He stated that the permit would not be ongoing and explained that in the beginning the permit would be for a shorter duration so that staff can gauge how the events go and make changes to future permits if needed. V. Reid asked if a conditional use permit would be required for the retail uses as those are developed. Finke stated that the intent would be for those to be permitted uses, so that slate of uses would be approved with the PUD. He noted that if the applicant wanted to do an alternate use not included in the list of allowable retail, that request would need to come back for approval. V. Reid referenced the trail connection on the eastern side and stated that the Park Commission noted that they would like a bike trail on the western side. She received confirmation that the applicant is only proposing the trail on the eastern side. White asked if this application encourages innovative approaches to storm water management in order to justify the PUD. Finke stated that the applicant is still working to meet the technical requirements of the watershed. He stated he was not sure how that could be better achieved. White referenced the concern of the property owner to the east regarding drainage and thought that she read that the applicant was going to provide more than adequate drainage. Finke explained that today the site drains over land to the property to the east and explained that the storm water management proposed would provide a series of ponds to manage that drainage and then drain around the property to the east. He noted that what is proposed would be a reduction to what is currently occurring but noted that in a large storm event the water would overtop the improvements proposed and still follow the current path to the wetland to the east. Muffin referenced the architectural design and asked why the wood lap siding is not allowed in the business park zoning. Finke stated that typically more durable material is required, such as stone. Muffin asked if it would be sufficient to simply state that the material must be maintained appropriately. Finke stated that the City has decided that it is appropriate to regulate building materials, noting that originally the intent was to get away from the use of metal in the zoning district and ensure that durable materials were being used. Murrin asked if she had read correctly that the City was proposing to decrease the sewer and water connection fees because the City was requiring a bigger pipe for sewer and water. Finke stated that he did not have that information off -hand but noted that the general City policy is to offer a credit when requiring a bigger pipe connection to support surrounding properties. He explained that this would save the City from having to install the larger pipe itself in the future. 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Albers received clarification on which Loram site would be used for shared parking. He asked how many additional parking sites are available at the north Loram site. Finke estimated 350 spaces at the Loram site. Albers asked for input regarding the parking along the County roads. Finke stated that the applicant proposes parking along Arrowhead and Prairie Drive, estimating 120 spaces available along one side of Arrowhead and 240 spaces if parking occurs on both sides. He noted that Prairie Drive would be a similar amount. He stated that the County plans to overlay the roadway next year and there have been discussions regarding overlaying the shoulders to accommodate the parking. V. Reid asked and received clarification that a PUD is being requested because of the unique mix of uses and because the use does not generally fit well within the business or industrial zones. Finke confirmed that the PUD zoning district is the best logical choice for this type of use. White received confirmation that this parcel is not included in the Highway 55 commercial district. Bruno Silikowski, the applicant, stated that he has appreciated working with Finke and his staff and appreciates the time and support that he has received throughout the process. He stated that this product will allow the community to come together and to serve the community better. He stated that most of the events have a charitable aspect to them noting that the community of the AutoMotorPlex allows its member to enjoy their passion and share that with the community. He stated that the Chanhassen site has been in existence for over 8 years and has support from the community and from the city staff and Mayor as well. Murrin asked if the applicant has a place inside the building that would include the clubhouse. Silikowski stated that the clubhouse would be within the retail space. He explained that a large amount of the retail space would be used as a gathering space for the members. Albers asked for more information on the special events, specifically whether those would be spread out throughout the year or only in summer months. Silikowski replied that the events would typically be in the warm weather months, April through November depending upon the weather. He stated that typically the events are four hours in duration, once per month, running from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. He stated that he has asked for up to 16 events as sometimes there are fundraiser events in addition to the regular monthly event. He stated that the events are for marketing, which are good for the sales and also develop a relationship with the community and greater auto community He stated that not every month would have two events. Rengel asked how the regular monthly events compare to the special events. Silikowski stated that the special events are generally smaller than the regularly cars and coffee events. He noted that the cars and coffee events have grown over the years and began with just 50 cars. He stated that the number of cars coming in for display and the number of spectators are regulated and limited. He estimated 400 vehicles and about 1,200 people were at the most recent German special event that they recently hosted in Chanhassen. He stated that they can easily handle the traffic and spectator traffic within the campus for that sized event. He expected that the events would be relatively small for the first few years, as the participation grows as word of mouth spreads. 3 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Barry stated that he is concerned with parking on Arrowhead. Silikowski stated that they are projecting the type of volume described in the staff report, noting that typically people are carpooling together, both spectators and people showing vehicles. Barry stated that he cannot envision that volume of people attending events without parking spreading to the neighboring streets. Silikowski stated that they often get a large volume of people walking from neighboring residential developments and again noted that spectators often come together in one vehicle. He noted that a large amount of parking can be accommodated on the site. He stated that they do not receive complaints at the other location, noting that they have a good relationship with the County and City police. He stated that the people coming into the event are also spending money at the local businesses while they are in town. He stated that they have been able to fine tune the events and have not a problem that they have not been able to correct and address. Albers stated that the events are a four-hour period of time and people are coming and going, therefore the full number of attendees are not at the site all at once. He received confirmation that people are driving their vehicles to the site for show rather than trailering the vehicles in. White stated that the facility in Chanhassen is on a site zoned business and asked if there is any residential around that site. Silikowski replied that there is residential development to the west of the Chanhassen site. He stated that there were concerns in the beginning with that site too but noted that four people from the abutting residential development have become members. He stated that they are good neighbors as they are aesthetically pleasing and the site is quiet. White stated that the Commission needs to take that into account because of the volume of residential development near this site. Silikowski stated that the site could develop as a FedEx delivery site or a manufacturing site which would have much more activity and would have a lot of traffic coming and going daily. He stated that typically there would only be about 12 people or less coming and going on a daily basis and therefore the site is quiet. V. Reid stated that during the events at the Chanhassen site there is activity on the street and asked how that could be discouraged. She noted that sometimes there are hotrods that drive along the roadway at that Chanhassen site that are not part of the event. Silikowski stated that activity does bother him and therefore he has discussed taping off the area to discourage that. He stated that they would create barricades to discourage that activity in Medina. He stated that they would partner with the police and would not tolerate that type of activity. He noted that the Chanhassen site is run by an association and therefore he does not have the power that he once did at that site but advised that he would have more power at the Medina site and would continue to partner with the police to discourage that activity. Murrin asked if the intention would be for Silikowski to hand off the Medina site to an association in the future. 4 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Silikowski stated that by law he has to hand off the site to an association within five years but noted that he would have much more input and control at the Medina site as the retail space will be leased. He noted that he has learned through the Chanhassen site and can apply that knowledge to this site. Rengel asked the reasoning for the similar phasing to Chanhassen, as she would think perhaps this site would develop faster being that the developer has already gone through a similar development. Silikowski stated that he would hope that the development would occur faster but noted that he would still like to plan for the case that does not happen and the development mirrors that of Chanhassen; stating that you hope for the best but plan for the worst. He stated that things can change and therefore he would like to plan for a good risk mitigation, noting that the economy can always change and he would like to be prepared. Rengel asked if parameters would be put into place before the site opens to discourage the "drag racing" on the street. Silikowski confirmed that there are things they can do from the beginning to discourage that activity. He stated that this site would have two entrances and exits, which would allow traffic to flow and would regulate that type of activity. He noted that there are other best management activities that they have gained that would also be applied. Rengel asked if there are methods for crowd control and traffic control that could be applied here. Silikowski stated that they limit the number of people to make events more manageable. V. Reid asked for an example of the security fence. Silikowski stated that there are photographs of the fencing used at Chanhassen, noting that the material may vary but something similar would be done. V. Reid asked the hours of operation. Silikowski stated that members have access to the site but normal business hours are typical. V. Reid asked if there are any concerns with the staff recommendations. Silikowski stated that there are a few things that he has discussed with Finke that were mentioned in his presentation, like the number of large events or adding additional retail options, but otherwise does not have concerns. V. Reid asked for information on the examples discussed previously regarding people that are not officially part of the event. Silikowski explained that is why they partner with the police, as they want that type of activity stopped immediately. He stated that the intent is to house the activities within the site. He explained that they do not want to always use the shared parking at Loram, but simply want to plan for the times when they will need additional parking. Barry asked if the fence will simply be along the north side of the property or the entire property. 5 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Silikowski stated that you will never be able to stop people from walking into the site. He noted that the property is landlocked on three sides and therefore the front side will be fenced. He stated that security is a method to keep people safe and protect the vehicles, making it more difficult for people to drive off the site. V. Reid opened the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. Dave Klis, 167104 45`h Ave N in Plymouth, spoke in support of the AutoMotorPlex. He stated that he is nearing retirement and he needs space for his hobby as his garage is too small, noting that his passion is restoring classic cars. He stated that he is looking for a community of automotive enthusiasts that he can gain information from. He stated that he is blown away at how people the members maintain the garages and the passion for cars that people have at the Chanhassen site. He encouraged the Commission to approve the request. Manny Villafana, 1482 Hunter Drive, stated that as he looks at the project he hears the concerns regarding garages and traffic but stated that that pictures from the Chanhassen show people that are of high living standard enjoying and investing in their passion. He stated that this will be a neighborhood of people that want to protect their investment and maintain the site. He wished that there was a business like this when he was collecting cars. He spoke of the integrity of the applicant and his family. He stated that if the Commission or residents have not been to the Chanhassen site they should go see it. He stated that the coffee and cars event is a family event. He compared this hobby to golf, noting that unlike golf like is something that the whole family can do. He did not think a garage is an accurate description as the facility also has kitchens and the whole family can spend time at the facility. He stated that this is a wonderful place that will bring good people into the community He encouraged the Commission to support this request. He was not worried about the crowds. James Lane, Medina resident, stated that he lives about two miles from the proposed facility but noted that he is present as the Attorney for Leslie Borg, who has the 20-acre parcel immediately east of the project site. He stated that the Borg's property consists of a horse facility and riding arena, which is the only occupied property around the Loram property. He expressed concern with the density/intensity of the development and the importance that development of this site be a well designed attractive looking workable transition to the rural residential core of Medina south and west of this site. He stated that this site has been zoned for business/industrial use for some time. He stated that Ms. Borg does not have quarrel with the intended business/industrial use of the property. He stated that staff will have time to ensure that the development will not only suit this property but also act as a transition to the rural residential core neighboring this property. He stated that Ms. Borg is also concerned with the management of storm water and runoff from this site as her property is downslope of the Loram property to the west. He stated that he would like to be able to retain an independent water consultant to independently suggest best management practices for this site as the water issues are a concern and priority of Ms. Borg. He stated that this seems to be a use that would be better fit to a 40-acre parcel rather than a 20-acre parcel. V. Reid encouraged Mr. Lane to speak with staff as they have information regarding the storm water management, as the plan states that 98 percent of the water will be maintained on the site which will be an improvement from what exists. Paul Jaeb, 1595 Hamel Road, stated that his property is directly south of the proposed property and has lived there for 11 years. He stated that he has 11 acres of land and has horses and dogs as well as a garage filled with old cars. He stated that he is extremely troubled with this proposal and agrees with the comments of Mr. Lane regarding the density and intensity. He stated that he drives the road every day and is concerned with 1,000 people coming to the site every other weekend. He stated that any parking 6 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes along Arrowhead would be preposterous as the roadway is a horse trail as well. He stated that this seems like a very bad fit and he is very concerned with the traffic this use would add to the area. He stated that the old cars are very loud and he was concerned that this would be a mechanic shop and he would be able to hear the tools from his property. He thought that due consideration should be given to the people that live nearest to this property. V. Reid noted a written letter the Commission received that will become part of the record. Finke confirmed that if additional written correspondence is received, it will be a part of the City Council packet. V. Reid closed the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. White stated that she visited the site in Chanhassen and appreciated the design standards. She noted that she did not attend during an event so she cannot attest for that aspect. She stated that the applicant is willing to go above and beyond the design standards. She stated that she also has concerns with the storm water management and she would want to ensure that the highest storm water management possible is provided to ensure that the surrounding areas are not impacted. She stated that she cannot support flexibility regarding landscaping and believed the developer should be held to the standards designed. She also believed that the minimum setbacks should be provided. V. Reid asked if the PUD standards are met, as if that is not met the application could not move forward. White stated that in her opinion the request does not meet the requirements for a PUD. Murrin stated that she believes that it does meet the requirements for a PUD has it is an innovative use with high quality materials and design that exceed the standards. She stated that the wetland would be maintained which would meet the third criteria in the PUD requirements. Albers agreed that the site would meet the individual criteria for a PUD, echoing the comments of Murrin. He stated that the storm water management would also be enhanced compared to what is currently provided on the site. He stated that open spaces would be a challenge because of the size of the development, agreeing that this is an intense development. He did not think adding additional land would improve the situation as the paved area would simply increase to connect the spaces. He stated that he would support the PUD. Rengel stated that she also supports a PUD for this request. She echoed concerns with storm water management. Barry stated that this site is zoned business and therefore could develop into a warehouse with much more regular traffic coming and going from the site. He stated that in his opinion this is a much better fit and use for the site and therefore could support the PUD. V. Reid agreed that this is an innovative unique use of the site and therefore would also support the PUD. She stated that now that there is consensus on the PUD, the Commission can discuss the Site Plan and recommendations. She asked what would happen if the storm water requirements are not met. Finke provided additional information on the storm water requirements and design standards in terms of rate and volume. He stated that if there is a nine -inch rain event, that would flow off the site, as a system cannot be designed for those large events; noting that occurs today as well on the site unimproved. He stated that there is a maintenance agreement that requires maintenance of the storm water facilities. 7 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes V. Reid mentioned landscaping and stated that it appears the only issue is the requirement for 70 percent opacity. Finke stated that staff has not seen a plan which increases the interior greenspace areas. He stated that the applicant is looking to increase the setback by five feet near the retail area and increasing the landscaping for opacity near the parking but does want to have discussions whether that meets the 70 percent. He noted that the PUD can provide flexibility in some areas but could also include enhancements in other areas. Albers stated that he would suggest to extend the landscaping along the southern border edge, noting that he does not notice any overhead trees along that area. Rengel agreed with extending trees around that edge, noting that the other sides are sufficient and additional landscaping will be provided on the interior. Barry stated that he is really opposed to any parking on Arrowhead and believed that there should be sufficient parking space on the site and between the Loram and Hennepin County sites. He asked if there is anything that can prevent the parking along the road during those events, as that is where the congestion will come in, especially if the road is not widened. Finke stated that posting no parking on the street would be a Hennepin County decision but noted that street parking could be regulated through the special events permit. He stated that Hennepin County has stated that they will let Medina take the lead on those decisions because Medina police have to enforce the parking. He stated that the special events permit will be the best method to regulate those activities because you can change the requirements as things move forward and you realize what will work best. He stated that things can be set more conservatively in the beginning and flexibility could be provided in the future should things work well. He stated that parking on Arrowhead is easy to enforce as it can be posted no parking and people can be ticketed. Muffin stated that she would be in favor of shared parking agreement with Loram and Hennepin County and the applicant can encourage people to park on the site or those sites to keep people off Arrowhead and Hamel roads. She asked if the parking on Arrowhead would be needed. Silikowski stated that he has spoken with Hennepin County about shared parking but has not yet received a response. He stated that the County is going to widen and pave the road, with the walking trail on the side of the subject property. He suggested allowing parking on the east side of the road. Albers asked for information on the flow of traffic. Finke provided additional details on how traffic will flow out of the site. There was discussion regarding the hot rods that may cruise by the event but it was determined that the police will handle enforcement of that type of activity. V. Reid asked if the Commission is comfortable with 16 special events. Muffin asked if all the changes need to be addressed, such as the alternate uses for retail such as a coffee shop and sandwich shop. 8 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 10/11/2016 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that staff can continue discussions with the Council but noted that if there are special concerns the Commission should call that out. V. Reid asked if the parking along Arrowhead should be discussed. Finke stated that is not a land use discussion and therefore that can be decided at a later time. White referenced the minimum of 20 percent of the building to be brick, stone or glass noting that the applicant's plan includes 14 percent of those materials. V. Reid explained that is because of the garage doors. White stated that her biggest concerns are on the retail building, noting that building exceeds the requirements. Finke agreed that the retail building would exceed the class one materials requirement. Motion by Murrin, seconded by Albers, to approve of the AutoMotorPlex PUD General Plan, Site Plan Review, and Plat to construct 237,500 square feet of private garage condominiums and accessory retail, service, and meeting Space on 19.17 acres east of Arrowhead Drive with the conditions noted in the staff report and the following additions: the approval shall be valid for three years for phase one and seven years for phase two, which amends item four; enhanced storm water improvements shall be provided for item six; additional screening on the south side shall be required for item ten; the uses should also include a fitness center, motor sports sales, coffee shop, and sandwich shop for item 12; item 17 shall limit special events to 16 per year. Motion carries 5-1 (White opposed). Murrin stated that she would like to go on record to state that the project will do more good for the City and the economy of the City than the current site provides. White stated that she feels that too many staff recommendations are listed that have not been integrated into the application, stating that she would like to see more recommendations put into the application and plan before she could support the request. Finke stated that this will be presented to the Council on November 1st, noting that any comments provided up to one week before the meeting will be accommodated into the Council packet. 9 11 October 2016 A 0N Andrew N. Jacobson Direct Dial. (612) 672-8333 Direct Fax: (612) 642-8333 andy.jacohson a@maslon.corn CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION clo Scott Johnson, City Administrator 20152 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Proposed Automotorplex Project, Medina, Minnesota Dear Planning Commission Members: This firm represents Dellcroft Farms, LLP ("Dellcroft Farms"), which owns approximately 156 acres of land on the west side of Arrowhead Drive, straddling Hamel Road. We are writing to oppose the PUD Concept Plan for the automotorplex facility (the "Autoplex Project") that has been proposed by Bruno Silikowski and Loram, Inc. (collectively, the "Developer"). The Autoplex Project involves development of an approximately 19 acre parcel of land, currently zoned Business Park, located on the east side of Arrowhead Drive south of Highway 55 and north of Hamel Road. The Autoplex Project site is located directly across the street from Dellcroft Farm's northern parcel. Based on the Developer's submittal, the existing Chanhassen autoplex is the template for the proposed Medina location. The Medina location to consist of 237,340 square feet of development of which approximately 12% is designated retail, although the application indicates that the general public will have limited access and use of the retail component. While a unique and interesting project in the appropriate setting, the proposed Autoplex Project is not compatible with surrounding land uses and is materially inconsistent with the City of Medina's 2030 Comprehensive Plan (the "Comp Plan"). As a result, the City must deny approval for the Autoplex Project. Alternatively, the City needs to adopt a comprehensive and fair approach to Comp Plan revisions and rezoning for the general area around the Autoplex Project site, including Dellcroft Farms, in order to achieve appropriate increases in density and assure compatibility of uses. Dellcroft Farms relies on the City being fair and consistent in its treatment of landowners and Dellcroft Farms will take appropriate steps to protect its interests in this matter. As you are aware, Minnesota law controls municipal planning decisions, such as the approvals sought by the Developer for the Autoplex Project. A key requirement of the statutes is that: "A local governmental unit .shall not adopt any official control or fiscal device which is conflict with its comprehensive plan or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans." Minn. Stat. § 473.865, subd. 2 A primary stated goal of the Comp Plan is for the City to protect residents from "(1) indiscriminate development, (2) exploitation of resources, and (3) the consequences of unplanned public services." Comp Plan at Page 1-1. Accordingly, the City Council has been expressly directed to "preserve the rural character of Medina" and to only approve projects that are "compatible with existing development." The MASLON LLP CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION October 11, 2016 Page 2 community vision statement begins with the stated goal for Medina to "maintain its rural character." Comp Plan at Page 2-3. The visions, goals and strategies include "maintaining rural character and rural heart of the City was a high value" and is "important to the quality of life that residents enjoy." Comp Plan at Page 1-4. Although the project is being developed by an experienced developer and we acknowledge the quality of the Chanhassen project location, the Autoplex Project plan is inappropriate for Medina as it is inconsistent with the Comp Plan and incompatible with the uses of the surrounding properties, as discussed further below. To begin with, the proposed development is not consistent with the type of commercial development envisioned for Medina in the Comp Plan. While the Developer characterizes the proposed uses for the Autoplex Project as "office condos" and retail, the nature of the use is anything but traditional commercial development, as illustrated by the Chanhassen location (the template for the Medina project). Even the City has recognized that the proposed uses are "not explicitly listed in the city's zoning regulations." The "office condos" label (referenced several times in the application materials as "auto condos") is not a complete or accurate characterization of the unique nature of the proposed project. Fundamentally, the Autoplex Project will be a private, upscale automotive enclave, with limited public access except during periodic events such as Cars and Coffee. Our understanding is that all, or significant portions of the project, will be enclosed by security fencing, there will be a security gate for vehicular entry and the relatively small retail component of the project will apparently generally be inaccessible to the public (i.e., the "retail operations will primarily serve the owners of the office condos"). Units at the Developer's project in Chanhassen have been referred to in various publications as "urban cabins" and "like a country club, except instead of golf, this is about cars." Having visited the Chanhassen facility on a number of occasions over the last several years for Cars and Coffee events, it is apparent that many of the units in Chanhassen are equipped with kitchens, full bathrooms and some even have sleeping accommodations, even though these "office condos" are not technically designated for residential use. Even the Developer recognizes that the project does not constitute traditional commercial development, characterizing the Autoplex Project as "a unique attraction to the community." Unfortunately, this proposed unique use is inconsistent with the type of commercial development for Medina envisioned in the Comp Plan, where the objectives for commercial use include: (i) providing for convenient and attractive shopping and services to meet the needs of residents, (ii) regulating the impact of commercial development that abuts residential areas "to ensure that commercial development has a minimal impact on residential areas," and (iii) ensuring that commercial uses are compatible with neiehborinz future and existink uses. Comp Plan at Page 5-17. The Developer's application materials make a number of references compatibility with its setting, including the conelusory statement that the Autoplex Project "will be compatible with these uses and is a good fit for this neighborhood area." The Developer's application materials also state that there have not been issues the surrounding neighborhood at the Chanhassen project, apparently as an indicator as to what one can expect from the Medina project, if approved. However, the Developer fails to recognize crucial differences between the Chanhassen and Medina locations. The area Chanhassen where the Developer's project was constructed was an established, developed commercial/warehouse/industrial area, quite different in character from the rural setting in Medina. The Chanhassen autoplex facility was constructed on a site with existing commercial/industrial buildings on three sides (north, south and east) and wetlands / open space on the fourth side (west). This is a stark contrast to the proposed Medina site that would be directly across the road from land zoned rural residential, the least dense zoning district in the City. MASLON LLP 330'.1 :=B.:.S PARuO 4 iLTFIR ; 90 SOU.-._-' CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION October 11, 2016 Page 3 The traffic and parking issues that would be generated by the Autoplex Project (e.g., Cars and Coffee events) is of particular concern to Dellcroft Farms. The Developer touts that heavy traffic for the AutoPlex Project "occurs 90% of the time outside peak hours of the other users in the area." However, this means the heavy traffic times for the Autoplex Project will occur on evenings and weekends -- adjacent to rural residential land, While evening and weekend event -related traffic patterns may work well in a commercial / industrial setting, such as Chanhassen where most of the surrounding business have limited or no evening and weekend operations, large crowds, loud / exotic cars and snarled up vehicular and pedestrian traffic along Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road early on a Saturday morning (events often start at 7:00 a.m.) are not compatible with the quiet and bucolic setting of a rural residential area. There are also issues related to access to the Autoplex Project site from Hamel Road. While the Developer plans to encourage access from TH 55 to the north, the Developer has no control over what route individuals use to access the site and can do nothing to prevent access from the south using Hamel Road. The Developer asserts, without support, that "{t]here is no reason for visitors to the site to use Hamel Road." In fact, there are several reasons why one would approach the Autoplex Project from the south via Hamel Road. First, entering the project from the south allows entry into the Autoplex Project with a right hand turn, eliminating the need for a left hand turn across traffic. This right turn entry would be particularly useful during weekend events, when it appears there will be 250 or more cars and related pedestrian traffic jamming the shoulders of Arrowhead Drive. Second, if one planned to park along the east side of Arrowhead Road, that would necessarily require an approach from the south using Hamel Road. All of this will create congestion and traffic hazards as cars maneuver to park and pedestrians make their way to and from the entry gate, as is the case in Chanhassen. Third, as there are no sidewalks on Arrowhead Drive and it is unclear how visitors would get from the peripheral parking locations mentioned in the application materials (i.e., the Loram property to the north and the Hennepin County property to the northwest) to the entrance of the project. As a result, it appears that most (if not all) of the offsite pedestrian traffic will necessarily funnel onto Arrowhead Drive when there are events at the Autoplex Project. While the Cars and Coffee events are a lot of fun (akin to a monthly automotive mini -Woodstock), anyone who has attended one in Chanhassen understands the challenges of access and parking. In my experience, if one does not get to Chanhassen early for an event, parking can be almost as challenging as at the State Fair. It is also important to keep in mind that at both Chanhassen and in Medina, almost of the visitor parking is located off -site, as vehicular access into the project is restricted to unit owners and their designated guests. The Cars and Coffee events in Chanhassen generate such a volume of offsite traffic (vehicular and pedestrian), that the Developer often pays for police and traffic control personnel from the City of Chanhassen to direct the vehicular and pedestrian traffic at events. For the reasons stated above, Dellcroft Farms objects to the proposed Autoplex Project. For the same reasons and in light of the City's obligations under Minnesota law to enforce for others the zoning guidelines set forth in the Comp Plan adopted by the City, the City must reject the Developer's application for the Autoplex Project. Alternatively, the City needs to take a broad and fair approach to Comp Plan revisions and rezoning for the area around the Autoplex Project site, including Dellcroft Farms. Please be advised that Dellcroft Farms will take appropriate steps to protect its interests in this matter. MASLON LLP CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION October 11, 2016 Page 4 Thank you in advance for your consideration of our concerns and please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, „, cc: Mayor Bob Mitchell Council Member John Anderson Council Member Lorie Cousineau Council Member Kathleen Martin Council Member Jeff Pederson Thomas Borman, Dellcroft Farms 4818-3693-7530, v. 1 MASLON LLP aaOJ Y,T,ELLS FARO() CENTER RD SOUTH SEVEN 7H STREET NNFAPOL S, MN "bh402140 H12.6-12.82DO I MASLON COM Dear Neighbor, Our family has owned 156 acres of land in Medina for over 60 years, on the west side of Arrowhead Drive straddling Hamel Road. You may have heard about the proposed AutoMotorPlex that a developer wants to build in our community on the east side of Arrowhead Drive, directly across from our land. The proposed project is 237,340 square feet of buildings, housing retail and 162 "auto condos" for collector and high performance cars. The project includes monthly car show events ("Cars and Coffee") intended to bring thousands of spectators and cars from all over the metro area to Medina on Saturday mornings during the spring, summer and fall. We have serious concerns about this project, particularly the weekend Cars and Coffee events, for a number of reasons, including: • Traffic and Parking o At least one Saturday a month during the spring through fall our community will be inundated with thousands of visitors to attend the car show events. A similar project in Chanhassen regularly brings in 2,000 to 3,000 visitors on any given Saturday. o The City projects that these car show events will involve parking hundreds of cars along Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road. It is unclear how the other 1,500 to 2,000 cars visiting the site will be managed for traffic or where they will be parked. a We are concerned that the roadways in Medina may be jammed with Saturday morning traffic because of events at the proposed project. • Compatibility o Much of the land around and near the proposed project is rural and residential. Large car show events are incompatible with the quiet, pastoral nature of our community. • Noise & Safety a Visitors to car shows often drive "performance cars." Performance cars can be loud and noisy, which is inappropriate for Medina's residential areas. o Performance cars are also built to drive fast. We are concerned that local roadways such as Hamel Road will become a favorite test track. Just this spring, there was a significant incident on Highway 12 with car enthusiasts, like those that would visit the proposed project, where more than a dozen exotic sports cars were clocked driving over 100 mph, resulting in a large police chase and closure of part of the highway. We fear similar incidents occurring in Medina because of this project. If you are also concerned about the potential problems this AutoMotorPlex will bring to our community, please attend the next City Council meeting on Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. at the Medina City Hall. The City Council intends to approve the project at this meeting unless sufficient concerns are raised. Sincerely, 01..1k Jeanne Corwin Dellcroft Farms Dusty Finke From: Jodi Gallup Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 8:06 AM To: Dusty Finke Subject: FW: New submission from Contact Us Dusty see comments below for the public record on the AutoMotorPlex. Jodi Gallup City of Medina Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Direct: (763) 473-8850 • Fax: (763) 473-9359 jodi.gallup@ci.medina.mn.us 2052 County Road 24 • Medina, MN • 55340 The City of Medina is now on Facebook. Like our page at https://www.facebook.com/cityofinedinamn/ to stay up-to-date on city news. From: Becky Lietzau [mailto:becklie6(@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2016 8:01 PM To: Jodi Gallup Subject: New submission from Contact Us Name Becky Lietzau Email becklie6@qmail.com Phone (612) 508-2628 Comments Hello Council Members, I would like to voice my concern regarding the proposed AutoMotorPlex being considered near Arrowheead and Hamel Rd, I'm concerned about the potential problem of noise and traffic dangers especially on Hamel Rd., and the congestion with the new housing projects that are coming up as well in that area. I'm guessing these homes sites will undoubtedly be built regardless. I would like to see something else in the proposed AutoMotorPlex area that is quieter, possibly offices or a business that does not have activities during warmer weather weekends Thank you for your time, Becky Lietzau 632 Hamel Rd. Hamel, MN 55340 1 Richard and Kimberly Gauvin 3022 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55356 October 26, 2016 Re: AutoMotorPlex development public comments Dear Medina City Council, We are writing to express our concern about the proposed AutoMotorPlex development. We have two main concerns: reduced road safety and incompatibility of the project with the quiet, rural nature of the city. Quoting from the city's vision statement: "Medina seeks to provide a safe, healthy and sustainable community for present and future residents through efficient and effective service, while retaining its rural heritage and promoting recreational, residential and business activities." As to road safety, this development is specifically designed to bring hundreds of high performance vehicles to our community, as well as thousands of vehicle enthusiasts for organized events. The owners of these vehicles will certainly want to drive them, and the local roads will be the natural playground (or race track) for them. We already have many people coming to our community to use our roads to speed and "open up" the throttle, especially on County Road 24 which we live next to. Adding hundreds of high end vehicles to our community will undoubtedly increase the incidence of loud, speeding vehicles on our roads. Further, the car shows will attract a large number of car enthusiasts from surrounding areas, many of which themselves have high performance cars. The increased traffic of high performance vehicles will increase danger to other drivers, cyclists and joggers that frequent our roads. In addition to road safety, we believe the project is incompatible with the city's stated vision of retaining its rural heritage. The Webster's definition of rural is "of or relating to the country and the people who live there instead of the city". A large number of high end automobile garages, performance automobiles and monthly public car shows cannot possibly be seen as fitting in with a rural heritage. Rather, high performance cars and car shows are city concepts. The appeal of Medina is largely based on the quiet, countryside environment. Please stay true to the city vision statement in promoting safety and our rural heritage and reject this proposed development. Sincerely, Richard and Kimberly Gauvin JAMES S. LANE, III Attorney at Law 2605 Hamel Road Medina, Minnesota 55340-9785 763/473-1075 jamesslane2605@gmail.com October 27, 2016 City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, Minnesota 55340 Attention: Mayor and City Council Re: AutoMotorPlex Dear Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council: The following comments supplement concerns that I expressed to the planning commission at a public hearing on October 11 on behalf of my client Leslie A. Borg, who resides at 1400 Hamel Road, immediately adjacent to the Loram/AutoMotorPlex project site. Ms. Borg's residence, stable and indoor riding arena, and paddocks and pastures are "downslope" from the Loram property. My client's primary concern is with storm water management and risk of storm water runoff from the project site across her property toward a large wetland to the northeast of both properties. If built as presently proposed, the project will sharply increase hard surfaces on the project site, resulting in increased volume and flow rates for surface and storm water draining from the site across Ms. Borg's property. If not properly controlled or managed, storm water runoff from the site could render significant portions of Ms. Borg's property unusable for their present use. Absent technical assurance to the contrary, we are not yet persuaded that whatever design features that engineers for the developer, city, and Elm Creek Watershed District have proposed contain on -site storage or retention ponds and discharges are sufficient in number, size and location to minimize storm water damage to Ms. Borg's property during heavy rain or snowmelt episodes. Some of you may share those concerns. You should, and you should inquire closely of the city engineer whether and how those concerns have been addressed. Specifically, we urge (a) your close attention to storm water maintenance terms and conditions of any development agreement and (b) also provide in such agreement for a special storm sewer improvement tax district pursuant to Minn. Statutes Page 2 of 2 Chapter 444 to protect the city and property owners and taxpayers, including my client, in the unfortunate event that designed storm water maintenance plans prove inadequate. AutoMotorPlex has proposed a very dense development with 12 large auto condo structures, ranging in size from 10,000 sq. ft. to 20,000 sq. ft., all jammed into just 20 A. The project would be much better suited to 30A. or 40A., not "shoehorned" into 20A. A significantly less dense, less intense development would reduce development pressures on boundaries, setbacks, interior roadways, landscaping, and other design features, allowing much more open overall development with wider, less constrained building sites, roadside berms, and better internal traffic circulation and parking. The AutoMotorPlex project site is directly across Arrowhead Drive from property that has been guided and zoned for rural residential use for many years. The outward appearance of all improvements, including retail and auto condos that face Arrowhead Drive, should be designed with a residential rather than industrial or commercial appearance to blend better with future residential uses to the west of Arrowhead Drive. Owners of neighboring residential properties should not be prejudiced or disadvantaged from residential use and enjoyment or future residential development of their properties by commercial or business park usage of properties on the east side of Arrowhead Drive that are inconsistent or incompatible in appearance and use. Now is the time for the city and planning staff to insist upon proper design safeguards to ensure outward appearances of auto condos that are as compatible in design and appearance as possible with future residential development to the west of Arrowhead Drive. At the recent public hearing, construction traffic and offsite parking and traffic control for AutoMotorPlex "special events" were of major interest to the planning commission. Construction traffic, which will plague the city and its residents for several years, perhaps as many as 6-8 if construction is staged or phased over such an extended period, and traffic to and from special events should be channeled to the site via State Highway 55 and away from city and county roads within the rural residential core of Medina. Event parking should be absolutely prohibited on either Arrowhead Drive or Hamel Road and instead should be contracted offsite at existing Loram or Hennepin County Transportation lots near the project site. Offsite parking should be serviced by shuttle service to minimize pedestrian use of Arrowhead. Drive. Special event permitting to regulate such extensive, repetitive, and predictable traffic and parking issues is not a reliable method for managing those issues. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. cc. Ms. Leslie A. Borg 27 October 2016 Mayor Mitchell and City Council Members Crry OF MEDIN A c!o Scatt Johnson, City Administrator 20152 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Proposed Automotorplex Project, Medina, Minnesota Dear Mayor Mitchell and City Council Members: SAS r 0\ Andrew N. Jacobson Direct Dial: (612) 672-8333 Direct Fax: (612) 642-8333 amlyjacobson@maslon.com This; firm represents Delleroft Farms, LLP ("Dellcrott Farms"), which owns approximately 156 acres of land across Arrowhead Drive from the proposed automotorplex facility (the "Autoplex Project"). This letter is a supplement to Dellcrofi Fame letter to the Planning Commission dated October 11, 2016 and to the letter that Jeanne Corwin sent out to Medina residents on Friday, October 21, 2016. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan consistency and compatibility issues raised in my prior letter, Dellcroft Fanns has particular concerns with proposed special events and the lack of adequate setbacks and screening along Arrowhead Drive. Special Events, At the October lit Planning Commission ineeting, the developer doubled the number of proposed special events that would require offsite parking from $ events per year in its original application to 16 events per year. These special events are designed to attract automotive enthusiasts from all over the metropolitan area, to a rural residential area, early on Saturday mornings (i.e., 7 a.m. or earlier). These weekend car show events will naturally encourage traffic from visitors on nearby roads in Medina. The developer has proposed event parking along both sides of Arrowhead Drive and Prairie Drive, as well as potential use of the parking lots at nearby commercial properties (Loram and Hennepin County), because the Autoplex. Project will not be able to handle the anticipated parking on -site. With projected attendance for events in the thousands (which the developer currently draws at its very similar project in Chanhassen), the mix of pedestrians and cars creates potential life safety issues, particularly if parking is permitted along Arrowhead Drive. Noise generated by the early morning special events is also a legitimate concern. The presence of hotrods and other loud performance cars at these early morning events was recognized by at least one of the Planning Commission members and is inconsistent with the rural atmosphere of Medina. The developer may be able to control parking and behavior on the project site., but the developer will have no control over noise, driving and parking off -site on Medina's roads. That task will fall to the City, and the burden will be suffered by all nearby residents. We believe that any approval of the project should be conditioned upon no off-street parking, even for special events, along nearby portions of Hamel Road and Prairie Drive or along Arrowhead Drive (either side). Hennepin County Public Works has already notified the City that the shoulders on Arrowhead Drive are "inadequate for .safe on -roar! sparking." Any commercial project in this area should be able to handle all required parking on -site. Even if the developer were to be able to secure an arrangement with Hennepin County and/or Loram for special event parking, parking along Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road would still be more convenient for visitors than either of those two distant lots. Without restrictions on parking on nearby roads, visitors will naturally MASLO N I.I.P 3300 WCLLS FARGO CENTER 100 SOU i I SEVENTH STIIEL I I MINNEA'ULIS, MN 550102-M 10 612.672,82'00 I. ni sLor4.l:oM MEDINA CITY COUNCIL October 27, 2016 Page 2 seek out the closest parking available. Finally, we believe the threshold for the City's special use permit requirement should be triggered if the event will either involve more than 700 people or require off' -site parking. We believe the City should conduct a proper analysis of the potential parking and traffic (pedestrian and vehicular) that will be generated by the special events at the Autoplex Project, given the unknowns of this project (e.g., the developer has not actually secured any of -site parking rights and the on -site projected parking capacity for events is a theoretical maximization of on -site parking that is inconsistent with how special event parking has been handled at the template project in Chanhassen) and significant impact of special event parking and traffic from the project that will be generated by the project at the now proposed 16 special events per year. Setbacks & Screening. Unlike the Hennepin County and Loram facilities to the north, which each have significant setbacks and visual buffering from the street and adjacent properties, the developer has proposed minimal required commercial setbacks along Arrowhead Drive across from 'Dellcroft Farms. Based on the October 41' staff report, the project does not satisfy the 100 foot set back requirement for projects in a BP zone located adjacent to residential land nor does it satisfy the landscaping requirements applicable in a BP district. The minimal proposed setbacks, combined with insufficient berming and landscape screening along Arrowhead Drive, would create an abrupt and inappropriate transition from commercial development to adjacent rural residential land. The lack of adequate berming and landscape screening will also accentuate the security Fencing that will run along the length of the project adjacent to Arrowhead Drive. Although we understand the developer's desire to maximize its use of the site and reduce the amount of land needed for the project, those goals should not result in a sacrifice of appropriate setbacks, berms and landscape screening to visually buffer the project from adjacent rural residential land. Even the minimal screening proposed to date consists almost entirely of deciduous trees along Arrowhead Drive, meaning there will be little visual screening for much of the year. Any approval of the project should require significantly greater setbacks from, as well as bcnning and sufficient landscape buffering along, Arrowhead Road. This is consistent with the staff recommendation in the October 46 report (see Staff Recommendations Items 9 and 10). .Finally, we request that the public, particularly directly affected property owners, be provided the opportunity to review and conunent on those revised elements of the project, prior to any City Council approval. We also think that the Council should withhold any consideration at the November 1, 2016 meeting; until these issues have been frilly and properly studied. Thank you in advance for your consideration of Dellcroft Fauns concerns. Sincerely, Andy'acobson cc: Jeanne Corwin, Dellcroft Farms Thomas Borman, Dellcroft Farms 4820-8822-5595 MASLON LLR 3300WELLS FARGO CENIER 190SOWN SEVENI II sTREET I MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 4140 I E112.67/.8209 I MASLON.1'.OIN Civil Engineering Site Design 118 East Broadway St., PO Box 566, Monticello MN 55362 Phone:763-314-0929 www.civilesd.com October 27, 2016 Dellcroft Farms Attn: Ms. Jeanne Corwin 1235 Yale Place, Apt. 902 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Re: Impact of Proposed AutoMotorPlex Project Research and Analysis Report Dear Ms. Corwin, I have completed the requested research and analysis of the proposed AutoMotorPlex project proposed on the east side of Arrowhead Drive, Medina in proximity to the Dellcroft Farms property located on the west side of Arrowhead Drive. The scope and focus of my research and analysis was to review the AutoMotorPlex project submittals and associated information, and identify any resulting impacts and/or conflicts as may be experienced by Dellcroft Farms and other properties in the area as well as evaluate compliance with City code requirements and recommended best practices in the industry. PROJECT INFORMATION Information reviewed as part of the analysis is as follows: • Automotorplex project plans last revised 10/24/2016 • City staff report to Planning Commission dated 10/04/2016 • Hennepin County Public Works review dated 10/06/2016 • Select sections of the City of Medina Comprehensive Plan • Select sections of the City of Medina Code • Aerial photos and maps available at numerous web sites. RESEARCH AND FINDINGS Parking: It is understood that the project proposes to host 16 special events for car enthusiasts each year, with these events occurring during the warm weather months. The project information indicates that similar events at the developer's Chanhassen facility (cited as a Page 1 of 5 template for the proposed Medina project) bring in 500 display vehicles and attracts large crowds of 2,000 — 3,000 people. The developer narrative indicates actual and potential parking availability at various locations both on and off site, with general comments regarding quantity available, and potential authorization to use some of the proposed offsite parking. Location of offsite visitor parking for special events on other properties (e.g., Loram, Hennepin County) should be confirmed and guaranteed to be available as part of the project approvals. This should be done through an irrevocable agreement with the other properties to ensure that the parking is and will remain available. Based on the publicly available information, no written commitments for offsite parking from other property owners have been provided in the project information available to date. Long term perpetual agreements may be hard to secure in general and in particular with respect to the Hennepin County facility, as the developer is a private for -profit entity. It is understood that at the Chanhassen site during special events, only condo garage owners and display vehicle owners and their guests are actually allowed to park on -site. All other visitors are required to park off -site. It is understood that the developer anticipates that parking will be handled similar at this site as it is in Chanhassen for the Cars and Coffee and similar special events. The developer's project narrative indicates that some parking availability for special events would be provided within the condo garage spaces. However, based on special event operations in Chanhassen, it is understood that many, if not most, of the condo garages would be occupied with personal vehicles and other items of the condo garage owner and thus not available for guest parking. The outdoor on -site parking availability noted in the project materials is an optimization of the maximum parking capacity of the site, but does not take into consideration that large sections of the proposed parking area is also the event area for the car shows and thus the project parking areas and drive aisles will be filled with display cars and pedestrians. In addition, display cars are rarely parked as tightly as a standard parking lot. I would anticipate some of the display vehicles at select events will be transported to the site resulting in additional parking needs for transport vehicles and trailers in addition to the display vehicles. Given the significant potential for shortage of onsite parking, I would recommend a detailed parking management plan for special events be completed, reviewed and incorporated as part of the project approval process. The analysis should be based on confirmed and practical on -site and off -site parking availability. An alternate solution for providing sufficient special event parking would be for the project developer to acquire additional land to the north to accommodate parking needs. I would recommend the northerly access location be shifted to the north end of this site such that the access would serve both the condo garages and serve the special event parking area. Periodic use of the parking area presents opportunity to utilize a grass/pave application which would reduce impervious surface as compared to standard pavement. Research and Analysis Report Page 2 of 5 Traffic Safety: Special event parking is proposed on both shoulders of Arrowhead Drive, although the possibility of parking on the east side of Arrowhead Drive only was discussed at the Planning Commission. In my opinion, any parking along Arrowhead drive would create an unsafe condition and I would recommend not allowing any parking on shoulders of Arrowhead Drive to accommodate this development. Note that the Hennepin County highway engineer (James N. Grube. P.E.) has also informed the City that the shoulders along Arrowhead Drive "would be inadequate for safe on -road parking." With special events proposed more than once per month, the potential for a vehicular accident or a vehicular pedestrian incident with the proposed on -street parking is high. The combination of existing traffic volumes, proposed traffic due to events, traffic speed, parallel parking with limited space on both sides of the road, and drivers pulling in/out at will combine to create a high accident potential. The on -street parking situation is not safe and the City should not permit it. Allowing parking for the project (special event or otherwise) on shoulders of Arrowhead Drive would be precedent setting for the City and will likely result in requests of similar nature in future development projects. The impact of allowing parking on shoulders of Arrowhead Drive to adjacent properties with future residential development is significant. Concerns would be hindrance of accessibility for residential property owners, emergency service accessibility, and effect on rural character. Setbacks: The developer proposes significantly reduced setbacks from those defined in the City code for the current BP zoning. It is understood the reduction is requested as part of the PUD application. The building setback for the project is proposed at 50 feet, with parking setback proposed at 35 feet. The current BP zoning would provide both building and parking setbacks of 100 feet. This dramatic decrease of required setback for the proposed project directly impacts the rural character of the area and eliminates much of the buffer between the commercial use and adjacent rural residential zoning. The 100 foot code required setback is intended to provide reasonable space and separation for a transition from business/commercial to residential development. Deviating from this requirement does not serve the public or any public interest. Clarification of measurement of setback should be confirmed. It appears the measurement for proposed setback in the staff report includes street right-of-way as part of the measurement. It should be noted that setback measurement as defined in Section 833.05.subd 8 of the code indicates when commercial and residential zones are separated by a road right-of-way, the setback is to be measured from the property line. If the code Research and Analysis Report Page 3 of 5 requirements were followed, the proper setback would be measured from the new right- of-way line established after street dedication on the east side of Arrowhead Drive. An increase of setbacks to the building and parking would provide space for berming, landscaping, and screening improvements that would be more consistent with anticipated development, and would also aid in mitigating the transition from business to residential land uses. Landscape Screening: The initial project presentation indicated that significant berming and landscape screening would be provided along Arrowhead Drive. However, the current plans propose no berming, and the proposed landscape plantings provide minimal (if any) screening along Arrowhead Drive. The plant selection is almost exclusively deciduous trees and shrubs that will result in leaf off conditions 6 months of the year. Only a few coniferous plantings are proposed near the southerly access, at locations that are not adjacent to the Arrowhead Drive right-of-way. The proposed tree plantings along Arrowhead Drive are typical for boulevard spacing, and proposed shrub plantings will provide little to no screening effect as site elevations at planting locations are predominantly lower than adjacent Arrowhead Drive elevations. City code addresses screening in Section 832.3.06 and indicates the following: Subd. 1. All structures and parking areas shall be screened from adjacent residential property as described within the yard setback requirements of each district. Subd. 2. In other situations where screening is required by the zoning ordinance or as a term of a conditional use permit, the standards of this Section shall be satisfied through the use offences, walls, or vegetative screens. (a) Standards for vegetative screens. Vegetative screens shall consist of fully hardy plant materials, planted in a way to be at least 80 percent opaque year-round. The height of the screen shall be determined by the city, taking into account the characteristics of the object(s) or area being screened, but shall be of adequate size immediately upon planting. The plants within a vegetative screen shall be in addition to the general landscaping requirements of this section. (b) Standards for screening fences or walls. A screening fence or wall shall be constructed of attractive, finished materials such as masonry, brick or wood. Materials and design shall be compatible with the principal structure. The height of the fence or wall shall be determined by the city taking into account the characteristics of the object(s) or area being screened. Research and Analysis Report Page 4 of 5 As previously noted, increasing the setback to building and parking would allow space for berming and sufficient screening that would be more consistent with code required standards. Summary: Current city guide plans and zoning of your property, and adjacent properties, establishes the expectations and requirements of development. The expectations of development of the proposed project site on the east side of Arrowhead Drive is summarized in the City code as follows: The purpose of the Business Park (BP) district is to provide an attractive, high quality business park primarily for office, high quality manufacturing and assembly, and non -retail uses in developments which provide a harmonious transition to residential development and neighborhoods by: 1) conducting all business activities and essentially all storage inside buildings, 2) consisting of low profile, high quality and attractive buildings which blend in with the environment, 3) providing open space, quality landscaping and berming which achieve a park- like setting; 4) including berming and buffering of parking, loading docks and other similar functions; and 5) protecting and enhancing the natural environment. The project as currently proposed via the PUD process results in an excessive reduction to City's expectations, standards, and development requirements that would otherwise result with a development that complied with standard BP zoning criteria. The Dellcroft Farms property will undoubtedly be impacted if the project is approved as currently proposed. In my opinion, site design modifications and further evaluation are necessary to achieve a development that is functional and compatible with adjacent properties. Give me a call with any questions at 763-314-0929. Cc: File 00616 Research and Analysis Report Page 5 of 5 Sincerely, Civil Engineering Design, LLC Scott Dahlke Professional Engineer Commercial Uses The previous objectives outlined referred to urban land uses with a residential component. The following objectives refer to commercial and industrial land uses that are connected to or planned for urban services. The Urban Commercial area is along the TH 55 corridor and will support businesses to benefit the residential areas to the north and south and commuters who travel on TH 55. Businesses will provide a variety of retail products and services mixed with light industrial/warehouses and smaller offices. Objectives: 1. Provide convenient and attractive shopping and services to meet the needs of City residents. 2. Avoid multiple access points to collector and arterial roads. 3. Encourage businesses that benefit the local community by providing employment opportunities offering convenience goods and services, utilizing high quality design, and having limited impact on public services. 4. Require commercial activities that serve the broader metropolitan market to have access to a regional highway or frontage road. 5. Regulate the impact of commercial development along the border between commercially and residentially guided areas to ensure that commercial property has a minimal impact on residential areas. 6. Regulate construction to ensure high quality, energy and resource efficient buildings and to promote such Green Building standards as LEED Certifications or the State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines: Buildings, Benchmarks and Beyond (B-3) standards. 7. Encourage construction that enhances the visual appeal of TH 55 corridor. 8. Create or update standards that promote a more rural appearance, or create campus style developments that protect ecologically significant areas and natural features. 9. Require frontage roads that do not directly access TH 55 corridor. 10. Require developments to provide frontage roads as shown conceptually in the transportation plan. 11. Require conditional use permits for manufacturing, processing, cleaning, storage, maintenance and testing of goods and products in order to prevent adverse affects to the City and its residents. 12. Use the site plan review process to ensure that commercial and industrial uses are compatible with neighboring future and existing uses, and with the adjoining public streets and highways. PUD's may be used to help accomplish this policy. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4) MEDINA Page 5- 17 ,11.RE Building a legacy — your legacy.® RUE October 25, 2016 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: AutoMotorPlex - Site Plan Review — Revised Comments City Project: LR-16-188 WSB Project No. 03433-010 Dear Dusty: 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the Site Plan submittal received on October 24, 2016 for the proposed AutoMotorPlex site located on Arrowhead Drive north of Hamel Road. The plans dated October 24, 2016 propose to construct 12 stand-alone buildings (auto condominiums) to store cars and related property. The sizes of the buildings range in size from 16,000 to 34,000 square feet each. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters. Sheet C200 (Site Plan) & C230 (Paving Plan) 1. Identify on the plan what type of concrete curb and gutter is being proposed. Complete. 2. Identify what type of vehicle was used for the turning movements and add detail to plan. Complete. 3. Show a typical pavement section(s) on plans. ,ez. Show hatch in legend to identify concrete paving and note proposed thickness; the paving plan does not show the concrete hatch at the garage entrances but many of the other sheets appear to do so, please clarify. 4. Show the location of parking spaces for the retail area. Complete. 5. Show location of any proposed fencing or gates. Complete. 6. Show an 8' wide bituminous trail, minimum of 5' boulevard, along the east side of Arrowhead Drive. Incomplete. It appears a trail has been shown, but adjacent to the existing roadway. The City standard is to have at least a 5' boulevard, the prefen-ed boulevard is 8' to allow for both turf and gravel shoulder. Complete, but where trail is shown adjacent to roadway (to avoid wetland) the width should be 10' to allow for additional clearance to the vehicular lane. The comments from the County also need to be addressed. 7. New parking is now shown across from building number 8, but has not been incorporated into the curb work or grading plan. Complete. 8. Show location of monument sign (if applicable). Sheet C300 (Grading Plan) & C310 (Erosion Control Plan) Complete. 2. Ideal bituminous slope grades are 2.0% or greater in at least one direction. Bituminous slope grades of 1.0% or less are highly susceptible to localized bird -baths. In many locations trench drains have been proposed to address flat profile grades, but there are others where Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com AutoMotorPlex— Site Plan Review —Revised Comments October 25, 2016 Page 2 grades are still less than 1.0% where trench drains are not proposed. The grades should be increased or trench drains added to address these locations. Complete. 3. Show locations of EOF's and NWL for all ponding and wetland areas on both the grading and erosion control plans. See additional comments on the stonnwater review. Add a note near CB 165 and CB 153. Complete. .oi Complete. 5. Add a SWPPP sheet to this plan set. These documents could also be added to the project specifications. Verification of this will need to be provided. 6. the location oftlle \' ciha -Ki Ltd .Thown. It ,Ir c €ns the. lGili'worl: nI tG ha\'c `ihilicll to the south. Complete. 7. Add erosion control blanket to steeper slopes along the northerly property line, south of the southerly entrance radius, and in a larger area around basin 102 to encompass the steeper slopes. Correct hatch where shown over paved surfaces. 8. Show a se, _ . ,., ._ .„ colL,. Complete. 9. Grading of the boulevard between site entrances has been shown as a swale. Storm sewer was added to drain at the northerly entrance, but none was added to drain the swale section directed to the southerly entrance. 10. The erosion control plan needs to include the areas on Arrowhead Drive where disturbed for the installation of water/sewer and the areas to the east of the site where the storm sewer is proposed. Add appropriate BMP's to limit erosion/sediment beyond proposed construction limits. Show construction limits for work occurring outside of the site boundary. Sheet C400 (Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Plan) 1. Change line type for the property boundary or sanitary sewer to differentiate better on plans. Specifically at the north side of the property it is difficult to detennine if the sanitary sewer ended east of manhole number 15 or if that is just the property boundary. Complete. _. size and type of existing water/sewer piping in all locations. Complete. 3. The City will require that both sanitary sewer and watermain are exteL y the north side of the property up to the easterly property line. The sanitary dead end will require a manhole with an invert to the east (plugged). Only 8-inch sanitary pipe is required for this extension. Complete. 4. Verify the size of the existing sanitary t, r c rrowhead Drive. The City's information shows this may only be an 8-inch pipe. Complete. 5. Or Complete. 6. The hydrant at the dead end on Arrowhead Drive is shown within the trail. Relocate where a minimum 2' of horizontal clearance can be maintained. 7. Show dimensions from the watennain to both sanitary and storm sewer on the plans. Complete. 8. Show size and type of water/sewer service locations to each building; also show water service shut-off locations. Minimize bends on sanitary sewer services, wye connections can be made at the main. 9. Note y, inches of insulation. Complete. 10. Drainage and utility easements are required over the watermain including the hydrant locations. 11. Add a gate valve to the watermain line extending south from the northerly property line. Complete. 12. Add gate valve at watennain connection to existing on Arrowhead Drive Complete. m AutoMotorPlex— Site Plan Review —Revised Comments October 25, 2016 Page 3 13. Note rim/invert information for added sanitary sewer manhole to the northeast of the site, length and invert of stub as well. Complete, but add note for length of pipe and stub invert for sanitary sewer east of MH 17. Complete. 14. Minimum grade for 8-inch sanitary pipe is 0.40%. Complete. 15. Verify that the distance from the hydrants to either storm or sanitary sewer is 10 feet. The hydrant location at the southwest site access is shown on top of the fence/ga' Complete. 16. Change the line type on the existing sanitary sewer north of the proposed __Lion on Arrowhead Drive. Currently, it looks as though it should be proposeci. Complete. 17. Per the City's design standards, sanitary sewer pipe with depths 26' or great 18. Complete. 18. Show limits of construction for work occurring outside of the site boundary. Sheet C420 & C421 (Storm Sewer Plan) 1. Add detail for trench drain design, including those that are to be construction directly over storm sewer piping (in -line). Add/modify detail to accommodate bituminous paving joint. n as NA eh. See note 3 under Sheet C300 comments. Complete. 3. Use different line type for the property boundary or storm sewer to differentiate better on plans. Complete. 4. Add rip -rap class and quantity at each location on the plan. Complete. 5. FES inverts into the storm pond should hay - elevations (998.0 versus 997.95), see stormwater comments for additional items. Complete. 6. Note width of easement east of the AUtOMI. arty where the storm sewer connection extends. Complete. 7. Show existing/proposed contours and site plan information for storm sewer discharge point to the northeast of the property. Complete. 8. Correct the elevation of the infiltration basin and/or storm s is so that FES are not submerged, see stormwater comments for additional items. Complete. Complete. 10. Drainage and utility easements are required over pond areas, pipes connecting ponds, and discharge pipes. 11. Incorporate the City standard details STO-15 and STO-16 into the control structure details on sheet C421. These details are not also needed on sheet C603. Complete. 12. Clean up text on sheet C420d rid the ponds, it overlapping a lot of line work or other text and difficult to rear Complete. 13. Consider temporary bypass fo, ... -__ _.Ltures to reduce inundation of filtration basins until plantings are established. Block with galvanized plate bolted to weir for use during pond maintenance operations in the future. Complete. 14. Storm sewer extension to the northeast. Based on the existing contours, the last 100 feet or so of the pipe may be exposed. In addition, the FES may be located within a wetland and flow is directed parallel to the contours as opposed to perpendicular. Based on the contours shown, the discharge will not flow east as shown on the plan, but southeast perpendicular to the contours. and modify the FES (and/or add structure) so that flow is directed correctly. 15. Show limits of construction for work occurring outside of the site boundary. 16. Correct draw order so that hatching in the pond areas does not obscure the text. General I . See additional stormwater management responses under separate cover. Complete. AutoMotorPlex—Site Plan Review — Revised Comments October 25, 2016 Page 4 3. Provide completed permits from both the MDH and DLI. 4. Provide an engineer's estimate for the site improvements including landscaping and irrigation system (if applicable) in Excel format. 5. Provide a construction schedule for the site improvements. 6. Address Hennepin County comments from letter dated October 6, 2016. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer A WSB i►' SB 701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 300 I Minneapolis, MN 55416 I (763) 541-4800 Memorandum To: Jim Stremel, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Earth Evans, P.E. Water Resources Project Manager WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: October 25, 2016 Re: AutoMotorPlex City Project No. LR-16-188 WSB Project No. 3433-010 We have completed a preliminary review of the stormwater management plan for AutoMotorPlex in Medina, MN. The site was previously reviewed on 10/21/16. The site is located in the northeast quadrant of Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road. Documents provided for review include the following: • Grading and Storm sewer Plan dated 10.24.16 • Stormwater Management Report and Modeling dated 10.24.16 These plans were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's Stormwater Design Manual and general engineering practices for stormwater management. 1. The majority of the previous comments have been addressed with the revised design. 2. The proposed draintile should be solid walled beneath the inlets into Basin 101 to reduce erosion potential. 3. The existing and proposed discharge rates offsite are listed below. Storm Event Existing Discharge (cfs) Proposed Discharge (cfs) 1-year 22.96 17.96 2-year 29.53 22.84 10-year 55.28 42.28 100-year 143.62 97.21 4. The TP load reduction is 3.0 Ibs/year Building a legacy— your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com UACtyAdmin\Planning \Active Land Use Applic. Proj. Plans \LR-16-188 AutoMotorPlex PUD General and Plat \DRC\MEMO_Auto MotorPlex_102516.docx Hennepin County Public Works Transportation Project Delivery James N. Grube, County Highway Engineer 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340-5421 October 6, 2016 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Preliminary Plat Review - AutoMotorPlex County Road 118 (Arrowhead Drive] - PID #1111823230002 Hennepin County Plat Review ID #3462A Dear Mr. Finke: Phone: 612-596-0300 Web: www.hennepin.us Minnesota Statutes 505.02, 505.03, and 462.358, Plats and Surveys, allow up to 30 days for county review of preliminary plats abutting county roads. The development team first introduced this project to county staff in December 2015. County staff has been in discussions with both the developer and city staff throughout the project planning. The preliminary plat for AutoMotorPlex was received by county staff August 23, 2016. The plat proposes to develop 19 acres of rural land into a collector auto storage facility. This project anticipates an overall phasing plan of 5 years, with phase one beginning in fall of 2016. The site when completed would include 237,340 square feet of commercial development over 12 buildings, The facility is anticipated to be open to the general public for occasional special events on weekends and serve as a regional destination for auto enthusiasts. The Hennepin County Plat Review Committee originally discussed the preliminary plat on August 30, 2016. Based on this meeting and subsequent discussion, the developer has made some modifications and further review was necessary. Based on the overall discussion and review of the most recent materials county staff received on September 26, 2016, we offer the following comments: Access - The development proposes to construct two access locations along County Road 118 (Arrowhead Drive). County staff understand the northerly driveway to serve as the primary access, while the southerly driveway would serve as an emergency or limited use access. As the southerly driveway appears to have more challenging sight distance and limited access spacing from Loram's driveway to the south it is essential that the southerly access remain limited in its use. In response to the sheet C230 Paving Plans in particular, we will require the following: • County standards for driveway width on a 21ane suburban commercial roadway is 32 feet • Proposed landscaping will not obscure sight distance at the driveways and vision of pedestrians and bikers on the future trail at the driveways • Adequate sight distance (vertical and horizontal) would need to be demonstrated at both proposed access locations Right -of -Way - Existing full right-of-way along this property is 66 feet. The proposed right-of-way dedication of 10 feet along County Road 118 would be adequate, however, the proposed 6 foot easement would not meet our necessary 50 foot half section, which requires a total dedication of 17 feet. Any easement dedication should also cover utility and drainage accommodations. We request the same dedication of 17 feet along the property's frontage of County Road 115 (Hamel Road) as this is also designated in comprehensive planning documents as an off -road trail. Bicycle and Pedestrian - The off -road trail needs to be 10 feet wide throughout the property. The southern portion of the property is particularly challenging from a drainage and wetland impact perspective. Wetland impacts may be unavoidable. The trail needs to be offset from the roadway, ideally located within the easement. We need to avoid water runoff flowing from the roadway onto the trail. The county will not be responsible for maintenance of the trail. Parking - The development proposal anticipates to hold occasional special events on weekends that will draw extensive overflow parking demands. County staff understand that the developer has an agreement with the adjacent Loram facility to provide parking for approximately 300 vehicles during such events. In our 2017 maintenance overlay we anticipate paving 3 foot wide shoulders, which would be inadequate for safe on -road parking. If the developer seeks overflow parking on the Public Works facility grounds, approval must be worked out with our facilities services department. Facilities questions can be directed to Jonathan Holmes at (612) 348- 3825 or jonathan.holmes@hennepin.us Drainage -In addition to the drainage concerns listed under `Bicycle and Pedestrian' we offer the following comments in response to the recently revised stormwater report and EVS response: • Should pre-treatment be considered for FES 130? We should avoid filling the wetland with sediment • EVS response, sheet C420 - Catch basins 134, and 135 would be preferable to remain as an open ditch that drains into a catch basin near the driveway entrance • EVS response item #12 - Time of concentration is low resulting in higher flows. No history of the roadway being anywhere close to overtopping at this location • Roadway drainage must be maintained to state aid standards Storm water and drainage questions can be directed to Drew McGovern at (612) 596-0208, or drew.mcgovern@hennepin.us Permits -- Please inform the developer that all proposed construction within county right-of-way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Permit questions can be directed to Michael Olmstead at (612) 596-0336, or michaeLolmstead@hennepin.us Please contact Bob Byers at (612) 596-0354 or robertbyers@hennepimus; or Jason Gottfried at (612) 596-0394 or jason.gottfr ied@hennepin.us for any further discussion of these items. Sincerely, C76/Ary-z...AA . James N. Grube, P,E. County Highway Engineer JNG/ldg cc: Plat Review Committee Mark Larson, Hennepin County Survey Office Jonathan Holmes, Hennepin County Facility Services Hennepin County Property Map Date: 10/5/2016 PARCEL ID: 1111823230002 OWNER NAME: Loram Maintenance Of Way Inc PARCEL ADDRESS: 80 Address Unassigned, Medina MN 00000 PARCEL AREA: 22.17 acres, 965,675 sq ft A-T-B: Torrens SALE PRICE: SALE DATA: SALE CODE: ASSESSED 2015, PAYABLE 2016 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non -Homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,490,000 TAX TOTAL: $15,349.68 ASSESSED 2016, PAYABLE 2017 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non -homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,490,000 Comm en ts: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to oompleteness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and )iii) is notsuitab le for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage. injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2016 N:IVICIN 1,1,11 N VZ90-91.0Z 91.0r61.110 v3vn llf 83kfUS0 w I1.13.n11U ill Nnvq(1 1 K1 I Ll rF1',u1N1.4N N1,111•1Ii\�11111•r „X"OIc110141A1fl11TV I�V✓k tk �. 118I1-1X3 lIVal NW'VNIa3W VNIa3W •X31d 101.04510-rote 1V11IWanS ALIO VtLES K men ax •nn •e n snot VNINNVld 1V1N3WNOWN3 MIA3A21f15 ONIIMNION3 _ri • ❑NV113M ONI ISIX3 r0111135 ea.neN I ZdIgidooinV.AS-000"94 sNb111re N Lv31Ma`Nln.ne OONQO olnV 2S-009`94 1.14 Sm-10-.119w .� 9aluxne'NIY�As ® NV113M ONIlSIX3 3A180 OV3HMIaa23a Y1,111., nuLOA- v 1333 NI 1 aal w, 1u3w3nNQV.. vello r 11V13H AS-006''84 OONoa 0t11 dS-000`6 NJv0l3S unsla 0£'0001 .1MH OE'9661311n0 ONV113M ONIISIX3 1 + ./ a q7,1 ♦ ` rSb JO ♦` a 1 .r• d a ` N sz 666'1311no 1 r ea a " O6Y66'0101108a 1_ wa �� NISV6 NOI1V811Id `! i \ 1 I 00.0001. MFt 00'666 1331nn 00'066 Vanid3 OISVH N011tltll N3 a IDVB135 N3$4n0 I311I1wIN3e0. • 411,111A1 � i ASV, IN ngrIVel A[ 31w0 o'�0 uln R vzozl 3�N�1N13, £OOoczszel. 4 Old 9HOEI 311S31 l swam 11 11V1321 JS-000'04 OONon O1nV 3S-000'6 OONOO o1nV dS-009`0z - 0 to A c 0 0 0 0 0 Z S 1 3NI1h1N3la ae1 I 3 �u1� e3tlL&n 0.'079N113. ssls G Et Project Narrative for Medina AutoMotorPlex Development on Arrowhead Drive August 19, 2016 Project Narrative describing submittal documents and approach for the Medina AutoMotorPlex proposed development including PUD and Plat Approval Proposers and Signature Sheet of Applicants Bruno Silikowski, Developer Loram, Inc. Technical Staff Civil Engineer & Land Surveying EVS, Inc. Wetland Delineation Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company Landscape Plan Landecon Geo Technical Terracon Architectural & Building Material Details BC Contracting Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Existing Conditions Proposed Planned Unit Development, Site Plan and Subdivision Plat O Site Plan and Subdivision Plat updates since review of Concept Plan in July, 2016 O Phasing and Construction Schedule o Permits and Approvals for this project O Compatibility of the Project with the Area and the Environment O Project Deviations from Code O Public Benefits of the Project Traffic and Event Management Wetland and Stormwater Management Design Infrastructure Improvements O Grading O Storm Water O Sanitary Sewer O Watermain o Streets and pavement, curbs Appendices A. Project Location Map B. City Zoning Map C. Existing Conditions Survey of the Property D. Subdivision Plat E. Site Plan F. Letters from County Commissioner Workman and City of Chanhassen City Manager Gerhardt G. Landscape Plan H. Wetland Report I. Stormwater Plan J. Grading and Erosion Control Plan K. Utility Plan -- Sanitary Sewer and Water L. Lighting and Security Plan M. Architecture Details and Building Materials N. Soils and Geo-Technical Report Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 2 INTRODUCTION This Project Narrative is written in a brief format explaining the nuances of the project with a review of the submittal documents including: the purpose and nature of the proposed subdivision, the details of the phasing of the project, the platting details, the construction schedule for phase one, and the details of each plan sheet submittal. Included with the narrative is a complete appendix with all of the attachments that are part of the total submittal. Plan sheets are compiled in the appendices on 11x17 folded sheets. This narrative is meant to explain each of the documents that are being submitted to support these approvals. Specific applications for approval are being submitted for each of the following items. o PUD General Plan of Development O Site Plan Review O Preliminary and Final Plat The project proposed is led by Bruno Silikowski, CEO of AutoMotorPlex America. He has significant development experience with projects of this type, most recently completed in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. In fact, this project will serve as a template for the project proposed in the City of Medina. It is the developer's intent to improve on the details of that project to enable the Medina project to be his best AutoMotorPlex creation. Loram, Inc. owns the property that includes approximately 25.1 acres south of the existing Loram development on Arrowhead Drive in Medina. They intend to convey 19.17 acres of this property to Bruno Silikowski for the Medina AutoMotorPlex project. Included in Appendix A is an aerial map of the project area including the proposed 19.17-acre development site. The project includes several wetlands that have been delineated and are included in the Wetland Delineation report contained in Appendix H. Specifically, on the 19.17 acre site, an approximate 2.0 acre wetland has been delineated. This will be the natural environmental feature of the development site. It will include a 1.5 acre stormwater Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 3 detention pond that will collect water from the site and serve to nourish the wetland. The intention is to complete the project over a five year period with Phase One beginning this fall. The first building will be completed and ready for use in the Spring of 2017. The primary site infrastructure will be completed within the Phase One work activities. A phasing plan and description of the development schedule is included in the Narrative. The request for approval includes the Subdivision Plat of the 25.18 acres into two lots, and the PUD approval for the Medina AutoMotorPlex development. Once these applications have been approved, specific building plans will be brought forward for approval within the Phase One construction schedule. Site work is proposed to begin in November, 2016, with building construction beginning shortly after completion of the site work. The Project Narrative describes the project and explains how it will work and fit on this parcel of land in Medina with the larger community. Compatibility of the project development with the surrounding area is very important to the success of this commercial endeavor. The land planning and environmental considerations have received significant study by the development team over the past several months. The following pages and documents will demonstrate the project in detail. The developer and his associates will be ready and available for discussion on all of the aspects of the project details as requested. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The current land use for the subject land parcel is primarily agriculture. The Loram development is Industrial with a small corner of land near Hamel Road and Arrowhead Drive used for a related maintenance operation purpose. On the west side of Arrowhead Drive, Hennepin County DPW land use is predominant with the southerly portion of land agriculture. The City has been reviewing residential land use concept plans for this land during the past several months, but no approvals are forthcoming. A Zoning Map (Map 7-1) in Appendix B demonstrates that the subject property is zoned Business Park which is compatible with the proposed use. The Developer is proposing to use the PUD zoning for the AutoMotorPlex development because of its unique site usage and layout. This is similar to the PUD designation of the Hennepin County DPW land development on the west side of Arrowhead Drive. There are limited improvements on the 25.18 acre parcel proposed to be subdivided with this application. It is primarily a farmed agricultural acreage and has been farm land as far back as the records show. The Loram Development north of the subject property was developed in 1980. The Hennepin County DPW was developed in 2000. An existing conditions land survey has been completed on this property and is included in Appendix C. The southerly 6 acres has a 20,000 sf maintenance and office building on the site with ingress/egress to Hamel Road. It is used for maintenance and operational services for the Loram business located adjacent to Highway 55. The surrounding land use west, east and south of the site is zoned rural residential with pockets of Business Park zoning along Hamel Road. Commercial land use is prevalent along the Highway 55 corridor. The subject development will be compatible with these uses and is a good fit for this neighborhood area. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 5 PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SITE PLAN and SUBDIVISION PLAT Updates to the Application since the Concept Plan review -- On July 12th and July 19, 2016, the Planning Commission and City Council members reviewed a Concept Plan for the Medina AutoMotorPlex and provided comments to the developer. Included in this section are a summary of the comments the developer received and the resulting action shown on the plans within this submittal package: (1) The Concept plan was based upon a 17.5--acre site including 215,000 sf of auto condos/retail development... In order to eliminate the upland problem noted by the City Planner in his review of the Concept plan and to eliminate the setback problems, the new plan includes 19.17 acres of developable site area and 237,340 sf of proposed development including 208,940 auto condos and 28,400 retail space. (2) The applicant is considering a PUD in order to allow flexibility in the development because it is not a standard business use and to allow a more residential feel to the building construction. The proposed use is fairly unique and is not explicitly listed in the city's zoning regulations. The garages are privately owned and store non- commercial items. The recreational and socialfliclub" aspects of the use differentiate it from typical storage garages. The applicant also proposes ancillary uses (retail, repair, conference spaces). These unique uses appear best addressed thorough a PUD, The Planning Commission and City Council should determine if the subject property is appropriate to accommodate such a mix of uses... There is a section later in the narrative which addresses the "Project deviations from code" and the "Public benefits of the project". The developer feels this project meets the definition of where a PUD should be used as a Planning Tool to provide flexibility for the design/approval of a project. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 6 (3) A minimum of 20% of the exterior building materials shall be brick, stone, stucco, or glass. Garage doors facing the exterior of the site shall be decorative in nature. Substantial berming and screening shall be provided for garage doors which face the exterior of the site. The developer would like to work with the City on these requirements and receive flexibility within the PUD process providing the resulting overall design is acceptable. An example involves the garage doors to the auto condo units. The developer intends to use an attractive design that should qualify as part of the minimum 20% exterior building materials stated in the City code. An architect working with the building contractor is currently working on these design issues. Creative design drawings and material boards will be available the week of 8-22 for the City's review. We suggest a meeting with the City staff to go over these issues and the Architect's materials. (4) Tree Preservation and Landscaping There are no existing significant trees on the site. The applicant has not provided a landscaping plan along with the concept plan. The BP district requires planting based on the perimeter of the site. In this case, a minimum of 73 over story, 37 ornamental trees and 121 shrubs would be required. The BP district also requires 8% of the area within the parking lot and loading docks to be landscaped and requires landscaping adjacent to buildings. It appears that the concept plan shows a fairly continuous arrangement of buildings and drive aisles. Staff recommends that the site plan incorporate more greens spaces between buildings and drive aisles... A Landscape Architecture plan is included in the submittal package. The site perimeter is covered adequately, but the internal area landscaping will have to be re-strategized. The Landscape plan has been done by Lan -De -Con. They will assist as the plan is fine-tuned. (5) Wetlands and Floodplain The concept plan shows a wetland in the center of the site along with a drainage way in the southwest corner. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 7 It appears that the concept plan has accommodated the City's minimum upland buffers around the wetland areas. The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans. Any development proposal would ultimately be subject too relevant stormwater standards... This submittal package includes a Wetland Report and a Stormwater Study and Plan. We will be submitting this package next week to the Elm Creek Watershed District Engineers. We held a meeting with them this week, received several helpful comments, and have incorporated these into our plan. They indicated the plan cannot be reviewed further until the City has accepted the submittal. It is our understanding that the fee and Watershed District submittal will be submitted directly to the Hennepin County Engineers. (7) Staff believes that a 2nd entrance, at least for emergency purposes, should be considered for the site. - With our increased property area and increased development density, the 2nd entrance we have incorporated on the design plans supports the City's request for additional access. We have met with Hennepin County DPW and conferred on this issue. They agree with our revised ingress/egress plan. (8) Sewer/Water The applicant has not provided a utility plan along with the concept plan. The applicant will be required to extend sewer and water from the north, keeping the sewer main as deep as possible to serve the site and surrounding lands. The utility plans shall extend service to the edges of the site,.. In this submittal we are extending water and sewer into the site along the north edge. The sanitary sewer will terminate at a manhole at the mid -point between the east and west property line. The water main will be extended as directed by the City. The additional length will be paid for by the City with a credit back to the project through a reduction in the SAC/WAC fees. Additionally, we have successfully Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 8 negotiated a 40-foot easement for utility construction across the north edge of the site with Loram. This can be used for utility construction activities. It is shown on the proposed Plat. (9) Park Dedication The concept plan contemplates a subdivision and the applicant has also indicated that they will divide the garage units into a condominium plat, The City's subdivision ordinance allows the City to require up to 10% of the buildable land, an 8% cash -in -lieu fee, or some combination thereof, Staff will present the concept to the Park Commission for comment. A future trail is shown along Arrowhead Drive in the City's Trail Plan. Park dedication will likely involve the dedication of land for this trail and, potentially, construction of the trail,,. In this submittal we have directly addressed the trail adjacent to the proposed AutoMotorPlex site on Arrowhead Drive. We believe it should be on the west side of Arrowhead Drive. This will have to be addressed as the contents of the Development Agreement are considered. (10) Conditions related to large events shall be required which may include, but not be limited to, subjects such as: days/hours, parking, exterior speakers, etc. We have included in this submittal a traffic and parking analysis which addresses event management and parking issues. Additional collaboration with the City may be necessary. (1 1) Two residents spoke at the public hearing, with comments related to stormwater runoff and potential noise from the vehicles. Stormwater requirements will be reviewed upon formal application, and the applicant indicated that their experience in Chanhassen is that there is not a lot of noise. - Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 9 Within the stormwater design submittal, we have studied and prepared a design which will be acceptable to the resident referred to in the City's comments. Additionally, we have prepared a brief traffic study which demonstrates that the traffic activity is quite low compared to other sites with greater than 200,000 sf of development space. However, these potential problems need to be monitored and addressed as the operations of the facility progress. The Chanhassen AutoMotorPlex has been a good neighbor to the surrounding community. We expect the same situation to occur in Medina. General Comments on the Application -- The 25.18 acres of property shown on the Existing Conditions Survey is proposed to be subdivided into two lots. The Medina AutoMotorPlex development will be located on the northerly 19.17 acres (Lot 1). Loram will maintain ownership on the southerly 6.01 acre parcel (Lot 2). Their use of this property will continue into the future as it operates today. A fiber optics line has been extended from the north on the Loram property on a 10 foot easement adjacent to the Arrowhead Drive right of way. The proposed land plat for this land is contained in Appendix D. The Site Plan for the proposed Medina AutoMotorPlex includes 237,340 sf of commercial development spread over 12 buildings (see Appendix E). The roadway system, parking areas, building coverage and other miscellaneous hard surface areas comprise 66% of the site. The remaining 34% pervious areas are covered by landscaping, ponds, wetlands and associated pervious materials. The center piece of the site plan is the 2-acre wetland in the middle of the site. Adjacent to the wetland is the primary stormwater pond. The site will have two ingress/egress points from Arrowhead Drive. On the north and west side of the site, a security fence with gates and electronic gate controls will be constructed. Security cameras will be operational throughout the site. Two of the buildings on the site will be retail totaling 28,400 sf. These retail operations will primarily serve the owners of the office condo Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 10 parcels on the development site. Their use via the general public will be limited. A traffic study is summarized later within this narrative document. Detailed information on parking and vehicular generated traffic is contained within this traffic study. The data is empirical and based upon the operation and usage of the Chanhassen AutoMotorPlex site developed in 2008 through 2012. The Chanhassen site has 215,000 sf of commercial development containing auto condos. Of this amount, approximately 40,000 sf is retail development associated with the office condo parcels. The operation and management of the Chanhassen site is a close approximation of how the Medina site will be managed. Phasing of the Project -- Two phases are shown on the Phasing plan. In the first phase, the site utilities, grading and drainage system will be installed. Additionally, the pavement and slabs for Buildings 1, 2, and 3 will be constructed. This construction process will progress with the construction of one building at a time; however, it is market driven, so multiple construction activities could occur. A portion of the Retail Building 4 and 5 will be constructed as well. Pavement and curbs in this area will be placed and the security fencing/cameras will be installed. In the second phase, additional building slabs will be constructed, pavement and curbs installed and other appurtenances connected. In the example of the Chanhassen development, the phasing and construction process took place over approximately five years. The retail portion of that development is currently being built. Building plan approval will only be requested for Phase One following the anticipated approval of the Plat and PUD for the overall development. As the building plans are being prepared and reviewed by the City, the grading, drainage, and infrastructure construction will be initiated on the site. This work is planned for Fall, 2016. It is expected that the first building will be completed in the early summer of 2017. Permits and Approvals -- Beside the PUD, Site Plan and Plat approval from the City of Medina, the developer is pursuing permits with the Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 11 following agencies. Additionally, discussion has taken place with Engineering staff from WSB Consulting Engineers regarding details of the project. Hennepin County DPW --- This agency has jurisdiction over Arrowhead Drive and Hamel Road. The developer has met with the County staff a couple of times to review work on the County right of way including utility construction and driveway access. The County has indicated their unofficial approval of the site plan that is being proposed at this time. Two access points are provided onto Arrowhead Drive. Additionally, Sanitary Sewer and Watermain will be constructed within the Arrowhead Drive right of way to the AutoMotorPlex site. Specific permits requesting approval of construction plans for the utilities and driveways will be reviewed after the City submittal has been made. Steve Groen and Bob Byers have been the main contact agents for the County. Elm Creek Watershed District -- The subject property is in the Elm Creek Watershed District. The Wetland Delineation report and Stormwater management design have been discussed with the Hennepin County officials responsible to the City of Medina for the oversight on this Watershed area. Jim Kajuwa and Ali Durgunoglu, are the two engineers that the developer's staff have had meetings. Once the City submittal has been made on the PUD and Final Plat, the Watershed District officials will begin their review and ultimate approval. COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROJECT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THE ENVIRONMENT Compatibility with Surrounding Area -- The subject site is relatively flat and currently contains a soybean farming agricultural application. There are a few trees standing in a wetland area in the southwest corner of the site. This area will not be impacted by the project construction. Additionally, the wetlands on the site will not be negatively impacted. Grading will occur over the entire site, but the basic land topography will be similar when the project is completed. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 12 The developer submitted a Concept plan to the Planning Commission on July 12, 2016 for their review and comments. Additionally, a similar meeting was held at the City Council on July 19, 2016. Two primary neighborhood concerns were voiced by adjacent residents at these meetings. First, a resident south of Hamel road expressed concern about the automobile traffic, specifically speeding and noise. The best way to address this concern is to review the Chanhassen project. This project was developed and constructed in the period of 2008 through 2012. It has been fully operable for several years. The traffic study that is contained within this narrative explains the traffic volume that occurs on a daily basis. The special events which occur approximately once per month, typically on a Saturday morning, are controlled by the individual auto condo owners. The primary traffic at these events will come from the Highway 55 corridor and return via that corridor. There is no reason for visitors to the site to use Hamel Road. The owners of the auto condo units form their own association and maintain a respectful, collaborative contact with each other and the surrounding neighborhood. There has not been a problem with these type of issues with the Chanhassen development. The second primary concern was brought up by the immediate neighbor to the east. This neighbor was concerned about drainage from the site. Specifically, with the 98% pervious area being changed to a 65% impervious area, there is a concern about increasing drainage problems. The developer has retained EVS, Inc to prepare a stormwater study and design that will mitigate any stormwater problems. The study and design plans are included in Appendix I of this narrative. A stormwater plan has been designed that will maintain 98% of the rainwater on the site through the use of stormwater catch basins, pipes, ponds, and the wetland system. It also contains an over -flow system that will be engaged at periods of times when back to back significant storms occur. In these cases, the water will overflow from the on -site system into an overflow pipe system that runs north and east into a larger regional wetland and stormwater ponding area. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 13 The neighboring property to the east will not have increased stormwater flows from this proposed development project. In fact, the current run-off will be lessened and controlled to a higher degree than it is currently. The developer and his technical staff will be ready to walk the reviewers through their plan in the near future as part of the City approval process. Additionally, the City can be assured of a double review effort. The Elm Creek Watershed District has a permitting process that overlays the City process. The developer's technical staff have met with the hydrology experts and are prepared to meet their agency standards. Compatibility with the Environment -- The project will minimize environmental impacts and be compatible with the rural area that is the background to the development's location. The site's natural amenities are being enhanced with the stormwater features that are proposed. Grading will minimize cuts and fills and follow the natural contours of the existing site. At the completion of the project, there will be many more trees and improved landscaping surrounding the site and on the internal portions of the site. Lights and noise impacts from the site will be minimal and less than other commercial activities. The lighting system will be downcast and hardly visible off site. The on -site traffic is primarily shielded from the surrounding properties by the buildings and landscaping. On street parking, outside of the periods of the special monthly events, is not allowed. All automobiles are parked within the owner's garage. The site is designed to minimize off site impacts. The Chanhassen site is an example of how this site will operate. The developer encourages members of the City's review team, or the public, to visit the Chanhassen site and review it first-hand. We will facilitate any request for such a field trip and review process. Additionally, in Appendix F are two letters from community officials that complement the quality of the Chanhassen AutoMotorPlex development, completed by this same developer. Project Deviations from Code -- This development will be unique from any other development in the City of Medina. In fact, there is only one Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 14 other development like this in the upper Mid -west area. Unique developments have unique needs. The PUD approach advocated by the Developer provides the flexibility to address these unique needs while maintaining necessary land use controls. We are requesting a few considerations from the City that are unique to this project. o Security -- this project area will be fenced on the Arrowhead Drive and north perimeter. Gate access will be restricted to the general public. The site will also have multiple camera and recorders throughout the development area. Police and fire emergency service providers will be equipped with a lock box or other means of access for the two gates. O Special events -- these events will happen once per month and will involve special parking and traffic needs. These needs are discussed more thoroughly in the traffic section of the narrative. We do not plan to construct separate dedicated parking lots or traffic lanes for these events. As in the City of Chanhassen, each event will have its' own special needs. We will control parking by using off -site parking lots and shuttle service to the site. We have an agreement to use the Loram parking lot for these events when necessary. Loram parking lot offers parking for approximately 300 vehicles. Additionally, we request the allowance of using the east and west shoulders of Arrowhead Drive for event parking purposes. Shoulder parking will accommodate approximately 250 vehicles between the Loram south parking lot entrance and Hamel Road. These two uses will handle 90% of all of our special event needs. When an event goes beyond this level, we will contact Hennepin County DPW for the use of their parking lot. They have parking for nearly 400 vehicles on site. o Retail development - The retail space is primarily utilized by the auto condo owners for their individual purposes to purchase products to assist them with updates, and restoration of their classic automobiles. Additionally, there may be an Auto Museum as part of the retail space. Limited car sales and special auto showroom space may also be utilized in this space. Novelty retail space for unique items catering to the auto condo ownership is also planned. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 15 O Garage door architecture -- It is proposed to use a special highly decorative garage door for each of the auto condo units. We would request these garage doors be looked at as meeting the 20% exterior code requirement for special materials. It is important to mention that none of the garage door units will have access to public roads; instead they will be connected to internal drive aisles that will be served by an ingress/egress point to Arrowhead Drive. The units that are impacted by this code are limited in their number on site to approximately 15% of the total length of the units. O Building Exterior Finish -- The AutoMotorPlex brand is based upon a higher standard of building site and building design than many other commercial businesses. We request the use of exterior materials similar to the existing facility in Chanhassen, MN. Our architect will be providing a series of photos, drawings, and material boards for your review. He has completed a project in the City of Chaska whereby he used a similar approach to demonstrate the building design. This material has been inserted in Appendix M for your review. The Architectural design details for the Medina AutoMotorPlex will be completed the week of August 22nd. O Park Dedication -- We have had discussions with the City of Medina staff regarding the Park dedication issue. Apparently, there is a need for a bicycle trail adjacent to Arrowhead Drive between Highway 55 and Hamel Road. One side of the discussion is to have the Medina AutoMotorPlex project construct this trail adjacent to the Arrowhead Drive right of way from the Loram south parking lot entry to Hamel Road; approximately 2700 lineal feet. We would prefer it not be connected with our development project and have three compelling reasons: (1) We have spoken with the Hennepin County DPW officials regarding the idea of using the Arrowhead Drive right of way for the trail construction, possibly as a trail and shoulder dual overlay. They have indicated, if this were to happen, they would prefer it to be on the west side of Arrowhead Drive. This would allow the trail to tie directly into an existing trail between the County entry onto Arrowhead Drive on the west side to Highway 55. In fact, Arrowhead Drive is on Hennepin County's pavement rehabilitation program for 2017. They indicated they would review the possibility of incorporating Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 16 paved shoulders into their program. Possibly this could become a signed bicycle trail between Highway 55 and Hamel Road. (2) We understand there is a residential development potential project that may develop property south of Hennepin County DPW on the west side of Arrowhead Drive. This is another reason to develop the trail on the west side of Arrowhead Drive to service these residents. The Medina AutoMotorPlex development will have zero bicyclists and very few pedestrians. (3) On the east side of Arrowhead Drive near the southerly boundary of the 19.17-acre parcel is a wetland that extends into the right of way of Arrowhead Drive and nearly to the edge of the roadway section (see the wetland information in Appendix H). The existence of this wetland will make it very difficult and costly to extend the trail on the east side of Arrowhead Drive through the AutoMotorPlex site south to Hamel Road. 0 We may request other considerations as we proceed through the development process of the City of Medina. Public Benefits of the Project -- The project has many benefits to the City of Medina that outweigh the requests made above. We have outlined four of the significant benefits. Increased real estate taxes from this fully developed project that will out value the current taxes and those from other business park projects that could be developed on this 20 acre site. Current real estate taxes for the 20 acre parcel are approximately $15,000. It is estimated that the taxes produced by the project at full build -out will increase significantly. New public infrastructure that will be valued near $1 million will be constructed as part of this improvement. A proven development that is looked at as a unique attraction to the community will be constructed in an area where it will offer a diverse development opportunity to the City of Medina's commercial development repertoire. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 17 TRAFFIC AND EVENT MANAGEMENT STUDY This section of the narrative includes a review of the traffic, parking and event management activities of the proposed Medina AutoMotorPlex site. It is based upon empirical evidence from the Chanhassen AutoMotorPlex development. Below is a table comparing the two development projects. The Chanhassen site is 100% operational; the City of Medina is proposed: Description of Site Characteristic Chanhassen Site Medina Site Site Size 17 acres or 740,529 sf 20 acres or 871,200 sf Commercial Density 215,000 sf Auto Condo Units 146 units 237,340 sf 162 units J Retail ' Property SF Value 50,000 $40 mill sf 28,400 99999 sf Based upon these numbers and a study of the Chanhassen site with a comparison to the Medina site, the following traffic and parking numbers have been derived from empirical data from the Chanhassen site. The site plan has each building numbered is used as a basis for this table. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 18 Medina AutoMotorPlex Traffic Impact Study Table of Proposed Density Auto Condo Building Development ** see attached site plan Density Building 40x40 ft Daily Traffic Description** Area, sf Dimensions Single Unit Generation #1 34,120 360 ft Lx 80 ft W 24 22 trips per day 160ftLx40ftW I #2 17,520 220 ft x 80 ft 14 7 trips #3 20,500 256 ft x 80 ft 16 8 trips #4 10,000 250 ft x 40 ft 8 4 trips I #5 4,000 120 ft x 40 ft 4 2 trips #6 16,000 200 ft x 80 ft 12 6 trips #7 20,000 250 ft x 80 ft 16 8 trips #8 20,000 250 ft x 80 ft 16 8 trips #9 16,000 200 ft x 80 ft 12 5 trips #10 18,000 225 ft x 80 ft 14 7 trips #11 16,800 210 ft x 80 ft 14 7 trips #12 16,000 200 ft x 80 ft 12 6 trips AutoCondo Total 208,940 162 81 trips per day Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 19 Retail Building Density Description** Area, sf #4 10,000 #5 18,400 Building Dimensions 250ftx40ft 40x40 ft Single Unit na varies na Daily Traffic Generation 2.0 per 1000 sf l 20 trips per day 3.0 per 1000 sf 55 trips per day Retail Total 28,400 38 trips per day Total Auto + Retail 237,340 Reduced by 50% because Of internal traffic moves 119 trips per day Note: Most of these trips occur in off peak periods during the week and on week -ends. Parking Information Parking facilities (Actual & # of Parking Stalls Potential) On site -- Medina AutoMotorPlex Vehicles parked on site = 1,000 grounds On site -- Auto Condos (inside garage 3) Shoulders of Arrowhead Drive Vehicles in garage = 3 x 162 units = 486 Vehicles on shoulders at 20' = 250 Loram Parking lot overflow / shuttle Parking lot = 300 vehicles Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 20 Hennepin County parking lot Parking lot = 400 vehicles Total of All Available parking Parking stalls = 2,436 vehicles (<1,000 feet) Summary of Traffic Data There are several observations that are made as a summary of the traffic data derived from the empirical evidence of the Chanhassen AutoMotorPlex. Additional concerns can be addressed by comparing these similar developments. 1. The weekday and normal traffic volumes from the fully built -out AutoMotorPlex development are minimal to the adjacent County road system. The special events that occur each month will need to be monitored for special circumstances that are unique to each. 2. Two ingress/egress points on Arrowhead Drive will be adequate for all traffic needs of the Medina development. They also will service the emergency service providers assuming readily available access conditions are maintained. 3. Parking needs under all normal circumstances are adequate on site. In fact, the Chanhassen site discourages on -site parking (outside of the garage areas) during normal hours of operation. Only guests are allowed to park on the internal streets. During these hours, no off -site parking will be needed. 4. During the special events that take place each month, parking demands will need to be thought through based upon the historical evidence of the event's impact at the Chanhassen site. With nearly 2,500 parking spaces readily available to the Medina AutoMotorPlex within 1000 feet of the site, there should not be a problem as long as the event is planned in advance. 5. It should be remembered that the traffic for the AutoMotorPlex site occurs 90% of the time outside the peak hours of the other uses in the area. Evenings, Saturday, Sundays, are the typical time when traffic movement occurs. This is off-peak and allows for a higher capacity for the AutoMotorPlex uses. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 21 WETLAND AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN Included in Appendices H $ I are two separate reports. The first is the Wetland Delineation Report completed by Mark Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company. We have only included a couple of pages from the report in the appendix. The second is the Stormwater Study and Design package completed by EVS Engineering. There is considerable overlap in these studies as the delineated wetland on site that totals approximately 1.5 acres is tied into the primary stormwater pond for the site which is approximately 1.0 acre. This 2.5 acre area will be landscaped and featured as an environmental and aesthetic component of the site. Outside of the wetland area, the remainder of the 19.18-acre site will drain into and through this pond and into the wetland. An overflow pipe route has been developed to the west edge of the site, north to the north perimeter and then east on the Loram property to the existing regional wetland/drainage area. The Wetland report will follow a different approval route than this submittal package. It will be reviewed by the Elm Creek Watershed District, Mn DNR, and MnWCA. Ultimately, the TEP panel will be convened and will decide if the material in the wetland report is accurate and delineated correctly. In this submittal, because the wetland report is 78 pages long, the only items in the appendix are the summary of the wetland delineation findings for the 25.18 acre parcel, and Figure 2 from the report which is a graphic map of the wetlands on the site. The full report will be submitted to the City on an electronic flash drive. If copies are required, EVS will provide upon request. In summary, there are two wetlands that need to be delineated within the overall 25.18-acre site. Figure 2 in Appendix H depicts these two bodies of wetland area. The larger body to the north will be the focus of the Medina AutoMotorPlex stormwater system. The stormwater report and design plan, which are included in Appendix I, conforms with the Elm Creek Watershed District requirements. Once the City has accepted the development submittal, Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 22 the stormwater materials will be reviewed by the Elm Creek Watershed District Engineers. The developer's technical staff have met with these engineers and feel their stormwater submittal meets the requirements of the Watershed District. Additionally, the design and overflow route for the stormwater system has been chosen to minimize the disruption to the neighboring property to the east of the proposed 25.18-acre development site. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS The infrastructure for the overall 19.18-acre site for the Medina AutoMotorPlex site will be installed during the Phase One construction project. Each of the plan sheets detailing these construction operations are within the appendix on 11x17 fold -out sheets. A brief description of each plan sheet is contained in this section of the narrative. It includes the following items: 0 Grading -- The site will be graded fairly close to the existing topography. The black dirt and poor soils will need to be removed and placed elsewhere on the site to make room for the subgrade for the building slabs and the pavement/curbs infrastructure. Additionally, the stormwater ponding areas on the site will need to be excavated. The grading plan that is being proposed is approximately 50,000 cubic yards short of dirt for the site. Once the GeoTech report is complete, this plan will be fine-tuned and this discrepancy resolved. 0 Sanitary Sewer -- The existing sanitary sewer exists on the west side of Arrowhead Drive near the south entry to the Loram parking lot. It is approximately 28 to 30 feet deep. The proposal is to extend this sanitary sewer to the south from this point to approximately the north perimeter of the proposed development site. From there, it would be jacked under the existing roadway and extended to approximately the mid -point of the site, still near the original depth. The total length of this deep sanitary sewer construction is 1,400 feet. From here, the lateral sewer pipes would be constructed through the proposed development at a lesser depth and service each of the twelve proposed Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 23 buildings. A 40-foot easement will be created within the plat for the utility construction and extended to the east edge of the proposed development site. Loram and the project's developer have agreed on this easement location which is essential in the future to allow the extension of the sanitary sewer trunk line. 0 Watermain -- The watermain will be extended to the site from approximately the same location on Arrowhead Drive, but at an eight foot depth. The City has requested an extension of the watermain through the south edge of the site at a size of 12 inches. The oversizing extension (the development only needs an 8 inch watermain for fire flow and domestic service) will be paid for by the City through a reduction (credit) in the SAC/WAC fees to the site. The specifics of the oversizing will need to be discussed as the project moves forward. Within the proposed development site, each building will be served with a water service and fire -control connection. Hydrants will be appropriately located through -out the site for firefighting purposes. 0 Streets and pavement, curbs -- These details are shown on the paving plan. Specific bituminous paving details will be completed upon completion of the Geo Tech report. There will be surmountable curbs and normal curbs at various locations within the site. The different locations of each are shown on the site plan. The street intersection radii have been studied carefully to allow fire fighting vehicles to maneuver through the site. Additionally, trailers are commonly used to transport materials and equipment through the site. Larger radii and relatively flat grades are common to avoid problems with these larger vehicles. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 24 APPENDIX F LETTERS Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 30 el! +�► CARVER COUNTY July 8, 2016 Tom3Norkmare OfficelbOrountyKommissioner0 Carver County Government Center Human Services Building 602 East Fourth Street Chaska, MN 55318-1202 Phone: 952 361-1510 Fax: 952 361-1581 Mr. Bruno Silikoski 1750 Motorplex Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Bruno: I am strongly inclined to pen this letter of support for you and the AutoMotorPlex in Chanhassen. The AutoMotorPlex is likely the greatest thing to happen in Chanhassen since The Chanhassen Dinner Theaters, The Uof M Landscape Arboretum and perhaps even Paisley Park. I am very aware of some of the reluctance involved in the development of the MotorPlex but of course by now we know those concerns were entirely unwarranted. Your steady and professional development of this operation in Chanhassen has made it a very desirable location not only for the owners of the individual units but also the general public who enjoy the many social events on site. In your Chanhassen operation there is ample evidence of an A+ development which I know you can duplicate elsewhere. Please let me know how I can continue to assist you in your pursuits at the AutoMotorPlex and beyond. All the Best, Tom Workman Carver County Commissioner Chanhassen, MN 952-250-4924 CITY OF CHANgASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax:952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.22 7.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 7901 Park Place Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Website www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us June 23, 2016 Mr. Scott Johnson City Administrator City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Chanhassen Auto MotorPlex Dear Mr. Johnson: I am often asked to write letters of recommendation, be it for prospective college students or city council members seeking appointment to boards and commissions. In this case, I would like to provide what is essentially an unsolicited letter fully supporting Bruno Silikowski and his development of the Chanhassen Auto Motorplex. I appreciated his guidance and thoughtfulness throughout what ended up being a wonderful addition to the City of Chanhassen. Bruno and his team did a great job identifying the core elements that this project needed to consider, which included high -quality building materials, professional landscape plans, and an overall master plan that blended in with the natural beauty of the Bluff Creek corridor and the numerous wetlands that surrounded the site. Based on the final outcome, I believe Mr. Silikowski has the experience and potential to duplicate this project elsewhere without hesitation. He was always available and looking out for potential disruptions to surrounding neighborhoods, and kept the city updated on his progress. With that said, I would strongly recommend Mr. Silikowski as a quality developer that follows through on his promises. Sincerely, Todd Gerhardt City Manager TG:ms Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow APPENDIX L LIGHTING & SECURITY Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 36 LIGHTING AND SECURITY PLANS Lighting will be mounted on the buildings and will cover the entire site. The architecture plans will include a lighting layout and fixture types. Energy conservation LED lamps that are directed downward and shielded so they are not visible from off site will be used. The lighting will be part of the overall security plans for the development. They will be controlled with appropriate on/off daylight controlled photo sensors. Security plans for the site include fencing on the north perimeter and the west perimeter of the site. The objective is to limit the public from access to the site without passing through one of the two electronically controlled gates. These gates will control traffic from the site onto Arrowhead Drive. Security personnel and Fire Department personnel will have special access to over -ride the locks on these gates. Additionally, the site will have numerous cameras with videotaping capabilities located through -out the site mounted at various locations on the buildings. Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 37 APPENDIX M ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS & BUILDING MATERIALS Medina AutoMotorPlex Page 38 zvxakpoloTAToinv 9ZOZ 0� 1Sf1J(lb' N V\I ` `d N I a 3 IA1 )(a cpcnovviny a�{� jo @sinpallyosiv a�{1 IV cv e, 0 Fj C"9 X0 I-1 0 2p a H 9 Xaldoioruoi,1V %OM '131:19 OIO`SI 'IVIOL 962,Z Labs ZEOb S8000 20 d`J %S '1.1"6S 9EL SMOQNIES %69 'Ld'aS ZZS9 `JNIQIS %6 '.1..3'a$ Met SNO.LS N-8 o W-8 l-8 ivy{-8 ,8b Z£ ,0£ 9-8 3-8 3-8 ,08 4-8 f-8 0-8 ,06 a awai ne - NVId a9109d k s=� 8 mall. - 9011V363 .19 3115 0 I✓�INI 1-8 9-8 H-8 V-8 ,08 �0 111 Malan Loran an Ma Inoxxx xxxxxxxo 0. NVO1.9 �� m a :F a Nai��.o odo�� 2o �� \ VIOSHNNIN `vmaaw 0000 x3zao,torA1oinV 0 1111 11 11 41 Ise es ��,},,��. es � is isips 0. %it 'Is CI 1'1 1 ,,44164 1��1 4140%1 " ," ` s" 1I 911113t1U1N0339 33 CO. V.LOWO CO 0NI1OVN1NO2 3 9 H0112101^1 01 1H013H 300a 3TVa3AV 0211411f e 1F1013H 3006 30Vd3AV ,4/� gagro ��o gggtg wNc66 aN0oMo cam ao N ti a 0 0 341 mQ N,ozoag� aC "��ata comPO' F zvxamJoloTAToinv 2oielej oloyd zvxamJoloTAToinv aanpaliLpad ieJauap zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv sapeDed Ouppng ,uxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv ,uxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv luoJd a2eaeg zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxammloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv snnopuiM zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv Asaci aoiaalui zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv LuXakpolobi loin' s>paa sepueaaA zvxamJoloTAToinv ,uxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv 2u!deospuei zvxakpoloTAToinv I. �111,, i1 rlll,11111 zvxamJoloTAToinv zvxamJoloTAToinv HMI.8MM SHHHS 1.790910Z 960Z 61:80 #.I.aafona alva llf 9331/0SO A8 0133133H0 A8 91998110 069E9 n88WON N011V8151088 808918111.916806 NAOS 05Mtl I8HS 71/8101658,10 tl1W IJIMA 80 NO m eano 3-eviNnowans 00+ alyo+d puod 0S 0 eano 3levlNnoWans 08110 WALE MAL N3 O9llVdH8d5tlM180a38 id0866891,81181 0NY NOISIA88AAS 9'L66 -1MN 5166 1MN IStl0I8108d5'Ntl'id 133d NI 31tl05 51N8011800 ALM .8018 £ SSN8381/60O ASIO .A680 Z 51393081110J ASIJ 9I'90'60 I J� NOMA. 31tla # �I SN3I IO 1N31N3OVNtlW 1N3A3 - ONIN21tld d0 A0021d laaxs NW VN103W N011tl00a VNIO3W - X31dM010140lfttl laafoxa 1tl111W9f1S A110 9E211-090-250 :fun. MOS e166e66114'6916+d 6e03 081883 ONINNYld 1tl1N3141N0211AN3 ONIA3M111S ONINMNION3 I 1 I I 1 I 1 _f 1 ±y I I I I 1 0 aa1awilad puod zEz3 aaawn SI IHRHS 1.790-9LOZ # 1a9f03d llf 9142'61;80 91Va 93N/DSO Aa aa9aa1-1, Ae NAv9a Riff NOSatl1,80Nd3SOf 053NNa4 d0 a1tl159111 V WV I1V111 ONV mom/mans Aa aaa4'da11 5tlM190d3a 110 1VO1313.15'NVId 51N9111140O ALM 91'£01/1 ELN3I11WOJ.SL1D 9I'LZ'60 Z 5LUH11'11'03A.LIO 9110'60 NOISIAfiIl aiva oghpolopoii V I�45a- _ J ANAIRJ 11431N3OVNVW 1N3A3 - ONINUVA AO dOOad 133a5 NW VNIO3W NOLLVJM VNIO3W -X3ldNOlOWO1nv Jog Co. 1tl11IWanS A113 61.5 uu�N 14+1+1..1 ua03 ONINNVld 1V1N3INNONIAN3 ONIA3ATJf1S 91411133NION3 1333 NI 31VOS OOL US 0 .ter 7r w' 1.79091.0Z 91.0Z 61:90 #.laaiona 8.1.891 llf 9331/0SO Afl 003103H0 Afl NAVBa 00999 n88WON N011Ve1s1088 80988I1 H10809 1.1.06088.1n8a0 0.130.5 aa1 o smrl 801119aaNn 888.800.3 71,101050,110.1800900017801.1 V NV I1VH1 ONV N081581M10.16 xe a uvaaeasvmaa0aaa 611111V80 Hl1AiI1ti300 A8988H I S1N0011800 AIM 908081 9 S.LN8801/000 01.810 .8860 Z 5LNH0.0100 A1.I0 9I'90'60 1 �r NOISIA3n aiva # 1 OINOInV SN81 S0 1N3IN3OVNVW 1N3A3 - ONIN21tld AO AOONd laaxs NW VN103IN N011V00n VNIO3W - X31dM010W0lf1V .a[oxa 1VIIRN f1SA119 0180890,90 9920890-200 90LOS 01oseuulW e18+10410993 .081883 ONINNtlId TOIN3141NOUTAN3 ONIA3AHf1S ONIN331,1I01,13 7 i FO Y4 t ONVl13M ONIISIX3 # / JIJLJ00. ERE! .117arilrirlir9101 uuuuuuuuu 9�91,996uMU.0• nn �uuuuue 133i NI 31V05 o9t os 9 F Fo Fo FA uuuul'•JLt�LJI��JL9 _-•_� _- 1.96661M 0066sa uno 00'966:0101109 FO .r0 __�--___ ___tea _ .61 q gnnn �1L�L�1L1 n_ �JDZI. ARM* 'LJ�tt C / 90"0001. ,IMH � OS'566agrun0 \ONV113M `JNIISIX3 � I } Y / l k, �JAuumsuu.8_09 0111 •WIl1 'Itt e, ie I u I ,� F e n e e l e l � u � 11 mi 8.111.01G AUTOMOTORPLEX - MEDINA COUNTY MAP HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN AUTO CONDO PROJECT CITY SUBMITTAL HENNEPIN COUNTY SHEET INDEX C010 COVER SHEET C100 EXISTING CONDITIONS C110 CONSTRUCTION NOTES C200 CIVIL SITE PLAN C210 WETLAND MONUMENTS PLAN C230 PAVING PLAN C300 GRADING PLAN C310 EROSION CONTROL PLAN C400 SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN C401 SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN C420 STORM SEWER PLAN C421 STORM SEWER PLAN C422 STORM SEWER PLAN C601 SITE DETAILS C602 SITE DETAILS C603 SITE DETAILS C604 SITE DETAILS C605 SITE DETAILS C606 SITE DETAILS VICINITY MAP tStfMR Rd WO Rd Medina 6loatoa: Tr, PROJECT LOCATION ,,,J,aI rryny I n a s tr layaao� nkd n•I Rd O 0 Evergreen Rd 81-ttetYrul VI aI Hamel 6 2 0 Hama, Legion Perk N Ul UOiVoy6 Holy Name Cemetery — 2,1 VICINITY MAP 1" = 1/4 MILE ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952-646-0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET COVER SHEET CLIENT AutoMotorPlex- # DATE REVISION I 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CITY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2018 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C010 - hi Ly; / /'_j i J /' l / l / / / / oo� / x0, / , r / / -�o� 7./ \ r / Bwp0 ` '-W, LINE OF THE E. 602 FEET mow• \ \ / / /I / /cI" SW. 1/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 \ I / / I I I I I I / / / / SEC. �11 TWP. 178 N. RGE. 23 W. A I / / I I / I I I / /`ho / ▪ N. V I// I I �� IL f I // // 9n / / y� \ I m ro d 1 1 / // / r A \V / i I p Tip o h / \ I I I i /// �� yp // //� �\ I / / /� /- // \ / I I I I I I/ P, /�/ /f 1 \-„, i // I I I i I, I '2 l g ( \\ LC) /' I I I I j \\ �i`v v v vv v 1v � v v yv v v,v \ \ \ / \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ --_ E9 \\ vv // hn -__ _jI v \\ A \ \\\\\v A vv g \ �� `.1 / �\\ iyl \ \ \� \ \ \\\\\\\I r l I . I n WET LAND- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ 1 1 L1 LJ-I I I I 1 1 1 �o II. II I ` / /-99\\ / / I \\ o ic+ V / _1 V I / I I I I I m \ m \ // ▪ vv I h m \ \-_- I � \ \m �;,/� _ I g�wL / 1 1 1 / 1 1 I v \ / / / / / / / // I I i —• Q / // A/ / ///// I 111\ p � �1-6 I' .. / / / /r / A I �� / / / / / / / / / / \/0p,_ a w o Qir / // I / / �/ / / / / / / / �Z IQ /„ - _ � /i---- / / ▪ 9 / \ r.� / / / / / / / / / / I010� LXty� -LINE PARALLEL WITH THEN LINE / / _---- - --�g1' y -// i / / // // / / 40 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 /---_�/ \ - / l I I I I SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. \ / 998-- / I 1 / I I nos I{ \ // 999 - --/ � a�� II \ C�/� // r — — -1000— — I I o� A A\ vV rr/// -�/j'� iooz I l I l 1 1 \ / / / � / / 1003---------- / 1004 , 1\\ \ \ \\ \\ , /r52-VV' V /rr//r-- loos-- ---- = J / / I \. \ / / // / / r r --ioo---------- \ \ \ \ / / .. / �// /�///i-----iooa--_Q _ _` I \ \ / / / / // /// / I / / / ---- 1 I \ � / / // �r --. ' � — \\ \J Q-AI`! ,QJ y \\\ T \Qd _ ▪ _____-ANI/.L — /C4_ /- - /A - Q - �= _\Gd —\Q CN\ 1— j //.1/ 7." E. LINE OF THE-. SW. 1/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. _ \41k r - - _ _ ' X / X\\ �V A\ d� ////////// r- %///X / \J tr \ �/ � "x // x/ / /-X___��- -_-X X /- // / S0'05'24"E 816.37 / / I I I I l I I \ N. 1586. OR. SEC. 11 118 N. RGE. 23 W. CAST IRON IENT - i W. LINE OF NW. 1/4-' ,h / SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. _8 h o pp ^pp� 1p�y I LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES x - -WL- -WL- GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES © STORM MH Q F.E.S • AREA DRAIN Zr HYDRANT CURB INLET 7Q0 UTILITY POLE 0 SANITARY MN � I I EXISTING CONDITIONS NOTES \ \ \\\ \-�99"1�- X \ xx x - \ / I I --E. LINE OF THE 22 :a '911 1 'll 045 / W.1/2 OF THE SW. 1/4 .X/t M5 341 30 / SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. Z/I 1S3M 911.30 132J ZO9# 1SV3.36iL 30 3Nn 1S2V 1+ cd : Z 3 2 \ _, x `S� � B�LJ \ / 13S13L BSSL 96BL BS9L \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 9s - \ \ `. -- \ \ \ \ // \ \\ \ oo� \ / � \\\ \ _ \ \ \\ ��O --�/ \ \ \ oc, \ / / \ \ \ /00 A AV / _ \\\\/, F I / \„� \\ \\\-- 1-I\\ \ A\ ^ \\- �I \\\ \goo \' f , \ L./ L O: y v �\- -K I V A A / / / / ' : A \ \ \ \ ,/ // / - / -N. LINE OF SW 1/4 / 1 L 1 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. �I V A ` _----- - - - �.A / \ . \\ \` a ; _ 1 / ° \ _ • L I�^I .../ o°\\0_ \ _y1V// \ \ <C x r — ,-, \\\ NL1 ---\ ▪ a_ \ 'oo \1-NW. COR. OF SW. 1/4 d 4,, SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. g p _o • FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT --700a, ▪ 0°&\ -\ g9 "-W. LINE OF THE E. 602 FEET W. 1/2 OF THE SW. 1/4 o SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. �_ --WETLAND--- ,p -LINE PARALLEL WITH I THE N. LINE OF THE SW 1/4 / SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. az 0 I 2 _ . I • \ — T , 'oo W. LINE OF SW. 1/4-' s9,Q0 e SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. LI0351. d17/1 MSL3H1 30 3NI1 KLUON - 3H1 01 1311V6Yd 3NI1 d 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION TAKEN FROM BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY PERFORMED BY EVS, EDEN PRAIRIE., MN EXPRESSLY FOR THIS PROJECT. 2. WETLANDS WERE DELINEATED AND FIELD LOCATED BY KJOLHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL ON 06/28/2016. 3. MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO SITE AND PROTECT EXISTING VEGETATION AND SITE FEATURES (CURBS, WALKS, PAVEMENTS, OVERHEAD AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, SIGNAGE, FENCING, ROADWAYS, ETC.) WHICH ARE TO REMAIN. 4. REPAIR OR REPLACE EXISTING PROPERTY AND SITE FEATURES, INCLUDING GRASS AND VEGETATION, WHICH IS TO REMAIN THAT IS DAMAGED BY THE WORK. TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION AND AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 5. UTILITY LOCATIONS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION / CONSTRUCTION. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE NOTED, THE ENGINEER SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED FOR RESOLUTION. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HIRE THE SERVICES OF A UTILITY LOCATOR COMPANY TO LOCATE ALL PRIVATELY OWNED UTILITIES THAT MAY BE DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. 7. VISIT THE SITE PRIOR TO BIDDING; BE FAMILIAR WITH ACTUAL. CONDITIONS IN THE FIELD. EXTRA COMPENSATION WILL NOT BE ALLOWED FOR CONDITIONS WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN DETERMINED OR ANTICIPATED BY EXAMINATION OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE PERTAINING TO EXISTING SOILS. UTILITIES AND OTHER SITE CHARACTERISTICS. 8. PROVIDE STUMP REMOVAL FOR ALL TREES AND STUMPS TO BE REMOVED. 9. PROVIDE FULL DEPTH CONCRETE SAWCUT AT LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAN WHERE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS TO REMAIN IN PLACE. 10. FOR ALL PRIVATE UTILITIES REQUIRING ABANDONMENT, REMOVAL, OR RELOCATION, CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WORK AND ANY OUTAGES WITH THE UTILITY PROVIDER. 11. PAVEMENT MAY BE RECYCLED AND USED AS MnDOT CLASS 7 STRUCTURAL FILL ON -SITE. 12. ANY WELLS FOUND ON -SITE ARE TO BE CAPPED ACCORDING TO LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. 13. INSTALL ALL SILT FENCE, TREE PROTECTION FENCE, INLET PROTECTION,. AND ROCK ENTRANCES PRIOR TO BEGINNING REMOVALS. 14. UTILITIES TO BE REMOVED AS NOTED. 15. DEMOLISH & DISPOSE OF ALL BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, MATERIALS, & EQUIPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. NO°1 .2"W 4 :.45 UAI'—�-LINE PARALLEL WITH THE W. LINE OF THE SW 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. 0 60 SCALE IN 120 FEET \ \ i\ 0 I 1 -CENTE HAMEI CENTERLINE HAMEL ROAD 1 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CITY COMMENTS SW. C FOUI 1 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2018 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C 1 00 LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES PROPOSED FEATURES PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD x FENCE —vrt- WETLANDS GAS UNDERGROUND GAS OHP OVERHEAD POWER FO FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES © STORM MH Q F.E.S • AREA DRAIN � HYDRANT CURB INLET 72UTILITY POLE QS SANITARY MN 7 20' MII 8 SETT PRO B58L PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK O SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED STRUCTURES • STORM MH 411 F.E.S 0 GATE VALVE • AREA DRAIN li` HYDRANT RIPRAP ■ CURB INLET SIGN ® WETLAND MON. • SANITARY MH TRENCH DRAIN EROSION CONTROL FEATURES 0 o SILT FENCE ® ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE r X X/ Y A x /I EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ✓////////i////A FIBER LOG INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER SITE PLAN NOTES TOTAL SITE AREA: 19.17 ACRES 1. DIMENSIONS ARE TO BACK OF CURB AND EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2. CONTRACTOR TO MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION. 3. CONCRETE SUPPLIERS ARE REQUIRED TO HAUL CONCRETE WASTE AND WASH OFF -SITE. LESLIE BORG PID 1111823230003 _ 1202.6' 30' MIN. BUILDING 20' MIN. PAVEMENT 30' MIN. BUILDING 20' MIN. PAVEMENT }}} SETBACK FROM SETBACK FROM SETBACK SETBACK SETBACK FROM 15'WETLAND , \ }}} HWL-aaa.w PROPERTY LINE R92' PROPERTY LINE FROM PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE BUFFER SETBA� — — BASIN 102 5'wEfLAND 3P BOTTOM:998.00 OUTLET: L:999 999.00 0 / f BUFFER 1 \ \\\ Q Q e W L:999.63 ^ oO /%' 40' lI HWL=10— R66 — p{1nET=9�J'-� — 1 V OUTLET=999.50 2;, 9 R2�' ( R25 -. •. ... - 1 .. - - .. ... .. vV A O r ,/ BASIN 101 ' 40' \ WLESMT-z / 'AA', � Z O U 50.2' ! I NWL: 997.50 HWL: 1000.73 a° i \ ao' (, R30' y 6 �40 y 17,600-SF AUTO CONDO I �I, TOc os o D 2� . I ., I °' �..,99 �S \ o � �/ 1 Q ' -s. . O 50. ,_ .V �: o �� 40' CO p ., CO 50' - Z O U O �' Q LL 4p, il `v, � \\ Y I / / \\\ \ \ R Ir �' / `/ ' / / ` \ I / \ \ / t \\ p / ^�\ 50' \�V/i 44.3' - So I� 76' 20 &IN. BUILDING SETBACKFROMLINE PROPERTY LINE 16,000-SF AUTO CONDO 588.3' • - CV LC)I // \ `� \ ' /I( \ R40' ` \ I �� EXISTING WETLAND \Nr\ I OUTLET:995.50 i ) 9G KL6 40' 7 TO �0�� 43.5' CIA �p 7 7� D /////-- r , / /�i r 11.5' PAVPVIE SJILDIf�•G _ NT f 46' I I HWL: 1000.05 T/RBo' 'O ' _ / 15' WETLAND / / L� / BUFFER SETBACK / / �1� 50' �/ / IACK FROM 'ERTY .INE o' 20,500-SF 1 .. AUTO CONDO y �` 40'\� °' �/ I / 7G 50' OO / - 1/ 1 25' W BUFFER \ / BUFFER ,x40' /O ) / ,�. 1 40' I Q 1 OO LQG / e�`' N \ /ice !�R25' ,�V// 50' 'V" �`.\ / R45' �/ , / i / CDO // O • 50' 45.8' - 40.1' `4y O 'OOQ OO // / �/ / so^^ V •i 1/ / /� N D 03 GJ 10,000-SF AUTO CONDO 4 Q 14'f .. 4,000-SF 12'-AUTO CONDO'' �! 1 I rJ 17,375-SF RETAIL • / le/ � - • i�� // i/ O� /// /f ` PIATA' O \�i N o o 8,750-SF RETAIL 15'/ Q FF TBA o o e BUFF `TRACK/ /25'WETLAND \ BUFFER \/ _— I JI t LlI 31.1-11Ak 11lil---- 191LLr 1 J11 11I1 . LLILI -ILILI II Ill _--- r . — N11 .0� 1 I EXISTING WL ESMT WETLAND__I � \\\ 10' 40'ROW I R25' 32' SITE 35'MIN. PAVEMENT SETBACK FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY _ 8' BIT TRAIL PROOF OF PARKING/ ' '• _ r FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY R25' 32SITE R45'\ iI 40'ROW � , MAIL EASEMI .�TRAILEASEMFNT JEUICAI ION � _ 120A6 1°'ADJACENQ_Wj / 7 _ -- / �_ I ARROWHEAD DRIVE 0 50 100 ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET SITE PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex" # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CITY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C200 SCALE IN FEET a O LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES x — —WL— —WL_ GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES © STORM MH Q F.E.S AREA DRAIN IX HYDRANT CURB INLET 'CL> UTILITY POLE QS SANITARY MN PROPOSED FEATURES —aSBL PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER - - - - - - WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK SANITARY SEWER )) STORM SEWER 1 WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR — — — — — MINOR CONTOUR 1g0 SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED STRUCTURES • STORM MH • AREA DRAIN ■ CURB INLET • SANITARY MH F.E.S ti HYDRANT v SIGN ® TRENCH DRAIN EROSION CONTROL FEATURES rxx/rxx/1 V/////////////A O O GATE VALVE RIPRAP ® WETLAND MON. SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET FIBER LOG INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER PAVING PLAN NOTES 1. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB AND EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2. CONTRACTOR TO MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION. 3. CONCRETE SUPPLIERS ARE REQUIRED TO HAUL CONCRETE WASTE AND WASH OFF -SITE. 4. CURB TO BE SURMOUNTABLE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN PAVING PLAN AS B618 ( Trerracon GeoRepor't OJ OJ 40'ROW = HO dH vo OJ 40' OJ -TFFAIEEASEMENT OJ HWL=1002Z1 — Crn="7 '51— OUTLET=999.50 r I BASIN 101 11 ' I NWL:997.50 I \ I / —OUTLET: 99TI0 11 HWL: 1000.73 I I I I� I �\ 0 �� EXISTING WETLAND4 \�I I / OUTLET:995.50 HWL:1000.05 / 35' MIN. PAVEMENT SETBACK 0J OJ — OJ TROM RIGHT-OF-WAY 8BIT TRAIL . ARROWHFADDR1VE Pavement Area PCC over ACC over Granular Base'1` Granular Base (inches) (inches) Heavy Duly 7 over 4 Standard Duty 6 over 4 Parking Stalls (for automobiles and light vehicles) 5 over 4 Not recommended 5 over 8 4 over 6 1. Pavement materials, mixdesign, and construction should conform to the cunrent Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Standard Specifications for Construction. 2. MnDOT Class 5, 6, or 7C granular base. The granular base course materials should be placed on a stable subgrade and compacted to at least 98 percent of the material's standard Proctor maximum dry density. Considers the subgrade is sloped to promote drainage and is prepared in accordance with section 4.2 Earthwork. 3. PCC pavement concrete should have a 28 day compressive strength of at least 4,000 psi. 4. A minimum surface course thickness of 2 inches is recommended with ACC pavements. 5. Trash container pads should be large enough to support the container and the tipping axle of the collection truck. Thicker pavement sections could be used to reduce maintenance and extend the expected service life of the pavements. BASIN 102 BOTTOM: 998.00 OUTLET: 999.00 Odf W L:999.63 FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY WL ESMTJ / WL ESMT - OJ OJ OJ 1 40'ROW—, 8'BIT TRAIL DEDICATION �` 10' 409DJAC�NT TO WI Tm— 7' 17 1R- IP IX MOUNTABLE STANDARD SECTION TBROUGN DRIVEVAAr I m PLACE 04 REAM AS %OM . WHERE CHI• CROSSES 1.11/ITY TRENCHES WON 1 IR' OF MAU. 48' FIRE TRUCK 10' o- / / / / / 3 / / / / £ /� / / / I / / // 1 I � ; \\ EXISTING \ WETLAND \ 0_ RAI —r -00 1 T 0 50 SCALE IN 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952.646-0236 Fax: 952-646-0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET PAVING PLAN CLIENT f AutoMotorPle # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CITY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA- JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 0811912016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C230 LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES PROPOSED FEATURES x GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES © STORM MH • AREA DRAIN CURB INLET QS SANITARY MN EOF 1003 1004.21 1.3% 1003.65 2.7% 004.05 Q F.E.S HYDRANT UTILITY POLE B58L PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION EROSION CONTROL FEATURES r X X/ Y X X /I V/ // // // // // // A PROPOSED STRUCTURES O o-�- • STORM MH y�F.E.S 0 GATE VALVE i • AREA DRAIN HYDRANT v, RIPRAP ■ CURB INLET -.- SIGN ® WETLAND MON. • SANITARY MH Ixiffq TRENCH DRAIN X / X \ SLAB ON GRADE 1004.7 i SLAB ON GRADE 1005.6 �004.69 -t- 0 5 // t t k 40'ROW 1004.00 1005.6 386:8 SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET FIBER LOG INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER x BIO FILTER MEDIA x x x x GRADING NOTES 1. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 2. PROTECT ALL SURFACE SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL. 3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION TAKEN FROM BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY PERFORMED BY EVS, INC. , EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, EXPRESSLY FOR THIS PROJECT. 4. UTILITY LOCATIONS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION / CONSTRUCTION. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE NOTED, THE ENGINEER SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED FOR RESOLUTION. 5. REFER TO RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 2016 BY TERRACON FOR ANY ADDITIONAL SITE PREPARATION INFORMATION OR REQUIREMENTS. 6. EXISTING TREES NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED IN THEIR ENTIRETY FROM THE SITE, INCLUDING ROOT STRUCTURES. NO CLEARING EFFORTS SHALL BE STARTED WITHOUT THE CAREFUL COORDINATION WITH THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE TO IDENTIFY TREES TO BE SAVED OR REMOVED. 7. EXISTING ORGANIC MATERIAL (TOPSOIL) TO BE REMOVED PER GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM BUILDING AND PAVEMENT AREAS. SUITABLE EXISTING MATERIALS MAY BE MINED FROM LANDSCAPE AREAS AND REPLACED WITH ORGANIC MATERIAL. x 99T996� EXISTING WETLAND OUTLET:995.50 HWL: 1000.05 0.5% 11 1 \ 99•.43 1001 50 002.00 tong 1012_ ARROWHEAD DRIVE 8. ALL RETAINING WALLS OVER 48 INCHES HIGH TO BE ENGINEERED BY OTHERS. SIGNED PLANS TO BE SUBMITTED BY CONTRACTOR TO THE CITY OF MEDINA AND TO THE ENGINEER. 9. 42 INCH FENCE RAILING IS REQUIRED AT THE TOP OF ALL WALLS OVER 48 INCHES HIGH. 10. THE FILL SOILS SHOULD BE PLACED AND COMPACTED USING LIFT THICKNESSES WHICH ARE COMPARABLY MATCHED TO THE TYPE OF FILL AND THE COMPACTOR BEING USED. THE COMPACTOR SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF OBTAINING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTION LEVELS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE THICKNESS OF THE FILL LIFT. 13. PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN AT CURBLINES ARE FLOWLINE ELEVATIONS UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. 14. SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN AT CATCH BASINS ON THIS GRADING PLAN DOES NOT REFLECT 2 INCH CASTING SUMP AND ACTUAL RIM ELEVATIONS. 15. CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO BETWEEN DAWN AND DUSK, OR THE HOURS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY OF MEDINA. 16. THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ENGINEER AND INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST THREE (3) DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 17. PLEASE SEE DETAIL 7 ON C606 FOR TYPICAL CROSS SECTION FOR BASINS 8 DRAINTILE '..... - - - x x x x\ x x 1 EOF 1001.00 1003.48 °°,s 0 0 1004.25 1007 50 BASIN 102 BOTTOM: 998.00 OUTLET: 999.60 H W L:999.63 r x1004.25 004.19 x 10Oy.00 004.75 1004.50 0.7% ` SLAB ON GRADE 1005.1 40'ROW 8"'''•-"TIL DEDICATION����-10‘\ /r f 'AnAC� TO WL WL - 0 50 SCALE IN 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET GRADING PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex119 # DATE REVISION I 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CTTY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C300 LEGEND EROSION CONTROL NOTES EXISTING FEATURES PROPOSED FEATURES x —yr — —µL- GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES • STORM MH Q F.E.S AREA DRAIN � HYDRANT CURB INLET 'OE, UTILITY POLE ©S SANITARY MN 0 r• EOF 100 B5� »— PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN 1 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION J EROSION CONTROL FEATURES t. PROPOSED STRUCTURES • STORM MH • AREA DRAIN ■ CURB INLET • SANITARY MH F.E.S HYDRANT --0— SIGN ® TRENCH DRAIN atij r x x/ Y X X /1 ///////i////A /- N 0-- TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET FIBER LOG • GATE VALVE RIPRAP ® WETLAND MON. INLET PROTECTION 2. 3. 4. 5. 7"74,- m - e \WA= RIM®tea® ena® 0ex OF - ~►'�• SILT FENCE SHALL BE PLACED NO CLOSER THAN 2 FEET FROM THE DELINEATED EDGES OF ALL WETLANDS. PONDS SHALL BE EXCAVATED AS EARLY IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AS POSSIBLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ANY SILT FROM THE POND AFTER THE SITE IS FULLY RESTORED. AFTER GRADING IS COMPLETE THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL BMP'S AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND DETAIL SHEET TO MINIMIZE EROSION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE THEIR OPERATIONS TO MINIMIZE THE DISTURBED AREA AT ANY GIVEN TIME. ALL SEED, SOD, MULCH AND FERTILIZER SHALL CONFORM WITH THE FOLLOWING MNDOT SPECIFICATIONS, AS MODIFIED BELOW: ITEM SOD SEED TEMP PERM BASIN (NWL TO HWL) MULCH ALL FERTILIZER TEMP PERM / •Agfa muc aaeviaa,Ida���rTrar+� SPECIFICATION NUMBER MNDOT 3878 MNDOT 3876 MIX 22-111 @ 40 LB/AC. MIX 25-141 @ 75 LB/AC. MIX 35-241 @ 85.5 LB/AC. MNDOT 3882 TYPE 3 @ 2 TONS/AC. MNDOT 3881 TYPE 1 10-10-20 @ 200 LBS/AC. TYPE 3 22-5-20 @ 350 LBS/AC. WET TYPE 4 18-1-8 @ 120 LBS/AC. GENERAL PLACEMENT MNDOT 2575 SOIL TRACKED ONTO PAVED SURFACES SHALL BE CLEANED DAILY BY SCRAPING OR SWEEPING AS REQUIRED BY THE MPCA. 6. A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL SHALL BE RESPREAD PRIOR TO SEEDING 8 MULCHING. 7. STOCKPILES MUST BE LOCATED AT LEAST 25 FEET FROM ANY ROAD, WETLAND, DRAINAGE CHANNEL, OR STORM SEWER INLET. STOCKPILES LEFT FOR MORE THAN 14 DAYS MUST BE STABILIZED WITH MULCH, VEGETATION, TARPS, OR OTHER APPROVED MEANS. STOCKPILES LEFT FOR MORE THAN 14 DAYS MUST BE CONTROLLED WITH SILT FENCE. 8. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED AS DETAILED IN THESE REQUIREMENTS. EACH TYPE OF PERMANENT RESTORATION SHALL BE CLEARLY SHOWN ON THE PLAN INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SOD, SEED, IMPERVIOUS COVER, AND STRUCTURES. AREAS WHICH TOPSOIL HAS BEEN PLACED AND FINISHED GRADED OR AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN DISTURBED AND FOR WHICH OTHER GRADING OR SITE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS ARE NOT ACTIVELY 10 UNDERWAY SHALL BE TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY RESTORED, POSSIBLY REQUIRING MULTIPLE MOBILIZATIONS, AS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: a. AREAS WITH SLOPES OF LESS THAN THREE (3) TO ONE (1) SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OF COMPLETING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. I b. AREAS WITH SLOPES GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THREE (3) TO ONE (1) SHALL BE SEEDED AND EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PLACED WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OF COMPLETING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. c. ALL SEED SHALL BE EITHER MULCHED AND DISC -ANCHORED OR COVERED BY EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TO PROTECT SEED AND LIMIT EROSION. TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT MULCH SHALL BE DISC -ANCHORED AND APPLIED AT A UNIFORM RATE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO (2) TONS PER ACRE WITH NOT LESS THAN EIGHTY (80) PERCENT COVERAGE. d.IF ANY DISTURBED AREA IS ANTICIPATED TO BE REDISTRIBUTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS, A TEMPORARY VEGETATIVE COVER SHALL BE REQUIRED CONSISTING OF AN APPROVED SEED MIXTURE AND APPLICATION RATE. e.IF THE GRADED AREA SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED FOR A PERIOD OF GREATER THAN SIX MONTHS, A PERMANENT VEGETATIVE COVER SHALL BE PROVIDED CONSISTING OF AN APPROVED SEED MIXTURE AND APPLICATION RATE. ALL EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ALTERATION AND MAINTAIN UNTIL TURF IS ESTABLISHED. ALL CONSTRUCTION RELATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM PONDING AREAS, STORM SEWERS, AND OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. p v,�.v�we.• sue® ,�. ��.�r.a®�� weep �� �� BASIN 102 �� .� °'�� 4°4 .. �� BOTTOM:998.00 OP I ! ` a 0.7 w OUTLET:999.00 ' i� �� o ! AIN �- n� HWL:999.63 1I 11 � `� AFT R GRADING B IN ���'� . 4. i� II i •! 11 _! �W�SMT011 ilr 0100 ...., �► _ kvitt O o bA TI I INLET r,�•-�rt \ — O— M1--r-e*1 cli�° • � PROTECTION �•� 0.4 %�• „/ s �. ` / PERIMm ER �. '°� _ERIM IER ARROWHEAD DRIVE 8' BIT L DEDICATIONS` �7RAIL EASEMI 10\ 0 50 IN 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET EROSION CONTROL PLAN CLIENT 119 AutoMotorPlex # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CTTY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C310 - - SCALE LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES X GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES © STORM MH Q F.E.S • AREA DRAIN IX HYDRANT CURB INLET 72, UTILITY POLE OO SANITARY MN Cep 0 rCBMH#15 8" INV(W)=983.48 r18'-8"PVC SDR 26@0.40% SMH 1 / RIM = 1M4 3 BL10 20.0' INV(E)=983.41 INV(W)=983.31 HYD HBOE = 1003.7 8X6 REDUCER 6" GV WM LOWERING l6 SEPARATION MIN. 4"INSULATE S RIMMH = 115001.8 BLD = 20.1' INV(S)=981.90 INV(E)=981.80 INV(W)=981.72 8" GV ! 8" DIP W SERVICES PROPOSED FEATURES B58L PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION EROSION CONTROL FEATURES r X X/ Y X X /I V/ //////// // // A PROPOSED STRUCTURES SMH 4 SERVICES RIM = 1002.3 BLD = 21.2' INV(E)=981.20 INV(S)=981.30 INV(W)=981.10 HYD HBOE = 1005.4 8X6 TEE 6" GV • STORM MH • AREA DRAIN ■ CURB INLET • SANITARY MH • F.E.S • HYDRANT SIGN f1=•' TRENCH DRAIN C< HYD HBOE = 1004.9 8X6 TEE 6" GV SERVICES SMH 16 RIM = 1004.3 BLD = 12.7' INV(N)=991.60 F » » �- 320'-8"PVC SDR 26@2.63% e SMH3 RIM = 1005.5 BLD = 25.2' INV(E)=980.40 INV(W)=980.31 JJ,d.UT 10' 40'RO�1 I -.-- TRAIL EASEMENT 8; ssi ® 12" GVI MATCH LINE 41--1T DIP W I i I O o-�- 0 GATE VALVE RIPRAP ® WETLAND MON. CC INV:. CO / INV: 9BI SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET FIBER LOG INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER 18" UIP W gHWL=100 -�0Z 3 2 (111T1 F� 9 CO N 995 6'PERF. DTE's S-H 9 RIM = 1 OR 8 BLD = 104" INV(SE)=992.40 INV(SW)=992.30 SANITARY SEWER NOTES ALL SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE PVC PIPE SDR-35 FROM 0'-15' DEEP, OR SDR-26 FROM >15' DEEP (ASTM 03034, ASTM C63, SDR 35), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SANITARY SEWER INSTALLATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2321. 2. INSTALLATION AND MATERIALS USED FOR BUILDING SANITARY SEWERS MUST COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS SPECIFIED IN MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.0530. \ \ SMH 12 RIM = 1004.5 BLD = 10.5' 995.3 INV(S)=994.02 INV(NW)=994.02 HYD,, HBO 1002.0 PERF.WIT 6" GV \ \�C 9 I WV: 996/ OUTLET:995.50 HWL:1000.05 3/ / / / 253' - 8" PVC SDR 35 @ 0.40 % `SMH 5 RIM = 1005.3 BLD = 15.6' INV(S)=989.79 INV(N)=989.70 (��N HBOE = 1005.4 8X6 8X6 TEE u6 GV SAN. I SERVICE r SMH6 RI RIM = 1005.4 v BLD = 14.6' INV(E)=990.90 HYD INV(N)=990.80 HBOE = 1aPa I 8X6 TEE G" GV I.1IIIIIIIIIIIIIII \ 2X6 TEE 35MIN. PAVEMENT SETBACK FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY I AN. SERVICE WATER - SERVICE �I I I , o RVICES HVOK- y WATERMAIN NOTES 1. ALL WATERMAIN PIPE SHALL BE DIP CL52. ALL WATERMAIN SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 7.5 FEET MINIMUM COVER (TOP OF PIPE TO FINISH GRADE). DIP, HYDRANT LEADS, AND FITTINGS SHALL BE ENCASED WITH POLYETHYLENE FILM CONFORMING TO ASTM D 1248-889. 2. 12 INCH WATERMAIN TO BE DIP CL52, AND 8 INCH WATERMAIN TO BE DIP CL 52 WITH 7.5 FEET MINIMUM COVER. 3. WATERMAIN SHALL BE INSTALLED AT LEAST 10 FEET HORIZONTALLY FROM ANY MANHOLE, CATCH BASIN, STORM SEWER, SANITARY SEWER, DRAINTILE OR OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCE FOR CONTAMINATION PER MN RULES 4715.1710, SUBPART 3. THIS ISOLATION DISTANCE SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE OUTER EDGE OF THE PIPE TO THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CONTAMINATION SOURCE. 4. WATERMAIN TO HAVE 18" CLEARANCE MINIMUM VERTICALLY FROM ANY OTHER UTILITY. AT THIS MINIMUM, LINE IS TO BE INSULATED WITH 4" INSULATE. 5. INSTALLATION AND MATERIALS USED FOR WATER SERVICE 6" PERF. DTILE BA�fPt40r2- _- BOTTOM: 998.aco OUTLET: 999.00 INV o,IiWL:999.63 2 O, \. \9. COS 4 INV: 997.0 HYD \\` HBOE = 1004.0 X6 TEE J6" V '. SERVICES SMH 10 RIM = 1003.9 BLD = 11.0' INV(SW)=993.00 V(NW)=992.9t -SMH 7 RIM = 1004.5 BLD = 13.3' INV(SE)=991.20 INV(W)=991.20 SERVICES SMH 8 RIM = 1003.8 BLD = 12.0' INV(NE)=991.90 INV(NW)=991.80 WATER SERVICE 0 '50 MIN. BLILD1:No COPPER BLEED VALVE _(HOLD LOCAL HP) 2X , ARROWHEAD DRIVE ERVICES 136'-8"PVC SDR 35@0.4:% SMH 11 RIM = 1004.2 BLD = 10.9' INV(SW)=993.40 INV(SE)=993.50 INV(NE)=993.30 FROM RIGHT-OF-WM1 8" GV MH 14 RIM = 1004.7 BLD = 9.9' SERVICE raNE)S=994.80 a PIPING MUST COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS SPECIFIED IN MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.0530. 6. ALL HYDRANTS SHALL BE WATEROUS IMPROVED PACER STYLE, MODEL WB-67, WITH SAFETY FLANGE AND STEM COUPLING. HYDRANT SHALL BE ROTATED AS NECESSARY SO MAIN CONNECTION IS DIRECTED TOWARDS ADJACENT ACCESS ROAD. 7. ALL WATER SERVICE OR GATE VALVE BOXES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION AREA MUST BE EXPOSED AND BROUGHT TO GRADE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. 7SMH 13 RIM = 1004.5 BLD = 9.9' INV(N)=994.60 / // / I' II I `WL ESMT HYD HBOE = 1005.0 8X6 TEE SMT-✓ 6" GV 8' GV /, //,, i // // // / //,/ / I , EXISTING \ WETLAnrr'. TEMP HYD RAIL EASEMI 40WHBOE = 1006.9 - 8' BIT TRAIL 'RO DEDICATION HBO REDUCER 10'.ADJACENT TO WL _ B GV T \ /I., `= , A 0 50 SCALE IN 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex- # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CTTY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C400 LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES PROPOSED FEATURES PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD x FENCE — —wL— WETLANDS GAS UNDERGROUND GAS OHP OVERHEAD POWER FO FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES Q STORM MH Q F.E.S • AREA DRAIN TX HYDRANT CURB INLET ' Q 3 UTILITY POLE OS SANITARY MN BS& PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK )•• SANITARY SEWER ))� STORM SEWER WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) — MAJOR CONTOUR — — — — — MINOR CONTOUR itei0 SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED STRUCTURES • STORM MH 41 F.E.S • AREA DRAIN �j• HYDRANT ■ CURB INLET —0— SIGN • SANITARY MH ®TRENCH DRAIN CONN. TO EX WM FIELD VERIFY 1212" GV 2, EROSION CONTROL FEATURES 0 o SILT FENCE ® ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE r X X/ Y X X /J EROSION CONTROL BLANKET I�/////////////.1 FIBER LOG O GATE VALVE RIPRAP ® WETLAND MON. INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER SERVICES HYD HBOE = 1005.4 8X6 TEE GV SMH3 RIM = 1005.5 BLD = 25.2' INV(E)=980.40 INV(W)=980.31 1 I0I' s c v 40'R�T 1 TRAIL EASEMENT Gt1RB CUT EX-SMH 1 RIM = 1004.2 BLD = 26.0' INV(S)=978.21 INV(N)=978.21 CONN. TO EXISTING FIELD VERIFY 530' - 12" DR-18 @ 0.30 •— —12“D1PWN} SMH2 RIM = 1006.3 BLD = 26.5' 12" PLUG INV(S)=979.90 I NV(N)=979.99 INV(E)=980.00 30' - 12" DR-18 @ 0.30% INV(N)=979.80 I� 0 50 SCALE IN 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex- # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CTTY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C401 LEGEND EXISTING FEATURES PROPOSED FEATURES x GAS OHP FO PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE LOT LINE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY EDGE OF ROAD FENCE WETLANDS UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD POWER FIBER OPTICS MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING STRUCTURES m STORM MH AREA DRAIN CURB INLET SANITARY MN 1 ^ TMH 176 RIM=1003.5 BLD: 11.3' 27" INV (S)=992.23 15" INV (W)=995.04 27 INV (E)=992.23 •� _ - 212'-27"RCP @0.35% K I I� A BS&. PROPERTY LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER B618 CURB AND GUTTER (PAVE PLAN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION EROSION CONTROL FEATURES Y X X/ Y X X /I U/////////////A PROPOSED STRUCTURES • STORM MH • AREA DRAIN ■ CURB INLET • SANITARY MH STMH 177 RIM=1001.0 BLD: 8.0' 27" INV (S)=992.97 27" INV (N)=992.97 F.E.S r HYDRANT SIGN TRENCH DRAIN O o-"- O GATE VALVE RIPRAP ® WETLAND MON. 266' - 27" RCP @ 0.35 % J Q F.E.S ,,,,4 HYDRANT 2 UTILITY POLE B 115 RIM=1004.2 BLD: 3.0' 12" INV (W)=1001.24 CB 10 RIM=1003.6 BLD: 3.3' 6" INV (S)=1001.70 6" INV (W)=1001.70 15" INV (S)=1000.35 •B L RIM=1001.0 _ �i o BLD::4.0' at 15" INV (E)=997.00 fB" EOF 1003 5 2 CBMH 114� RIM=1004.0Q BLD: 4.0' 6" INV (S)=1000.71 15" INV (E)=999.96,„ 15" INV (5)=999.96', m -1 • �I v BMH 200 1004.1 RIM=1003.7 BLD: 3.0' 12" INV (E)=1000.69 w 15" INV (W)=1000.69 CBMH 113-3 9 RIM-1003.3 A BLD: 4.5' ✓ 6" INV (E)=1001.80 C9i 6" INV (N)=1001.80 15" INV (N)=99924 6" INV (S)=1001.80 o 18" INV (S)=999.24 44' - 15" HCH l@ U.50% c CBMH 117 RIM=1004.3 BLD: 5.0' 18" INV (W)=999.38 12" INV (N)=999.38 24" INV (SE)=999.38 c OJ _ CJ D�IE7ATI0-1T- RIM-1004.8; 1f1 100,�.1 BLD: 5.3 12" INV (S)=999.50 1 sVS sys 144'-15"RCP @0.69 ) CBMH RIM=1002.5 BLD: 3.4' INV (N)=999.36 INV (W)=999.11 CBMH 11 RIM=1003.2 BLD: 5.5' 30" INV (W)=997.68 15" INV (E)=998.65 30" INV (S)=997.68 33' - 30" RCP @ 0.52% CBMH 111 RIM=1002.6 BLD: 4.1' INV (W)=998.45 INV (N)=998.45 INV (E)=998.45 37' - 18" RCP @ 0.65% • CBMH 11 RIM=1003.7 BLD: 5.0' 6" INV (N)=1001.72 18" INV (N)=998.69 18" INV (S)=998.69 134' 3) BMH 11 RIM=1003.5 BLD: 4.4' 24" INV (NW)=999.01 24" INV (E)=999.01 12" RCP @ 0.95% CB 118 RIM=1004.2 BLD: 3.6' t 6" INV (N)=1001.91 6" INV (S)=1001.91 12" INV (S)=1000:65 @N CBMH 13 RIM=1006.7 BLD: 7.7' 12" INV (N)=999.00 INV (S)=998.98 CONN. TO EXISTING FIELD VERIFY CB 12 RIM=1004.1 BLD: 3.2' I 12" INV (S)=1000.871,1.,. I'"T" 1 1 I 1 1 9''"'' 0= - J OJ STMH 11 RIM=1006.1 BLD: 6.1 12" INV (N)=1000.13 12" INV (S)=1000.13 18" INV (E)=1000.03 Illlfl 153' 12" RCP @ 0.48% OJ '59'-15" 2_ P aj0.64% SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET FIBER LOG INLET PROTECTION TEMPORARY FAIRCLOTH SKIMMER STMH 17 RIM=1000.5 BLD: 6.6' 18" INV (S)=994.50 21" INV (W)=994.30 27" INV (N)=993.90 < STMH ' RIM=1000.: BLD' 6 3' 6" DT = 995.0 21" INV (W)=994.51 21" INV (E)=994.50."L=1000.7` �� 985.17r1-755751- - ES T5� ��// J 5 CY CL III RIPRAP I/// _maw -tot CO INV (E=997.50 PERF. DT )II a1 I � l- QQ• �laA/�:SJ97�50-II I 6 I I I E ngg:10 A I I 11 HWL: 1000.73 I I 1 I I 6" PERF. DTILE "Ip996;S, CO` '1'A I co I ,( /,/ // 0 ES 100 8 C4 CL III RIPRA I (N)=997.50 CO // 11 INV: 996.5 OS/19 RIM=1000.0 v BLD: 4.5' 6" DT: 996.0 24" INV (SW)=995.5 11 ,1 2 30" RCP @ 0.48% 1 -1 I II MH 132 RIM=1004.6 BLD: 6.9' 15" INV (W)=997.70 15" INV (SE)=997.70 TMH 133 M-1007.4 LD: 8.8' CB 15 12" INV (SW)=1001.5•. rrt "• I I I I I RIM=1003.815" INV (N)=998. 15" INV (E)=• PG ieS ale P I 112" INV (E)1000.5B0 - 2x9C RIPRA STORM SEWER NOTES 1. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE RCP, CLASS III (MIN.), WITH FLEXIBLE WATERTIGHT JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-361 OR PVC PIPE (ASTM D3034, SDR 35) INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2321, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. FLEXIBLE JOINTS AT STORM SEWER PIPE CONNECTIONS TO STRUCTURES: 2.1. IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES 4715.0700 AND 4715.0750, PROVIDE FLEXIBLE JOINTS AT ALL PIPE CONNECTIONS TO ALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURES. 2.2. ACCEPTABLE MANUFACTURERS / PRODUCTS: 2.2.1. FERNCO, "CONCRETE MANHOLE ADAPTORS" OR "LARGE DIAMETER WATERSTOPS" 2.2.2. PRESS -SEAL, WATERSTOP GROUTING RINGS 2.2.3. OR APPROVED EQUAL STMH 17 RIM=1004.3 BLD: 8.9' 18" INV (S)=995.47 18" INV (N)=995.47 242' - 18" RCP @ 0.40 % �C CB 158 \M=1001.00 MEL INV (1�=997.67 28 /15" RCP @ 0.60% ‘ \\`\\1 -OS 19i �\1 RIM=1000.0 A\\A A BLD: 4.5' \\� \ 6" DT: 996.0 \\ 24" INV NW)=995.50 AA "PERF. DNE V\ FES 14. 1 \ \ 84SY CL III RIPRAP 99 ,\ \\INV(S)=997.50 47' - 24" RM@ 1.08 % �� S 194 \ \\•28,.�30",RCP @ 0.6016/0 12 vY CL III RIPRAP\\\ CO • �sjNV 996.5 INV ( E)=995.00 \ \ dl, FES 179 \� INV (E)=995.50 ES 192 12 CY CL III RIPRAP INV (NE)=995.00 46' - 24" RCP @ 1.08% EXISTING WETLAND OUTLET:995.50 HWL: 1000.05 ES 130 5 CY CL III V (N y TMH 131 RIM=1002.0 BLD: 6.7' 15" INV (NW)=997.00 15" INV (SE)=995.30 CB1v1H 146 RI 1002.7 BLD: 4.9 30" INV (RVV)=997.76 5 30" INV (E)=997.76 RIM 003.6/ BLD: 4.3' (SW)=999.24 5.00 INV (SE)=999.2 B 121 RIM=1003.8 BLD: 3.3' 12" INV (N)=1000.48 35' MIN. PAVEMENT SETBACK 61' - 12" RCP @ 0.58%1 J FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY 32' - 12" RCP @ 0.38% H B 201 IM 1007.1 BLD: 5.4' 12" INV (NE)=1001.71 s OS 17 RIM=999.6 BLD: 3.9' 6" DT: 996.5 8" INV (N)=995 69 UTILITY NOTES 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION TAKEN FROM BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY PERFORMED BY EVS INC., EDEN PRAIRIE, MN EXPRESSLY FOR THIS PROJECT. 2. LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES; VERIFY LOCATION, SIZE, AND 7. INVERT ELEVATIONS. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE NOTED, THE ENGINEER SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED FOR 8. RESOLUTION. 3. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF PROPOSED BUILDING UTILITY SERVICES, VERIFY ALL PROPOSED BUILDING UTILITY SERVICE PIPE SIZES, LOCATIONS, AND ELEVATIONS WITH MECHANICAL PLANS. COORDINATE CONSTRUCTION AND CONNECTIONS WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. 4. ALL CONNECTIONS TO CITY UTILITIES TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF MEDINA STANDARDS. 5. VERIFY ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITY SERVICES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 6. CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL FOR EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ANY 6" PERF. DTILE EOF 1001.00 BMH 164 RIM=1003.9 BLD' 9 0' DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN LOCATED UTILITIES AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SHOULD BE NOTED AND FORWARDED TO THE ENGINEER. COORDINATE WITH IRRIGATION AND LIGHTING CONTRACTORS FOR CONDUIT CROSSINGS NEEDED. RECORD AS -BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED BY THE CONTRACTOR UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. 9. ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. 10. PVC SOLVENT WELD JOINTS MUST INCLUDE A PRIMER OF CONTRASTING COLOR TO THE PIPE AND CEMENT (MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.0810, SUBPART 2). 0 SCALE HVp v EOF SBEL @BEFLESN/4' SUMP •�� 4 CY 12" INV (S)=999.16 E RCP@0,A _ RIPRAP 15"INV (W)=998.91 1003.5 \��L O OM: 8SBL esBL- eseL esBL \ QU LET: 999.00 INV 7.0 ' 98' - 12" RCP @ 0.51 % a�iV�7 •999.63 �j CB 14 RIM=1003.4 BLD: 3.2' 2" INV (SW=1000.22 43' - 21" RCP @ 0.66%\ CBMH 142 0' / RIM=1002.9 BLD: 5.0' 6" INV (SW)=1001.02 18" INV (SW)=997.95 21" INV (N)=997.95 CBMH 14 RIM=1004. BLD: 4.9' 6" INV (SW)=1002.4� d 1 \ 12" INV (NE)=999.59 / 15" INV (NW)=999.34 CBMH 141 RIM=1001.9 BLD: 4.2' INV (S)=997.67 INV (N)=997.67 BMH 155 RIM=1003.7 BLD: 3.8' 12" INV (W)=999.90 15" INV (NE)=999.90 Od OJ C _ _ F8'BIT TRAIL JI I dH9 vs sys � Ib s ARROWHEAD DRIVE �•r CO~ \\,4 INV: 997.0 BMH 143 RIM=1003.7 BLD: 5.3' 6" INV (SW)=1001.80 6" INV (5E1=1001.80 15" INV (SE)=998.72 18" INV (SW)=998.36 18" INV (NE)=998.36 BMH 147 RIM=1003.3 BLD: 5.1' 6" INV (SW)=1001.35 15" INV (NW)=998.53 24" INV (SW)=998.13 0" INV (NE)=1998.13 CBMH 14: RIM=1004.5 BLD: 5.2' 6" INV (SE)=1002.25 6" INV (NE)=1002.25 15" INV (SW)=999.28 12" INV (SW)=1000.08 24" INV (NE)=999.28 CB 15" RIM=1005.2 BLD: 3.T 2" INZ??? 19S6 .47 OJ _ RIGHT-OF-WAY .H VSw �sys svo vs #- 85BL T BSBL \� 893h CBMH 161 RIM=1002.9 BLD: 8.8' 18" INV (W)=998.39 32' - 21" RCP @ 0.43% 15" INV (E)=998.55 81' - 18" RCP @ 1.17% 21" INV (N)=998.14 164 L 12" KCH @ U. O% <=20> BMH 150 TMH 162 6" INV (NW)=1002.50 RIM=1003.7 12" INV (S)=1000.45 SAFL BAFFLE W/4' SUMP CB 15 LEM B 165 RIM=1002.9 BLD: 3.2' 12" INV (N)=999.66 .00 OJ OA 40'ROW OJ 8' BITWIL DEDICATION Oi 50 IN ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 CITY SUBMITTAL AutoMotorPlex- 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CM COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE 08/19/2018 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44828 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DATE PROJECT # SHEET NUMBER ES 173 25 CY CL III RIPRAP NV (W)=990.26 MH 174 IM=995.1 BLD: 4.6' 27" INV (W)=990.55 27" INV (E)=990.55 TMH 75 RIM=1001.5 BLD: 10.3' 7" INV (W)=991.18- 27" INV (E)=991.18 _ STORM SCHEDULE STRUCTURE # DIAMETER OUTLET SUMP BUILD CASTING CBMH 101 48" 999.11 0 3.39' R-3067 CB 102 27" 1000.35 0 3.25' R-3360-A CBMH 111 48" 998.45 0 4.15' R-3067 CBMH 112 48" 998.69 0 4.98' R-3360-A CBMH 113 48" 999.24 0 4.46' R-3360-A CBMH 114 48" 999.96 0 3.99' R-3067 CB 115 2' x 3' 1001.24 0 2.97' R-3067 CBMH 116 48" 999.01 0 4.44' R-3067 CBMH 117 48" 999.38 0 4.96' R-3360-A CB 118 27" 1000.65 0 3.55' R-3360-A STMH 119 48" 1000.03 0 6.07' R-3360-A CB 120 2' x 3' 1000.87 0 3.22' R-3067 CB 121 2' x 3' 1000.48 0 3.27' R3067 STMH 131 48" 995.30 0 6.67' R-1642-B STMH 132 48" 997.70 0 6.94' R-1642-B STMH 133 48" 998.60 0 8.76' R-1642-B CBMH 134 48" 998.98 0 7.72' R-4342 CB 135 27" 999.50 0 5.27' R-4342 CBMH 141 48" 997.67 0 4.23' R-3067 CBMH 142 48" 997.95 0 4.97' R-3360-A CBMH 143 48" 998.36 0 5.34' R-3360-A CBMH 144 48" 999.34 0 4.90' R-3360-A CB 145 2' x 3' 1000.22 0 3.16' R-3067 CBMH 146 48" 997.76 0 4.95' R-3067 CBMH 147 48" 998.13 0 5.12' R-3360-A OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURES # 191 & 193 TOP: 1001.48 ELEV: 1000.73 SLOT 2.5' x 1 INLET 997.5 TOP WEIR: 999.50 6" PERF. DTILE INV: 996.00 27" RCP BOTTOM 994.5 INV: 995.5 SEE DETAIL 6 (STO-16) FOR FURTHER DETAIL TMH 1 6 ST H 1 RIM=1003.5 RIM=1001.0 LD: 11.3' BLD: 8.0' 27" INV (S)=992.23 27" INV (S)=992.97 lip 15" INV (W)=995.04 27" INV (N)=992.97 �27" INV (E)� 92.23 C� 212' - 27" RCP @ 0.35% r • RIM: 1003.45 START:1002.95 END:1002.72 45' @ 0.50% /6" TRENCH DRAIN T1 STORM SCHEDULE STRUCTURE # DIAMETER OUTLET SUMP BUILD CASTING CBMH 148 48" 999.28 0 5.24' R-3360-A CBMH 149 48" 999.56 0 4.84' R-3360-A CBMH 150 48" 1000.45 0 4.13' R-3360-A CB 151 2' x 3' 1001.07 0 3.35' R-3067 CBMH 152 48" 1000.06 0 5.70' R-3067 CB 153 2' x 3' 1000.67 0 3.33' R-3067 CBMH 154 48" 999.24 0 4.33' R-3067 CBMH 155 2' x 3' 999.90 0 3.80' R-3067 CB 156 2' x 3' 1001.47 0 3.73' R-3067 CB 158 48" 997.67 0 3.33' R-3067 CB 159 2' x 3' 1000.50 0 3.33' R-3067 CBMH 161 48" 998.14 4 8.76' R-3067 STMH 162 48" 999.33 0 4.41' R-1642-B CBMH 163 27" 1000.65 0 3.25' R-3360-A CBMH 164 48" 998.91 4 8.99' R-3067 CB 165 2' x 3' 999.66 0 3.24' R-3067 STMH 170 48" 993.90 0 6.56' R-1642-B STMH 171 48" 995.47 0 8.88' R-1642-B OS 172 48" 995.69 0 3.92' STMH 174 48" 990.55 0 4.58' R-1642-8 STMH 175 48" 991.18 0 10.32' R-1642-B STMH 176 48" 992.23 0 11.27' R-1642-B STMH 177 48" 992.97 0 8.01' R-1642-B CB 180 27" 997.00 0 3.98. R-4342 OS 191 48" 995.50 0 4.52' OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE # 172 ELEV: 999.63 TOP WEIR: 999.00 SLOT 3' x 0.75- INLET 998.0 TOP: 1000.39 0.75' MAINTENANCE BYPASS INV: 998.0 GALVANIZED PLATE BOLTED TO WEIR 6" PERF. DTILE INV: 996.50 18" RCP BOTTOM 994.69 INV: 995.69 SEE DETAIL 6 (STO-16) FOR FURTHER DETAIL *PLEASE SEE DETAIL 7 ON C606 FOR TYPICAL CROSS SECTION FOR BASINS 8 DRAINTILE 266' - 27" RCP @ 0.35% STMH 17 RIM=1000.5 BLD: 6.6' 18" INV (S)=994.50 21" INV (W)=994.30 27" INV (N)=993 90 ST-idH RIM=1000. BLD: 6.3' 6" DT = 995.0 21" INV (W)=994.50 21" INV (E)=994.50 HWL=1 995.Q1{j10ET�J9g5 QUILES 99 -FES T5 STORM SCHEDULE STRUCTURE # DIAMETER OUTLET SUMP BUILD CASTING CBMH 200 48" 1000.69 0 2.97' R-3067 CB 201 27" 1001.71 0 5.36' R-4342 FES TABLE STRUCTURE # CONNECTED PIPE DIA. INVERT CLIII RIP RAP (CY) FES 100 30" 997.50 5 FES 130 15" 995.00 8 FES 140 30" 997.50 5 FES 157 15" 997.50 8 FES 160 21" 998.00 5 FES 173 27" 990.26 15 FES 179 21" 995.50 FES 192 24" 995.00 12 FES 194 24" 995.00 12 V m 1°000E5l WA. Mu MS LAM 009.0.002 gullet WV 5150- Fax MR I 11040, aac� w nw u.+w.nm.ex. tac<n •Fsi� ure effn•. H r S4t?n. vnu wu. { ROLE KPA:r mutt anrt error 0000.10 w.re ww.0m.. a mr»em asIII WORMER 5TPI1CRRE MTH CONCRETE MERE WAIL STG15 J STMH 171 RIM=1004.3 BLD: 8.9' 18" INV (S)=995.47 18" INV (N=995.47 C: 14 OS 17 RIM=999.: BLD: 3.9' � 6" PERF. D 6" DT: 996. 8" INV (N)=995 69 �`�'_- :3vcNar•>•�� 5T�8 RAP@0 - :O OM: •b: 6 • LET: 991 ed I-'999.63 \\2. `98 CC d (IN.) H (IN.) 9 (DEG.) y (INT Ys D MIN. MAX. 12 34 130 230 12 15 34 130 230 12 ti 18 34 130 230 12 21 44 140 220 12 a w 24 44 140 220 12 z a 27 44 140 220 12 E 30 54 150 210 12 36 54 150 210 12 1 8" k.ar...124" H 000 000 000 000 000 000 FRONT SIDE SAFL BAFFLE PANEL VI DIA. ANCHOR BOLT 2" EMBEDMENT 1" x 1" STEEL TUBE FRAME NUT W/LOCK DETAIL A WASHER Upstreamr Technologies TOP VIEW OF SUMP OUTLET CASTING 27" INSIDE DIA. 7 0 INLET SIDE VI 1 OF SUMP UPSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES INC. IS THE EXCLUSIVE LICENSEE OF THE SAFL BAFFLE .00 IN ' 97 0 �a o.an gog,FL BAFFLE STRUCTURE ..HNe4"TAIN4RD SUMP MANHOLE W/BAFFLE ern deskins eroto no Ups -train "ipc'13°2911 UPSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES INC. BMH 164 RIM=1003.9 LD 9 0' SAFL BAEFLE N/4LS_U 12" INV (S)=999.16 15" INV (W)=998;91 1003.5 BSBL BSBL 98' - 12" RCP @ 0.51% CBMH 161a BSBL 0 SAFL BAFFLE 50 100 SCALE IN FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET STORM SEWER PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex- # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CITY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY DSG/KEB DATE 08.19.2016 CHECKED BY JLL PROJECT # 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C421 12' WIDE ADA TRENCH DRAIN FRAME & COVER SHALL BE ADA, HEEL -PROOF, 12" GALVANIZED STEEL WITH H-20 LOADING HIRMIL I llllllllllll IllMilf OM @ 2,-01, O.C. (6) #4 LONG'L_ i EO© 1003 5 Q m c U1 a.' d 7 a tD W N 0 «-cc < < < < < ASK RIM: 1003.45 START:1002.95 END:1002.72 45' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T1 RIM: 1003.72 START:1003.22 END:1003.02 39' @ 0.52% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T3 > ASBL > »- RIM:1003.70 START:1003.20 END:1002.26 189' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T2 L RIM: 1003.94s RIM: 1003.93 START:1003.44- START:1003.43 END:1003.28 END:1003.24 31' @ 0.50% 38' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T6 6" TRENCH DRAIN T7 RIM: 1003.70 START:1003.20 END:1002.91 57' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T4 RIM: 1004.00 START:1003.50 END:1002.89 16" TRENCH DRAIN T8 121' @ 0.50% 4BI 111148 RIM: 1004.06 START:1003.56 END:1003.04 103' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T9 OH OL 10- Od Od lidt D6IBICtATIOTT 7uup dHO r JI -sro sro I Sdo } svo 1 sve 4IPRDW- EASEMEN>6 R66=ANI 11111=L V// ~BASIN--ifl'Y co I I sic%11W7� :-990 T II I I HWL: 1000.73 I 1 ITyIT I I 6" PERF. D,TILLEE yN 996.3 99 4I I Y �\ 1 aaaiiiyyy"' I cD / `� i I II - 1%/� 0 �/ CO INV: II �( I I \I \I, OL EXISTING WETLAND OUTLET:995.50 HWL: 1000.05 CONCRETE COLLAR AT CONNECTION 6" DRAINTILE CHEEK WALL , CURB OR RETAINING WALL PER PLANS CUT DRAI NTILE FLUSH WITH INSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE BAnt ' I� BO TOM: .0000 OU LET: 999.00 IN B�iV�999.63 \ : \ y •4 INV: 997.0: J �1 \\ RIM: 1004.08 START:1003.58 END:1003.16 83' @ 0.50% 16" TRENCH DRAIN T19 RIM: 1003.65 START:1003.15 END:1002.84 62' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T17\ RIM: 1004.28' START:1003.78 END:1002.87 183' @ 0.50% \ 6" TRENCH DRAIN T18 RIM: 1004.25 START:1003.75 END:1003.07 135 @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T10 RIM: 1004.25 \ START:1003.75 END:1003.47 55' @ 0,51 % 6" TRENCH DRAIN T11 1_ 4.111.1_ 1E4 11 111 I- 1111 71.111 35' MIN. PAVEMENT SETBACK r Dd -FROM R GT-IT-OF-WAY -d OL 03_ _ 0_1 _ Od 8' BIT TRAIL H .111 d^B sve srs srsSVO to sv4 s Od FITO RIGHT-OF-WAY HO * JH6 1� srs SVD 1 sro 1 Svo 1 I Sro I ARROWHEAD DRIVE RIM: 100 START:1 END:100 56'@0. 6" TRENCH CONCRETE COLLAR TRENCH DRAIN, SEE AT CONNECTION PLANS FOR TYPES B" PVC DRAIN TILE CORE DRILL CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE AT REQUIRED LOCATIONS. FIELD VERIFY NOTE: CUT DRAINTI'LE FLUSH WITH INSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE PRECAST CONCRETE CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE 1. ALL STORM SEWER PIPING RUNS SHALL USE RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS AT PIPE CONNECTIONS TO CATCH BASINS FOR WATERTIGHT CONNECTION PER PLUMBING CODE. E0 1003.5 BSEL RIM: 1004.33 START:1003.83 END:1003.06 154' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T20 RIM: 1004.86 START:1004.36 END:1004.05 74' @ 0.42% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T15 WI FRMTJ RIM: 1004.00 START:1003.50 END:1003.10 80' @ 0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T21 RIM: 1004.15 START:1003.65 END:1003.25 80'@0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T22 RIM: 1004.79 START:1004.29 END:1003.89 79'@0.50% 6" TRENCH DRAIN T14 RIM: 1004.37 LSTART:1003.87 END:1003.71 33' @ 0.50 6" TRENCH I� START o004.00 I / END:1003.76 6" TRENCH 6" TRENCH DRAIN T16 / / v / DRAIN T73 4.35 �� •. � l/ // 003.85 / / 3.57 50 DRAIN T12 " 0 EXISTING � t�L 9\ms ,BBB-T,^u/LESbd��tAND, B _ %j Od Od 1- 40'ROW � +SAIL EASE g gIEDICgATION ip' _• lj�'AD IAC�gNT TO vl7�fo=ANI =, 1 \� vo ova 0 50 100 FEET ENGINEERING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EVS, INC. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952-646-0236 Fax: 952.646.0290 www.evs-eng.com CITY SUBMITTAL PROJECT AUTOMOTORPLEX- MEDINA LOCATION MEDINA, MN SHEET STORM SEWER PLAN CLIENT AutoMotorPlex119 # DATE REVISION 1 09.06.16 CITY COMMENTS 2 09.23.16 CITY COMMENTS 3 10.03.16 CTTY COMMENTS 4 10.24.16 CITY COMMENTS 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 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSEPH L. LARSON DATE 08/19/2016 REGISTRATION NUMBER 44628 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DSG/KEB JLL DATE PROJECT # 08.19.2016 2016-062.1 SHEET NUMBER C422 I SCALE IN S CEO O x X XASLX x x x x x X X x x-ABA4 X x x I 3 5 x X 5 X X X x x X\ I I: �� rPi ,111) gel �,►- ,...., x x x x x x—� giti, .- sBSBL 1W1 0 0 0 ... lea ifta. 0I1/9 4 07 11W ai. � '�f '' W�� n - _ 'SBL —BSBL— — —BSBI— — —net —BSB\ ,=� O M„ Fx � 'BSBL 9SBL • • DSBL • • ESBL" " ESBL B3 �` ,\ UTLa: 999.0 + -" . r\�`.tra 1 NV7E:999.13 6 +++++•.�. 11 a1.� *• Pl CEO " + 1. I + + + + +. + BASIN 101 + + 0'4• + ( 1:74 NWL: 997.50 HWL: 1000.73 \ \ . h -,� \ NN \ lei + + \ 1 II ift, ,\ , ,___+ * ,,,„ , ')„ ...,.. , ,, , ,, i� + ,..-.., , + / 4 + � \+ + . \ � I 12 �1 � VINYL LA ` . + + i� i+ + \+ / + + + + /+ \ .\ + , , ISFW \ \ \ \ 9 ii'' � - ROCK M CEO 1 . + + + + + + + + + +\ 4- 63 t 5 J „,- po II `t 7'-' - .. � :+ +, + + + + + ± ± ± ± i►. j 7 - /��� . � �.� / ++++++++++- 0 ... .. EXISTING WETLAND- +\ \ pr,,,04 + + OIWTLET:995150 + t / . f — — — 4111,* + +IWL+1000:05 + + 410.* / I 0 \ / /' ) 1 /:*:.. ur 3 swo i .r. +++ + ++ ++,�� �� v/ .fA„iii, ..•4 , , /1/4kft1.7i..,5ii.4 * Allr -4Ik . . /... ,-- , ' /. /, , // , . ,� /. I '�.:,�: � � �i I; ASL 4�; � cJ � l , ` / !,IAA 7 1 -• 1 BHS/- Or�� f ABM Iie.i ..I� - TOR39 9 a 84, �dill i, \ .0 '''l 4 1 ill — — — — — — — — iin�ri — — — — — — — — — _ _ EXISTING \i (/yvg�,\ —.\B.. l6 7�IIII, Ta a _ ��8 T.. s. as. e a �llII.. a 8 �l. Fa �m 'las9 ���% • a .\\8 tB ®S�{--A- t�-FF� //' WG U...L11-Y.a+ \\ T\9. 6 ►.. Fesa ===Tse .f►: ...mTB'.e ...1 .... .. ��.T•Ga a� � — �/ •-- ` 0� �1 irtMIA i i �� _,,� ►tgAM; X44, Crkir! O.* era ►'fi.►1rek er4 OF* ►1% OA .** q.6 ►fw ►74 �! _lam 0 „ . . .%. (DJ \ �\ J i� i�z ►w< T.E�� I i,yvi� .i '" AYlLY�'►Y.r tiri >`s�a.,tiga 4.1; ��i ��i � � i.'I tcr1► *Qi\ s IrDY Iq r(i',v�lb 4,---4} Ib � . Ilir �_ ib di `� r r � J Oj n _ A► iginah sew - WO ir dal ling� iap ... -- - -- I--.'-_ - �. l�� r ADD N� JI10 d e t:r'{' eF, - .� .H JII d : i a di dtl "'��! H� •"^!'.. • • ` 0 .V ��, .' --- H4 dtl �i dH Stle Stlp Stlp --. 3Yp---"' STT $9p --~\ _ Sb9 se —Stle Stlp SVD Sbe Stle SVn S../ 6 Stlp Stle Stle Sbp - ,.gym _ e . ROWHFAE DRIVE a P PRE ABM PRE ,.i h ,., na—t--- 5 OJ of OJ J 1 1DJ of J of of 6 J OJ PLANT SCHEDULE: Automotorplex of Medina KEY QTY COMMON/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT REMARKS Coniferous & Deciduous Trees BHS 39 Overstory Deciduous Tree 6 BB PRE 10 PRINCETON ELM/ Ulmus americana'Pdneeton' 2.5" BB - ASL 12 AMERICAN SENTRY LINDEN/ Tilia americana'McKSenby 25" 88 ABM 21 AUTUMN BLAZE MAPLE/ Acer x freemannli'Jeffersred' 2.5" BB - SWO 24 SWAMP WHITE OAK/ Quercus bicolor 2.5" BB - CEO 79 COMMON HACKBERRY/ Celtis occidentalis 2.5" BB Coniferous & Deciduous Shrubs SFW 63 FLAME WILLOW/ Sally 'Flame' #5 CONT TOR 64 Seed Mixes TOR SPIREA/ Spiraea betulifolia'Tor' #2 CONT All plantings shall be true to name and size in accordance with American Nurseryman's Standards. Planting soil shall be a 1-1-1 mixture with 1 part peat, 1 part soil, and I pad sand. All plantings shall be guaranteed for one year (365 days) from date of acceptance. Landscape Contractor shall replace any dead or damaged plants at no additional cost to Owner during the guarantee pedod. All Wes shall be staked and wrapped as shown in details. Sod shall be cultured Kentucky bluegrass, free of weeds and dumps. Landscape Contractor 11 at at t' f' stall le and roll all sod as needed to assure a smooth turf. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 shall be staked. Any sliding of sod shall be replaced by Landscape Contractor. All shrub beds and areas indicated as receiving rock mulch shall receive a 3" deep layer of 1-1/2" River Rock over 4 mil. blade poly. All ground cover areas shall receive a 1" layer of rock mulch with no poly. All areas where sod and mulch touch shall have commercial grade black poly edger as shown nn details. All shrub beds and areas indicated as receiving wood chip mulch shall receive a 3" deep layer of 1" sq: 2" sq. hardwood chips free of leaves, twigs, and other extraneous debris over weed barrier fabric. All ground cover areas shall receive a 1° layer of wood chip mulch with no weed barrier fabric. LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale 50 25 0 25 50 100 DSCAPE EDGING & CH TYPICAL PROJECT NAME/LOCATION, J m MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 Area to Reci a an equal number of Switch Grass, Fox Sedge 8lndian Grass plugs planted 36" O.C. MNDOT SEED MIX 270 Landscape Contractor shall be responsible for locating all utilities by actual location in the field prior toany planting operation. ALUM. LOWER MAN. TED 30 YR OWENS CORNING CLASS A SHINGLE VINYL WINDOW MAN. T$D- Km .1.. OFTItrNaL Ev0WNSR�_ i� 1huu,Nlr��l.N.. ,■■. '5- :::i ,f,f.,.■irfrr•� 3'VERAHDA rED rffl.i.o•f NE. Nils l� ^ �iiii _!..•._ fff �.i■.�ooi IL P� I II�IIIii�� III WOOD FRAMED DECK -OPTIONAL AWNING MAN, TBD 1 --� � ®— Y OWNER �_•= — 3-0 STEEL HALP Linter I� illll� illlli^ � illlli1 � Ill O ®-- "" -�llll1 - '®- " a Illll�= '®" — I*111 OVERHEAD " • " DOOR OVERHEAD DOOR OVERHEAD DOUR �i -T "... d:i LAP SMART SIDING ii • .1 .• = ,•— '�•' �iiii� flfi ••' 'i!•!!. ��. — �� •• 7Nfifi yq f '.Tf!1TI fill fill �y _�i 7e s= n iiii iiii STONE MAN, TBD P'f • ! !!•■ l.Iy�/.—I• 11 • _N■•_ • _;�ii�— 1 /_• .-�1--, IwI I�I_y—, 1 ! I■ •�; i I�f •.—• h r•.ry,.rf. tiI �7 80 —0 90 —0 80 —0 _ Qnn 0.1vAMN .ae ,."._.f \ / 90' 80 ' 80 x o , ° x , - .` II j ° • MT ���� e - 8-A 8-B 8-C 8-D I 8-E � 8-F 30' I 32' 1 8-G 48' I .14 o ° 4 o o 0 °" �— H.-------�- 8-H 8-1 8-J 8-K � 1 1 8-L 8-M , @ � x � 8-N 1 ) �' \\ FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 8 i PLAN LOCATION — BUILDING , © 8 1"=20' OSITE NTS uuH.. I.cNI1VER uAN. TBD 30 YR OWENS CORNINO CLASS A SHINGLE- 1 F VINYL. WINDOW MAN. TED^_ ". WOOD FRAMED DECK°Vr flit ffff iiii MAN. OWNER N1 i����i�i�pii OPTIONALBY OWNER TBD AWNENG MAN. TBD =ICI — -_ C•IMM =W■=fN■■p ___1i1IMlIIIII. __ _'-_ - neeAWNING � I �. � 1 1 � � 1 ` 3-0 STEEL HALF LIGET 1$ E 14 IISOIA.TED OVERHEAD DOOR 1$ R 14 INSULATED OVERHEAD DOOR -il a = 1$ X I4 nNSULATED OVERHEAD DOOR " 1$ x 14 ROMA7$D OVERHEAD DOOR if X 141f1EINATED OVERHEAT' DOOR � _ Y$ z 14 m$W1,{TED OVERHEAD DOOR 1$ R 14 DI$QI.AT$D OVERHEAD DOOR } LAP SMART SIDING • u. ••f f•• _ Niles ••NI••i .. •• • _ 3�•f _ ..' ffff if•. r .t r- r. _. ... _ •. r�% .ffo ifNf STONE MAIN. TBD - 4•.l l/!■• ��.�r /wr •� •■ i'. 7l� • i�1�• •_ i: / /• •."1/.e ..f!: .. Q ACM DCvAAUM -ri STONE 1294 SQ.FT. 9%D SIDING 5822 SQ.FT. 59%O WINDOWS 736 SQ.FT. 5% GARAGE DOORS 4032 SQ.FT 27% TOTAL 15,010 SQ.FT. 100%D DATE: ADD 25, 2014 PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: no CHECKED BY: CAD SCALE. NE DWG NAME: s1 CONTACT: R DUE REVISIONS: /61 P1 85 Al .i0 vfi ca o a�d� y zoo a�dzx ✓ 000t4 d • � O O �d r Cn pp F+ O 100 N O W0IQ IQ4 [J CnW rnrA° AAAA'0 H�•-3;'3 r O • -1N�� O 0 ' c XIV •%•er be efle NibII i�°• • �t �1l�1�r •- •- '� OV • 1�1� • •' �lt� e • 1Wlt •;• �i�r • 40. loll ���ir �t, et •lit•t • °�l • ` •' 11` 1�1, tb*go°.,r et. et •-• o1,!1, •,�°• 1�tr�t � It et • � *et � ��r '• h.°4 1ib b1�r 1,*1,r • • 40Or 1h°•1i •. I44:4 Ietoet et• et � 1-1 et i I��'' ri'• r�0 - w- — r 29' 2 3/4" AVERAGE ROOF HEIGHT BUILDING AVERAGE ROOF HEIGHT TO MONITOR BC ONTRACTING CO I 700S ] S. PHONE 701-358-3010 FARGO NORTH DAKOTA 58103 FAX 701-277-9494 EC BCCONTRACTING Experienced. pehable Respons+we. 0 0 IIII IIIIIII J'V' Wets eto �1t :S *1lb • to e! IN lit dell It -lb° to -° �0 *1! I u 20'-0" AUTOMOTOPLEX woo MEDINA, MINNESOTA G 1 a 6 x G K N O a 30 YR OWENS CORNING CLASS A SHINGLE VINYL WINDOW MAN. TBD LAP SMART SIDING STONE MAN. TBD ALUM. LOUVER MAN. TBD MATT i1111:11'1 T 1I•••=�•I••=NN•I NNIN�NNNI�NIN•�IIII�NNNN IIIIE I-1111—���I����������—li MI:MIIIIMMI NNNN�NNNN�NNNI IN�NNM•N•N E NNNN •NN•=NN••=ENN• NNNN�MI aMI N••N=ENN•=ENN•—.: 'Ii�NNNN�NNNN�NNNN T..=II•I =NN•I=II•I ,-""-"" _ iiii —iiii —iiii MI—NNNI—NNNN iiii iiii iiii ,sm.... E iiii aiiiim�����m���� �.: Iy IS % 9 INSULATED ■■■■■■i�yY- 1 ■■■■■■ Y. ■■■■■■ 38 R 9 INSULATED 38 R 9 INSULATED ■■■.■ aY.�iK:� -L TwY Y. .. nY.h Y:3--- .1. :.- T-r• �•s.�� [ - - - OVERHEAD DOOR OVERHEAD DOOR q,Y T T H -�,Tg. OVERHEAD DOOR , y - 7f. .. -. `. .. .. .. rPOZOStiOilagati .'l ", - i' S 1.- Ia Yari .- . ..Y• ALUMINUM STORE ONT ALUMINUM STORE ONT s ALUMINUM STOREFRO ALUMINUM STOREFRONT OEND ELEVATION OFRONT ELEVATION C� 1 � Y-�i TIi4 I �Y Y �..�-Sc■��� OEND ELEVATION r11.11 ••••MEM BOMB NO• —MN ••• _ _ ___ NNNN ��� ••NIa ••••=mm MM •M •� NNNN NNNN—NNNI NNNN r•••— •� _ ••• ••• ••••=••�� •••• ••••NNNN �N�••••�� ����• . ms• = r �Yy Y R ALUMINUM STORpFROIg'f' 80 -0 ALUMINUM STOREFRO ALUMINUM STOREFRO ALUMINUM STORE OPT 90 -0" 250 -0- 0 REAR ELEVATION ALUMINUM STO RONT ALUMINUM STORE O ALUMINUM STOREFRONT 80 -o r REPRESENTATIVE BUILDING #4 STONE 1294 SQ.FT. 9°/0 SIDING 10657 SQ.FT. 71% WINDOWS 694 SQ.FT. 5°/0 STOREFRONTS 1782 SQ.FT 12°/0 GARAGE DOORS 486 SQ.FT 3% TOTAL 15,010 SQ.FT. 100% DATE: AUG. 25. 2016 PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: RB CHECKED BY: CAD SCALE: as DWG NAME: st CONTACT: R. BOE REVISIONS: 44 0 J` O OZ O 0 2 0 O v - 1..4 �^ W Al LORAM FIRST ADDITION C.R. DOC. NO. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 118, Range 23, lying West of the West line of the East 602 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, which lies South of a line drawn Easterly parallel with the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, from a point on the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 528 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter. Together with: That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 118, Range 23, described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter; thence Southerly along the West line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 386.41 feet; thence Easterly parallel with the North line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 368 feet; thence Southerly parallel with said West line to the center line of Hamel Road; thence Easterly along said center line to the intersection with the West line of the East 602 feet of said West Half of the Southwest Quarter, thence Northerly along said West line of the East 602 feet to said North line of the Southwest Quarter; thence Westerly along said North line to the point of beginning. Together with: That part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the West line of said Southwest 1/4 distant 386.41 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof, which point is the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence East, parallel to the North line of said Southwest 1/4, a distance of 368 feet; thence South, parallel to the West line of said Southwest 1/4, to the center line of the County Road No. 9 (Hamel Road); thence Southwesterly, along the center line of said County Road, to a point on the West line of said Section 11 distant 434.65 feet South from the point of beginning; thence North, a distance of 434.65 feet, to the point of beginning, except the Southerly 33 feet and the Westerly 33 feet thereof, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as LORAM FIRST ADDITION and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use forever the public ways, and easements for drainage and utility purposes as shown on this plat. In witness whereof said Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this day of 20 Signed: Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc., a Minnesota corporation. By Its General Counsel and Secretary. Bob C. Carlson STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 20 , by Bob C. Carlson, Its General Counsel and Secretary of Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc., a Minnesota corporation on behalf of the company. Signature of Notary Notary's Printed Name Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission Expires January 31 20 I, Michael P. Koller, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on the this plat; that all monuments depicted on the plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on the plat. Dated this day of 2016. Michael P. Koller, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 48987 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2015, by Michael P Koller. Signature of Notary Notary's Printed Name Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My Commission Expires January 31, 20 MEDINA, MINNESOTA This plat of LORAM FIRST ADDITION was approved and accepted by the City Council of Medina, Minnesota, at a regular thereof held this day of 20 . If applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been received by the City or the prescribed 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2. CITY COUNCIL OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA By Mayor By Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this day of 20 Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor By Deputy SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 38313.565 (1969), this Plat has been approved this day of 20 Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor By REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of LORAM FIRST ADDITION was filed in this office this day of 20 at o'clock _ .M. Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles By Deputy COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of LORAM FIRST ADDITION was recorded in this office this day of 20 at o'clock _ .M. Martin McCormick, County Recorder By Deputy \ 2015-002.1 ENGINEERING 1 SURVEYING I ENVIRONMENTAL 1 PLANNING SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS LORAM FIRST ADDITION 1 C.R. DOC. NO. 20 N- o � Ico oo E. LINE OF THE NW 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. 1 SO°07'49"W 2727.92 E. LINE OF THE-, SW. 1/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. UNPLA TIED SO°05'24"E 816.37 E. 1/4 COR. SEC. 11--- TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT 1 SO'OS'24' E 458.15 20.00 -' 1 20.00 o 119.21 69.46 l _ * N88'3800"E --7 NO005'24"W • Nilfi6'g4 10.00 51.13 50.68 20.00_ ' y �4 z6"E DRAINAGE S89'54'59"W- N88°38'10"E .` °' N8838.10"E N89°54'36"E J '--W. LINE OF THE E. 602 FEET - ti NI SW. 1/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 /- SD'D5'24_E 216.81 _� \�,; AND uram SEC. 71 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. ,(\0 / 0' - r2s° I 31 ,1^'� J ZD \ 0 \ f' EASEMENT . 33.87 F' N1°21'49"W 124.78 79.76 N39°13'S5"E -I>67�/ r N1'27'49"W \\ \I` N88'47'S3"E'II `\ I 21 7q 34.72- /1 \ F\ \ !rl N23'21'42"W N72'09'36"E 'I\\ \ �\ � \f/ 23.88 --DRAINAGE AND--- ,\ UTILITY EASEMENT 45.30 )0 N43'3525"E "�y y� 110 �I =11 ,I -WATERMAIN o i I EASEMENT 7 0 • 50'24'34"E 165.45 / - - S0'08'23"E 119.87 - r-' 3991 SO'12'06"E �-1--LINE PARALLEL WITH THE N. LINE o OF THE SW I/4 OF THE NW. 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. 20 29.17 -SO°22'53"E ,r WATERMAIN 8 EASEMENT CENTERLINE 10' UTILITY EASEMENT--‘ y PER DOCUMENT NO. 5389125s„. -140°22'02'W 327.08- - _ 0 -��--- --319.71 - `i-4 FOOT DRAINAGE AND NO°18'53"W 809.40 8 UTILITY EASEMENT �o WATERMAIN-�. EASEMENT "--6 FOOT TRAIL EASEMENT 58939'10"W 296.25 SS \i. Nz S � 25.42 f 534'07'18"W 29.72- j 520'30'31"W 25.24_j 55'39'39"E 2-15L \\2--/ -T -WATERMAIN / 30 53'S4"W 69.54 - 29.56 ,` / . �' .'' EASEMENT N49158'39"E \- 0"�0/ 6_61.5N 71'41 Sfi E J / o N4520'0,.,74 \ �oo / 1 / 9/ 5 --WET L4ND--, S\\' 21.91 / I I r� I I P 6p 62 .E S� 5153/ N� 10 10 I >-WATERMAIN EASEMENT vO� N/ '--N. LINE OF SW 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. -E. LINE OF THE SW. 1/4 ' SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. SO°07'49"W 2672.20 NO°05'01 "W 386.40 v� DRAINAGE AND-' UTILITY EASEMENT 1 UNPLATIED 750.40 j \;s' T _ 7� • \ I 364.000, } \ E-W. LINE OF THE E. 602 FEET l� \,o W.1/2 OF THE SW. 1/4 , SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. -DRAINAGE AND UTILTYY EASEMENT-4=4 -E. LINE OF THE ' SEC. 11 ' F THE SW. SEC. 11 \ \ �TWP. 116 N.. RGE. 23 W. d�zm3z \ N�3¢z N \ F- 19.29_ � 1 N5T41'35'E 1 ---WETLAND--' � \ 1010 N �--__- I �1 1 1m N I WATERMAIN- , - EASEMENT Im51 I I \‘L 50°6�B,L�oC ▪ o_ � _ � III---��� , I I� 20.50� �y�-. 6 �S I n K w 1 II a�loll 1 1 071. \ \ 20.50-7�!`I - f \ / �.-- NO_OS'01"W 149'84 /��/ 25.50-� -L- i� '� -�, \� /',%// 1 1 211 11 "n NO°1T52'W 418.10 w rykp N/ - O - � / t � / 7 � I / `--LINE PARALLEL WITH m 1 /, �'`/ 4' �� THE W. LINE OF THE SW 1/4 w ,�k� / �. SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. 1 /j/ 1 i, / / +. /w Imo' --LINE PARALLEL WITH THE N. LINE OF THE SW 1/4 / wATERMAIN / / SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. ( EASEMENT / "4' V. 1 10 / 110 / � I I I N / /' to 6</' 1 /; 5_y20.52 l --WET LAND--"' \OS 5�(\ 1 /"Jl m i' --- \ VVV o 1 - � �NO°19'34"W 200,51-- - NO°33'34 W 185.91- - ___ 632 392.73 4FOOT GRAINAGEAND -� NU°17'52"W UTILITY EASEMENT 66: 7� -1 L-4FOOTDRAINAGEAND 386.41# -W` -TM- •y ` 4 • - C UTILITY EASEMENT NO°17'$2"W --0- -1M- � , I �-6 FOOT TRAIL < °On a e 33.00 <III S 8 EASEMENT NO°1T52"W 400.00 8 EXCEPTION -�A NO°17'52"W 386.41 436.32 (434.65 DEED) Po M (CO RD.NO 118) 82z 73 /- 089°3707"E NO 3500"W 251.34 - 303.65- - 0°77'S3NV 331.20- - _- 0-6 FOOT TRAIL EASEMENT 40.00 ARROWHEAD DRIVE a 8 s 528' NO°18'53"W 1864.99 j_ 1 1- - L-NW. COR. SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. W. LINE OF NW. 1/4-' SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. ■ BASIS OF BEARING NO°18'53"W 808.99 THE ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SW 1/4, SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 118 NORTH, RANGE 23 WEST, WHICH IS ASSUMED TO BEAR S 89° 48' 06" E. UNPLATTED GRAPHIC SCALE 60 0 30 60 1 inch = 60 feet. L-NW. COR. OF SW. 1/4 SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT ■ SECTION MAP Na9nz'3rE Found 2681.89 -T-mod elf Site' found' S89 48'O6"E 2660 65 G' MEL RO S w n� 5 IyyI f°u�ntl�6a9'4J'38"E � 2640.69 found F.. N Sec. 11, Twp. 118 N., Rge. 23 W. 5th Principal Meridian NOT TO SCALE W. LINE OF SW. 1/4-' SEC. 11 TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. UNPLA TTED ■ LEGEND • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND 0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET W/CAP STAMPED"RLS 48987" DENOTES CAST IRON MONUMENT FOUND 2 IN 40 11 1 HAMEL ROAD I 1.--CENTERLINE OF I HAMEL ROAD II �19.55 888°03'52"W co to: N eL 1-6 N zol� • ' ~ m `n 0_ N Ioo U C.) � oo w x m co CO I 33 1 40 rn I 1 J J O z J J w CO I SW. COR. SEC. 11--, TWP. 118 N. RGE. 23 W. FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT SO°77'52"E 1849.21 ear"-66.1 ENGINEERING I SURVEYING I ENVIRONMENTAL I PLANNING SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS 1 November 2016 MAS LON Andrew N.Jacobson Direct Dial: (612) 672-8333 Direct Fax: (612) 642-8333 andyjacobson@maslon.com maslon.com Mayor Mitchell and City Council Members CITY OF MEDINA c/o Scott Johnson, City Administrator 20152 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Proposed Automotorplex Project, Medina, Minnesota Dear Mayor Mitchell and City Council Members: This letter is a further supplement to Dellcroft Farm's letter to the Planning Commission dated October 11, 2016 and prior letter to the City Council dated October 27, 2016. In addition to Dellcroft Farms' previously stated concerns, the City Council no formal action by the City Council is appropriate or prudent as: (a) the City's PUD and plat standards have not been satisfied with respect to the proposed project, and (b) based on the size and scope of the project, an EAW has not been prepared for the project (an EAW for this project appears to be a mandatory requirement under Minnesota Administrative Rules Section 4410.4300). Thank you in advance for your consideration of Dellcroft Farms' concerns. Sincerely, Andy/Jacobson cc: Jeanne Corwin, Dellcroft Farms Thomas Borman, Dellcroft Farms 4820-2196-9467 MASLON LLP 3300 WELLS FARGO CENTER ! 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET i MINNEPOLIS; MN 55402-4140 1 612.672.3200 roASLoN com MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: October 26, 2016 MEETING: November 1, 2016 City Council SUBJ: Ellis and Nancy Olkon— Lot Size Variance-2362 Willow Dr. Public Hearing Overview of Request Ellis and Nancy Olkon have requested a lot size variance to allow the subdivision of their approximately 21 acre parcel into two parcels. The applicant would also need to request a preliminary plat in order to carry through with the subdivision. There are a number of technical matters which are not completed yet for their subdivision application which will require additional costs in order to carry through. Since the subdivision is contingent upon the variance, staff thought it would be worthwhile to consider the variance before the applicant accrues extra costs to complete the subdivision request. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Willow Drive and County Road 24. The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) and is guided Rural Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. Surrounding properties are all Rural Residential as well. The property contains a home and three outbuildings on the northern portion of the property on the top of the hill. The property slopes steeply from the north to the south, where the southern half of the property includes a wetland. A grove of trees is located along a drainage way in the north central portion of the property and most of the remaining property is pastured. An aerial of the subject site can be found at the top of the following page. Analysis As noted above, the property is zoned Rural Residential (RR). The following table summarizes the dimensional standards of the district and the proposed lots. Required Proposed Lot 1 Proposed Lot 2 Minimum Lot Area 5 acre contiguous suitable soils 1.3 acre suitable 1.5 acre suitable (suitable soils) Gross Lot Area N/A 10.49 acres 10.49 acres Minimum Lot Width 300 feet 250 feet 395 feet Minimum Lot Depth 200 feet 1135 feet 1135 feet Ellis and Nancy Olkon Lot Size Variance Page 1 of 5 November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting The applicant has requested a variance to reduce the minimum lot size of the proposed lot from 5 acres of contiguous suitable soils on both lots to 1.3 acres and 1.5 acres, respectively. The 5-acre suitable soil requirement is referenced in both the Subdivision and Zoning ordinances. Each of these ordinances include a separate set of criteria by which a variance request is reviewed. Section 825.45, Subd. 2 establishes criteria by which the City reviews zoning variance requests: (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In order for a practical difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board Ellis and Nancy Olkon Page 2 of 5 November 1, 2016 Lot Size Variance City Council Meeting shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. In addition, the Subdivision Ordinance establishes the following criteria for variances to the subdivision ordinance. (a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result if the strict letter of this ordinance were carried out. (b) The conditions upon which the application for the variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not common to other properties within the City. (c) The hardship is related to the requirements of these regulations and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (d) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The applicant describes in their narrative why they feel the criteria are met. Council Members are encouraged to review the narrative in order to determine Generally, the applicant states that they were told they could subdivide their property back in 1986 and that financial needs provide a difficulty and hardship. The applicant also references a 1999 amendment to the rural residential zoning requirements which increased the requirement from 2-acres of suitable soils to 5-acres. The zoning code explicitly states that economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. Instead, the circumstances surrounding the property are to be considered, and must be unique, and not common to other properties. Staff believes that many properties which may (or may not) have been able to be subdivided prior to the 1999 Rural Residential code change are similarly situated. The Rural Residential land use within the Comprehensive Plan establishes a maximum density of one lot per 10 gross acres. If approved, the proposed variance would not result in development in excess of this maximum density requirement. Staff believes that a variance which would allow for development in excess of 1 lot per 10 acres would further not meet the criteria. As a result of the steep slopes and wetlands on the property, the portion of the lots which are most practical to build upon are limited. These areas are close to adjoining property lines, Willow Drive, or the wetland on the property. Each include approximately an acre on the top and bottom of the slope, of which a fairly significant portion would be reserved for septic sites. Ellis and Nancy Olkon Page 3 of 5 November 1, 2016 Lot Size Variance City Council Meeting Other Considerations As noted above, there are many more items which would need to be considered for the subdivision. Most importantly, the wetland delineation has not been submitted for review and approval. This will need to be completed before the subdivision can be considered. Also, proposed Lot 1 does not meet minimum Lot Width requirements from County Road 24. It appears that adequate excess width exists in Lot 2 in order to shift the lot line within the wetland area. This would not impact the buildable areas of the lots. In addition, access would need to be provided for the eastern lot to a public roadway. Hollybush Road to the east is a private road which the applicant has not provided proof of the ability to utilize, and the large wetland separates the private road from the upland portion of the lot. The other alternative would be for a driveway easement over Lot 1 for the benefit of Lot 2. The proposed lots would be served by a private well and individual septic system. The applicant has identified a primary and secondary septic site for each of the proposed lots, which the building official indicated appeared sufficient. The existing buildings on the property also would not appear to meet setback requirements from the proposed dividing line. Provisions would need to be made to realign the subdivision or to demolish the structures. It appears that less than 200 feet exist between the structures, so insufficient space exists to maintain one as an animal structure (requiring a 150 foot setback) and also the other structure as a storage building (requiring a 50 foot setback). Review Criteria/Planning Commission Recommendation The review criteria for variances were discussed above, along with comments from staff. Staff does not believe the criteria have been met primarily because the circumstances seem as if they would be common across the Rural Residential zoning district and not unique to the property. In addition, it seems that as if the variance would not be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance of providing ample space for future septic systems in addition to other expected improvements (homes, outbuildings, etc.) upon the sites. As noted above, the City Council would need to make all of the findings in order to approve of the variance request. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance request at their September 13 meeting. Draft minutes from the review are attached for reference. The Planning Commission unanimously found that the criteria were not met and recommended denial of the request. Specifically, the Commission noted that the circumstances did not appear to be unique to the property, but were common for parcels in the rural residential area. Additionally, the variance would not be in harmony with the intent of the ordinance and could confer upon the owner special privileges not available for other owners. Ellis and Nancy Olkon Page 4 of 5 November 1, 2016 Lot Size Variance City Council Meeting If the City Council instead finds that all of the criteria have been met, staff has provided potential conditions to be included related to the variance, in addition to the conditions related to the subdivision: 1) The variance is contingent upon approval of a preliminary plat showing that all other relevant requirements are met. 2) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the plat and variance. Potential Council Action The City Council, serving as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, should first hold a public hearing on the variance request. The City received one favorable written comment ahead of the Planning Commission review, which is attached for reference, and did not receive additional comment through the Planning Commission meeting. If the City Council concurs with the findings of the Planning Commission, the following motion would be in order: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the variance request based upon the findings noted by the Planning Commission. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Excerpt from DRAFT 9/13/2016 Planning Commission minutes 3. Comment received from J. Mallet 4. Building Official Comments 5. City Engineer Comments 6. Applicant Narrative 7. Preliminary Plat received by the City 9/1/2016 Ellis and Nancy Olkon Page 5 of 5 November 1, 2016 Lot Size Variance City Council Meeting Project: LR-16-187— Olkon Variance and Preliminary Plat The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 8/1/2016 8/1/2016 3 Yes Y Fee 8/1/2016 8/1/2016 1 Y Y $5000 Mailing Labels 8/3/2016 8/1/2016 8 Y Y Narrative 8/8/2016 8/8/2016 2 Y Y Narrative -Updated 10/21/2016 10/21/2016 11 Y Y Survey/Prelim Plat 8/1/2016 7/15/2016 1 Y Survey/Plat — Updated 8/23/2016 1 Y N Survey/Plat— Updated 8/30/2016 8/28/2016 1 Y N Survey/Plat — Updated 9/1/2016 9/1/2016 1 Y N Septic Designs 8/1/2016 7/29/2016 9 Y Y Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Building Official Comments 8/10/2016 1 Y City Engineer Comments 8/9/2016 1 Y Hennepin County Comments 8/3/2016 1 Y Incomplete Planning Commission report 9/8/2016 5 11 pages with attachments Legal Notice Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes J. Mallet Letter 9/13/2016 Y Planning Commission minute excerpt 9/13/2016 PCExcerpt Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/13/2016 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — Ellis and Nancy Olkon — Variance from the Contiguous Suitable Soil Requirements for a Subdivision at 2362 Willow Drive Finke presented a request for a lot size variance at 2363 Willow Drive, noting that this request is part of a larger request but advised that the plat was not ready for review and explained that this decision will be helpful to determine if the applicant should move forward. He stated that the subject site and all surrounding sites are zoned rural residential and therefore require five acres of contiguous suitable soils per lot. He stated that the five acres of contiguous suitable soils requirement is the zoning tool the City uses for the rural residential land use, noting that the maximum density within the Comprehensive Plan for the rural residential zone is one lot per ten acres. He stated that the subject site does include a fair amount of wetland and steep slopes, which make soils unsuitable for septic systems. He stated that there are criteria that must be met, specific for variances and within the subdivision ordinance, in order to approve a variance. He reviewed the criteria necessary to qualify for a variance from the zoning criteria. He noted that the subdivision variance criteria are slightly different and reviewing those criteria, noting there are commonalities. He stated that specific to the zoning criteria it states that economic considerations alone should not be considered as difficulty. He stated that if the Commission finds that the criteria are met for a variance there are other issues that would need to be discussed and resolved in order for the plat to move forward, such as wetland locations. He stated that staff believes that the fact that the property was divided prior to the contiguous suitable soils rule would be fairly common in the rural residential district and not unique to the property. He stated that the applicant is present to answer any questions. Barry stated that the applicant's letter states that a variance was granted in the subdivisions for Bueller and Stonegate and asked the lot sizes for those developments. Finke replied that Stonegate was a Conservation Design Planned Unit Development and therefore a variance was not obtained, noting that those lots were about two acres in size. He stated that in the Bueller case the size was 3.5 acres of suitable soils, noting that subdivision only resulted in one buildable lot and an outlot. Albers stated that it would be his assumption that you could not build below and pump up the hill to a septic site. Finke replied that it could possibly be done but noted that is a steep slope. He stated that with really careful design it would be possible to accommodate a rural lot on two acres. Albers stated that his other concern would be that some of the two -acre lot would be consumed with the driveway and the setbacks, noting that lot two would be pushed towards the gully. Finke confirmed that the setback is 50 feet. He stated that septic mounds are likely 60x100 each. V. Reid asked how many pieces of land would have a similar situation potentially. Finke stated that it would be difficult to generalize since each situation would be different. V. Reid asked how many people in the city would have a similar type of situation. Finke stated that in order to answer the question, you would have to determine what similarities you are comparing and to what alternative. You could look at development potential given two different alternatives. 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/13/2016 Meeting Minutes V. Reid said she was curious approximately how many people were in the same boat. Finke replied that there are 108 parcels in the rural residential district that are 20 acres or more in size. He stated that more common than not there are limitations with the soils that suggest their dividability would be limited. He stated that more than half of them would be more subdividable if the City considered a 10-acre minimum rather than suitable soils. He stated that the suitable soils calculation has been used since the 1980's and the early 1990's the size was increased to five acres of suitable soils. He stated that while there could be discussion on the policy in the future, that is not the question in front of the Commission tonight. Ellis Olkon stated that he knows some of the Commission and Council as he has been on the Park Commission for three years. He stated that when the conversation began in 1987 when his neighbor to the east was dealing with the Council in order to subdivide what is now Hollybush. He stated that the City Council told him that he could not have his subdivision unless his neighbors, the Olkons, granted him an easement, which would amount to % of an acre of land free. He stated that the Council persuaded him that it would be beneficial to the City to go forward with the easement for Hollybush and told him that when he desired he would be able to subdivide his property in half. He stated that he is basing his request on promises that he was given at that time, noting that he has been a resident of Medina for 31 years. He stated that he has sat down with and explained his situation to each and every member of the City Council and began those discussions with the members of the Council four years ago. He stated that four years ago he was told that he would have to be patient because of the situation with Stonegate. He stated that ultimately the Council caved on Stonegate and there is precedent. He stated that he has 21.8 acres and of that % acres is an easement for Hollybush. He stated that he is not setting precedent but simply asking to subdivide his property. He stated that the City made a lot of money in taxes from the Hollybush development noting that he did not receive any money for that easement. He asked that this issue be referred to the City Council to grant the variance. He stated that if the body does not want to recommend the variance he asked that the Commission refer the item to the Council with no recommendation. He recognized that Finke is simply abiding by the rules in his staff report and believed that his request should be grandfathered in because of the precedent set by Stonegate. R. Reid asked if there is any agreement in writing from the 1980's. Olkon replied that he does not have written agreements but could get affidavits. Murrin asked why the property owner wants to subdivide rather than sell as is. Olkon replied that by subdividing he would be able to generate an additional $300,000 to $600,000 that would assist with his wife's medical bills, noting that she is a quadriplegic and her hospital costs for eight weeks was $1,500,000 and the costs for personal care annually are $100,000. Murrin asked for clarification on when the easement was granted. Olkon replied that he began discussions with the Council in 1986 and granted the easement in 1988. He stated that they were later made aware, in 2008, that an ordinance was passed in 1999 by a different mayor and council to change the suitable soils requirement. Barry asked how much suitable the applicant has. Olkon stated that there is enough property and suitable soil to build two five bedroom homes, noting that one home is still there. 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/13/2016 Meeting Minutes Barry stated that in 1988 it appears the applicant was still aware that a variance would be necessary. Olkon stated that he had a promise and agreement from the Council members that he would be allowed to subdivide. He noted that many homes were built on one acre or less. He acknowledged that he may have needed a variance should he wanted to subdivide in 1988. Finke stated that the history is a bit complicated on suitable soils, as prior to 1988 there were two classifications of suitable soils, conventional and innovative. Olkon asked that Finke read aloud a letter from his next door neighbor, which was unsolicited. He noted that his neighbor, who would be most affected, is in favor. It was noted that the Commission received a copy of the letter. He acknowledged that he should have gotten his promises in writing from the Council in 1988. Chair V. Reid stated that the letter from Judy Mallet is entered into the record. Finke stated that there are no suitable soils in the easement area, which means the easement and the subdivision of Hollybush is largely irrelevant to whether the Olkon lot is subdividable. Olkon stated that he could grant an easement from lot one to lot two for access. He stated that the other subdivision issues could be worked out but the issue tonight is simply the variance. He stated that the soils consultant has stated that there are suitable soils to build two large five -bedroom homes with two large septic systems. V. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. No comments made. V. Reid closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Barry asked the location of the current septic system. Olkon identified the current location, noting that the system is 49 years old and would most likely need to be replaced soon. He identified two septic site locations that could be used. V. Reid stated that she personally does not think it would cause a problem but noted that the problem is that the criteria would have to be met. Murrin noted that the suitable soils would still not be met and advised that previous decisions do not set precedent for future variances. She advised that Stonegate was a Conservation Design PUD. She stated that comments made by the Council in 1986 were not made in writing and therefore the Commission should follow the Comprehensive Plan guidelines. Olkon noted that some of the properties in Stonegate are less than two acres in size. V. Reid stated that the item that concerns her is whether the variance would provide special privileges to the applicant over others with similar lands. R. Reid agreed that there are numerous property owners that would like variance from the suitable soils requirement. 3 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 9/13/2016 Meeting Minutes V. Reid stated that she feels bad that there was no payment for the easement that Mr. Olkon provided. She stated that the variance cannot be issued for economic hardship and reviewed the other criteria that are not met. Murrin stated that the economic hardship criteria clearly states that the main reason cannot be for economic gain and the applicant has stated that he would like to subdivide so that he could get more money when he sells. R. Reid stated that the job of the Planning Commission is to review a case against the rules and therefore she does not believe that the Commission could grant the variance as the criteria are not met. Albers agreed with the comments of R. Reid and noted that this would grant special privilege. He stated that there are other properties similarly situated and he would imagine that more of these requests would come forward if this was approved. He did not believe the request meets the requirements for a variance. Barry agreed that special personal circumstances have to be taken out and the Commission has to review the request against the requirements and therefore the request does not meet the requirements. White stated that she would also agree and noted that although the Commission may want to consider the special circumstances, this request is not even a minimal variance request and is far from meeting the criteria for a variance. R. Reid asked if the Commission must issue a recommendation for approval or denial, as the applicant had asked the Commission to take no action. Finke noted that there did not appear to be a reason for the Commission to not make a recommendation. V. Reid replied that the Commission must make a decision and the Council can consider the other circumstances during their review. She stated that as much as she may like to recommend approval she simply cannot. Motion by R. Reid seconded by Albers, to recommend denial of the variance from the contiguous suitable soil requirements for a subdivision at 2362 Willow Drive. Motion carries unanimously. Finke reported that the City Council will hear this request on October 4th at 7:00 p.m. 4 Dusty Finke From: Scott Johnson Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:23 PM To: Dusty Finke Cc: 5pu5b15ic@usa.net Subject: FW: Olkon variance Hi Dusty, Please add Judy and Chris Mallett's comments to the public record for the Planning Commission tonight. Thanks, Scott From: MIS [mailto:5pu5b15ic@usa.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:20 PM To: Scott Johnson Subject: Olkon variance Dear Scott, Because we are unable to attend the hearing tonight, we would appreciate your providing this note to the City of Medina Planning Commission for tonight's hearing on item #2 "Ellis and Nancy Olkon". The Olkons are our southern neighbor whose northern boundary is completely contiguous with our southern boundary. We have known the Olkons since 2007 when we became Medina residents and their neighbor. We do not pretend to understand the issues involved in granting or denying the Olkons' request for a variance, but we do understand that the City of Medina is involved in an intensive and extensive review and adoption of a New Comprehensive Plan that will affect the future of Medina for years to come. As residents, we rely on the Planning Commission and City Council to make decisions in the best interests of the city as a whole and of its constituents. Thus we ask you to please extend every courtesy in reviewing the Olkons' request, particularly considering their extreme personal circumstances. If there is a stone to lift, please lift it to see if there is any relief that can be granted to them and still stay within the borders of the Commission's and Council's citywide responsibilities. Thank you for your consideration. Judy and Chris Mallett 2492 Willow Drive, Medina MN 55340 i METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES, INC. Loren Kohnen, Fres. August 10, 2016 TO: Debra Petersen FROM: Loren Kohnen RE: Preliminary Plat Lot Split 2363 Willow Drive N. (763) 479-1720 FAX (763) 479-3090 Mtrowst76@aol.com 1) I have reviewed the septic design provided for what would be a new lot. 2) The septic design meets all the requirements of M.P.C.A. Rules, 7080, 7081, 7082. 3) Roth sites must be fenced and protected before any construction or site work is started, and remains in place. 4) A new design for a mound style system which will match the requirement for the proposed home to be built, will be required. LK:jg Box 248, Loretto, Minnesota 55357 Dusty Finke From: Tom Kellogg <TKellogg@wsbeng.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:02 AM To: Debra Peterson; Batty, Ronald H. Cc: Jim Stremel Subject: RE: Olkon Application - LR-16-187 Deb, My preliminary comments are shown below. Please let me know if you have questions or need anything else. • Willow Drive and County Road 24 rights -of -way should be dedicated as part of this plat. • The roadway easement discussed in their narrative should be shown on the plat. • It appears there are wetlands on the property. All wetlands should be delineated and appropriate easements over these wetlands should be shown on the plat. • 5' interior and 10' exterior perimeter drainage and utility easements should be shown on the plat. • The plat should be submitted to Hennepin County for their review and comment. • The City should consider obtaining additional right-of-way along Willow Drive for the future trail on the shoulder shown on the Future Facility Planning Map. Thanks, Tom Tom Kellogg Senior Project Manager d: 612-209-5113 lc: 612-209-5113 WSB & Associates, Inc. I Oddfellows Building 23 2nd Street SW Suite #200 I Rochester, MN 55902 WSB nilAT °FIBI1 2wEK This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. From: Debra Peterson [mailto:Debraftci.medina.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 10:01 AM To: Tom Kellogg; Batty, Ronald H. Subject: Olkon Application - LR-16-187 Please review the attached application request for a Variance and Preliminary Plat. The Narrative is new. Please review by the 12tn Vara Pazr3on .988ociat¢ Planna City of MRdina 2 Ellis and Nancy Olkon 2526 Willow Dhive North + Medina, MN 553400 Home: 763-475-2526 • Cell: 612-222-5055 E-Mail: ellisolkon@gmail.com Date: August 8, 2016 City of Medina Planning Commission 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55430 Dear Planning Commission: um We are writing to request that the City of Medina Planning Commission recommend variances from current city ordinances to allow us to subdivide our 2I.8-acre property (2362 Willow Drive North) in half and grant a preliminary plat. Such action is fundamentally fair, follows through on promises the City of Medina made to us in 1986-1987, and is in keeping with the "undue hardship provision" in Section 820.59, Subd. 1 "Standards for Variances". We explain each of these reasons in more detail below after providing some background on the property in question. We have owned our home since May of 1985. In 1986, our neighbor to the east, Thomas Ogdahl, told us that he had been in negotiations with the City of Medina to subdivide his approximately 50 acres of land to build seven to eight homes of about 7 acres each. The City Council, then, told Ogdahl that it would allow him to subdivide the land only if the driveway connected the housing development to Willow Drive South. For that to happen, we agreed to give Ogdahl an easement on about three quarters of an acre of our land to build the driveway. We were very reluctant to do so at first, not seeing how this would benefit either the City of Medina or us. After all, we had moved to Medina in 1985 partly for its rural character, and this developmentt to our immediate east would be a departure from that. But Mayor Tom Anderson and several members of the City Council persuaded us otherwise 1) arguing that that the housing development (now, Hollybush) would bring substantial tax revenues into the City and 2) promising that if Hollybush was built, we would in turn be able to subdivide our 21.8 acres of land in half on a newly constructed driveway "when we got old and grey". For these reasons, we agreed to deed this easement without any monetary consideration. Yet, the City of Medina and Ogdahls have both been enriched by millions of dollars as a result of this easement. In 2008, twelve years later after we granted the easement, we retained Gronberg Surveyors to conduct a survey in anticipation of going forward with a plat subdivision as promised. It was then that we discovered that, in 1999, a different City Council enacted Code 826.25, requiring 5-acres of contiguous soil acceptable to the City of Medina. Unfortunately, we never received notice of the proposed code as required by law. The contiguous soil code should no longer be the applicable standard. After considerable litigation, the Planning Commission and Medina City Council have granted both the Stonegate and Buehler developments, a variance from the 5-acre requirement. In 2015, Stonegate was granted a variance from (�l Code 826.25 and allowed to build 41 homes on about 170 acres of land. In 2015, the Buehler was granted a variance on 3.70 acre of land. Therefore, for reasons of fundamental fairness, we should receive the same variances that were granted to both Stonegate and Buehler. We also think that our case qualifies for the "undue hardship provision" in Subd. 1 Standards for Variances from Section 820.59. The hardship provision stems from Nancy's illness, and continued care. In 2012, after finishing a last round of chemotherapy for a reoccurrence of lymphoma, Nancy was bitten by a mosquito and infected with West Nile Virus while gardening in our backyard. The Virus caused her brain to swell, she was admitted into the intensive care unit, went into a coma for 2 months, and hospitalized for six months more.. When Nancy came home in March of 2013, she was wheelchair bound. We have had to fit our house to make it handicap accessible, and spent $500,000 on PCA care not covered by insurance. For the last two years, we have been trying to sell our house so that we can continue to afford the care Nancy needs to live in dignity. Subdividing the property would allow us to sell our house, expedite our move, and continue to provide Nancy the care she needs. During this difficult period, several City Council members generously attempted to help us get the variance to subdivide our land, and counseled us to be patient while the Planning Commission and City Council considered the case of Stonegate. We have remained patient, but for reasons of fundamental fairness, for the sake of the integrity of the City Council and its prior assurances to us, and to allow us to continue to provide Nancy with the care she needs, we ask that the City of Medina grant the variance from Code 826.25 - as has already been granted to Stonegate and Buehler - and subdivide our property in half and grant a preliminary plat for purposes of sale. Also in keeping with Section 820.59 Subd. 1(d). Standards for Variances, "The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located." The attached soil testing concluded that two areas are shown on both east and west parcels to support a 5 bedroom homee which allows more than enough space for a primary and secondary drain field. Dividing our land in half would neither alter the rural character nor affect the natural beauty of the area - all reasons for why we moved to the City of Medina, why we have loved to live here, and would remain if not for Nancy's condition. Thank you for taking the time to consider our case. Sincerely, Ellis and Nancy Olkonn 2362 Willow Drive North Medina, MN 2 Date: October 21, 2016 Medina City Council 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55430 Re: Supplemental Narrative Dear Mayor Mitchell and Honorable City Council Members: We are writing to request that the City Council grant variances from current city ordinances to allow us to subdivide our 21.8-acre property (2362 Willow Drive North) in half and grant a preliminary plat. Such action is fundamentally fair, follows through on promises the City of Medina made to us in 1986-1987, and is in keeping with the soil standards as established by governmental agencies to protect the health, safety, and welfare of city residents. As the 1986 minutes of the City Council minutes [Exhibits 3 — 6] clearly demonstrate, Thomas °gland's', our neighbor to the east, had a difficult journey to establishing the Hollybush Hills development. In 1986, he had been involved in protracted negotiations with his neighbors and the City of Medina to build the Hollybush Hills subdivision. The Hollybush Hills was to be on 50+ acres of land, subdivided to build eight homes of about 4 to 6 acres each. For that to be granted, the City Council told °gland that he needed a driveway connecting Hollybush Hills Subdivision to Willow Drive South on land we own. We initially refused the °glands' many requests. As a result, the Oglands tried to persuade several owners on Mohawk Drive (Exhibit 6) on his east to grant an easement. On April 20, 1988, we relented and granted the easement for no monetary consideration. The reasons for this are explained in our letter to the Planning Commission; in short, we had granted the easement as a result many promises by Mayor Tom Anderson, Wilfred Sherer, Anne Theis and several other city officials in at least one open Council meeting and several private meetings. Unfortunately, the 1986 City Council minutes do not reflect these promises because in the 1980s all discussions and testimony was not recorded and went into the record in a short summary fashion (Ex. 1 & 2 affidavits of Ellis and Nancy Olkon). If the City refuses to grant us a Variance, we would be injured because of our detrimental reliance by past City Council elected officials and others. There are other compelling reasons to grant us this Variance. Thomas Ogland is referred to as Thomas Ogdahl in the letter to the Medina Planning Commission, dated August 8, 2016. 1. Dividing our land in half would neither alter the rural character nor affect the natural beauty of the area as the two plats will be over 10 acres each -- within the meaning of the City's comprehensive plan which establishes a maximum density of one lot per 10 gross acres. 2. This would not establish a precedent, as ours is a unique situation based upon a promise of a plat subdivision to the Olkons in consideration of the Olkons granting an easement to the Oglands. 3. Our neighbors support our request. a. The Planning Commission sent out 35 notices for the September 13t meeting. No one appeared in opposition and the neighbors most affected supported our request for a Variance (See letter to Scott Johnson dated 9/13/2016).� g 4. We never received notice of the 1999 proposed Ordinance requiring 5 contiguous acres of suitable soil and the grandfathering clause(See Ex. 7). 5. Our updated soil survey, proposed plat division, and wetlands delineations clearly state that we have suitable soils to build two 5 bedroom homes on the east and west with two suitable sites for two septic systems on both the east and west sites. Please see Loren Kohnen report. According to Minnesota Rule 7080, "the minimum acceptable contiguous soil area is generally (1) acre, which allows enough space for a primary and secondary drain field." 6. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. 7. There is recent precedent for the City Council granting us this variance. For example, the City of Medina has settled litigation with Deerhill (previously known as Stonegate) that allows for 41 plats with about 2 acres each and granted last year a variance on the Buehler property of 3.5. Even though the Planning Commission was divided 3 to 3. 8. See attached response to City Planner report and Planning Commission meeting of September 13, 2016. Ellis and Nancy Olkon 2362 Willow Drive North Medina, MN. 55340 [1] Thomas Ogland is mistakenly referred to as Thomas Ogdahl in the letter to the Medina Planning Commission. RESPONSE TO CITY PLANNER REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 1. If the Council minutes were complete, we would be confident that it would support our case. Unfortunately, the minutes are in summary form. An hour of the meeting is reduced to a few sentences. Nevertheless, the minutes -- when taken in their totality -- support our claim that promises were made that we would be able to subdivide our property at the appropriate time. 2. There is nothing in his report stating that we are grandfathered in. 3. Mr. Finke advocates that other property owners are similarly situated without giving evidence or statistics to substantiate this claim. RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 1. At the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Finke responded to a question of how many people are similarly situated by replying "that there are 108 parcels...". This wrongly implied that 108 property owners would be able to apply for a subdivision if ours was granted. But Mr. Finke supplied no evidence to this effect. Indeed, one week later, Finke stated at a meeting with Robin Benson, Administrator Scott Johnson, and myself that 108 parcels was a mere guess and, in fact, he does not know the actual number of similarly situated property owners. 2. Mr. Finke also errantly told the Commission that they had to either recommend approval or denial, when in fact the Commission could have issued " no recommendation" to the City Council. Finke noted that "there did not appear to be a reason for the Commission to not make a recommendation." At the Commission meeting, based on Finke's statement, Chair Victoria Reid noted before the vote "that the Commission must make a decision and the Council can consider other circumstances during their review." She stated that as much as she would like to recommend approval, she simply cannot. At the meeting a week later, Finke admitted that the Commission could come up with a "no recommendation". AFFIDAVIT OF NANCY K. OLKON I, Nancy K. Olkon, being first duly sworn do depose and state: 1. I had numerous meetings with Thomas Ogland and Wilfred Hunk Scherer in 1986, 1987, and 1988 as it relates to the proposed Hollybush development. 2. I attended at least one Council meeting where it was discussed by a Medina city official whose name I cannot remember that if my husband and I granted an easement to the Ogland's we would be able to subdivide our 21 plus acres in half in the distant future when we got elderly. 3. I am currently disabled and it would be difficult for me to attend your meetings on our request for a Variance. 4. We would have never signed the easement on April 20, 1988 if there had not been promises both at a Council meeting and in private meetings. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Dated: K 11� Nancy K. on o Subscribed and sworn to before me This 2 �S day of September, 2016 � � A� ROB ERT TAYLOR BAGGOTT NOTARY PUBLIC- Jan. ► 9 ABC Jan i . 31. 2021 m. _ Notary Public AFFIDAVIT OF ELLIS OLKON I, Ellis Olkon, being first duly sworn do depose and state: 1. In early 1986 and 1987, I had numerous meetings with Mayor Thomas Anderson, Councilpersons Wilfred Scherer and Anne Theis, City Planning Commission member Stephen Schmit, both privately and publicly, as it related to Thomas and Phyllis Oglands application to subdivide their 50 acres for a housing development, later known as Hollybush; 2. Thomas Ogland, my neighbor on my east, made numerous visits to my home in early 1986 discussing his desire to subdivide his land into 8 plats before and after his other alternative on Mohawk Drive was also denied by several landowners to his east; 3. Nancy and I refused all of his requests in 1986; 4. We granted the easement in early 1988 after we were convinced by city officials that the easement would benefit ourselves as well as the Oglands and the City of Medina; 5. After the September 13, 2016 planning commission meeting, I examined the 1986, 1987, and 1988 council minutes and, to my dismay, the minutes were skeletal accounts of the meetings and did not include the text clearly demonstrating that the City of Medina had granted us a future subdivision. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Subscribed and sworn to before me this —day of October, 2016 fti2c41: )krA,‘ Ellis Olkon ROBERT A KOCH NOMRELIC -AO U My Cart rion Exlres Jan. 31. 2020 2 graaients anu ulLClltvaa �< <a .. ..•. .� �_.." _-__ ..--_- __-- _-._.. . was to calculate the leachate/groundwater dilution and travel time. He further suggested that no garbage be allowed in Areas 2, 3, 4, until the items are completed. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Heideman to authorize the City Clerk t6 write a letter to Woodlake informing them of the recommendations made by Bruce Liesch and Associates and direct them to proceed according to those recommendations. Motion declared carried Moved by Heideman, seconded by Scherer to note receipt of the Woodlake Sanitary Service letter, dated June 3, 1986, concerning status of the Leachate Collection System and prep- aration of Area 2.. Motion declared carried Schlosser Subdivision Council discussed request for final subdivision approval of Leonard and Bernice Schlosser's subdivision, Maple Trail Addition. Glenn Cook recommended that the road width be 30 ft. rather than 24 ft., as previously dis- cussed Greg Ebert agreed that the old, exixting house on the property would be removed by August 31. Donna Roehl stated that the Park Dedication fee would be $3780.00. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Scherer to authorize preparation of a resolution granting final approval to Maple Trail Addition, with payment of $3780 for Park Dedication fee; private road to be 30 ft. in width; removal of the existing house by August 30, 1986 and execution of a private road agreement. Motion declared carried Thomas Ogland Subdivision Council discussed Thomas Ogland's plans to subdivide the intersection with Willow Dr., into 8 lots. Anne Heideman asked that the right-of-way on Medina Rd. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Heideman to authorize preparation of preliminary approval to Thomas gland's subdivision,.Hollybush Hills, endations made by the ,Planning Commission, }.nc Ing!prAyate roadway agreement built to City specifications;' park delliCat5.o" e on Lot 2, Block 1; and Lot"1,`,Blotlel; drainage and berming to be'approved by staff; right-of-way and payment of administration fees. Motion declared carried 6-3-F6 6r,/zn uj 62 with entrance onto Co. Rd. 24, at be verified. Lots 4., a resolution granting according to recomm- with road 5, Block 2; verification of road - Dennis Peterson/Phil Johnson, Subdivision Council reviewed application of Dennis Peterson and Phil Johnson to subdivide 20 acres on Tamarack Dr. Council discussed the need to verify whether or not Art Peabody had provided the 30 ft. easement on his property, for the proposed road. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Reiser to authorize preparation of a resolution granting preliminary approval to the Peterson/Johnson subdivision on gamarack Dr. according to Planning Commission recommendations; the collection of park dedication fees on all three lots; Tamarack dr., right-of-way, to be secured; ponding and drainage easement to be provided and approved; road agreement to include proper width for road easement; determin- ation as to whether or not Art Prabody included a 30 ft. easement on the north side of the road easement. Motion declared carried Cavanaugh/Dabrowski, Subdivision Council discussed the application for combiniation of six. lots in Independence Beach and subdivision into three parcels. Moved by Reiser, seconded by Mitchell to approve the combination/subdiviion of the Cavanaugh, Dabrowski subject to payment of lz sewer/water assessments; old debris to be removed from the propoerty; houses be built according to prepared building envelope and the city to approve location of the utility easement. Motion declared carried Fx 3 JoEllen Hurr explained that the easement for the private road has an area that is only 30 feet in width and the city is holding bond funds until the easement question is resolved. Donna Roehl asked that Council take some action regarding the release of the escrow funds as she has had telephone calls from Art Peabody and his bank asking for release. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Scherer to retain the Peabody escrow funds until the private road easement problem is resolved. Motion declared carried Tom Ogland, Hollybush Hills Subdivision Moved by Scherer, seconded by Heideman to table action on the Hollybush Hills subdivision until September 16, 1986, pending resolution of ownership and plat signing. Motion declared carried 12: Hennepin County Park Reserve District, Signs JoEllen Hurr explained that the Park Reserve District has twelve signs of 501 sq. ft. and are requesting a permit for 2, two sided signs 27" by 87" each. She stated that they have 2500 acres of land and she believed the request is not unreasonable. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Schere to issue the sign permits to Hennepin County Park Reserve District for the two identification signs. Motion declared carried ke Landfill JoEllen Hurr reported on the Woodlake Landfill tour and those who had attended and also explained that there are three meetings scheduled in September before the Metro- politan Council to consider the expansion. Thomas Anderson asked that Council address the letter from the Citizens Opposed to Woodlake Landfill regarding the hiring of an attorney who specializes in waste manage- ment issues. Anne Heideman asked what was unique about the group of attorneys that had been suggested. She asked that Council acknowledge receipt of the letter but do not believe that it is necessary to proceed with their suggestion, at this time. Hwy. 55 Moratorium JoEllen Hurr stated that the report from Dahlgren and Associates had been received and she would be scheduling a meeting for the committee. Planning Workshop Moved by Heideman, seconded by Scherer to authorize JoEllen Hurr to attend a workshop ON Hazardous Waste on October 24, 1986 for a fee of $125.00. Motion declared carried 5. TWIN CITY MONORAIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS Council discussed the Joint Powers Agreement between the cities of Glenwood and Medina for application to the State of Minnesota for Economic Development Funds for Twin City Monorail's purchase of a company in North Carolina that will be moved to Minnesota. Robert Mitchell suggested that Item 2 be changed to include a limit of $5000 for fees incurred to prepare the application and charged to the cities at 60% Glenwood, 40% Medina. Also Item 4 to be changed to include reviewal and approval by Medina. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Heideman to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Glenwood for the purpose of making application for Minnesota Economic Development funds on behalf of Twin City Monorail, subject to inclusion of the changes suggested above. Motion declared carried 6. BUILDING INSPECTING CONTRACT Moved by Reiser, seconded by Heideman to enter into contract with Loren Kohnen according to prepared contract. Motion declared carried Donna Roehl stated that the County Sheriff's Department would answer all calls in Medina when a Medina officer is not on duty. 12' 7. POLICE OFFICER COURT TIME Donna Roehl explained that Mark Moran had requested overtime pay for a court appearance; that he would not have to appear for to many more cases as the petty misdemeanors would be dismissed and that no court appearances were scheduled for Robert Anderson or Michael Sankey. She stated that she had asked Attorney, Dayle Nolan for her opinion and she advised that because there wer very few cases pending it would be better to pay the overtime than to not have the officer appear in court or to have to settle the issue in some other way. She also reported that two other nearby cities pay overtime as part of an employee leaving service. 8. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Wright -Hennepin Electric Moved by Scherer, seconded by Reiser to adopt Resolution 86-71, allowing Wright -Hennepin Electric to bury lines on Medina Rd. to serve 1110 Medina Rd. Motion declared carried Wright -Hennepin Electric Moved by Scherer, seconded by Reiser to adopt Resolution 86-72, allowing Wright -Hennepin Electric to bury lines to serve 3075 Tamarack Dr. Motion declared carried Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Moved by Scherer, seconded by Reiser to adopt Resolution 86-73 allowing Northwestern bell Telephone Co. to bury lines on Pheasant Ridge Rd. and Hunter Dr. Motion declared carried Kilkenny Ln./Hamel Rd. Improvements The following bids were received at 10:00 A.M., September 16th for the Kilkenny Ln./Hamel Rd. improvement and storm sewer project: C.S. McCrossan, $111,596.25; B and D Underground, $126,911.80; Preferred Paving, $128,88L Burschville Construction, $129,448.40. Glenn Cook reported that the Hamel Rd. project would consist of laying drain tile, filling the ditch and constructing a 6 ft. wide shoulder. Council discussed the fact that the bids were 13% higher than the engineers estimate and whether or not the project should be ordered now or delayed until 1987. JoEllen Hurr stated that John Day was waiting for the work to be done so that he could restore his parking lots on Hamel Rd. Robert Mitchell suggested that the property owners might not object to the assessments after the project is constructed and the area improved. Moved by Scherer, seconded by Mitchell to adopt Resolution 86-74 awarding bid for the Kilkenny Ln./Hamel Rd. improvement project to C.S. McCrossan for $111,596.25. Motion Glared carried 9. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT Thomas Ogland, Hollybush Hills, Final Subdivision Approval Moved by Reiser, seconded by Mitchell to adopt Resolution 86-75, granting final subdivision approval to Hollybush Hills Subdivision. Motion declared carried Leonard Schlosser, Final Subdivision Approval JoEllen Hurr stated that no action would be required as the Les Pendens release had not been filed. Tally Ho Farms, Lot Line Rearrangement JoEllen Hurr stated that the Groves Property Co. would be Tally Ho Farms to combine Lots 2, 14 and 15 and subdivide Buckskin Dr. She stated that the location of the barn on documented with a variance approved for the barn. rearranging the lot lines of into 2 lots, with frontage on the propprty would need to be Minnegasco Moved by Scherer, seconded by Heideman to adopt Resolution 86-29. allowing Minnegasco to bury gas lines at Pinto Dr. and Tower Dr. Motion declared carried Wright -Hennepin Electric Moved by Scherer, seconded by Heideman to adopt Resolution 86-30, allowing Wright -Hennepin Electric to bury lines on private road serving the Medina Creekside subdivision, provided that they tunnel under Willow Dr. Motion declared carried Mohawk Dr./Medina Rd. Glenn Cook presented a plan to upgrade the intersection f Medina Rd. and Mohawk Dr, to accomodate the road that is planned for the Tom Ogland subdivision. He explained that Oglands would do the grading, if the city would do the graveling, which would cost about $15,000. He stated that the area of alignment is owned by several different people and would need to be obtained from them. He stated that the grading would cost approximately $5000. JoEllen Hurr stated that she would like to know if Council was interested in participating in the project before they proceed further with the plans. William Reiser stated that the City had a lot of problem roads that needed to be taken care of before spending money on this project. Moved by Heideman, seconded by Scherer to table the matter until the Planning Commission has submitted its recommendations on the subdivision. Motion declared carried 4f 14/15 g-to 6. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT Leonard Greene, Conditional Use Permit for Kennel JoEllen Hurr reviewed memo and Planning Commission recommendations regarding the application of Leonard and Carole Greene to construct a house and adjoining kennel at 2800 Hunter Dr. She stated that the house would be located 150 ft. from property lines and Council discussed the list of Planning Commission recommendations. Leonard Greene read a memo explaining their plans and addressing the concerns of the Plann- ing Commission. He asked that that not be limited to the breed of dog nor the sex of dogs. Thomas Anderson stated that the Council needs to consider subsequent owners of the property. JoEllen Hurr stated that unless a new owner kept Schnauzer's they would need to apply to the City for a Conditional Use Permit. Phil Zietlow, Planning Commission member, stated that they had addressed the number of dogs of either sex because there might be a problem is the numbers were not specified. Anne Heideman stated that the Nelson permit did not specify the breed and allowed 8 female and 7 male dogs. Maxwell , Orono resident explained that he has a kennel license in Orono for 20 years, with no complaints; they do not limit the number of dogs and that the dogs are raised for show, not profit. Phil Zietlow stated that the Nelsons do not have close neighbors, who might be bothered by noise, that is why the breed of dog was specified in the Greene conditions. Moved by Mitchell, seconded by Reiser to authorize preparation of a resolution approving the Leonard and Carole Greene Conditional Use Permit to operate a kennel at 2800 Hunter Dr. with Planning Commission recommendations except that 15 dogs of either sex will be allowed. Motion declared carried Dr. Greene asked if they would need to come to Council every time that they wished to keep a different breed of dog on the premises. JoEllen Hurr stated that she could handle that request on an administrative basis. Jim Lutz, Lutz Elm Creek Addition JoEllen Hurr reviewed conditions to be included in the development contract for Lutz Elm Creek Addition. She stated that the Park Dedication fee would be $6800; security to be posted for street, sewer and water construction, would be $391,335.15; Red Fox Dr. would be changed to Elm Creek Dr. She also stated that Mr. Lutz had asked if the security amount could be reduced as work progresses; that the city agree to plow the snow prior to accept- ance of the streets and that the number of building permits that would be issued would not STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN I, the undersigned publisher or editor of the Lakeshore Weekly News, swear that said the newspaper has its office of issue at 18178 Minnetonka Blvd, in the City of Wayzata, in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and is a third class free distribution newspaper with a combined circulation of 25,000. I further state an oath that the printed Legal Notice hereto attached as a part hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed therein in the English language one a week for 1 -t '-lish..cion the 261tw day of MA ,19�1_1, a last appeared on the Z. day of �'�aY 19411. The following is a copy of the lower case alphabet which is acknowledged to have been the size and kind or type used in the publication of said notice. Publish` or Editor) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 30-'iiay of N1^Y , 19 _ Notary Public AMY L CICCHESE NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2000 .4,10101A, CITY OF MEDINA PUBLIC NC)T'ICE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO.296 The City Council of the City of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. 2%. The ordinance codifies changes in the state law regarding individual sewage treatment systems. The innovative (mound) systems -has been eliminated. Both trench and mound systems are now classified under state law as standard systems The amendment brings the city's ordinance into compliance with this provision. The amendment also provides that a minunum of five con- tiguous acres of acceptable soil is necessary for installation of a standard sewage treatment system Beginning on July 'L 1999, c+n mnra tuio - - .. . i-With:, tl. city. Existing two acre lots as of that date wilibe "grand - fathered'' under the amended ordinance' Additional changes will be made in the city's Individual Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems ordinance in the future for the purposes of consistency with state law and this ordinance amendment. The full text of Ordinance No. 296 is available at Medina city hall during regular business hours Adopted May 20,1997 By Order of the Medina City Council Paul Robinson City Clerk Published in the Lakeshore Weekly News this 29th day of May,1997. 10/15/2016 Gmail - Fly: Olkon rarianoe M Gmail FW: Olkon variance 2 messages MIS <5pu5b15ic@usa.net> Reply -To: 5pu5bl5ic@usa.net To: Ellis Olkon <ellisolkon@gmail.com> Dear Ellis, We are not able to attend tonight's hearing but we did send this note. Regards to you and Nancy. Judy and Chris Ellis Olkon <ellisolkon@gmail.com> Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:23 PM From: MIS [mailto:5pu5b15ic@usa.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:20 PM To: Scott Johnson (Scott.Johnson@ci.medina.mn.us) <Scott.Johnson@ci.medina.mn.us> Subject: Olkon variance Dear Scott, Because we are unable to attend the hearing tonight, we would appreciate your providing this note to the City of Medina Planning Commission for tonight's hearing on item #2 "Ellis and Nancy Olkon". The Olkons are our southern neighbor whose northern boundary is completely contiguous with our southem boundary. We have known the Olkons since 2007 when we became Medina residents and their neighbor. We do not pretend to understand the issues involved in granting or denying the Olkons' request for a variance, but we do understand that the City of Medina is involved in an intensive and extensive review and adoption of a New Comprehensive Plan that will affect the future of Medina for years to come. As residents, we rely on the Planning Commission and City Council to make decisions in the best interests of the city as a whole and of its constituents. Thus we ask you to please extend every courtesy in reviewing the Olkons' request, particularly considering their extreme personal circumstances. If there is a stone to lift, please lift it to see if there is any relief that can be granted to them and still stay within the borders of the Commission's and Council's citywide responsibilities. Thank you for your consideration. Judy and Chris Mallett 2492 Willow Drive, Medina MN 55340 ellisolkon@gmail.com <ellisolkon@gmail.com> Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 4:09 PM To: MIS <5pu5b15ic@usa.net> obi-9l na mr 9l-Sl-L �Ya AN,. viaeouuyy laVid1.5 84i Yo rko, mm, JoZxn mKen. s pual pasuas,l ON 0 wo I 01[ND, 4omp.o Mf 1004 KW Jaw, D 'at4 R p9A v.v1 Pad., ,a wiyo a!a� wp vM1 1.41 �x1Jaa ,t�Jo4 I 0 L irW Cr) F Cr) cn w 09 L 1 4if t-tLti-L56 9itGO 7AY '33k1 ONO 3A0K1 M017M 1-1.410N Stir S2I3Ntirld 3JfS SHOISAHIIS aNvz 'SH33NION3 ONI^nrisNO0 ONI 'SHIVIDOSSV (INV DuaiiNoT3 iL99014 'ON '000 'YAd 1NIM3S 3 (NON 31&vid333V loN OV --KW; V OT 1 S'llos 319H1933 v snowiNop 'DV 'ss'l 0,.00 M 118YJ530 sa.I0o ,g6°pZ - spool 6urpnloxa 68.0930o loyoy ayou113O3ddy 'ADM yo yy6i3 poo.1 amour you op soma Sal kpS urnyop pauJnsso uo uodn pasoq 333 uMogs s6upoaa sdaua RyunoO Sad ^aurl inowo0 6urysixa sayouap .--Les- -- 'dada soll!M yO Apaysoa puo 'trZ -oy pnoy J(yunoO yo Apocn3ou 6u1A1 CZ-Sly-1.Z u01134$ yo 3aponp ysoayyaoN ayy Io ysoayy-ioN ayy yo pod yoyl tiL6 - �NIQIhIQ-. aasodoad �F ter"-`-. \ r ca-al I- i73S7- . 1 I \\�\ti - z Il y==alai I y'r=luurae }I s \\\ e,y3s fIL. 314 ism H180V y6.566 S3SIW33d 3O NOI1dlaOS3O -ItlO31 � 0310 3 iTlMR1(S0�"AIYll31F 10dY -OW Ill 3 f 0 11 Y VIOSHNNIPI `XINf100 NId3NNaH Sc-BTT-Ta NOLLOHS dO %%T HN HILL NI 1 - - --- 3 , l S .554E8 NOW10 SIZ`IR 5 I it Hal A.V IHRAO smas QNd Ldld A.avNiwriaad MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING: SUBJECT: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson Jim Stremel, City Engineer October 26, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting — November 7, 2016 2016 Deerhill Preserve Project —Updates & Change Order Background The 2016 Deerhill Preserve Improvement Project is well underway. Since the beginning of September, the developer's contractor has been mass grading the site, constructing stormwater ponds, installing storm sewer, and preparing the roadway subgrade. At this point, the developer's contractor is focusing on finishing the subgrade preparations to allow the City's contractor can begin their work. During the developer's mass grading operations and work to prepare the road subgrade, sand - vanes with significant groundwater flow were encountered in a number of areas. The wet weather has also contributed to higher than optimum levels of moisture in the subgrade. These two factors have resulted in the developer's geotechnical engineer to recommend adding a sand layer to the subgrade as well as a significant amount of draintile to accommodate the groundwater flows and wet subgrade conditions. The proposed sand layer will add a level of strength to the roadway section, even when wet conditions persist. Under the City's contract, the scope of the original work included placement of geotextile fabric, aggregate base, and paving. The proposed improvements did not include the placement of a sand subgrade layer to the extent proposed by the developer. The developer has requested that the City's contractor include the sand placement with their work scope; the proposed construction techniques to place the sand as proposed would require one contractor to place the fabric, sand, and aggregate base as one continuous operation. The original bid did include a relatively small quantity of sand for minor corrective work. The additional sand placement can be completed under the current contract and specifications as designed. However, due to the quantity of sand proposed and the cost implications, a change order has been prepared for approval. The amount of sand in the original bid was 500 cubic yards, but the amount recommended with the current request is an additional 8,600 cubic yards. In summary, the developer is requesting that additional work is included with the City contract. The cost of the proposed change order to address the subgrade issues, furnish, haul, and place 8,600 cubic yards of sand is $215,000.00. The original contract amount was $698,776.62. The total contract amount including the change order will then be $913,776.60. It is important to note that the final cost of the additional work will be based on the actual quantity of materials used. The original amount calculated for the proposed assessment, which includes construction, contingency, overhead, and financing costs was determined to be $1,085,720. With the proposed change order, the proposed assessment amount increases to $1,300,720. The schedule of the City's portion of the project has been delayed approximately two weeks due to the progress of the developer's contractor. The addition of the sand will also require more time to install. For these reasons, the contractor is requesting additional time for the placement of the sand beyond the original substantial completion date. The City and contractor have agreed that a substantial completion date of November 23, 2016 will be adequate time to complete the additional work. After discussions with the City's contractor, City Staff, and the developer's engineer, concerning the schedule and subgrade issues, we are recommending that the first lift of bituminous pavement wait until 2017. The City's contractor has agreed to honor the original bid price of the bituminous paving up to June 30, 2017. Council Action Requested We recommend that the City Council review the information provided and consider approval of the Change Order enclosed. 2 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER Contract: 2016 Deerhill Preserve Improvement Project Order No. 1 Owner: City of Medina Date: 11-01-16 To: Midwest Asphalt Corporation, PO Box 5477, Hopkins, MN 55343 You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications: Description of Changes DECREASE INCREASE Supplemental Plans and Specifications Attached in Contract Price in Contract Price Item 5 "Select Granular Borrow (CV)" : + 8,600 CY $ $ $215,000.00 TOTALS $ $ $215,000.00 NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT $ $ $215,000.00 JUSTIFICATION: During the developer's mass grading operations and work to prepare the road subgrade, sand - vanes with significant groundwater flow were encountered in a number of areas. The wet weather has also contributed to higher than optimum levels of moisture in the subgrade. These two factors have resulted in the developer's geotechnical engineer to recommend adding a sand layer to the subgrade as well as a significant amount of draintile to accommodate the groundwater flows and wet subgrade conditions. The proposed sand layer will add a level of strength to the roadway section, even when wet conditions persist. Attached is the report provided by the developer's geotechnical engineer discussing the issues and recommended corrective action in more detail. The original bid did include a relatively small quantity of sand for minor corrective work. The additional sand placement can be completed under the current contract and specifications as designed. However, due to the quantity of sand proposed and the cost implications, a change order has been prepared for approval. The amount of sand in the original bid was 500 cubic yards, but the amount recommended with the current request is an additional 8,600 cubic yards. The Current Contract Total including previous Change Orders is: Six Hundred Ninety Eight Thousand, Seven Hundred and Seventy Six, and 62/100 Dollars ($ 698,776.62) The amount of the Contract will be increased by the Sum Of: Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($ 215,000.00 ) The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders Will Be: Nine Hundred Thirteen Thousand, Seven Hundred Seventy Six and 60/100 Dollars ($ 913,776.60 ) The Contract Period provided for final completion will be extended to November 18, 2016. This document will become a supplement to the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Requested City of Medina (Date) Recommended Engineer (Date) Accepted Contractor (Date) MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: October 28, 2016 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates — November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Olkon Variance and Preliminary Plat — 2362 Willow Drive — Ellis and Nancy Olkon have requested a variance from the minimum suitable soils requirements to subdivide their 20 acre property into two lots. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance request at the September 13 meeting and unanimously recommended denial. Staff intends to present the variance to the City Council on November 1. Staff presented the variance before the applicant completes the cost of finalizing remaining items on the plat. B) AutoMotorPlex PUD General Plan and Plat — east of Arrowhead Drive, north of Hamel Road — Bruno Silikowski has requested review of a PUD General Plan and Plat for construction of approximately 237,500 square feet of private garage condominiums for motorsports enthusiasts. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the October 11 Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval 6-1. Staff intends to present to the City Council on November 1. C) Excelsior Group Concept Plan — 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road — The Excelsior Group has requested review of a Concept Plan for development of 58 single family homes north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive. The property is not in the current staging period and is currently proposed to be guided rural residential in the 2040 Comp Plan Update. The request is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing at the November 9 Planning Commission meeting. D) Jeffrey -Johnson Lot Line Rearrangement and Easement Vacation — 2605 and 2505 Willow Drive — Glenn Jeffrey has requested approval of a rearrangement of the lot line between his and his neighbor's property. The Jeffrey's propane tank is located on the Johnson property. The applicant has withdrawn the request and the project will be closed. E) Just for Kix, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery, Wright -Hennepin Solar Panels —The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. F) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll— These preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application G) Deerhill Preserve, Hamel Haven subdivisions — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before construction begins. Other Proiects A) Comprehensive Plan — The draft Plan is published on the City's website, please encourage residents to review. Residents can provide feedback on mySidewalk or by contacting me. Open Houses are scheduled for October 27, 29 and November 1. Staff has sent an invitation to all property owners in the City for the events. B) City Hall Renovation — the project is (finally) near completion. Furniture is scheduled for installation on November 7 and Planning will be moving downstairs on November 8-9. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 1 November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medusa, MN 55340-9790 p:763.473-9209 f:763.473.8858 non -emergency: 763 -5 25.6210 MEMORANDUM Emergency 9-1-1 TO: City Administrator Scott Johnson and City Council FROM: Director Edgar J. Belland DATE: October 28, 2016 RE: Department Updates IACP Conference I attended the IACP conference from October 15th through October 18th. I attended classes on dealing with officer involved shootings, improving leadership, de-escalation training, reducing domestic violence calls through proactive policing, and responding to mental health emergencies under a new decision from the Supreme Court. I also listened to a keynote speaker, Simon Sinek, who spoke about his book, "Leaders Eat Last". The training was excellent; the networking was second to none, and I had the opportunity to talk with and learn from some of the police chiefs across the nation. With the challenges we are facing in law enforcement today, it was a great opportunity to hear how other chiefs are dealing with these challenges. Department Meeting On October 26th we held our department meeting and covered three mandatory policies required by the Minnesota Peace Officer Standards Training Board (POST). The policies were the pursuit policy, technology policy, and the impartial policing policy. We also discussed the Brady/Giglio case rulings that require police departments to disclose any internal investigations on officers that would potentially discredit the officer in court hearing. Last month I signed an agreement with our City Attorney and County Attorney stating that our department would notify them of any internal investigations that would possibly have a Brady/Giglio issue. I am happy to report we have none at this time. We also had a presentation on the 2017 benefits. Canvas Program The Canvas program is a new software system that tracks our officers training digitally. We have had this program up since the beginning of the year and it is working great. The police department tracks all training the officers attend. Officers sign into the program for each training. We then scan in the class materials covered in that training. A record is entered into each officer's training file digitally. This greatly assists us in tracking mandatory training for the POST Board audits. We are planning to expand Canvas to our field training program this fall, making all the documentation for the program digital. We are also considering using the Canvas program for fire permits and hunting permits reducing paper and time beginning in 2018. Investigator Position Since the middle of September when Investigator Domino resigned, Sergeant Nelson and Investigator Hall have been sharing the in-house investigation responsibilities. On October 26th I appointed Officer Kevin Boecker as our next in-house investigator. He will start the position January 1, 2017. Patrol by Sergeant Jason Nelson The week of October 17 to October 21, Officer Jessen attended use of force instructor school. Officer Jessen is now our second use of force instructor along with Officer Boecker. On October 20th, Officers Hall, Converse, McGill and I attended night driving and pursuit intervention school at St. Cloud. Officer McKinley attended the active shooter exercise at the Wayzata Middle School. It was a large scale exercise that had over 160 officers, firefighters and ambulance personnel. Patrol Activities For the dates of October 12 to October 26, 2016, our officers issued 47 citations and 116 warnings for various traffic infractions. There were a total of five traffic accidents, 15 medicals and 11 alarms. On October 14, 2016, I assisted Hennepin County detectives with a search warrant on a Hamel business. The property that was the subject of the search warrant was located. On October 17, 2016, Officer Converse took two thefts from motor vehicle reports. In both reports the vehicles were left unlocked overnight in the driveway. In one of the cases the suspect used a garage door opener to gain access to the garage and then into the residence where a purse and other items were stolen along with miscellaneous tools. Credit cards were attempted to be used and a suspect has been developed. All stolen property was recovered in Ham Lake. Investigation is ongoing. On October 22, 2016, Officer McKinley took a theft from motor vehicle report. Victim indicates that while golfing at the Medina County Club someone stole his cell phone. Case forwarded to Investigations. On October 25, 2016, Officer Converse spoke with a homeowner who indicated drones are flying over her residence on a regular basis in the evening hours. Requested extra patrol. On October 25, 2016, Officer Boecker was dispatched to an accident that almost struck the front doors of the Rockler building. When Officer Boecker arrived he located the driver and he was found to be extremely intoxicated. Witness stated that the car was traveling west on Highway 55 near the intersection of Willow Drive when the passenger car attempted to pass a semi on the right side and lost control crashing into the ditch and almost into Rockler. The driver who again was intoxicated stated that he did not remember what happened. The driver was arrested for DWI. Investigations by Investigator David Hall On October 9, 2016, an unknown person committed a theft at a business in the Hamel area. Video surveillance was received and a Crime Alert requesting assistance in identifying the suspect has been sent out. Further follow up will be completed should the suspect be identified. On October 17, 2016, officers took a report of two residential burglaries in the Hamel area. These incidents took place overnight into the early morning hours. While completing a follow-up investigation, some of the property was turned into the Anoka County Sheriff's Office and possible suspects identified. Sergeant Nelson and I completed a follow-up search warrant at a residence in Anoka County recovering further items related to the burglary. Further follow up to be conducted and suspect to be interviewed. Once the investigation is complete, the case will be submitted to the Hennepin County Attorney's Office for charges. An investigation is also continuing in a large embezzlement case. Suspects have been identified and are in the process of being interviewed. When the investigation is completed, the case will be submitted to the Hennepin County Attorney's Office for charges. There are a total of 9 open investigations. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: October 26, 2016 MEETING: November 1, 2016 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • The Deer hill Project has run into several setbacks with the wet soils being the big issue. There is a change order being prepared for $215,000 which will be presented to you at the Council meeting. The poor soils are not a surprise to me and there needs to be corrections to make this road stable. • The milling for Sioux Drive has been completed. The rest of the correction project will start October 31st. This project should last a little more than a week with a little luck and some good weather. • PW is starting the process of switching our trucks over to snow removal. The trucks are getting there DOT inspections. This will likely bring up a few items that will need to be addressed. • We do still have a few blacktop patches around the City to get done before the snow flies. WATER/SE WER/ST ORMWATER • We are planning on putting well #8 on line next week. Everything seems to work great with just a few adjustments to the controls, and some minor punch list items to be cleaned up. • All of the hydrants have been serviced. There are just minor repairs that need to be done. PW will document the inspections and repairs in case of any problems during a fire. • I have been working on the Inflow and Infiltration issues with the sewer system. The City of Independence is going to take care of their portion of the sewer exceedance. WSB and I will come up with a response to the exceedance in the Hamel area system. • The storm pond on the Tower Drive project has been corrected again and let's hopes it's the last. This project only has a handful of small items to be completed and then it will be complete. PARKS/TRAILS • PW has completed the base work for the parking lot at the Paul Fortin Field in Hamel Legion Park. This has been a large project this year. We are still hoping to get the curb in and possibly a lift of blacktop yet this fall. • Our lawn service contractor should be out to do fall cleanup at a few designated parks. I think our new contractor did a good job and I am hoping they stay on next year. • The brush pile has been chipped and will be hauled out shortly. The leaves are coming in fast this time of year. I stopped by twice last weekend to push them up just to keep up with the amount of traffic at the compost site. ORDER CHECKS OCTOBER 19, 2016 - NOVEMBER 1, 2016 044992 XCEL ENERGY $40.28 044993 ALLINA HEALTH SYSTEM $50.00 044994 GEYER, REBECCA $41.25 044995 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN $3,179.18 044996 MATTAMY MPLS PRTNSHP $36.46 044997 MN DEPT OF LABOR/INDUSTRY $6,477.89 044998 OH, YUNJE $12.75 044999 OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS FUND V LP $1,000.00 045000 CITY OF ORONO $1,551.02 045001 OSMANSKI, MARK/ROBIN $59.84 045002 PRICKETT,STEVE $10,000.00 045003 SHERRYL JOOS $125.00 045004 LAURENCE F LEJEUNE $5,000.00 045005 PROPERTY RESOURCES $500.00 045006 ROBERTS, JOE $260.00 045007 WEALSHIRE, THE $500.00 045008 BANSAL,SACHIN $150.00 045009 ROSSINI, RACHELLE $250.00 045010 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC $104.94 045011 ASPEN MILLS INC $85.70 045012 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO $1,029.45 045013 BARBER CONSTRUCTION CO INC $7,556.53 045014 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE $1,996.52 045015 BIFFS INC $535.30 045016 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC $677.53 045017 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES $1,798.79 045018 CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCE INC $220.13 045019 DESIGNING NATURE, INC. $2,598.41 045020 ECM PUBLISHERS INC $110.81 045021 GDS,LLC $362.09 045022 HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES I $1,300.00 045023 HAMEL LUMBER INC $286.92 045024 HAMEL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT $68,053.75 045025 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD $320.21 045026 HENRYS WATERWORKS INC $514.04 045027 HOLIDAY FLEET $310.46 045028 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC $4,364.26 045029 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR $343.00 045030 LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MGMT INC $39.50 045031 MADISON NATIONAL LIFE $629.15 045032 MARCO INC $29.21 045033 MODERN MARKETING $315.83 045034 MUNICIPAL BUILDERS INC $28,081.52 045035 NAPA-GENUINE PARTS CO $115.04 045036 NAPA OF CORCORAN INC $134.26 045037 OFFICE DEPOT $149.87 045038 OIL AIR PRODUCTS LLC $375.40 045039 RANDY'S SANITATION INC $60.00 045040 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC $7,779.32 045041 SCHERERS PUMPKIN PATCH $150.00 045042 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC $1,058.96 045043 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL $535.40 045044 TEGRETE CORP $1,216.00 045045 TIMESAVER OFFSITE $136.00 045046 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR $207.00 045047 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE $3,169.40 045048 WSB & ASSOCIATES $24,455.75 045049 XCEL ENERGY $87.63 045050 CAREFREE SERVICES INC $5,958.00 Total Checks $196,485.75 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS OCTOBER 19, 2016 — NOVEMBER 1, 2016 003869E PR PERA $13,715.85 003870E PR FED/FICA $15,588.25 003871E PR MN Deferred Comp $2,335.00 003872E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA $3,161.37 003873E SELECT ACCOUNT $693.12 003874E CITY OF MEDINA $20.00 003875E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL $20.00 003876E PR FED/FICA $281.79 003877E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA $110.19 003878E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC. $34.19 003879E PREMIUM WATERS INC $12.54 003880E FRONTIER $56.13 003881E MINNESOTA, STATE OF $1,540.00 003882E CULLIGAN-METRO $32.75 003883E SELECT ACCOUNT $464.79 003884E AFLAC $394.88 003885E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE $4,678.43 003886E KONICA MINOLTA $168.48 003887E MARCO (LEASE) $954.20 003888E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC $219.90 003889E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN $1,893.04 003890E XCEL ENERGY $11,977.88 003891E VALVOLINE FLEET SERVICES $136.44 003892E SELECT ACCOUNT $287.54 Total Electronic Checks $58,776.76 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT OCTOBER 19, 2016 507482 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L $1,314.63 507483 BARNHART, ERIN A. $1,965.67 507484 BELLAND, EDGAR J $2,522.48 507485 BOECKER, KEVIN D. $2,332.90 507486 CONVERSE, KEITH A $2,081.14 507487 DINGMANN, IVAN W $1,750.82 507488 DOMINO, CHARMANE $15.95 507489 ENDE, JOSEPH $1,409.33 507490 FINKE, DUSTIN D. $2,160.20 507491 GALLUP, JODI M $1,667.32 507492 GLEASON, JOHN M. $2,161.99 507493 GREGORY, THOMAS $2,043.95 507494 HALL, DAVID M. $2,208.83 507495 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S $2,352.37 507496 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. $2,226.35 507497 KLAERS, ANNE M $1,116.32 507498 LANE, LINDA $1,506.21 507499 LEUER, GREGORY J. $2,040.08 507500 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R $1,435.41 507501 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D $1,425.52 507502 NELSON, JASON $2,221.15 507503 PETERSON, DEBRA A $1,614.15 507504 REINKING, DEREK M $1,554.26 507505 SCHARF, ANDREW $573.87 507506 SCHERER, STEVEN T. $2,392.97 507507 VIEAU, CECILIA M. $1,114.72 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $45,208.59 PAYROLL CHECK OCTOBER 18, 2016 20436 DOMINO, CHARMANE $1,205.02 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $1,205.02