Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout08-15-2018 POSTED IN CITY HALL August 10, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2018 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 8 of the City Code related to Mixed Residential Zoning District regulations 6. Approval of May 15, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes (concurrent with City Council) 7. Approval of July 10, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes 8. Council Meeting Schedule 9. Adjourn Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 August 8, 2018 City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: August 2, 2018 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – August 8, 2018 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Woods of Medina Final Plat –710 Shawnee Woods Road and 4412 County Road 116 – 4412 JKP LLC has requested final plat for a 16-lot subdivision on approximately 8.25 acres. The City Council reviewed and adopted a resolution of approval at the July 17, 2018 meeting. A hearing related to the establishment of a stormsewer improvement tax district is scheduled at the August 8 meeting. B) Sampson Lot Combination – 3132 Lakeshore Avenue – Richard and Karen Sampson have requested the combination of two substandard lots into a single lot. This application was supported by the Council’s recent action to lower fees in such cases. The application is scheduled for review at the August 8 City Council meeting. C) Ditter Concept Plan – Jim Ditter, Tom Ditter, and Ditter Properties have requested review of a concept plan related to the potential subdivision of four existing parcels totaling approximately 25 acres into six lots. Two of the existing parcels are served by City sewer and included within the urban service area but all the property is zoned rural residential. The applicants requested that the City consider rezoning the two parcels served by city sewer to Suburban Residential, allowing the parcels to be reduced in size to create additional rural lots. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the May 8 meeting and feedback was generally supportive of what was proposed. The Council reviewed on June 19 and raised questions whether designating the property as LDR was consistent with the objectives of the Comp Plan. The Council directed staff to continue discussions with the Ditters and staff has done so. The application will be left open in case the Ditters have additional information to provide in the coming months. D) Maxxon Site Plan Review – 900-920 Hamel Road – Maxxon has requested a site plan review for a 4,854-square foot addition between the two existing buildings on their property. The applicant proposes to convert existing bituminous to pervious surfacing because no more hardcover can be added as a result of the Elm Creek Shoreland Overlay District. The Planning Commission reviewed at the January 18 meeting and recommended approval. The Council granted approval on February 20. Staff will work with the applicant on conditions of approval before construction begins. E) Lunski Final Plat – Lunski, Inc. has applied for final approval of the subdivision related to the development of 83 units of mixed senior housing and 24,000 s.f. of office north of Highway 55 and west of Mohawk Drive. The Council adopted a resolution of approval at the November 16 meeting. Staff will work with applicant on conditions of approval before construction begins. F) Reserve of Medina Second Addition – Toll Brothers has requested approval of the second phase of the Reserve of Medina project. The City Council adopted approval documents on September 19, 2017. Staff will work with the developer related to the conditions of approval. G) Reiser lot line rearrangement – 1425 County Road 24 and PID 23-118-23-32-0002 – The John H. Reiser Trust and Philip W. Reiser Trust have requested approval of a lot line Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 August 8, 2018 City Council Meeting rearrangement between two 10-acre parcels. The City Council adopted a resolution approving the rearrangement at the April 17, 2018 meeting. The project will now be closed. H) Johnson ADU CUP, Dykhoff Septic Variance, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery – The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. I) Hamel Road Thirty Two, Hamel Haven subdivisions – These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded Other Projects A) Comprehensive Plan – Met Council staff has indicated that the City’s 2020-2040 Plan Update will be formally reviewed during August. The Environmental Services committee is scheduled for August 14, the Community Development Committee on August 20, and the Met Council review on August 22. B) Stormwater Ordinance and Design Guide –staff met with Engineering staff to discuss the scope and workplan for reviewing the City’s stormwater regulations to conform with the City’s surface water management plan and current practices. The Planning Commission and City Council held a workshop on the regulations at the May 15 meeting. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the ordinance at their July 10 meeting and recommended approval. Staff intends to present the ordinance and design guide at the August 8 Council meeting. C) Mixed Residential zoning district – the City held an open house on June 12 and received feedback on the regulations which will ultimately apply to the Mixed Residential land use. Staff will use this feedback to draft an ordinance for a public hearing at the August 15 Planning Commission meeting. D) Administrative Assistant Interviews – Steve, Jodi and I interviewed six finalists for the Administrative Assistant vacancy. We were impressed with the pool of candidates and are excited for Katrina to join the team! E) Baker Park Master Plan Stakeholder Group – I met with a number of representatives from other jurisdictions with Three Rivers park staff to kick-off their Master Planning process for Baker Park. Three Rivers will be reaching out to residents and citizen groups over the next 6 months for feedback on Baker Park. F) Hennepin County Transportation Leadership Meeting – Steve and I met with new Division Managers at Hennepin County Transportation. The Department has reorganized and are reaching out to cities to introduce the new leadership folks. G) Long Lake Subwatershed Partnership – Scott and I took part in a conference call with the partners. In addition to the carp data collection, Minnehaha Creek Watershed is conducting water quality monitoring throughout the subwatershed. The partners agreed that the District would put together a grant application to submit to BWSR requesting funds to use the data to design an implementation plan. This grant is due at the end of August, and staff may be asking for a resolution of support from the City Council at the August 21 meeting. Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director and Nick Kieser, Planning Intern DATE: August 9, 2018 MEETING: August 15, 2018 Planning Commission SUBJ: Public Hearing – Mixed Residential Zoning District Background The City’s Comprehensive Plan update is currently in review by the Metropolitan Council and is anticipated to be approved this month. The Comprehensive Plan process included over 15 months of public participation, 8 community meetings, 15 Steering Committee meetings, 4 concurrent City Council/Planning commission worksessions, an online forum, a formal public hearing and a series of City Council reviews. Through this process, the City developed the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan identified property which could accommodate the future growth to meet certain mandates that the City planned for, including: • Land sufficient for construction of a minimum of 950 future residential units • Minimum overall density of 3 units/net acre for new residential development • A minimum of 244 of the residential units were required to be planned at higher density (>8 units/net acre) The Land Use Plan within the Comprehensive Plan sets planned land uses and densities and also establishes objectives for these uses. The City is then required to review and make appropriate changes to its official controls, including zoning regulations, within nine months of the updated Plan being in effect. The Implementation Chapter (7) of the 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan describes the changes the City anticipated needing to make because of various changes in the Plan. One of the primary changes noted is for the City to establish regulations to implement the Mixed Use Residential Land Use. Staff does not believe existing regulations provide a good means to implement. The Implementation Chapter states: “Mixed Residential Land Use Standards will need to be established for development within the Mixed Residential Land Use to ensure that such development is consistent with the objectives and policies of the use. Specifically, standards will need to require that a portion of the development provide for residential development with a net density of 8 units/acre or greater and will provide for guidance to incorporate such density into surrounding neighborhoods which will likely be developed at lower densities. The regulations will be intended to allow a portion of the Mixed Residential site to be reserved for higher density residential development as a separate development if a portion of the site is developed at lower densities.” Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting Mixed Residential Land Use The Comprehensive Plan guided groups of properties in two locations as Mixed Residential, generally located northwest of the Medina Road/Brockton Lane and north of Hamel Road/east of Arrowhead Drive. These properties are identified on the map below. It is important to note that the Mixed Residential properties are staged for potential development within the 2025-2030 staging period. There are no development proposals expected for some time, but the City is required to have the official controls in place. The entire Draft Comprehensive Plan update is available on the City’s website, the land use chapter is attached for reference, and staff has copied the most relevant information below. The City’s official controls are required to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Within the Draft Comprehensive Plan, the Mixed Residential land use is defined as follows: “Mixed Residential (MR) identifies residential land uses that may be developed with a variety of housing styles at an overall average density between 3.5 and 4.0 units per net acre, within which a minimum of the units equivalent to 1.0 unit per acre are required to be developed at higher densities above 8.0 units per acre. Uses within the MR land use are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The land use provides flexibility for the type of housing to be developed, including detached single family, twin homes, townhomes and multiple family buildings. The MR land use will allow for different types of housing to be developed in coordination with each other or independently, provided the objectives related to overall density and minimum number of higher density housing units can be achieved within a defined area.” Ordinance Amendment Page 3 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting The Plan also establishes policies and objectives which are meant to guide the City when creating the official controls. For the sake of the Mixed Residential land use, these policies and objectives are contained within the broader objectives of the Residential Land Uses in the City: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Regulate land within the Mixed Residential land use to provide opportunities for residential development with a density in excess of 8 units/acre. Flexibility is purposefully provided within the land use to support opportunities for a single project to provide both low- and high- density housing or for multiple developers to partner on independent projects within a Mixed Residential area. 3. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use. 4. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. 5. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 6. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking, green space, landscape buffering and height limitations. 7. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary. 8. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low impact development design standards. 9. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public facilities and the City’s stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth strategies. 10. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan. 11. Protect property within the City’s MUSA boundary from development prior to the provision of urban services that will hinder future division. 12. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes, conservations easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City’s open space and natural features. 13. Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. 14. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. 15. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 16. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required. 17. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space. Ordinance Amendment Page 4 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting 18. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD’s in exchange for (1) reduced land coverage of buildings, (2) provision of more multi-family units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources. 19. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood. 20. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods and to maintain public health and safety. Open House Discussion The City held an open house on June 12, 2018 to provide an opportunity for interested residents to provide feedback and to discuss the regulations that were to be developed for the land use. Residents, members of the City Council and Planning Commission, and staff were in attendance. A summarized report of the comments provided during the open house is attached. Road Infrastructure/Traffic The main comments raised at the Open House related to the potential impacts of increased traffic with the new development. Infrastructure planning is a primary component of the Comprehensive Plan process, and the City has anticipated the development of various properties, including the Mixed Residential properties, when creating the infrastructure plans. The City’s Transportation plan anticipates improvements for Brockton Lane and the construction of Tamarack Drive near the Mixed Residential property. The road infrastructure is anticipated to be improved with or before development occurs in Mixed Residential. Neighborhood Compatibility Many of the written comments received questioned the compatibility of the higher density housing required by the Mixed Residential land use to the surrounding land uses. Some comments specifically requested that only single-family development be permitted in the area near the Enclave and the Medina Road and Brockton Lane intersection. This type of limitation would appear inconsistent with the definition of the mixed residential land use and the objectives related to reserving opportunities for higher density housing and providing flexibility for a mix of housing styles. Conceivably, one way for the requirement for higher density housing to be “transferred” from the Brockton/Medina Road area to the Hamel Road parcels would be if the owners of both sites agreed to master plan both areas together such that the requirements were met over all of the property. Absent such an arrangement, staff believes it would difficult to meet the objectives of the mixed residential land use if higher density housing is not permitted. Staff has incorporated language into the draft ordinance to require the higher density housing to be located, to the extent practicable, to be buffered from existing lower density development and to be buffered. Ordinance Amendment Page 5 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting Flexibility Several of the comments received from the stakeholders requested that the regulations provide flexibility for the type of high and low-density development on the site. These comments were primarily from the owners of the mixed residential properties. Parks/Open Space There was also a good deal of discussion related to the need to preserve the open space as much as possible and to provide park and trail amenities to the new developments. These comments align with Medina’s Community Vision and the objectives noted for residential development. Wanting to protect Medina’s natural resources and open space is a top priority in our community. Summary of Ordinance Guided by the information within the Comprehensive Plan and the feedback from the Open House, staff has drafted the attached ordinance for review. Staff utilized existing regulations as a starting point for the ordinance. The ordinance is organized in the following sections: 1. Section 843.01 – Purpose – This section describes the purpose of the district, which provides the main criteria by which the City reviews requests within the district. 2. Section 843.02 – Review and Approval Process – This section describes the process by which development of Mixed Residential property is reviewed. It provides for a “Master Plan” process to allow different portions of a development site to be developed at different times and by different parties, while ensuring that requirements of the Mixed Residential land use are met. 3. Section 843.03 – Allowed Uses – This section describes which uses would be permitted within the Mixed Residential district. Permitted uses include: a. Single-Family Homes b. Two-Family Homes c. Townhome Dwellings d. Multiple Family Structures e. Parks and Open Space f. Essential Services Conditional Uses include: a. Religious Institutions b. Educational Facilities c. Assisted Living Facilities and Nursing Homes d. Day Care Facilities serving 16 or fewer persons e. State Licensed Residential Facility, serving 16 or fewer persons 4. Section 843.04 – Single/Two Family Lot Standards – This section includes the requirement for single- and two-family lots. The minimum requirements mirror the requirements of the R2 zoning district. Ordinance Amendment Page 6 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting 5. Section 843.05 – Townhome/Multiple Family/Other Lot Standards – This section includes requirements for other uses. The minimum requirements are similar to the requirements of the R4 zoning district. The allowed density is regulated through by the “minimum net area per dwelling unit.” The draft ordinance would permit townhome and multiple family development up to 10 units per acre, plus additional density if certain design and construction features are provided. These features include affordable housing, low impact development, recreational or open space amenities, etc. For example, the ordinance would permit development at 11 units per acre if a project was LEED certified. Even with this “additional density” on the multi-family portion of the site, the overall number of units would still be limited by the maximum density of 4 units/acre on the overall site. The current ordinance would limit height within the Mixed Residential district to 3 ½ stories, or 45 feet. This matches the maximum height otherwise permitted in the City, with the exception of Uptown Hamel, which permits 4 stories under limited circumstances. 6. Section 843.06 – Conditional Use Standards – This section includes additional standards which would apply to any conditional use proposed in the district. Policy Discussion The Planning Commission and Council are encouraged to discuss the ordinance in its entirety, but staff has also identified the following aspects of the ordinance which may be of particular interest. Flexibility for Density Staff has included language within the ordinance which would permit some flexibility for density for projects which protect natural features or otherwise exceed minimum standards. The language would permit a deviation of up to +/–10% of the density. Staff believes this may be an advisable tool because the density range of the Mixed Residential land use is very narrow (3.5- 4.0 units/net acre), especially on smaller sites. As an example of scale, the density range for a 50-acre parcel would be 175-200 units. The flexibility included in the ordinance would extend this range to 158-220. The City would have the discretion to grant this flexibility, which could provide incentive to encourage preservation or exceeding other requirements. Maximum Building Height for Multi-Family The draft ordinance would limit the height of structures to 3 stories or 45 feet (effectively, 3.5 stories). Single- and Two-family dwellings would be limited to 2.5 stories. Additional height could permit a smaller footprint for multi-family buildings, since the overall number of units is fixed and an applicant may desire to build up instead of out. With the exception of limited circumstances in Uptown Hamel, the tallest height permitted in other districts in the City is 45 feet or 3 stories. Ordinance Amendment Page 7 of 7 August 15, 2018 Mixed Residential Zoning District Planning Commission Meeting Maximum Net Area Per Dwelling for Multi-Family The draft ordinance does not set a limit on the reduction of net area (or “additional density”) for multi-family development which can be acquired by incorporating some of the extra features noted in the ordinance. The overall maximum number of units would still apply to the entire site. As a result, if a master plan included higher density on a multi-family portion of a site, the remaining site could incorporate larger single-family lots or additional open space. Minimum Lot Size for Single-Family The draft ordinance currently requires a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet and minimum lot width of 60 feet for single-family lots. Again, since the overall maximum number of units is capped for the sites, the Planning Commission and Council may wish to discuss whether to reduce these minimum standards. With the same amount of lots occupying a smaller footprint, this could allow the preservation of natural resource areas and open space around the lots. For the sake of reference, the “villa” lots on the north end of the Enclave at Brockton and in the Villas at Medina County Club are approximately 55-57 feet in width. The lots within the Fields of Medina and most of the lots in the north end of the Enclave (Hunter Drive side) are 65 feet in width. Potential Action The Planning Commission should hold a Public Hearing before considering the ordinance. The Commission should direct staff to make any changes it sees fit and, when completed with its review, could take the following action: Move to recommend approval of the ordinance regarding the Mixed Residential Zoning District (with the changes noted by the Commission). Attachments 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Comp Plan Information 3. Comment Cards Received 4. Open House Activity Summary Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE CREATING REGULATIONS OF THE   MIXED RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT;   AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE   The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 843 of the code of ordinances of the City of Medina is adding as follows: SECTION 843 MIXED RESIDENTIAL (MXR) DISTRICT Section 843.01 Mixed Residential (MXR) – Purpose. The purpose of the Mixed Residential (MXR) district is to implement the mixed residential land use described in the City’s Comprehensive Plan by providing a zoning district for a mix of residential styles with an overall average density of 3.5-4.0 units per acre but which includes at least a certain amount of higher density residential units. Any land use application or similar request within this district shall be reviewed for consistency with the following objectives in addition to the other standards of the district and city code. Any application may be required to be amendment or shall be denied if found to be inconsistence with these objectives. Any request shall be consistent with the following objectives: (1) The MXR district shall consist of a creative and thoughtful mix of residential styles which preserve open space and natural features. (2) The layout and design of a MXR development shall complement adjacent existing and planned land uses and shall, to the extent practicable, locate and buffer higher-density residential uses from lower density uses on adjacent property. (3) The overall net residential density shall be 3.5 units per acre to 4.0 units per acre over the net area (e.g. a site with a Net Area of 50 acres could be developed with 175-200 total units). (4) The total number of residential units developed shall include a minimum number of higher-density units equal to the Net Area of a development site. For the sake of this requirement, the higher-density units shall exceed 8.0 units per net acre. For example, a site with a Net Area of 50 acres would be required to include a minimum of 50 higher- density units (in excess of 8.0 units per net acre) as a part of the total 175-200 residential units. (5) Development on a MXR development site may be phased, provided the site is master- planned to ensure compliance with the purpose and standards of the MXR district and the Mixed Residential land use in the Comprehensive Plan. An enforceable covenant shall be recorded against the property to ensure development occurs consistent with these requirements. (6) In a phased MXR development in which property is reserved for future high-density residential development, flexibility for a range of high density units shall be reserved equivalent to at least 5% of the maximum number of units. For example, if a site with a Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE total Net Area of 50 acres (maximum units=200) reserves 7 net acres for future high- density development, the master-plan is required to reserve capacity for a minimum of 56-66 units on these 7 net acres. The remaining 43 net acres could be developed with no more than 134 units. (7) The City may consider modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards. Such modification shall not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +10% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use. Section 843.02 (MXR) Development Review and Approval Process. Subd. 1. Mixed Residential Master Plan Required. A Mixed Residential Master Plan shall be required to regulate uses, density and permissible number of units over a MXR development to ensure compliance with the purpose, objectives, and requirements of the district and of the Comprehensive Plan. No development, construction, or subdivision of property shall be permitted in the MXR District prior to the review and approval of a Master Plan as described in this subsection. Subd. 2. All development, construction, and subdivision requests shall be consistent with the approved Master Plan. Any request which is not consistent with the approved Master Plan shall be denied. Subd. 3. Master Plan Review Procedures. An application for Mixed Residential Master Plan approval shall follow the process described herein. A Master Plan may be reviewed on its own, or concurrently with other requests such as a concept plan, preliminary plat, or site plan review. (a) Submittal Requirements. An application for Master Plan review shall include all of the following information: (1) Application form (2) Fee prescribed by City fee schedule (3) A Mixed Residential Master Plan which includes: (i) Clear identification of the limits of the overall site(s) to which the Master Plan will apply. (ii) Documentation of property ownership, interest in title, or authorization from owner(s) of all parcels to make application on their behalf. (iii) Narrative describing how the project serves the purposes of the MXR district. (iv) General site analysis identifying Net Acreage and the locations of floodplains, wetlands, required upland buffers, and waterbodies. The site analysis shall also identify existing improvements, existing vegetation, sensitive environmental areas, significant view sheds and other important features. (v) Permissible range of residential units and minimum number of high-density residential units required based upon Net Acres. (vi) A sketch plan demonstrating planned residential densities consistent with the requirements of the mixed residential land use Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE and MXR district, including potential building layout, unit style, street jurisdiction, lot layout, environmental conservation areas, public or private open space, public or private recreation space, and other elements of the plan. (vii) Identification of important utility and other infrastructure connections and issues. (viii) Connectivity of the site to surrounding existing and planned land uses, potential pedestrian/bicycle connections, and other external land use relationships. (4) A survey showing all easements of record may also be required by the Zoning Administrator. (5) Any additional information as may be reasonably required by the Zoning Administrator to review compliance with relevant code requirements. (b) The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposal. Notice of the public hearing shall be published in the official newspaper designated by the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing. For land located in the RR, RR-1, RR-2 or RR-UR zoning districts, notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to owners of property located within 1000 feet of the outer boundaries of the subject property. For land located in any other zoning district, notice shall be mailed to the owners of property located within 350 feet of the outer boundaries of the subject property. (c) The proposal shall be forwarded to the City Council following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, or after 45 days have elapsed since the commission began its review, whichever occurs first. The City Council shall act on the application within the time period prescribed by state law. The person making the application shall be notified of the action taken. (d) A Mixed Residential Master Plan shall only be approved if it determined to be consistent with the purpose of the district, the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant requirements of City Code. The City Council may impose such conditions it deems appropriate to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and to ensure consistency with relevant requirements. (e) The Master Plan shall be recorded against the subject property and regulate future requests for development, construction, or subdivision. Section 843.03. (MXR) Allowed Uses. Subd. 1. Permitted Uses. The following shall be permitted uses within the MXR district, subject to applicable provisions of the City Code: (a) Single-Family Homes (b) Two-Family Homes (c) Townhome Dwellings (d) Multiple Family Structures (e) Parks and Open Space (f) Essential Services Subd. 2. Conditional Uses. The following shall be permitted within the MXR district, subject to conditional use permit approval, the specific requirements established in Section ###, and other applicable provisions of the City Code: Ordinance No. ### 4 DATE (a) Religious Institutions (b) Educational Facilities (c) Assisted Living Facilities and Nursing Homes (d) Day Care Facilities serving 16 or fewer persons (e) State Licensed Residential Facility, serving 16 or fewer persons Subd. 3. Accessory Uses. The following accessory uses shall be permitted within the MXR district, subject to applicable provisions of the City Code and provided such use is subordinate to and associated with a permitted or conditional use: (a) Garages or detached private structures, except no such structure shall contain components to constitute a separate complete dwelling unit. (b) Off-street parking (c) Private swimming pools, sport courts, and other common recreational facilities (d) Signs, subject to the requirements of the sign ordinance (e) Solar Equipment, if affixed to a structure, and in compliance with Section 828.09 subd. 1 of the City Code Section 843.04. (MXR) Single Family and Two Family Residential Lot Standards. The following standards shall be observed for all single-family and two-family residential uses, subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in the City Code. Subd. 1. Density of Development and Number of Units: Development or redevelopment shall be consistent with density and number of unit requirements in the Comprehensive Plan and the approved Mixed Residential Master Plan. Subd. 2. Minimum Lot Width (Single Family Detached): 60 feet. The minimum lot width shall be increased to 80 feet for lots with a side yard adjacent to a collector or arterial roadway. Subd. 3. Minimum Lot Width (Two Family Dwelling): 50 feet per unit. The minimum lot width shall be increase to 80 feet for a unit with a side yard adjacent to a collector or arterial roadway. Subd. 4. Minimum Lot Depth: 90 feet. Subd. 5. Minimum Front Yard Setback: 25 feet, except as follows: (a) Additional setback for garage doors facing streets: Garage doors which face a street shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet. (b) Reduced setback for side-load garage: The front yard setback may be reduced to 20 feet if no garage doors face a street and if garage walls facing the street include a window or architectural elements to give the appearance of living space. Subd. 6. Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 25 feet. The rear yard setback may be reduced to 15 feet if abutting a preserved open space or common area, but may not be reduced if abutting public park property. Ordinance No. ### 5 DATE Subd. 7. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (Single Family Detached): 7.5 feet Subd. 8. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (Two Family Dwelling): 10 feet, except the side yard setback shall be reduced to zero for the common wall between two dwelling units. Subd. 9. Street Setbacks: The following yard setback shall be required adjacent to public or private streets. Structures, parking areas, and active recreational areas shall not be located within this setback area. The required yard setback shall be based on the classification of the street in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: (a) Private Street: 25 feet. Parking areas and recreational areas shall be exempt from this requirement. (b) Local Roadway: 25 feet. (c) Collector or Arterial Roadways: 50 feet. Subd. 10. Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area. Impervious surface coverage may exceed this amount if stormwater management practices are implemented which, according to the City Engineer, exceed stormwater retention and treatment regulations. However, in no case shall impervious surface coverage exceed 60 percent of the lot area remaining after wetlands and stormwater ponds have been excluded. Subd. 11. Maximum Building Height: All buildings shall meet the following requirements: (a) Building height shall not exceed 32 feet, but the maximum building height shall be increased to 35 feet if the structure is equipped with a compliant fire suppression system or if interior side yard setbacks are increased by 50 percent. (b) No building shall exceed two and one-half stories in height, with a limitation of two stories facing a street. (c) Maximum distance from ground to eave. In no case shall the vertical distance from the lowest ground level (at the footprint of the building and eight feet out) to the eave be greater than 32 feet. Subd. 12. Building Materials and Design. (a) Building Materials. All exterior building materials shall be durable and consistent with relevant codes, regulations, and other industry standards. (b) Garages. Each principal dwelling unit shall include garage space with a minimum capacity of two vehicles. In the case that garage doors occupy more than half of the horizontal building façade facing a street, architectural elements shall be provided to reduce the monotonous appearance of garage doors. These elements may include varying the setback of the garage doors, differentiating roof designs, constructing dormers, and installing garage doors with windows or other design elements. (c) Utilities. Utilities shall be placed underground. Ordinance No. ### 6 DATE Subd. 13. Landscaping Requirements for the Development Site. (a) Generally. All areas within a development site shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by streets, sidewalks, trails, buildings, driveways, walks, recreational areas, plaza space, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and turf grass. Properly maintained prairie and natural vegetation is encouraged within common open space and buffer yards. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetative filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall be included in the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (b) Buffer Yards. Buffer yards shall be required adjacent to less intensive zoning districts and adjacent to collector and arterial roadways. The buffer yard requirements are described in Section 828.31 of the City Code. (c) Maintenance. The developer shall be responsible for establishing a long-term maintenance plan to see that common space and buffer yard landscaping and fencing is maintained in an attractive and well-kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. Landscape irrigation, where necessary, shall be consistent with City water usage regulations. (d) Landscaping Guarantee. The developer shall guarantee the growth and maintenance of all plants for a minimum of two growing seasons following an inspection of all completed plantings. (i) The developer shall submit a financial guarantee and provide access to the property, in forms acceptable to the city, prior to issuance of any building permit to ensure the planting and survival of the plantings. The developer may transfer financial guarantee responsibility to another willing entity. (ii) Any plant which does not survive or has severely declined (for example, 25% of the crown has died in the case of trees) shall be replaced, and the replacement will be guaranteed for an additional two growing seasons. After the additional growing seasons, any of the new plants which do not survive or have severely declined shall be replaced. After provisions have been made for maintenance of these new plants, the city shall release any remaining financial guarantee. (e) Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. Subd. 14. Landscaping Requirements for Individual Single-Family and Two-Family Lots. (a) Generally. Each lot shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by buildings, driveways, walks, patios, recreational areas, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and turf grass. Properly maintained prairie or natural vegetation may be utilized within buffer yards. Integrated stormwater management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetated filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall be included in the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. Ordinance No. ### 7 DATE (b) Lawn Establishment. The entire lot and adjacent right-of-way to the edge of the street shall be landscaped and vegetation established prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a new home. (i) Financial Guarantee Option. If vegetation is not established at the time of certificate of occupancy, the city may accept a financial guarantee, in an amount determined by the city council, to ensure that landscaping is completed within one year. If landscaping is not completed, the city may take action to complete the work, and the property owner shall grant access to the property and be responsible for the cost of such work. (ii) Type of Ground Cover. Low maintenance and water conserving alternatives to traditional Kentucky bluegrass are encouraged and may be seeded. Otherwise, sod or hydro-seed application shall be required. (c) Yard Trees. A minimum of four overstory trees shall be required to be planted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each dwelling unit. Trees shall meet the following requirements: (i) Financial Guarantee Option. If the trees are not planted at the time of certificate of occupancy, the city may accept a financial guarantee, as established by the city council, to ensure that planting occurs within one year. (ii) Size. Deciduous trees shall not be less than two caliper inches measured four feet off ground, and coniferous trees shall not be less than six feet in height. (iii)Location. For single-family dwellings, two trees shall be located within 15 feet of the front lot line. For two-family dwellings, at least one of the trees shall be located within 15 feet of the front lot line. Trees shall be located in a way which does not interfere with utilities. (iv) Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species, as listed within the tree preservation ordinance are required, unless otherwise necessary. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. The trees shall not be of a single species and, to the extent possible, should be differentiated across the neighborhood so that no more 25 percent are from one species. (v) Credit for Preserved Trees. The city may reduce the required number of overstory trees if existing trees are preserved in the front yard. In order to receive credit, the trees shall satisfy the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Section 828.41. (d) Maintenance. The property owner shall be responsible to see that landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well-kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. Irrigation for landscaping and lawns shall be consistent with city water usage regulations. (e) Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. Ordinance No. ### 8 DATE Section 843.05. (MXR) Standards for Townhome, Multiple Family Residential and other Uses. The following standards shall be observed for townhomes, multiple family residential uses and other uses, excluding single-family and two-family dwellings. The standards shall be subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in the City Code. Many of these standards may be applied across a coordinated development so that individual lots may not meet all requirements (lot area and impervious surface coverage, for example) but the development as a whole is consistent with the standards. In these situations, the City shall require documentation which describes the property which is subject to the coordinated development. Subd. 1. Density of Development and Number of Units: Development or redevelopment shall be consistent with density and number of unit requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 2. Density Bonuses: Exceptions or modifications to the density requirements may be considered natural resources are protected or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Subd. 3. Minimum Net Area per Dwelling Unit: 4,350 square feet, except as modified by Subd. 4. below. Subd. 4. Reduction of Minimum Net Area per Dwelling Unit. Certain design and construction features serve to reduce the real and perceived impacts of crowding prevalent in multiple- residential dwelling units and building complexes. The Minimum Net Lot Area per Unit requirement above may be reduced in accordance to the following, except that the density after the bonus(es) must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (a) Affordable Housing (max. reduction = 560 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). The density bonus shall be based on the proportion of units which will be preserved as affordable housing and the nature of the restriction utilized to maintain affordability. (b) LEED Certification or similar (max. reduction = 390 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). The density bonus shall be based upon the level of certification, with the full bonus available for the highest level of certification. (c) Low impact development (max. reduction 200 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). The density bonus shall be based on the water quality improvements above those required by the city. (d) Exceeding building design, landscaping or buffer yard requirements (max. reduction 390 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). (e) Sound suppression (max. reduction = 200 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). To be eligible, the STC rating must be increased by ten from that specified as the minimum in the Minnesota State Building Code. (f) Underground Parking (max. reduction 560 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). The density bonus shall be based upon the number of parking stalls provided, with the full bonus available if at least one underground space is provided per dwelling unit. (g) Oversized garages or lockable storage units (max. reduction 110 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). Additional storage must be 100 square feet for townhomes or 50 square feet or greater for other uses. Ordinance No. ### 9 DATE (h) Common open space and shared recreational facilities (max. reduction = 390 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit) (i) Dwelling unit amenities (max. reduction 110 square feet of Net Lot Area per Unit). Amenities such as additional bathrooms, fireplaces, etc. Subd. 5. Minimum Setback from Perimeter of Site: 40 feet, except as modified below. This setback shall apply to structures, parking, and recreational areas. (a) Increased setback for three-story buildings. The required structure setback shall be increased to 50 feet if the building exceeds two and one-half stories. (b) Increased setback adjacent to less intensive zoning district. The setback adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district shall be increased to 50 feet. (c) Increased setback for required buffer yard. The required setback shall be increased when necessary to abide by buffer yard requirements. Subd. 6. Street Setbacks: The following yard setback shall be required adjacent to public or private streets. Structures, parking areas, and active recreational areas shall not be located within this setback area. The required yard setback shall be based on the classification of the street in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: (a) Private Street: 25 feet. Parking areas and recreational areas shall be exempt from this requirement. (b) Local Roadway: 40 feet. (c) Collector or Arterial Roadway: 50 feet. Subd. 7. Minimum Setbacks between buildings within a development: 30 feet. Subd. 8. Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area. Impervious surface coverage may exceed this amount if stormwater management practices are implemented which, according to the City Engineer, exceed stormwater retention and treatment regulations. However, in no case shall impervious surface coverage exceed 60 percent of the lot area remaining after wetlands and stormwater ponds have been excluded. Subd. 9. Maximum Building Height: Building height shall not exceed 45 feet or three stories, whichever is greater. In the case that a structure is not equipped with a compliant fire sprinkler system, the maximum building height shall be 30 feet. Subd 10. Building Materials and Design (a) Building Materials. (i) Generally. All exterior building materials shall be durable and consistent with relevant codes, regulations, and other industry standards. (ii) Accent materials. No less than 20 percent of any façade facing a public or private street shall be an accent material. These materials may include shakes, brick, stone, face brick, decorative concrete, or others approved by the city. (iii) Multiple Family Structures. No less than 50 percent of the vertical exterior building materials shall be non-combustible material such as brick, face brick, decorative Ordinance No. ### 10 DATE concrete, glass, or others approved by the city. (b) Garage Doors. In the case that garage doors occupy more than half of the horizontal building façade facing a street, architectural elements shall be provided to reduce the monotonous appearance of garage doors. These elements may include varying the setback of the garage doors, differentiating roof designs, constructing dormers, and installing garage doors with windows or other design elements. (c) Building Modulation and Articulation. Buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 50 feet of building perimeter to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This may include varying building height, building setback, building orientation, roof pitch, roof design, or significant differences in building materials/design. (d) Enclosed Parking. Townhomes shall include garage space with a minimum capacity of two vehicles, and multiple family structures shall include a minimum of one enclosed or underground parking stall per dwelling unit. (e) Utilities and Mechanical Equipment. All utilities shall be placed underground. Mechanical and HVAC equipment serving individual dwellings shall be screened, to the extent possible, from all public or private streets as well as from adjacent structures. Equipment which serves more than six dwelling units shall be screened as follows: (i) Rooftop Equipment. Equipment shall be screened through the use of architectural elements and materials which are compatible with the overall design of the building. Wood fencing or chain link fencing with slats shall not be permitted. (ii) Ground Equipment. Equipment shall be screened with walls which are constructed of materials which are compatible with the building or with landscaping which is opaque during the entire year. (f) Trash and Recycling Facilities. (i) Trash and recycling bins for individual dwelling units shall be stored so not to be prominently visible from streets or neighboring units. (ii) For other uses, all trash and recycling shall be stored within the principal building, within an accessory structure, or within an enclosed outdoor area easily accessible from the principal structure. The accessory structure or enclosed area shall be constructed of similar materials and have compatible architecture as the principal structure and shall abide by yard setback requirements. Subd. 11. Landscaping Requirements. (a) Generally. All areas within a development site shall be landscaped, except for areas occupied by streets, sidewalks, trails, buildings, parking lots, driveways, walks, recreational areas, plaza space, wetlands, wetland buffers, and woodlands. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs, plantings, and turf grass. Water conserving alternatives to traditional Kentucky-Bluegrass are encouraged. Properly maintained prairie or natural vegetation is encouraged within common open space and buffer yards. Species with known vulnerability to disease or infestation shall not be permitted. Integrated stormwater Ordinance No. ### 11 DATE management practices, such as vegetative swales, vegetated filter strips, bioretention, and raingardens, shall be considered landscaping and shall be included in the gross acreage of the parcel when calculating impervious surface coverage. (b) Building Setting. A 10-foot wide landscaped area shall be provided adjacent to all buildings except for walks, driveways, and plaza/patio space. Walks within this landscaped area shall be limited to where practically necessary to serve access points of buildings. (c) Buffer Yards. Buffer yards shall be required adjacent to less intensive zoning districts and adjacent to collector and arterial roadways. The buffer yard requirements are described in Section 828.31 of the City Code. (d) Overstory Deciduous Shade Trees and Coniferous Trees. A minimum of one tree per 60 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. (i) Size. Deciduous trees shall not be less than two caliper inches measured four feet off ground, and coniferous trees shall not be less than six feet in height. (ii) Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. (iii)Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species, as listed within the tree preservation ordinance are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. (iv) Credit for Preserved Trees. The city may reduce the required number of overstory trees if an applicant preserves more existing trees than required by the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Section 828.41. The city shall determine the amount of credit granted for such existing trees. (e) Ornamental Trees. A minimum of one tree per 120 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter shall be required. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. One tree per 150 feet shall be required if a water conserving alternative is utilized for the lawn or if bioretention or other low impact development practices are implemented. (i) Size. Trees shall not be less than one and one-half caliper inches measured four feet off ground. (ii) Location. Tree location shall be approved by the city prior to planting. (iii)Type. Trees shall be suitable for the soil and site conditions and compliment others in the area. Native species are required unless otherwise necessary. No more than 25 percent of trees may be of a single species. (f) Understory Shrubs. In addition to trees, a full complement of understory shrubs shall be provided to complete a quality landscape treatment of the lot. Shrubs shall be potted and a minimum of 24 inches. In no instances shall the number of shrubs be less than one per 40 feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter. Any lot perimeter for which a buffer yard is required shall be excluded from this calculation. One shrub per 50 feet shall be required if a water conserving alternative is utilized for the lawn or if bioretention or other low impact development practices are implemented. Ordinance No. ### 12 DATE (g) Parking Lot Landscaping. A minimum of eight percent of the total land area within parking areas shall be landscaped. Parking lots with fewer than 10 stalls shall be exempt from these requirements. (i) Landscaping at least 12 feet in width shall separate parking lots into cells of no more than 120 stalls. (ii) Landscaping shall break up rows of parking approximately every 20 spaces. (iii) Species selection shall be guided by soils conditions and plantings shall be designed in a way which increases the likelihood of long-term survival. (iv) Where practical, the landscaping areas shall be designed to receive stormwater runoff from the adjacent parking area. (h) Maintenance. The developer shall be responsible for establishing a long-term maintenance plan to see that common space and buffer yard landscaping and fencing is maintained in an attractive and well-kept condition and to replace any landscaping that does not survive. Landscape irrigation, where necessary, shall be consistent with water usage regulations. (i) Landscaping Guarantee. The developer shall guarantee the growth and maintenance of all plants for a minimum of two growing seasons following an inspection of all completed plantings. (i) The developer shall submit a financial guarantee and provide access to the property, in forms acceptable to the city, prior to issuance of any building permit to ensure the planting and survival of the plantings. The developer may transfer responsibility of financial guarantee to another willing entity. (ii) Any plant which does not survive or has severely declined (for example, 25% of the crown has died in the case of trees) shall be replaced, and the replacement will be guaranteed for an additional two growing seasons. After the additional growing seasons, any new plants which do not survive or have severely declined shall be replaced. After provisions have been made for maintenance of these new plants, the city shall release any remaining financial guarantee. (j) Tree Preservation. Removal of significant trees and any construction activity within residential districts shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance Section 828.41. Section 843.06 Supplemental Requirements for Specific Uses within the MXR Zoning District. In addition to the general standards specified for conditional uses in section 825.39 of the City Code and other requirements of this ordinance, the following uses shall not be permitted unless the city council determines that all of the specific standards contained in this subdivision will be met: Subd. 1. Religious Institutions. (a) the minimum lot size shall be increased to 4 acres; (b) the minimum lot width and depth shall be increased to 300 feet; Ordinance No. ### 13 DATE (c) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (d) no exterior bells or loudspeakers; (e) buffer yard requirements adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district or the same zoning district shall be increased to an opacity measurement of 0.5. Buffer yard requirements are described in Section 828.31 of the City Code. (f) structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the maximum combined floor area of all structures on a property shall not exceed 40,000 square feet; (g) sanctuary seating capacity shall not exceed 500 persons; (h) the number of persons on-site at any given time shall not exceed two times the capacity of the sanctuary, with the exception of larger events no more than four times per year. The city may place further limitations on the number of persons on-site based on the number of parking stalls provided; (i) residential uses shall not be permitted, with the following exceptions: a. housing for clergy employed at the property, as an accessory use. Such housing shall not exceed 4,000 square feet in floor area of habitable space, which shall be counted against the total floor area allowed on a site; or b.continuation of a residential use existing on the property prior to the religious institution being established. Continuation of a residential use shall be limited in term and be subject to Interim Use Permit approval; (j) the property shall not be utilized for for-profit purposes, or regularly utilized by for- profit entities; (k) playgrounds and outdoor recreational areas shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from residential property with adequate screening to protect neighboring properties from noise and adverse visual impacts; (l) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre- cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (m) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 2. Educational Facilities. (a) the minimum lot size shall be increased to 4 acres; Ordinance No. ### 14 DATE (b) the minimum lot width and depth shall be increased to 300 feet; (c) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (d) no exterior bells or loudspeakers; (e) buffer yard requirements adjacent to or across a street from property of a less intensive zoning district or the same zoning district shall be increased to an opacity measurement of 0.5. Buffer yard requirements are described in Section 828.31 of the City Code. (f) structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the maximum combined floor area of all structures on a property shall not exceed 40,000 square feet;; (h) the number of persons on-site at any given time shall not exceed 700, with the exception of larger events no more than four times per year. The city may place further limitations on the number of persons on-site based on the number of parking stalls provided; (j) the property shall not be utilized for for-profit purposes, or regularly utilized by for- profit entities; (k) playgrounds and outdoor recreational areas shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from residential property with adequate screening to protect neighboring properties from noise and adverse visual impacts; (l) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre- cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (m) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 3. Assisted Living Facilities and Nursing Homes. (a) shall abut an arterial or a collector roadway; (b) parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility, expected guest visitation and the likelihood of residents owning vehicles. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district; (c) sufficient outdoor plaza and recreational areas shall be provided; Ordinance No. ### 15 DATE (d) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, fiber cement siding, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre-cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal, wood, or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (v) the minimum required net lot area per unit shall be reduced by 50% for nursing home, memory care, or similar units which do not include individual kitchens and where residents are not able to drive. In order to reduce the required lot area in this way, an agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City is required to be recorded against the property ensuring that the units will remain nursing home or memory care units. (vi) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 4. Day Care Facilities serving 16 or fewer persons (a) shall abut an arterial or a collector roadway; (b) shall not be operated within a townhome or multiple family dwelling; (c) parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility and the number of clients to be served. Circulation shall be sufficient so drop-off and pick- up of clientele does not interfere with the right-of-way; (d) sufficient outdoor recreational areas shall be provided; (e) the facility shall meet licensing requirements as required by law; (f) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 5. State Licensed Residential Facility or housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D, serving 16 or fewer persons (a) shall abut an arterial or a collector; (b) shall not be operated within a townhome or multiple family dwelling; (c) parking requirements shall be based on the number or residents at the facility as well as the number of employees. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district; (d) the facility shall meet licensing requirements as required by law; Ordinance No. ### 16 DATE (e) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this _____day of _____, 2018. ______________________________ Attest: ___________________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on the ______ day of _______, 2018.   Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 1 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 1 CChhaapptteerr 55:: LLAANNDD UUSSEE && GGRROOWWTTHH _______________________________________________________________________________________________ IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn Medina has significant natural resources, high-quality neighborhoods and areas for commercial and retail development. The City’s extensive wetlands and limited infrastructure availability, together with past community planning, have contributed to its rural character. The metropolitan area is a high growth area. Medina’s rural charm makes it an attractive alternative to the more intensely populated areas found closer to Minneapolis and St. Paul. This chapter discusses existing and future land use patterns in the City. 22001166 EExxiissttiinngg LLaanndd UUsseess TABLE 5-1 EXISTING LAND USES (2016) Land Use Acres Percent Agricultural 3,208.3 18.7% Golf Course 532.5 3.1% Industrial and Utility 278.6 1.6% Institutional 194.2 1.1% Major Highway 83.1 0.5% Mixed Use Residential 6.8 0.0% Multifamily 17.5 0.1% Office 38.9 0.2% Open Water 1,174.5 6.9% Park, Recreational, or Preserve 1,836.2 10.7% Railway 77.0 0.4% Retail and Other Commercial 186.6 1.1% Rural Residential 4,447.1 26.0% Single Family Attached 44.1 0.3% Single Family Detached 916.1 5.4% Undeveloped 119.0 0.7% Wetlands 3,960.0 23.1% Total 17,120.5 100% Agricultural Use includes farms and other parcels greater than five acres in size used primarily for agricultural, pasture and rural purposes. A large percentage of the City is designated as agricultural. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 2 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 2 Residential Use is divided into four designations: Rural Residential consists of larger tracts of land and homesteads, including hobby farms, on parcels without City sewer and water service. The Rural Residential land use also includes rural property which is currently vacant and is not planned for urban services. Single Family Detached includes detached single-family residential properties which are served with urban services. Single Family Attached includes attached single-family residential properties such as twin homes, duplexes, townhomes and rowhomes. Multifamily includes residential properties such as apartment buildings and condominiums. Mixed Use Residential Use identifies properties which include residential units upon the same property as a commercial use. Most of these uses are buildings in the Uptown Hamel area which include apartments above commercial or office space. Industrial and Utility Use is primarily in the TH 55 corridor and includes light industrial, warehouse, and manufacturing facilities. The use also includes utility uses throughout the community such as electric substations, water treatment facilities and the like. Office Use is primarily in the TH 55 corridor and includes a number of the City’s largest employers. Retail and Other Commercial Use is primarily in the TH 12 and Highway 55 corridors and in the Uptown Hamel area. Park, Recreational or Preserve Use includes parks and public recreational and protected open space. Baker Park Reserve has a significant impact on planning due to its size and regional attraction, as well as its effect on the City’s tax base and use. Golf Course Use includes existing golf courses. Institutional Use includes City, county, or state owned property, religious institutions, nursing homes, cemeteries, and other similar uses. Major Highway and Railway Uses identify land occupied by federal or state highways and railroad improvements. Undeveloped Use identifies areas that are currently vacant but have been subdivided in anticipation of a new development. Much of this land may currently be on the market. Sites which are actively in development are excluded from this use and designated as their approved land use. Wetlands, Lakes and Open Water Wetlands and lakes play an important role in the City because together they affect 30.2% of the City land and significantly impact the City’s land use patterns. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 3 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 3 NNaattuurraall FFeeaattuurreess aanndd AArreeaass The City contains many ecologically significant natural resource areas that provide value to all residents by providing natural beauty and wildlife habitat, improving water quality and adding to land values. These natural areas are described in further detail in the Open Space Report but merit discussion from a land use and development perspective. The City has an extensive network of wetlands and lakes that significantly impact the developable areas in the City. Woodland areas are located throughout the community, including a number of remnants of the Big Woods along with many other significant stands. The community has made conscious choices to preserve and protect the natural areas and to improve their quality. Because 35.4% of the land area in Medina is comprised of lakes and wetlands and many of these areas are under private ownership, it is critical for the City to educate residents about the importance of maintaining healthy wetlands, woodlands and lakes. These natural features comprise the City’s green infrastructure system: the City’s natural support system that promotes healthy sustainability of the community. As the City grows, the natural areas will be a critical element of every decision-making process. The City undertook an extensive natural resource and open space planning effort that will be the foundation for land use decisions. The Open Space Report indicates the ecologically significant areas that require protection and the areas that will be maintained as a part of the City’s conservation network. SSoollaarr AAcccceessss PPrrootteeccttiioonn Medina is committed to encouraging and promoting solar energy as a clean, alternative form of energy production and reducing carbon-based emissions through the following policies and strategies: • Protect access to solar resources by permitting solar equipment to be attached to structures for self-generation, subject to appropriate limitations related to community character. • Protect access to solar resources by permitting ground mounted solar equipment for self- generation within rural, agricultural, and business uses, subject to appropriate limitations related to scale, mitigation of impacts on neighboring properties, and community character. The Metropolitan Council has estimated the City’s solar potential as follows: Gross Potential (Mwh/yr) Rooftop Potential (Mwh/yr) Gross Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)2 Rooftop Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)2 40,619,888 532,719 4,061,988 53,271 Map 5-1 displays the City’s Solar Suitability Analysis Map. Protecting solar access means protecting solar collectors (or the location of future collectors) from shading by adjacent structures or vegetation. Existing structures and buildings in the City generally do not present significant shading problems for solar energy systems. Most single family attached and detached homes are one or two stories and most multi-family, commercial, and industrial buildings are two stories or less. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 4 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 4 While these ordinance standards help protect solar access, it is not possible for every part of a building or lot to obtain unobstructed solar access. Mature trees, topography, and the location of structures can limit solar access. However, on most properties the rooftop of the principal building would be free of shading by adjacent structures. Therefore, the majority of property owners in the City could utilize solar energy systems, if they so desired, as a supplement or alternative to conventional fuels. HHiissttoorriicc PPrreesseerrvvaattiioonn The City of Medina currently does not have any sites or structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The City of Medina has a strong interest in preserving representative portions of its history. The City previously worked with the West Hennepin Pioneer Museum to restore the Wolsfeld Family cabin which was originally built in 1856. It is thought to be one of the original homes in Medina. The City further commits to providing the following general guidelines related to historical preservation: • Partner with organizations that want to preserve historically significant areas, landmarks, and buildings in Medina; • Modify zoning regulations as necessary to help preserve areas that may be historically significant. FFuuttuurree GGeenneerraall LLaanndd UUssee PPoolliiccyy DDiirreeccttiioonn As described in the Vision Statement, the City of Medina strives to promote and protect its open spaces and natural environment. The City has historically been, and intends to continue to be, primarily a rural community. The City has planned for a limited amount of future development consistent with regional forecast and consistent with Community Goals. Future Land Use Plan Principles The Future Land Use Plan guides the development of Medina through 2040, and will be used to implement the City’s goals, strategies and policies. The Plan is guided by the Vision and Community Goals as furthered by the following principles: Development Patterns and Neighborhood Form • Encourage open spaces, parks and trails in all neighborhood developments. Surveys indicate that a high quality of life is found when residents have visual access to green spaces. • Create neighborhoods with a variety of housing types that are well connected with roads, trails or sidewalks. • Maintain the integrity of rural neighborhoods and promote development patterns consistent with existing rural residential development. • Recognize neighborhood characteristics and promote new development compatible in Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 5 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 5 scale, architectural quality and style with existing neighborhoods. • Stage residential growth to minimize the amount of adjacent developments which occur within the same time period. • Guide density to areas with proximity to existing infrastructure and future infrastructure availability. • Concentrate higher density development near service oriented businesses to help promote walkability. • Consider planned development in surrounding communities when making land use decisions in the City. Road Patterns • Recognize regional highway capacity and planned improvements, along with use forecasts, as major factors in planning for growth and land use changes. • Establish collector streets with good connections through the community’s growth areas. • Promote trails and sidewalk access near roads and thoroughfares to encourage multi- modal transportation choices. • Consider opportunities to improve north-south travel within the City. Open Spaces and Natural Resources • Preserve natural resources throughout the community and provide educational opportunities to residents to help them understand the value of natural areas. • Preserve open spaces and natural resources. • Protect wooded areas and encourage improvement of existing resources and reforestation. Evaluate existing woodland protections and supplement as necessary. • Support the guidelines identified in the Open Space Report to preserve the City’s natural systems. Business Districts and Commercial Areas • Focus service businesses and development near urban residential densities and along primary transportation corridors. • Provide connections between residents and commercial areas and promote businesses within mixed-use areas. • Work to create job opportunities in the community for Medina residents to reduce traffic and commuting demands. • Emphasize service and retail uses which serve the needs of the local community and provide opportunities for the community to gather. • Support business development with a corporate campus style which provides open spaces and protects natural resources. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 6 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 6 TThhee GGuuiiddee PPllaann Medina's Future Land Use Plan, Map 5-3, maintains Medina’s rural character and protects the City's natural resources while accommodating limited growth and development which is consistent with the City’s Vision, Community Goals and Land Use Principles. Table 5-2 below demonstrates the expected 2040 land uses in the community. TABLE 5-2 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN Future Land Use (2040) Gross Acreage % Net Acreage % Rural Residential 8,402.2 49.1% 6,015.3 35.1% Agriculture 222.7 1.3% 174.5 1.0% Future Development Area 671.9 3.9% 547.9 3.2% Low Density Residential 1172.5 6.8% 865.7 5.1% Medium Density Residential 58.5 0.3% 46.2 0.3% High Density Residential 29.6 0.2% 25.7 0.2% Mixed Residential 137.1 0.8% 94.1 0.6% Uptown Hamel 45.0 0.3% 41.2 0.2% Commercial 254.2 1.5% 197.6 1.2% Business 704.6 4.1% 471.9 2.8% Rural Commercial 67.5 0.4% 47.6 0.3% Institutional 270.2 1.6% 194.0 1.1% Parks, Recreation, Open Space 2,771.5 16.2% 1,971.2 11.5% Private Recreation 343.1 2.0% 297.5 1.7% Closed Sanitary Landfill 192.2 1.1% 124.7 0.7% Right-of-Way 673.1 3.9% 616.9 3.6% Total Acres 16,015.9 11,732.0 Lakes and Open Water* 1,104.6 6.5% 1,104.6 6.5% Wetlands and Floodplain 4,283.9 25.0% Total City 17,120.5 17,120.5 * Lakes and Open Water amounts include areas adjacent to lakes which are not included in Hennepin County parcel data and exclude un-meandered lakes. The Growth and Development Map (May 5-4) highlights areas within the City in which a change of land use is contemplated by the Future Land Use plan. The map also highlights wetland areas within Medina which significantly affect land planning, development, and infrastructure decisions. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 7 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 7 Future Land Use Designations Rural Residential (RR) identifies areas for low-intensity uses, such as rural residential, hobby farms, agricultural, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. Density within the RR land use shall be no more than one lot per 10 acres and the area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by this Plan. Agricultural (AG) identifies areas which are planned for long-term agricultural uses. Density within the land use can be no more than one lot per 40 acres which will not be served by urban services. Property within this land use is eligible to be part of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program. Future Development Area (FDA) identifies areas which could potentially be planned for future urban development in the City that will be provided municipal sewer and water services. This area will remain rural unless and until designated for urban services in a future Comprehensive Plan update. The purpose of the FDA designation is to communicate the future planning intentions to the community. This designation is tentative and depends greatly on future infrastructure improvements, including to regional highway capacity. Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units per acre and 3.0.units per acre which are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary use in this area is single- and two-family residential development. Medium Density Residential (MDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 5.0 and 7.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses in this designation will be a mix of housing such as single family residential, twin homes, town homes, row homes, and small multiple family buildings. High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 and 15.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. Mixed Residential (MR) identifies residential land uses that may be developed with a variety of housing styles at an overall average density between 3.5 and 4.0 units per net acre, within which a minimum of the units equivalent to 1.0 unit per acre are required to be developed at higher densities above 8.0 units per acre. Uses within the MR land use are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The land use provides flexibility for the type of housing to be developed, including detached single family, twin homes, townhomes and multiple family buildings. The MR land use will allow for different types of housing to be developed in coordination with each other or independently, provided the objectives related to overall density and minimum number of higher density housing units can be achieved within a defined area. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 8 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 8 Uptown Hamel (UH) the Uptown Hamel land use allows residential and commercial uses to be mixed on adjacent sites and to be mixed within the same building or property. Residential development in this designation may be between 4.0 and 15.0 units per acre. The Uptown Hamel area is served by urban services. Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments including commercial, office and retail uses. These uses are concentrated along the arterial corridors and are served or will be served by urban services. Business (B) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including office, warehouse, and light industrial. This designation identifies larger tracts of land that are suitable for office and business park developments and are served or will be served by urban services. Rural Commercial (RC) identifies commercial land uses which are not served by urban services, but rather by individual wells and septic systems. The scale of development in this land use shall be limited to protect water resources. Institutional (INST) identifies existing public, semi-public, and non-profit uses such as governmental, cemeteries, religious, educational and utilities. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) identifies publicly owned or permanently conserved land which is used for park, recreational, or open space purposes. Private Recreation (PREC) identifies areas that are currently used for outdoor recreational uses which are held under private ownership but are not publicly maintained. Limited numbers of residential uses may be included or have previously been developed within this land use designation, accounting for no more than 10% of the land area. Density within the residential portion of the use shall be between 2.0 and 3.0 units per net acre where urban services are available and one unit per 10 acres where services are not available. The City does not anticipate additional residential development within the land use. Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) identifies an existing closed sanitary landfill. The Woodlake Landfill is owned by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as part of Minnesota’s Closed Landfill Program. The MPCA has jurisdiction over land use regulations of the landfill and has made available a description of the types, locations, and potential movement of hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or decomposition gases related to the facility in its Closed Landfill Plan. The City hereby incorporates such information and the City will provide such information as required by law. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 9 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 9 AAvveerraaggee NNeett RReessiiddeennttiiaall DDeennssiittyy The Metropolitan Council has designated the portion of the City within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area as Emerging Suburban Edge. Residential development within the Emerging Suburban Edge designation is required to be planned for new development and redevelopment at average net density of at least 3-5 units per acre. The average net density for planned residential development in Medina is 3.17 units per acre as described in Table 5-3. TABLE 5-3 NET RESIDENTIAL DENSITY Future Land Use Planned Net Acreage Minimum Density Minimum Number of Units Low Density Residential 186.4 2.0 372.8 Medium Density Residential 24.5 5.0 122.5 High Density Residential 16.1 12.0 193.2 Mixed Residential 94.1 3.5 329.4 Total Planned Residential 321.1 1,017.9 Average Net Residential Density 3.17 The Metropolitan Council requires communities to assume development at the minimum density of each land use when projecting net residential density. In reality, development will occur within the allowed range, higher than the minimum. This will result in density being higher than calculated above. Redevelopment is anticipated within the Uptown Hamel area and is likely to include additional residential units. The intent of the Uptown Hamel land use is to permit flexibility in the amount of residential and commercial development and is therefore not projected in Table 5-3. However, residential development within Uptown Hamel is required to exceed 4 units per net acre, which would further comply with Metropolitan Council minimum net density requirements. EEmmppllooyymmeenntt IInntteennssiittyy FFoorreeccaassttss The Metropolitan Council requires that communities provide a measurement of forecasted employment. Acceptable measures include floor area ratios, building footprint percentages or impervious surface percentages. Medina anticipates that new development in the Commercial and Business land uses will tend to result in 50-65% impervious surface coverage. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 10 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 10 LLaanndd UUssee PPoolliicciieess bbyy AArreeaa The following section provides policies for land use designations and is categorized into generalized subsections. The policies for each category as provided below directly support the Community Goals and Land Use Principles. These designations are generalized land uses and are not specific zoning districts. The City will update the zoning ordinance and applicable codes to be consistent with the land use plan and designations identified in this section. The planning process revealed a strong interest in promoting high quality, sustainable development in the City. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for large scale or master plan types of development, regardless of whether they are residential, commercial or mixed-uses will be available and will be supported through zoning. RRuurraall DDeessiiggnnaattiioonnss The rural designations include Agricultural, Rural Residential and Future Development Area. A large percentage of the community falls into these categories. The purpose of these designations is to provide low-intensity land uses, such as rural residential, farming, hobby farms, horticulture, conservation of natural and ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. This area will not be provided with water or sewer service during the timeframe covered by this Plan. A significant segment of this area consists of large, rural parcels with single-family homes. The City recognizes that such low-density, development will continue to be a desired housing alternative. The City's goal is to maintain the rural character of this area. The Metropolitan Council System Statement shows the majority of this area as Diversified Rural, and the City utilizes the Rural Residential designation to be consistent with the System Statement. The Metropolitan Council has identified a significant portion of Medina’s rural area in the Long-term Sewer Service Area (LTSSA) for the Blue Lake wastewater facility. The Metropolitan Council designates the LTSSA for the possibility of extension of urban services in the long-term, beyond 25 years in the future. Medina is required to identify the LTSSA in its Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Council’s LTSSA is identified in Map 5-5. The Metropolitan Council states that the LTSSA is intended to provide opportunities to efficiently extend urban services to accommodate long-term growth. The City believes that much of this area does not support efficient extension of urban services and the City seeks opportunities to remove property from the LTSSA. The following factors affect the efficiency of providing future urban services and are displayed on Map 5-6: • Wetlands, Topography, Regional Parks and Scientific Areas Wetlands occupy a significant portion of the area identified by the Metropolitan Council within the LTSSA, accounting for approximately 40% of the area. This fact, along with topographical conditions, would make the provision of wastewater service inefficient. In Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 11 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 11 addition, Baker Park and the Wolsfeld Woods Scientific and Natural Area occupy large portions of Medina’s rural area, further separating any developable areas. • Historical development patterns Much of the LTSSA was developed with large-lot residential neighborhoods prior to the Metropolitan Council’s LTSSA designation. These properties tend to include large homes with comparatively high home values, making the likelihood of redevelopment with urban services costly. The Metropolitan Council seeks density lower than 1 unit per 10 acres for efficient extension of wastewater service. As evidenced on Map 5-6, the vast majority of the LTSSA within Medina has been previously developed in a pattern that is denser than 1 unit per 10 buildable acres. As a result, much of the LTSSA does not provide opportunity for efficient extension of wastewater service by the Metropolitan Council’s policy. • Distance between regional infrastructure and City infrastructure The Metropolitan Council would need to extend wastewater service into the southern area of Medina if development were to occur in the future. The City’s primary municipal water system is in the northern portion of Medina. One of these services would need to be extended a great distance in order to be provided in connection with the other, or the City would need to establish a separate water system. Either alternative would be costly and would not be efficient. In discussions with Metropolitan Council staff, the City has identified approximately 730 acres to be removed from the LTSSA in the southern portion of the City, because a similar acreage in the northwest corner of the City was added to the Blue Lake wastewater facility service area. The City will continue to seek opportunities to remove property from the LTSSA because of the factors noted above. The City’s Open Space Report proposes several different implementation techniques for allowing open space development and planning to maintain rural character and simultaneously preserve significant natural resources. This result may take the form of innovative developments that clusters smaller lots on larger parcels with permanently conserved open space. Such innovative arrangements can help preserve the City’s natural resources, open space and rural character, while still maintaining an average overall density of ten acres per unit. Medina’s wetlands, lakes, scattered woodlands and soil conditions prevent smaller, unsewered lot development, but are ideal for low-density rural housing. Medina's policy in the permanent rural area is to keep strict soil requirements for septic sites, but allow flexibility for Open Space design developments and to ensure that the permanent rural area will remain rural by eliminating the need for future extension of a sanitary sewer service to replace failing systems. Objectives: 1. Allow low-density development in the Rural Residential Area including innovative arrangements of homes that preserve open space and natural resources. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 12 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 12 2. Encourage conservation of open space, farms and ecologically significant natural resources in the rural areas. 3. Enforce stringent standards for the installation and maintenance of permanent, on-site sewage disposal systems. 4. Allow public facilities and services, such as parks and trail systems, if compatible with rural service area development. 5. Allow land uses, such as home-based businesses, hobby farms, horse stables, nurseries and other smaller-scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining residential development. 6. Regulate noise, illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety. 7. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per forty acres for property in the Agricultural land use. 8. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for new development in the Rural Residential and Future Development Area land use. 9. Consider exceptions to maximum density standards for open space developments that protect natural features and put land into permanent conservation. Within the Metropolitan Council’s long term sewer service area (see Map 5-5), these exceptions will be allowed to result in development with a density in excess of one unit per ten gross acres if consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. 10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Future Development Area land uses during this planning cycle. 11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant natural characteristics. 12. Require that lots contain adequate soil types and conditions as defined in the City's on-site septic system requirements. 13. Protect property within the Future Development Area designation from subdivision and development by requiring ghost plats for subdivisions so that future urban expansion is not compromised. 14. Reduce impervious surfaces where possible by applying low impact design standards and encourage innovative materials and plans that reduce runoff. 15. Encourage and incentivize landowners to participate in the protection and conservation of significant natural resources. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 13 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 13 UUrrbbaann SSeerrvviiccee DDeessiiggnnaattiioonnss The Urban Service Area includes the residential and commercial areas of the City that are currently or will be served by municipal water and sewer services. Residential Uses Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use. 3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary. 4. Regulate land within the Mixed Residential land use to provide opportunities for residential development with a density in excess of 8 units/acre. Flexibility is purposefully provided within the land use to support opportunities for a single project to provide both low- and high- density housing or for multiple developers to partner on independent projects within a Mixed Residential area. 5. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low impact development design standards. 6. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth strategies. 7. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan. 8. Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to the provision of urban services that will hinder future division. 9. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes, conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City's open space and natural features. 10. Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. 11. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 14 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 14 12. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. 13. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 14. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking, green space, landscape buffering and height limitations. 15. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 16. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required. 17. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space. 18. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD’s in exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi-family units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources. 19. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood. 20. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods and to maintain public health and safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 15 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 15 UUppttoowwnn HHaammeell The Uptown Hamel land use allows for a mix of residential and commercial uses to create a vibrant, walkable, and attractive place; a place to shop, work and live. Objectives: 1. Allow a mix of residential and commercial uses to co-exist on adjacent parcels as well as within the same structure or on the same parcel. Uptown Hamel is intended to provide flexibility in terms of residential and commercial uses. As a result, it is difficult to project future uses in the area, but it is estimated that approximately 40% of the land will be utilized for residential purposes, 40% for commercial uses, and 20% for office uses. 2. Consider alternatives for meeting parking requirements including parking in the rear of buildings, shared parking, on-street, underground, or ramp parking. 3. Use building standards that enhance and maintain the small town heritage and traditional small-town look including brick facades, traditional street lighting, and overhangs over the sidewalk, boardwalks, and the like. Establishment of design guidelines to support this objective. 4. Involve residents, businesses, community groups and other stakeholders in the planning of these areas. 5. Create master plans for mixed-use areas to ensure integration of uses and responsiveness to adjacent land uses. 6. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 7. Encourage underground or structured parking through flexibility to standards, including increased residential density up to 20 units per acre. 8. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. 9. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 10. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 16 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 16 Commercial Uses The following objectives refer to commercial land uses which will provide a variety of retail products and services mixed with smaller offices. Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Provide convenient and attractive shopping and services to meet the needs of City residents. 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 and the rural vistas and open spaces of the City. 8. Establish standards for the commercial area north of TH 55 at Tamarack Drive which results in a high quality, walkable and appropriately scaled development which complements nearby residential neighborhoods, emphasizes goods and services for local residents over highway users and provides gathering opportunities for the community. 9. Require frontage roads that do not directly access arterial roadways and limit access to arterial and collector roadways. 10. Limit the scale of commercial development where urban services are not available to protect water resources and to integrate such uses with surrounding rural lands. 11. 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. 12. Emphasize pedestrian safety. 13. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 14. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 17 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 17 Business Uses The following objectives refer to business land uses that are connected to or planned for urban services. Businesses in this use generally include office complexes, business park development, warehouse and light industrial opportunities. Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Encourage businesses that benefit the local community by providing employment opportunities utilizing high quality design, and having limited impact on public services. 3. Consider permitting uses such as nursing homes and assisted living facilities where suitable, subject to appropriate requirements related to density, ensuring compatibility between uses, and preventing the use from being predominantly independent-living residential in nature. These uses are expected to occupy a very small proportion of Business land. Residential density is estimated to be between 5-20 units per net acre, but flexibility will be considered based upon the mix of nursing home, assisted living, memory care, independent living units, and other uses proposed within a development. 4. Regulate the impact of development along the border between business and residentially guided areas to ensure that business uses have a minimal impact on residential areas. 5. 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. 6. Encourage construction that enhances the visual appeal of TH 55 corridor and the rural vistas and open spaces of the City. 7. Create or update standards that promote a more rural appearance, or create campus style developments that protect ecologically significant areas and natural features. 8. Require frontage roads that do not directly access arterial roadways and limit access points to collector and arterial roadways. 9. 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. 10. Emphasize pedestrian safety. 11. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 12. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 18 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 18 Staging Plan The staging plan is tied to infrastructure plans, including water, wastewater and transportation, to ensure that growth and development are commensurate with services necessary to support new residents and businesses in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The staging plan, Map 5-5, utilizes flexible staging boundaries to direct where and when development should proceed within the City and is built on the following principles: • Growth should encompass a balance of land uses to provide residential and business areas for development throughout the planning period. The staging plan also is intended to reduce concentration of development within a location during a particular timeframe. • The staging plan identifies staged increments of 5-year periods and provides some flexibility between adjacent staging periods. Development shall be limited to a maximum of two years prior to the existing staging period, and will be tied to an incentive based points system. Such flexibility will not be permitted for new high- density residential development to finalize prior to 2021 as deemed necessary by the Metropolitan Council to ensure sufficient land is available at higher densities from 2021- 2030. Table 5-5, located on the following page, describes the net acreage of the various land uses by Staging Period. The following table describes the corresponding number of residential units which could be developed upon property within each Staging Period. The numbers below do not include several lots that have been approved for development, but are not yet constructed, which is why the capacity noted below differs slightly from the forecasts noted in Chapter 3. Although most of the property staged for development is available in earlier timeframes, the City anticipates that actual growth will be more linear as described in the forecasts in Chapter 3. TABLE 5-4 STAGING PLAN – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY Time Period Total Residential Units High Density Residential Units 2018-2021 345 32 2021-2025 161 161 2025-2030 464 94 2030-2035 0 2035-2040 47 Total 1,017 287 Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 19 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 19 TABLE 5-5 STAGING PLAN – NET ACRES Future Land Use Existing 2017 Change 2018-2021 2021 Change 2021-2025 2025 Change 2025-2030 2030 Change 2030-2035 2035 Change 2035-2040 2040 Rural Residential 6,015.3 0.0 6,015.3 0.0 6,015.3 0.0 6,015.3 0.0 6,015.3 0.0 6,015.3 Agriculture 174.5 0.0 174.5 0.0 174.5 0.0 174.5 0.0 174.5 0.0 174.5 Future Develop. Area 547.9 0.0 547.9 0.0 547.9 0.0 547.9 0.0 547.9 0.0 547.9 Future Staged Growth* 666.1 -467.7 198.4 -13.4 185.0 -161.5 23.5 0.0 23.5 -23.5 0.0 Low Density Resid. 679.3 95.5 774.8 0.0 774.8 67.4 842.2 0.0 842.2 23.5 865.7 Medium Density Res. 21.5 24.7 46.2 0.0 46.2 0.0 46.2 0.0 46.2 0.0 46.2 High Density Resid. 9.6 2.7 12.3 13.4 25.7 0.0 25.7 0.0 25.7 0.0 25.7 Mixed Residential 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.1 94.1 0.0 94.1 0.0 94.1 Uptown Hamel 33.2 8.0 41.2 0.0 41.2 0.0 41.2 0.0 41.2 0.0 41.2 Commercial 135.9 61.7 197.6 0.0 197.6 0.0 197.6 0.0 197.6 0.0 197.6 Business 196.8 275.1 471.9 0.0 471.9 0.0 471.9 0.0 471.9 0.0 471.9 Rural Commercial 47.6 0.0 47.6 0.0 47.6 0.0 47.6 0.0 47.6 0.0 47.6 Institutional 194.0 0.0 194.0 0.0 194.0 0.0 194.0 0.0 194.0 0.0 194.0 Parks, Rec, Open Space 1,971.2 0.0 1,971.2 0.0 1,971.2 0.0 1,971.2 0.0 1,971.2 0.0 1,971.2 Private Recreation 297.5 0.0 297.5 0.0 297.5 0.0 297.5 0.0 297.5 0.0 297.5 Closed Sanitary Landfill 124.7 0.0 124.7 0.0 124.7 0.0 124.7 0.0 124.7 0.0 124.7 Right-of-Way 616.9 0.0 616.9 0.0 616.9 0.0 616.9 0.0 616.9 0.0 616.9 • Future Staged Growth represents the acreage which is included in a future Staging Period. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 20 Resubmitted for Met Council Review – June 2018 Page 5- 20 (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Medina 12 PINTO DRC OUNTY RO AD 24 H O M E S T EADTRLWILLOW DRCOUNTY ROAD 101COUNTYROAD116HAMEL RD ARROWHEADDRCOUNTYROAD19PARKVIEW DR55 High : 1277143 Low : 9 00001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 2 30.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Medina, Hennepin County Gross Solar Potential(Watt-hours per Year) HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Map 5-22016 Existing Land Uses 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Submitted for Metropolitan Council ReviewMap Date: December 4, 2017 Legend Agricultural Rural Residential Single Family Detached Single Family Attached Multifamily Mixed Use Residential Retail and Other Commercial Office Industrial and Utility Institutitional Park, Recreational, or Preserve Golf Course Major Highway Railway Open Water Undeveloped Wetland Locations HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Map 5-3Future Land Use Plan 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Resubmitted for Metropolitan Council ReviewMap Date: January 11, 2018 Legend Future Land Use Rural Residential Agricultural Future Development Area Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Residential Uptown Hamel Commercial Business Rural Commercial Institutional Private Recreational Park, Recreational, and Open Space Closed Sanitary Landfill HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Katrina Independence Mooney Peter Unnamed Spurzem Holy Name Half Moon Wolsfeld Medina Unnamed Unnamed Winterhalter Thies School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Lost Horse Unnamed Academy Marsh Map 5-4Development and Growth Plan 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Submitted for Metropolitan Council ReviewMap Date: December 4, 2017 Legend Future Land Use Rural Residential Agricultural Future Development Area Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Residential Uptown Hamel Commercial Business Rural Commercial Institutional Private Recreational Park, Recreational, and Open Space Closed Sanitary Landfill Wetland Locations Wetland Locations HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Katrina Independence Mooney Peter Unnamed Spurzem Holy Name Half Moon Wolsfeld Medina Unnamed Unnamed Winterhalter Thies School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Lost Horse Unnamed Academy Marsh Map 5-5Staging and Growth 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Resubmitted for Metropolitan Council ReviewMap Date: June 6, 2018 The Staging and Growth Plan allows potential flexibility for urban services up to two years prior tothe indicated staging period. Such flexiblity will be considered through a evaluation system based onthe extent to which a proposal exceeds general City standards. The Future Development Area identifies areas whichmay potentially be planned for urban services in thefuture beyond the term of this plan (post-2040). The Long-term Sewer Service Area is a long-termplanning designation of the Metropolitan Council. Itidentifies areas which may be considered for potentialsanitary sewer service in the future beyond the termof this Plan. Legend Urban Services Phasing Plan Developed 2018 2020 2021 2025 2035 FDA LTSSA HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Katrina Independence Mooney Peter Unnamed Spurzem Holy Name Half Moon Wolsfeld Medina Unnamed Unnamed Winterhalter Thies School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Lost Horse Unnamed Academy Marsh Map 5-6Metroplitan CouncilLong-term Sewer Service Area 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Resubmitte d for Metrop olitan Cou ncil Revie wMap Da te: Februa ry 23, 2 018 The Futu re De ve lopmen t Area identifies areas whichmay potentially be plann ed fo r urba n service s in thefuture beyon d the term of this plan (p ost-20 40). The Lon g-te rm Sewer Service Area is a long -termplanning designation of the Metropolita n C ouncil. Itidentifies areas which may be conside re d for potentialsanitary sewe r service in the fu ture beyo nd the termof this Plan. Leg en d Net Acres of LTSS A P ar cels Under 10 net acres Over 10 net acres Proposed to be removed from LTSSA Wetland Locations Metropolitan Urban Service Area Existing Urban Services (2017) Added to MUSA 2018-2040 Future Development Area (post-2040) Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MED►INA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher de. • .n a smalle .. ortion c the site to allow for :._er lots and increa = • open ace on the r : of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Pr► for ei ing flexibility r. Single family houses only. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3-stry buildi with a 4-s • building with a larger ..o : tnt. mailer '.. .rint. I'd prefer no apartment or condo structure. 3. ther sug ions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: Please consider re -planning. None of presented options neither are guitable for Medina nor accommodate interests of Medina residents 5. Other comments/questions: No units should be considered that could potentially impact livability of current Medina residents. No development plans should be considered that would impact properly value of existing Medina residents. • rd Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: Daria Trakhtenberg Phone: 763-245-2247 Address: 3061 Wild Flower Trail Email: Medina, MN 55340 dariatberg@gmail.com Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an would prefer: 3 -story building with a larger footprint. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. roviding flexibility for either. C.l rat , TM 44 [Cc [i v� ff I apartment or condo structure with the saiiie"number uni , I 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. u agAg-et,va etpeet ezAA.J2 v' lii G�( 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards f r deverpment• 1-0 red r�v1, lvote2 P c.44 5. Other comments/questions: LE 6 lc_ 64Aci rEi Cr.-trvu. : C b It C - '51(e -u. (6-AC; �. tIA k hag as (1141 / > u.�v h v /WSW )('lease contac me regarding my questions above Name: � (iYl d � a.. �C�G2 �-��--, Phone: l� iL -fit Address: e±02—"' JJ r trio() ( Teri f l?.e Email: "f 13 i s , ht s . ii (i1 ac/ 3 -story building with a r:er footprint. Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibilit for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would • er: 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on re irements and s andards for development: LOIN �� it um cal`Nilr�inoi t (oWi'O Nc) Marerl WIVcirl 5.pther comments/questions: 101 NIA oxi\irim,t Name: o Please contact me regarding my questions above ‘11\1(10i) Address: 'L0 b rut/ Ovl Phone: Email: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story building wit rger footprint. 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirem nts and standards for development: (j )ey( �✓'_l , / �� �� ��J S 5. Other comments/questions: •1 /'7 . `t e l ❑ Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: l- c��'�ZAI n Phone: �Address: 7)._ �G���� GEC Email: 3 -story building with a larger footprint. Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I re er: 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments/questions: ❑ Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: L( Address: ` l (9_ r.) bruck rff� e Ccm flyir ,///` Phone: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. ONG ob°6 069 f-fa-fr,2e,['i naae Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: + G' /1,(C? 3-s b ing with a 4 -story . ildin. « a lam rint. smaller rint. jeri<_ 3. Other suggestions/feedback equirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments/questions: p /, c—F%IC/ S f Af3J�Cl .C`7Tl?-t v , crrf,C / ZcR a_ 0lie-e r h 42.-e,t :e .s %.e scI o Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: ogee41/4.- iee4 Phone: ,3 CJ' Address: /1“ &t rit tee — 1 d,jA, Email: ,"7„66:4L /no c . ° v�� Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, 1 would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with t would prefer: 3 -story building with a 4 -story building with a larger footprint. smaller footprint. Providin: fle r either. 0,6s)(c:.$ 100 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: `C.etC2.4e, th3Gam- k1i- A -fAf+- (, z,,� 5.Other comments/questions: Cal Akiib 1e_ +0 CA,Creitpr !titer Name: Please contact me regarding my questions above 7142,0-1-tre4i Phone: q62- (//12, — 6 3-6 Address: ;Obi WI Id Pio 'a 1 1M “-'&11,0 Email: :Se Q &e ti1"T eN b Q6i/1024 coii Address: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story building with larger footprint. 4\1 4 -story building wit smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments s ons: TA ib -y)ctg( 1Lib <-)) [010At--- in (,V, W � i ke( gel 01- tfrif -b) IAA Wei/ ❑ Please contact me regardingp my questions above Name: INN/// 2IH' l t, )Qi M Phone: 444) ' 'S ' 57I 3 I Email: 1 11 l��r � �"� a Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: lowitl_ high -r density on a Limiting e hi:' end of smaller p io of the site to the high -de 'ty . ortion of allow for la : - r lots and the site which c • d be increased op ' space on the balanced by sm 11- dots on rest of the • ite. the rest of the : rte. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story bi cling with a larger fo 4 -story buil . i with a smaller foo 3. Other suggestions/feedba k wi requirements a d standa i s fi r development: LA5 \w1Vt, d E1662.i 5. Other comments/questions: tea'4WL'3 o Pleasecontactme regarding my questions above -7 Name: Li t ZZe LTI)Y% Phone: Address: rThtfe (�, V7',�. Email: p0(1) U✓` a Yl(ka,;)t v co _ WAYZATA PUBLIC SCHOOLS August 7, 2018 Dear Planning Commission Members, The Wayzata Public Schools, Independent School District #284, has determined that it is economically advisable to secure additional land. As you may be aware, Wayzata Public Schools has entered into a purchase agreement for a portion of the Wessin property north of Hamel Road and either side of Tamarack Drive. We hope to close on the property before September 1, 2018. This land will position future Wayzata School Boards for the future! At this time, there are no imminent plans for use of the property. However, we have been observing the Medina Comprehensive Plan process carefully. We would highly support the mixed residential designation for the area. With the educational facilities as a conditional use, we would have the opportunity, in the future to work with the City of Medina to serve families and children. Our future need(s) may or may not involve the entire available acreage. We would work with city officials during the planning process. The Wayzata Public Schools continues to experience robust growth. A large portion of the City of Medina is served by ISD# 284. Although largely rural at this time, the City of Medina could represent significant future growth for Wayzata Schools. This parcel could be a developed by the district to serve an educational purpose. Thank you for the opportunity to provide support for the current designation. Sincerely, L c7 Kristin Tollison Director of Administrative Services Excellence. For each and every student. Dusty Finke From: Jay Echtenkamp <j.s.echtenkamp@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 10:32 AM To: Dusty Finke Subject: August 15 Planning Commission meeting Hello Dusty, I was planning to be at next week's meeting but my schedule will not permit my attendance. If I may, I would like to pass on my comments. I understand the need to the city to rezone for higher density in order to meet Met Council requirements. I have no issues with rezoning the land northwest of Brockton Lane and Medina Road to "Mixed Use Residential" so long as it is compatible and consistent with the neighboring use. After all, I am now part of that redevelopment. I am concerned that the language of proposed Mixed Use Residential terminology includes 'apartments'. Specifically, that " an overall density of 3.5-4.0 units/acre. However, a portion .. may be developed at a higher density of 8 units/acre or greater .. , which may include apartments". The Arrowhead Drive/Hamel Road parcel is compatible with higher, apartment -potential density. The Brockton/Medina parcel is not. As you know, the Arrowhead Drive/Hamel Road property is surrounded by "Vacant Land Commercial" and "Industrial Preferred". Adjacent property owners include Loram, the Medina Business Park, and the City of Medina. Arrowhead Drive has better access to Highway 55 for apartment density. Not so for the residential roads that surround the Brockton/Medina Road parcel. I know that the planning commission and you must already recognize that higher apartment density is more appropriate for the Arrowhead Drive parcel. My question is this: If the Planning Commission approves Mixed Residential for both parcels, would the commission put on the record that "apartments" should be prohibited (discouraged?) as a land use in the Medina/Brockton parcel because "apartments" would be inconsistent/incompatible with the adjacent residential and town home density? Thanks for receiving/reviewing my comments. Best regards, Jay Echtenkamp 3041 Wildflower Trail Medina (763)229-5666 1 June 11, 2018 Dear Council Members, My name is Dan Dugan and my wife Jennifer and I have lived at 4125 Brockton Lane since 1992. Our property has been identified as one of three located on the northwest corner of Medina Rd and Brockton Ln. We received your letter inviting us to the open house to discuss regulations related to the Mixed Residential land use including our property. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend but my wife will be there. We understand that the city has a requirement imposed by the Met Council to provide opportunities for development. We also understand the overall density intentions and have only one major concern. Please consider the following request in your process for establishing development guidelines. Since the home on our property is of a much greater value than those of our neighbors, it is important to us that we retain that value when development comes. There are basically two practical choices available to us: 1) Sell the property to a developer (house included) and watch it get bulldozed to make room for the construction of homes similar in size to the new homes sharing the north side of our property. 2) Sell the majority of our property and retain the home. This would mirror the Echtenkamp situation of which I am very familiar as they have been our neighbors for years. In order to achieve this, we would need flexibility to reduce the units per acre immediately surrounding our house to construct new homes of a similar value. The remaining land available would have an increase in units per acre to compensate. The intent is that we would still achieve the overall unit/acre requirement and be able to remain in our home. I am not a developer or a builder but I believe that larger homes for part, complimented by multifamily for the remainder might work. We have no intention of leaving our property and we understand that development must happen to satisfy the Met Council. As longstanding residents of Medina, our request, at this early point in the process, is simple. We ask that, as part of your development guidelines, you please allow us the flexibility to consider both options in the future. Sincerely, Dan & Jennifer Dugan Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MED►INA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher de. • .n a smalle .. ortion c the site to allow for :._er lots and increa = • open ace on the r : of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Pr► for ei ing flexibility r. Single family houses only. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3-stry buildi with a 4-s • building with a larger ..o : tnt. mailer '.. .rint. I'd prefer no apartment or condo structure. 3. ther sug ions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: Please consider re -planning. None of presented options neither are guitable for Medina nor accommodate interests of Medina residents 5. Other comments/questions: No units should be considered that could potentially impact livability of current Medina residents. No development plans should be considered that would impact properly value of existing Medina residents. • rd Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: Daria Trakhtenberg Phone: 763-245-2247 Address: 3061 Wild Flower Trail Email: Medina, MN 55340 dariatberg@gmail.com Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an would prefer: 3 -story building with a larger footprint. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. roviding flexibility for either. C.l rat , TM 44 [Cc [i v� ff I apartment or condo structure with the saiiie"number uni , I 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. u agAg-et,va etpeet ezAA.J2 v' lii G�( 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards f r deverpment• 1-0 red r�v1, lvote2 P c.44 5. Other comments/questions: LE 6 lc_ 64Aci rEi Cr.-trvu. : C b It C - '51(e -u. (6-AC; �. tIA k hag as (1141 / > u.�v h v /WSW )('lease contac me regarding my questions above Name: � (iYl d � a.. �C�G2 �-��--, Phone: l� iL -fit Address: e±02—"' JJ r trio() ( Teri f l?.e Email: "f 13 i s , ht s . ii (i1 ac/ 3 -story building with a r:er footprint. Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibilit for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would • er: 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on re irements and s andards for development: LOIN �� it um cal`Nilr�inoi t (oWi'O Nc) Marerl WIVcirl 5.pther comments/questions: 101 NIA oxi\irim,t Name: o Please contact me regarding my questions above ‘11\1(10i) Address: 'L0 b rut/ Ovl Phone: Email: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story building wit rger footprint. 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirem nts and standards for development: (j )ey( �✓'_l , / �� �� ��J S 5. Other comments/questions: •1 /'7 . `t e l ❑ Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: l- c��'�ZAI n Phone: �Address: 7)._ �G���� GEC Email: 3 -story building with a larger footprint. Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I re er: 4 -story building with a smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments/questions: ❑ Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: L( Address: ` l (9_ r.) bruck rff� e Ccm flyir ,///` Phone: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. ONG ob°6 069 f-fa-fr,2e,['i naae Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: + G' /1,(C? 3-s b ing with a 4 -story . ildin. « a lam rint. smaller rint. jeri<_ 3. Other suggestions/feedback equirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments/questions: p /, c—F%IC/ S f Af3J�Cl .C`7Tl?-t v , crrf,C / ZcR a_ 0lie-e r h 42.-e,t :e .s %.e scI o Please contact me regarding my questions above Name: ogee41/4.- iee4 Phone: ,3 CJ' Address: /1“ &t rit tee — 1 d,jA, Email: ,"7„66:4L /no c . ° v�� Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, 1 would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with t would prefer: 3 -story building with a 4 -story building with a larger footprint. smaller footprint. Providin: fle r either. 0,6s)(c:.$ 100 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: `C.etC2.4e, th3Gam- k1i- A -fAf+- (, z,,� 5.Other comments/questions: Cal Akiib 1e_ +0 CA,Creitpr !titer Name: Please contact me regarding my questions above 7142,0-1-tre4i Phone: q62- (//12, — 6 3-6 Address: ;Obi WI Id Pio 'a 1 1M “-'&11,0 Email: :Se Q &e ti1"T eN b Q6i/1024 coii Address: Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: Allowing higher density on a smaller portion of the site to allow for larger lots and increased open space on the rest of the site. Limiting the high end of the high -density portion of the site which could be balanced by smaller lots on the rest of the site. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story building with larger footprint. 4\1 4 -story building wit smaller footprint. 3. Other suggestions/feedback on requirements and standards for development: 5. Other comments s ons: TA ib -y)ctg( 1Lib <-)) [010At--- in (,V, W � i ke( gel 01- tfrif -b) IAA Wei/ ❑ Please contact me regardingp my questions above Name: INN/// 2IH' l t, )Qi M Phone: 444) ' 'S ' 57I 3 I Email: 1 11 l��r � �"� a Mixed Residential Open House Comment Card MEDINA 1. Given the requirement for development of a fixed number of residential units on the same site, I would prefer: lowitl_ high -r density on a Limiting e hi:' end of smaller p io of the site to the high -de 'ty . ortion of allow for la : - r lots and the site which c • d be increased op ' space on the balanced by sm 11- dots on rest of the • ite. the rest of the : rte. Providing flexibility for either. 2. In the development of an apartment or condo structure with the same number of units, I would prefer: 3 -story bi cling with a larger fo 4 -story buil . i with a smaller foo 3. Other suggestions/feedba k wi requirements a d standa i s fi r development: LA5 \w1Vt, d E1662.i 5. Other comments/questions: tea'4WL'3 o Pleasecontactme regarding my questions above -7 Name: Li t ZZe LTI)Y% Phone: Address: rThtfe (�, V7',�. Email: p0(1) U✓` a Yl(ka,;)t v co _ WAYZATA PUBLIC SCHOOLS August 7, 2018 Dear Planning Commission Members, The Wayzata Public Schools, Independent School District #284, has determined that it is economically advisable to secure additional land. As you may be aware, Wayzata Public Schools has entered into a purchase agreement for a portion of the Wessin property north of Hamel Road and either side of Tamarack Drive. We hope to close on the property before September 1, 2018. This land will position future Wayzata School Boards for the future! At this time, there are no imminent plans for use of the property. However, we have been observing the Medina Comprehensive Plan process carefully. We would highly support the mixed residential designation for the area. With the educational facilities as a conditional use, we would have the opportunity, in the future to work with the City of Medina to serve families and children. Our future need(s) may or may not involve the entire available acreage. We would work with city officials during the planning process. The Wayzata Public Schools continues to experience robust growth. A large portion of the City of Medina is served by ISD# 284. Although largely rural at this time, the City of Medina could represent significant future growth for Wayzata Schools. This parcel could be a developed by the district to serve an educational purpose. Thank you for the opportunity to provide support for the current designation. Sincerely, L c7 Kristin Tollison Director of Administrative Services Excellence. For each and every student. Dusty Finke From: Jay Echtenkamp <j.s.echtenkamp@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 10:32 AM To: Dusty Finke Subject: August 15 Planning Commission meeting Hello Dusty, I was planning to be at next week's meeting but my schedule will not permit my attendance. If I may, I would like to pass on my comments. I understand the need to the city to rezone for higher density in order to meet Met Council requirements. I have no issues with rezoning the land northwest of Brockton Lane and Medina Road to "Mixed Use Residential" so long as it is compatible and consistent with the neighboring use. After all, I am now part of that redevelopment. I am concerned that the language of proposed Mixed Use Residential terminology includes 'apartments'. Specifically, that " an overall density of 3.5-4.0 units/acre. However, a portion .. may be developed at a higher density of 8 units/acre or greater .. , which may include apartments". The Arrowhead Drive/Hamel Road parcel is compatible with higher, apartment -potential density. The Brockton/Medina parcel is not. As you know, the Arrowhead Drive/Hamel Road property is surrounded by "Vacant Land Commercial" and "Industrial Preferred". Adjacent property owners include Loram, the Medina Business Park, and the City of Medina. Arrowhead Drive has better access to Highway 55 for apartment density. Not so for the residential roads that surround the Brockton/Medina Road parcel. I know that the planning commission and you must already recognize that higher apartment density is more appropriate for the Arrowhead Drive parcel. My question is this: If the Planning Commission approves Mixed Residential for both parcels, would the commission put on the record that "apartments" should be prohibited (discouraged?) as a land use in the Medina/Brockton parcel because "apartments" would be inconsistent/incompatible with the adjacent residential and town home density? Thanks for receiving/reviewing my comments. Best regards, Jay Echtenkamp 3041 Wildflower Trail Medina (763)229-5666 1 June 11, 2018 Dear Council Members, My name is Dan Dugan and my wife Jennifer and I have lived at 4125 Brockton Lane since 1992. Our property has been identified as one of three located on the northwest corner of Medina Rd and Brockton Ln. We received your letter inviting us to the open house to discuss regulations related to the Mixed Residential land use including our property. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend but my wife will be there. We understand that the city has a requirement imposed by the Met Council to provide opportunities for development. We also understand the overall density intentions and have only one major concern. Please consider the following request in your process for establishing development guidelines. Since the home on our property is of a much greater value than those of our neighbors, it is important to us that we retain that value when development comes. There are basically two practical choices available to us: 1) Sell the property to a developer (house included) and watch it get bulldozed to make room for the construction of homes similar in size to the new homes sharing the north side of our property. 2) Sell the majority of our property and retain the home. This would mirror the Echtenkamp situation of which I am very familiar as they have been our neighbors for years. In order to achieve this, we would need flexibility to reduce the units per acre immediately surrounding our house to construct new homes of a similar value. The remaining land available would have an increase in units per acre to compensate. The intent is that we would still achieve the overall unit/acre requirement and be able to remain in our home. I am not a developer or a builder but I believe that larger homes for part, complimented by multifamily for the remainder might work. We have no intention of leaving our property and we understand that development must happen to satisfy the Met Council. As longstanding residents of Medina, our request, at this early point in the process, is simple. We ask that, as part of your development guidelines, you please allow us the flexibility to consider both options in the future. Sincerely, Dan & Jennifer Dugan 1 CITY OF MEDINA 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday July 10, 2018 4 5 1. Call to Order: Chairperson White called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 6 7 Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Aaron Amic, Dino DesLauriers, Robin Reid, 8 Janet White, and Rashmi Williams. 9 10 Absent: Planning Commissioner Kerby Nester. 11 12 Also Present: Planning Director Dusty Finke. 13 14 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 15 16 No comments made. 17 18 3. Update from City Council Proceedings 19 20 Cousineau reported that the Council considered the Ditter concept plan. She stated that the 21 Council was not necessarily opposed to the idea but believe that more time should be spent to 22 create a different configuration with fewer lots. She stated that the ordinance was passed 23 regarding the disconnection of sanitary sewer. She stated that the overlay projects for 24 Buckskin Drive and Hickory Drive were approved. She noted that there was still an 25 outstanding issue with the draft Comprehensive Plan and the high-density staging. She stated 26 that the Council gave in to the 2021 staging desired by the Metropolitan Council to move 27 forward. She stated that the Council received the 2017 Financial Report and received a clean 28 opinion. She noted that the Council recently approved a liquor license for Target. 29 30 DesLauriers asked which proposed developments the high-density staging would impact. 31 32 Finke noted that the staging would impact three properties, two of which had presented 33 concept plans, Elim Care and the Palm property. 34 35 White stated that she was surprised at the level of discussion for the Ditter concept plan and 36 asked for input. 37 38 Cousineau stated that it seemed to not fit currently and would require an amendment to the 39 Comprehensive Plan and therefore the timing did not seem appropriate. She stated that the 40 Council encouraged the applicant to continue to work with staff to determine if a different 41 configuration could be created with lesser lots. 42 43 Finke stated that he had a conversation with the Ditters and they are reviewing their options. 44 45 4. Planning Department Report 46 47 Finke provided an update. 48 49 50 2 5. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 8 of the City Code 51 Related to Stormwater Management Regulations 52 53 Finke explained that staff reviewed the ordinance to determine necessary updates. He stated 54 that the ordinance was reviewed to determine the elements that would trigger the 55 requirements and the design guide provides options to property owners to meet the 56 requirements. He stated that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing tonight and 57 then offer any comments on the proposed ordinance. He noted that comments can also be 58 made regarding the design guide. He stated that the ordinance has two primary changes, 59 while the design guide has been swiped clean and redone with the updated current 60 information. He stated that the primary ordinance changes are related to the triggers that 61 require a property owner to install BMPs on their property. He stated that the City has more 62 stringent triggers than the watershed, so smaller projects would require the construction of 63 stormwater improvements. He noted that the goal is to find the mix of having improvements 64 to water quality before it becomes impaired and tying those improvements to the addition of 65 hardcover. He provided examples of exemptions. He stated that the volume control 66 requirement is proposed to increase from one inch of rainfall needing to be controlled to 1.1 67 inch. He noted that while infiltration is required in other communities, the high-water table 68 and clay soils do not make Medina prime for infiltration. He stated that while filtration is not 69 a preferred method of volume control, the method is left as an option because that will still be 70 a practical option for some sites. 71 72 Albers asked if much is gained by making the requirements more stringent. 73 74 Finke replied that the implementation of stormwater management improvements is the main 75 way in which the City meets the TMDL requirements from the watershed. He stated that 76 more stormwater projects equate to more phosphorus reduction, which helps the City to reach 77 the goals of the watershed without requiring the City to complete additional projects on its 78 own. 79 80 White opened the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. 81 82 No comments made. 83 84 White closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. 85 86 White stated that there are impaired waters in Medina and asked for additional information on 87 triggers for those areas. 88 89 Finke replied that impaired waters do not have different requirements. He stated that there 90 are however different requirements for properties within 300 feet of lakes and streams that 91 limit hardcover to 25 percent of the site which is controlled by the shoreland overlay district 92 regulations. 93 94 Amic asked if there are any unintended negative consequences moving from one inch to 1.1 95 inch. 96 97 Finke replied that additional area would be required for the additional ten therefore a 98 consequence would be additional occupation of the site for the improvement. He noted that 99 two thirds of the City would be required to meet the 1.1-inch requirement by the watershed 100 regardless of the City requirement. He stated that there are impacts from the thresholds, as an 101 improvement would be required if 5,000 square feet of hardcover is added. He explained that 102 3 each lot in a development would not be required to meet the stormwater requirements, as the 103 development itself is planned to meet the requirements as a whole. 104 105 Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend adoption of the ordinance related to 106 stormwater management as presented. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Nester) 107 108 6. Approval of the May 8, 2018 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 109 110 Motion by DesLauriers, seconded by Reid, to approve the May 8, 2018, Planning 111 Commission minutes as presented. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Nester) 112 113 7. Council Meeting Schedule 114 115 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Albers volunteered 116 to attend in representation of the Commission. 117 118 8. Adjourn 119 120 Motion by Albers, seconded by Amic, to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Motion carried 121 unanimously. 122 1 CITY OF MEDINA 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Special Meeting – Tuesday May 15, 2018 4 Concurrent Meeting with City Council 5 6 1. Call to Order: Chairperson White called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Aaron Amic, Dino DesLauriers, Kerby 9 Nester, Robin Reid, Janet White, and Rashmi Williams. 10 11 Absent: None 12 13 Also Present: Mayor Bob Mitchell, Councilmember Kathleen Martin, Councilmember John 14 Anderson, Councilmember Jeff Pederson, City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Planner 15 Dusty Finke, Associate Planner Deb Pederson, City Stormwater Engineer Stephanie Hatten. 16 17 2. Stormwater Discussion 18 19 Planning Director Dusty Finke introduced Stephanie Hatten of WSB Engineering to present the 20 Stormwater Design Guide Update. 21 22 Hatten explained the changes came out of the surface water management plan and the update was 23 necessary to be consistent with the three Watersheds. She explained the guidelines had been 24 confusing and so the update helps to better clarify and provide flexibility. Staff is recommending 25 that stormwater improvements be triggered on increases of impervious disturbance of 5000 26 square feet for all land uses. Redevelopment is triggered when a site is greater than one acre and 27 more than 40% of hardcover disturbed, however if disturbance is reduced by 10% then no 28 stormwater requirements apply. Single family development is exempt if disturbance is less than 29 20% of the site. 30 31 Volume Control/Water Quality – In order to meet these requirements, a project would have to 32 absorb 1.1 inches of run-off over the new impervious during a 24 hour rainfall. 33 34 Water Reuse for irrigation from stormwater ponds provides a good opportunity for volume 35 control in Medina and is typically done through residential lawns and uses like golf courses. 36 37 Infiltration basins are difficult to function properly in Medina since our soils are more clay type 38 soils which is difficult to drain within a 48 hour period which is required. Due to clay soils the 39 City typically utilizes filtration type methods. Iron enhanced sand filters can be used which 40 removes more phosphorus, but life cycle is only 8-10 years and annual maintenance is higher but 41 has a huge water quality benefit. Medina currently has a lot of filtration basins, but no iron 42 filters. 43 44 Hatten explains the changes to the thresholds were minimal but language is simpler. The changes 45 being contemplated by staff give developers more options to meet the volume control, and it 46 slows down run-off on projects. 47 48 Finke noted that the City’s management practice requirements were largely similar to those of the 49 watersheds in the community. However, the City’s existing regulations tend to be triggered on 50 2 smaller projects which watersheds may not require improvements. He noted that staff had 51 discussed adding an exemption for residential projects with low levels of hardcover under 20%. 52 53 Amic inquired how the new regulations would affect a development such as his family’s 54 construction of the Goddard School. He noted that substantial additional costs may have caused 55 the project to fail. 56 57 Finke stated that the project was part of a broader development which was already approved prior 58 to existing stormwater requirements. If the entire development would have been developed 59 today, it would have needed to incorporate more treatment practices, which would likely have 60 increased the cost of the lots purchased. He noted, however, that these requirements would be in 61 place for the watershed regardless, so the City’s requirements are not significantly different. The 62 difference is whether improvements are triggered by smaller projects. 63 64 Finke asked the committee if they favored lower triggers which would require improvement with 65 small projects. Martin says she likes the plan. Council members and Planning Commissioners 66 generally concurred. 67 68 Mitchell and Hatten discuss where drinking water comes from. Hatten explained that Medina 69 relies on other cities to recharge our aquifer since we have so much clay. 70 71 Finke said staff will be preparing an ordinance and design guidelines. 72 73 3. Adjourn 74 75 The consensus of the City Council and Planning Commission was to adjourn the meeting at 6:44 76 p.m. 77