HomeMy Public PortalAbout11-09-2016 POSTED IN CITY HALL November 4, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2016
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. Approval of Draft October 11, 2016 Meeting Minutes
6. Public Hearing – Excelsior Group – 2212 and 2120 Chippewa Road –
Concept Plan Review for 61 Single Family Lots
7. Council Meeting Schedule
8. Adjourn
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 1 November 1, 2016
City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: October 28, 2016
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) Olkon Variance and Preliminary Plat – 2362 Willow Drive – Ellis and Nancy Olkon have
requested a variance from the minimum suitable soils requirements to subdivide their 20 acre
property into two lots. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance request at the September 13
meeting and unanimously recommended denial. Staff intends to present the variance to the City
Council on November 1. Staff presented the variance before the applicant completes the cost of
finalizing remaining items on the plat.
B) AutoMotorPlex PUD General Plan and Plat – east of Arrowhead Drive, north of Hamel Road –
Bruno Silikowski has requested review of a PUD General Plan and Plat for construction of
approximately 237,500 square feet of private garage condominiums for motorsports enthusiasts. The
Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the October 11 Planning Commission meeting and
recommended approval 6-1. Staff intends to present to the City Council on November 1.
C) Excelsior Group Concept Plan – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road – The Excelsior Group has
requested review of a Concept Plan for development of 58 single family homes north of Chippewa
Road and west of Mohawk Drive. The property is not in the current staging period and is currently
proposed to be guided rural residential in the 2040 Comp Plan Update. The request is tentatively
scheduled for a public hearing at the November 9 Planning Commission meeting.
D) Jeffrey-Johnson Lot Line Rearrangement and Easement Vacation – 2605 and 2505 Willow Drive
– Glenn Jeffrey has requested approval of a rearrangement of the lot line between his and his
neighbor’s property. The Jeffrey’s propane tank is located on the Johnson property. The applicant
has withdrawn the request and the project will be closed.
E) Just for Kix, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery, Wright-Hennepin Solar Panels –The
City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants
with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects.
F) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll– These preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting
a final plat application
G) Deerhill Preserve, Hamel Haven subdivisions – These subdivisions have received final approval.
Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before construction begins.
Other Projects
A) Comprehensive Plan – The draft Plan is published on the City’s website, please encourage residents
to review. Residents can provide feedback on mySidewalk or by contacting me. Open Houses are
scheduled for October 27, 29 and November 1. Staff has sent an invitation to all property owners in
the City for the events.
B) City Hall Renovation – the project is (finally) near completion. Furniture is scheduled for
installation on November 7 and Planning will be moving downstairs on November 8-9.
1
CITY OF MEDINA 1
PLANNING COMMISSION 2
DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3
Tuesday October 11, 2016 4
5
1. Call to Order: Chairperson V. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6
7
Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Chris Barry, Laurie Rengel, Kim Murrin, 8
Robin Reid, and Janet White. 9
10
Absent: Robin Reid. 11
12
Also Present: City Planner 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
Anderson reported that the Council met the previous week and approved a change order for 21
well #8, as well as approval for grant submission to the Metropolitan Council. 22
23
V. Reid asked if there were any specific comments from the Council regarding the concept 24
plan for the AutoMotorPlex. 25
26
Anderson stated that the Council listened to the applicant and his presentation, although he 27
could not remember specific concerns from the Council. 28
29
4. Planning Department Report 30
31
Finke provided an update. 32
33
5. Approval of Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 34
35
Motion by Murrin, seconded by Rengel, to approve the September 13, 2016 Planning 36
Commission meeting minutes with the noted corrections. Motion carries unanimously. 37
38
6. Public Hearing – AutoMotorPlex – PUD General Plan, Site Plan Review, 39
and Plat to Construct 237,500 Square Feet of Private Garage 40
Condominiums and Accessory Retail, Service, and Meeting Space on 19.17 41
Acres East of Arrowhead Drive, North of Hamel Road 42
43
Finke went over the request from AutoMotorPlex, which would include various land use 44
requests and a proposed development which includes 208,000 square feet of private garages 45
that would be condominiumized and sold to individual owners. He stated that the site would 46
also include 28,000 square feet of retail area related to the garage areas. He stated that the 47
applicant owns a similar site in Chanhassen and has invited the Commission to visit that site 48
following the concept review earlier this summer. He reviewed the current zoning and noted 49
that the applicant is requesting a PUD which would allow flexibility to the underlying 50
standards to provide more flexibility for a better development. He stated that the applicant 51
has suggested this PUD zoning because of the relatively unique use. He noted that staff 52
2
attempted to summarize the comments from the concept review within the staff report. He 53
described the proposed layout of the site, noting that most of the garage doors will face the 54
interior of the site. He noted that the City is underway in the process to update the 55
Comprehensive Plan and advised that the subject property is still proposed to remain as 56
business while the neighboring properties are proposed to remain as rural residential. He 57
reviewed the setback requirements and the setbacks proposed by the applicant. He noted that 58
staff has spoken with the applicant to advise that additional landscaping would be needed to 59
buffer between the neighboring residential property. He reviewed the proposed building 60
materials and architectural design proposed. He reviewed the proposed parking, noting that 61
typically this amount of retail space would require additional parking spaces. He stated that 62
the applicant believes the parking proposed would be sufficient, as the area is gated and noted 63
that there would be additional space that could be converted to parking if needed. He noted 64
that the Chanhassen site hosts large events, which tend to require on-street parking and shared 65
parking with neighboring uses. He stated that the applicant has worked with Loram and has 66
an agreement that the large events could use their parking. He noted that the applicant also 67
proposed parking on two roadways. He noted that staff believes these large events would be 68
better governed through special event permits rather than attempting to place conditions 69
through this request. He noted that the events are limited and therefore the property is 70
typically very quiet in use. He stated that a trail is proposed to the Loram site which would 71
provide a connection if that area is used for shared parking. He stated that the Commission 72
should begin discussion with the PUD request as the Site Plan is contingent upon that PUD. 73
He stated that in regards to the phasing of the construction, staff had originally recommended 74
that phase one be constructed within the first year and three years for the second phase. He 75
explained that because of the number of buildings in phase one, the applicant is requesting 76
three years for all the structures in phase one and up to seven years for phase two. He stated 77
that in regards to the retail, the applicant would like to add a fitness center and to broaden the 78
description of auto sales to include other types of motor sports as well as the availability of a 79
coffee/sandwich shop. He stated that the applicant would like to increase the number of 80
special events from once per month to 16 times per year. 81
82
Rengel asked for more information on what is included in phases one and two. 83
84
Finke reviewed the phasing plan as proposed, noting that the phasing as proposed by the 85
applicant would better match what they experienced in Chanhassen. He noted that staff does 86
not see a problem with allowing additional timing for the construction of the buildings. 87
88
Barry asked how many parking stalls the applicant needs for the large events. 89
90
V. Reid asked if each special event would require a permit or whether all the special events 91
would be handled under one permit. 92
93
Finke stated that the special event permits are reviewed administratively and can be denied. 94
95
V. Reid asked if it is hard or easy for the City to deny a special event permit. 96
97
Finke stated that the City would have the option to approve or deny. He stated that the permit 98
would not be ongoing and explained that in the beginning the permit would be for a shorter 99
duration so that staff can gauge how the events go and make changes to future permits if 100
needed. 101
102
V. Reid asked if a conditional use permit would be required for the retail uses as those are 103
developed. 104
105
3
Finke stated that the intent would be for those to be permitted uses, so that slate of uses would 106
be approved with the PUD. He noted that if the applicant wanted to do an alternate use not 107
included in the list of allowable retail, that request would need to come back for approval. 108
109
V. Reid referenced the trail connection on the eastern side and stated that the Park 110
Commission noted that they would like a bike trail on the western side. She received 111
confirmation that the applicant is only proposing the trail on the eastern side. 112
113
White asked if this application encourages innovative approaches to storm water management 114
in order to justify the PUD. 115
116
Finke stated that the applicant is still working to meet the technical requirements of the 117
watershed. He stated he was not sure how that could be better achieved. 118
119
White referenced the concern of the property owner to the east regarding drainage and 120
thought that she read that the applicant was going to provide more than adequate drainage. 121
122
Finke explained that today the site drains over land to the property to the east and explained 123
that the storm water management proposed would provide a series of ponds to manage that 124
drainage and then drain around the property to the east. He noted that what is proposed 125
would be a reduction to what is currently occurring, but noted that in a large storm event the 126
water would overtop the improvements proposed and still follow the current path to the 127
wetland to the east. 128
129
Murrin referenced the architectural design and asked why the wood lap siding is not allowed 130
in the business park zoning. 131
132
Finke stated that typically more durable material is required, such as stone. 133
134
Murrin asked if it would be sufficient to simply state that the material must be maintained 135
appropriately. 136
137
Finke stated that the City has decided that it is appropriate to regulate building materials, 138
noting that originally the intent was to get away from the use of metal in the zoning district 139
and ensure that durable materials were being used. 140
141
Murrin asked if she had read correctly that the City was proposing to decrease the sewer and 142
water connection fees because the City was requiring a bigger pipe for sewer and water. 143
144
Finke stated that he did not have that information off-hand but noted that the general City 145
policy is to offer a credit when requiring a bigger pipe connection to support surrounding 146
properties. He explained that this would save the City from having to install the larger pipe 147
itself in the future. 148
149
Albers received clarification on which Loram site would be used for shared parking. He 150
asked how many additional parking sites are available at the north Loram site. 151
152
Finke estimated 350 spaces at the Loram site. 153
154
Albers asked for input regarding the parking along the County roads. 155
156
Finke stated that the applicant proposes parking along Arrowhead and Prairie Drive, 157
estimating 120 spaces available along one side of Arrowhead and 240 spaces if parking 158
4
occurs on both sides. He noted that Prairie Drive would be a similar amount. He stated that 159
the County plans to overlay the roadway next year and there have been discussions regarding 160
overlaying the shoulders to accommodate the parking. 161
162
V. Reid asked and received clarification that a PUD is being requested because of the unique 163
mix of uses and because the use does not generally fit well within the business or industrial 164
zones. 165
166
Finke confirmed that the PUD zoning district is the best logical choice for this type of use. 167
168
White received confirmation that this parcel is not included in the Highway 55 commercial 169
district. 170
171
Bruno Silikowski, the applicant, stated that he has appreciated working with Finke and his 172
staff and appreciates the time and support that he has received throughout the process. He 173
stated that this product will allow the community to come together and to serve the 174
community better. He stated that most of the events have a charitable aspect to them noting 175
that the community of the AutoMotorPlex allows its member to enjoy their passion and share 176
that with the community. He stated that the Chanhassen site has been in existence for over 177
eight years and has support from the community and from the city staff and Mayor as well. 178
179
Murrin asked if the applicant has a place inside the building that would include the 180
clubhouse. 181
182
Silikowski stated that the clubhouse would be within the retail space. He explained that a 183
large amount of the retail space would be used as a gathering space for the members. 184
185
Albers asked for more information on the special events, specifically whether those would be 186
spread out throughout the year or only in summer months. 187
188
Silikowski replied that the events would typically be in the warm weather months, April 189
through November depending upon the weather. He stated that typically the events are four 190
hours in duration, once per month, running from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. He stated that he 191
has asked for up to 16 events as sometimes there are fundraiser events in addition to the 192
regular monthly event. He stated that the events are for marketing, which are good for sales 193
and also to develop a relationship with the community and greater auto community. He 194
stated that not every month would have two events. 195
196
Rengel asked how the regular monthly events compare to the special events. 197
198
Silikowski stated that the special events are generally smaller than the regular cars and coffee 199
events. He noted that the cars and coffee events have grown over the years and began with 200
just 50 cars. He stated that the number of cars coming in for display and the number of 201
spectators are regulated and limited. He estimated 400 vehicles and about 1,200 people were 202
at the most recent German special event that they recently hosted in Chanhassen. He stated 203
that they can easily handle the traffic and spectator traffic within the campus for that size 204
event. He expected that the events would be relatively small for the first few years, and grow 205
as word of mouth spreads. 206
207
Barry stated that he is concerned with parking on Arrowhead. 208
209
5
Silikowski stated that they are projecting the type of volume described in the staff report, 210
noting that typically people are carpooling together, both spectators and people showing 211
vehicles. 212
213
Barry stated that he cannot envision that volume of people attending events without parking 214
spreading to the neighboring streets. 215
216
Silikowski stated that they often get a large volume of people walking from neighboring 217
residential developments and again noted that spectators often come together in one vehicle. 218
He noted that a large amount of parking can be accommodated on the site. He stated that 219
they do not receive complaints at the other location, noting that they have a good relationship 220
with the County and City police. He stated that the people coming into the event are also 221
spending money at the local businesses while they are in town. He stated that they have been 222
able to fine tune the events and have not had a problem that they have not been able to correct 223
and address. 224
225
Albers stated that the events are a four-hour period of time and people are coming and going, 226
therefore the full number of attendees will not be at the site all at once. He received 227
confirmation that people are driving their vehicles to the site for show rather than trailering 228
the vehicles in. 229
230
White stated that the facility in Chanhassen is on a site zoned business and asked if there is 231
any residential around that site. 232
233
Silikowski replied that there is residential development to the west of the Chanhassen site. 234
He stated that there were concerns in the beginning with that site too, but noted that four 235
people from the abutting residential development have become members. He stated that they 236
are good neighbors, as they are aesthetically pleasing and the site for the most part is quiet. 237
238
White stated that the Commission needs to take that into account because of the volume of 239
residential development near this site. 240
241
Silikowski stated that the site could develop as a FedEx delivery site or a manufacturing site 242
which would have much more activity and would have a lot of traffic coming and going 243
daily. He stated that typically there would only be about 12 people or less coming and going 244
on a daily basis and therefore the site is quiet. 245
246
V. Reid stated that during the events at the Chanhassen site there is activity on the street and 247
asked how that could be discouraged. She noted that sometimes there are hotrods that drive 248
along the roadway at that Chanhassen site that are not part of the event. 249
250
Silikowski stated that activity does bother him and therefore he has discussed taping off the 251
area to discourage that. He stated that they would create barricades to discourage that activity 252
in Medina. He stated that they would partner with the police and would not tolerate that type 253
of activity. He noted that the Chanhassen site is run by an association and therefore he does 254
not have the power that he once did at that site, but advised that he would have more power at 255
the Medina site and would continue to partner with the police to discourage that activity. 256
257
Murrin asked if the intention would be for Silikowski to hand off the Medina site to an 258
association in the future. 259
260
Silikowski stated that by law he has to hand off the site to an association within five years, 261
but noted that he would have much more input and control at the Medina site as the retail 262
6
space will be leased. He noted that he has learned through the Chanhassen site and can apply 263
that knowledge to this site. 264
265
Rengel asked the reasoning for the similar phasing to Chanhassen, as she would think perhaps 266
this site would develop faster being that the developer has already gone through a similar 267
development. 268
269
Silikowski stated that he would hope that the development would occur faster, but noted that 270
he would still like to plan for the three years in case that does not happen and the 271
development mirrors that of Chanhassen; stating that you hope for the best, but plan for the 272
worst. He stated that things can change and therefore he would like to plan for good risk 273
mitigation, noting that the economy can always change and he would like to be prepared. 274
275
Rengel asked if parameters would be put into place before the site opens to discourage the 276
“drag racing” on the street. 277
278
Silikowski confirmed that there are things they can do from the beginning to discourage that 279
activity. He stated that this site would have two entrances and exits, which would allow 280
traffic to flow and would regulate that type of activity. He noted that there are other best 281
management activities that they have gained that would also be applied. 282
283
Rengel asked if there are methods for crowd control and traffic control that could be applied 284
here. 285
286
Silikowski stated that they limit the number of people to make events more manageable. 287
288
V. Reid asked for an example of the security fence. 289
290
Silikowski stated that there are photographs of the fencing used at Chanhassen, noting that 291
the material may vary but something similar would be done. 292
293
V. Reid asked the hours of operation. 294
295
Silikowski stated that members have access to the site, but normal business hours are typical. 296
297
V. Reid asked if there are any concerns with the staff recommendations. 298
299
Silikowski stated that there are a few things that he has discussed with Finke that were 300
mentioned in his presentation, like the number of large events or adding additional retail 301
options, but otherwise does not have concerns. 302
303
V. Reid asked for information on the examples discussed previously regarding people that are 304
not officially part of the event. 305
306
Silikowski explained that is why they partner with the police, as they want that type of 307
activity stopped immediately. He stated that the intent is to house the activities within the 308
site. He explained that they do not want to always use the shared parking at Loram, but 309
simply wanted to plan for the times when they will need additional parking. 310
311
Barry asked if the fence will simply be along the north side of the property or the entire 312
property. 313
314
7
Silikowski stated that you will never be able to stop people from walking into the site. He 315
noted that the property is landlocked on three sides and therefore the front side will be fenced. 316
He stated that security is a method to keep people safe and protect the vehicles, making it 317
more difficult for people to drive off the site. 318
319
V. Reid opened the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. 320
321
Dave Klis, 167104 45th Avenue N in Plymouth, spoke in support of the AutoMotorPlex. He 322
stated that he is nearing retirement and he needs space for his hobby, as his garage is too 323
small, noting that his passion is restoring classic cars. He stated that he is looking for a 324
community of automotive enthusiasts that he can gain information from. He stated that he is 325
blown away at how the members maintain the garages and the passion for cars that people 326
have at the Chanhassen site. He encouraged the Commission to approve the request. 327
328
Manny Villafana, 1482 Hunter Drive, stated that as he looks at the project he hears the 329
concerns regarding garages and traffic, but stated that the pictures from Chanhassen show 330
people that are of high living standard enjoying and investing in their passion. He stated that 331
this will be a neighborhood of people that want to protect their investment and maintain the 332
site. He wished that there had been a business like this when he was collecting cars. He 333
spoke of the integrity of the applicant and his family. He stated that if the Commission or 334
residents have not been to the Chanhassen site they should go see it. He stated that the coffee 335
and cars event is a family event. He compared this hobby to golf, noting that unlike golf, this 336
is something the whole family can do. He did not think a garage is an accurate description, as 337
the facility also has kitchens and the whole family can spend time at the facility. He stated 338
that this is a wonderful place that will bring good people into the community. He encouraged 339
the Commission to support this request. He was not worried about the crowds. 340
341
James Lane, Medina resident, stated that he lives about two miles from the proposed facility, 342
but noted that he is present as the Attorney for Leslie Borg who has the 20-acre parcel 343
immediately east of the project site. He stated that the Borg’s property consists of a horse 344
facility and riding arena, which is the only occupied property around the Loram property. He 345
expressed concern with the density/intensity of the development and the importance that 346
development of this site be a well designed attractive looking workable transition to the rural 347
residential core of Medina south and west of this site. He stated that this site has been zoned 348
for business/industrial use for some time. He stated that Ms. Borg does not have quarrel with 349
the intended business/industrial use of the property. He stated that staff will have time to 350
ensure that the development will not only suit this property but also act as a transition to the 351
rural residential core neighboring this property. He stated that Ms. Borg is also concerned 352
with the management of storm water and runoff from this site, as her property is downslope 353
of the Loram property to the west. He stated that he would like to be able to retain an 354
independent water consultant to independently suggest best management practices for this 355
site, as the water issues are a concern and priority of Ms. Borg. He stated that this seems to 356
be a use that would be a better fit to a 40-acre parcel rather than a 20-acre parcel. 357
358
V. Reid encouraged Mr. Lane to speak with staff as they have information regarding the 359
storm water management, as the plan states that 98 percent of the water will be maintained on 360
the site which will be an improvement from what exists. 361
362
Paul Jaeb, 1595 Hamel Road, stated that his property is directly south of the proposed 363
property and has lived there for 11 years. He stated that he has 11 acres of land and has 364
horses and dogs as well as a garage filled with old cars. He stated that he is extremely 365
troubled with this proposal and agrees with the comments of Mr. Lane regarding the density 366
and intensity. He stated that he drives the road every day and is concerned with 1,000 people 367
8
coming to the site every other weekend. He stated that any parking along Arrowhead would 368
be preposterous, as the roadway is a horse trail as well. He stated that this seems like a very 369
bad fit and he is very concerned with the traffic this use would add to the area. He stated that 370
the old cars are very loud and he was concerned that this would be a mechanic shop and he 371
would be able to hear the tools from his property. He thought that due consideration should 372
be given to the people that live nearest to this property. 373
374
V. Reid noted a written letter the Commission received that will become part of the record. 375
376
Finke confirmed that if additional written correspondence is received, it will be a part of the 377
City Council packet. 378
379
V. Reid closed the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. 380
381
White stated that she visited the site in Chanhassen and appreciated the design standards. She 382
noted that she did not attend during an event, so she cannot attest for that aspect. She stated 383
that the applicant is willing to go above and beyond the design standards. She stated that she 384
also has concerns with the storm water management and she would want to ensure that the 385
highest storm water management possible is provided to ensure that the surrounding areas are 386
not impacted. She stated that she cannot support flexibility regarding landscaping and 387
believed the developer should be held to the standards designed. She also believed that the 388
minimum setbacks should be provided. 389
390
V. Reid asked if the PUD standards were not met, would the application still move forward. 391
392
White stated that in her opinion the request does not meet the requirements for a PUD. 393
394
Murrin stated that she believes that it does meet the requirements for a PUD and that it is an 395
innovative use with high quality materials and design that exceed the standards. She stated 396
that the wetland would be maintained which would meet the third criteria in the PUD 397
requirements. 398
399
Albers agreed that the site would meet the individual criteria for a PUD, echoing the 400
comments of Murrin. He stated that the storm water management would also be enhanced 401
compared to what is currently provided on the site. He stated that open spaces would be a 402
challenge because of the size of the development, agreeing that this is an intense 403
development. He did not think adding additional land would improve the situation, as the 404
paved area would simply increase to connect the spaces. He stated that he would support the 405
PUD. 406
407
Rengel stated that she also supports a PUD for this request. She echoed concerns with storm 408
water management. 409
410
Barry stated that this site is zoned business and therefore could develop into a warehouse with 411
much more regular traffic coming and going from the site. He stated that in his opinion this 412
is a much better fit and use for the site and therefore could support the PUD. 413
414
V. Reid agreed that this is an innovative unique use of the site and therefore would also 415
support the PUD. She stated that now that there is consensus on the PUD, the Commission 416
can discuss the Site Plan and recommendations. She asked what would happen if the storm 417
water requirements are not met. 418
419
9
Finke provided additional information on the storm water requirements and design standards 420
in terms of rate and volume. He stated that if there were a nine-inch rain event it would flow 421
off the site, as a system cannot be designed for those large events; noting that occurs today as 422
well on the site unimproved. He stated that there is a maintenance agreement that requires 423
maintenance of the storm water facilities. 424
425
V. Reid mentioned landscaping and stated that it appears the only issue is the requirement for 426
70 percent opacity. 427
428
Finke stated that staff has not seen a plan which increases the interior greenspace areas. He 429
stated that the applicant is looking to increase the setback by five feet near the retail area and 430
increasing the landscaping for opacity near the parking, but does want to have discussions 431
whether that meets the 70 percent. He noted that the PUD can provide flexibility in some 432
areas, but could also include enhancements in other areas. 433
434
Albers stated that he would suggest extending the landscaping along the southern border 435
edge, noting that he does not notice any overhead trees along that area. 436
437
Rengel agreed with extending trees around that edge, noting that the other sides are sufficient 438
and additional landscaping will be provided on the interior. 439
440
Barry stated that he is really opposed to any parking on Arrowhead and believed that there 441
should be sufficient parking space on the site and between the Loram and Hennepin County 442
sites. He asked if there is anything that can prevent the parking along the road during those 443
events, as that is where the congestion will come in, especially if the road is not widened. 444
445
Finke stated that posting no parking on the street would be a Hennepin County decision, but 446
noted that street parking could be regulated through the special events permit. He stated that 447
Hennepin County will let Medina take the lead on those decisions because Medina police 448
have to enforce the parking. He stated that the special events permit will be the best method 449
to regulate those activities because you can change the requirements as things move forward 450
and you realize what will work best. He stated that things can be set more conservatively in 451
the beginning and flexibility could be provided in the future should things work well. He 452
stated that parking on Arrowhead is easy to enforce, as it can be posted no parking and people 453
can be ticketed. 454
455
Murrin stated that she would be in favor of the shared parking agreement with Loram and 456
Hennepin County and the applicant can encourage people to park on their site or those 457
designated sites to keep people off Arrowhead and Hamel roads. She asked if the parking on 458
Arrowhead would be needed. 459
460
Silikowski stated that he has spoken with Hennepin County about shared parking, but has not 461
yet received a response. He stated that the County is going to widen and pave the road, with 462
the walking trail on the side of the subject property. He suggested allowing parking on the 463
east side of the road. 464
465
Albers asked for information on the flow of traffic. 466
467
Finke provided additional details on how traffic will flow out of the site. 468
469
There was discussion regarding the hot rods that may cruise by the event, but it was 470
determined that the police will handle enforcement of that type of activity. 471
472
10
V. Reid asked if the Commission is comfortable with 16 special events. 473
474
Murrin asked if all the changes need to be addressed, such as the alternate retail uses of a 475
coffee shop and sandwich shop. 476
477
Finke stated that staff can continue discussions with the Council, but noted that if there are 478
special concerns, the Commission should call that out. 479
480
V. Reid asked if the parking along Arrowhead should be discussed. 481
482
Finke stated that is not a land use discussion and therefore that can be decided at a later time. 483
484
White referenced the minimum of 20 percent of the building to be brick, stone or glass, 485
noting that the applicant’s plan includes 14 percent of those materials. 486
487
V. Reid explained that is because of the garage doors. 488
489
White stated that her biggest concerns are on the retail building, noting that building exceeds 490
the requirements. 491
492
Finke agreed that the retail building would exceed the class one materials requirement. 493
494
Motion by Murrin, seconded by Albers, to approve of the AutoMotorPlex PUD General 495
Plan, Site Plan Review, and Plat to construct 237,500 square feet of private garage 496
condominiums and accessory retail, service, and meeting Space on 19.17 acres east of 497
Arrowhead Drive with the conditions noted in the staff report and the following additions: the 498
approval shall be valid for three years for phase one and seven years for phase two, which 499
amends item four; enhanced storm water improvements shall be provided for item six; 500
additional screening on the south side shall be required for item ten; the uses should also 501
include a fitness center, motor sports sales, coffee shop, and sandwich shop for item 12; item 502
17 shall limit special events to 16 per year. Motion carries 5-1 (White opposed). 503
504
Murrin stated that she would like to go on record to state that the project will do more good 505
for the City and the economy of the City than the current site provides. 506
507
White stated that she feels that too many staff recommendations are listed that have not been 508
integrated into the application, stating that she would like to see more recommendations put 509
into the application and plan before she could support the request. 510
511
Finke stated that this will be presented to the Council on November 1st, noting that any 512
comments provided up to one week before the meeting will be accommodated into the 513
Council packet. 514
515
7. Comprehensive Plan Open House Schedule 516
517
V. Reid provided a brief overview of the upcoming open house schedule for the 518
Comprehensive Plan. 519
520
Finke advised of a Steering Committee meeting that will be held the second or third week in 521
November. 522
523
8. Council Meeting Schedule 524
525
11
Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday. 526
527
White volunteered to attend the meeting. 528
529
Rengel stated that she would like to join White at the meeting to see how the updates are 530
conducted. 531
532
9. Adjourn 533
534
Motion by Albers, seconded by Rengel, to adjourn the meeting at 9:22 p.m. Motion carried 535
unanimously. 536
Excelsior Group Page 1 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: November 3, 2016
MEETING: November 9, 2016 Planning Commission
SUBJ: Excelsior Group LLC – Concept Plan Review –
2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road – Public Hearing
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: October 20, 2016
60-day Review Deadline: December 19, 2016
Summary of Request
The Excelsior Group, LLC has requested review of a Concept Plan for a 61-lot residential
development north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive. The subject site is a total of
37 acres (31 net acres), with two single family homes. Much of the property is pasture with
some tilled farmland. There are also four wetlands located throughout the site.
The subject site is guided for Low Density Residential development in the current
Comprehensive Plan within the 2021-2025 staging period. The Comp Plan would permit a
property to develop up to two years early through an incentive-based point system. As such, the
property would not be permitted to be developed until 2019 under the existing Comprehensive
Plan, even with the “jump ahead” provision. The properties are zoned Rural Residential-Urban
Reserve, which is an interim zoning designation for property until development occurs consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Property to the north and west are currently rural residential lots, planned for future low density
development in the Comp Plan after 2021. Polaris is located to the southeast of the subject
property and the Wealshire is under construction to the east. The property south of Chippewa
Road is planned for future commercial development. An aerial of the site and surrounding
property can be found at the top of the following page.
The purpose of a Concept Plan is to provide feedback to the applicant prior to a formal
application. The Planning Commission and City Council will not take any action and the
feedback is purely advisory.
The applicant had provided a concept plan on the same property for review during the summer.
The concept had included 87 single-family lots, with a mix of smaller single-family lots,
including 55-foot wide “villa” lots on the east of the site. Minutes from the Planning
Commission and City Council meetings are attached, but generally did not support amendments
to the Plan to allow for the development.
Excelsior Group Page 2 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
Comprehensive Plan
As noted above, the subject properties are guided Low Density Residential (LDR) in the current
Comp Plan, which would anticipate development with a net density of 2-3.5 units per acre. The
properties were part of the Staging Plan amendment completed last year, which changed the
properties from the 2016-2020 staging period to the 2021-2025 staging period. The amendment
also reduced the amount of flexibility permitted for developing prior to the staging period. A
residential development can occur two years prior to the staging period (rather than up to 5 years
early). As such, the properties could not be developed until 2019 without a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
The City is currently in the midst of its decennial Comprehensive Plan update. The Steering
Committee has completed a draft of the Plan, which has been out for public feedback for over a
month. The City has held a series of Open Houses on the Plan, and the Steering Committee is
scheduled to review the feedback and potentially finalize the draft Plan at their November 14
meeting. The Planning Commission will likely hold the formal Public Hearing on the Plan at the
Excelsior Group Page 3 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
December 13 meeting. The Plan update is almost certain to be in effect before the subject sites
could be developed in 2019.
The draft 2040 Comp Plan update designates the subject property and property to the west, north,
and northeast as Rural Residential, no longer being included within the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA).
The DRAFT Comprehensive Plan is available on the City’s website, and the Draft Future Land
Use map is attached for reference.
It appears that the applicant’s intent is to provide the concept plan as a way to advocate for the
City to consider changing the draft plan in order to designate the subject property as Low
Density Residential. If the City chose ultimately not to change the draft Plan update, the
applicant could apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Staging of the current
plan, or would have to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment immediately after the new
plan becomes effective.
The Vision and Community Goals speak to only expanding urban services as necessary to
support the minimum forecasted growth. The subject property is not proposed for urban services
within the draft Comp Plan update, even though it is planned for urban services in the current
Plan. In order to support the goal of limiting expansion, the City may wish to discuss reducing
growth in another location if expanding services to this site.
Proposed Site Layout
The applicant proposes 61 single family lots.
The lots appear to meet the R1 zoning district
standards, which is the district utilized by the
City to implement the LDR land use. The
proposed density appears to be 2.0 units/acre,
which is the minimum requirement of the
LDR land use. This would need to be
confirmed following completion of a wetland
delineation and final plans.
The applicant proposes a single access point
off of Chippewa Road, at the location of the
existing 2212 Chippewa Road driveway.
The applicant proposes an approximately ½ acre tot lot area near the center of the site, adjacent
to the existing pond. Other open space areas are proposed within the site.
Tree Preservation and Buffer Yards
Few trees are located on the subject properties. Any application would be subject to the City’s
tree preservation and replacement requirements.
R1 Requirement
Minimum Lot Size 11,000 s.f.
Minimum Lot Width 90 feet
Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet
Front Yard Setback 25 feet
Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet
Side Yard Setback (combined) 25 feet (15 & 10)
Side Yard (corner) 25 feet
Rear Yard Setback 30 feet
Max. Hardcover 40%
Excelsior Group Page 4 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
Any development request would need to provide landscaped buffer yards to rural properties to
the west and north.
Wetlands and Floodplain
The subject properties appear to contain four wetlands, which most of the wetland areas being in
the southern portion of the site. The applicant proposes impacts to the southwestern wetland in
order to construct a street to serve lots in this portion of the site. The concept plan identifies the
City’s minimum upland buffers around remaining wetland areas.
FEMA maps identify no floodplains on the subject properties.
Transportation
The applicant proposes a single access point at Chippewa Road, located where the 2212
Chippewa driveway is today. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, information
should be provided to determine if improvements should be required for Chippewa Road.
Mohawk Drive has limited right-in/right-out access to the east of the site. As a result, eastbound
traffic would be required to go west on Chippewa Road to Willow Drive in order to turn left onto
Highway 55.
The concept plan shows a connection to property to the west. If the surrounding property is
guided as rural residential, these connections may not be advisable. Staff recommends
reorienting the street layout depending on the planned land uses to the north and west.
Sewer/Water
If development were to occur at the subject site, sewer and water infrastructure would be
required to be extended from Mohawk Drive to the property. The applicant would also be
required to loop the water main to connect to the main north of the Wealshire project.
A preliminary review indicates that the subject site could be served through gravity sewer lines
to the existing system.
Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review
The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans. Any development proposal
would ultimately be subject to relevant stormwater standards.
Park Dedication
The City’s subdivision regulations requires up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated
for park purposes. The City may also choose to accept cash in-lieu of all or a portion of this land
dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre-developed market value, up to a maximum of
$8000 per home. Staff does not believe the fee would reach the maximum in this case, but it will
be determined more precisely during the preliminary plat review if the applicant proceeds with a
formal application.
Excelsior Group Page 5 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
The concept plan identifies an approximately ½ acre park area which includes a “tot lot” with
playground equipment. The concept plan also identifies trail connections through the
neighborhood connecting to Chippewa Road and to Wealshire. If the applicant proceeds with a
formal application, the connection to Wealshire, which is private property, would need to be
discussed with the property owner.
The nearest City Park is fairly distant from the subject site. Residential development in this area,
be it at this site or another site, would appear to necessitate a neighborhood City park. A
neighborhood park is likely between 4-10 acres in area, depending on the anticipated nearby
population and improvements desired.
Staff Comments
Staff believes that it is best to consider the concept plan within the broader context of the draft
Comprehensive Plan update. The draft identifies the subject site and property to the west, north,
and northeast as rural residential. Considering a change to the subject site warrants discussion of
the surrounding properties as well.
This area of the City is proposed to be removed from the MUSA and designated Rural
Residential in the draft plan. The subject sites are some of the most proximate properties
removed from the MUSA to existing and planned urban development.
The fact that adjacent property is currently being developed for the Wealshire project is one of
the reasons that the property owners advocate the designation of the subject property as LDR. If
only the subject site is changed to LDR, this transition between rural and urban would still arise,
it would just occur further west and between different land uses. Staff believes it is worth
considering which use provides a better transition to a rural land use: a suburban neighborhood
of 2 homes/net acre or the memory care facility under construction.
As noted above, the subject site does provide advantages from an infrastructure standpoint when
compared to some property which is currently planned for low density residential development.
The property appears to be serviceable via gravity sewer and would provide the opportunity to
better loop the water system with that being constructed in connection with the Wealshire project
to the east. The subject site is also located closer to Willow Drive, which will provide more
convenient access to east-bound Highway 55 prior to the construction of Chippewa Road east of
Mohawk Drive.
Each of the parcels included in the concept plan is located within a different school district; the
western parcel within Wayzata, and the eastern parcel within Rockford. Some of the proposed
lots are split by the school district line, which introduces some complexities, and neighboring
residents would end up in different school districts. Twice the number of buses would also need
to drive through the neighborhood.
The Planning Commission and City Council should review and provide comments on the
Concept Plan. Because the property is within the 2021 Staging timeframe, staff believes it make
sense to review the concept within the context of the Draft Comprehensive Plan update.
Currently, the draft Plan identifies the properties to be removed from the MUSA and to be
guided rural residential.
Excelsior Group Page 6 of 6 November 8, 2016
Concept Plan Review II Planning Commission Meeting
If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, staff has provided comments throughout the
report, which are summarized below:
1) Any future application shall be subject to all relevant City regulations and policies.
2) The applicant shall provide information necessary to confirm that gravity sewer service is
practical.
3) Any proposed development proposal should include provisions for vegetative buffers to
rural properties to the north and west.
4) Land dedication should be considered for a neighborhood park.
5) The applicant shall provide information requested by the City Engineer to determine
whether street improvements are necessary to support the development.
6) The street alignment should be updated to remove the street connection to the west in
order to reduce wetland impacts and development adjacent to rural property.
Attachments
1. Minutes from Planning Commission review
2. Minutes from City Council review
3. Engineering Comments dated
4. DRAFT Comp Plan Information (Vision, Goals, Future Land Use)
5. Concept Plan
Project: LR‐16‐189– Excelsior Concept Plan II The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 10/7/2016 10/7/2016 7 Yes Y Fee 10/7/2016 10/6/2016 1 Y Y $1000 Mailing Labels 10/20/2016 10/20/2016 6 Y Y Narrative 10/20/2016 1 Y N Concept Plan Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Building Official Comments 10/18/2016 1 Y City Engineer Comments 10/27/2016 2 Y Police Comments 10/11/2016 1 Y Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from June 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes
1
Public Hearing – Excelsior Group – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road – PUD Concept
Plan for a Subdivision of 87 Single Family Lots
Finke presented a request for a PUD Concept Plan review for residential development at the property
located at 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road. He stated that the property is 37 acres, 31 net acres, and
would be proposed to have 87 single family lots. He stated that the property is currently guided low
density residential and is in the 2021 staging area. He noted that the property had been in the 2016
staging area but was shifted to the 2021 area when the amendment was made to the staging plan. He
stated that previously the plan allowed for a property to jump ahead one five-year development cycle
but when the plan amendment was made, the flexibility was changed to only allow a two year jump
ahead which would allow the property to move ahead to 2019. He noted that the City is in the
process of updating the Comprehensive Plan, noting that thus far in that process the subject sites have
been considered rural residential. He advised that the projected growth has been substantially
reduced, almost 50 percent, by the Metropolitan Council which is why the staging plan was amended
and why the Comprehensive Plan updates include lesser density as well. He identified the subject
sites on an aerial map, noting that the properties are currently residential with pastured land and
wetlands. He described the adjacent uses and noted that the Concept Plan does show the Wealshire
project to the east, which recently received final approval from the Council. He reviewed the
proposed access that would be provided to the site and noted that the plan includes a small arch in the
center. He stated that the lots to the east would be proposed as 55 feet wide lots with detached villas,
while the western half of the site would be proposed as 65 to 75 feet wide with single family homes.
He noted that would be similar to the north portion of the Enclave or Fields of Medina. He stated that
the City is on pace to have the updated Comprehensive Plan in place prior to when the property could
develop, given the flexibility which would allow a two year jump ahead to 2019. He stated that for
that reason staff believes that it would be logical for the Commission to review the Concept under the
draft version of the Comprehensive Plan, noting that if the City does like this concept it would be
possible to incorporate these properties as low density development within the draft Comprehensive
Plan, which could then be adjusted accordingly. He noted that an application could be reviewed prior
to the staging period but explained that in past cases that were similar, the occupancy of the building
was not allowed until the staging period was reached. He reviewed the land use map and noted that
the Steering Committee has been operating under the guise of meeting the minimum requirements of
the system statements from the Metropolitan Council. He noted that low density residential would be
similar to R-1 zoning which would have larger lots, 90 feet in width, with larger setbacks than what is
proposed for this concept. He noted that an R-1 zoning would allow two units per acre, while this
concept has 2.8 units per acre. He stated that in regard to transportation, staff noted the limited right-
in/right-out access at Mohawk Drive. He stated that the potential development could have an impact
on the traffic patterns planned for the City. He noted that the concept review is advisory and does not
require formal action.
Murrin asked for clarification as the report states that the eastern portion of the site would be within
the Rockford school district, while the western portion would be within the Wayzata school district.
Finke replied that there are two sites, the eastern 19 acres is within the Rockford school district, while
the western homestead is in the Wayzata school district boundaries.
R. Reid referenced the future land use plan, noting that this property and the properties around it, with
the exception of the Wealshire property, are guided for rural residential. She noted that the property
along Willow is guided for low density and asked for some background information on that decision.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from June 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes
2
Finke stated that while he cannot speak for the entire Steering Committee, the decision would go
towards the community goals to spread out development in different staging periods. He noted that
the property is closer to the full access intersection as well.
Barry referenced the challenge of the timing with updating the Comprehensive Plan, noting that it is
difficult to make a recommendation since the property straddles two different planes.
Glen Schmidt stated that the Excelsior Group does a lot of residential development, noting that he is
present in representation of the property owners. He stated that they do understand that the property
resides in the flux area. He explained that the property was in the 2016 staging area and was moved
to the 2021 area. He noted that based on the surrounding uses it would make sense for this property
to be residential. He explained that it would make sense to have development around the Wealshire
property so that property is not on an “island”, noting that the detached villas could be a good
transition from that development. He displayed a sketch of what the development could look like,
noting that the PUD concept is different than the normal lot size. He stated that the housing products
proposed for the concept would also provide some housing types that are currently not available in
abundance within Medina. He stated that they have not spoken with the Wealshire property but they
would be willing to work with that property in regard to connection of trails and potential access
points. He stated that the engineer believes that the sewer could be served by gravity sewer going
back to the existing sewer line located at Chippewa and Mohawk. He stated that the intent was to
bring the potential project to the City and determine if it would be desirable, noting that they would
be flexible in the method used to go forward. He noted that preliminarily the site could be serviced
by existing infrastructure and would provide a mix of housing, perhaps for the people that work
across the street. He noted the location adjacent to Wealshire would allow a family to purchase a
home close to their loved one that lives at Wealshire to make visiting much easier. He noted that the
yards would be irrigated through the stormwater ponds rather than using City water for irrigation. He
stated there are wetlands and open space in the middle that would be protected. He did not anticipate
any updates needed for City streets. He stated sewer and water are close and therefore could be
connected to. He advised that they work with local Minnesota builders to provide a nice variety of
housing types. He stated that trails and a park would be provided in the community. He stated that
although the products provided would not meet the definition of affordable through the Metropolitan
Council, the villas would have a price beginning in the high $300,000’s while the home would begin
at $650,000 and the villas would be affordable compared to the Medina housing stock. He stated that
if there is support for the concept they would work with staff to determine the best path to fruition.
Murrin referenced the exits and asked if there would be only one exit for the property.
Schmidt stated that they would anticipate the one entrance, where the current entrance to the property
is. He stated that if there is a determination that the roads to the north will not be necessary, perhaps
they could work with Wealshire to connect to the fire road and make that an actual road.
Murrin asked if there was a requirement for two access points for a development.
Finke stated that it is not a requirement, noting there are other developments in the City that were
approved with one entrance.
Murrin noted that the proposed park would be three quarters of an acre and asked if the applicant
would be open to a larger park.
Schmidt replied that they would certainly consider that option.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from June 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes
3
White opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m.
Bruce Workman stated that he is one of the landowners and has lived on the property for 30 years.
He noted that originally he planned to sell the property 15 years ago, but he liked it so much in
Medina that he decided to stay. He stated that he was surprised by the recent potential changes to the
Comprehensive Plan and did not think it was fair for the City to leapfrog over their property to
develop further to the east. He stated that Chippewa was a ten-ton road, noting that he paid a high
assessment, and that road would be sufficient. He noted that the utilities are in place as well and
believed the City should do what is right for the landowners and the City. He noted that the other
landowner has also lived on his property for over 30 years. He stated that this would be the right
development at the right time. He stated that the pond is 16 feet deep and has fish in it, which would
be a great amenity next to the park.
Craig Gray, spoke in representation of his mother who lives at 1951 Chippewa Road, and stated that
he is not sure how he feels about this concept compared to the draft Comprehensive Plan. He stated
that he does not have any objections to the concept and believed that the market would dictate
whether or not the development would be successful. He stated that if there is a demand for this
development, it should be built. He noted that the properties around this area have been allowed to
develop and believed that the road would ultimately need to be upgraded, which his family would
need to contribute towards. He did not believe that was fair as his family would be restricted to
develop under rural residential. He believed that his family should be given the same consideration as
this plan and as the Cavanaugh property. He stated that it seems ridiculous that this area is intended
to be an island of rural residential.
Brian Stephenson stated that he owns the property to the north of the eastern property. He noted that
his concern is that if this concept moves forward, then the surrounding properties should all be
included in similar development standards and staging. He stated that he has lived on his property for
30 years and if this property develops with houses, he will move on.
White closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m.
Murrin asked how long the applicant has owned the land. It was clarified that the landowners still
own the land and this is simply a concept. She stated that she would like to keep as much open space
as possible and would be concerned with adding more houses, as the draft Comprehensive Plan does
not go in the direction of higher density. She stated that she has concern with the setbacks, stating
that if a development was allowed on that property she would want to see less houses. She would
also want to ensure that the property could be serviced by sewer and would like to see two access
points. She stated that she would also like to see a larger park.
R. Reid stated that there are fairly specific criteria for PUD and even stricter criteria for the jump
ahead, noting that this development does not meet virtually any of the criteria. She did not see any
reason to grant the extreme variances for the small lots. She believed this to be an ordinary
development and did not find it to be innovative or preservation of natural features. She stated that
using the stormwater for lawn irrigation is already required and is not going above or beyond. She
stated that she would want to see the lot sizes meet the requirements and did not see any reason to
accommodate this development.
Barry agreed that the lot sizes are a lot smaller than what is allowed under R-1. He stated that he does
like the pond by the park. He stated that three parcels over is low density residential, noting that this
is a similar sized space. He noted that the City is still allowing that type of development, just in
different areas. He stated that perhaps the applicant should ask the Steering Committee to look at
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from June 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes
4
their area again, as this area has been guided for low density and is just recently proposed for change.
He believed that low density residential would fit in this location, but that discussion would need to
be had with the Steering Committee and staff. He noted that the concept would need to better match
the low density requirements if that zoning was allowed.
White echoed the comments of the other Commissioners and agreed that the applicant should bring
their request for low density to the Steering Committee. She agreed that she did not believe that the
PUD criteria were met through this concept.
R. Reid stated that if a proposal were brought back that met R-1, there would be a worthwhile
discussion on whether this should be allowed to develop. She noted that the PUD and jump ahead do
not make sense.
Finke stated that the Council will review this concept the following Tuesday.
Medina City Council Excerpt from June 21, 2016 Meeting Minutes
1
Excelsior Group LLC – PUD Concept Plan Review – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road (7:30
p.m.)
Martin recused herself from this discussion.
Finke noted that the Council will only be asked to provide comments on the Concept Plan at this
time. He stated that the subject site is 37 acres in size with approximately 31 of those acres
buildable. He stated that the land is included in the 2021 staging area, with the ability to jump ahead
two years which would be 2019. He stated that these properties could have previously been
developed in 2016 but advised that the City amending the staging plan previously to delay
development because of the decreased density for the City within the system statements from the
Metropolitan Council. He identified the parcels and the surrounding property uses. He noted that
access is proposed from Chippewa Road with a park proposed in the center of the project. He
advised that there were roads stubbed to neighboring properties to the north, but explained that
alignment may need to be changed as the neighboring properties are guided for rural residential
under the draft Comprehensive Plan. He advised that the draft Comprehensive Plan is expected to be
in place prior to the time this property would be allowed to develop and therefore the Concept Plan
should be considered under the draft Plan. He stated that if the Council supports the concept it would
be possible to amend the draft Comprehensive Plan. He described the proposed site layout of 87
small single family lots, noting that the proposed plan would have a density of 2.8 units an acre
compared to the two lots per acre allowed under low density residential. He described some
transportation issues that would be impacted by this concept. He stated that the Planning
Commission was not supportive of this concept and suggested that if a formal application were to
move forward the applicant should have larger lots.
Ben Schmidt, Excelsior Group, stated that they did hear the comments of the Planning Commission
in regard to larger lots and stated that they are not opposed to that and would be willing to consider
that. He stated that the unit mix was proposed because of the neighboring Wealshire use and the lack
of that product type in Medina. He stated that they were aware that the project had been pushed back
in the staging plan and believed that this plan would meet the criteria necessary to jump ahead in the
staging plan. He stated that they believe that it would make sense for this property to develop sooner
rather than later. He noted that one of the main criteria in the staging plan was whether the project
could be served by existing infrastructure and stated that as far as they know the property can be
served by the existing infrastructure. He stated that almost all the wetland would be preserved. He
stated that they believed this project would work well with the Wealshire property and the
neighboring employment centers. He stated that they would entertain changes to the Concept Plan
and would like to know if the Council is willing to consider development on that site or whether the
development is going to be pushed back.
Mitchell asked about the minimum lot size, width and depth for rural residential.
Finke provided those calculations.
Pederson stated that he attended the Planning Commission meeting and commented that in his
opinion the road system is adequate. He stated that he did not think it would make a difference
whether the City builds out Chippewa to the east. He stated that he would like to see larger lot sizes
and a larger park in the center. He stated that the big question would be the staging as the property is
currently going to be guided from low density to rural residential in the draft Comprehensive Plan.
Medina City Council Excerpt from June 21, 2016 Meeting Minutes
2
Anderson stated that Pederson made some great points, agreeing that the lot size is too small. He
was unsure that the PUD criteria are met. He stated that he would like to protect the work the
Steering Committee has done but also acknowledges that the property is currently zoned low density.
Cousineau stated that 18 months ago the City slowed down the development through the staging plan
and she cannot ignore that fact. She stated that in her opinion this is more of a question of when
rather than a yes or no. She stated that in her mind she would consider this application under the
current Comprehensive Plan as the draft is just a draft.
Batty agreed that the current Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document at this time but agreed
with the logic of staff. He stated that the broad question would be whether the City is ready for this
to be developed or whether the development should continue to be pushed back.
Mitchell stated that the Wealshire property was approved for development without perhaps
considering the development timing for the neighboring properties. He stated that perhaps it would
make sense for something less than rural residential to be next to Wealshire.
Pederson stated that at the Planning Commission meeting the neighbors to the north of the project
were not happy that they would not be allowed to develop in anything outside of R-1. He stated that
the people in the northern part of the City believe that the development has been focused in the north
but noted that is because the sewer pipes began in that area.
Bruce Workman stated that he has lived in this City for 30 years and worked on the 1990
Comprehensive Plan when he was on the Planning Commission. He stated that since that time he has
watched the property go in and out of development. He noted that they were planning on developing
the property in 2016 but then the staging plan was changed and a commercial site, Wealshire, was
allowed to develop. He stated that in his opinion it is time to allow this property to develop and the
property around this property to the north. He stated that if the City can get what it wants and the
developer is satisfied then now is the time to develop or these properties would be developed into
five acre lots.
Anderson stated that he is cold on the project because it moves the staging process too far forward.
Cousineau agreed with Anderson and that is her opinion as well, not today but perhaps in 2019.
Pederson stated that Mr. Workman is correct that this has been a long time coming. He stated that he
drives the road every day and does not see a major problem with the project.
Cousineau stated that if this property remains as low density in the draft Comprehensive Plan, then
perhaps another site is changed to rural residential in order to balance that out.
Anderson noted the comment and stated that he would pass that onto the Steering Committee.
Mitchell stated that this would push development further west which is desirable but acknowledged
the timing issue because of the staging plan. He noted that he was not thrilled with the small lot size
and would recommend meeting the low density zoning requirements. He stated that in his opinion
Wealshire changed things for that area.
Pederson agreed that the Wealshire project did change things for that area.
engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
K:\03433-060\Admin\Docs\Submittal 102016\_2016-10-20 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Comments.docx
October 27, 2016
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: The Excelsior Group Concept Plan – Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-16-183
WSB Project No. 03433-060
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed The Excelsior Group Concept plan submittal dated October 10, 2016. The plans
propose to construct 63 single family parcels.
The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general
engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with
regards to engineering and stormwater management matters.
Site Plan & Civil
1. Verify structure builds and the feasibility of serving the area with a gravity sewer system as
proposed. Show where the proposed connection points would be located to the existing
system. Complete based on email correspondence with City and as shown on plan.
2. Looping connections will be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. The
adjacent property to the east will be constructing a watermain that will provide a stub to the
very northeast corner of The Excelsior Group site.
3. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water.
4. The concept plan shows two trail connections to the neighboring property to the east. The
site plan for the adjacent property does not include trail connections to these locations. The
applicant will need to work with the adjacent property owner to provide trail connections.
Traffic
5. The intersections should be analyzed to determine if turn lanes are required on Chippewa
Road or nearby intersections for either capacity or safety.
6. The proposed intersections should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns.
7. Dependent on the increase on vehicular traffic, the development may contribute to the need
for extending Chippewa Road to the east between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Dive.
The Excelsior Group Concept Plan – Engineering Review
October 27, 2016
Page 2
K:\03433-060\Admin\Docs\Submittal 102016\_2016-10-20 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Comments.docx
Stormwater
8. The development will need to meet the City’s infiltration requirement, which can be met by
reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation.
9. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
Vision Statement
Medina is a community united by a common goal: to sustain and enhance the quality of life of its residents. Medina will pro tect
its significant natural resources and open space throughout the City, while honoring its rural heritage and fostering safe and well-
designed neighborhoods, places of recreation and destinations for citizens to gather. Development within the City will be
commensurate with available transportation systems, municipal services and school capacity.
Goals
Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of
the community to promote the rural character of Medina.
Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources
throughout the community.
Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly
approaches to planning, engineering and development.
Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate
regionally forecasted residential growth, desired business
opportunities and achievement of other Community Goals.
Develop at a sustainable pace proportionate with capacity of
schools and transportation, water supply and wastewater
infrastructure available to the City.
Spread development so that it is not geographically
concentrated during particular timeframes.
Promote public and private gathering places and civic events
that serve the entire community.
Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community
recreational facilities, connect neighborhoods, and encourage
healthy lifestyles of its residents.
Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of
costs to support residents at all stages of their lives.
Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that
complements the residential areas of the City.
Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of
the City’s police department and coordination with its
contracted volunteer fire departments.
Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes,
retaining a skilled and efficient staff and long-range planning
and financial management.
OSI
Target
Polaris
Gregor Farm
Cit y of Loretto
Hamel Legion Park
Walter G. Anderson
Maple Plain Park and Pool
Medina Golf and Country Club
Loram
City Hall
Water Tower
Peg's C afe
HAMEL
HIGHWAY 55
M E D IN A
PIO
N
EE
R
TAMARACKCOUNTY ROAD 24
WILLOWCOUNTY ROAD 19HACKAMORE
H
O
M
E
S
T
E
A
D
NAVAJO HUNTERPRAIRIETOMAHAWKPARKVIEWTOWNLINEMOHAWKCOUNTY ROAD 101BROCKTONCHIPPEWA
COUNTY ROAD 116HOLY NAMELEAWOODMEANDER
BAKER PARKTAMRACKWAYZATA ARROWHEADC LY D E S D A L E
LAKE SHORE
DEERHILL
SPUR
KELLER
C
A
R
RIA
G
E
BLACKFOOTMAPLE
S P R U C E
EVERGREEN
CHEYENNE
TOWER
ELM CREEKMORNINGSIDE
BOBOLINK PINTOLILACSHOREWOODBLUEBELLMEADOWOODSCOUNTY ROAD 11
WALNUT
PRIMROSE
APACHEME
DI
NA
L
A
K
E
PINE SIOUXCHESTNUT
OAKVIEWHARMONY BERGAMOTTRILLIUMCOTTONWOODSYCAMORE
NORTHRIDGE
SHAWNEE WOODS
BOYERCHEROKEE BUCKSKINKATRINKA
LAKEVIEW
H O L L Y B U S H
CHERRY HILL
C O X WI
LD MEADOWSM E LO D Y LI
NDENCRESTVIEW
CAPRIOLEELSEN
TRAPPERS
MORGAN CALAMUSHILLVIEW
PHILLIPSVIXEN
SUMMIT
PAWNEE
SETTLERS
COVEYA L B E RT
CABALINE
LOST HORSE
WICHITA
RED FOXFOXTAIL
TOWN LINEWI
LLOWBROOKS U N R I S E
HIGHCRESTCREEKVIEW
DUSTYHICKORYHUNTERARROWHEADAPACHEWILLOWBROCKTONCOUNTY ROAD 19DEERHILL
CHIPPEWA
MEANDER
COUNTY ROAD 24WILLOW PINTOFuture Land Use PlanDRAFT 08/30/2016
0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Map Da te: Sep tembe r 13, 2016
Legend
Future Lan d Use
Rural R esidential
Agricultural
Future Development Area
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density R esidential
Mixed Residential
Uptown Hamel
Com mercial
Business
Rural C omm ercial
Institutional
Private Recreational
Park, Recreational, and Open Space
Closed Sanitary Landfill
Wetland Locations
Wetland Locations
��' i
\ \ \ \ l 1 \ \
i ' 1
I i i /
` \
i 1 i ��\ \ \
\
" \ \
j
\ L _ - - - \ \ \
4 7 / 1 .
i 4 4 ` , . . . 4 1
/
\ L i T _ _ . t e r `
C j
- 1 . 1 4 =
- - -
\
w t r E c
i y i f A r J E 0 . r _
P ��I
P a r c e l D a t a -
A d d r e s s 2 2 1 2 C h i p p e w a R o a d
P I D 0 3 - 1 1 8 - 2 3 - 2 3 - 0 0 0 5
A r e a : 1 9 . 5 3 a c r e s ( 8 5 0 , 5 4 9 s f )
- - �� A s ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - ����' - ' -
f i r . " % " . I s
i \
D e s c r i p t i o n : T h e E a s t 6 5 5 . 5 3 f t o f t h e S W a o f t h e N W 1 / 4
P a r c e l D a t a -
A d d r e s s 2 1 2 0 C h i p p e w a R o a d
P I D 0 3 - 1 1 8 - 2 3 - 2 4 - 0 0 0 2
A r e a : 1 7 . 6 2 a c r e s ( 7 6 7 , 5 4 9 s f )
D e s c r i p t i o n :
/ v ; / _ _
- - / ' 1
��' - - - - - - - , . ,
s a ��a B F . 0 8 7 . 1 7
C H I P P E W A R O A D
2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0
r A L E I N F E E T
P r o p o s e d D e s i g n D a t a : 6 1 L o t s
R 1 Z o n i n g
M i n W i d t h - 9 0 f t
M i n A r e a - 1 1 , 0 0 0 s f
F y s b - 2 5 ' 1 / 3 0 ' 9
S y s b - 1 0 ' m i n / 2 5 ' t o t a l
C r n r - 2 5 '
R y s b - 2 0 ' o p e n / 3 0 '
5 0 ' R O W
2 8 ' B - B S t r e e t s
D R A W I N G N A M E
N O .
B Y D A T E
R E V I S I O N S
V 6 . 0
D R A W N B Y
R S M
C H E C K E D B Y
D A T E
U S E ( I N C L U D I N G C O P Y I N G , D I S T R I B U T I O N , A N D / O R C O N V E Y A N C E O F
I N F O R M A T I O N ) O F T H I S P R O D U C T I S S T R I C T L Y P R O H I B I T E D W I T H O U T
S A T H R E - B E R G Q U I S T , I N C . ' s E X P R E S S W R I T T E N A U T H O R I Z A T I O N . U S E W I T H O U T
S A I D A U T H O R I Z A T I O N C O N S T I T U T E S A N I L L E G I T I M A T E U S E A N D S H A L L T H E R E B Y
I N D E M N I F Y S A T H R E - B E R G Q U I S T , I N C . O F A L L R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y .
S A T H R E - B E R G Q U I S T , I N C . R E S E R V E S T H E R I G H T T O H O L D A N Y I L L E G I T I M A T E
U S E R O R P A R T Y L E G A L L Y R E S P O N S I B L E F O R D A M A G E S O R L O S S E S R E S U L T I N G
F R O M I L L E G I T M A T E U S E .
I H E R E B Y C E R T I F Y T H A T T H I S P L A N O R S P E C I F I C A T I O N W A S
P R E P A R E D B Y M E O R U N D E R M Y D I R E C T S U P E R V I S I O N A N D T H A T I
A M A D U L Y R E G I S T E R E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R U N D E R T H E
L A W S O F T H E S T A T E O F M I N N E S O T A .
N a m e , P . E .
D a t e :
L i c . N o .
E E R S
S O R
S A T H R E - B E R G Q U I S T , I N C .
P A P
1 5 0 S O U T H B R O A D W A Y W A Y Z A T A , M N . 5 5 3 9 1 ( 9 5 2 ) 4 7 6 - 6 0 0 0
C I T Y P R O J E C T N O .
M E D I N A ,
M I N N E S O T A
C o n c e p t P l a n - R 1 Z o n i n g 1 0 0 6 1 6
W o r k m a n & S c h e r b e r
T H E E X C E L S I O R G R O U P
F I L E N O .
2 4 9 5 8 - 0 0 2
X
P R O J E C T N A M E A N D N U M B E R
0 1 / 1 3 / 1 6