HomeMy Public PortalAbout02-13-2017MEDINA
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2017
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 January 10, 2017 Meeting Minutes.
6. Public Hearing - Lunski, Inc. — Concept Plan Review for a 80 unit,
three-story senior assisted/independent living facility and
commercial/medical office development — North of Hwy 55, South of
Chippewa Rd, and west of Mohawk Drive.
7. Public Hearing - LJP Development, LLC — 1432 County Road 29 —
Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Commercial to High Density and
Rezoning from Commercial Highway (CH) to Residential -Limited
Multiple Family (R4) District.
8. Council Meeting Schedule
9. Adjourn
POSTED IN CITY HALL FEBRUARY 9, 2017
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 February7, 2017
City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mitchell and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: January 31, 2017
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – February 7, 2017 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. The City Council adopted a resolution denying the
variance on December 20. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the plat at the
January 10 meeting and recommended denial. The City Council reviewed on January 17 and
directed staff to prepare a resolution denying the request. The resolution will be presented on
February 7.
B) Woodridge Church Site Plan Review – 1500 County Road 24 – Woodridge Church has
requested a Comp Plan amendment, rezoning, lot combination, conditional use permit
amendment, site plan review, and interim use permit for construction of a 15,085 square
foot addition to the north side of the existing building. The Planning Commission held a
public hearing on the lot combination, CUP interim use permit and Site Plan at their
Monday, December 19, 2016 meeting, on the Comp Plan Amendment and rezoning on
January 10. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of all of the
applications. The City Council reviewed on January 17 and directed staff to prepare
documents approving the request. The resolutions and ordinance will be presented on
February 7.
C) Marx CD-PUD Concept Plan – 2700 and 2900 Parkview Drive – Wally and Bridget Marx
have requested review of a concept plan for a 6 lot conservation design subdivision on
approximately 90 acres. The applicant proposes 51.58 acres (10 buildable acres) of
conservation. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at their
January 10 meeting and provided comments. The application is scheduled to be presented
to the Council on February 7.
D) Lunski Senior Community Concept Plan – North of Highway 55, East of Willow Drive
(PID 03-118-23-32-0007) – Lunski, Inc. has requested review of a Concept Plan for
development of an approximately 126 unit senior living community to include independent
and assisted living units. The applicant is considering changes to their plan and has
requested a delay in review. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to hold a
public hearing on the request at their February 13 meeting.
E) Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning – 1432 County Road 29 – LJP Development LLC
has requested to reguide the subject property to High Density Residential (HDR) and to
rezone to the R4 zoning district for potential development of a 28-42 unit memory care
facility. The City’s DRAFT 2040 Comp Plan identifies the property as HDR, but the
applicant desires to move ahead quicker than the Comp Plan Review. The Planning
Commission is tentatively scheduled to hold a public hearing on the request at their
February 13 meeting.
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 February7, 2017
City Council Meeting
F) Three Rivers Park/We Can Ride CUP – 4301 County Road 24 – Three Rivers Park District
and We Can Ride have requested a conditional use permit amendment to allow We Can
Ride, a nonprofit that provides programming to individuals with disabilities or special
needs, to occupy the stable previously utilized by Three Rivers Park mounted patrol. The
Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to hold a public hearing on the request at
their February 13 meeting.
G) AutoMotorPlex, 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.
H) Woods of Medina, Capital Knoll– These preliminary plats have been approved and staff is awaiting
a final plat application
I) Capital Knoll, 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 – The Planning Commission held the Public Hearing on the 2020-2040
Comprehensive Plan update at the December 13 meeting. Following the hearing, Commissioners
discussed all chapters of the plan and recommended a number of changes. Following discussion, the
Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Plan. Staff presented the Plan for City
Council review at the January 3 meeting and intends to present again at the February 7 meeting.
B) Long Lake subwatershed Carp Study Grant – On January 6, I attended a meeting related to a
proposed Hennepin County Opportunity grant application by Medina, Orono, Long Lake, and
Minnehaha Creek to study rough fish in the Long Lake subwatershed. The grant would support the
study of the fish in order to determine management strategies and potential water quality
improvements. The cost of the study is $160,000, with the grant to cover $100,000. Staff requested
additional details on the expected cost of future management in order to determine if additional
investment in the study would be appropriate. This information will be presented to the Council
when available.
1
CITY OF MEDINA 1
PLANNING COMMISSION 2
DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3
Tuesday January 10, 2017 4
5
1. Call to Order: Commissioner R. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6
7
Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Chris Barry, Kim Murrin, Laurie Rengel, 8
and Robin Reid. 9
10
Absent: Planning Commissioners Dino Deslauriers and Janet White. 11
12
Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke and Associate Planner Deb Peterson. 13
14
2. Election of 2017 Planning Commission Chair and Vice-Chair 15
16
Finke opened the floor for nominations for the position of Chair. 17
18
R. Reid nominated White for the position of Chair. 19
20
Finke stated that he spoke with White prior to the meeting and she was willing to accept the 21
position of Chair, if nominated. 22
23
Finke closed the floor for nominations as there were no additional nominations. 24
25
Motion by Murrin, seconded by R. Reid to appoint Commissioner Janet White as Chair of 26
the Planning Commission for 2017. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Deslauriers and 27
White) 28
29
Finke opened the floor for nominations for the position of Vice-Chair. 30
31
Murrin nominated Albers for the position of Vice-Chair. 32
33
Albers accepted the nomination. 34
35
Finke closed the floor for nominations as there were no additional nominations. 36
37
Motion by Murrin, seconded by R. Reid, to appoint Commissioner Todd Albers as Vice-38
Chair of the Planning Commission for 2017. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: 39
Deslauriers and White) 40
41
Albers took over as Acting Chair of the Planning Commission. 42
43
3. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 44
45
Albers referenced a written comment that was provided to the Commission from the Pederson 46
family regarding the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that it would be submitted into the 47
record. 48
49
4. Update from City Council Proceedings 50
51
2
Anderson reported that the Council met the previous week to consider approval of the 2040 52
Comprehensive Plan, noting that the item was tabled per a discussion brought forth by 53
Councilmember Pederson with a request that the Steering Committee and Planning 54
Commission consider rezoning of his family’s property near Wealshire. He stated that the 55
letter submitted by Councilmember Pederson and his family withdraws their request and 56
therefore the Comprehensive Plan will most likely be approved on the Consent Agenda of the 57
next Council meeting. He stated that there was also discussion regarding the conservation 58
design ordinance and whether the Council should consider lowering the bonus density 59
allowed. He stated that the Council will once again discuss the topic at their February 7th 60
meeting. 61
62
5. Planning Department Report 63
64
Finke provided an update. 65
66
6. Approval of the December 13, 2016 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 67
68 Motion by Murrin, seconded by R. Reid, to approve the December 13, 2016, Planning 69
Commission minutes with the noted corrections. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: 70
Deslauriers and White) 71
72
7. Approval of the December 19, 2016 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 73
74 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Rengel, to approve the December 19, 2016, Planning 75
Commission minutes as presented. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Deslauriers and 76
White) 77
78
8. Public Hearing – Wally and Bridget Marx – 2700 – 2900 Parkview Drive – 79
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 6 Lot Conservation 80
Design-PUD Subdivision with the Permanent Preservation of Land 81
82
Finke explained the intent for the conservation design-PUD subdivision and the flexibility 83
that can be gained through the preservation of land. He stated that the property does include 84
various aspects of natural resources that have been identified in the City’s natural resources 85
and open space reports. He identified the high-quality tamarack swamp and area of maple 86
basswood. He explained the potential access proposed and displayed the concept plan as 87
proposed by the applicant. He identified the proposed conservation areas. He explained the 88
intent of the ordinance, noting that the objectives provide a little more detail on those 89
elements. He stated that there are six proposed lots which would be a 200 percent density 90
bonus, as normal development would allow for three lots. He stated that the typical buildable 91
lot size ranges from 1.6 acres to 6.5 acres, with the majority of the lots coming in with 2 to 3 92
acres of buildable land. He stated that over 75 percent of the property is proposed for 93
conservation, noting that only 11.5 acres of that land is considered buildable. He noted that 94
the site in total has 28 acres which still makes the conservation proposed to be 40 percent of 95
the total buildable land and therefore exceeds the 30 percent threshold of the ordinance. He 96
provided additional details on the section of land that staff recommended for inclusion in the 97
conservation area. He stated that lots one and two would not meet the minimum lot width for 98
the shoreline and provided additional details on possible conservation that could be 99
designated to avoid the issue of non-compliance. He stated that staff spoke with the septic 100
provider to determine that reasonable septic service and site locations could be provided on 101
the lots. He stated that this is simply a process to allow input, and formal action is not 102
required tonight. He stated that staff believes that this property would be a good candidate 103
for conservation, but discussion would be needed regarding the potential density bonus. He 104
3
stated that the forester indicated that a little stewardship could push the wooded areas into a 105
higher quality categorization. 106
107
R. Reid referenced building site three and asked if that has been eliminated. 108
109
Finke stated that area was marked as a higher priority conservation area and therefore the lots 110
were shifted. 111
112
R. Reid noted that the change was not listed in the conditions and asked if that should be one 113
of the conditions for approval. 114
115
Finke stated that one comment referenced a reduction to the number of septic systems and 116
therefore shifting the lot would be one of the ways to accomplish that. 117
118
Barry referenced the five contiguous acres of suitable soils stipulation and asked if that is per 119
lot or proposal. 120
121
Finke stated that the base zoning of the rural residential zoning district requires five acres of 122
contiguous suitable soils per lot. He explained that simply determines the base density and 123
then during the review of the conservation design-PUD request, there would need to be a 124
determination as to whether there would be justification of a bonus density; and if so, the 125
percentage of density bonus that would be allowed. 126
127
R. Reid referenced site number three and asked if that meets the shoreline overlay 128
requirements for setback. 129
130
Finke confirmed that the lot would meet those requirements. 131
132
Rengel asked and received clarification on the flexibility that is provided under the 133
conservation design-PUD ordinance. 134
135
Albers asked for information on what appears to be a road near the lake. 136
137
Finke replied that is a field road currently and noted that it is very steep and therefore he is 138
not sure if that would be practical to reuse. 139
140
Kent Williams, 1632 Homestead Trail, stated that he is present to represent the applicant on 141
this proposal. He stated that they are looking for feedback from the Planning Commission 142
and City Council and will then consider that input in regard to their potential proposal. He 143
stated that the Marx family has lived on the property since 1998 and have put a substantial 144
amount of work into the property as it was formerly a pig farm. He stated that the result has 145
been an explosion of wildlife to and from School Lake. He stated that Mr. Marx has also 146
established the largest privately owned English garden that has received international 147
accolades. He stated that the proposal from staff would move lot three into the garden and 148
therefore they would not agree with that element because of the work that Mr. Marx put into 149
the garden and the accolades it receives. He noted that he himself was part of the Planning 150
Commission when the conservation design-PUD ordinance was enacted. He stated that he 151
was also on the Commission when Mr. Marx brought forward two other requests for a 152
conservation design-PUD on the property. He noted that he was disappointed by the first 153
request, but the Marx family came back with a much improved request in 2012 that was 154
approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. He stated that the Marx family then 155
discovered part of the land could not be developed until 2016. He noted that he was 156
disappointed at that time because he felt the City was losing out on the conservation of 157
4
valuable resources. He stated that he was happy when Mr. Marx contacted him to state that 158
they would like to try it again as all the property is now available for development. He noted 159
that this is a challenging site because of the topography and wetlands. He stated that this is 160
the highest percentage of land proposed for a conservation design-PUD that the City has ever 161
considered, and is also high quality elements. He noted that a total of 70 acres would be put 162
into conservation easement as there would be unbuildable land in addition to the 11.5 acres of 163
buildable land. He noted that part of the conservation is contained on the lots and will further 164
restrict what can be done on that land. He stated that the conservation proposed far exceeds 165
the development proposed. He discussed what would happen under typical development of 166
the site. He stated that these types of resources need to be managed and this is a method to 167
ensure that happens as the land would be put under stewardship with a management plan that 168
ensures that not only is the land not built upon, it is also managed in a responsible and 169
reputable manner. He stated that they proposed that lot three remain in the current location as 170
it is the lowest quality wooded area and only contains boxelder trees which are not even 171
protected by the tree ordinance. He stated that they would much prefer to have the garden 172
over the boxelder trees. He stated that they did contemplate clustering the homes, but wanted 173
to stay with the more rural character rather than have a suburban character. He referenced the 174
existing field road and agreed that it is very steep. He noted that it is often washed out and 175
would possibly be a hazard during the winter months. 176
177
Murrin asked who would manage the conservation easement land. 178
179
Mr. Williams replied that they are in conservation with two potential organizations and 180
provided the examples. 181
182
Michael Pressman, applicant’s conservation consultant, confirmed that the intent would be 183
that the steward would maintain the land in a similar manner. He provided additional details 184
stating that the subdivision would also have a list of dos and don’ts of what could be done. 185
186
Murrin stated that the property is beautiful and would encourage the stewards to follow the 187
method that Mr. Marx has used. She asked if the apple orchard would be cut down to build a 188
home. 189
190
Mr. Williams stated that whoever purchases the lot would have the options to either build a 191
home and remove the orchard, could build a home and keep a portion of the orchard, or the 192
person who purchases the neighboring lot could choose to purchase that lot as well to keep as 193
an orchard. 194
195
Albers referenced the placement of one of the lots and the neighboring home. 196
197
Mr. Williams replied that they are willing to move the alignment of the lot slightly, but want 198
to be cautious to ensure that the viewsheds of the other lots are not impacted to maintain the 199
rural character. 200
201
Albers asked if there has been consideration to making lots one and two just one lot. 202
203
Mr. Williams stated that currently there is a field directly adjacent to the neighboring home 204
owner and was unsure what they could see from their home, but believed perhaps a portion of 205
the orchard could be seen. He recognized that the neighboring homeowner would be able to 206
see a home if the development is approved. 207
208
Murrin asked if the owners of lot five would be able to maintain the garden or choose to do 209
what they like with it. 210
5
Mr. Marx replied that the owner of the lot would be able to do what they desire with it. He 211
stated that it is costly and cumbersome to maintain. He stated that he will not be able to 212
maintain the garden forever. He stated that hopefully lot five would be the last lot sold. He 213
stated that if he sold the entire property as one lot, the home would be built where lot one is 214
proposed. He noted that most likely lot one would be the only home that would be visible. 215
216
Albers noted that lot one is the location of the five contiguous acres of suitable soils and 217
therefore if sold as one property, it is where someone would build. 218
219
Mr. Marx stated that he has attempted to donate the garden to the Arboretum but they asked 220
how many millions of dollars he would give to help maintain the land. He stated that he also 221
attempted that with Three Rivers Park District and was declined. He explained that there is 222
not a public entity that will accept the donation. 223
224
Albers opened the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. 225
226
No comments made. 227
228
Albers closed the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. 229
230
Rengel stated that she does not have anything she would proposed to change, but at some 231
point in the process would like to see a land stewardship plan. 232
233
Finke noted that is part of the first formal step of the process. 234
235
R. Reid referenced the site design done by staff and asked if that was done before or after the 236
applicants. 237
238
Finke stated that he did it six years ago, and did it again after he saw this application. He 239
stated that to a certain extent, things that he found in the site design were similar to what he 240
had done. 241
242
R. Reid asked if staff would still recommend using their site design over the applicant’s. 243
244
Finke stated that he is not suggesting that the staff design supersede the applicant’s, but is a 245
process of the request to see what would be the same and what would be different. He stated 246
that the staff version is done looking at the open space report and natural resources report. 247
He stated that staff recognizes that this ordinance has to include an incentive if it is going to 248
be a tool that the City is going to use to create open space without the City having to buy 249
property for conservation. He provided additional input regarding the septic systems. 250
251
Mr. Marx provided additional details on horse trails. 252
253
Barry stated that his concern was that lot four might be too far to access the septic, but was 254
satisfied with the engineering comments. 255
256
Finke stated that the Council is set to review the concept plan on February 7th and the Park 257
Commission will discuss at their meeting next Wednesday. 258
259
9. Public Hearing – Lunski, Inc. – Concept Plan Review for a 126 Unit Three-Story Senior 260
Assisted/Independent Living Facility and a One-Story Commercial Building to be 261
Located North of Hwy 55, South of Chippewa Rd, and West of Mohawk Dr 262
263
6
10. Public Hearing – Woodridge Church – 1542 County Road 24- Comprehensive Plan 264
Amendment to Change Future Land Use from Rural Residential to Public/Semi-Public 265
and Rezoning to Rural Public/Semi-Public 266
267
Finke stated that the Commission started this process the previous month when they 268
considered a series of requests from Woodridge Church. He noted that the Commission 269
tabled the request for rezoning as there was not a public hearing noticed for the 270
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He stated that the public hearing has been noticed and the 271
Commission can therefore continue their discussion and take action on the rezoning and 272
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He noted that the rezoning would rezone the western 273
parcel which will be combined with the church property, which was a condition of the 274
variance granted for the ultimate build out of the church property. 275
276
Albers opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. 277
278
No comments made. 279
280
Albers closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. 281
282
Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Barry, to recommend approval of the rezoning request and 283
Comprehensive Plan Amendment as proposed. (Absent: Deslauriers and White) 284
285
11. Public Hearing – Ellis and Nancy Olkon – 2362 Willow Drive – Preliminary Plat for a 286
Two Lot Subdivision 287
288
Finke provided background information noting that the Commission previously considered a 289
variance to the minimum lot size for a two-lot subdivision. He advised that the City Council 290
denied the request. He noted that at the time of original submission the preliminary plat was 291
not yet completed and therefore was not fully reviewed at the time of the variance request and 292
therefore the City must still take action on the preliminary plat. He reviewed the proposed 293
details, noting that the lot split dimensions are still the same as they were in September when 294
the Planning Commission last considered the request. He noted that both lots one and two 295
would not meet the minimum lot standards. He stated that findings were provided in the staff 296
report that support denial of the request. He noted that the applicant is present and this item 297
also requires a public hearing. 298
299
Tom Wexler, Edina resident, stated that he is a retired judge and probably the least 300
knowledge person that will speak on these matters tonight. He referenced a letter from 301
Jennifer Hamstead that was provided to the City today, in addition to a letter he also 302
submitted. He stated that the objections raised by staff may be technically correct but 303
subjected that they are de minimis under the circumstances and he hoped the Commission has 304
the ability to use their judgement as to what is reasonable and necessary to preserve the health 305
and welfare of Medina. He agreed that lot two does not meet the minimum lot width if you 306
measure the frontage along County Road 24, but noted that it is an irregular shaped lot. He 307
stated that an opinion in the letter provided by Ms. Hamstead is that lot width should be 308
measured on the roadway of the access, which is along Willow Drive. He stated that the 309
floodplain elevation was mentioned and Minnehaha Creek visited the property and 310
determined that none of the floodplains would extend into the buildable area or the area 311
proposed for septic systems. He stated that both lots are over five acres in size and therefore 312
believed that perhaps it was the suitable soils stipulation that is a problem. He referenced a 313
letter from Loren Kohen, the City’s building official, who states that there are suitable soils 314
on both proposed lots for septic systems. He stated that all the agencies and attorneys that he 315
has contacted have stated that there is no authority for the proposition that five acres of 316
7
suitable soils are required for a safe and effective septic system. He noted that one acre is the 317
standard for a safe and effective septic system. 318
319
Barry stated that the role of the Planning Commission is to follow the ordinances and 320
regulations of the City and therefore the ordinance states that five acres of suitable soils are 321
required as a minimum lot size within the rural residential zoning district and therefore the 322
Commission must follow that. 323
324
Rengel stated that because there is such a disparity from what is proposed to the regulation, 325
the Commission could not support that level of disparity under the variance request. 326
327
Mr. Wexler stated that if the Commission has discretion he would ask that they use that. He 328
stated that in his time as a judge he did use discretion at times when he was asked to enforce a 329
matter that was not appropriate. He noted that these are two ten-acre lots. 330
331
R. Reid stated that the Commission does not have the amount of discretion available to make 332
such an extensive exception to the five acre suitable soils requirement and therefore felt that 333
the Commission must recommend denial. She noted that the applicant can bring their request 334
forward to the City Council. 335
336
Ellis Olkon stated that this is a preliminary plat division, noting that he is not requesting to 337
build on the property but simply to split the lot. He stated that you would not need five 338
contiguous acres if someone is not building on it right now. He stated that they would simply 339
like to split the lot in half at this point. He stated that since 1999 the City of Medina has 340
never prevailed on the issue of five acres of contiguous suitable soils. He asked that the 341
Commission give no recommendation if they cannot support the request. He noted that he 342
would like to save the City legal fees if this does need to go forward to court. 343
344
Albers opened the public hearing at 8:42 p.m. 345
346
Margaret Invie stated that she lives across from the Olkons and she does not understand why 347
the City would not allow the property to be split into two parcels. She noted that, if divided, 348
each lot would be ten acres in size. 349
350
Mr. Olkon noted that the neighbor to the north also wrote a letter in support which was 351
provided in August. He stated that he also spoke with several residents in Hollybush that do 352
not object to his proposal. He stated that he has not found one person that objects to the 353
request and asked that the City save itself legal fees. 354
355
Albers closed the public hearing at 8:44 p.m. 356
357
Rengel asked if the original request is being reconsidered. 358
359
Finke explained that requests often require more than one element and explained that the City 360
has only acted on the variance and therefore action will still be needed on the plat. 361
362
Murrin asked if there is a requirement that each plat have five acres of contiguous suitable 363
soils. 364
365
Finke confirmed that is the minimum lot size as defined in the rural residential zoning 366
district. 367
368
8
Murrin stated that the only option would then be to deny the request because the lot size does 369
not meet the requirements of the zoning district. 370
371
Albers noted that another option would be to not take action. 372
373
Murrin stated that the job of the Commission is to provide a recommendation, and therefore a 374
recommendation should be made one way or the other and confirmed by a consensus of the 375
Commission. 376
377
Finke provided additional details on lot width and how that is calculated under City Code. 378
379
Wexler asked if the lot line could be changed a bit to comply with the lot width requirement. 380
381
Finke stated that lot lines could be modified, but that is not what is being proposed. 382
383 Motion by Murrin, seconded by Rengel, to recommend denial of the proposed preliminary 384
plat by Ellis and Nancy Olkon at 2362 Willow Drive based upon the findings described in the 385
staff report. (Absent: Deslauriers and White) 386
387
12. Council Meeting Schedule 388
389
Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday, noting that the Council 390
will also consider the Olkon request at that meeting. 391
392
Murrin volunteered to attend the meeting in representation of the Commission. She noted 393
that the next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Valentine’s Day and asked if the 394
Commission would be open to changing the date. 395
396
Motion by Murrin, seconded by Rengel, to change the date of the February 14, 2017, 397
Planning Commission meeting to Monday, February 13th. (Absent: Deslauriers and White) 398
399
13. Adjourn 400
401
Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Rengel, to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Motion 402
carried unanimously. 403
Lunski Senior Community Page 1 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: February 9, 2017
MEETING: February 13, 2017 Planning Commission
SUBJ: Lunski Senior Housing/Office Concept – PID 03-118-23-32-0007 –
Public Hearing
Summary of Request
Lunski, Inc. has requested review of a Concept Plan for potential development of an
approximately 80-unit assisted/independent living senior building, a 42,000 s.f. medical office
building, and 5,000 s.f. commercial building north of Highway 55, west of Mohawk Drive and
south of Chippewa Road. The subject site is 10.8 acres in size, with a wetland occupying
approximately 2.6 acres. Much of the remaining site is wooded, although many of these trees are
recently re-grown and are not significant trees (greater than 8-inches in diameter) which are
regulated by the tree preservation ordinance.
The subject site is guided for Commercial development in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan
and is zoned Rural Commercial Holding (RCH). The RCH district is meant as an interim use for
property which is planned for development but currently is undeveloped. The draft 2020-2040
Comprehensive Plan update proposes to change the future land use of the subject property to
Business.
Property to the east and west share the guiding and zoning of the subject property. This is the
case in the current Comp Plan and the properties are all proposed to be changed in the 2020-2040
Plan update. Property north of Chippewa Road is proposed to be guided Rural Residential in the
2020-2040 Plan update. Property to the northeast is proposed to be guided Low Density
Residential. An aerial of the site and surrounding lands can be found at the top of the following
page.
An assisted/independent living facility is not a permitted use in the Commercial zoning districts.
The applicant is considering a request to rezone the subject property to the Business (B) zoning
district in order to allow for development of the use. “Nursing homes, assisted living facilities,
and independent living facilities associated with such uses” are permitted in the B district.
The applicant intends to request that the City rezone the subject property to the B district in order
to accommodate the proposed development. As noted above, the draft 2020-2040 Plan update
proposes to change the future land use to Business. Following adoption of the Plan, the City
would likely consider a similar rezoning.
The purpose of a Concept Plan Review is to provide advisory comments to the applicant,
generally on an application which involves some discretion by the City. In this case, the primary
policy question of the concept plan review is whether the City would support rezoning the
Lunski Senior Community Page 2 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
property to the B zoning district prior to a Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Business land
use, since the property is guided for Commercial development in the current Comp Plan. The
descriptions of the land uses in the current plan are as follows:
General Business (GB) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including light
industrial and retail uses. 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.
Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments; can include
commercial, office and retail uses; is concentrated along the TH 55 corridor and are served or will be
served by urban services.
Interestingly, the current Comprehensive Plan does not include specific objectives for each of
these land uses, but rather includes them as a single list, which is attached for reference.
Staff also reviewed the proposed concept plan within the context of the B zoning district, but this
was really more for informational purposes for the applicant. If the applicant proceeds to request
a rezoning and development under the B zoning district, these comments will help the applicant
comply with code.
Highway 55
Future Low
Density
Residential
Rural Residential
Polaris
Future Business
Lunski Senior Community Page 3 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
Concept Plan
The applicant’s concept plan includes the construction of an approximately 114,000 s.f. building
to house the assisted/independent living facility, a 42,000 s.f. office or medical office building
and a 5,000 s.f. commercial building. All of these structures are proposed to the south of the
wetland on the property. A shared access drive is proposed from Chippewa Road along the west
of the property.
The applicant proposes to divide the property into three lots and an outlot. The outlot (called Lot
1 on their plans) contains the access road. Lot 2 is located north of the wetland, is approximately
3.28 acres in size and is identified for future development by the applicant. Lot 3 is
approximately 4.27 acres in size (approximately 2 acres buildable) and is proposed to contain the
senior housing building. Lot 4 is approximately 2.43 acres in size and contains the office
building and commercial building.
The following table summarizes the dimensional standards of the B zoning district compared to
the concept plan. A number of aspects appear to need to be adjusted in order to comply with the
B district, which are highlighted in yellow.
Business District
Requirement
Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4
Minimum Lot Size 3 acres* 3.28 acre 4.27 acre 2.43 acre
Minimum Lot Width 175 feet 200 feet 270 feet 698 feet
Minimum Lot Depth 175 feet 578 feet 619 feet 160 feet
Front Setback 40 feet 130 feet 50 feet
Side/Rear Setback 25 feet 60 feet 20 feet
Side/Rear Setback** 15 feet 20 feet 20 feet
Add. Setback for
Height >35 feet
+1 foot per foot
(~+ 7 feet for Lot 3)
South ~ 22
feet require.
Street Setback
Private 30 feet 130 feet 20 feet
Local 40 feet N/A N/A
Minor Collector 40 feet N/A N/A
Arterial 50 feet N/A 50 feet
Residential Setback 100 feet 300 feet 520 feet
Parking Setbacks
Front or Street 25 feet 0 25 feet
Private Road 20 feet 0 50 feet
Side/Rear 15 feet 85 feet 23 feet
Residential 100 feet 320 feet 540 feet
Impervious Surfaces 70%
* Lot size may be reduced to 2 acres if part of coordinated development with shared improvements such as
stormwater management or parking.
** The interior side yard setback may be reduced to 15 feet in order to accommodate shared use of loading dock
circulation, fire lanes or other site improvements, or to configure buildings in a way to screen loading docks.
Lunski Senior Community Page 4 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
Generally, the concept plan is laid out according to the B district standards. Staff noted a
number of things that would need to be adjusted. These factors, plus some comments related to
landscaping and parking below suggest that a reduction of building size may be appropriate for
the site.
Fire Department access will be especially important for the large senior building. Staff
recommends that the applicant work with the Fire Marshal and Fire Chief up front on proper
access and circulation.
The applicant has not stated proposed split between assisted living units and independent living
units. This information is important because assisted living facilities are the permitted use and
independent living units are only permitted if associated with an assisted living. The unit split
would also affect required parking for the facility.
Building Design
Conceptual elevations were provided for the senior housing building and the commercial
building. All buildings will need to be designed according to B district standards. The senior
housing building is predominantly stucco and stone, and appears to meet the building material
standards of the B district.
The B district requires modulation of the building façade a minimum of once per 100 feet and
requires “generous window coverage.” The Planning Commission and Council can provide
feedback to the applicant on the conceptual building elevations.
Transportation
The applicant proposes a single access point onto Chippewa Road near the western edge of the
property. The City Engineer recommends a traffic study to determine what improvements will
be required to be constructed by the applicant at the connection to Chippewa Road and to
determine the appropriate location for the access along the Chippewa Road frontage.
The applicant proposes a fairly extensive sidewalk and trail system throughout the site. Staff
recommends that this sidewalk be extended to Chippewa Road in order to connect with a future
trail connection. Right-of-way or easement and potential trail construction will likely be
considered by the Park Commission in connection with the development.
Wetlands/Floodplain
A wetland approximately 2.6 acres in area runs from the west center of the site to the southeast
of the property. The applicant proposes to fill a portion of this wetland in order to extend the
driveway from Chippewa Road to the southern portion of the site. It does not appear that an
alternative exists to access this portion of the lot, except for an access onto Highway 55, which is
to be avoided. The wetland impacts will be contingent upon Wetland Conservation Act approval
and required mitigation.
The wetland is identified in the City’s wetland management map as a Manage 1 wetland,
requiring an average buffer of 30 feet in width. The applicant’s narrative claims the wetland is a
Manage 2 and the concept shows a buffer 25-feet in width. The applicant should update the
plans to meet buffer requirements or submit data supporting the Mange 2 designation. Structures
Lunski Senior Community Page 5 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
are required to be setback a minimum of 15 feet from the upland buffer. It appears that this
setback is not met in at least one location.
There are no floodplains identified by FEMA on the property.
Tree Preservation/Landscaping
The applicant proposes to remove approximately 30% of the significant trees for development of
Lots 3 and 4 and construction of the access drive. Additional removal may occur for Lot 2 in the
future. As noted above, there are many trees which are smaller than 8 inches in diameter and are
not regulated by the tree preservation ordinance which are proposed to be removed. The tree
preservation ordinance permits 10% the significant trees on the entire site to be removed without
replacement for initial site development and an additional 15% of the trees on each lot in
connection with construction on the site. The applicant has aggregated this number and will
need to break it down per lot upon development. Any removal in excess of this amount will
need to be replaced on an inch:inch basis.
The following landscaping requirements apply in the B zoning district:
• All buildings are to be separated from parking lots and access drives by a minimum of 12
feet of landscaping. It appears that more greenspace is necessary to meet this requirement.
• 8% of the parking/driveway/loading dock area is required to be landscaping. The applicant
should confirm if additional greenspace is required.
• Landscaping breaks in the parking lot are required to be a minimum of 12 feet in width. It
appears additional width needs to be provided.
• In addition to required tree replacement, minimum planting of the following is required: 56
overstory trees, 28 ornamental trees and 94 shrubs.
In general, it appears that additional greenspace is necessary to meet the standards of the B
district. It appears that the overall mass of the improvements on Lots 3 and 4 may be more than
appropriate for the site. This is reinforced by the fact that some structures to not meet minimum
setback requirements and the fact that the uses appear to be under-parked (discussed below).
Parking
As noted above, the parking requirements for the senior housing building is largely dependent on
the expected unit mix between assisted living and independent living. The applicant seeks some
flexibility on the unit mix, which is acceptable, so long as the assisted living is the primary use.
In such a case, if one assumes 45 units of assisted living and 35 independent living, the minimum
parking requirement would be 85 parking spaces, of which a minimum of 35 are required to be
enclosed or underground. The applicant proposes 71 underground spaces and 35 surface spaces,
for a total of 106.
The office and commercial buildings are proposed to be 28,000 s.f. and 5,000 s.f. in size. One
parking space per 250 s.f. is required, for a total of 132 spaces. The applicant proposes 30
garage stalls and 53 surface stalls, for a total of 83. The applicant should adjust building
footages accordingly.
Lunski Senior Community Page 6 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
Mechanical Equipment/Utilities/Trash and Recycling
Mechanical equipment and utilities such as transformers are required to be screened. Details will
be required on formal application.
Trash and recycling storage is required to be within a structure or within a screened area adjacent
to a structure. Details will be required on formal application.
Purpose of Concept Plan Review
According to Section 825.63 of the City Code: “Concept plan review serves as the basis for
informal conceptual discussion between the city and the applicant regarding a specific land use
proposal. It is designed to assist the applicant in preparing a formal land use application for the
city’s consideration. The purpose of the concept plan review is to identify significant issues,
suggest design considerations and discuss requirements of the city’s official controls. Concept
plan review is optional, not mandatory, for qualified applicants.” Concept Plans are appropriate
in cases where the formal request which will arise out of the concept plan involves some amount
of discretion on behalf of the City.
As noted at the beginning of the report, the primary policy question at hand is whether the City
would support a rezoning to the Business District even though the property is guided
Commercial in the 2010-2030 Comp Plan. These uses are described early in this report, and
share a set of objectives which is attached for reference.
As previously mentioned, the subject property is proposed to be guided Business within the draft
2020-2040 Comp Plan update. Once this change is in effect, it is likely that the City would need
to initiate a rezoning similar to that which is contemplated by the applicant.
Because the objectives of the Commercial and Business land uses are shared in the 2010-2030
Comprehensive Plan and because the subject property is proposed to be reguided in the 2020-
2040 Comp Plan update, staff does not oppose the contemplated rezoning.
It appears that the applicant may have an interest in flexibility to allow independent living to be a
primary use within the senior housing building, as opposed to assisted living units. This fact,
plus the fact that concept plan appears to need some flexibility to the B zoning district, suggests
that a Planned Unit Development may be a tool the applicant could consider. Most of staff’s
comments related to the need to reduce building size and increase greenspace would hold within
discussion of a PUD. However, it would allow the potential to discuss a predominantly
independent living complex if the Planning Commission and City Council support such a project.
With regards to the concept plan, staff has provided comments throughout the report, but
summarizes the main comments below:
1) Concept shall be updated for consistency with the B zoning district. This likely will
include a reduction of building size in order to meet minimum setback, landscaping,
parking and emergency circulation requirements.
2) The applicant shall specify the maximum number of units which are proposed to be
utilized as independent living units. The primary use of the senior housing building shall
be assisted living units. Independent living units are only permitted if associated with the
primary assisted living use.
Lunski Senior Community Page 7 of 7 February 13, 2017
Concept Plan Planning Commission Meeting
3) The applicant shall update plans to meet minimum wetland buffer requirement.
4) The applicant shall update plans to meet minimum parking requirements.
5) The applicant shall update tree preservation information to account for individual lot
development and replacement and update landscaping plans for consistency with B
district standards.
6) The applicant shall meet the recommendation of the City Engineer, the City Fire Marshal,
the Fire Department, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and other relevant
agencies.
Attachments
1) Objectives of the Commercial (and General Business) land use
2) City Engineer Comments dated 2/3/2017
3) Applicant Narrative dated 1/27/2017
4) Concept Plan dated 1/27/2017
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 17
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
Commercial Uses
The previous objectives outlined referred to urban land uses with a residential component. The
following objectives refer to commercial and industrial land uses that are connected to or planned
for urban services.
The Urban Commercial area is along the TH 55 corridor and will support businesses to benefit the
residential areas to the north and south and commuters who travel on TH 55. Businesses will
provide a variety of retail products and services mixed with light industrial/warehouses and
smaller offices.
Objectives:
1. Provide convenient and attractive shopping and services to meet the needs of City
residents.
2. Avoid multiple access points to collector and arterial roads.
3. Encourage businesses that benefit the local community by providing employment
opportunities offering convenience goods and services, utilizing high quality design, and
having limited impact on public services.
4. Require commercial activities that serve the broader metropolitan market to have access
to a regional highway or frontage road.
5. Regulate the impact of commercial development along the border between commercially
and residentially guided areas to ensure that commercial property has a minimal impact
on residential areas.
6. Regulate construction to ensure high quality, energy and resource efficient buildings and
to promote such Green Building standards as LEED Certifications or the State of
Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines: Buildings, Benchmarks and Beyond (B-3)
standards.
7. Encourage construction that enhances the visual appeal of TH 55 corridor.
8. Create or update standards that promote a more rural appearance, or create campus style
developments that protect ecologically significant areas and natural features.
9. Require frontage roads that do not directly access TH 55 corridor.
10. Require developments to provide frontage roads as shown conceptually in the
transportation plan.
11. Require conditional use permits for manufacturing, processing, cleaning, storage,
maintenance and testing of goods and products in order to prevent adverse affects to the
City and its residents.
12. Use the site plan review process to ensure that commercial and industrial uses are
compatible with neighboring future and existing uses, and with the adjoining public
streets and highways. PUD’s may be used to help accomplish this policy.
701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800
Building a legacy – your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com
February 3, 2017
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review
City Project No. LF-16-193
WSB Project No. 03433-140
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed The Medina Senior Living application and plans dated January 25, 2017. The
applicant proposes to construct an 80 unit senior living complex consisting of three stories and
approximately 114,000 square feet. In addition, a 42,000 square foot two-story medical/office
building and 5,000 square foot commercial building are also proposed for the site.
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 and Grading Plans
1. Provide dimensions for the typical parking space(s), proposed drive isles, access roads, etc.
The utilities are also shown on this plan and make it difficult to read, either eliminate these
on this plan or make the line-types lighter.
2. The City’s comprehensive trail plan shows a future trail extension along Chippewa Road.
The applicant may need to provide additional right of way, easements, and/or construct a trail
along this section of Chippewa Road as a part of the park dedication allocation to the City.
3. Depending on the location of the future trail along Chippewa Road, the proposed monument
sign location may be in conflict.
4. Provide an exhibit showing the turning movements of trucks within the site including the
delivery entrances along with a detail of the truck dimensions.
5. The cover sheet identifies an area labeled “wetland mitigation”. I believe this should be
labeled wetland impact area and not mitigation.
6. Provide details and design information for the proposed boardwalk with future submittals.
7. A cross section for porous pavement has been provided, but is not noted on the site or
grading plans. Confirm this will be used and if so, add to the plans.
8. Label more of the proposed contours. Add the contours for the westerly ponding location.
Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review
February 3, 2017
Page 2
9. Add City detail plates to the plans pertinent to the project in lieu of Hill Engineering, Inc’s
detail plates.
10. There are details shown in the plans for retaining wall, show the location and elevation
information on the site/grading plans.
11. Correct the symbol for the proposed tree locations on sheet 12; it is not clear what types of
trees are being planted in relation to the legend on sheet 13.
12. Label the wetland buffer and provide dimensioning on each sheet.
13. In general, plans shall meet the requirements set forth in the City’s Design Manual.
Utility Plan
14. Label manhole invert information along with the size and type of the existing pipe.
Easements may be required by the City to encompass all or a portion of the sewer into the
site.
15. Label the existing size and type of existing watermain. Looping connections will be required
to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. Easements may be required by the City to
encompass all or a portion of the proposed water system.
16. Extend the watermain up to the right of way line adjacent to Chippewa Road.
17. Although the City allows DIP in some cases, the City prefers PVC C900 for watermain
installations, please revise.
18. Label the building services separately and include type of pipe and stub invert information
for the sanitary services. One of the watermain labels is shown as “8” PVC DIP…”, please
correct.
19. Show hydrant locations.
20. Provide dimension labels between watermain and both sanitary sewer and storm sewer
piping.
21. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for the proposed structures served by
City water.
22. The narrative suggests that future development may occur on the northerly portion of the site.
Show sewer and water stubs to this parcel as well.
Traffic & Intersections
23. The site driveway is located on the west side of the site to Chippewa Road. The driveway is
approximately 70 to 80 feet from the existing driveway into the adjacent property to the west.
These driveways are very close together and consideration should be given to moving the
proposed driveway as far east as possible.
24. The posted speed limit on Chippewa Road is currently 40 mph. There are horizontal curves
on the current roadway west of the proposed site driveway. With these situations the
proposed driveway should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns.
25. The proposed site plan shows a “Future Phase” to the development. The density of this phase
should be considered when reviewing the transportation impacts from the site. Once the use
Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review
February 3, 2017
Page 3
for this parcel is identified, a trip generation review and consideration for traffic impacts will
be needed.
26. A traffic study should be completed with assumptions of all future development, to determine
whether turn lanes should be constructed on Chippewa Road or within the proposed site
entrance in order to accommodate the proposed trip generation.
27. Dependent on the increase on vehicular traffic, the development may contribute to the need
for extending Chippewa Road to the east between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Dive.
Stormwater Management
28. The development will need to meet the City’s infiltration requirement, which can be met by
reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation.
29. Several ponds are shown on the grading plans. The City requires compliance with the
volume control requirement and it is not apparent that any infiltration or filtration volume is
provided.
30. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards and permitting
requirements.
31. Provide a stormwater management plan and modelling calculations in accordance with City
requirements with future submittals. No building or grading permit will be issued until a
satisfactory stormwater management plan has been approved by the City.
32. Calculations must be submitted indicating the culvert under the proposed entrance road is
sized adequately to convey the offsite tributary area to the wetland
33. The City functions as the LGU for administering the WCA. Submit the appropriate WCA to
the City.
34. Label the size and type of existing and proposed storm sewer piping, label the invert
information on the catch basins/manholes.
35. Include an erosion and sediment control site plan with future submittals.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
City Engineer
January 27, 2017
Dusty Finke
City Planner, City of Medina
Department of Planning and Zoning
2052 County Road 24
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Mr. Finke,
Please find enclosed the summary for the proposed development located between Highway 55 and
Chippewa Road (PID #0311823320007). The proposed project consists of three components: a 3 story
Assisted / Independent Senior Living Community, a two story Medical / Office building, and a one story
commercial building.
Project Description:
We are proposing an 80 unit (approximate) assisted / independent senior living community consisting of
three stories and approximately 114,000 square feet (including garage level). The design of the senior
community will accommodate a variable mix of assisted living and independent living units depending
upon leasing demand. Amenities will include on-site dining, a bistro café / coffee shop, beauty salon,
exercise / wellness room, and various group gathering areas accommodating a wide variety of activities.
Extensive outdoor spaces including porches, patios and trails across the site provide additional
opportunities for residents to engage the natural setting. In addition, a 42,000 s.f. (including garage
level), two story Medical / Office building and a 5,000 s.f., one story commercial building is proposed on
the south end of the site adjacent to Highway 55.
The existing site:
The 10.8 acre site is zoned Rural Commercial Holding (RCH). A large portion of the site consists of a
Manage 2 Wetland. The wetland area including buffer and required building setbacks total slightly more
than 40% of the overall site area. There have been a variety of concept plans prepared consisting of a
variety of proposed uses for the site. All of the other concept plans required significantly more wetland
impacts in order to develop a feasible concept plan. Since the existing wetland bisects the property and
there are site access controls along Highway 55, it is impossible to avoid all wetland impacts while
utilizing available developable land. This proposed design minimizes the amount of proposed wetland
impact to the greatest amount possible. It is anticipated that wetland replacement will be achieved by
purchasing available off-site wetland banking credits.
2
There are almost 2,000 caliper-inches of significant trees located on the property. The proposed design
preserves 70% of the existing significant trees. It is proposed that all of the required replacement trees
will be provided on-site, along with other site landscaping.
The proposed buildings:
The principal building is a 3 story, 80 unit (approximate) assisted living / independent senior community
with one level of parking partially below grade. The total gross area of this building, excluding garage,
will be approximately 86,000 square feet. The garage will be approximately 28,000 square feet and will
contain approximately 70 parking stalls.
The Medical / Office building is proposed as a two story structure with one level of parking partially
below grade.
The commercial outbuilding will be one story and contain approximately 5,000 square feet of
commercial space. This space is intended to attract business which will be complimentary to the
adjacent Senior Community as well as the area as a whole.
Proposed architectural details of the new buildings:
The buildings will comply with the City of Medina’s performance standards for exterior materials per
Section 835 and 838.5 (by reference). They will be detailed in a traditional manner, including a masonry
base and accents, and provide warm earth tone colors. The senior building will employ sloped roofs at a
minimum 6:12 pitch while the outbuilding designs are yet to be developed. The buildings will provide a
regular patterned window system and a variety of materials to subdivide exterior facades to minimize
scale and enhance the community feel.
Proposed site work:
The site work will consist of the initial development, which will include extending utilities through the
site and the development of the main access drive. Lot development will initially focus on construction
of the senior building and supporting site features. The outbuildings will likely be developed as separate
components of the overall site.
Sanitary sewer is currently available at the southwest corner of the site near the proposed outbuilding.
Sanitary sewer service will be extended to the 3 proposed building pads and also along the proposed
access drive to provide service for potential future development on the northern portion of the site.
Watermain is currently available within the northern portion of the Highway 55 right of way. Water
service will be extended to the 3 proposed building pads and also along the proposed access drive to
provide service for potential future development on the northern portion of the site.
Stormwater management is proposed to be handled on-site meeting all required rate, volume & quality
requirements. All stormwater is proposed to be discharged to the existing onsite wetland complex. The
3
plan currently has 2 retention ponds shown. In addition to these 2 major facilities, a number of smaller
infiltration/filtration basins (rainwater gardens) will be developed within the project site.
Project Phasing:
At this time, the current scope of the project is focused on the senior living community with the
outbuildings intended to be future phases.
We look forward to a thoughtful discussion about this site and the potential benefits of its development.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Dean Lunski
Lunski Inc.
1416 Mainstreet
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
&+,33(:$
67$7(+,*+:$<12
3$5.,1*6(7%$&.
%8,/',1*
:(7/$1'
0,7,*$7,21
6(1,25$66,67('
,1'(3(1'(17/,9,1*
&20081,7<
6725<81,76
*$5$*(67$//6
6)
(67,0$7('727$/6
3</21
6,*1$*(
02180(17
6,*1$*(
'(/,9(5<029(,1
(175$1&(
(175$1&(/(9(/
:(7/$1 '
$9* 6(7%$&.%8))(5
:(7/$1'
',5(&7,21$/
02180(17
6,*1$*(
5(7(17,21
321':
)2817$,1
)8785(
3+$6(
%2$5':$/.
5(7(17,21
321'
%,780,1286
3$7+
35,1 &,3$/%8,/',1*
%8,/',1*3$5.,1*6(7%$&.
%8,/',1*3$5.,1*6(7%$&.
3$5.,1*6(7%$&.
%8,/',1*
0 ,16(7%$&.
/27
6)
$&5(6
/27
6)
$&5(6
/27
&20021
6)
$&5(6
/27
6)
$&5(6
*$5$*(
(175$1&(
0$,1
(175$1&(
67$//6
685)$&(67$//6
&200(5&,$/
*$5$*(
(175$1&(
2)),&(0(',&$/
6725<6)3(5
*$5$*(67$//6
6)
(67,0$7('727$/6
&200(5&,$/
6725<
6)
612:
6725$*(
3</21
6,*1$*(
5($5
3$7,2
+,*+:$<
&+,33(:$52$'
32/$5,6
,1'8675,(66,7(
/,1*,11
%0:
5(&<&/(56
1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH
6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD
020(1780'(6,*1*5283'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+&21&(373/$15(9,(:0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD6,7(
6,7(3/$1-DQXDU\QD6&$/(
6,7(3/$1
29(5$//6,7($5($
$&5(6 6) 727$/6,7($5($ $3352;,0$7(
$&5(6 6) '(/,1($7(':(7/$1'$5($
,1&/8',1*6(7%$&.$1'%8))(5 $3352;,0$7(
$&5(6
6) ())(&7,9(86($%/(6,7($5($
,1&/8'(60,125:(7/$1'0,7,*$7,21$7$&&(66'5,9(
&855(17=21,1* 585$/&200(5&,$/+2/',1* 5&+
6,7($''5(66 3,'
352326('86(
/27 &20021/27
/27 )8785('(9(/230(17
/27 6(59,&(%$6('5(6,'(17,$/&$5()$&,/,7<
$66,67('/,9,1*,1'3(1'(17/,9,1*
6(1,25&20081,7<
/27 &200(5&,$/0(',&$/2)),&(
6(7%$&.5(48,5(0(176
3$5.,1*6(7%$&. )5217$1'5($5
3$5.,1*6(7%$&. 6,'(<$5'6
%8,/',1*6(7%$&. )5217$1'5($5
%8,/',1*6(7%$&. 6,'(<$5'6
352326(')$5
/27 1$
/27 7%' )8785('(9(/230(17
/27 6) 6) )$5
/27 6)6)6) )$5
5(48,5('3$5.,1*
&200(5&,$/287%8,/',1* 6)6)3(567$// 67$//6
0(',&$/2)),&(%8,/',1* 6)6)3(567$// 67$//6
352326('3$5.,1*
&200(5&,$/3$5.,1* 685)$&(67$//6*$5$*(67$//6 67$//6
$66,67('/,9,1*)$&,/,7<
685)$&(67$//6*$5$*(67$//6 67$//6
727$/67$//63529,'('
127726&$/(6,7(/2&$7250$3
3001
992.72
3002
990.25
Gas Line
3013
992.41
Gas Line
3053
989.21
Toe
3056
988.77
Toe
3061
988.30
Toe
3067
987.84
Toe
3069
989.70
Gas Line
3073
990.37
Gas Line3074
992.66
Gas Line
3101
993.34
MH
3117
988.03
Toe
3127
989.12
Toe
MM MMM
MM
999
998 997
996 995
994 993
992
991
990
990
991
992
992
991
990
989 9919
9
0 99299399499599699799
3
995996•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•994995
347
346
345
344 343
342341340339
338337336335
334
333332
331
330
329
328327
326 325
324 323322321
320
319318
317316 315314
313 312
311
310
309 308
307
306
305
304
303
302
301
300
299
298 297296
295
294 293292291
290
289
288 287
286285
284 283282281 280279
278
277
276
275
274
273
272
271
269
268
267
266
265
264 263262261260
259
258257256
255
254253
252251250
249
248247
246
245
244
243
242241240
239
238237
236
235
234233
232231230229228227226225224223
222
221220
219
218 217216
215
214
213 212211210 209208207206205204
203202201 200199198197196195 194193192191190189995
996
997
998
998
995
993
9
9
2
997993
999
993
995
997
999
1001 100410031002100110001004
1003
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
TREE
SURVEY
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
07 of 14
3101
993.34
MH
MMMMM
MM
999
998 997
996 995
994 993
992
991
990
990
991
992
992
991
990
989 9919
9
0 99299399499599699799
3
995996•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•9948" IRONWOOD10" IRONWOOD
9" BASSWOOD
9" CHERRY
8" ASH11" BASSWOOD24" BUR OAK
9" AM ELM8" AM ELM
8" ASPEN8" ASPEN
10" COTTONWOOD
8" BOX ELDER9" SIB ELM8.5" SIB ELM
9" COTTONWOOD
8.5" COTTONWOOD10" COTTONWOOD
13" COTTONWOOD
8" COTTONWOOD
9" COTTONWOOD
8" COTTONWOOD9" COTTONWOOD
8.5" COTTONWOOD10" COTTONWOOD9" COTTONWOOD
8.5" COTTONWOOD8" COTTONWOOD
10" COTTONWOOD10" COTTONWOOD9" COTTONWOOD
8" COTTONWOOD
8.5" ASH
8.5" BOX ELDER
8" WILLOW13" WILLOW
14" COTTONWOOD
9" COTTONWOOD
14" COTTONWOOD17" WILLOW
15" COTTONWOOD
12" COTTONWOOD
15" COTTONWOOD
12" BOXELDER40" WILLOW24" WILLOW
20" WILLOW18" WILLOW
14" WILLOW18" WILLOW
12" BOX ELDER25" BOX ELDER
8" ASH
17" SIB ELM
8" WILLOW
8" ASH8" ASH10" AM ELM
10" AM ELM
10" BASSWOOD
8" BASSWOOD
24" ASH
30" BASSWOOD
8" WHITE ASH
8" ASH
8" WHITE ASH9" WHITE ASH
8" BASSWOOD8" BASSWOOD
12" BASSWOOD
9" IRONWOOD
30" WHITE OAK
8" IRONWOOD
27" WHITE OAK
11" IRONWOOD27" BUR OAK
10" IRONWOOD
8" BASSWOOD8" BASSWOOD
9" AM ELM
9" AM ELM
27" BUR OAK24" WHITE OAK
42" BUR OAK
26" BUR OAK
8" BASSWOOD
8" AM ELM
9" BASSWOOD12" AM ELM12" BASSWOOD
8" BASSWOOD10" BASSWOOD9" BASSWOOD9" BASSWOOD
13" BASSWOOD
9" CHERRY
10" ASH
10" ASH
9" COTTONWOOD 18" BUR OAK
21" BUR OAK
12" BUR OAK12" BUR OAK
21" BUR OAK14: BUR OAK20" BUR OAK
24" BUR OAK
20" BUR OAK15" BUR OAK
18" WHITE OAK
16" BUR OAK
16" BUR OAK
20" WHITE OAK
8" RED OAK
24" BUR OAK
27" BUR OAK
30" BUR OAK20" BUR OAK
8" AM ELM
24" BUR OAK
13" ASH9" ASH
12" ASH
8.5" ASH8" ASH9" ASH
8" ASH
11" ASH11" ASH
9" ASH
9" ASH
8.5" ASH15" BUR OAK8.5" ASH
8.5" RED OAK
8" ASH
8" AM ELM
11" RED OAK
40" BUR OAK
24" BUR OAK
20" WHITE OAK
15" IRONWOOD16" ASH20" WHITE OAK
20" ASH
8" AM ELM 22"BUR OAK
9" BASSWOOD
9" BASSWOOD8" BASSWOOD20" WHITE OAK
18" ASH
10" IRONWOOD
10" IRONWOOD
18" WHITE OAK8" IRONWOOD9" IRONWOOD9" IRONWOOD
13" IRONWOOD
995
995
996
997
998
998
995
993
9
9
2
997993
999
993
995
997
999
1001 100410031002100110001004
1003
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
08 of 14
MM MMM
MM
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FFE=1001.8
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
HWL=998.0
NWL=996.0
LFE=1001.8HWL
=
9
9
4
.
0
NWL
=
9
9
1
.
0
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
SITE PLAN
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
09 of 14
3101
993.34
MH
MM MMM
MM
999
998 997
996 995
994 993
992
991
990
990
991
992
992
991
990
989 9919
9
0 99299399499599699799
3
995996•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•994FFE=1001.8
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
x 100
0.
2
995
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
995
996
997
998
998
995
993
9
9
2
x 100
0.
8
x 100
0.
9
x 100
0.
7
x 1001.
2
x 1001.
2
x 1000.6
x 1
0
0
0
.
6
x 1001.
0
x 100
0.
7
x 1001.
2
x
1
0
0
0
.
7
x 1001.
0
x 1001.
2
x 100
1.
0
x 100
1.
2
x 994.
5
x 994.
4
x 994.
0
x 994.
5
x 994.
2
x 9
9
4
.
2
x 1000.
9x 1001.0
x 1001.
3x 1000.6x 999.2
x 999.
4
x 998.
5
x 1004.
8
x 1003.8
x 100
2.
6
x 99
9
.
8
x 1004.
8
x 1004.6
x 1002.2x 1001.
4
x 1004.2
x 1001.7x 100
1.
9
x 100
3.
3
x 100
0.
2
x 100
0.
8
x 999.
8
x 1005.
3
HWL=998.0
NWL=996.0
x 994.
5
x 1005.
0 x 994.5
x 994.
5
x 10
0
5
.
5
x 100
5.
5
x 994.
5
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x
1
0
0
1
.
5
x 994.
5
x 99
4
.
5x 1005.5
x 100
2.
8
x 1000.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
5
x 1
0
0
0
.
1
x 100
0.
7
LFE=1001.8x 100
1.
4
997993
999
HWL
=
9
9
4
.
0
NWL
=
9
9
1
.
0
993
995
997
999
1001 100410031002100110001004
1003
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
GRADING
PLAN
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
10 of 14
MM MMM
MM
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FFE=1001.8
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
HWL=998.0
NWL=996.0
LFE=1001.8HWL
=
9
9
4
.
0
NWL
=
9
9
1
.
0
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
UTILTIY PLAN
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
11 of 14
CONNECT TO EX.
MANHOLE
IE=978.00
127 L.F. 8" PVC
SDR 26 @ 0.40%
• • • • • •• ••• • •• •••••••••••••••
R-1733
RE=1000.1
IE=978.5
337 L.F. 8" PVC
SDR 26 @ 0.40%
• • • • • •• ••• • •• •••••••••••••••
R-1733
RE=999.7
IE=979.9
37 L.F. 8" PVC
SDR 26 @ 0.40%
8" PLUG
8" PLUG
47 L.F. 8" PVC
DIP CL 52
••••••••••••••••••••••
330 L.F. 8" PVC
DIP CL 52
••••••••••••••••••••••
6" BUILDING
SERVICES
8" BUILDING
SERVICES
6" BUILDING
SERVICES
496 L.F. 8" PVC
DIP CL 52
177 L.F. 8" PVC
DIP CL 52
8" WET-TAP
W/ VALVE
••••••••••••••••••••••
• • • • • •• ••• • •• •••••••••••••••
R-1733
RE=1001.2
IE=985.5
• • • • • •• ••• • •• •••••••••••••••
R-1733
RE=995.5
IE=986.3
204 L.F. 8" PVC
SDR 26 @ 0.40%
169 L.F. 8" PVC
SDR 26 @ 0.40%
3101
993.34
MH
MM MMM
MM
999
998 997
996 995
994 993
992
991
990
990
991
992
992
991
990
989 9919
9
0 99299399499599699799
3
995996•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•994FFE=1001.8
FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
x 100
0.
2
995327 FFE=1005.5
GFE=994.5
995
996
997
998
998
995
993
9
9
2
x 100
0.
8
x 100
0.
9
x 100
0.
7
x 1001.
2
x 1001.
2
x 1000.6
x 1
0
0
0
.
6
x 1001.
0
x 100
0.
7
x 1001.
2
x
1
0
0
0
.
7
x 1001.
0
x 1001.
2
x 100
1.
0
x 100
1.
2
x 994.
5
x 994.
4
x 994.
0
x 994.
5
x 994.
2
x 9
9
4
.
2
x 1000.
9x 1001.0
x 1001.
3x 1000.6x 999.2
x 999.
4
x 998.
5
x 1004.
8
x 1003.8
x 100
2.
6
x 99
9
.
8
x 1004.
8
x 1004.6
x 1002.2x 1001.
4
x 1004.2
x 1001.7x 100
1.
9
x 100
3.
3
x 100
0.
2
x 100
0.
8
x 999.
8
x 1005.
3
HWL=998.0
NWL=996.0
x 994.
5
x 1005.
0 x 994.5
x 994.
5
x 10
0
5
.
5
x 100
5.
5
x 994.
5
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x
1
0
0
1
.
5
x 994.
5
x 99
4
.
5x 1005.5
x 100
2.
8
x 1000.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
0
x 995.
5
x 1
0
0
0
.
1
x 100
0.
7
LFE=1001.8x 100
1.
4
997993
999
HWL
=
9
9
4
.
0
NWL
=
9
9
1
.
0
993
995
997
999
1001 100410031002100110001004
1003
0
Scale In Feet
10050
Engineer Name
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NO.
JRH
JRH
DATE:
DESIGNED BY
JRH
DATE
LIC. NO.:
PROJECT
REVISIONS
TITLE SHEET
SHEET NUMBER
MEDINA, MN
CLIENT
DEAN LUNSKI
MAIN STREET
HOPKINS, MN 55343
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
MEDINA
COMMERCIAL
24552
I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
1585 DUNLAP STREET NORTH
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108
(612) 987-4455
HILLENG@GMAIL.COM
01/25/2017
HE201501 01/25/2017
12 of 14
67$,5
6)
*$5$*(
75$6+
/2%%<
67$,5
/2%%<
87,/,7,(6
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
67$,5
6)
678',2
6)
.,7&+(1
6)
(;(5&,6(
:(//1(66
81,6(;
87,/,7,(6
75$6+
6)
$0(1,7<
63$&(
6)
$0(1,7<
63$&(
6)
$0(1,7<
63$&(
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
6)
/2%%<
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
6)
%(' 67$,5
6)
/2%%<
0$,1
(175$1&(
3257(
&2&+(5(
&29(5('
325&+
6)
678',2
'(/,9(5<
(175$1&(
5($53$7,2
1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH
6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD
020(1780'(6,*1*5283'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+&21&(373/$15(9,(:0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$
*$5$*($1'
),567)/225
3/$1-DQXDU\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(
*$5$*()/225
6&$/(
67)/225
3$5.,1*6&+('8/(
*$5$*(
&RPSDFW6WDOO
6WDQGDUG6WDOO
*UDQGWRWDO
*5266%8,/',1*$5($%<)/225
*$5$*( 6)
67)/225 6)
1')/225 6)
5')/225 6)
727$/*5266%8,/',1*$5($ 6)
81,70,;%<7<3(
%('
%(''(1
%('
%(''(1
678',2
*UDQGWRWDO
6)
%('
6)
%('6)
%('
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
67$,5
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
87,/,7,(6
75$6+
6)
$0(1,7<
63$&(
6)
%('
6)
678',2
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
/2%%<6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('6)
%('
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
6)
678',2
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
6)
%('
'(1
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
67$,5
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6725$*(
87,/,7,(6
75$6+
1856(
67$7,21
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
678',2
6)
678',2
6)
/2%%<
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
'(1 6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('
6)
%('6)
%('
6)
%('
1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH
6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD
020(1780'(6,*1*5283'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+&21&(373/$15(9,(:0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$
6(&21'$1'
7+,5')/225
3/$1-DQXDU\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(
1')/225
6&$/(
5')/225
67)/225
1')/225
5')/225
522)
*$5$*(
6+,1*/('522)
/$36,',1*6721(9(1((5
0$6215<%$6(
678&&2
6721(9(1((5
0$6215<
67)/225
1')/225
5')/225
522)
*$5$*(
6+,1*/('
0$6215<%$6(
678&&2
9,1</:,1'2:
6721(
/$36,',1*
0$6215<%$6(
67)/225
1')/225
5')/225
522)
*$5$*(
/$36,',1*6+,1*/('522)
0$6215<
6721(
678&&2
$/80,180%$/&21<
67)/225
1')/225
5')/225
522)
*$5$*(
678&&2
9,1</:,1'2:6
6+,1*/('522)/$36,',1*
6721(678&&2
0$6215<
6721(
0$6215<%$6(
6721(
0$6215<
1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH
6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD
020(1780'(6,*1*5283'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+&21&(373/$15(9,(:0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$
(;7(5,25
(/(9$7,216-DQXDU\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(
6287+(/(9$7,21
6&$/(
1257+($67(/(9$7,21
6&$/(
1257+:(67(/(9$7,21
([WHULRU)LQLVK3HUFHQWDJHV
&XOWXUHG1DWXUDO6WRQH 6)
&XOWXUHG1DWXUDO6WRQH 6)
/DS6LGLQJ 6)
6WXFFR 6)
0DVRQU\%DVH 6)
(VWLPDWHG7RWDOV 6)
*OD]LQJLVQRWLQFOXGHGZLWKLQWKHWRWDOVDERYHKRZHYHUUHSUHVHQWV
DSSUR[LPDWHO\RIWKHRYHUDOOIDFDGH
6&$/(
6287+:(67(/(9$7,21
67)/225
522)
6+,1*/('522)
/$36,',1*
0$6215<
9,1</:,1'2:
678&&2
$/80,1806725()5217
67)/225
522)
6+,1*/('522)
678&&2
/$36,',1*
0$6215<67)/225
522)
6+,1*/('522)
/$36,',1*
0$6215<
678&&2
67)/225
522)
6+,1*/('522)
678&&2
/$36,',1*
0$6215<
1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH
6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD
020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+&21&(373/$15(9,(:0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$
287%8,/',1*
(;7(5,25
(/(9$7,2161RYHPEHU,VVXH'DWH6&$/(
1257+(/(9$7,21
6&$/(
($67(/(9$7,21
6&$/(
:(67(/(9$7,21
6&$/(
6287+(/(9$7,21
([WHULRU)LQLVK3HUFHQWDJHV
0$6215<%$6( 6)
/$36,',1* 6)
678&&2 6)
(VWLPDWHG7RWDOV 6)
*OD]LQJLVQRWLQFOXGHGZLWKLQWKHWRWDOVDERYHKRZHYHUUHSUHVHQWV
DSSUR[LPDWHO\RIWKHRYHUDOOIDFDGH
LJP Development, LLC Page 1 of 5 February 13, 2017
Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: February 9, 2017
MEETING: February 13, 2017
SUBJ: LJP Development LLC. - 1432 Baker Park Road (CR 29) –
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning – Public Hearing
Summary of Request
LJP Development, LLC has requested a Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning for property located
at 1432 Baker Park Road (County Road 29). The applicant requests a change of the future land
use in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan from Commercial to High Density Residential and a
Rezoning from Commercial-Highway to R-4, Limited High Density Residential. The applicant
desires to develop a memory care facility upon the property, which is not permitted with the
Commercial zoning districts of the Comprehensive Plan.
The draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan proposes to change the future land use to High
Density Residential, so the proposed amendment would be generally consistent with the
direction the City is heading. However, the applicant seeks to begin development sooner than
the Comprehensive Plan update will be in effect.
The subject property is approximately 2.12 acres in size, located north of Highway 12 on the east
of County Road 29. An existing house and detached garage are currently located on the site. A
multi-tenant commercial building is located to the south, a single-family home to the north, the
City of Maple Plain is across County Road 29 and Baker Park Reserve to the east. The
residential property to the north is guided similarly to the subject site and is also proposed to be
changed to High Density Residential in the draft Comprehensive Plan update. An aerial of the
subject site and surrounding lands can be found at the top of the following page.
Analysis
The subject property and other adjacent properties are proposed to be guided High Density
Residential in the draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan. The properties are also within the
current staging period of both the current Plan and the draft Update. These properties were seen
as a good opportunity for higher density housing because the park and ride across the street in
the City of Maple Plain provides the only opportunity for transit in the City.
Nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and similar facilities are currently listed as conditional
uses in the R-4 zoning district. These uses are permitted in a number of other districts as well,
including the R-3 district and the Business districts. Staff believes that the uses are a good fit for
the higher density districts, but it should be noted that memory care units and nursing home units
do not technically count as dwelling units. The City guided approximately 13 acres as high
density residential in the draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan update. Allowing nursing homes
LJP Development, LLC Page 2 of 5 February 13, 2017
Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting
and memory care units within the high density district may reduce opportunities for multi-family
housing in the City.
The High Density Residential land use is described in the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
“High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 7.0
units per acre and 30 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban
services. The primary uses will include duplexes, triplexes, town homes, apartment
buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park.
This designation is identified in areas that are generally accessible to transportation
corridors and commercial uses.”
Future High Density Residential
Existing residence,
Guided HDR
Met Transit
Park and Ride
LJP Development, LLC Page 3 of 5 February 13, 2017
Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting
The draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan proposes to amend the density range of the HDR land
use to 12 to 15 units per acre. As a result, the City will need to make adjustments to the zoning
districts intended to implement the HDR land use.
In general, staff does not have concerns with the proposed future land use change, since it is
consistent with the draft Plan update. Staff does have some concern that amending individual
parcels while the broader Plan update is under review may incent developers to get a similar
“jump” on the process, which could lead to substantial administrative burdens. Two pending
applications may show that this concern is warranted. However, the likelihood of this being
common seems fairly low.
Beyond the more procedural/process concern, the other question relates to the fact that the
density range of the HDR land use is proposed to be changed in the draft Plan update, which
would also necessitate changes to the zoning districts. If the subsequent development was
proposed to be multi-family housing, determining appropriate land use regulations to apply
during this duel timeframe may prove difficult.
In order to alleviate this concern, staff believes it may be advisable to establish a new land use
designation in the 2010-2030 Comp Plan which matches the new HDR designation in the draft
2020-2040 Plan update. The relevant zoning designation could also be adjusted in the following
months while the applicant’s proposed amendment is under review by neighboring jurisdictions
and the Met Council. The City would ultimately need to make such an amendment following
adoption of the Comp Plan update.
Staff believes that the actions described above could maintain consistency between the existing
Plan and draft Plan update while allowing the developer to move forward. The City has the
discretion to decide that the risk to the planning process is too high and deny this request in order
to allow the draft Comp Plan update process to be completed. Staff anticipates the new plan to
be effective by the end of the year, so approving the interim amendment requested by the
applicant it would likely allow construction one year earlier.
Concept Plan Review
In connection with the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning, the applicant
submitted a conceptual sketch which illustrates what they intend to construct upon the property.
The applicant is considering a 42-unit, single story memory care facility. The applicant intends
to construct 28 units in a first phase, with the potential of a 14-unit expansion. Twenty-three
parking spaces are proposed to be constructed to serve the structure.
As noted above, the updated HDR land use allows a density range of 12 to 15 units per acre. The
subject property would, therefore, be expected to accommodate 26-31 residential units.
Staff believes it is reasonable that memory care facilities and nursing homes would not be
subject to the same density limitations of the HDR land use. The units are substantially smaller
than apartment units. In this case, it appears that the units are approximately 288 square feet
(18’x16’). Also, parking needs are lower per unit since the residents of such facilities will not be
LJP Development, LLC Page 4 of 5 February 13, 2017
Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting
driving, even after accounting for staff and visitor parking. This difference is not explicit in the
zoning code for the R-4 district, but could be addressed when the district is updated to be
consistent with the new density range.
Following is a summary of the dimensional standards of the R-4 district and what is proposed by
the applicant’s sketch:
R-4 Requirements Proposed Concept
Area per Unit 3,600-6,200 s.f. per unit* 2,198 s.f. per unit
Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 20 feet
Street Setbacks
Local Streets 40 feet 40 feet
Arterial Roads 50 feet 50 feet
Impervious Surface Max. 60% 54% (w/ expansion)
* As staff noted above, it may be reasonable for alternative density for memory care facilities and nursing homes.
Also, additional density is permitted in the R-4 district through bonuses for things such as construction which
exceeds the minimum standards, providing affordable housing, and other elements.
The applicant’s sketch does not provide much detail on proposed building construction, but plans
will be required to be consistent with City Code upon any formal application. As noted above,
the applicant proposes a single-story building, which would result in a much lower profile than
would generally be expected in the HDR land use.
The sketch does not include a proposed landscaping plan. Staff recommends that substantial
screening and planting be provided along the north of the proposed building, where an existing
single-family home is located. It appears that the proposed construction will impact a number of
significant trees on the site. The application will be subject to the tree preservation ordinance.
The applicant proposes to construct a new street connection from Baker Park Road to the south
of the subject property. This street was planned by the City when the property immediately to
the south was developed. The intent is for this new street to serve the property to the east and
also to loop to the south where the existing shared driveway for Holiday and the multi-tenant
building is located. This loop road would provide Hennepin County the opportunity to limit left
turning traffic from the shared driveway north of Holiday in order to improve safety at the
intersection of Baker Park Road and Highway 12. The applicant does not propose to construct
the loop at this point, as right-of-way would need to be acquired upon development of the larger
site to the east. As proposed, the new street does not provide an adequate turn-around for City
trucks. Staff believes the best alternative may be for the street to remain privately maintained
until such time as it is extended in the future.
Staff believes that a sidewalk should also be constructed along with the street connection. A
future trail connection is contemplated along Baker Park Road, so the sidewalk connection could
connect.
The applicant will also need to extend sewer and water services from Baker Park Road in serve
their facility and in connection with construction of the new street. Comments from the City
Engineer and County Engineer are attached.
LJP Development, LLC Page 5 of 5 February 13, 2017
Comp Plan and Rezoning Planning Commission Meeting
Review Criteria
The City has the highest amount of discretion when reviewing Comprehensive Plan
Amendments. Amendments should be consistent with and serve the overall vision and goals of
the City. Because the City is in the midst of the 2020-2040 Plan update, it is reasonable to
review the request within context of both the existing Plan and the draft Plan update. Staff has
attached relevant information from both Plans.
According to 825.35 of the zoning code: “[zoning] amendments shall not be issued
indiscriminately but shall only be used as a means to reflect changes in the goals and policies of
the community as reflected in the Plan or changes in conditions in the City.” In this case, if the
requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved, the rezoning would be appropriate in
order to implement the change.
Staff Recommendation
Unless the Planning Commission and City Council are concerned that the requested amendment
places undue risk on the planning process, staff recommends approval of a Comprehensive Plan
amendment and rezoning. As noted above, staff would recommend that the change in land use
be to a new designation which matches the density range in the 2020-2040 Plan update. Staff
would also recommend that the R-4 zoning district be amended in the interim to be consistent
with this range. The City would need to make this change following adoption of the Plan update.
Staff would recommend the following conditions if the request is approved:
1) The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment shall not be effective until reviewed by
neighboring jurisdictions, approved by the Metropolitan Council, and subsequent adopted
by the City Council
2) The proposed zoning amendment shall not be effective until the Comprehensive Plan
amendment is adopted by the City Council following Metropolitan Council approval.
3) The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and other relevant
documents.
Potential Motion
If the Planning Commission finds the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is consistent
with the vision and goals of the Plan, the following motion would be in order:
Move to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning
subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
Attachments
1) Comprehensive Plan Information
2) City Engineer Comments
3) Hennepin County Engineer Comments
4) Applicant Narrative
5) Applicant Concept Plan
2010-2030
Comprehensive Plan
Information
Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals & Strategy Page 2 - 3
Adopted November 17, 2009
Community Vision
The following statement provides a vision of the community for the future and the resultant
goals and strategies.
The City of Medina Shall…
Maintain its rural character in which natural infrastructure is the dominant feature while
planning for new business and residential areas, where highway access is available and where
the City of Loretto and neighborhood of Uptown Hamel already exist, to create a healthy,
cohesive community for all ages in which to live and work.
Protect natural resources and natural corridors. Residents will be able to enjoy the natural
environment with planned trails and connections. Healthy living for all residents will be
encouraged and supported through availability and proximity to activities such as horse-riding,
bicycling and walking.
Plan neighborhoods using innovative design techniques to ensure a high quality of life for
residents. A diversity of housing will exist to support and promote the livability of the
community. Neighborhoods will be planned in proximity to Uptown Hamel, Loretto and other
urban areas as they develop and will provide walkable, pedestrian friendly accessibility.
Development will be focused along the TH 55 growth corridor where more dense residential
areas and businesses will be located.
Community Character and Livability
1. Maintain the rural quality and small town feel of the community.
Strategies:
Encourage development that preserves open spaces and creates linkages with
natural areas.
Maintain the rural heritage and history of Medina.
Develop Uptown Hamel as a livable, pedestrian friendly town center within the
City of Medina.
Maintain and enhance the quality of development in Uptown Hamel through the
creation of design and performance standards.
Encourage a sense of community by maintaining and creating distinct
neighborhoods.
2. Maintain areas of solitude and quiet that contribute to the rural character of the
community.
Strategies:
Preserve the rural heart of the community through open space planning and low impact
development.
Preserve natural areas and make them accessible where appropriate.
Develop tools to support the reduction of noise and light pollution.
Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals & Strategy Page 2 - 4
Adopted November 17, 2009
3. Preserve natural resources, rural vistas and rural quality of the community.
Strategies:
Support open space planning as a guide for future development.
Create a land use plan that supports the preservation of natural resources and
rural vistas.
Educate and encourage residents to maintain and preserve significant natural
areas on their properties.
Develop a program to educate and encourage community awareness and
involvement focused on preservation of natural resources and vistas throughout
the City.
4. Encourage innovative and creative approaches to planning, engineering, and city
governance.
Strategies:
Support the development and testing of alternative solutions such as Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building standards and Low
Impact Development (LID) to typical engineering and planning problems.
Research and use innovative planning methods including open space planning,
conservation and other low impact development techniques.
Encourage methods of Low Impact Development.
Require developers to consult with staff before plans are presented and maintain
open communication for problem solving between staff, decision-makers and the
public to find the best solution to planning and engineering issues.
Encourage staff to monitor land planning approaches in other communities and
government bodies for innovative solutions facing the City.
5. Maintain the characteristics of the community and its land through thoughtful
planning.
Strategies:
Create a future land use plan that is compatible with existing land use patterns.
Identify areas within the community that could benefit from innovative
planning, or more study.
Identify areas that have conflicting land uses and develop solutions to mitigate
current and future problems.
Develop and create safe road patterns and traffic control measures to establish
safety for all modes of transportation.
Maintain the rural quality of the community despite proximity to the Twin Cities
and adjacent suburban areas.
Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals & Strategy Page 2 - 5
Adopted November 17, 2009
Land Use and Growth Goals
1. Manage and support planned, compact orderly growth in designated areas.
Strategies:
Create a staging plan to support well-planned and orderly growth within the
designated growth areas.
Identify areas to support higher density opportunities.
Use existing land use plans to help guide consistent development throughout the
community.
Preserve and respect existing character and development, while accommodating
and serving new development in an environmentally friendly and economically
sustainable way.
Encourage growth in areas with proximity to infrastructure, including
transportation corridors, water, wastewater and community facilities.
Work with developers to create neighborhoods and development that support
the staging and land use plan.
2. Maintain a diversity of land uses that allows for the preservation of rural and
agricultural lands.
Strategies:
Prepare a flexible land use plan that encourages rural and agricultural lands
while allocating areas for more intense development.
Prepare and adopt a land use plan that designates compatible land uses to
minimize conflicts as development occurs.
Require transitions between rural and more urban areas through zoning and
other performance standards.
3. Support the development of a land use plan that responds to regional growth
strategies while maintaining the rural character and vision of the community.
Strategies:
Create a land use plan that considers adjacent land uses of neighboring
communities.
Work with adjacent communities to identify areas of linkage, particularly those
areas where natural resources and open space connections can be made.
Identify regional growth strategies to determine areas that can support and
enhance such strategies and goals.
Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals & Strategy Page 2 - 6
Adopted November 17, 2009
4. Encourage innovative, environmentally friendly development in all growth areas to
promote a sustainable land use pattern.
Strategies:
Identify areas that are suitable for innovative and conservation development.
Support open space planning and use it to develop tools and techniques to
support conservation development and other low impact development
alternatives.
Work with land owners, developers and stakeholders to identify land that can
contribute to green corridors, trails and storm water management areas.
5. Enhance and update the zoning ordinance to support the goals and visions of the
community.
Strategies:
Develop land use and zoning ordinance categories that directly respond to the
natural resources in the City.
Utilize county, state or federal programs to encourage retention of the natural
features within the City.
Neighborhood Pattern and Housing Goals
1. Provide a diversity of housing at a range of values to support a sustainable
community.
Strategies:
Encourage developments to include a variety of housing types including single
family and multifamily.
Provide housing options that workers in Medina can afford.
Work closely with local lenders, builders and other organizations to help Medina
meet the housing goals related to workforce housing options.
Explore zoning methods that allow neighborhoods with mixed housing types
and other appropriate uses within residential areas.
Create and maintain a level of affordability options in the community’s housing
stock.
Create ordinances that support well designed and maintained housing at all
levels.
Encourage development of neighborhoods compatible with adjacent land uses.
Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals & Strategy Page 2 - 7
Adopted November 17, 2009
2. Maintain and enhance diverse neighborhood patterns conducive to residence, work
and leisure.
Strategies:
Encourage methods of subdivision design to protect and enhance environmental
features in rural residential areas.
Maintain a road system designed to accommodate Medina residents in a manner
consistent with identified goals and strategies.
Create and strengthen the appearance of City gateways and key transportation
corridors through street scaping, design standards, zoning, trails, lighting,
sidewalks, signage, and other tools.
Develop and enforce design, performance, development and site planning
standards, incentives and resources to ensure quality development.
Encourage development to provide a variety of housing types within a single
development.
Create a high quality neighborhood environment in every development.
Update the zoning ordinances and other development standards for consistency
with the housing goals defined in this plan.
3. Promote increased density along the development corridor including compact,
walkable neighborhoods in proximity to Uptown Hamel.
Strategies:
Encourage the integration of multi-modal access including parking, sidewalks,
bike paths and pedestrian crossings within new developments.
Enhance and maintain Uptown Hamel design standards that support a livable,
pedestrian friendly community.
Allow mixed-use development within Uptown Hamel.
Ensure that residential neighborhoods have adequate access to parks and trails
and that parks and green space are integrated into the Uptown Hamel
development areas.
Encourage higher density development along Hamel Road east of County Road
115 (locally known as Pinto Drive) to help define the area as a pedestrian
friendly, attractive urban area for residents and businesses.
Create linkages between neighborhoods, parks and businesses within Uptown
Hamel to promote the walkable character of the area.
Encourage a retail center in the development corridor to provide shopping and
work opportunities to residents.
Maintain commercial development at the intersection of TH 55 and CR-19.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 5
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
FFuuttuurree GGeenneerraall LLaanndd UUssee PPoolliiccyy DDiirreeccttiioonn
The City continues to be primarily a rural community with opportunities for agricultural uses,
commercial and residential development and open spaces. These factors will continue to guide
development but will also include opportunities for diversification of land uses not presently
found in the community.
The City has guided future development and increased density along the TH 55 corridor to help
encourage sustainable land use patterns. Sustainability principles include proximity to existing
transportation systems and available infrastructure without leap-frogging into areas not currently
served by urban services. The majority of growth and development will be located in the areas
with urban services to maintain the rural character of the community and to use the infrastructure.
The Future Land Use Plan is primarily an extension of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan area. The
areas guided for future development are within the 2000 service areas but phasing and available
land has been adjusted to reflect recent experience, growth and population projections. Although
the proposed plan is consistent with the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, changes occur within the
specific land use designations.
GGeenneerraall LLaanndd UUssee DDeevveellooppmmeenntt PPoolliicciieess::
1. The Future Land Use Plan guides future development to strengthen, enhance, and protect the
City's rural character and natural environment.
2. Medina recognizes the historical development pattern as a framework for the City's future
land use policy.
3. Medina will guide growth in compact efficient locations to preserve open space and the rural
heart of the community.
4. The Planning Commission and Council will review each development proposal to ensure
consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
5. The staging plan will be referenced for all future development plans in the growth corridor
and shall guide future land use decisions to ensure availability and adequacy of services.
6. Medina will encourage commercial and business development to locate along the TH 55
corridor and retail and service opportunities to locate in mixed-use areas.
7. Developments will be required to provide buffers between incompatible land uses and will be
required to provide landscaping, berms, or other screening methods to ensure the integrity of
neighborhoods.
8. Ecologically significant natural areas will be protected using conservation easements and other
open space tools as identified in the Open Space Report.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 6
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
Future Land Use Plan Principles
The Plan guides the development of Medina through 2030, and will be used to implement the
City’s goals, strategies and policies. The purpose of the Plan is to create a community with the
following characteristics:
A well integrated and preserved natural resources and open space system focused on
maintaining the rural heart of the community.
Housing diversity and options within the community including rural, suburban and urban
densities with the most compact development guided along the TH 55 transportation
corridor.
Opportunities for business and commercial development along major transportation
corridors and intersections.
An efficient, safe transportation system.
Support of active living opportunities such as a well planned parks and trails systems that
are accessible to all residents.
Four physical land use elements affect the overall character of the community:
1. Suburban and rural development patterns and neighborhood form;
2. Major road patterns;
3. Open spaces and natural resources; and
4. Commercial and business development.
The relationship of these elements will impact the transportation system and community facilities
and may need review as a result of increased development.
Development Patterns and Neighborhood Form
Encourage open spaces, parks and trails in all neighborhood development. The survey
indicated 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
scale, architectural quality and style with existing neighborhoods.
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.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Page 5- 7
Amended May 21, 2013 (CPA2030-4)
Road Patterns
Encourage development near existing roads and transportation intersections to ensure
efficiencies within the system.
Connect existing neighborhoods with infill neighborhoods to ensure safety through
increased access.
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.
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.
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
the TH 55 corridor and CR 101 and CR 19.
Guide commercial development to areas along key transportation corridors, primarily
TH 55.
Promote businesses within mixed-use areas.
Work to create job opportunities in the community for Medina residents to reduce
traffic and commuting demands.
Orono PlymouthCorcoran
IndependenceKatrina
Independence
Medina
Spurzem
Peter
School Lake
Holy Name
Half Moon
Wolsfeld
Mooney
Krieg
Miller
Thies
Ardmore
HAMEL
PIONEER
H
O
M
E
S
T
E
A
D PARKVIEWWILLOWCOUNTY ROAD 19MEDINANAVAJO
HIGHWAY 55
TOWNLINETAMARACKCHESTNUT
COUNTY ROAD 24 ARROWHEADHUNTERCHEYENNE BROCKTONHOL
Y NAMEHACKAMORE
H O L L Y B U S H
MORNINGSIDE HUNTERTAMARACKHIGHWAY 55
M E D I N A M E D IN A
WILLOWCOUNTY ROAD 24
Loretto
Maple Plain
Independence
Maple GroveGreenfield
TOMAHAWKCHIPPEWA CHIPPEWA
COUNTY ROAD 19COUNTY ROAD 101COUNTY ROAD 116MOHAWKARROWHEADCOUNTY ROAD 11
CLYDESDALE
C LY D E S D AL E
EVERGREENCOUNTY ROAD 19WILLOWH A M E LWILLOWPIONEER HAMEL
HIGHWAY 55
Last Amended: May 21, 2013 (CPA 2030-4)Adopted: November 17, 2009
UTM, Zone 15N, NAD 83
Scale: 1:30,000[
Future Land Use Plan
*This map is not perfectly precise. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified.
Map 5-2
0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Guide Plan
Rural Residential
Agriculture
Developing-Post 2030
Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 U/A
Medium Density Res 3.5 - 6.99 U/A
High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A
Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 U/A
Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 U/A
Commercial
General Business
Industrial Business
Private Recreation (PREC)
Parks and Recreation
P-R - State or Regional
Open Space
Public Semi-Public 0 U/A
Closed Sanitary Landfill
Right-of-Way
2020-2040
Comprehensive Plan
Information
Chapter 2 – Vision and Community Goals Page 2 - 1
DRAFT – February 7, 2017
Chapter 2: VISION & COMMUNITY GOALS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
The Vision and Community Goals chapter is the heart of the Comprehensive Plan and provides
the foundation from which City officials make consistent and supporting land use decisions.
This chapter includes a set of general community goals that guided the creation of this Plan.
The concepts in this chapter are some of the few static elements of the Comprehensive Plan. If
land uses change or other infrastructure varies from the Plan, decisions will be founded in the
goals set forth below. The Vision and Goals were created with the involvement of the
Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee (the “Steering Committee”), City officials, and
residents of Medina and are broadly supported.
Land use designations are subject to strong social and economic pressures to change.
Accordingly, it is appropriate that such systems be periodically evaluated in light of changing
social and economic conditions. As development evolves, the Vision and Goals will provide the
guidance for accomplishing the vision for the future of the community even when changes are
necessary to the land use plan.
Detailed objectives and recommendations are contained within each of the subject chapters of
this plan.
Creating the Vision and Goals
The residents, the Steering Committee, City officials and staff participated in the planning
process for the Plan. A series of public participation meetings were conducted to introduce and
solicit information from the residents of Medina. The Steering Committee held work sessions
that focused on integrating the concerns and desires of the community together with
accommodating growth and regional impacts. An online forum provided additional
opportunity for residents to impact the Vision and Community Goals as they were formulated.
In addition to land use and growth planning, the City implemented open space, natural
resources, and infrastructure planning. The goals which guided this process are integrated into
this chapter.
Each element of this plan was developed with assistance from city officials and a diverse group
of community stakeholders producing a truly representative plan. The City made a conscious
decision to emphasize natural resources and open space conservation.
Community Vision
The following statement provides a vision of the community for the future and the resultant
goals and strategies.
Medina is a community united by a common goal: to sustain and enhance the quality
of life of its residents. Medina will protect its significant natural resources and open
space throughout the City, while honoring its rural heritage and fostering safe and well-
Chapter 2 – Vision and Community Goals Page 2 - 2
DRAFT – February 7, 2017
designed neighborhoods, places of recreation and destinations for citizens to gather.
Development within the City will be commensurate with available transportation
systems, municipal services and school capacity.
Community Goals
The following Community Goals are derived from the Vision Statement and inform
objectives and strategies throughout the various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of the community to
promote the rural character of Medina.
Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources throughout the community.
Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly approaches to planning,
engineering and development.
Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate regionally forecasted
residential growth, desired business opportunities and achievement of other
Community Goals. Such development and growth shall be at a sustainable pace
proportionate with capacity of schools and transportation, water supply and
wastewater infrastructure available to the City.
Spread development so that it is not geographically concentrated during particular
timeframes.
Promote public and private gathering places and civic events that serve the entire
community.
Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community recreational facilities,
connect neighborhoods, and encourage healthy lifestyles of its residents.
Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents
at all stages of their lives.
Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that complements the residential
areas of the City.
Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of the City’s police
department and coordination with its contracted volunteer fire departments.
Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes, retaining a skilled and efficient
staff and long-range planning and financial management.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 4
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. The
survey indicated 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
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
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 5
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.
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 5-2Future Land Use PlanDRAFT 1/31/2017
0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Map Date: January 31, 2017
Legend
Future Land Use
Rural Residential
Agricultural
Future Development Area
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Residential
Uptown Hamel
Commercial
Business
Rural Commercial
Institutional
Private Recreational
Park, Recreational, and Open Space
Closed Sanitary Landfill
701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800
Building a legacy – your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com
January 30, 2017
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Medina Memory Care Facility – Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-17-195
WSB Project No. 03433-200
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed The Medina Memory Care Facility application and plans dated January 12, 2017.
The applicant proposes to construct a single story senior living facility with roughly 30 individual
units (with a future addition adding 12 more) with a gross area of 20,000 square feet located at 1432
County Road 29.
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
1. The City’s comprehensive trail plan shows a future trail extension along CSAH 29. The
applicant may need to provide additional right of way, easements, and/or construct a trail or
sidewalk as a part of the improvements.
2. Any work within Hennepin County right of way will require a permit. The applicant shall
also meet the requirements of the County’s plat review committee.
3. The proposed public roadway as proposed is not acceptable as a public street due to an
inadequate turn-around at the dead-end. The City may allow the applicant to construct this as
a private roadway with the understanding that when future development occurs to the east,
the public right of way will be dedicated to the City.
Utilities
4. The City of Medina’s sanitary sewer system serves the existing retail site to the south. Show
where the proposed connection points to the existing system on future plan submittals and
verify the existing pipe location/size or manhole inverts. Easements may be required by the
City to encompass all or a portion of the sewer into the site.
5. Sizing, connection points, and manhole locations of the proposed sanitary sewer shall be
made in consideration of both the proposed site improvements and future development to the
east.
Medina Memory Care Facility – Engineering Review
January 30, 2017
Page 2
6. The City Maple Plain’s water system currently serves the existing retail site to the south.
Show the proposed connection points to the existing system on future plan submittals and
verify the size and type of watermain. The final design shall meet all City of Maple Plain
watermain design standards. Confirm whether or not a permit from the City of Maple Plain
will be required.
7. Watermain will be required along the entire length of the proposed public roadway up to the
adjacent property to the east and shall be sized to meet the capacity needs for fully developed
conditions for the area or a minimum diameter of 8-inches, whichever is larger. Show a stub
to the north lot line for future extension to the north. Easements may be required to
encompass all or a portion of the proposed water system within the site.
8. The applicant should provide evidence that adequate water pressure and fire flow capacity
will be available for the proposed structures served by City water. Show hydrant locations on
future submittals.
9. A 30’ drainage and utility easement exists on southwest portion of site, utilize to the greatest
extent possible with the proposed water and sewer infrastructure.
Traffic & Intersections
10. The future access to CSAH 29 will be controlled by Hennepin County. As indicated in the
narrative, full access to the proposed Medina Memory Care Facility site and existing retail
site will be combined into one location between the existing retail and the proposed site at
some point in the future. The existing shared access to the retail site and Holiday will remain
open with the proposed development. However, the access will need to be converted to a
right-in/right-out in the future when development to the east is proposed, in accordance with
Hennepin County requirements.
11. A 30 unit Senior Care facility would generate approximately 109 daily trips, 6 AM peak hour
and 8 PM peak hour trips, and would not trigger the need for turn lane improvements on
CSAH 29. However, with the future concentration of traffic at the single access point and
considering future development potential in this location, left and right turn lanes should be
provided along CSAH 29. At minimum, the applicant shall provide the necessary right of
way along the CSAH 29 to accommodate the requisite number of turn lanes.
12. The proposed public street connecting to CSAH 29 should be designed to accommodate two
lanes exiting (one left and one right lane) and one lane entering.
13. A detailed Traffic Study should be completed with assumptions of all future development, to
determine the length of the turn lanes to be constructed on the proposed public road in order
to accommodate the proposed development as well as the future development to the east.
Stormwater Management
14. The development will need to meet the City’s infiltration requirement, which can be met by
reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation.
15. The development is located within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and
will need to meet the appropriate standards for this type of development and disturbance
level.
16. The project site of 2.12 acres will need to meet the requirements for a Major Expansion
Project. Provide a stormwater management plan and modelling calculations in accordance
Medina Memory Care Facility – Engineering Review
January 30, 2017
Page 3
with City requirements with future submittals. No building or grading permit will be issued
until a satisfactory stormwater management plan has been approved by the City.
17. The City’s freeboard standard requires at least 2 feet of vertical separation between a
stormwater ponding emergency overflow and the lowest exposed opening of any proposed
structure onsite.
18. Show the storm sewer discharge points from the site and how that will be incorporated into
the existing retail site to the south and future development to the east.
19. The concept plan did not provide specific contouring of the proposed pond area(s); provide
site/pond contouring with future submittals. During the 100-year rainfall event, the HWL
elevation must be at least 1’ below the existing roadway shoulder edge and the wetted
perimeter fully encompassed within the site. Future expansion to CSAH 29 shall be taken
into consideration with the proposed design.
Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E.
City Engineer
1
Dusty Finke
From:Jason D Gottfried <Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us>
Sent:Monday, January 23, 2017 8:41 AM
To:Dusty Finke
Cc:mark@terra-mark.com; Kelly.Grissman@threeriversparks.org; Robert H. Byers; Sherman,
Tod (DOT)
Subject:RE: 1432 Co. Rd. 29 Comp Plan and Rezoning - LR-17-195
Attachments:1432 CSAH 29.pdf
Hello Dusty,
The plat review committee discussed the Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning proposal for 1432 County Road 29 on
Tuesday, January 17th and have made the following comments for consideration by this project moving forward:
There have been a number of discussions over the years regarding the configuration of access along CSAH 29 in
this area, notably the Park Commons development to the south in 2005‐2006. As previously discussed, we
envision the long‐term future of CSAH 29 between US 12 and CSAH 19 (Main Street) most likely as a 3‐lane
urban section with storm drains.
Upon the completion of the planned internal loop road, a median would be constructed north of the
intersection with US 12 to limit access to right‐in/right‐out at the holiday station/retail center.
With a Baker Park trail head only ¼ mile to the north it would be highly desired to include a sidewalk if not an
off‐road trail connection along this section as well. Furthermore, with the Three Rivers Park boundary
immediately surrounding this property, the developer may want to work with Three Rivers Parks personnel to
establish an internal connection to the trail system.
In order to accommodate an eventual 3‐lane section with trail, we would likely be seeking a 17 foot dedication
in order to accomplish a 50 foot half section here.
This development may also want to consider regrading the surface up to CSAH 29, and removing the curb to put
in a ditch grading it into their pond (under a permit). We can work with the necessary parties on the best
approach here as the development moves forward.
Thank you for your consideration,
Jason
Jason Gottfried
Senior Planning Analyst
Hennepin County
Office: 612-596-0394
Email: Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us
Hennepin County Public Works
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340-3410
From: dusty.finke@ci.medina.mn.us
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 3:04 PM
To: Scott Johnson <Scott.Johnson@ci.medina.mn.us>; Steve Scherer <Steve.Scherer@ci.medina.mn.us>; Debra Peterson
<Debra@ci.medina.mn.us>; Batty, Ronald H. (rbatty@Kennedy‐Graven.com) <rbatty@Kennedy‐Graven.com>; Jim
Stremel (JStremel@wsbeng.com) <JStremel@wsbeng.com>; Jason D Gottfried <Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us>;
MEMORANDUM
1000 Twelve Oaks Center Drive Tel 952.426.7400
Suite 200 Fax 952.426.7440
Wayzata, MN 55391 www.mohagenhansen.com
MOHAGEN HANSEN
Architecture | Interiors
Date: January 12, 2017
Memo To: City of Medina
From: Steve Oliver
Mohagen Hansen Architecture | Interiors
Project: Medina Memory Care
Project No.:
MH Project No. 16400.0ACE
Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request - Project Narrative and Overview
Applicant Information
Developer: LJP Development, LLC, 16620 57
th Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55446
Contact: Larry Palm, 612‐919‐3953, palml@aceelectrical.net
Jennifer Palm, 952‐201‐9916, palmj@aceelectrical.net
Property Information
Property ID: 3011823220004
Property Address: 1432 County Road 29, Medina, MN 55359
Owner: Granite Investments, LLC (Ace Properties LLC 5465 State Highway No. 169, Plymouth, MN 55442)
Property Size: 2.12 Acres
Application Request
Comp Plan Amendment: Request to change guided use from Commercial to High Density Residential.
Zoning Amendment/Rezoning: Request to rezoning from Commercial CH to Residential R‐4.
The applicant has reviewed the project with staff and it was made apparent that the ideal zoning for the
proposed project – a memory care facility – is R‐4. While other options were considered, such as rezoning
from CH to Business B, but the B category is limited in applicability for this project type, including specifically
the minimum lot size required. It was deemed that rezoning to R‐4 is really the best fit.
The challenge with rezoning to R‐4, which is a High Density Residential classification, is that the
comprehensive plan currently shows the subject property to be guided as Commercial. Rezoning to R‐4
would therefore be in conflict with its guided use, at least in the short term.
It is the applicant’s understanding that the city is in the process of reworking the comprehensive plan in
keeping with Met Council requirements and intends to revise the guided use for this parcel, and the
neighboring parcel, to High Density Residential, which would be in keeping with the intent of this project.
The intent of the city is also to reduce the density range from the current 7 to 30 units per acre down to 12‐
Memorandum
January 13, 2017
Medina Memory Care – Rezoning and Comp Plan Amendment Request
Page 2 of 3
MOHAGEN HANSEN
Architecture | Interiors
15 units per acre. As proposed, the development would result in 19.8 units per acre which would fall within
the guidelines of the current High Density Residentail category. From an intensity of use standpoint, 19.8
units per acre of memory care is substantially less intense than 19.8 units per acre of multi‐family
apartments. So, in considering how this request and the development plan align with the future guide plan,
the proposed density would not create a more intense use as parking demands and trips in and out of the
site by residents will be extremenly low (residents are not drivers or vehicle owners). Parking demand and
vehicle traffic for the proposed housing type will be minimal compared to 42 units of standard apartment
housing. In the case of an apartment building, it would not be uncommon to have 2 to 4 residents per unit,
depending on unit type. That is not the case with this project as each of the units is essentially a private
bedroom with a private bathroom, so occupany will be 1:1 for the most part.
The applicant believes that, although the rezoning would be in conflict with the current comp plan, the long
term intent of the comp plan would be satisfied, including the density objectives, thereby justifying the
rezoning in the near term.
Project Description
The proposed project involves a new single story senior living facility intended to provide supportive care
services for residents with memory deficits. Phase 1 of the project would entail the construction of roughly
28 to 30 individual resident units or rooms along with the support spaces to serve those residents – dining
room, commercial kitchen, living and recreation spaces, staff and care team spaces, etc. The project would
be similar in nature to the Beehive project in Excelsior, Minnesota. Phase two of the project would involve
the addition of another 12 resident units and related support and living spaces. The facility is expected to
be approximately 20,000 gross square feet in size. The facility will offer units under the Elderly Waiver
program of the State of Minnesota, thereby contributing to the city’s offering of affordable housing units.
Site
The existing 2.12 acre site has been a residential property in recent history and the smaller site to the north
is also a residential property at this time. The property to the south was redeveloped by this applicant in
2008, creating the small retail building that is there today.
At the time the retail building was developed, Hennepin County took additional right of way along the east
side of County Road 29, making the retail parcel smaller by roughly 7 feet. It is expected that the same
“taking” on the part of the County will be required for the subject property and the current site plan reflects
that adjustment.
Additionally, in 2008, the County wanted to develop a long term plan to modify access to the retail site and
to the Holiday Station to the south. In that redesign, the county intends to discontinue the full access
condition between the retail site and the Holiday Station, requiring a loop road to be developed around the
east and north sides of the retail site. The existing access south of the retail site would be converted to a
right‐in‐right‐out only condition. This project proposes to install the north leg of that loop road, only in so
far as is required to serve the subject property. It is expected that the east section of the loop road, behind
the retail site, would be constructed as such time as the larger propert to the east is developed, not as part
Memorandum
January 13, 2017
Medina Memory Care – Rezoning and Comp Plan Amendment Request
Page 3 of 3
MOHAGEN HANSEN
Architecture | Interiors
of this project. As proposed, all access to the subject property will come off of the new public road in
keeping with the County’s long‐range plan.
It is understood that the setback to any built item (building or paving) is 50 feet from County Road 29 and
that the setback to a building from the new public road will be 40 feet, while the setback to parking there
will be 20’. Other setbacks on interior side and rear lot lines is 20’ to any built improvements. Per the
zoning ordinance for the R‐4 use, the following additional requirements or limitations apply:
1. A Conditional Use Permit will be required.
2. Unit density must be between 7 and 30 units per acre, or 12‐15 units per acre, if the reduction is
adopted. 19.8 units/acre is proposed.
3. Buffer yards are not required.
4. R‐4 design standards will apply.
5. The maximum impervious material allowed is 60% of the site area.
Parking
In the R‐4 district, high density residential uses are required to have enclosed parking for residents. In this
case, the resident mix is such that residents will not be drivers or vehicle owners, therefore, no enclosed
parking is proposed. Per review with staff, surface parking will be provided for visitors plus one stall for
every staff member on the largest shift. Visitor parking is proposed at a rate of 1 per 4 units.
We believe the parking needs for the project are reasonably satisfied as proposed and offer the following
parking summary as support:
Parking Demands: Qty. Factor Stalls Provided
Memory Care Phase 1
Staff 10 1:1 10
Residents 28 1:4 7
Memory Care Phase 2
Staff 2 1:1 2
Residents 14 1:4 4
Total Parking Demand: 23
Total Stalls Provided: 23
Development Timeframe
It is expected, following a positive outcome with the zoning and comp plan amendment application, that the
applicant will continue project development approvals with a full development review application at the
earliest possible opportunity. The objective is to get all project approvals in place to be able to start
construction as soon as possible in the spring.
K:\JOBS\Medina Memory Care 16400\01_Admin\Code\16400_MMC_Narrative_011217.docx
KATRINA LAKE
SUBJECT SITE
2008 RETAIL
DEVELOPMENT
BAKER PARK
RESERVE
HIG
H
W
A
Y
1
2COUNTY ROAD 29MEDIN
A
MAPLE
PLAIN
SITE LOCATION MAPSITE LOCATION MAP
MEDINA, MN
January 12, 2017
SCALE: 1" = 40'
20'40'0 80'
MEDINA MEMORY CAREEXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
MEDINA, MN
January 13, 2017
N
SCALE: 1" = 40'
20'40'0 80'
MEDINA MEMORY CARESITE CONCEPT
MEDINA, MN
January 12, 2017
N
PORCHES
DETAIL
COLOR/TEXTURE
MATERIAL/ACCENTS
HOME
GABLES
LANDSCAPE
MEDINA MEMORY CAREEXTERIOR PRECEDENT IMAGES
MEDINA, MN
January 13, 2017