Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout08-08-2017 POSTED IN CITY HALL AUGUST 4, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 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. Public Hearing – Excelsior Group LLC – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Rd. – PUD Concept Plan with Staging Plan Flexibility 6. Public Hearing – Arrowhead Holdings LLC – 4101 Arrowhead Drive – Preliminary and Final Plat for subdivision and lot combination 7. McDonalds – 822 Highway 55 – Variance from required setback adjacent to right-of-way to replace trash enclosure 8. Continued Public Hearing – Dean Lunski – North of Hwy 55, South of Chippewa Rd and west of Mohawk Drive – Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and Site Plan Review – 9. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment and Rezoning – Closed Landfill-Restricted District and Closed Landfill-Area of Concern Overlay District 10. Approval of July 11, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 11. Council Meeting Schedule 12. Adjourn Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 August 2, 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: July 26, 2017 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – August 2, 2017 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Hamel Road Thirty Two Plat (combination) – 32 Hamel Road LLC has requested approval of a plat to combine 3 lots at 32-42 Hamel road into a single parcel. The City had previously approved of this lot combination, but it was not finalized by a previous owner. The Planning Commission reviewed at the July 11 meeting and recommended approval. The City Council reviewed on July 18 and directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval which will be presented at the August 2 meeting. B) Crosby/Snow 2nd Home CUP – 2402 Hamel Road – Buddy and Kim Snow have requested a conditional use permit to construct a 2nd principal single family home on property owned by Kim’s parents. The RR district allows a 2nd home on properties over 40 acres for family, employees or guests. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 11 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. Staff intends to present to the City Council on August 2. C) School Lake Nature Preserve CD-PUD – Wally and Bridget Marx have requested review of a PUD General Plan of development and preliminary plat for a conservation design subdivision to include 6 lots and conservation of 70 acres (11.76 buildable). The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the June 13 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The applicant has adjusted plans in light of recent City Council direction to include a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres in rural CD-PUD projects. Staff intends to present the request at the September 5 City Council meeting. D) Lunski Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, Site Plan Review – Lunski, Inc. has applied for approvals for a development of 90 units of mixed senior housing, 24,767 s.f. of office, and 4,100 s.f. commercial north of Highway 55 and west of Mohawk Drive. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 11 Planning Commission meeting. The Commission tabled the request in order to allow the applicant to update plans to meet comments from the Elm Creek Watershed and City Engineer. Staff intends to present the request to the Commission on August 8 and potentially the City Council on August 15. E) OSI Lot Line Rearrangement – Open Systems International (OSI) has requested approval of a lot line rearrangement (division and combination) between their property at 4101 Arrowhead Drive and the adjacent outlot to the southeast. The applicant intends to extend their parking lot into this area. Staff intends to present the request to the Planning Commission on August 8 and potentially the City Council on August 15. F) Excelsior Group Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Plan – The Excelsior Group has requested a comprehensive plan amendment for the City to amend the staging of development for property located north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive for a 68-lot single-family subdivision. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and will present the request when complete, potentially at the August 8 Planning Commission. G) McDonald’s Variance – McDonald’s has requested a variance to reduce the required setback for a replacement trash enclosure. The existing enclosure is being removed by Hennepin County in Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 August 2, 2017 City Council Meeting connection with the County Road 116 improvement project and needs to be relocated. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and will present the request when complete, potentially at the August 8 Planning Commission. H) Johnson ADU CUP, Dykhoff Septic Variance, Three Rivers/We Can Ride CUP, Woodridge Church, 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. I) Woods of Medina – This preliminary plat has been approved and staff is awaiting a final plat application J) 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 draft Comprehensive Plan has been routed to affected jurisdictions for their review. Staff has received preliminary comments from the Met Council and is meeting with the various departments to clarify some matters. B) Cable Franchise/Broadband discussion – staff took part in a conference call with Mediacom and MnDEED in an attempt to convince the state to provide the grant funding previously approved to apply to remaining build-out in the City. 104 PR0,1'OSED MEDINA,5EN10R LIVING COMMUNITY PROPOSED WATERMA CONNECT! 100, PLAY fi%LG • CHIPPEWA )R AD , Parcel Data - Address 2212 Chippewa Road PID 03-118-23-23-0005 Area: 19.53 acres (850,549 sf) Description: The East 655.53 ft of the SW a of the NW 1/4 Parcel Data - Address 2120 Chippewa Road PID 03-118-23-24-0002 Area: 17.62 acres (767,549 sf) Description: STORM -WRrre Wdla-dGrcdlrn r+radp00 NQRt's 200 100 0 100 200 400 4111111I ALE IN FEET ,714Re Irv. �IIe � yllc cE nor -EASEMENT Re I 1005 WE TLAND BOUNDARY LJM --_ o— CHIPPEWA ROAD 4' 0I. Wu Mon DEvELORmEm7 SOL WATERMAIN STUB - RS ee,Ens.,,T 57 SIGN RUlLOIuc SETBACK PARK kO SETBACK , KEwley Na 7 -- Proposed Design Data; 40 Lots R1 Zoning Min Width - 90 ft Min Area - 11,000 sf Fysb - 25'I/30'g Sysb - 10' min/25' total Crnr - 25' Rysb - 20' open/30' 50' ROW 28' B -B Streets Proposed Design Data: 28 Lots PUD Zoning Min Width - 65 ft Min Area - 7,000 sf Fysb - 25'1130'g Sysb - 7' min/14' total Crnr - 20' Rysb - 20' DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS V6.0 DRAWN BY RSM CHECKED BY DATE 07/27/17 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Name, P.E. Date: Lic. No. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA Concept Plan - R1 / PUD BRINDLE PATH THE EXCELSIOR GROUP FILE NO. 24958-002 X PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER OPEN SPACE +/-41,278 SF (0.95 acres) , \/ W J�w w ___)/ WETLAND # +/-36,680 SF (0.84 acres) MVO 90' LOTS +/-556,255 SF (12.77 acres) 5TOKM W4PK TKE +11 E ++1 lr POND (+/ -20669 0+) OPEN SPACE +1-160.779 SF (3.69 acres) W, LW v+ WETLAND #2 w 41 `" +/-39,888 SF , -w w w (0.92 acres) CHIPPEWA ROAD ROW /-201,938 SF (4.64 acres) r 65' LOTS +/-292,427 SF (6.71 acres) UPLAND PARK +/-59,481 SF (1.37 acres) PARKING /-2,281 SF (0.05 acres) OPEN SPACE +/-230,022 SF (5.28 acres) WETLAND +1-1,008 SF (0.02 acres) 510+11 IVATEK TKEhrl9ENT POND #1+ WETLAND +/-18,700 SF (0.43 acres) :( / 1 / 1 , .: ) L NORM 200 100 0 100 200 400 ■® i ` Ern i � LE IN FEET AREAS ROW - +/- 201,938 SF (4.64 ACRES) 65' RESIDENTIAL LOTS - +/- 292,427 SF (6.71 ACRES) 90' RESIDENTIAL LOTS - +/- 556,255 SF (12.77 ACRES) OPEN SPACE - +/- 507,995 SF (11.66 ACRES) (27,017+41,278+48,899+160,779+230,022) UPLAND PARK - +/- 59,481 SF (1.37 ACRES) WETLAND - +/- 109,326 SF (2.51 ACRES) (36,680+39,888+14,058+18,700) PARKING - +/- 2,281 SF (0.05 ACRES) TOTAL SITE AREA - +/- 1,618,098 SF (37.15 ACRES) GROSS DENSITY 68 lots / 37.15 acres = 1.83 lots/acre NET DENSITY (total area - wetland area - upland park) 37.15 - 2.51 - 1.37 = 33.27 acres 68 lots / 33.27 acres = 2.04 lots/acre DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS V6.0 DRAWN BY RSM CHECKED BY DATE 01/13/16 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Name, P.E. Date: Lic. No. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA AREA EXHIBIT BRINDLE PATH THE EXCELSIOR GROUP FILE NO. 24958-002 x o I „a 0. '..)-� MH Structure -(64) / / RIM: 1010.0 INV: 999.4 / BLD 10.6' / \ /-�\ 1 / \/ /� MH Structure -(45) RIM: 1009.0 INV: 998.8 I BLD: 10.2' \ - 7- A / / \I 90,0.001 --- ���' 8' PVC SDR 35 57.0 LFj@0.53% -�\ PROPOSED I\ '0WATERMAIN I §.CONNECTION\ MH Structure - (4 6) RIM: 10090 INV. 998.3 BLD: 10.7 ./// '7 \\ 7, MH Structure - (75) RIM: 1009.0 INV: 993.3 BLD: 15.7' MH Structure - (51) RIM: 1007 0 INV: 993.7 BLD: 13.3' MH Structure - (50) RIM: 1004.0 INV: 994.0 BLD: 12.0' 90. ------------ 1- MH Structure - (47) RIM: 1010.0 INV: 992.6 BLD: 174' TPfATIfNT PONE) #1 +/-20,669 5) MH Structure - (74) RIM. 1008 0 INV: 992.1 BLD: 15 9' MH Structure -(59) RIM: 1004.0 \� INV: 989.5 BID:14,5' / ' 5) \ , N. N // MH Structure -(48) N. / RIM: 1006.0 N / INV: 989.2 / -.: - BLD: 168' /I a'r \\ //':--7 \\ / : vA \ vA / 5/05)71wAre FEATM#N/PON• z (+/-8,747 57) i---1004 \\ iLmisevJl MH Structure - (73) RIM: 1003.0 INV: 990.0 BLD: 13.0' MHIM:1004.0 RIM: 1004.0 INV: 988.8 BLD :152' MH Structure - (62) RIM: 1011.0 INV 1000.0 BLD: 11.0' / I / / I 1 / I I I 1 PLAY Pl�LD MH Structure - (58) RIM: 1002.0 INV: 991.0 BLD: 11.0' / MH Structure - (55) / RIM: 1005.0 PAPK / / / J 94.4 BLD: 0.6' OPENSPACE /' \\ 5,05 iyFf5 .E / v •/ 0 MFTRIM: 10IM:10re04.0-(56) V INV: 992.0 BLD: 12.0'. MH Stricture - (57) RIM: 10020 INV: 991.5 BLD: 0.5' / / / 996-_\ / / / 25.0_ MH Structure - (35) RIM: 1001.2 BLD: 19.2' CHIPPEWA ;R MH Structure - (54) RIM: 1006.0 INV: 994.9 o BLD: 11.1' / \ / \I IlJ 51001 WAT0P TPTATI0NT PON0 #1i («/-1778// 5F) 0 or Weiland G7edion (+/-40,000 sf) I HYD MH Structue =(37) RIM: 991.8 INV: 979.4 BLD: 12.4' L.( Or I_ IxxI▪ \\ `I - l4 II 1ST= 992-r POSSIBLE FUTURE TRAIL CONNECTION gg i �i • I I I I 1 I 116_1 10' DRA!t'�AGE U1/CITY E SEF \10.00' 200 100 0 100 200 400 4111111I SCALE IN FEET DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS V6.0 DRAWN BY RSM CHECKED BY DATE 01/13/16 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Name, P.E. Date: Lic. No. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA Concept Plan - UTILITY BRINDLE PATH THE EXCELSIOR GROUP FILE NO. 24958-002 UP1 PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER / J \ 0 7072 1010 006 - -1002-' 00 9 ou, / ,sm al MH Strut (42) RIM: 1013.0 INV 1001.0 BLD: 12.0' T' see MH Structure - (43) //Q RIM: 1012.0 //r3' INV: 1000.5 , BLD: 11.5' MH Structure- (44) RIM. 1011.0 / INV: 1000.0 / OLD: 11.0' /.. n,w3: MH Structure - (64) RIM: 1010.0 INV 9994 BLD: 10.6' / 1 / 1Y/ / 1 /// � �M�v\ Ilo 11 / 1 MH Structure -(45) - RIM: 1009.0 INV: 998.6 815:.10.2' MH Structure - (46) RIM: 1009.0 INV: 998.3 BLD: 10.7'. 900\ MHSOucture-(41).0- RIM: 1014.0 INV' 1001 5 BLD: 12.5' 57OP11 WATER _ TKfATM>NT PONE #1 -/-/20,669 51) / 89.9 vv 1 \ \ A A V A \ \ v Iv \\\\\\\\v v I vv A vV A vvv ▪ v 7076 i _ MH Structure - (76) 1 RIM: 1014.5 I/ INV: 1002.5 p. BLD: 12.0' N' 0 I 6 )1 / 1 I I I I�!,5;9 I II MH Structure - (72) RIM: 1014.0 / INV: 9984 BLD: 15.6' 90.0 "21,2_2- / / i '1 / i / MHSGucture-(61),/ ..-- ...--- .....- 7009 _ _-- MH Structure - (67) 1 RIM:1010.0 0 INV:T.. 1------- : ..-- 21..6.0e / {/ A I �� _ BLD: 12.fi' \ -----_-_---r-, Smucture-(63') \ \\ �r INVki : 996.6 1009.0 \ \ - _ ''''''---.L...,,,,, BLD: 12.4' \ \ \ m3u \ ////%///�'///////�/////// I / Y / js.o / / Win,, I /I 1 , /'� / 1 / \ • . MH Structure- (62) RIM'. 1011.0 , INV: 1000.0 BLD: 11.0' / I I / I I / I I I op e"MC slot, 3g. /////J✓//�✓///�/ 2 I �,ou,< �� / 1 3,m3� / 1 I iii%✓/Ji-_-_-_____ -- , \I -/�//J/////�� \ / PLAY Pil/LE NORM 200 100 0 100 200 400 SCALE IN FEET PAP// OP5NSpAC 5,05 A/0PC MH Structure - (55) RIM: 1005.0 INV: 994.4 BLD: 10.6 0 MFT IM:1004.(6). V RIM: 992. 0 rib INV: 992.0 0L0:1251 /\ / MH Structure - (68) RIM: 1008.0 INV: 996.2 BLD: 11.8' MH Structure 2(54) RIM 1006 0 INV: BLD 11 .9 B 1.1' a.ioi / 10.00' //WATERDAAI1 ST U -B 41C-- o 0 k IQ IST 72 992-j II 25 POSSIBLE FUTURE TRAIL CONNECTION DRAWING NAME NO. BY DATE REVISIONS V6.0 DRAWN BY RSM CHECKED BY DATE 01/13/16 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Name, P.E. Date: Lic. No. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CITY PROJECT NO. MEDINA, MINNESOTA Concept Plan - UTILITY BRINDLE PATH THE EXCELSIOR GROUP FILE NO. 24958-002 U/ PROJECT NAME AND NUMBER Excelsior Group Page 1 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: November 3, 2016 MEETING: November 8, 2016 Planning Commission SUBJ: Excelsior Group LLC – PUD Concept Plan Review – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road – Public Hearing Review Deadline Complete Application Received: July 28, 2017 60-day Review Deadline: September 26, 2017 Summary of Request The Excelsior Group, LLC has requested review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 68-lot residential development north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive. The subject site is a total of 37 acres (31.3 net acres), with two single family homes. Much of the property is pasture with some tilled farmland. The applicant’s concept also identifies five wetlands located throughout the site and two additional potential wetland areas. The subject site is guided for Low Density Residential development in the current Comprehensive Plan within the 2021-2025 staging period. The Comp Plan would permit a property to develop up to two years early through an incentive-based point system. As such, the property would not be permitted to be developed until 2019 under the existing Comprehensive Plan, even with the “jump ahead” provision. The applicant seeks approval for this jump ahead provision to permit construction during 2018 and they propose homes to be occupied in 2019. The properties are zoned Rural Residential-Urban Reserve, which is an interim zoning designation for property until development occurs consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Property to the north and west are currently rural residential lots, planned for future low density development in the Comp Plan after 2021. Polaris is located to the southeast of the subject property and the Wealshire is under construction to the east. The property south of Chippewa Road is planned for future commercial development. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found at the top of the following page. The purpose of a PUD Concept Plan is to provide feedback to the applicant prior to a formal application. The Planning Commission and City Council will not take any action and the feedback is purely advisory. The applicant had provided two concept plans on the same property for review during the summer and fall of 2016. Excelsior Group Page 2 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Purpose of a Planned Unit Development According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. Excelsior Group Page 3 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. City Code requires the flexibility permitted under the Staging Plan to be considered within the context of a PUD. Comprehensive Plan As noted above, the subject properties are guided Low Density Residential (LDR) in the current Comp Plan, which would anticipate development with a net density of 2-3.5 units per acre. The properties were part of the Staging Plan amendment completed in 2015, which changed the properties from the 2016-2020 staging period to the 2021-2025 staging period. The amendment also reduced the amount of flexibility permitted for developing prior to the staging period. A residential development can occur two years prior to the staging period (rather than up to 5 years early). As such, the properties could not be developed until 2019 without a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant argues that they would not occupy houses until 2019, which they argue could be consistent with the staging, even if construction were to begin in 2018. The City is currently in the midst of its decennial Comprehensive Plan update. The Steering Committee has completed a draft of the Plan, which has been out for public and jurisdictional feedback for almost a year. The City anticipates that the Plan update will be in effect before the subject sites could be developed in 2019. The draft 2040 Comp Plan update designates the subject property as Low Density Residential, but delays the staging of the property to 2025. Property to the west, north, and northeast of the site has been guided as Rural Residential within the draft Plan update, no longer being included within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The DRAFT Comprehensive Plan is available on the City’s website, and the Draft Future Land Use map is attached for reference. Because the DRAFT Comprehensive Plan update is within the review process, staff believes it is relevant to consider in connection with a proposed development, even if it is not yet in effect. Excelsior Group Page 4 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Proposed Site Layout The applicant proposes 68 single family lots. 40 of the lots, predominantly in the western portion of the site and along the northern boundary, are proposed to be 90-feet in width and 11,000 s.f. in area. These lots would generally align with the R1 zoning district standards, which is the district utilized by the City to implement the LDR land use. The concept plan identifies 28 “villa” style lots which are 65-feet wide and 7,000 s.f. in area. The applicant has not explicitly requested setback flexibility beyond the lot size consideration. R1 Requirement 90-foot lots Villa lots Minimum Lot Size 11,000 s.f. 7,000 s.f. Minimum Lot Width 90 feet 65 feet Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet 25 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet 30 feet Side Yard Setback (combined) 25 feet (15 & 10) 15 feet (7.5 & 7.5) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 30 feet 25 feet Max. Hardcover 40% 50% The concept plan shows a 1.37 acre park near the center of the development. The proposed density appears to be 2.3 units/acre, compared to the 2.0-3.5 units/acre requirement of the LDR land use. There is a discrepancy between this number and the applicant’s calculations on their plans because they did not subtract wetland buffer areas. They would need to be confirmed following completion of a wetland delineation and final plans, because there is approximately .88 of an acre of potential wetland/buffer shown on their concept which they do not believe is wetland. The applicant proposes a single access point off of Chippewa Road, at the location of the existing 2212 Chippewa Road driveway. Tree Preservation and Buffer Yards Few trees are located on the subject properties. Any application would be subject to the City’s tree preservation and replacement requirements. Staff believes it is extremely important for any development to provide a substantial landscaped buffer yards adjacent to rural properties to the west and north. Wetlands and Floodplain The subject properties appear to contain five wetlands, which most of the wetland areas being in the southern portion of the site. The applicant proposes impacts to the southwestern wetland in order to construct a street to serve lots in this portion of the site and also to impact a small wetland in the eastern portion of the site. The concept plan identifies the City’s minimum upland buffers around remaining wetland areas. FEMA maps identify no floodplains on the subject properties. Excelsior Group Page 5 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Staff would recommend considering removing the three lots in the southwest corner of the property. This would allow a reduction of wetland impacts for the street connection to the southeast. These lots would have a higher potential of impacts to adjacent rural property because of the location of improvements on neighboring property. This property could either be preserved as open space or potentially for development when and if the MUSA is ever extended to property to the west during a future Comp Plan process. Transportation The applicant proposes a single access point at Chippewa Road, located where the 2212 Chippewa driveway is today. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, information should be provided to determine if improvements should be required for Chippewa Road. Mohawk Drive has limited right-in/right-out access to the east of the site. As a result, eastbound traffic would be required to go west on Chippewa Road to Willow Drive in order to turn left onto Highway 55. The City has identified a future connection of Chippewa Road east of Mohawk Drive to connect with Arrowhead Drive. Staff believes this connection is important to support development in the area of Chippewa Road/Mohawk Drive. This road connection is not yet in place and staff believes that it is important that provisions are made for construction of this street before any property is allowed to jump ahead pursuant to the staging plan flexibility. The concept plan shows a connection between the neighborhood and the property to the west. If the surrounding property is guided as rural residential, these connections may not be advisable. As noted above, staff would recommend against development in their corner of the site because of the adjacent rural land use. Sewer/Water If development were to occur at the subject site, sewer and water infrastructure would be required to be extended from Mohawk Drive to the property. The applicant would also be required to loop the water main to connect to the main north of the Wealshire project. A preliminary review indicates that the subject site could be served through gravity sewer lines to the existing system. As proposed, the subject property would be served by a single water main along Highway 55 (to Mohawk) without any looping. The City Engineer and Public Works state that having a second means to route water to this neighborhood would be important. The City’s water plan identifies a second water main along new Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive east to Arrrowhead Drive. This water main connection is not yet in place and staff believes that it is important that provisions are made for construction of this connection before any property is allowed to jump ahead pursuant to the staging plan flexibility. Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans. Any development proposal would ultimately be subject to relevant stormwater standards. Excelsior Group Page 6 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Park Dedication The City’s subdivision regulations requires up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated for park purposes. The City may also choose to accept cash in-lieu of all or a portion of this land dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre-developed market value, up to a maximum of $8000 per home. Staff does not believe the fee would reach the maximum in this case, but it will be determined more precisely during the preliminary plat review if the applicant proceeds with a formal application. The concept plan identifies an approximately 1.37 acre park area. The concept plan also identifies trail connections through the neighborhood connecting to Chippewa Road and to Wealshire. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application, the connection to Wealshire, which is private property, would need to be discussed with the property owner. The nearest City Park is fairly distant from the subject site. The City’s draft Park Plan has identified the need for a neighborhood City park in this area to support residential development on the subject site and other nearby parcels. A neighborhood park is likely between 4-10 acres in area, depending on the anticipated nearby population and improvements desired. Staff believes it is important for this park to be provided if property is to develop earlier than the staging plan suggests. Staging Plan Flexibility As noted above, the draft 2040 Comp Plan update stages the subject property for development after 2025. The current Comprehensive Plan stages the property for development after 2021, and would permit flexibility to development up to 2 years sooner. The applicant desires to construct the neighborhood in 2018, with the first home being occupied in 2019. Section 825.34 of the City Code states that “the city council, following consultation of the planning commission, may consider requests for flexibility to the date which city water and sanitary sewer utility services are available according to the Phasing Plan, as permitted within the Comprehensive Plan. Properties shall only be prioritized for early development when it is determined by the city that a proposed project significantly achieves the criteria described below…” The subsection continues: “The city council shall deny a request for flexibility to the Phasing Plan, except upon a finding that the proposed project significantly achieves the criteria identified…below. The following represents the minimum standard which must be met in order for the city council to consider flexibility to the Phasing Plan. The city council shall have the discretion to require achievement of additional city objectives during the review process. (1) The crucial factor described…shall be determined to be achieved; and (2) Fifty or more points shall be achieved amongst the various primary and secondary factors….” Following are the criteria for reviewing requests for Phasing Plan Flexibility. The applicant has provided a description within their narrative on how they believe these factors are achieved. Excelsior Group Page 7 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Staff has provided some comments behind a number of the criteria in italics for consideration by the Planning Commission and Council. (a) Crucial factor: Infrastructure Capacity. The city shall review existing sanitary sewer, water, and street infrastructure to determine if sufficient capacity exists to support all three of the following: 1) existing development previously approved by the City; 2) the proposed project; and 3) all other development which has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan for the current Phasing period. If existing capacity is determined to be insufficient for the proposed project, but the project proposes to make necessary improvements, the city may give consideration to such proposal, provided the improvements are constructed at no cost to the city or other property owners. The improvements shall also be consistent with city infrastructure plans and policies and be designed to serve other future development when appropriate. In terms of the crucial factors, staff raised questions above related to both transportation and domestic water supply for the subject site. A future road connection for Chippewa Road east of Mohawk Drive was identified in the Comprehensive Plan to support development in this area and has not been constructed. The need to loop the water system has also been identified and not yet provided. Staff believes the water main connection is a fairly time sensitive improvement necessary for consideration with any flexibility to the staging plan. Provisions also need to be made for the construction of Chippewa Road to the east of Mohawk Drive. Staff recognizes that this project will be complicated and may take a longer time period to implement. As such, a means for a significant contribution towards the construction of Chippewa Road could be considered in connection with a request for Staging Plan flexibility. Staff has also identified park infrastructure as a need in order to support development. 1.3 acres of parkland is inadequate to support development in the area. A minimum of 3 acres would be required under standard park dedication calculations. (b) Primary factors (maximum of 10 points per item): (1) Sustainability. To achieve this objective, the project shall incorporate sustainable practices such as high energy efficiency, responsible construction materials and processes, site design which supports multiple transportation options, and other sustainable practices. The proposed site layout does appear to provide good opportunities for non-motorized transportation. (2) Natural resource protection and low impact development. To achieve this objective, the project shall incorporate low impact development practices and exceptional natural resource and ecological preservation. Meeting the minimum tree preservation and wetland protection regulations shall be equivalent to one point, with additional points granted for additional preservation. The applicant proposes to reuse stormwater for irrigation and provide two trees per lot, which essentially abide by the City’s minimum standards for any development. The Excelsior Group Page 8 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting removal of the lots in the southeast corner of the site would contribute towards additional natural resource protection. (3) Proximity to existing development. To achieve this objective, the project shall be adjacent to or a short distance from existing development which is served by city utility services. Property which is immediately adjacent to existing development shall be granted the most points, with fewer points granted with increased distance. The subject site is adjacent to the Wealshire project currently under construction and across the street from Polaris’s headquarters. The property south of Chippewa Road is within the current staging period. Property to the north and west is planned for rural uses under the draft 2040 Comp Plan. (4) Open Space Protection. To achieve this objective, the project shall permanently protect open space from development. The number of points granted shall be based on the relative size of the open space area protected and the ecological value of the open space. The applicant proposes additional open space to the south of the narrow wetland in the southeastern portion of the site. The applicant proposes a 1.3 acre park, which is less than would be anticipated with standard park dedication requirements. The removal of the lots in the southeast corner of the site would contribute towards additional open space protection. (5) Limited impacts on city services. Points for this objective shall be based upon the expected need for city services, with fewer points granted for projects which have a higher potential impact. For example: (i) Projects which can access regional roadways with limited distance on city streets may be granted additional points. (ii) Commercial uses which create lower levels of traffic, particularly truck traffic, may be granted additional points. (iii) Commercial uses with lower water usage may be granted additional points. The City has identified the need for Chippewa Road to be extended to serve development in this area. A means to provide this connection should be secured in connection with any discussion related to staging plan flexibility. (c) Secondary factors (maximum of 5 points per item): (1) High quality architectural design and materials. Points may be granted for this objective for a number of different elements. Meeting the minimum requirements of the underlying zoning district with regards to building materials, modulation, and other relevant standards would be equivalent to one point. Additional elements may include: (i) Varying types of home within a single-family development. (ii) Utilization of more high quality building materials, such as brick and stone, than is required by the underlying zoning district. (iii) Four-sided architecture. The applicant has suggested that it would be high quality. No architectural guidelines or examples have been provided. Excelsior Group Page 9 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting (2) Community amenities. Points may be granted for this objective based on a number of different amenities, examples of which include: (i) Private trails, recreational, or gathering areas beyond which is required as part of park dedication requirements. (ii) High quality signage and lighting fixtures, to be maintained by the property owner(s). The concept plan includes a fairly substantial network of trails within the neighborhood. A 1.3 acre park is proposed, which would be smaller than expected to support the area. (3) Affordable housing (residential development only). To achieve this objective, affordability shall be guaranteed by a covenant or similar means approved by the city. The amount of points granted shall be based on the level of affordability as well as the proportion of units which are affordable. The applicant does not propose to guarantee affordability, but does believe the villa product on the east portion of the site would provide some diversification of housing style. (4) Employment opportunities (commercial/business development only). Points for this objective shall be based on the number of employees, especially new positions which will be filled after the user begins operations within the city. Not relevant. (5) Other factors. The City may grant additional points to projects that meet objectives which are not specifically described above. Review Criteria The purpose of the PUD Concept Plan is to provide purely advisory comments to the applicant for their consideration whether and how to continue with a formal application. The City has a great deal of discretion when reviewing a PUD because it is a rezoning, which is a legislative action. A PUD should only be approved if it achieves the purposes of the PUD district (described on pages 2-3), the Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. In this case the request is also required to meet the staging plan flexibility criteria. The Planning Commission and City Council should consider the request within this context. Staff Comments Staff believes that it is best to consider the concept plan within the broader context of the draft Comprehensive Plan update in addition to the current Comprehensive Plan and the criteria for the staging plan flexibility. The draft proposes to delay development upon the subject site until 2025 and also re-guides property to the west, north, and northeast as rural residential. It is interesting to note that each of the parcels included in the concept plan is located within a different school district; the western parcel within Wayzata, and the eastern parcel within Rockford. If the applicant proceeds with a formal application after receiving the comments from the Planning Commission and City Council about whether this proposal meets the purposes of a Excelsior Group Page 10 of 10 August 8, 2017 PUD Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting PUD and the criteria for Staging Plan flexibility, staff has provided comments throughout the report, which are summarized below: 1) Any future application shall be subject to all relevant City regulations and policies. 2) The applicant shall provide information necessary to confirm that gravity sewer service is practical. 3) Any proposed development proposal should include provisions for substantial vegetative buffers to rural properties to the north and west. 4) Land dedication should be considered for a neighborhood park. 5) Provisions should be made for the extension of a water main to provide a second means of providing water to the subject site 6) Provisions should be made for the future extension of Chippewa Road east of Mohawk Drive. 7) The applicant shall provide information requested by the City Engineer to determine whether street improvements are necessary to support the development. 8) The street alignment should be updated to remove the street connection to the west in order to reduce wetland impacts and development adjacent to rural property. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Engineering Comments dated 7-11-2017 3. DRAFT Comp Plan Excerpts (Vision, Goals, Future Land Use) 4. Applicant Narrative 5. Concept Plan Project:  LR‐17‐211 – Excelsior Group PUD Concept Plan The following documents are all part of record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports.  All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document  Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic  Paper Copy? Notes Application  6/30/2017  6/30/2017  5  Y  Y  Updated 7/14/2017 (3 pages) Fee  6/30/2017  6/29/2017  1  Y  Y  $3000 Narrative  6/30/2017  NA  4  Y  Y   Concept Plan  6/30/2017  4/14/2017  1  Y  Y   Plans  7/27/2017  N/A  4  Y  Y   Eng Response  7/27/2017  7/27/2017  2  Y  Y   Planning response  7/27/2017  7/27/2017  3  Y  Y    Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document  Document Date # of pages Electronic  Notes Legal Comments  7/17/2017  1  Y   Engineer Comments  7/11/2017  2  Y   Building Official Comments  7/7/2017  1  Y   Elm Creek Watershed Comments  7/20/2017  1  Y   Legal Notice  7/28/2017  6  Y  9 pages w/ list and affidavit Preliminary Review  7/20/2017  2  Y   Planning Commission Report  8/4/2017  10  Y  33 pages w/ attachments  Public Comments  Document Date  Electronic  Notes        engineering planning environmental construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700   Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\010387-000\Admin\Docs\2017-06-30 Submittal\_2017-07-12 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Comments.docx July 11, 2017 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: The Excelsior Group Concept Plan III – Engineering Review City Project No. LR-17-211 WSB Project No. 010387-000 Dear Mr. Finke: We have reviewed The Excelsior Group Concept plan submittal dated June 30, 2017. The plans propose to construct a total of 68 lots with 40 of them being customary single family lots and the other 28 being single family “villa” lots. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. Site Plan & Civil 1. Verify structure builds and the feasibility of serving the area with a gravity sewer system as proposed. Show where the proposed connection points would be located to the existing system. The applicant did provide confirmation of this with a previous concept plan, please verify this is still the case with the current concept. 2. Looping connections will be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. The adjacent property to the east has constructed a watermain that provides a stub to the very northeast corner of The Excelsior Group site. 3. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for those lots served by City water. 4. The concept plan shows a trail connection to the neighboring property to the east. The site plan for the adjacent property does not include a trail connection to this location. The applicant will need to work with the adjacent property owner to provide trail connections. Traffic 1. The concept plan shows future roadway connections to the west of the proposed development. The applicant should provide an estimate of the ultimate traffic volume that would utilize the proposed roadways to reach this future expansion. The Excelsior Group Concept Plan III – Engineering Review July 11, 2017 Page 2 K:\010387-000\Admin\Docs\2017-06-30 Submittal\_2017-07-12 Excelsior Group Concept Plan - WSB Comments.docx 2. The intersections should be analyzed to determine if turn lanes are required on Chippewa Road or nearby intersections for either capacity or safety. 3. The proposed intersections and trail crossings at Chippewa Road should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns. 4. 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 & Wetlands 5. The development will need to meet the City’s infiltration requirement, which can be met by reusing stormwater from the proposed ponds for irrigation. 6. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards. 7. A wetland delineation report and replacement plan is required prior to any wetland impact. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Jim Stremel, P.E. 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- 6 TThhee GGuuiiddee PPllaann Medina's Future Land Use Plan, Map 5-2, maintains Medina’s rural character and protects the City's natural resources while accommodating limited growth and development which is consistent with the City’s Vision, Community Goals and Land Use Principles. Table 5-2 below demonstrates the expected 2040 land uses in the community. TABLE 5-2 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN Future Land Use (2040) Gross Acreage % Net Acreage % Rural Residential 8,734.5 51.1% 6,476.4 37.9% Agriculture 265.5 1.6% 204.9 1.2% Future Development Area 396.2 2.3% 366.7 2.1% Low Density Residential 1,103.7 6.4% 879.2 5.1% Medium Density Residential 58.3 0.3% 44.9 0.3% High Density Residential 29.3 0.2% 26.3 0.2% Mixed Residential 137.0 0.8% 97.1 0.6% Uptown Hamel 45.0 0.3% 39.0 0.2% Commercial 247.1 1.4% 196.0 1.1% Business 716.9 4.2% 503.0 2.9% Rural Commercial 87.4 0.5% 59.4 0.3% Institutional 270.0 1.5% 199.0 1.1% Parks, Recreation, Open Space 3,106.5 18.1% 2,054.0 12.0% Private Recreation 294.7 1.7% 260.5 1.5% Closed Sanitary Landfill 192.1 1.1% 124.3 0.7% Right-of-Way 673.1 3.9% 672.4 3.9% Total Acres 16,356.5 12,202.6 Lakes and Open Water 763.5 4.5% 763.5 4.5% Wetlands and Floodplain 4,153.9 24.3% Total City 17,120.5 17,120.5 The Growth and Development Map (May 5-3) highlights areas within the City in which a change of land use is contemplated by the Future Land Use plan. The map also highlights wetland areas within Medina which significantly affect land planning, development, and infrastructure decisions. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 7 Future Land Use Designations Rural Residential (RR) identifies areas for low-intensity uses, such as rural residential, hobby farms, agricultural, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. Density within the RR land use shall be no more than one lot per 10 acres and the area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by this Plan. Agricultural (AG) identifies areas which are planned for long-term agricultural uses. Density within the land use can be no more than one lot per 40 acres which will not be served by urban services. Property within this land use is eligible to be part of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program. Future Development Area (FDA) identifies areas which could potentially be planned for future urban development in the City that will be provided municipal sewer and water services. This area will remain rural unless and until designated for urban services in a future Comprehensive Plan update. The purpose of the FDA designation is to communicate the future planning intentions to the community. This designation is tentative and depends greatly on future infrastructure improvements, including to regional highway capacity. Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units per acre and 3.0.units per acre which are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary use in this area is single- and two-family residential development. Medium Density Residential (MDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 5.0 and 7.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses in this designation will be a mix of housing such as single family residential, twin homes, town homes, row homes, and small multiple family buildings. High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 and 15.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. Mixed Residential (MR) identifies residential land uses developed between 3.5 and 4.0 units per net acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The land use provides flexibility for the type of housing developed, including detached single family, twin homes, townhomes and multiple family buildings, provided the overall density of a project falls within the range noted above and provides some higher density housing. Some portion of each site shall be developed at densities over 8.0 units per net acre. At a minimum, each development in the land use shall include one higher density housing unit per net acre, which shall be complemented with open space and recreational activities. Uptown Hamel (UH) the Uptown Hamel land use allows residential and commercial to be mixed on adjacent sites and to be mixed within the same building or property. Residential development in this designation may be between 4.0 and 15.0 units per acre. The mixed-use business areas will be served by urban services. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 8 Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments including commercial, office and retail uses. These uses are concentrated along the arterial corridors and are served or will be served by urban services. Business (B) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including office, warehouse, and light industrial. This designation identifies larger tracts of land that are suitable for office and business park developments and are served or will be served by urban services. Rural Commercial (RC) identifies commercial land uses which are not served by urban services, but rather by individual wells and septic systems. The scale of development in this land use shall be limited in order to protect water resources. Institutional (INST) identifies existing public, semi-public, and non-profit uses such as governmental, cemeteries, religious, educational and utilities. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) identifies publicly owned or permanently conserved land which is used for park, recreational, or open space purposes. Private Recreation (PREC) identifies areas that are currently used for outdoor recreational uses which are held under private ownership but are not publicly maintained. Limited numbers of residential uses may be included or have previously been developed within this land use designation. Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) identifies an existing closed sanitary landfill. The land is owned by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) which also has jurisdiction over land use regulations. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 9 AAvveerraaggee NNeett RReessiiddeennttiiaall DDeennssiittyy The Metropolitan Council has designated the portion of the City within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area as Emerging Suburban Edge. Residential development within the Emerging Surburban Edge designation is required to be planned for new development and redevelopment at average net density of at least 3-5 units per acre. The average net density for planned residential development in Medina is 3.15 units per acre as described in Table 5-3. TABLE 5-3 NET RESIDENTIAL DENSITY Future Land Use Planned Net Acreage Minimum Density Minimum Number of Units Low Density Residential 171.0 2.0 342.0 Medium Density Residential 21.3 5.0 106.5 High Density Residential 13.9 12.0 166.8 Mixed Residential 97.1 3.5 339.9 Total Planned Residential 303.3 955.2 Average Net Residential Density 3.15 Redevelopment is anticipated within the Uptown Hamel area and is likely to include additional residential units. The intent of the Uptown Hamel land use is to permit flexibility in the amount of residential and commercial development and is therefore not projected in Table 5-3. However, residential development within Uptown Hamel is required to exceed 4 units per net acre, which would further compliance with Metropolitan Council minimum net density requirements. EEmmppllooyymmeenntt IInntteennssiittyy FFoorreeccaassttss The Metropolitan Council requires that communities provide a measurement of forecasted employment. Acceptable measures include floor area ratios, building footprint percentages or impervious surface percentages. Medina anticipates that new development in the Commercial and Business land uses will tend to result in 50-65% impervious surface coverage. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 10 LLaanndd UUssee PPoolliicciieess bbyy AArreeaa The following section provides policies for land use designations and is categorized into generalized subsections. The policies for each category as provided below directly support the Community Goals and Land Use Principles. These designations are generalized land uses and are not specific zoning districts. The City will update the zoning ordinance and applicable codes to be consistent with the land use plan and designations identified in this section. The planning process revealed a strong interest in promoting high quality, sustainable development in the City. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for large scale or master plan types of development, regardless of whether they are residential, commercial or mixed-uses will be available and will be supported through zoning. RRuurraall DDeessiiggnnaattiioonnss The rural designations include Agricultural, Rural Residential and Future Development Area. A large percentage of the community falls into these categories. The purpose of these designations is to provide low-intensity land uses, such as rural residential, farming, hobby farms, horticulture, conservation of natural and ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. This area will not be provided with water or sewer service during the timeframe covered by this Plan. The City's goal is to maintain the rural character of this area. The Metropolitan Council System Statement shows the majority of this area as Diversified Rural, and the City utilizes the Rural Residential designation to be consistent with the System Statement. A significant segment of this area consists of large, rural parcels with single-family homes. The City recognizes that such low-density, development will continue to be a desired housing alternative. The City’s Open Space Report proposes several different implementation techniques for allowing open space development and planning to maintain rural character and simultaneously preserve significant natural resources. This result may take the form of innovative developments that clusters smaller lots on larger parcels with permanently conserved open space. Such innovative arrangements can help preserve the City’s natural resources, open space and rural character, while still maintaining an average overall density of ten acres per unit. Medina’s wetlands, lakes, scattered woodlands and soil conditions prevent smaller, unsewered lot development, but are ideal for low-density rural housing. Medina's policy in the permanent rural area is to keep strict soil requirements for septic sites, but allow flexibility for Open Space design developments and to ensure that the permanent rural area will remain rural by eliminating the need for future extension of a sanitary sewer service to replace failing systems. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 11 Objectives: 1. Allow low-density development in the Rural Residential Area including innovative arrangements of homes that preserve open space and natural resources. 2. Encourage conservation of open space, farms and ecologically significant natural resources in the rural areas. 3. Enforce stringent standards for the installation and maintenance of permanent, on-site sewage disposal systems. 4. Allow public facilities and services, such as parks and trail systems, if compatible with rural service area development. 5. Allow land uses, such as home-based businesses, hobby farms, horse stables, nurseries and other smaller-scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining residential development. 6. Regulate noise, illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety. 7. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per forty acres for property in the Agricultural land use. 8. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for new development in the Rural Residential and Future Development Area land use. 9. Consider exceptions to maximum density standards for open space developments that protect natural features and put land into permanent conservation. 10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Future Development Area land uses during this planning cycle. 11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant natural characteristics. 12. Require that lots contain adequate soil types and conditions as defined in the City's on-site septic system requirements. 13. Protect property within the Future Development Area designation from subdivision and development by requiring ghost plats for subdivisions so that future urban expansion is not compromised. 14. Reduce impervious surfaces where possible by applying low impact design standards and encourage innovative materials and plans that reduce runoff. 15. Encourage and incentivize landowners to participate in the protection and conservation of significant natural resources. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 12 UUrrbbaann SSeerrvviiccee DDeessiiggnnaattiioonnss The Urban Service Area includes the residential and commercial areas of the City that are currently or will be served by municipal water and sewer services. Residential Uses Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. 3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary. 4. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low impact development design standards. 5. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth strategies. 6. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan. 7. Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to the provision of urban services that will hinder future division. 8. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes, conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City's open space and natural features. 9. Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. 10. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. 11. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. 12. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 13. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking, green space, landscape buffering and height limitations. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 13 14. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 15. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required. 16. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space. 17. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD’s in exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi-family units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources. 18. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood. 19. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods and to maintain public health and safety. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth DRAFT – February 7, 2017 Page 5- 17 Staging Plan The staging plan is tied to infrastructure plans, including water, wastewater and transportation, to ensure that growth and development are commensurate with services necessary to support new residents and businesses in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The staging plan, Map 5-4, utilizes flexible staging boundaries to direct where and when development should proceed within the City and is built on the following principles: x Growth should encompass a balance of land uses to provide residential and business areas for development throughout the planning period. The staging plan also is intended to reduce concentration of development within a location during a particular timeframe. x The staging plan identifies staged increments of 5-year periods and provides some flexibility between adjacent staging periods. Development shall be limited to a maximum of two years prior to the existing staging period, and will be tied to an incentive based points system. Table 5-5, located on the following page, describes the net acreage of the various land uses by Staging Period. The following table describes the corresponding number of residential units which could be developed upon property within each Staging Period. Although most of the property staged for development is available in earlier timeframes, the City anticipates that actual growth will be more linear as described in the forecasts in Chapter 3. TABLE 5-4 STAGING PLAN – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY Time Period Total Residential Units High Density Residential Units 2018-2020 343 161 2020-2025 94 2025-2030 469 95 2030-2035 0 2035-2040 48 Total 955 256 Chapter 5 - Land Use & GrowthDRAFT – February 7, 2017Page 5- 18TABLE 5-5STAGING PLAN - NET ACREAGEFuture Land Use Existing 2017 Change 2017-2020 2020 Change 2020-2025 2025 Change 2025-2030 2030 Change 2030-2035 2035 Change 2035-2040 2040 Rural Residential 6,481.0 0.0 6,481.0 0.0 6,481.0 0.0 6,481.0 0.0 6,481.0 0.0 6,481.0 Agriculture 204.9 0.0 204.9 0.0 204.9 0.0 204.9 0.0 204.9 0.0 204.9 Future Develop. Area 980.1 -327.8 652.3 -99.5 552.8 -162.2 390.6 0.0 390.6 -23.9 366.7 Low Density Residential 708.2 34.7 742.9 47.3 790.2 65.1 855.3 0.0 855.3 23.9 879.2 Medium Density Res. 23.6 21.3 44.9 0.0 44.9 0.0 44.9 0.0 44.9 0.0 44.9 High Density Residential 12.4 13.9 26.3 0.0 26.3 0.0 26.3 0.0 26.3 0.0 26.3 Mixed Residential 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.1 97.1 0.0 97.1 0.0 97.1 Uptown Hamel 39.0 0.0 39.0 0.0 39.0 0.0 39.0 0.0 39.0 0.0 39.0 Commercial 142.9 53.1 196.0 0.0 196.0 0.0 196.0 0.0 196.0 0.0 196.0 Business 246.0 204.8 450.8 52.2 503.0 0.0 503.0 0.0 503.0 0.0 503.0 Rural Commercial 59.4 0.0 59.4 0.0 59.4 0.0 59.4 0.0 59.4 0.0 59.4 Institutional 194.4 0.0 194.4 0.0 194.4 0.0 194.4 0.0 194.4 0.0 194.4 Parks, Rec, Open Space 2,054.0 0.0 2,054.0 0.0 2,054.0 0.0 2,054.0 0.0 2,054.0 0.0 2,054.0 Private Recreation 260.5 0.0 260.5 0.0 260.5 0.0 260.5 0.0 260.5 0.0 260.5 Closed Sanitary Landfill 124.3 0.0 124.3 0.0 124.3 0.0 124.3 0.0 124.3 0.0 124.3 Right-of-Way 672.4 0.0 672.4 0.0 672.4 0.0 672.4 0.0 672.4 0.0 672.4 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 5-12016 Existing Land UsesDRAFT 01/26/2017 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Map Date: January 26, 2017 Legend Agricultural Rural Residential Single Family Detached Single Family Attached Multifamily Mixed Use Residential Retail and Other Commercial Office Industrial and Utility Institutitional Park, Recreational, or Preserve Golf Course Major Highway Railway Open Water Undeveloped Wetland Locations HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Map 5-2Future 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 HIGH W A Y 5 5 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 HAMEL RD MEDINA R D PIO N E E R T R L TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRHOM E S T E A D TR L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Katrina Independence Mooney Peter Unnamed Spurzem Holy Name Half Moon Wolsfeld Medina Unnamed Unnamed Winterhalter Thies School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Lost Horse Unnamed Academy Marsh Map 5-3Development and Growth PlanDRAFT 12/8/2016 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Map Date: January 20, 2016 Legend Future Land Use Rural Residential Agricultural Future Development Area Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Residential Uptown Hamel Commercial Business Rural Commercial Institutional Private Recreational Park, Recreational, and Open Space Closed Sanitary Landfill Wetland Locations Wetland Locations HIGHWAY 55 ")55 ")24 ")19 ")101 ")116 ")11 ")24 ")19 £¤12 H A M E L R D M E D IN A R D PIONEER TRL TAMARACK DRWILLOW DRHACKAMORE RD ARROWHEAD DRH O M E S T E A D T R L CHIPPEWA RD HUNTER DRPARKVIEW DRBROCKTON LN NMEANDER RD EVERGREEN RD BROCKTON LN NCHIPPEWA RD WILLOW DRWILLOW DRHUNTER DR")55 Katrina Independence Mooney Peter Unnamed Spurzem Holy Name Half Moon Wolsfeld Medina Unnamed Unnamed Winterhalter Thies School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Unnamed Lost Horse Unnamed Academy Marsh Map 5-4Staging and GrowthDRAFT 11/15/2016 0 0.5 10.25 Miles Map Date: January 20, 2017 The Staging and Growth Plan allows potential flexibility for urban services up to two years prior tothe indicated staging period. Such flexiblity will be considered through a evaluation system based onthe extent to which a proposal exceeds general City standards. The Future Development Area identifies areas whichmay potentially be planned for urban services in thefuture beyond the term of this plan (post-2040). The Long-term Sewer Service Area is a long-termplanning designation of the Metropolitan Council. Itidentifies areas which may be considered for potentialsanitary sewer service in the future beyond the termof this Plan. Urban Services Phasing Plan 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 Future Development Area (post 2040) Long-term Sewer Service Area Existing Service Area (2017) Brindle Path Project Narrative The Excelsior Group proposes Brindle Path, a 40 -acre Single Family Low Density Residential subdivision for the City of Medina. The thoughtful development creates a community that is mindful of the vision and goals of the city Medina, and creates a thoughtful transition between more intensive uses to the south and east and rural residential to the north and west. Location The Site is located on Chippewa Road, West of Mohawk Drive. The project is directly west of the Wealshire memory care facility, directly north of Polaris Headquarters, and northeast of the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development. General Description of Request The 2 properties that comprise Brindle Path are designated as Low Density Residential (LDR) in the current Comprehensive Plan and the same on the draft Comprehensive Plan. Originally the properties were included in the 2016-2020 Phasing Plan. This Phasing Plan was amended in early 2015 pushing these properties to the 2021-2025 Phasing Plan. This request is for the council to exercise the Phasing Plan flexibility provided in chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan. This flexibility allows the Phasing Plan to be pulled forward 2 years. In this instance, Certificates of Occupancy can be granted in 2019, allowing development in 2018. Housing The proposed Brindle Path contains 68 total lots. 40 lots will be customary single family lots that meet the R1 zoning (minimum 90 feet wide and 11,000 sf). The remaining 28 lots are proposed as single family "Villa" lots. The homes on these lots will be single level living geared towards empty nesters. The developer is requesting lot size flexibility (minimum 65 feet wide and 7,000 sf) so that these lots will conform to the expectations of the target market of the villa homes. However, in keeping with comments regarding previous submittals, the 28 villa lots are internal to the development or adjacent to the Wealshire. Therefore none of the villa lots will abut any rural residential lot, but instead all of the lots adjacent to rural residential meet the Rl zoning standards. Parks, Trails 8c Open Spaces Brindle Path will include sidewalks on all streets. These sidewalks will link to the trail system that runs throughout the development. The trails will connect to the centrally located park and provide opportunities for passive recreation among the wetlands and open space within the development. The trails are planned to provide opportunities to connect to the Wealshire, Polaris and the planned Lunski Senior Housing Development. The park at the center of the development is planned as a city park and is large enough to provide an area for playground equipment, open play and walking, and a multi -use soccer/football field. This field can become the "home" field for Brindle Path and the existing neighborhoods to the northeast. Infrastructure Sewer All of Brindle Path can be served via gravity to the existing sewer at the intersection of Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive Water Brindle Path will utilize existing watermain in Chippewa Road. The development of Brindle Path will allow the watermain serving the Wealshire to be looped to the watermain on Chippewa Road. Further looping of the watermain can be accomplished by connecting to the watermain serving the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development that comes from the south. Streets Brindle Path will access Chippewa Road approximately at the location of the existing driveway. Vehicles from Brindle Path will travel a short distance on the city streets (Chippewa Road and Mohawk Drive), before accessing State Highway 55. Phasing Plan Flexibility Specifics The Brindle Path concept plan has been in front of the Planning Commission, City Council and Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee several times over the past 18 months. Although there has been lively discussion over various components of the plan there seems to be consensus that development in the proposed location makes sense. The steering committee recommended, and the Council accepted, that the property be guided Low Density Residential (LDR) in the new 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The rationale for keeping the property designated as LDR in the future Comprehensive Plan was the area was easily served by existing infrastructure and created a nice transition from more intensive uses (Wealshire and Polaris) to the less intensive rural residential uses to the north and west. This reasoning is even more appropriate considering the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development. Brindle Path now fills the hole between these 3 projects not only in terms of transitional uses, but also linking infrastructure (watermain, trails, parks, etc.). The proposed project meets or exceeds the factors necessary to allow Staging Plan Flexibility. 1. Crucial Factor: Infrastructure Capacity — The entirety of the project can be served with existing infrastructure located in Chippewa Road. Perhaps more importantly, the project can serve as a bridge between the newly constructed Wealshire on the east side of the property and the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development to the southwest. This will allow important watermain and trail connections. 2. Primary Factors (10 points per item) — a. Sustainability — Houses within Brindle Path will incorporate sustainable practices including high energy efficient, and environmentally responsible construction materials. The location of Brindle Path creates possibilities for a live/work environment to be created with Polaris headquarters to the south, the Wealshire memory care facility to the east, and the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development to the southwest. With 240+ senior housing units on the adjacent properties, the Villas at Brindle Path will create opportunities for elderly residents who are healthy and active to live very near a more frail spouse who requires the services of either of the adjacent senior housing facilities. The synergy between the 3 projects will allow active Medina residents to stay in Medina, as they will have a senior campus environment. Historically seniors looking to move to an active adult community desire that future housing with services options are located very nearby so they don't have to reacclimate to a new community as they become more frail and require housing with services. In addition, it will provide opportunities for Medina families to relocate more frail parents/grandparents nearby. b. Natural resource protection and low impact development — Brindle Path will use a storm water re -use infiltration system to re -use storm water runoff to irrigate. This reduces groundwater use while also providing superior stormwater treatment. The Project will exceed the tree preservation ordinance by adding at least 2 trees to each finished lot. The project will meet all wetland protection regulations, with very little wetland impacts, with plans to put conservation easements over wetlands to ensure their protection and preservation in the future. c. Proximity to existing development — Brindle Path is directly adjacent to the Wealshire memory care facility, and northeast of the proposed Lunski Senior Housing Development. It is also directly north of Polaris Headquarters. All three of these developments utilize city services. d. Open Space Protection — Wetlands and open space within Brindle Path will be preserved in perpetuity by use of a conservation easement. This includes the addition of 40,000 sf of new wetlands. The proposed development includes a 5 -acre city park and trail network that will act as a bridge between the Wealshire, Polaris, and Lunski projects, providing intergenerational recreational opportunities and connectivity. e. Limited impacts on city services - Residents of Brindle Path will use approximately i/z mile of city streets to access State Highway 55. This is very limited impact to the city roadways. Furthermore, the storm water re -use for irrigation of the development will limit the impact on the amount of city water consumed by the development. 3. Secondary Factors (maximum of 5 points per item) a. High quality architectural design and materials — Brindle Path is proposed to have 2-3 local builders to ensure a variety of housing styles and designs. To maintain neighborhood consistency, a Homeowners Association(HOA) and Architectural Review Committee (ARC) will be implemented. The ARC will oversee and enforce high quality of design and materials. The ARC will ensure varying types of home design throughout the community and the use of quality materials including brick and stone. b. Community amenities — Brindle Path will include a park and a trail system, which will connect residents both inside and outside of the neighborhood, and take advantage of the natural environment. As discussed previously, the development will include a 5+ acre city park, big enough to include playground equipment and a soccer/football field, providing a "home" field for Brindle Path and the existing neighborhoods in the northeast. The trail system provides connectivity to the Wealshire, Polaris, and Lunski projects and the city park. c. Affordable Housing — the two different product types, while they may not necessarily meet the Metropolitan Council's definitions of affordable, do meet the City's Housing Objective of "providing opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives." 4. Employment Opportunities — Brindle Path is a single family residential development; thus, there will not necessarily be jobs created by the homes, but this community has the potential to provide a live/work environment for employees of the neighboring senior housing facilities and Polaris Headquarters. Arrowhead Holdings, LLC Page 1 of 4 August 8, 2017 Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: August 1, 2017 MEETING: August 8, 2017 Planning Commission SUBJ: Arrowhead Holdings, LLC – Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination - 4101 Arrowhead Drive – Public Hearing Review Deadline Complete Application Received: July 30, 2017 60-day Review Deadline: September 28, 2017 Summary of Request Arrowhead Holdings, LLC desires to rearrange the lot line between 4101 Arrowhead Drive (the lot containing the Open Systems International (OSI) headquarters) and the adjacent vacant outlot to the southeast. This rearrangement would allow for an expansion of the OSI parking lot to the southeast to accommodate increased parking for OSI’s expanding employment. Rather than just replatting the lot and outlot to shift the lot line, the applicant has requested a two-step process which would: 1) Subdivide the vacant 3.4 acre outlot at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and Arrowhead Drive into a lot and a (reduced size) outlot; and 2) Immediately afterwards combine this small lot to the larger OSI property. The applicant desires this process for their own real estate and financing reasons. The subject properties are zoned Commercial-Highway. The property to the north is currently zoned mixed use, but proposed to be reguided to Business in the draft 2040 Comp Plan. Property to the northeast is currently rural lots, planned for Low Density Residential in the draft 2040 Comp Plan. An aerial can be found at the top of the next page. Proposed Lots The existing OSI lot is 20.02 acres and the existing Outlot is 3.4 acres. The applicant proposes to shift 1.15 acres from the Outlot into the OSI lot, resulting in the OSI lot being 21.17 acres and the outlot being 2.23 acres. Because the application is proposing to subdivide the outlot and then subsequently combine a portion of the property into the OSI lot, the City has to review the “lots” at each step of the process. The following tables summarize the requirements of the CH district and the proposed “lots” following the initial subdivision and then also following the subsequent lot combination. It appears that the proposed lots meet all dimensional standards following both the initial subdivision and the subsequent lot combination. Arrowhead Holdings, LLC Page 2 of 4 August 8, 2017 Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination Planning Commission Meeting Initial Subdivision: CH Requirement Lot Created, Immediately Combined with OSI Lot Outlot A Min. Lot Size 1 acre 1.15 acre 2.23 acre Min Lot Width 100 feet 194 feet 350 feet Min Lot Depth 120 feet 258 feet 345 feet Subsequent Lot Combination: CH Requirement Outlot A Proposed OSI Lot After Combination Min. Lot Size 1 acre 2.23 acre 21.17 acre Min Lot Width 100 feet 350 feet 596 feet Min Lot Depth 120 feet 345 feet 1725 feet Front Setback 25 feet N/A 587 feet Rear Setback 25 feet N/A 345 feet Side Setback 15 feet N/A 136 feet Res. Setback 50 feet N/A N/A Hwy 55 Setback 50 feet N/A 211 feet Parking Setbacks Front 25 feet N/A 232 feet Rear/Side 10 feet N/A 40 feet Street Setback 25 feet N/A 25 feet Res Setback 40 feet N/A N/A Max Hardcover 75% 0% 28.8% Arrowhead Holdings, LLC Page 3 of 4 August 8, 2017 Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination Planning Commission Meeting The lot line is being adjusted in order to accommodate a future expansion of the OSI parking lot. No other development is proposed at this time. As a result, development matters such as traffic, landscaping, and the like are not reviewed at this time in connection with the plat or lot combination. The parking lot expansion would be reviewed through relevant Site Plan Review provisions for compliance with code. This would likely be an administrative review because of the size of the expansion. Right-of-way and Easements The property owner dedicated right-of-way for Arrowhead Drive during the original subdivision of the property in 2009. The City Engineer did not recommend additional right-of-way in connection with this plat. MnDOT was routed on this request and also did not request additional right-of-way. The applicant proposes new drainage and utility easements on each side of the new property line between the OSI lot and the outlot. Park Dedication During the initial subdivision of this property back in 2009, the applicant requested to defer park dedication for the Outlots until these areas were developed in the future. Now that a portion of Outlot C is proposed to be added to the OSI lot and developed, staff believes it is appropriate impose the deferred fees. The City is allowed to require up to 10% of the buildable property (.115 acres for the land being added to the OSI lot) or 8% of the market value. In 2009, the cash-in-lieu fee for the OSI lot was determined to be $5,124.35 per acre. It is likely that this number is slightly low because land values have increased since 2009. For example, the current taxable market value of Outlot C is $345,000, or $102,071 per acre, which would result in a fee of $8,165.68 per acre. However, staff believes it is reasonable to use the 2009 amount since the property is not proposed to be further subdivided. The City’s subdivision ordinance would permit the City to utilize the current pre-developed market value. If the City Council determines it is appropriate to use the 2009 fee calculation, this would result in a park dedication fee of $5,893.00 for the 1.15 acres being combined with the OSI lot and developed. Review Criteria/Staff Recommendation According to Subd. 10 of Section 820.21 of the subdivision ordinance, the City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the following finding are made: (a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28. (b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. Arrowhead Holdings, LLC Page 4 of 4 August 8, 2017 Preliminary/Final Plat; Lot Combination Planning Commission Meeting (d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. Staff believes it is reasonable to conclude that none of these findings are met with either the subdivision or the subsequent combination, subject to the conditions noted below. As such, staff recommends approval of the plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The Owners shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to plat corrections, title documentation, and recording instructions; 2. The plat shall be filed with Hennepin County within 180 days of the date of the city council resolution granting final approval or the final plat shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the Owner and approved by the City Council; and 3. The Owner shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary and final plat and related documents. Staff also recommends approval of the subsequent lot combination subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the lot combination is contingent upon recording of the plat of Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition; 2. The Owners shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to title documentation, and recording instructions; 3. The Owner shall record necessary documents to effectuate the lot combination within 180 days of the date of the city council resolution granting approval or such approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the Owner and approved by the City Council; and 4. The Owner shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary and final plat and related documents. If the Planning Commission finds that the plat does not violate one of the findings noted above, the following motion would be in order: Move to recommend approval of the Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Second Addition and the subsequent lot combination subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat 4. Survey showing proposed lot combination Project:  LR‐17‐209 – OSI Plat and Lot Combination The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports.  All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document  Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic  Paper Copy? Notes Application  6/28/2017  6/28/2017  3  Y  Y  App from owner received 7/31 Fee  6/28/2017  6/27/2017  1  Y  Y  $5000 Preliminary Plat  6/28/2017  6/19/2017  1  Y  Y   Final Plat  6/28/2017    1  Y  Y   Parking Lot Plans  6/28/2017  6/9/2017  4  Y  Y   Title Commitment  7/31/2017  7/5/2017  9  Y  Y   O&E Report  7/31/2017  7/21/2017  4  Y  Y   Response Letter  7/31/2017  7/30/2017  1  Y  N    Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document  Document Date # of pages Electronic  Notes Legal Comments  7/10/2017  1  Y   MnDOT Comments  7/12/2017  2  Y   Legal Notice  7/28/2017  3  Y  5 pages w/ list and affidavit Preliminary Review  7/20/2017  2  Y    Public Comments  Document Date  Electronic  Notes       ; I• O wner: ARROWHEA D HOLDINGS, LLC \ � 6.. B;rah\ ^E 5proce I. t Hirel� \ / Birc h E\E Owner: ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC 2 Birch Birch. l\ESE Birc h vch 3" Birch Hyd. Birch E— \ E'E. \ Sign N -v -"g• \ \ \ \ 89. 3 � In v 975 72 / i% ° � Birc h ' O: H \ 8"—S �.0 8 —S L 18. J / \ �Z Birc h Top 9.6.3 N8 V 1 O'59M E ,, 62.72 �/ ��\\y "•, v: -98A.15 ------)--_--- --'.N e \ // �_----� —I 1 \ \ / / o / / \ J... `... . w 1" Drainage and Utility Easement per .._.. r:..._... \ w / I \I CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK 9 \\ - --. _. t / l' // \ / / / I / / I I / / I \� --- 992 \ ▪ 10 / / I \ / ca`�c� / I \\ / 1Dyl y �o I \\ IS1.'.---------- \w11 O IO�pRE FEgfl w ll 1 \ 07,0241 \ 1 1 \\ g96 / 1 I II \ 1 1w \ \ I 1 1\ \ r., f \ H % i • \/ / I 1 1 \ 0 / / / / w 1 I \ / / / I I' \ // / / / L. I / N / // / I / 2 / / w, I / 990 V I' I / / / / f I 1 V // // // I \_ / / / /,,., I Io /// � // / / / To p 1005. l2� 991.15 8 I / I/ I/ I/ \ c ;ssr, \cam\ \ c .„..._,_.\ - \ ' \�\\\ \�C\ C\ - PARK /E/ Birc h Top 996.70 O ^a ina ge \c\ raffia Sig n T op 99. Inv. 96 Pre lmin ary Plat o f: CAVAN AUGHS MEADOWWOODS PARK SECON D ADDITION T. d. Hyd . 6 -ST E\E`E� Traf Sign al MF7.� I nv. 982.04 982.90 990 Top 995.64 / Top 988.22 10" Inv. 969.25 8" Inv. 973 27 7s NO TES * Bearings shown are based on the plat of CAVA NAU GHS MEA DOWWOO DS PARK. * Contact Gopher State One for utility locations before any construction shall begin . Phone 651-454-0002. * Zoning: CH (Commercial Highway) * Total area = 147,075 feet (3.38 acres). 15 30 60 90 Scale in F eet LEGEND —s — Sanitary S ew er — ST— Storm Sewer — w— Waterrnain Hyd.d Hydrant GV • Gate Valve MH 0 Manhole CB O Cat ch Basin Co o Cl ean out I> Flared End H o. Invert Elevation PP - 0- Power Pole LP-- Light Pole r Electrical Transformer T 17 Teleph one Pedestal I :I Concrete Surface I I Bit umi nous S urfac e — G—Buried Gas C —Buried Commu nications E Buried Electric DEVELOPER OSI 4101 Arr owh ead Dri ve Medina, Minnesota 55340 Phone: 763-551-0559 Attention: Adam Schlafke OW NER Arrowhead Holdings, LLC 4101 Arrowhead Drive Medina, Minnesota 55340 Attention: Ronald Ingram SURVEYOR/ENGINEER Rehder & Associates, Inc . Suite 110 3440 Federal Dri ve Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Ph on e: 651-452-5051 Attention: Gr eg Gentz PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Outlot C, CAV ANAUGHS ME ADOWWOODS P ARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Mi nnes ota. I h ereby certify that this preliminary plat was prepared by me or under my directi on and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 19th day of June, 2017 RENDER & ASSOCIATES, INC . Gary C. Huber, Land Sur veyor Minnesota License No. 22036 Rehder and Associate s, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 3440 Federal D riv e • Suite 110 • Eagan, Minn esot a • Ph one (651) 452-5051 JOB: 174-2445.019 CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOOD PARK SECOND ADDITION • } C.R. DOC. NO. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That the Arrowhead Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: Outlot C, CA VANAUGHS MEAD OWWOODS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, M innesota. Has caused the same to be surv eyed and platted as CAVANAUGHS MEADOWWOODS PA RK SECOND ADDIT ION and do hereby dedicate to the public for public use the drai nage and utility easements as created by this plat. In witness whereof said Arro whead Holdings, LLC, a Minneso ta limited liablility co mpany, has caused these prese nts to be signed by its proper officer this day 20 of , 2017. OCD. \; I * CD <'.\ By Ronald J. Ingram, Vice President and Secretary 0 25 50 100 150 Scale in Feet The so uthweste rly lin e of Outlot C, CAVANAUGHS M EADOWWOODS PARK has a bearing of N69°58'14"W. O De notes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron mo nume nt set and marked by Minneso ta License No. 22036 Drainage and Utility Ea se me nts are shown thus: 5 51 Being 5 feet in width and adjoining lot lines and being 10 feet in width and adjoining right of way lines unle ss othe rwise indica ted on the plat. , ARROWHEAD HOLDINGS, LLC STATE OF CO UNTY OF This instrument wa s acknowledge d befo re me on this day of Ho ldings, LLC, a Minne sota limited lia bility company, on be half of the coo mpany. Notary Printed Name 2017, by Ronald J. Ingram, Vic e Presid ent and S ecr etary of Arrowh ead Notary Public, My Commissi on E xpir es I, Gary C. Huber do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct represe ntatio n of the boundary surve y; that all mathe matical data and labels are correctly design ated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat hav e been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water bo undaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnes ot a Statutes, Secti on 505 .01, Subd . 3, as of th e date of this certificate are sho wn and labe led on this plat; and all public wa ys are sho wn an d labeled on this plat. Dated this day of , 2017. STATE OF MINNESOTA CO UNTY OF DAKO TA This instrumen t was ackno wle dged before me on this Gary C. Huber, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota Lic ense N o. 22036 day of 2017, by Gary C. Huber. Notary Printed Name CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA Notary Public, County, Minnesota My Commission E xpires This plat of CAVANAUGHS ME AD OWW OODS SEC OND ADDITI ON was approved and accepted by the City C ouncil of the City of Medina, Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof h eld this d ay of , 2017. If applicable, th e writt en comments and recomm end ations of th e Commissioner of Transp ortati on and the County Highway Engineer ha ve be en recei ved by the City or th e prescrib ed 30 -day period has elapsed without rec eipt of such comm ents and rec ommendati ons, as pro vided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2. City Council, City of Golden Valley, Minnesota By , Mayor By , Administrator/Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL EST ATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that th e ta xes pay able in 2017 and pri or y ears ha ve b een paid f or land describ ed on this plat, dat ed this day of , 2017. Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota By: , Deputy Pursuant to MN. STAT. Section 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this day of , 2017. Chris F. Ma vis, C ounty S ur vey or By: COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota I h ereby c ertify that the within plat of CA VANAUGHS MEADOWWO OD PARK SEC OND ADDITI ON was filed in this office this day of , 2017, at o'clock .M. Martin McCormick, County Recorder By: , Deputy Rehder and A ssociate s, Inc. VAN 101 NOISNVdX3 03S0dONd 0 0 II V32W 101 ONIXSVd ONIISIX3 N / /i / / /1 // / / / // / / /' / / //II / / / / / ARROWHEAD DRIVE / / / / / / / / I I / I , / /' / / / / / /// /// / / // '/(-, 1 1 n // 1 1 \ I// 7 /// / /// / // / I / /// // 111 --J / /,i% //11/ COD ZONE A A ..... /// / / /// // /// // 0 9 PARKING LOT EXHIBIT OSI, INC. — PARKING LOT ADDITION CITY OF MEDINA Issued I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under m direct su ervision n t am a duly Licensed Prof i a E n n the laws of theStet of�1tr tneRE_ Date Reg No Rehder & Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers, Planners and Land Surveyors 3440 Federal Drive, Suite 110 • Eagan, Minnesota 55124 651-452-5051 • Fax: 651-452-9797 • email: info@rehder.com PROJECT NO.: 171-2445.017 DRAWING FILE: 2445017.DWG McDonald’s Page 1 of 4 August 8, 2017 Setback Variance for Trash Enclosure Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: August 2, 2017 MEETING: August 8, 2017 Planning Commission SUBJ: McDonalds – Setback variance for trash enclosure replacement - 822 Highway 55 Review Deadline Application Received: July 7, 2017 120-day Review Deadline: November 5, 2017 Summary of Request McDonald’s has requested a variance from the required setback in order to construct a trash enclosure and storage building to replace an existing enclosure and building which is being removed in connection with the construction of the County Road 116/Highway 55/Clydesdale Trail road project. The subject site is located at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and County Road 116 and is 2.24 acres in size. Hennepin County is attempting to acquire a portion of the property for roadway right-of-way in order to construct Clydesdale Trail in order to provide access for McDonald’s and Intercomp. The new street may also provide future access options for the two property owners to the west. The subject property includes the McDonald’s restaurant, including parking and a drive-thru. The existing storage building and trash enclosure is within the property Hennepin County is attempting to acquire for the construction of Clydesdale Trail. The northwestern 0.75 acres of the property is vacant and wooded. An aerial of the site can be found at the top of the following page. The Commercial-Highway (CH) zoning district requires: “all trash and material to be recycled shall be stored within the principal building, within an accessory structure, or within an enclosed outdoor area adjacent to the principal structure. The accessory structure or enclosed area shall be constructed of similar materials and have compatible architecture as the principal structure and shall abide by yard setback requirements.” The applicant has indicated that there is no location remaining which can meet setback requirements and also function for their operations if Hennepin County acquires the easement as proposed. The applicant proposes to relocate the enclosure and storage structure to the south of its existing location, northwest of the McDonald’s building. This location would meet property line setbacks, but would not meet the setback requirement from the right-of-way which is being acquired by Hennepin County. McDonald’s Page 2 of 4 August 8, 2017 Setback Variance for Trash Enclosure Planning Commission Meeting The proposed location of the replacement trash enclosure and storage structure is only 1.34 feet from the right-of-way that Hennepin County is attempting to acquire. The CH zoning district requires a setback of 25 feet from streets, resulting in a variance request to reduce the setback by 23.6 feet. The following table summarizes the proposed trash enclosure and storage structure location in comparison to the CH district standards: CH Requirement Proposed Street setback (new easement on west) 25 feet 1.3 feet Side Yard Setback (southern) 15 feet 15 feet CR116 Setback (east) 25 feet 193 feet Rear setback (north; superseded by street setback) 25 feet 76 feet As noted above, the proposed location would meet structure setbacks except for the fact the County is acquiring right-of-way for the extension of Clydesdale Trail. McDonald’s Page 3 of 4 August 8, 2017 Setback Variance for Trash Enclosure Planning Commission Meeting Variance Criteria Subd. 2 of Section 825.45 of the City Code establishes criteria which the City must find in order for a variance to be approved. The applicant describes how they believe these criteria are met within their narrative, which is attached for reverent. The criteria are following, along with potential findings provided by staff in italics: (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Staff believes that the fact that the proposed location would meet setbacks but for the acquisition of right-of-way by the County supports the argument that the variance is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. In addition, the addition of landscaping to minimize the visual impact of the enclosure and structure helps serve the purpose and intent of the ordinance. It should also be noted that the cul-de-sac would be removed when and if the road is extended further to the west in the future. At such time, some of the right-of-way could be vacated and the structure could come into compliance. (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff does not believe the variance would be inconsistent with the objectives of the comprehensive plan. (c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In order for a practical difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; Staff believes the property owner is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. The use is permitted in the district, as are trash enclosures. The variance would allow the enclosure and structure to be shifted to a location which meets setbacks, but for the acquisition of the right-of-way for the cul-de-sac. (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and Staff believes that the fact of the County acquiring right-of-way in the location of the existing enclosure and structure and also acquiring property adjacent to other potential locations for the structure is fairly unique. These circumstances do not seem to be created by the landowner. (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff believes that the cul-de-sac will be used fairly limitedly, and that with appropriate landscaping, the character of the locality will not be altered. McDonald’s Page 4 of 4 August 8, 2017 Setback Variance for Trash Enclosure Planning Commission Meeting Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission should first invite public comment on the proposed variance. The City Council, in its role as the board of appeals and adjustments, will hold a public hearing on the variance at the September 5, 2017 City Council meeting, beginning after 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Staff has provided potential findings related to the variance criteria above. If the Planning Commission finds that the criteria have been met, staff would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1) Except as modified by this approval, the Applicant shall construct the trash enclosure and storage structure as shown on the plans received by the City on 7/7/2017 and 7/31/2017. 2) The Applicant shall install landscaping, subject to approval of City staff, to minimize the visual impact of the trash enclosure and storage structure from the right-of-way. 3) The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within one calendar year of the date of approval or the variance approval shall be null and void, unless the Applicant requests and the City Council grants an extension. If the Planning Commission finds that the criteria been satisfied, the following motion would be in order: Move to recommend approval of the Setback Variance for McDonald’s for the replacement of the trash enclosure and storage structure based upon the findings in the staff report and subject to the conditions noted in the report. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Applicant narrative 3. Site Plan 4. Setback Exhibit 5. Plans Project:  LR‐17‐212 – McDonalds Variance – Trash Enclosure Setback The following documents are all part of the record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports.  All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document  Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic  Paper Copy? Notes Application  7/7/2017  7/7/2017  3  Y  Y   Fee            Part of road project Narrative  7/7/2017  7/7/2017  6  Y  Y   Setback Exhibit  7/7/2017  7/7/2017  1  Y  Y   Plans  7/7/2017  7/7/2017  6  Y  Y   Enclosure Plans  7/31/2017  6/8/2016  1  Y  N   Mailing Labels  7/7/2017  7/6/2017  2  Y  Y    Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document  Document Date # of pages Electronic  Notes Legal Comments  7/17/2017  1  Y   Building Official Comments  7/7/2017  1  Y   Legal Notice  7/27/2017  8  Y  10 pages w/ list and affidavit Review Timeline Update  8/1/2017  1  Y   Planning Commission Report  8/4/2017  4  Y  17 pages w/ attachments  Public Comments  Document Date  Electronic  Notes       L A N D F O R M Narrative McDonalds USA LLC Site Improvements Narrative McDonalds USA LLC Site Improvements Narrative McDonalds USA, LLC Medina, MN L A N D F O R M July 7, 2017 Table of Contents Table Of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Variance ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Contact Information ..................................................................................................................................... 7 MCD15292-Phase 3 July 7, 2017 Project Narrative 5 Introduction On behalf of McDonalds USA, LLC, Landform is pleased to submit this variance application to relocate the existing trash enclosure at McDonalds Restaurant located at 822 Hwy 55, Medina, MN. McDonalds is pleased to accommodate the County’s road improvements and will provide high quality improvements on the site. Variance Hennepin County is proposing to construct new right-of-way on the northern boundary of the property that wraps around to the northwest corner. The proposed road improvements will eliminate the entrance of the property on the eastern boundary of the site and re-locate the entrance on the new road to the north. A portion of the property on the northwest side of the site will also be taken by the County for the road improvements. The County will be completing the road and access improvements for the site. The existing trash enclosure is currently located on the northwest corner of the property however, the new configuration of the road and associated site entrance will require the enclosure to be moved slightly to the west. The new location will result in the trash enclosure being placed in the right-of-way setback. Section 838.1.05, Subd. 5 (CH Lot Standards) requires a 25-foot setback for all structures in the front yard. The proposed location of the new trash enclosure will be 1.34 feet from the right-of-way. Therefore, we are requesting City approval for a variance for a 1.34-foot setback where 25 feet is required. We have reviewed the request in accordance with Minnesota State Law and City ordinance standards in Section 824.45, Subd. 2, which provides standards for variances. Our application meets these standards as follows: a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The proposed variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. The relocation of the trash enclosure is in response to the new access road constructed by the County. The intent of the Ordinance is to provide uniformity. The new street provides access to the rear yard of McDonalds and adjacent properties, which have similar needs for the rear-yards of the businesses. The location of the trash enclosure in the setback is consistent with the intent to provide a consistent street frontage. b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The accessory trash enclosure is essential to the operation of the McDonalds and cannot be placed in another MCD15292-Phase 3 July 7, 2017 Project Narrative 6 location on site. The trash enclosure’s location is only changing only slightly from the existing location. c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. For a practical difficult to be established, all the following criteria shall be met: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; McDonalds is proposing to use the property in a reasonable factor and is requesting the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty. The County is taking land to construct a new road where the old trash enclosure was located and an alternative location is not practical for the operations of the restaurant. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and The circumstances of the variance are unique to the property and not created by the landowner. The County is constructing a new access road north of the site. If the County were not constructing this road and taking land, the trash enclosure would not need to be moved. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The trash enclosure is already located on the northern edge of the property and will only be moved to accommodate the location of the new road. Summary We respectfully request approval of the variance to allow a 1.34-foot setback where 25 feet is required. MCD15292-Phase 3 July 7, 2017 Project Narrative 7 Contact Information This document was prepared by: Mary Matze Landform 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Sean Murphy at smurphy@landform.net or 612.638.0224 Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R in collaboration with: McDONALD'S, USA LLC.McDONALD'S xMedina, MN 07.07.2017 ROW SETBACK EXHIBIT NORTH 030 LEGEND 20 SCALE ENLARGED PLAN1 M PREFINISH METAL z o 4 4 4 16" 4'- " 20" 6'-6" 13'-4" 5'-10" T/MASONRY WALL ) 10 ELEV. +8'-0" L111! i l TRASH CORRAL / ELECTRICAL TRASH CORRAL CITY COMMENTS CIVIL CHANGES CITY COMMENTS KITCHEN CHANGES PERMIT SET DESCRIPTION 9 2 i^ I��WWii T/PARAPET �� CO.O ALUM. i / 1 1' FLASHING CAP (2) 2X8 TOP PLATE W/ BLOCKING O. " C000.0 \ / 4" �� ALUM. $ D I-1 ---r0 ---- - / / ELEV. + 6'-4" 1 U I II \ \ SEE DWG, S4.0 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INS 1/2"DIA. ' I BOLTS ®A32"HOR O.C. ■ 4 L II -----1-. M - \� v p 12'-8" �� \o \� ����■ I ® V V N ���� 1®��®®�� v DOI R F GATE - SEEV TAIL 9/C0.0 / ® Ai' �, L V p ° PB ��1'•� ®®® �• DS 8"SPLIT FACE v V \ ill i i i i i i CMU BLOCK BY ANCHOR BLOCK, COLOR TO BE 'CONCORD RED' OR EQUAL MORTAR P4620 'ROOTBEER' BY PRISM PIGMNETS OR EQUAL REINFORCE W/ #5'S 0 & 0 48"R O,C, END, O I DUROWALL REINFORCED ® 16"C Q. \\\\\\\\ vp \ J i L \ \p r °\ �� J 1— p 5 CONCRE E SLAB OVER 6 GRANULAR FILL. REINFORCE \ KEY FRONT ELEVATION NOTES: \ SLAB W/ 6x6 -`W1.4 x W1.4 \ 2 0 HOLLOW METAL DOOR - D GATE POST - SEE DETAILS \Q \ \ p WWF(TYP. 0TRASH CORRAL) d \ CO.0 1/4 =1 —O L�I� A" SPUR FACED CMU BY METAL - PAINT TO MATCH BENJAMIN (2) N" SIDE GATE POST MOORE 'BOSTON BRICK' (1) 8" CENTER GATE POST \ \ TRASH CORRAL �; V - R \ 6 y111 ANCHOR BLOCK, COLOR C UNA-CLAD RN-CLACOPING BY FIRESTONE 2092-30 OR EQUAL e \ \ \I ° Q ® v ° V \ \ CO.O TO BE 'CONCORD RED' ALUM ANNODIZED OR EQUAL (CLEAR ALUMINUM COIL) OR EQUAL pB -REFILISHED DOWNSPOUT PIPE BOLLARD - PAINTED DS - COLOR TO MATCH YELLOW SURROUNDING MATERIAL '0.' L''', ^ 0 \ \ 0 0 `� \ < 0 `� M o a \ "STORAGE \ p ,; o� \ \ SHED \ 4" CONCRETE SLAB OVER 6" 04 i v� \ LL LL' m m < ce 5 \ E `^� p \ a GRANULAR FILL. REINFORCE v p E o a w a \ 4 .I f� T/MASONRY WALL m ELEV. +8'-0" CELLSB EN W/FILL GROUT,CK LAP BARS 24" �' I 5" CONCRETE SLAB FINISHED GRADE OR PAVEMENT 'n CO. r. \ \ p SLAB W/ 6x6 - W1.4 x W1.4 a a w CO. I LJ T/PARAPET \ WWF X 12 D .0 (TYP. 0 §STORAGE SHED) • ap \ // II ALUM $ PREPARED BY: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or v report was prepared by me or under my direct z `o supervision d that I am a duly registered igm $g • ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of MINN TA =m _ eprese t'VdrPFTr?— ayy DESIGN Architecture, Inc. Signature IAN ROBERT JOHNSON u'os� 08/05/20 18050 CEs�o. A Dale Registration Number \ ® 24-07617., \ Q p a ^ \ I I I I ELEV. + 6'-4" p t^ p a \ I I AS APPLICABLE \ \ a p . a EQ. 6'-4 6'-4" EQp I 1 I I 9 \ a \/ / / { J. I b Q g I I , o I- — ■I E FOUNDATION o, a \ a p Q 1 1 I \ V BI v V 4 \ l 1 I. , f f \ ° V V \ I I \ p \4 8 6v p \ I 1 1- T :f 1 - I I I -111-111 11=111=111=1I ® WALL -SEE PLAN w rc ��pp v v v�. I \4PAREy---_-J Lam -� vJ \ N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ °S REAR ELEVATION FOOTING -SEE E PLAN m It, J 3 6 TYPICAL WALL SECTION 33'-0" 20" x 10" CONT. CONCRETE FOOTING W/ (2) #4 CONT. 3 CO.O 3/4 = 1 —O CO. BARS NOTE: T/MASONRY WALL ������ ELEV. +8'-0"$ ST/MASONRY ELEV. +8'-0" WALL -{ I I I I° - I I I I. - 1 1" NIPPLE ii � 1 16 GA. SHEER 1. HOLLOW METAL DOOR SHALL BE �— ������■ T/PARAPET 1 L. I I. } 4' -0"X7' -0"X 1 3/4" WITH FRAME, ___ $T/PARAPET 1 'I 1 THRESHOLD, CONTINUOUS HINGE, ®�®_®®®�®®®®®�®®I ELEV. + 6'-4" ELEV. + 6'-4" c I I 1 -I LEVER HANDLE AND STOREROOM ®�®_®®i®i®®®®®®■ - _ {. I I - I I -_ I I I' LOCKSET 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -' : WELDED PLATE COLLARS TO " METAL ATTACH TO WOOD PANELS AS REQ'D 1/2" STL. PLATE 2. INCANDESCENT LIGHT FIXTURE SHALL BE WIRE GUARD, 40 FURNISHED.SEMORE 0®®■■li����®®�®®®■ 1 -I I I I I I: I WATT LAMP,AND SURFACE MOUNT. •®ice®®�®�®®�®��® I I I I I I I ` PASS & -#44 OR LIGHTING ®®®®®®�®�®®��®®■ 1 1 f 1 1 1 - r 1 1 LTD MG -1 f a -#1742-2000 ®®®®r■®®®®��®®®�■ PB E r` I I I Ds \ 1 _ 3�4" CANE BOLT 1 TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN W/ SHED M J CM M �'/ 4" HOOK 7 BOLT DETAILS T01/2FRAME� 4 LEFT SIDE ELEVATION 5 RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION co.o 1/4" 1' O" CO.0 1/4"=1'-0" CO.0 1/4"=1'-0" CO.0 NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL FLAT ROOF CONSTR METAL AREA COLLAR TO FIT OVER 6"0 POST GREASE BETWEEN POST AND HINGE SEE ROOFING NOTES PREPARED FOR: ©2014 McDonald's USA, LLC Q - 8 McDonald's USA, LLC These drawings and specifications are the confidential and proprietary property of McDonald's USA, LLC and shall not be copied or reproduced without written authorization. The contract documents were prepared for use on this specific site in conjunction with its issue date and are not suitable for use on a different site or at o later time Use of these drawings for reference or example on nether proa project requires the se rvices s of properly licensed architects and engineers. eers Reproduction of the contract documents for reuse on another project is not authorized. 24 GA. GALV. METAL CAP SNAPPED OVER CONT. MTh. 3/4" EXT. GRADE PLYWOOD SLOPE 1/4" PER FOOT Milt_ & AT BACK, 0LOPET & NAILED AT BACK, SLOPE ,i 2x 4 NAILER t" WELD /_/ r TO FRAME 1610 -BL G�RCEASE FITTING, TOWARD ROOF. (AS SHOWN) ,VIII CONTINUOUS 2X8 RIM JOIST • 1/2"DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS 0 32" O.C. DOUBLE ix 6 OVER WII I � T/BLOCK 4" CONC. BLOCK (TYP. DRILLIT& \ TAP HOLE 6 ) RIPPED 2x12 ROOF r ELEV. +8'-0" DOOR ONLY • n _ _ - 2x 4 NAILER (TYP. OF 3) " JOISTS AT 24" O.C. /' CONTINUOUS 2x12 i . -- PRE -FINISHED MTh. GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT BY G.C. 10 FASCIA BD. (2) L 3-v2x 4"x 3/16 LLV ® L ANGLE FRAME & DIAG. BRACES (GRIND - WELDS & CORNERS SMOOTH) PAINT W/2 COATS RUSTOLEUM. ALEMITE 1610 -BL HYDRAULIC GREASE FITTING TYP 6 ( PL) ` m\ ' o 1110 RIM JOIST " CONT. SEALANT (TYP.) DOOR ' 20 4 NAILER (TYP.) M, @p\ BOND BEAM W/ (2) #5'S (NP.) ,Il, CONT. 2x 8 TOP PLATE DOUBLE AT PERIMETER ' I ( l T 7T l I �nnnn (-- TREX BOARD- COLOR �� 12 HINGE METAL COLLAR POST, BOLT TOP DETAILS TYP. WELD BOTTOM COLLAR TO COLLAR TO GUARD POST 111_I II, 8" SPLIT FACE CMU BLOCK BY `` Jl i, l : TO MATCH FIELD COLOR OF BLDG. ANCHOR BLOCK, COLOR TO BE 9 DOOR HEADER i CO.O NOT TO SCALE I IG� 'CONCORD RED' OR EQUAL MO RTAR P4620 'ROOTBEER' BY S OR PRISM EQUAL CO.0 3/4 _1 —0 DRAWN BY PSH STD ISSUE DATE 2015_07 REWEY/ED BY KD DATE ISSUED 03/08/16 SITE ID SITE ADDRESS 022-0088 1245 PAUL BUNTON DR. NW, BEMIDJI, MINNESOTA RD#18022 W/ REINFORCEMENT ®16 0.C. VERTICAL MAN DOOR LATCH-Z.1-7' ATCH �i y7 -) i In SLOPE TOP , m 3 e TITLE 2015 STANDARD BUILDING 45114- WOOD/WOOD DESCRIPTION WOOD BEARING WALLS W/BRICK EKTERIOR FINISH WOOD ROOF TRUSS FRAMING CULTURED STONE. EXTERIOR FINISH ARCADE/ENTRY #5 VERT. BARS ®48" O.C. AND ®EA. JAMB SEE PLANS SEE 1/C0.0 1/2" COMPRESSIBLE JOINT FILLER Ilx EXPANSION JT. SLOPE PER CONC. SLAB CO.O SEE 1 C0.0 ° a a ° ° W TYP. Fl 00K SLAB CONSTR. , FIRISHED GRADE ARCH. t , SEE PLAN OR PAVEMENT AS 111 APPLICABLE ° , . _ �' , �.. a m CONC. SPLASH BLK. • m. 11� 4 mN �� i� o 6" DIAM. LS' CONC. FILLED a STEEL POST mww POURED - CONCRETE N FOOTING (5 O o I` w I >i o Ea o 1- oao a w L'. i TOP OF SLAB/CORRAL NON -FROST SUSECEPTABLE // -- \ Y ELEV. +0'-0" $ 1Q" FREE DRAINING �_/ a ° ° ° a o °• e °.° w „°"d .° oo �o / I 1 GRANULAR FILL i a m o. 0° ° p0,ll�j°000aoo,00°o ° °o° o _ _ 1111" °o $ ° o•o _ voe o4° h - - '1E111=111=7 IA El -, •o••°o• o $/- Yb:°a ° OU5a$. tL�o�B°=vo,i . i--I / /=I _ _ - _ - - _ I II I II II I 1 TO FROST DEPTH �11 5" CONC. SLAB BARS AT 24" O.C. i FOUNDATION WALL -SEE 8/C0.0 I I J�-�-�1 I 6" DIA. GATE POST SEE DETAIL 12/C0.0 _ _ -III 1 1 11 11 11111=111=111=1 p \ III —III —II I o ___ _ I I I I I I 1=111=111=1 / / _ #4 III- III- 8" CMU FOUNDATION WALL #4 BARS AT 24" ®�® O.C. EMBED 8" MIN. ® FOOTING I x I L___1 DETAILCANE S /CO.O LTS SEE 13 a m z % % / -SEE PLAN _ _ CO.0 3/4" HOLES DRILLED L _ _ J INTO CONCRETE L'T' �■ FOOTING - SEE PLAN ° , ° --- 13 TYP. GATE POST DETAIL 1111 i / 22-0088.00.8 C O . O " TRASH CORRAL ° ° °, 5 ' ` 8 SECTION 10 SECTION AT TRASH ENCLOSURE STOOP 11 TYP. GATE DETAIL CO.O 3/4»=1 —0 CO.O N.T.S. CO.0 1/2"-1 —O CO.O 1"=1 —0 C0.1 MEDINA, MN McDONALD'S USA, LLC. MEDINA, MINNESOTANORTH NO SCALE AREA LOCATION MAP ABBREVIATIONS SYMBOLS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTIONSYMBOL EROSION CONTROL SYMBOLS DRAWING SYMBOLS SITE/UTILITY CONTACTS OWNER LEGAL DESCRIPTION BENCHMARK 12 2 CITY PLANNER PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR LANDFORM 105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 TEL 612-252-9070 FAX 612-252-9077 CONTACT: STEVE SABRASKI PROJECT CONTACTS CIVIL ENGINEER LANDFORM 105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 TEL 612-252-9070 FAX 612-252-9077 CONTACT: ERIC LINDGREN SURVEYOR NEWEXISTING DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION McDONALD'S USA, LLC. 1650 WEST 82ND STREET #900 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55431-9888 TEL (952)-300-5504 CONTACT: CARTER MANN DESCRIPTIONSHEET NO. CIVIL & LANDSCAPE TITLE SHEET EXISTING CONDITIONS DEMOLITION SITE PLAN GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING & EROSION CONTROL CIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS CIVIL / LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX & REVISION MATRIX C0.1 C1.1 C1.2 C2.1 C3.1 C7.1 07.07.17X X X X X X SHEETS ISSUED BY ISSUE / REVISION DATE4'8+'9'&$;&4#90$;56#6'07/$'4/E&10#.&>575#..%4'8 4'8+5+10*+5614;1((+%'#&&4'555*''60#/'24161+557'&&#6'4'8+'9'&0#6+10#.07/$'4&#6'&#6'+557'&%+6;5*''601564''6#&&4'5556#6'%1706;%'46+(+%#6+10 PROJECT NO. FILE NAME:LANDFORMc2017MCD15292-3 0 1 6 (1 4 %1 0 5 6 4 7 %6 +1 0 Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.®® 55 55 SITE C1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4'8+'9'&$;&4#90$;56#6'07/$'4/E&10#.&>575#..%4'8 4'8+5+10*+5614;1((+%'#&&4'555*''60#/'24161+557'&&#6'4'8+'9'&0#6+10#.07/$'4&#6'&#6'+557'&%+6;5*''601564''6#&&4'5556#6'%1706;%'46+(+%#6+10 PROJECT NO. FILE NAME:LANDFORMc2017MCD15292-3 0 1 6 (1 4 %1 0 5 6 4 7 %6 +1 0 Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.®® NORTH 03060 SITE PLAN NOTES C2.1 SITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES ZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARY 4'8+'9'&$;&4#90$;56#6'07/$'4/E&10#.&>575#..%4'8 4'8+5+10*+5614;1((+%'#&&4'555*''60#/'24161+557'&&#6'4'8+'9'&0#6+10#.07/$'4&#6'&#6'+557'&%+6;5*''601564''6#&&4'5556#6'%1706;%'46+(+%#6+10 PROJECT NO. FILE NAME:LANDFORMc2017MCD15292-3 0 1 6 (1 4 %1 0 5 6 4 7 %6 +1 0 Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.®® NORTH 02040 n�n�n�n�n�n�n�n�n�n� n�n� n�n� n�n� n�n� C3.1 GRADING NOTES PAVING NOTES EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES LEGEND n�n�n�n�4'8+'9'&$;&4#90$;56#6'07/$'4/E&10#.&>575#..%4'8 4'8+5+10*+5614;1((+%'#&&4'555*''60#/'24161+557'&&#6'4'8+'9'&0#6+10#.07/$'4&#6'&#6'+557'&%+6;5*''601564''6#&&4'5556#6'%1706;%'46+(+%#6+10 PROJECT NO. FILE NAME:LANDFORMc2017MCD15292-3 0 1 6 (1 4 %1 0 5 6 4 7 %6 +1 0 Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.�� NORTH 02040 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. __________________________________________________________________ 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Medina Planning Commission FROM: Nate Sparks DATE: August 3, 2017 Meeting Date: August 8, 2017 RE: Medina Senior Living Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review CITY FILE: LR-17-204 Application Date: June 19, 2017 Review Deadline: August 18, 2017 (120-day extension: October 17, 2017) BACKGROUND Lunski, Inc. has made an application for a rezoning, preliminary plat, and site plan review for development of a three-story 90 unit senior housing building, a two-story medical office building, and a vacant lot for future development. The Planning Commission tabled the item at the July meeting requesting revisions. The main areas for revisions related to tree preservation, wetlands, building setbacks, watershed district comments, and engineering comments. Some revisions have been made. PROJECT SITE The property is located north of Highway 55, west of Mohawk Drive, and south of Chippewa Road. The site is 10.8 acres in size. There is a 2.6 acre wetland on the lot. Much of the site is wooded. ZONING / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The subject site is guided for a Commercial land use in the current Comprehensive Plan and Business in the proposed 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The property is zoned RCH, Rural Commercial Holding which is an interim designation for land awaiting urban development. This area is identified for urban development, at this time. PROPOSED REZONING The applicant proposes to rezone the property to B, Business District, which would be consistent with the direction the City is heading in the draft 2020 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan. “Nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and independent living facilities associated with such uses” are a permitted use within this District. In the 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which is still in effect until the 2020 - 2040 Plan is adopted, this site is guided for a Commercial land use which contemplates “commercial, office, and retail uses” that are “concentrated along the TH 55 corridor.” The Business zoning district was designed more to implement the Business land use in the 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Commercial-Highway district was designed for the Commercial land use. However, because the City has contemplated changing the land use of the subject site to Business in the draft 2020 - 2040 Plan, any rezoning would ideally be generally consistent with the 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan and not in conflict with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The 2010 - 2030 plan does establish unique objectives for the Commercial and Business land uses, but instead the uses share a similar set of objectives. As such, it could be argued that the rezoning to Business is not inconsistent with the 2010 - 2030 Commercial land use, especially within the context of the proposed change to Business in the draft 2020 - 2040 Plan update. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT The applicant is proposing to divide the parcel into three lots and an outlot. The outlot is intended for a private street. Lot 1 is a 3.39 acre site intended for future development. Lot 2 is a 3.08 acre site that is intended to house the senior facility. Lot 3 is a 3.81 acre lot for a medical clinic/office building. The minimum lot size is 3 acres in the B District. Lot The minimum lot width in the B District is 175 feet with a minimum lot depth of 175 feet. It appears that all lots meet these standards. Lot Area Upland Area Width Depth B District Standards 3 acres N/A 175 feet 175 feet Lot 1 3.39 acres 2.64 acres 175 566 Lot 2 3.08 acres 2.13 acres 245 457 Lot 3 3.81 acres 2.99 acres 175 705 The Park Commission reviewed the plan and recommended cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of $262,500, less an appropriate credit for the proposed private trails on the site. SITE & BUILDING PLAN REVIEW Site Access The site is proposed to be accessed by a 24 foot private street off of Chippewa Road. The street is on the plan within Outlot A. The entirety of the road would need to be contained within the outlot. The City's Subdivision Ordinance requires private streets to meet City road standards. The outlot will need to be owned by an association to which all lots would be members for maintenance of the road. The proposed private street is not centered in the proposed outlot. The applicant states that this is due to grade changes towards the western property line and to balance the need for spacing between the access point to the west and wetlands to the east. The private road needs to be located within the Outlot. Drainage and utility easements should be enlarged along the outlot to a minimum of 20 feet subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. This also results in the trail along the drive being on the individual lots. The trail should be placed within an easement to ensure it may be used by all site users. The City Engineer requested a traffic study and some additional information has been requested. This information will determine the necessity of any turn lanes or improvements at nearby intersections. Senior Housing Building The senior facility is proposed with 90 units and about 100,000 square feet. There are 32 one bedroom, 14 two- bedroom, 10 memory care, 5 special care, and 29 studio units. The units range from roughly 450 square feet for the studio, 580 square feet for the one bed room, and 900 for the two-bedroom units with some variation. The special and memory care units are smaller. There are 48 garage stalls proposed on the lowest level of the building. Forty-five of the units are for “independent living.” The B District allows for assisted living facilities with independent living “associated” with the use. This would appear to require 50% of the units, at minimum, to be assisted living with the remaining independent units to be age restricted. Of the 45 assisted living units, 15 are proposed to be memory/special care. The proposed building is three stories tall. The average roof height to adjacent grade is 44' 2.5”. The B District allows building heights of 30 feet, 35 feet with sprinklers, and 45 feet with necessary conditions required by the fire marshal. Required yard setbacks are required to be increased for buildings greater than 35 feet in height by the amount they exceed 35 feet in height. This would be an additional 9 feet. In the B District, all exterior building materials are required to meet the following standards: (a) A minimum of 20 percent of the building exterior shall be brick, natural stone, stucco (not Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product), copper, or glass. (b) A maximum of 80 percent may be decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre-cast concrete panels. Decorative concrete shall be color impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and shall be patterned to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance. (c) A maximum of 20 percent may be wood, metal (excluding copper), fiber cement lap siding or Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. The proposed building is 19% masonry, 17% stone, 8% lap siding, 26% stucco, and 30% glass. This appears to meet the requirements for the exterior finish. The lap siding is cement fiber board. Building modulation is required for every 100 feet of horizontal length. The proposed structure is meeting this requirement. Medical Office Building The proposed medical/office building is two stories in height and about 25,000 square feet. The proposed floor plan is not very detailed and just shows general space. The plans state that average roof height to adjacent grade is 35' 6”. The building appears to be meeting the building modulation requirements. The proposed building is 58% masonry, 8% “architectural wood veneer”, 12% stucco, and 22% glass. This appears to be consistent with the required architectural standards. Lot 1 No construction is proposed for Lot 1, at this time. A demonstration building has been placed on the lot for conceptual review. Setbacks & Performance Standards Within the B District, the minimum front yard setback is 40 feet. This may be reduced to 30 feet for a private street. Setbacks to arterial roads are required to be 50 feet. Side and rear yard setbacks are required to be 25 feet, which may be reduced to 15 feet in order to accommodate shared site improvements. Yard setbacks are required to be increased for buildings greater than 35 feet in height. This would add slightly over 9 feet of required setback to the senior building and 6 inches to the setback of the medical/office building. The building location has been adjusted to meet the 50 foot setback. The senior building appears to be able to accommodate the extra 9 feet of setback to the private road and side and rear lot lines. Parking lots are required to have a 25 foot front yard setback, 25 feet to a street side yard, 20 feet for a street side yard to a private street, and 15 feet to the side and rear yard. The side and rear yard parking setback may be reduced in cases where the parking is shared, as is proposed in this situation. As proposed, it appears that these setbacks are generally met. In Section 832.2.06 it states that there is a 100 foot setback to residential zoned areas for both buildings and parking lots. The properties across Chippewa Road are zoned residential. The right-of-way is 66 feet in width, leaving at least 34 feet on the subject site to account for. The 40 foot front yard building setback would be greater than this distance and the applicant has adjusted the parking area to meet the requirements. The B District standards state that impervious surfaces are capped at 70% unless utilizing shared improvements when the limit may be raised to 80%. The applicant is currently proposing to meet this standard by using porous pavement. There is a proposed skyway between the two buildings. Existing regulations do not provide a means to allow an encroachment on required yards for such a structural element, unless the lots were combined as one lot. Tree Preservation & Landscaping The applicant has revised the tree preservation plan for the lot development to be on a per lot basis, as required by ordinance. This results in a required replacement of 320.5 inches of trees for the development on Lots 2 and 3. The applicant is proposing 34 inches of replacement trees, as part of the landscaping plan. The applicant intends to replace as many trees on the property as possible, but it will only be possible to replace a small portion of the trees on-site around the proposed improvements. In similar cases in the past, the City has accepted off-site planting as an alternative, or a cash contribution towards future off-site planting. The City has accepted $100 per inch of replacement in a previous example. As currently proposed, this would result in a fee of $286,500. The applicant has indicated that they may seek a tree replacement waiver. Section 828.41 Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a waiver may be granted by the City in cases where “the applicant has exhausted all reasonable design options.” It also states that the applicant is “eligible for a waiver only if he or she implements all Best Management Practices.” The Best Management Practices are listed as: (a) Realignment of proposed streets and utilities in order to avoid Tree removal; (b) Reduction of required street width and increase of street grade up to an eight (8) percent slope by the city when the applicant can demonstrate that these changes result in Tree preservation; (c) The use of Private Roads in lieu of public streets; (d) Variation in street radius and speed design; (e) Modified grading plans; (f) Flexible lot lines; (g) Alternative utility configurations, such as the use of ejector pumps, force mains, or revised home elevations to minimize grading; (h) The use of flexible development standards, such as clustering of homes, in order to preserve Old Growth Forest Remnants, Significant Trees and open space; (i) The preservation of unique and rare Tree species or communities identified in the Natural Resource Inventory; and (j) The use of Low Impact Development principles. The applicant has not provided information related to how these practices have been implemented, so at this time, staff does not believe a waiver is justified. The landscaping plan requirements for development in the B District would be 56 overstory trees, 28 ornamental trees, and 94 shrubs. The planting schedule provided with the plan actually shows 57 overstory trees, 27 ornamental trees, and 131 shrubs. This is generally consistent with ordinance requirements. All mechanical equipment, trash areas, and loading docks are required to be screened. Also, Section 828.07 requires screening from any commercial use to a residential use which would require screening on Lot 1. Lighting As required by Ordinance, a photometric lighting plan has been submitted for review. The subject site lies within Lighting Zone E4 which corresponds to areas which exhibit high ambient lighting levels. The zone generally includes urban areas with primary land uses for commercial, business and industrial activity (including highway commercial and downtown districts). According to the lighting plan, a total of 44 exterior fixtures are proposed upon the subject property as summarized below: Type Plan Symbol Height Quantity Arrangement Parking Lot Fixture (Commercial) A2 32 feet* 2 Back to back Parking Lot Fixture (Senior Residential) B4 & B5 22 feet* 11 Single Pedestrian Scale Fixture C 12 feet 13 Single Pedestrian Scale Fixture D 3.5 feet 13 Single Wall Sconce WP15 NA 5 Single * Referenced fixture height includes 2-foot pole base As shown, all proposed light fixtures meet the maximum pole height requirements of 32’ - 6” (30 feet plus a pole base which does not exceed a height of 30 inches). Consistent with Ordinance requirements (for E4 zones), all fixtures are proposed to have an output of less than 2,000 lumens and are to be fully shielded such that light sources are not visible from adjacent properties and rights-of-way. Within E4 zones, the Ordinance stipulates that maximum lighting levels at the property line must not exceed 1.5 footcandles before curfew and 0.6 footcandles “after curfew.” In review of the photometric lighting plan, it appears that maximum lighting levels at the property line measure 0.1 footcandles which conforms with Ordinance requirements. Signage In Section 815.11, the B District allows for one free standing sign per lot up to 80 square feet of sign area and 20 feet in height. Signs are required to be setback 10 feet from all property lines and outside of a clear vision triangle for a street or access drive. There are three free standing signs proposed. Sign locations have been modified to meet City Ordinance requirements. Off-Street Parking The plan currently has 216 stalls on the site. The parking areas are proposed to be shared. The City's parking ordinance states that the required parking is required to be on the parcel with the use generating the parking demand except in cases of shared or joint parking. This may be deemed acceptable provided there is an association in place to manage this common element adequately to ensure the proper amount of parking is provided at all times. Section 828.51 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that parking stalls be a minimum of 9' x 19' with a two-way drive aisle width of 22 feet. The City may require that primary drive aisles be increased to 24' in width. The plan generally shows the primary drive aisles with a 24 foot width and the secondary with a 22' width. The ordinance states that a maximum of 20% of the required stalls may be provided as compact car spaces, which are required to be a minimum of 8' x 16' in size. Section 828.51 Subd. 1 (j) states that “to the extent practicable, dead end drives shall not be permitted.” There is a dead end drive aisle for parking on the east end of the medical/office building. A fire truck turn around and car turn around have been provided. The number of stall required for the medical/office building is based on 1 stall per 250 square feet. This results in a parking requirement of 100 stalls. The applicant is providing 33 stalls on the lowest level of the building and the remainder in the parking lots to satisfy the 100 stall requirement. The senior building does not have a specific number designated for required parking. Therefore, the Planning Commission is to review the parking and make a recommendation to the City Council. It is important to keep in mind that the required parking is to accommodate residents, guests, and employees. Fluctuations in the number of independent living units versus the assisted living units could alter the number of needed parking stalls. Therefore, it is very important that the proper number of stalls be provided on the site. City Staff reviewed the Institute of Transportation Engineers Standards Manual which recommends 0.4 stalls per unit for senior assisted living and 0.35 stalls per unit for memory/special care units. The remaining independent living units could defer to the City's multi-family parking standard for 2.25 stalls per unit. This would result in a parking requirement of 120 stalls. Forty-eight stalls are being provided in the lowest level of the building and the balance of parking are satisfied. The Planning Commission felt that the provided parking was sufficient. Some suggested that the applicant provide some of the parking in a “proof of parking” arrangement to be provided if needed later. However, the applicant has stated that they would likely need most of the required parking. Grading & Drainage In the B District standards, in Section 832.3.03, states that “site improvements shall be designed in a way which most effectively maintains predevelopment topography, drainage patterns and ecological functions.” It also states that “drainage and stormwater improvements shall be designed with an emphasis on integrated stormwater management practices such as vegetative swales, filter strips, biorention, and similar improvements as approved by the city rather than pipes and retention ponds.” Wetlands There is a 2.6 acre wetland on the site. This wetland is identified as a “Manage 1” classification. This requires an upland buffer adjacent to the wetland with an average width of 30 foot. City requirements allow an averaging of the buffer width by narrowing in some locations and widening in others as long as a minimum of 20 feet in width is provided. The setback from a principal structure to the buffer is 15 feet and 5 feet for accessory structures. Private trails, parking areas, and structures are not permitted within the buffer. The applicant is proposing two areas of wetland impact. One is for the road and utilities to access the site. The other is to allow for the Senior Building to meet the upland buffer setbacks. The second impact is on the northwest corner of the Senior Building and could easily be avoided through the design of the building or layout of the site. Watershed District Staff stated that “additional impacts to meet the buffer are not desired, and the option of a variance would be difficult for staff to support. We certainly understand the need to for impacts to bring in the access to the site given access constraints. What is much less clear is why the building footprint and location cannot be modified to meet the required standards (a matter of 10 feet).” Alternative to this wetland impact would be to adjust the site arrangement, reduce the footprint of improvements on the lot, or seek a variance from the setback requirements. Staff believes it would be difficult to justify a variance in this case. At the southeast corner of the Senior building, the structure is not meeting the upland buffer setback. The applicant is meeting the setback to the base of the building but then cantilevering the structure into the setback to what appears to be about 7 feet. Overhangs of up to 2 feet, including balconies, are permitted encroachments into setbacks. The applicant will need to adjust these overhangs or perhaps average the wetland buffer in order to shape it in another way. There is also a boardwalk proposed over the wetland. The City Engineer has requested additional information regarding these impacts and the WCA application. Utilities The site will be serviced by sewer and water. The City Engineer has provided comments and requested revisions. Easements for utility mains may be required. Association Documents Due to the shared parking and the private street, a strong association will be required for this development. Draft covenants were provided and reviewed by the City Attorney. The Attorney recommended revisions to ensure that the association and not the developer is the declarant and that the easements be made to continue in perpetuity to ensure that the easements can't be terminated. Also, is was recommended that there not be clauses placing restrictions on the reciprocal agreements that would weaken the shared parking concept. The applicant should work with the City Attorney on making revisions to these documents. REQUEST REVIEW The applicant is proposing a rezoning to B, Business which will correspond with the 2010 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The 2010 - 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which is still in effect, identifies this parcel as Commercial. The General Business designation more directly corresponded with the Business District. The Comprehensive Plan discusses the two designations as follows: 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. 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. The purpose of the Business District is: “The purpose of the Business (B) district is to provide for a zoning district for a mix of office, high quality light industrial, and larger-scale retail and service uses with proximity to arterial roadways. Development shall include high quality and attractive building materials and architectural design as well as extensive landscaping in order to limit impacts on surrounding land uses, and shall be integrated and coordinated in a way to most efficiently utilize site improvements and to protect the natural environment.” The rezoning will need to be found to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The site plan has some issues that will need to be corrected in order to meet all zoning requirements. In the Subdivision Ordinance it is stated that the City shall deny approval of a preliminary plat if one or a combination of the following finding are made: (a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature. (b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. (d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant is proposing to develop the property by putting two uses on two lots that share parking and utilize a private street. The two uses and the associated parking are fully utilizing the site and there still appear to be additional plan revisions necessary to meet storm water requirements, wetland buffers, tree preservation, minimum parking, and setbacks. A third lot is being made available for future development that would also result in additional tree removal and storm water management issues. If the Planning Commission finds that this application is not meeting the necessary review criteria, it would be appropriate to forward a recommendation of denial to the City Council. Otherwise, the Planning Commission could forward this onto the Council with a recommendation of approval with the following conditions: 1. A Mechanism shall be provided to ensure the senior building meets zoning requirements, including limitations on independent living units and required parking provisions. 2. The entire private road shall be within the Outlot. 3. The applicant shall meet tree replacement requirements 4. The Senior Building shall be adjusted or reduced in size to meet required setbacks. 5. The wetland impacts shall be subject to WCA review and approval. 6. Association documents shall be provided in the manner requested by the City Attorney and shall specifically address the parking being provided on the office property for the benefit of the senior housing building. 7. Park dedication shall be paid as recommended by the Parks Commission. 8. All comments from the Elm Creek Watershed District shall be addressed. 9. All comments from the City Engineer shall be addressed. 10. The preliminary plat shall be updated to provide sufficient right-of-way for Chippewa Road. 11. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the City Attorney with regards to title documentation. 12. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement to the City in a form and of substance acceptabled to the City Attorney to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval and relevant City requirements and policies. 13. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit in an amount of 150% of the cost of improvements in order to ensure completion. 14. The final plat applicant shall be filed within 180 days of the date of the city council resolution granting preliminary approval or the approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. 15. The applciant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary plat, site plan review, and related documents Attached: Aerial Photo List of Documents Engineer’s Comments received 7/6/2017 Elm Creek Watershed District Comments received 7/6/2017 Applicant’s Narrative Preliminary Plat Plan Set dated 7/20/2017    Project:  LR‐17‐204 – Lunski Senior Community Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review The following documents constitute the complete record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports.  All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall. Documents Submitted by Applicant: Document Received Date Document Date # of pages Electronic Paper Copy? Notes Application 5/12/2017  5/12/2017  3  Y Y   Fee 5/12/2017  5/12/2017  1  Y Y  $11,000 Narrative 6/19/2017  6/19/2017  4  Y Y   Labels 6/19/2017  NA  1  Y Y  Labels inaccurate; staff updated Plan Set 5/12/2017  5/12/2017  23  Y Y   Plan Set – Updated  6/19/2017  6/19/2017  25  Y Y   Plan Set – Updated  7/24/2017  7/20/2017  25  Y Y   Soils Map 5/12/2017  5/12/2017  3  Y Y          Traffic Analysis 5/12/2017  5/10/2017  66  Y Y   Preliminary Plat 5/16/2017  5/12/2017  1  Y Y   Preliminary Plat – Updated  7/24/2017 Not updated1  Y Y   Draft Covenants 6/19/2017  NA  19  Y Y   Wetland Replace. App.  6/19/2017  6/19/2017  13  Y Y   Stormwater Report  6/19/2017  6/16/2017  142  Y Y   Arch Response 7/24/2017  7/17/2017  2  Y N   Eng Response – Elm Creek  7/24/2017  7/19/2017  6  Y N   Eng Response – traffic  7/24/2017  N/A  4  Y N   Eng Response  7/24/2017  7/19/2017  5  Y N    (continued on back)   Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Legal Comments 5/25/2017  1  Y  Legal Comments 6/28/2017  1  Y  Building Official Comments 5/26/2017  1  Y  Building Official Comments 6/26/2017  1  Y  MnDOT Comments 6/1/2017  1  Y No Comments City Engineer Comments 5/30/2017  3  Y  City Engineer Comments 7/6/2017  4  Y  Elm Creek Watershed Comments  7/6/2017  9  Y  No Recommendation Incomplete Letter 6/2/2017  2  Y  Legal Notice 6/30/2017  19  Y  Planning Commission Report 7/6/2017  9   53 pages w/ attachments Planning Commission Report 8/3/2017  8  Y 46 pages w/ attachments  Public Comments  Document Date  Electronic  Notes Planning Commission minutes 7/11/2017  Y       701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800    Building a legacy – your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com  July 6, 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. LR-17-204 WSB Project No. 03433-140 Dear Mr. Finke: We have reviewed The Medina Senior Living application and plans dated June 20, 2017. The applicant proposes to construct a 90 unit senior living complex consisting of three stories and approximately 118,100 square feet. In addition, a separate 40,000 square foot two-story medical/office building is 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. The utilities shown on the site plan and make it difficult to read, either eliminate these on the site 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. Provide an exhibit showing the turning movements of trucks (fire and delivery) within the site including the delivery entrances along with a detail of the truck dimensions. 4. Provide details and design information for the proposed boardwalk with future submittals. 5. Provide a legend on the site plan denoting the various types of paving and walkways proposed for the site with clear hatching patterns. 6. There are details shown in the plans for retaining wall, show the location and elevation information more clearly on the site/grading plans. The elevations should include both the top and bottom of the wall. 7. Note that slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in locations where the steep slopes are proposed. 8. Correct the symbol for the proposed tree locations on the landscaping sheets; it is also not clear what types of trees are being planted in relation to the legend. Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review July 6, 2017 Page 2 9. The City will provide confirmation whether or not additional ROW is required along Chippewa Road for the trail once the traffic study has been updated as indicated in this review concerning the turn lanes. 10. In general, plans shall meet the requirements set forth in the City’s Design Manual. 11. Maximize the parking lot bump out at the southeasterly lot to allow for greater turning movement space during backup maneuvering. 12. Provide analysis to confirm that the proposed underground parking is feasible given the underlying soil conditions and water table elevation. Utility Plan 13. Easements may be required by the City to encompass all or a portion of the sanitary sewer and watermain into the site. 14. Looping connections may be required to minimize long dead-end watermain sections, the layout provided will require review by the City’s Fire Marshall. Extend the watermain south with the sanitary sewer alignment along the westerly property line and provide a second connection to the existing watermain at TH 55. 15. Extend the watermain and sanitary sewer stubs up to the right of way line adjacent to Chippewa Road. Add gate valve to the watermain stub. 16. Label the building services separately and include type of pipe and stub invert information for the sanitary services. Add missing invert information to northerly sewer stub. 17. Provide dimension labels between watermain and both sanitary sewer and storm sewer piping. 18. Use different line-type for sanitary sewer that includes arrows to denote direction of flow. 19. Verify that adequate water pressure will be available for the proposed structures served by City water. 20. On Sheet C5.0 under Sanitary Sewer Notes, note 1 needs to be corrected to meet the requirements of the City of Medina design guidelines in regards to pipe strength designation and bury depth. 21. Based on the current design, it appears the applicant will be required to apply for permits from DLI and MDH, provide copies to the City. Traffic & Intersections 22. Although the Traffic Study does indicate that no turn lanes are required at the Site Entrance, the updated information and analysis outlined below should be provided to make a final determination. In addition, in order to provide a recommendation on the need for turn lanes at Willow Drive or determining the interaction between the adjacent driveways, the additional information and analysis should be provided. 23. 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. 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 this in mind, the proposed Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review July 6, 2017 Page 3 driveway should be analyzed for sight distance issues or concerns. A figure showing the site line analysis should be provided. 25. The intersection analysis only considered Chippewa Road at the site entrance. To document the area impacts, the intersections of Chippewa Road at Willow Drive and Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive should also be analyzed. 26. The site traffic generation should be revised/updated with the following: o The text of the project narrative indicates that the Senior Housing part of the site includes assisted living as well as the senior housing. o The medical office is now smaller 24,757 sf o The retail is now larger 4,320 sf. Is it anticipated that this could be a Pharmacy? If so, that should be used for traffic generation. 27. The majority of the traffic to and from the site will use Willow Drive to TH 55. Additional analysis showing delay’s and queues need to provided, specifically for the left and right turn movements at: o Chippewa Road at site driveway; o Chippewa Road at Willow Road; o Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive. 28. The site plan should be updated to show the correct location of the proposed uses. The future phase (commercial) access location to the main driveway is close to Chippewa Road. This should be evaluated to insure no conflicts. 29. The Traffic Study indicates that the interaction between the Site entrance and the property driveway adjacent to it does not have any issues. Provide the assumption(s) for development of the adjacent property and additional discussion/analysis, including future traffic generation and the anticipated left/right turn queues between driveways, to validate whether or not there will be future impacts and issues. Stormwater Management 30. The development will need to meet the City’s infiltration requirement. It is not clear in the submittal how this will be accomplished. One option is to utilize stormwater reuse from the proposed ponds for irrigation. 31. Several ponds are shown on the grading plans. The City requires compliance with the volume control requirement and it is not clear that any infiltration or filtration volume is provided. 32. The development will need to meet the appropriate Elm Creek Watershed standards and permitting requirements, provide permitting documents to the City when approved. 33. Provide demonstration that the water quality criteria have been met using PondNet, P8, or other approved water quality modeling method. 34. Specify if future impervious area at the north side of the site has been included for treatment or if this area is to be treated once constructed. 35. EOFs must be labeled on the plans for all BMPs. 36. Label the size and type of existing and proposed storm sewer piping, label the invert information on all catch basins/manholes. Medina Senior Living – Engineering Review July 6, 2017 Page 4 37. Calculations must be submitted indicating the culvert under the proposed entrance road is sized adequately to convey the offsite tributary area to the wetland. 38. North Pond must have a minimum dead pool depth of 3 feet. 39. North Pond NWL does not match that used in HydroCAD. Confirm the correct NWL and HWL. 40. Show HWL on the plans for the biofiltration basin. 41. Confirm that the freeboard from the lowest opening of the buildings meets the two feet of freeboard from the emergency overflow elevations of the BMPs. Wetland Impacts 42. Label the wetland buffer and provide dimensioning on each sheet. 43. WCA application comments: o Include a more complete description of the purpose and need for the project, including any standards that may apply to the driveway, pathways, ADA, etc. o It appears that project elements other than the driveway are contributing to the wetland impact as well (grading for the building, paved pathway, and gazebo area). Add a discussion of the need and design requirements for these elements. o If stormwater will outlet into the wetlands, discuss how the stormwater will be pre- treated prior to discharging to the wetland and include in the impact acreage any impacts that result from outfall structures, including riprap. o Add a discussion regarding the boardwalk. o The current application does not include details regarding avoidance alternatives. The WCA requires that two avoidance alternatives be discussed. One can be a no-build alternative. Include exhibits of each alternative. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer elm creek Watershed Management Commission ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE TECHNICAL OFFICE 3235 Fernbrook Lane Hennepin County Public Works Plymouth, MN 55447 Department of Environment and Energy PH: 763.553.1144 701 Fourth Ave. South, Suite 700 E-mail: judie@jass.biz Minneapolis, MN 55415 www.elmcreekwatershed.org PH: 612.596.1171 E-mail: jason.swenson@hennepin.us CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA • PLYMOUTH • ROGERS S:\EMD \DEMCON\CORR\SWENSON\WATERSHEDS\ELM CREEK \PLAN REVIEWS\2017\2017 -019 Medina Senior Community, Medina\2017-0 19 Review Memo .docx Medina Senior Living Facility Medina , Project #2017-019 Project Overview: The 10.8-acre commercial project site is located north of Highway 55, south of Chippewa Drive and midway between Willow Drive and Mohawk Drive. The site is currently vacant and covered by forested lands and a cattail marsh wetland is located in the central portion of the site running in an east -west direction. The proposed project is 6.00 acres, with 3.77 acres of impervious surface and will include two new main building structure s, an accessory structure, and paved parking and driveway access to Chippewa Road. The remaining approximately 3.5 acres on the north side of the site will be platted for future development and is not subject to the Elm Creek Watershed Commission review now. Our review will be for compliance to the Commission’s 3 rd generation standards and rules. Applicant: Lunski Inc . – c/o Dean Lunski, 1416 Main Street, Hopkins, MN 55343. Phone: 952- 929-3400. Email: dlunski@psidb.com Agent/Engineer: Hill Engineering, Inc . – c/o Jay Hill, P.E., 1585 Dunlap Street North, Saint Paul , MN 55108. Phone: 612-987-4455. Email: hilleng@gmail.com Exhibits : 1) ECWMC Request for Plan Review and Approval received May 31 , 2017 (City authorization is J une 1 , 2017). 2) Project review fee of $2,750 on May 31 , 2017. 3) Complete plan was received on June 20, 2017. 4) Medina Senior Living Community Preliminary Plat (dated 5/12/2017) 5) Medina Senior Living Community, Site Plan Review Submittal (dated June 19, 2017) CS..........Cover Sheet A-SITE ..Architectural Site Plan C1.0 .......Existing Conditions C2.0 .......Tree Survey C3.0 .......Site Plan C4.0 .......Grading Plan C5.0 .......Utility Plan C6.0-6.2 Civil Details C7.0 .......SWPPP Medina Senior Living Community Page 2 Medina, Project 2017-019 July 5, 2017 C7.1 .......Erosion Control Plan L1.0-2.0 .Landscaping Plan 6) Stormwater Design Report, dated June 16 , 2017 (unsigned). 7) Joint Application Form for Wetland Impacts, Dated 6/19/2017 8) Purchase Agreement for Wetland Bank Credits, 6/16/2017 Findings ; 9) A complete application was received on June 20 , 2017. The initial 6 0-day review period expires August 19, 2 017. 10) The entire site will be routed to the existing wetland located in the center of the property. The wetland discharges through a 15” Culvert to the south into the Highway 55 Right of Way, then south under Highway 55 and through neighboring properties before discharging into the series of wetlands and ditches south of Highway 55 eventually flowing north into Rush Creek. 11) Rule F. Floodplain Alteration does not pertain to this project. There are no established FEMA or ECWMC flood plains within the project corridor. 12) Rule G. Wetland Alteration. City of Medina is the Local Government Unit administe ring the Wetland Conservation Act of Minnesota. A wetland delineation has been completed and approved by the LGU. The applicant proposes impacts to 0.11 acres of wetlands to complete the project. The applicant is proposing to purchase banking credits to mitigate the pro posed impacts. Credits are proposed to be purchased from the Soberg wetland bank in Hennepin County, roughly 1 ½ miles west of the proposed impacts. In addition, there is a trail crossing of the wetland with no details of what this crossing is (grading, b oardwalk, etc…). Information about this crossing must be added to the project plans and should be included in any WCA permit applications. These issues should be addressed by the City of Medina in their role as WCA LGU. 13) Rule I. Buffer requirements. Buffers are required to be an average of 25 feet wide, with a minimum width of 10 feet. Several revisions are required to meet the Commission’s requirements as follows: a. At the proposed wetland impact area, a 10 foot wide minimum buffer is required. Based on the site improvements as shown, this will require moving several proposed trails out of the minimum buffer as they are not allowed in the buffer when constructed as part of other site improvements. b. The proposed gazebo will also need to be moved out of the 10 foot required minimum buffer, and we suggest it also meet the recommended structure setback of 15 feet from the required buffer. c. There are multiple locations where the proposed buildings encroach into the recommended 15 foot structure setback from the wetland buffer. Medina Senior Living Community Page 3 Medina, Project 2017-019 July 5, 2017 d. The applicant must provide calculations demonstrating that minimum area is met for the wetland buffers, taking into account all areas that require additional width being added for slopes that are steeper than 6H:1V. There are multiple areas where the minimum slopes are not met. e. The applicant is proposing including all of the south pond and sloped as part of the wetland buffer to increase the average buffer width. Staff will accept the pond in the minimum 25 foot buffer in this area, but will not allow the remainder of the pond to be include in the buffer width averaging. 14) Rule E. Erosion and Sediment Control will meet the Commission’s requirements with minor revisions: a) A final plan, dated and signed by a Professional Engineer licensed in Minnesota, must be submitted to the Commission and the City of Medina . b) The SWPPP must include a map identifying the receiving waters from the site. The SWPPP states that the site drains to waters that are impaired. These must be identified correctly in the SWPPP, not just stated generically. A review of the MPCA impaired waters map did not identify any impaired waters within 1 mile of the site. c) Note #6 on Sheet C4.0 need to be changed to state stabilization must occur within 14 days per the current NPDES permit. The language on the plans has not been effective since August of 2013 when the current NPDES permit was made effective. d) The SWPPP should identify who prepared the SWPPP and the training received that qualifies them to prepare the SWPPP to comply with NPDES permit requirements. A copy of the University of Minnesota Erosion Control Certification is one example. e) BMP Notes on Sheet 7.0, Item 1 refers to designing all BMPS for 0.5 inches of runoff. This should be replaced with 1.1 inches, per the current Elm Creek Watershed Standards (which will also meet the current requirements of the NPDES construction stormwater permit in effect since August of 2013. f) The plans should have an actual Statement of Estimated Quantities (SEQ) on the plans for at a minimum of all erosion control items to comply with NPDES permit requirements. g) The erosion control plans must provide redundant sediment control devices (such as a second line of silt fence) adjacent to the wetland on site since the required 50 foot buffer in the NPDES permit will not be maintained. h) Inlet erosion controls should be shown at all culverts on the site per the detail plate ERO -9 on Sheet C7.0 i) Details are missing for the proposed filtration basin such as the depth of the facility above the filtration medium (see the cross section on Sheet C6.2). In addition, these details appear to conflict with some of the standard plate details on RG-02 and RG-03 on sheet C6.0. Details RG-02 and RG-03 are also largely illegible at the scale they are currently printed at and should be increased in size. j) The Civil details on sheet 6.0 include a porous asphalt detail/cross section that refers to a draft specification from MnDOT dating to 2012. The applicant should note that this specification is now outdated and should be updated to MnDOT’s current standard. The Medina Senior Living Community Page 4 Medina, Project 2017-019 July 5, 2017 la st revision from MnDOT is dated 4/3/2017 and may be found in MnDOT Special Provisions SP 140. k) No soil borings were provided for review showing the groundwater elevations on the site. If any of the proposed pervious parking facilities or rain garden do not meet the required 3 feet of separation from the groundwater elevation, then an impermeable liner is required. This appears to primarily be an issue for the proposed rain garden facility. l) The bottom of all infiltration/infiltration features should be scarified (ripped) to a minimum depth of 12 inches prior to installing the remainder of the infiltration feature. 15) Rule D. Stormwater Management will be provided by two proposed ponds and filtration feature (rain garden). Per the stormwater reports, runoff from the rooftops is proposed to be routed directly to the south stormwater pond. However, no details on how this is proposed to occur are provided for review, and the roof profile of the senior living community does not support this conclusion as shown on the plans. Runoff from the parking areas is a routed through pervious parking areas and then also is directed to the south stormwater pond. Runoff from the entrance access and some trails is proposed to be directed to the northern stormwater pond. A rain water garden is also proposed for the site that will provide treatment for runoff from so me of the proposed trails only. Again, it should be noted that the stormwater calculations do not appear to take into account any further expansion on the north side of the site at this time outside of the proposed access drive. 16) The southern pond outlet will be equipped with a 12” orifice at 990.0’ and discharges through a 10” outlet pipe at 991.0’ in elevation. No details on proposed pipes or outlet control structures were provided for review in the plan set. 17) The northern pond will be equipped with a 12” orifice at 990.0’ and discharges through a 12” outlet pipe at 991.0’ in elevation per the HydroCAD model. The project plans call for a normal water level of 992.0’. This discrepancy must be resolved. No details on proposed pipes or outlet control structures were provided for review in the plan set. 18) The HydroCAD modeling for the site does not take into account the existing watersurface or the proposed water surface correctly in the modeling. All open water surfaces, such as open water in the wetland and open water on each of the proposed ponds should be modeled using a curve number of 98 (though this is not included in the impervious surfaces calculation). 19) Stormwater rate control. The post-development stormwater runoff rates for the 2-, 10- and 100-year events meet the standards as presently modeled and are shown below: Storm Event E xisting Discharge Rate (cfs) Proposed Discharge Rate (cfs) 2-year 2.60 0.87 10-year 5.04 1.66 100-year 10.81 3.58 Medina Senior Living Community Page 5 Medina, Project 2017-019 July 5, 2017 These rates will require verification when modifications are made to the HydroCAD models. 20) Volume analysis: The volume abstraction requirement for 1.1” of runoff from 3.37 acres of new impervious surface is about 13,460 cubic feet. The applicant notes that soils are not conducive for infiltration . However, a significant portion of the site appears to contain type C soils that have a higher infiltration rate than used in the modeling for the project. The applicant is proposing to build three separate areas of parking with pervious pavement and storage provided under the pavement with drain tile outlets. Two of these appear to be able to be redesigned to take advantage of the better soils to increase the volume abstraction. Without detailed infiltration testing of the soils at the actual elevations where infiltration is proposed to occur, the applicant is advised to use the infiltration rates from the Minnesota Stormwater Manual with a factor of safety of 2.0 applied to them (ie: reduce the infiltration rate in ½). The applicant proposes using excess wetland buffer areas for additional abstraction credits. Per the notes above, the area covering the south pond is not acceptable for use in these calculations. The applicant will need to provide a better accounting of how the required abstraction will be met for the site. 21) Water quality and nutrient analysis : a. The applicant provided a narrative account of water quality and nutrient analysis from the site, but provided no backup calculations to demonstrate how these numbers were determined. b. The applicant also appears to call the existing forested area on the site grassland, meadow, or open space. The applicant is advised to apply the correct pre-developed land use of woodland to the water quality calculations. c. The applicant must provide the calculations from PondNET or other water quality modeling software (such as the MIDS calculator) to demonstrate the source of the information provided in the narrative. 22) At the time of writing this report, it was not certain which party (City of Medina or the applicant) would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the stormwater management facilities. A responsible party must be established for the O&M Plan. Medina Senior Living Community Page 6 Medina, Project 2017-019 July 5, 2017 Recommendation: None at this time. Significant revisions are still required to the site to bring it into compliance with ECWMC Rules. Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy July 5 , 2017 Jason Swenson, P.E. Technical Advisor to the Commission ���� CAI NST��..<6 LUNSKI INC. x en scpJ "vs -m1-4 June 19, 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 two components: a 3 story Assisted / Independent Senior Living Community and a two story medical/office building. Project Description: We are proposing a 90 unit assisted / independent senior living community consisting of three stories and approximately 118,100 square feet. The design of the senior community will accommodate a minimum of 50% assisted living units and likely more depending upon leasing demand. Amenities will include on -site dining, a bistro cafe / 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 to the residential building, a two story, 40,000 s.f. (approximate) medical / office building is proposed adjacent to Highway 55 along the southern portion of the site. The intended use will provide a synergistic relationship with the senior facility and augment the services available to residents on site in addition to providing a valuable medical resource within the area. A proposed skyway connection between the two buildings will further allow residents and staff to work in tandem across the two facilities. An underground parking garage as well as surface parking is provided for this facility. After receiving comments through the city's Concept Submittal review of the project, and per discussion with City staff, we have made a number of revisions to the overall project. These revisions are the result of both internal review as well as our best attempt to comply with the City of Medina's zoning ordinances. These revisions include: " Overall reduction of units within the senior living facility from 135 to 90. " Reduction in the medical / office building area by approximately 6,000 s.f. " Eliminated 1 story commercial building within the southwest corner of the site resulting in a need for 17 fewer parking stalls. " All buildings within the development conform to setback regulations per B zoning requirements. " Lot lines are revised to reflect the footprint of the access drive within lot 1 as well as the parking layout between lots 3 and 4. " Parking calculations are revised to better reflect the City's ordinances however the ordinances do not specifically address a service based senior living facility as a type of use. " A walking path has been extended to Chippewa Road per staff comments. " The current site plan complies with B zoning district landscape requirements including: 12' buffer between all buildings and access drives, 8% of parking and drive areas are landscaped, and landscaping breaks within the parking lot are minimum 12' wide. The existing site: The 10.8 acre site is zoned Rural Commercial Holding (RCH). A large portion of the site consists of a Manage 1 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. 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 Senior Living Facility building is a 3 story, 90 unit 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 99,800 square feet. The garage will be approximately 18,500 square feet and will contain 48 parking stalls. The medical / office building will be two stories and contain approximately 24,800 square feet of commercial space. In addition, a lower level will accommodate 33 garage stalls as well as service space. The intended use would provide a regional clinic with the potential for specialty care such as chiropractic, orthopedic, or rehabilitation / physical therapy services. A skyway connection between buildings on site allows direct access for the residents of the senior facility to take direct advantage of these additional services available. 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). The Senior Living Facility will be detailed in a traditional manner, 2 including a masonry base and accents, and provide warm earth tone colors. The Senior Living Facility will employ sloped roofs at a minimum 6:12 pitch. The medical / office facility design has a more modern feel however will share masonry materials with the senior living facility as well as other material cues. A manufactured wood veneer and composite metal panel elements accent the masonry and stucco structure. Both buildings provide a regular patterned window system and a variety of materials to subdivide exterior facades to minimize scale and enhance the community feel. Parking: There has been significant discussion regarding the amount of parking required for the proposed uses on the site. Currently 220 total parking spaces are provided across lots 3 and 4. 81 stalls (37%) are underground garage parking, minimizing additional impervious site coverage. The medical / office building requires 100 parking stalls and currently meets city ordinances for its use at 1 parking stall per 250 s.f. of area. The Senior Living Facility is currently allotted 120 parking stalls. The City of Medina does not recognize a service based senior living facility within its parking ordinances and therefore does not have a use type which can be properly applied in this situation. Currently we are calculating parking for this facility in the following manner: 45 Independent Living Units x 2.25 spaces / unit (Apartment use per Ordinance) = 102 stalls 30 Assisted Living Units x .4 spaces per unit (per City Staff) = 12 stalls 15 Memory Care / Special Care Suites x .35 spaces per unit (per City Staff) = 6 stalls Total calculated parking = 120 stalls Internally, ownership as well as the design team have evaluated a number of scenarios to ensure adequate parking is provided as it is a key component to the success of this development. Because there is not a specific ordinance which applies to this use, an alternate method of calculating parking based upon past experience and evaluation of other similar facilities results in the following: 45 Independent Living Units x 1.25 spaces per unit = 57 stalls 30 Assisted Living Units and Specialty Care Suites x .4 (per City staff) = 12 stalls Employee parking per shift = 28 stalls 90 total units x .25 guest parking (per Ordinance) = 23 stalls Total calculated parking (alternative method) = 120 stalls Based on the parking evaluations above, we feel the proposed uses are adequately parked and will function as intended. Additional parking factors include: • Covenants between lots within the development allowing shared parking across lot lines to allow for ebb and flow of parking based on unique demand for certain occasions such as guest parking on holidays. 3 " Private shuttle transportation provided by the Senior Living Facility reduces the need for residents to maintain a private vehicle. " The senior facility will maintain a minimum 50% assisted living units per the City's requirement however as the building matures, this percentage is likely to increase as a primary goal of the facility will be to allow residents to age in place. This would result in an additional decrease in demand for private vehicles on site in the future. Proposed site work: The site work will consist of the initial development of Lots 1, 3 and 4 and will include extending utilities through the site and the development of the main access drive. Overall site development will be consistent with the submitted Site Plan Review package with Lot 2 remaining a future phase. Sanitary sewer is currently available at the southwest corner of the site near the proposed outbuilding. Sanitary sewer service will be extended to the 2 proposed buildings 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 2 proposed buildings 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 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: Overall, site development will consist of Lots 1, 3 and 4 including construction of all underground utilities, site improvements, and landscaping. The Senior Living Facility on Lot 3 will be the first building to be constructed. The intent is to begin construction of the medical office / building on Lot 4 within the allotted city approval timeframe. 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 4 0 Scale In Feet 6030 DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaPRELIMINARY PLAT05/12/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 DELINEATED WETLAND BOUNDARY 30' WETLAND BUFFER 15' WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK ALL OF OUTLOT A TO BE DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER W/ MONUMENT SIGNS +,*+:$< &+,33(:$52$'02+$:.'5,9(:,//2:'5,9(6,7( $%29( $&&(66,%/( $%29(),1,6+(')/225 $5&+,7(&7 $/80,180 $3352;,0$7( %($5,1*3/$7( %(1&+0$5. %/2&.,1* %27720 %277202):$// &$67,13/$&( &$7&+%$6,1 &(,/,1* &(5$0,&7,/( &/($5 $1&( &21&5(7( &21&5(7(0$6215<81,7 &216758&7,21 &217,18( 286 &2856( $%9 $&& $)) $5&+ $/80 $3352; %3/ %0 %/.* %27 %2: &,3 &% &/* &7 &/5 &21& &08 &2167 &217 &56 '(9(/23(5 $5&+,7(&7 &5$,*+$570$1 .(/&,(52%,1621 1+$03'(1$9(18( 68,7( 673$8/0,11(627$ FUDLJ#PGJDUFKLWHFWVFRP NHOFLH#PGJDUFKLWHFWVFRP &21752/-2,17 '(7$,/ ',$0(7(5 ',0(16,21 '225 '2:163287 '5$:,1* '5,1.,1*)2817$,1 (/(&75,& $/ (/(9$7,21 (48$/ (;+$867 (;,67,1* (;3$16,21-2,17 (;3$16,21 (;+$867)$1 (/(&75,&$/3$1(/ (/(&75,&:$7(5&22/(5 (;7(5,25 ),1,6+(')/225(/(9$7,21 ),5(3/$&( &- '7/ ',$ ',0 '5 '6 ':* ') (/(&7 (/ (4 (;+ (;,67 (- (;3 () (/(&31/ (:& (;7 ))( )3/ )/225'5$,1 )227,1* )281'$7,21 ),5(+<'5$17 *$*(*$8*( *$/9$1,=(' *(1(5$/&2175$&725 *5$%%$5 +$5':$5( +($7,1*9(17,/$7,21 $,5&21',7,21,1* +(,*+7 +$1',&$3 +2//2:0(7$/ +25,=217$/ +26(%,%% ,1&/8'( ,16,'(',$0(7(5 ,168/$7,21 ,17(5,25 ,19(57 )' )7* )1' )+ *$ *$/9 *& *% +': +9$& +7 +& +0 +25 +% ,1&/ ,' ,168/ ,17 ,19 -2,67 /$0,1$7( /$9$725< /()7+$1' /,*+7 0$7(5,$/ 0$1+2/( 0$18)$&785( 0$6215< 0$6215<23(1,1* 0(7$/ 0,6&(//$1(286 127,1&2175$&7 127726&$/( 180%(5 21&(17(5 23(1,1* 23326,7( 23326,7(+$1' 2876,'(',$0(7(5 29(5+($' -67 /$0 /$9 /+ /7 0$7 0+ 0)5 0$6 02 07/ 0,6& 1,& 176 12 2& 231* 233 23+ 2' 2+ 29(5+($''225 3$5$//(/ 3$57,7,21 3$9(0(17 3/$67,&/$0,1$7( 3/$7( 35(6685(75($7(' 32/<9,1</&+/25,'( 3281'63(5648$5()227 3281'63(5648$5(,1&+ 35(&$67 3523(57</,1( 32:(532/( 48$55<7,/( 5$',86 5(7851$,5 522)'5$,1 5()(5(1&( 52&.)$&( 5,*+7+$1' 5,*+72):$< 2+' 3$5 3$57 3907 3/$0 3/ 37 39& 36) 36, 3& 3/ 33 47 5 5$ 5' 5() 5) 5+ 52: 5220 528*+23(1,1* 52'$1'6+(/) 6+($7+,1* 6+2:(5 6,0,/$5 62/,'&25( 63(&,),&$7,216 648$5( 67$,1/(6667((/ 67250'5$,1 6758&785$/ 6<00(75< ,&$/ 7+,&.1(66 7232)&21&5(7( 7232)6/$% 7232):$// 75($' 7<3,&$/ 7232))227,1* 81),1,6+(' 50 52 5 6 6+7* 6+5 6,0 6& 63(& 64 667/ 6' 6758&7 6<0 7+. 72& 726 72: 7 7<3 72) 81) 85,1$/ 81/(66127('27+(5:,6( 9(57,&$/ 9(177+58522) :22' :$7(5&/26(7 :$7(5+($7(5 :$7(53522),1* :$7(55(6,67$17 :(/'(':,5()$%5,& :,'7+:,'( <$5'+<'5$17 <$5''5$,1 <$5',1/(7 85 812 9(57 975 :' :& :+ :3 :5 ::) : <+ <' <, $%%5(9,$7,216 $//1(&(66$5<$1'255(48,5('7(676,163(&7,2166+23'5$:,1*5(9,(:6 $1''5$:,1*,17(535(7$7,2165(48,5('%<7+(*(1(5$/&21',7,2166+$// %((;(&87('%<$5(*,67(5('$5&+,7(&7$1'25%<$5(*,67(5('(1*,1((5 ,)1277+($5&+,7(&72)5(&25'$1'257+((1*,1((52)5(&25'6+$//%( +(/'+$50/(66)257+$73257,212)7+(:25.,03523(5/<(;(&87('7+( ,163(&7,21$5&+,7(&7$1'25(1*,1((56+$//%(&20(5(63216,%/()257+26( ,163(&7,216'(&,6,216$1'25'2&80(17,17(535(7$7,2160$'($67+(< 5(/$7(727+(&2175$&7'2&80(176$1'7+(,5,17(17 $//&216758&7,216+$//0((7$//$33/,&$%/(&2'(6$1'0267675,1*(17 6+$//$33/< ',0(16,216*,9(1)250$6215<21$5&+,7(&785$/'5$:,1*6$5(120,1$/ 81/(6627+(5:,6(127(' 6&$/('0($685(0(1762)'5$:,1*66+$//127%($//2:(' ',0(16,21)25678':$//6$5(72)$&(2)678'$1'',0(16,216)25 0$6215<:$//6$5(72)$&(2)%/2&.81/(6667$7('27+(5:,6( *(1(5$/127(6 352-(&76,7(/2&$7,21 &216758&7,21&2168/7$17 -21*80%5,// 32%2; 0,11($32/,601  &,9,/(1*,1((5 -$<+,//3(5/6 '81/$3675((71257+ 673$8/0,11(627$ +LOOHQJ#JPDLOFRP 352-(&76800$5< 6+((7,1'(; /XQVNL,QF '($1/816., 0$,1675((7 +23.,160,11(627$ 0RPHQWXP'HVLJQ*URXS//& +LOO(QJLQHHULQJ,QF%XLOGLQJ&RQVWUXFWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW,QF 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\ 0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD 6,7(3/$15(9,(:68%0,77$/ -XO\  $5&+,7(&785$/ $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<*$5$*(3/$1 -XQH $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<67)/2253/$1 -XQH $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<1')/2253/$1 -XQH $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<5')/2253/$1 -XQH $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<(;7(5,25(/(9$7,216 -XO\ $ 6(1,25)$&,/,7<(;7(5,25(/(9$7,216 -XQH $ 0(',&$/2)),&()/2253/$16 -XQH $ 0(',&$/2)),&((;7(5,25(/(9$7,216 -XQH $ (;7(5,253(563(&7,9(6 -XQH $ (;7(5,253(563(&7,9(6 -XQH &,9,/ & (;,67,1*&21',7,216 -XO\ & 75((6859(< -XO\ & 6,7(3/$1 -XO\ & *5$',1*3/$1 -XO\ & 87,/,7<3/$1 -XO\ & &,9,/'(7$,/6 -XO\ & &,9,/'(7$,/6 -XO\ & &,9,/'(7$,/6 -XO\ & 6:333 -XO\ & (526,21&21752/3/$1 -XO\ &6 &29(56+((7 $6,7($5&+,7(&785$/6,7(3/$1 $6,7(/,*+7,1*3+2720(75,& 29(5$//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/$1',03$&7$7$&&(66'5,9( &855(17=21,1*585$/&200(5&,$/+2/',1* 5&+ 352326('=21,1*%86,1(66 % 6,7($''5(663,' 352326('86( /27287/27 /27)8785('(9(/230(17 /276(59,&(%$6('5(6,'(17,$/&$5()$&,/,7< $66,67('/,9,1*,1'(3(1'(17/,9,1* 6(1,25&20081,7< /270(',&$/2)),&( 6(1,25/,9,1*)$&,/,7< 81,76(1,25$66,67('/,9,1*,1'(3(1'(17/,9,1* &20081,7< $3352;,0$7(/<6) 127,1&/8',1**$5$*( 67$//81'(5*5281'3$5.,1**$5$*( 6725<%8,/',1*+(,*+7 0(',&$/2)),&(%8,/',1* 6725<0(',&$/2)),&(%8,/',1* $3352;,0$7(/<6)$%29(*5$'( 67$//81'(5*5281'3$5.,1**$5$*( 6.<:$<&211(&7,21726(1,25)$&,/,7< 237,21$/ /27 )8785(3+$6( 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD&6 &29(56+((7-XO\QD/$1'6&$3( / /$1'6&$3(3/$1 -XO\ / /$1'6&$3('(7$,/6 -XO\ &+,33(:$52$' 67$7(+,*+:$<12  3$5.,1*6(7%$&.  %8,/',1*6(7%$&. :(7/$1' ,03$&7 6(1,25$66,67(' ,1'(3(1'(17/,9,1* 6725<*$5$*(81,76 *$5$*(67$//66)  3</216,*16(( '(7$,/$,17(51$//< ,//80,1$7(' :(7/$1'%2 81'$5 <$9 (5 $*(6 (7 %$&.%8 ))(5 :(7/$1' 02180(176,*1 6(('(7$,/$ )8785( 3+$6( %2$5':$/. 5(7(17,21 321' %,780,1286 3$7+  3 5 ,1 &,3 $/%8 ,/',1 *6 (7%$&. %8,/',1*3$5.,1*6(7%$&. %8,/',1*3$5.,1*6(7%$&. 3$5.,1*6(7%$&.  %8,/',1*6(7%$&. 0 ,16(7%$&.%8))(5 /27 6) $&5(6 /27 6) $&5(6 /27 287/27 6) $&5(6 /27 6) $&5(6 '(/,9(5< 75$6+ 0$,1 (175$1&( 67$//6 67$//6 *$5$*( (175$1&(   2)),&(0(',&$/ 6725<*$5$*( *$5$*(67$//6 6)  3</216,*1$*(6(( '(7$,/$,17(51$//< ,//80,1$7(':'<1$0,& ',63/$< 0$1$*( )8785(&211(&7,21:&+,33(:$52$'75$,/ %8,/',1*6(7%$&. %8 ,/',1 *6 (7 %$&.    %8 ,/',1 *6 (7 %$&.6.<:$< &211(&7,21$7 1')/225 612: 6725$*( &29(5(' (175$1&( 67 )/225   67$//6  5($5(175$1&( /2:(5/(9(/ *$5$*( (175$1&( *$=(%2    &20081,7< *$5'(1$5($6 6(&85(' 0(025<&$5( &2857<$5' %28/'(55(7$,1,1* :$//67<3,&$/',1,1*3$7,2      :$//6,*1$*(6(( (;7(5,25(/(9$7,216 :$//6,*1$*( 6(((;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216 :$//6,*1$*( 6(((;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216 :$//6,*1$*( 6(((;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216 :$//6,*1$*( 6(((;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216   /2 $',1 *=2 1 ( ),5('(37 &211(&7,21 /2$',1*=21( &('$5 )(1&(     &200(5&,$/ )8785(3+$6( 6725< 6)&203$&767$//6 7851$5281' $5($35,9$7('5,9(     5(7(17,21 321' &203$&7 3$5.,1*67$//6   (0(5*(1&< 9(+,&/(7851 $5281'        &/($59,6,21 75,$1*/( &/($59,6,21 75,$1*/(    0,16(7%$&.)5205(6,'(17,$/ $&5266&+,33(:$5'  52: 6(7%$&.   3$5.,1*6(7%$&.)5205(6,'(17,$/',675,&7  020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$6,7( $5&+,7(&785$/ 6,7(3/$1-XO\QD6&$/(  $5&+,7(&785$/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/$1',03$&7$7$&&(66'5,9( &855(17=21,1*585$/&200(5&,$/+2/',1* 5&+ 352326('=21,1*%86,1(66 % 6,7($''5(663,' 352326('86( /27287/27 /27)8785('(9(/230(17 /276(59,&(%$6('5(6,'(17,$/&$5()$&,/,7< $66,67('/,9,1*,1'(3(1'(17/,9,1*6(1,25&20081,7< /270(',&$/2)),&( 6(7%$&.5(48,5(0(176 %86,1(66',675,&7   3$5.,1*6(7%$&. )5217$1'5($5  3$5.,1*6(7%$&. 6,'(<$5'6  )5217<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&.  )520+,*+:$<  5($5<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&.  6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&. 6,'(<$5'6 0$<%(5('8&('72 :+(16+$5('$0(1,7,(6(;,67 /275(48,5(6$'',7,21$/6(7%$&.%$6('8321%8,/',1* +(,*+7$%29( /275(48,5(6$'',7,21$/ 6(7%$&.%$6('8321%8,/',1* +(,*+7$%29( 352326(')$5 /271$ 287/27 /276)6) )$5 )8785('(9(/230(17 /276)6) )$5 /276)6) )$5 5(48,5('3$5.,1* 6(1,25/,9,1*)$&,/,7<727$/81,76 0,172%($66,67('/,9,1*$1'25 63(&,$/7<&$5(  7+(0(',1$&,7<25',1$1&('2(6127,'(17,)<6(1,25/,9,1*256(1,25&$5( )$&,/,7<:,7+,16(&7,2168%'2))675((763$&(65(48,5('6(( &$/&8/$7('3$5.,1*%(/2: 0(',&$/2)),&(%8,/',1*6)6)3(567$// 67$//6 &$/&8/$7('3$5.,1* 6(1,25/,9,1*)$&,/,7< /27  ,/81,76[63$&(63(581,7 67$//6 $/81,76[63$&(63(581,7 67$//6 0(025<&$5(63(&,$/&$5(68,7(6[63$&(681,7 67$//6 727$/6(1,25/,9,1*)$&,/,7<352326('3$5.,1* 67$//6 &200(5&,$/3$5.,1* /27  727$/0(',&$/2)),&(%8,/',1*3$5.,1* 6)3(567$// 67$//6 727$/&$/&8/$7('3$5.,1* 67$//6 3529,'('3$5.,1* /27685)$&(67$//6*$5$*(67$//6 67$//6 /27685)$&(67$//6*$5$*(67$//6 67$//6 727$/3529,'('3$5.,1* 67$//6 ‡6+$5('3$5.,1*&29(1$176:,//%((67$%/,6+('%(7:((1/276$1' ‡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cale In Feet 6030 C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaEXISTING CONDITIONS05/12/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 0 Scale In Feet 6030 C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaTREE SURVEY05/12/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaSITE PLAN06/13/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 0 Scale In Feet 6030 CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF SITE GRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. BUILDING DIMENSIONS REFER TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• NOTED. ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 5.0' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ALL PRIVATE CURB AND GUTTER TO BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ADA PEDESTRIAN RAMPS W/TRUNCATED DOMES TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT ALL CURB CROSSINGS OF SIDEWALK. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SITE SIGNAGE AND STRIPING AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. HANDICAPPED PARKING PROVIDED PER ADA CODE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ALL HANDICAPPED STALLS, HANDICAPPED LOGOS AND CROSS HATCH HANDICAPPED LOADING AISLES WITH BLUE PAVEMENT MARKING PAINT, 4" IN WIDTH. CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ANY/ALL DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC ARROWS, AS SHOWN, IN WHITE PAINT. ALL SIGNAGE SHALL INCLUDE POST, CONCRETE FOOTING AND STEEL CASING WHERE REQUIRED. ALL SIGNAGE NOT PROTECTED BY CURB, LOCATED IN PARKING LOT OR OTHER PAVED AREAS TO BE PLACED IN STEEL CASING, FILLED WITH CONCRETE AND PAINTED YELLOW. ALL SIGNS TO BE PLACED 18" BEHIND THE BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. HANDICAP SIGNAGE TO BE INSTALLED 60"-66" HIGH AS MEASURED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN AS REQUIRED BY MN CODE. SIGNAGE & STRIPING NOTES DELINEATED WETLAND BOUNDARY 30' WETLAND BUFFER 15' WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK PREFABRICATED ALUMINUM PIER SUPPORTED BOARDWALK (OVER WETLAND) BITUMINOUS TRAIL RETAINING WALL) GAZEBO BIOFILTRATION BASIN POROUS BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT STORMWATER POND STORMWATER POND BITUMINOUS TRAIL HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT POROUS BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT DEPRESSED ISLAND W/ RIBBON CURB (TYPICAL) 7,281 S.F WETLAND IMPACT (MITIGATION TO BE VIA PURCHASING WETLAND BANK CREDITS) PROPOSED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER W/ MONUMENT SIGN C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaGRADING PLAN06/13/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 0 Scale In Feet 6030 30' WETLAND BUFFER 30' WETLAND BUFFER PROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER 0 Scale In Feet 6030 C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaUTILITY PLAN06/13/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 140 L.F. 8" PVC SDR 26 @ 0.40% • • • • • •• ••• • •• ••••••••••••••• R-1733 RE=1001.3 IE=978.6 366 L.F. 8" PVC SDR 26 @ 0.40% • • • • • •• ••• • •• ••••••••••••••• R-1733 RE=999.2 IE=980.1 37 L.F. 8" PVC SDR 26 @ 0.40% 8" PLUG 50 L.F. 8" PVC DIP CL 52 •••••••••••••••••••••• 50 LF 8" PVC SDR 26 @ 2.0% 8" CAP IE=986.2 38 LF 6" PVC C900 6" CAP 8"x6" TEE •••••••••••••••••••••• 8" WET-TAP W/ VALVE • • • • • •• ••• • •• ••••••••••••••• R-1733 RE=999.4 IE=985.2 CONNECT TO EX. MANHOLE IE=978.00 HYDRANT 6" GV 8"X6" REDUCER 166 L.F. 8" PVC C900 •••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••• 140 L.F. 8" PVC C900 8" 45%% BEND •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 160 L.F. 8" PVC C900 HYDRANT 6" GV 18 LF 6" PVC C900 8"X6" TEE 221 L.F. 8" PVC C900 HYDRANT 6" GV 14 LF 6" PVC C900 8"X6" TEE 351 LF 8" PVC C900 HYDRANT 6" GV 20 LF 6"PVC C900 8"X6" TEE 247 L.F. 8" PVC SDR 26 @ 3.00% 40 LF 8" PVC C900 8" CAP 8" TEE 26 LF 6" PVC SDR 26 @ 2.0% 6" CAP IE=985.7 WETLAND BUFFER FES201 12" PVC IE=991.0 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=993.0 IE=991.0 (10" PVC) IE=990.0 (ORIFICE) FES101 10" PVC IE 990.5 50 L.F. 10" PVC @ 1.00% 42 LF 12" PVC@ 0.50% CBMH202 (24"X346") RE=993.0 IE=991.21 20 LF 12" PVC @ 0.50% 124 LF 12" PVC @ 0.50% CBMH203 (24"X36") RE=993.0 IE=991.31 CBMH204 (24"X36") RE=993.0 IE=991.93 114 LF 12" PVC @ 0.50% CBMH205 (24"X36") RE=994.1O IE=992.50 110 LF 12" PVC @ 4.09% ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 8" PVC @ 0.00% •••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 4" PERF PE @ 0.00% ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 8" PVC @ 0.00% •••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 4" PERF PE @ 0.00% ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 8" PVC @ 0.00% •••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.0 IE=997.0 67 LF 4" PERF PE @ 0.00% •••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.6 IE=997.61 130 LF 8" PVC @ 0.00% 130 LF 4" PERF PE @ 0.00% ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=1000.6 IE=997.61 42 LF 8" PVC @ 1.45% FES301 24" RC APRON IE 990.18 82 L.F. 24" RCP CL V @ 1.00% FES302 24" RC APRON IE 991.0 CB213 (24"X36") RE=995.0 IE=992.59 ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• RE=995.0 IE=992.45 28 L.F. 15" RCP CL V @ 0.50% 90 L.F. 15" RCP CL V @ 0.50% FES401 15" RC APRON IE 992.0 FES502 24" RC APRON IE 993.15 115 L.F. 24" RCP CL V @ 1.00% FES501 24" RC APRON IE 992.0 FES601 12" PVC IE 990.5 82 L.F. 12" PVC @ 1.83% • ••••••••••••••••••••••• RE 994.0 IE 992.0(12"PVC) IE991.0 (ORIFICE) C DateProject ArchitectPermit Submit DateProject NumberNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION765 North Hampden Avenue, #180 St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 952.583.9788 Medina, MinnesotaLANDSCAPE PLAN06/13/1716043n/a1585 DUNLAP STREET N ST. PAUL, MN 55108 612.987.4455 0 Scale In Feet 6030 USE POND FOR PRIMARY WATER SOURCE FOR PRIVATE STREET BOULEVARD IRRIGATION. PROVIDE POTABLE WATER SECONDARY BACKUP SUPPLY. USE POND FOR PRIMARY WATER SOURCE FOR SITE IRRIGATION. PROVIDE POTABLE WATER SECONDARY BACKUP SUPPLY. WETLAND BUFFER  $  $  $  $ 6) *$5$*(  6) 6725$*( 5(&(,9,1* 6) 75$6+ 67$,5 67$,5 67$,5 6(59,&( /2%%< /2%%< 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0& 6) 0(025< &$5( 68,7( 6) 0& 6833257 $5($ 6) 67$)) $5($ ',1,1* /,9,1* 6(&85(' 0(025< &$5( &2857<$5' .,7&+(1 0(025< &$5( (175$1&(  5(7$,1,1*:$// 5(7$,1,1*:$// (/(9$725 3,7$%29( *$5$*( )/225        020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ *$5$*( )/2253/$1-XO\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(  *$5$*()/225 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 3257( &2&+(5( 6) .,7&+(1 )$0,/< ',1,1* 50 6) ',1,1* 5220 6) 81,71 6) 81,71 6) 81,7;6) 81,7' 6) 81,7& 6) 81,7$ 6) 81,7'6) 81,7$ 6) 81,7$ +($57+ 5220 6) ,17(51(7 %,6752 &$)( 6) :(//1(66 &(17(5 6) $'0,1,675$7,9( &21)(5(1&( 5220 6) %5($. 5220 6) &/,1,& 6) 81,7( 6) 81,7$ /2%%< 0$,/ $&&(6672 &20081,7<*$5'(16 6) +286( .((3,1* 2)),&( 2)),&( 2)),&( 67$,5 67$,5 67$,5 5(&(37,21 6) %8,/',1* (1*,1((5 '(021675$7,21 .,7&+(1 6) 81,7$ 6) 81,7& 6) 81,7) 6) +286( .((3,1* " " 6) 63(&,$/ &$5( 68,7( 6) 6& 6) 6& 6) 6& 6) 6& 6) 6& 2)),&( 6) 81,7$ 6) 67$)) $5($ 6) 6& 6833257 $5($ ',1,1*$5($ /,9,1*$5($  $  $  $  $  $ (/(9$725 81,6(; $    $ $ $     $     $          $ 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ ),567)/225 3/$1-XO\,VVXH'DWH81,70,;%<7<3( %('   %('   0(025<&$5(5220   63(&,$/&$5(81,7   678',2   *UDQGWRWDO   *5266%8,/',1*$5($%<)/225 /2:(5/(9(/ 6) 67)/225 6) 1')/225 6) 5')/225 6) 727$/*5266%8,/',1*$5($ 6) 6&$/(  67)/225 83 83 83 83 83  $  $  $  $  $ 6) 81,77 6) 81,77 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,75 6) 81,7+ 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7' 6) 81,76 6) 81,7( " " 6) 81,7* 6) +286( .((3,1* 6) 81,7& 6) 81,7( 6) 81,7/ 6) 6725$*( 23(172 %(/2: 6.<:$< &211(&7,21 75$16)(56 '2:17267 )/225 12 $&&(66721' )/225:,7+287 &5('(17,$/6 67$,5 75$6+ 67$,5 67$,5 /,%5$5< &20081,7< /,9,1*$5($ 6) 81,74 6) 81,73 6) 81,7( 6) 6725$*( 6) 81,7- 6) 67$)) $5($ 6) 81,7& 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7. 6.<:$< /2%%< (/(9$725     $     $     $  $   $  $  $    $ 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ 6(&21' )/2253/$1-XO\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(  1')/225  $  $  $  $  $ 6) 81,77 6) 81,77 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7& 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,75 6) 81,7+ 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7' 6) 81,7' 6) 08/7,385326( 5220 &+$3(/ 6) 81,7* 6) 81,74 6) 67$)) $5($ 6) +286(.((3,1* 6) 81,76 6) 81,7( 6) 81,7% 6) 81,70 6) 81,7/ 6) 81,7% 6) 81,7( 6) 81,73 6) 6725$*( 67$,5 67$,5 67$,5 75$6+ 681'(&. 6) &20081,7< /,9,1*$5($ 6) 81,7( 6) 6725$*( 6) 81,7- 6) 38% (/(9$725 29(5581 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ 7+,5')/225 3/$1-XO\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(  7+,5')/225 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   /2:(5/(9(/*$5$*( (175<(;,7 5(7$,1,1*:$// 9,1</:,1'2: 678&&2 6+,1*/('522) 6721( 3257(&2&+(5(6721( 0$6215< 678&&2 /$36,',1* &$676721(&$3 6,// 6.<:$< &211(&7,21 67$,5(*5(66(;,7   :$//6,*1$*(6) 6)29(5$//:$//$5($  6)$//2:('3(56(&7,21E     67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   $/80,1806725()5217 (175< 6721( 0$6215<%$6( 6+,1*/('522) 35(),1,6+('0(7$/ *8$5'5$,/ $/80,1806725()5217 #522)3$7,2 3(5*2/$ 678&&2 0$6215< 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   6.<:$<&211(&7,21 /2:(5/(9(/*$5$*( (175<(;,7 5(7$,1,1*:$//0$6215<5(&(,9,1* 75$6+5220$&&(66 /$36,',1* 6721( 678&&2 9,1</:,1'2:6 6721( 6+,1*/('522) &$676721(&$3 6,// 35(),1,6+('0(7$/%$/&21,(6   (;7(5,25),1,6+3(5&(17$*(6 0$6215< 6721( ),%(5&(0(17/$36,',1* 678&&2 */$=,1*23(1,1*6 6) 6) 6) 6) 6)      6) 727$/ $9(5$*(522)+(,*+7)520$'-$&(17*5$'(    3(5&(17$*(2)%$6(0(17/(9(/81'(5*5281'        '<1$0,&',63/$< 64)7 ,17(51$//< ,//80,1$7('6,*1 3$1(/6 64)7 &$676721( 35(&$67&$3 0$6215< 35(&$67&$3   $///,*+7,1*$662&,$7(' :,7+6,*1$*(6+$// &21)2507225',1$1&( 6(&7,21 7+('<1$0,&',63/$< 6+$//&21)25072 25',1$1&(6(&7,21 68%'     ,17(51$//< ,//80,1$7(' 6,*13$1(/ 64)7 &$676721( 35(&$67&$3 0$6215< 35(&$67&$3 $///,*+7,1*$662&,$7(' :,7+6,*1$*(6+$// &21)2507225',1$1&( 6(&7,21 ,17(51$//< ,//80,1$7('6,*1 3$1(/64)7 &$676721( 35(&$67&$3 0$6215< 35(&$67&$3 $///,*+7,1*$662&,$7(' :,7+6,*1$*(6+$// &21)2507225',1$1&( 6(&7,21 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ (;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216-XO\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(  35(6(17$7,216287+(/(9$7,21 6&$/(  35(6(17$7,21 0$,1(175<(/(9$7,21 6&$/(  35(6(17$7,21 ($67(/(9$7,21 6&$/(  3</216,*1 $  /27 6&$/(  3</216,*1 %  /27 6&$/(  02180(176,*1 &  /27 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   6(&85('0(025<&$5(&2857<$5'67$,5(*5(66(;,70$6215< 6721( 6+,1*/('522)678&&2 /$36,',1* 5(7$,1,1*:$// 35(),1,6+('0(7$/*8$5'5$,/ 678&&2 /$36,',1*6721( 9,1</:,1'2:6   67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   6+,1*/('522) 6721( 35(),1,6+('0(7$/%$/&21,(6 3257(&2&+( 0$,1(175$1&( 522)3$7,23(5*2/$ 35(),1,6+('0(7$/*8$5'5$,/ 9,1</:,1'2:6 &$676721(&$3 6,// 6721( 35(),1,6+('0(7$/*8$5'5$,/ 5(7$,1,1*:$// 678&&2 /$36,',1* 678&&2 0$6215< 6(&85('0(025<&$5(&2857<$5'   :$//6,*1$*(6) 6)29(5$//:$//$5($  6)$//2:('3(56(&7,21E   020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ (;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216-XO\,VVXH'DWH6&$/(  35(6(17$7,21 1257+(/(9$7,21 6&$/(  35(6(17$7,21 :(67(/(9$7,21  6) *$5$*( 6) 6(59,&(67$,5 67$,5 (/(9$725 (/(9$725 87,/,7,(6 6) /(9(/ 67$,5 67$,56.<:$<$%29(6) /(9(/ 67$,5 67$,5 522)723 3$7,26.<:$<$&&(66522) 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(:1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD0HGLFDO2IILFH%XLOGLQJ0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ )/2253/$16-XQH,VVXH'DWH6&$/ (    *$5$*(/(9(/ 6&$/ (    ),567)/2253/$1 6&$/ (    1')/225 *5266%8,/',1*$5($%<)/225 *$5$*(/(9(/ 6) 67)/225 6) 1')/225 6) *UDQGWRWDO 6) *$5$*(3$5.,1* *$5$*(/(9(/  *UDQGWRWDO  67)/225  5RRI   *$5$*(/(9(/   1')/225   6.<:$<&211(&7,21 0$6215< $/80,1806725()52170$,1(175< 35(),1,6+('0(7$/&20326,7(3$1(/ $5&+,7(&785$/:22'9(1((5 0$6215< 678&&2 &20326,7(0(7$/3$1(/ 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   67)/225  5RRI   *$5$*(/(9(/   1')/225   0$6215< 678&&2&20326,7(0(7$/3$1(/ 0$6215< $/80,180 6725()5217 /2:(5/(9(/*$5$*($&&(66 67$,5(*5(66(;,7 6(59,&($&&(66 $/80,180:,1'2:6 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   67)/225  5RRI   1')/225   &20326,7(0(7$/3$1(/ 678&&2 0$6215< &$676721( $5&+,7(&785$/:22' 9(1((5 $/80,180:,1'2:6 6.<:$<&211(&7,21 $/80,1806725()5217 0$,1(175<   :$//6,*1$*(6) 6):$//$5($  6)$//2:('3(56(&7,21E 67)/225  5RRI   *$5$*(/(9(/   1')/225   &20326,7(0(7$/3$1(/ 678&&2 0$6215< &$676721( $5&+,7(&785$/:22' 9(1((5 $/80,180:,1'2:6 (;7(5,25'(&.*8$5'5$,/ &20326,7(0(7$/ 3$1(/ 0$6215< &$676721(   :$//6,*1$*(6) :$//$5($ 6)  6)$//2:('3(56(&7,21E 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   (;7(5,25),1,6+3(5&(17$*(6 0$6215< $5&+:22'9(1((5 678&&2 6) 6) 6)    6) 727$/ */$=,1*23(1,1*6 6)  $9(5$*(522)+(,*+7)520$'-$&(17*5$'(    67)/225  5RRI   *$5$*(/(9(/   1')/225     6):$//6,*1$*(  6)$//2:('7+,6:$// 67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   /2:(5/(9(/   67)/225  5RRI   1')/225   6):$//6,*1$*( 6)$//2:('7+,6 :$//   67)/225  1')/225   5')/225   522)   020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(:1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD0HGLFDO2IILFH%XLOGLQJ0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ (;7(5,25 (/(9$7,216-XQH,VVXH'DWH6&$/ (   1257+:(67(/(9$7,21 6&$/ (   6287+($67(/(9$7,21 6&$/ (   :(67(/(9$7,21 )5217(175$1&( 6&$/ (   6287+(/(9$7,21 +,*+:$<(;32685( 6&$/ (   6287+($67'(7$,/(/(9$7,21 6&$/ (   6287+:(67'(7$,/(/(9$7,21 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ (;7(5,25 3(563(&7,9(6-XO\,VVXH'DWH3(563(&7,9(6287+9,(:)520+,*+:$< 3(563(&7,9(6287+($679,(:)520+,*+:$< 020(1780'(6,*1*5283//&'DWH3URMHFW$UFKLWHFW3HUPLW6XEPLW'DWH3URMHFW1XPEHU&+6,7(3/$15(9,(: -8/< 1RUWK+DPSGHQ$YHQXH 6W3DXO0LQQHVRWD 0HGLQD6HQLRU/LYLQJ&RPPXQLW\0HGLQD0LQQHVRWD$ (;7(5,25 3(563(&7,9(6-XO\,VVXH'DWH3(563(&7,9(6(1,25%8,/',1*0$,1(175< 3(563(&7,9(1257+9,(:)520&+,33(:$52$' Ordinance – Closed Landfill Restricted Page 1 of 4 August 8, 2017 and Closed Landfill Area of Concern Planning Commission Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: August 3, 2017 MEETING: August 8, 2017 Planning Commission SUBJ: Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Amendment – Closed Landfill-Restricted and Closed Landfill Area of Concern Districts Background The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) operates the Woodlake Landfill in the western portion of the City as part of its Closed Landfill Program. The Landfill is located north of Hamel Road and west of Tomahawk Trail. Waste has not been accepted at the landfill since 1993 and the MPCA began management in 2000. A fuller summary of the history of the Landfill can be found in the attached Closed Landfill Land Use Plan from the MPCA. Minnesota state law requires that the local municipality enact land use and zoning regulations which are consistent with the Closed Landfill Use Plan established by the MPCA for the Landfill. In addition to regulating the use on the landfill property, the Woodlake Landfill Plan identifies a Groundwater Area of Concern and Methane Gas Area of Concern which extend off of the Woodlake Landfill site and onto neighboring properties. In addition to guiding the requirements the City must set on the Woodlake Landfill, the state of Minnesota also requires that the City incorporate information about the Groundwater Area of Concern and Methane Gas Area of Concern. The attached ordinance is intended to meet these state requirements. The Woodlake Closed Landfill Use Plan from the MPCA is also attached for reference. The MPCA recommends that the City enact an overlay district or setback for property within the Methane Gas Area of Concern. Methane gas controls are in place in Woodlake Landfill, but if these measures fail, there is a chance that methane gas may migrate into the Methane Gas Area of Concern. Methane gas can become explosive in confined spaces such as basements when mixed in air. The Land Management Director from the MPCA has indicated that he intends to be present at the hearing to answer any questions. Ordinance Summary The attached ordinance includes three primary sections. The first section deletes the existing regulations for and Sanitary Landfill District, which were in place back when an active landfill was permitted on the property. The second section establishes the Closed Landfill-Restricted (CLR) zoning district and applies regulations to the Woodlake Landfill. The third section of the ordinance creates a Closed Landfill Area of Concern (CLAOC) overlay district which is proposed to apply to property onto which the Woodlake Landfill Groundwater Area of Concern (GWAOC) or Methane Gas Area of Concern (MGAOC) extends. Ordinance – Closed Landfill Restricted Page 2 of 4 August 8, 2017 and Closed Landfill Area of Concern Planning Commission Meeting CL-R – Closed Landfill-Restricted District. The second section of the ordinance creates regulations for the Closed Landfill-Restricted (CLR) to apply to the Woodlake Landfill site. The ordinance utilizes the MPCA’s template ordinance, which is meant to address the mandates within the Land Use Plan for the Landfill. The only permitted use within the CLR district are the management of the closed landfill. Solar equipment is permitted through a Conditional Use Permit. These uses are identified by the MPCA in the land use plan. The draft ordinance establishes setback and design standards which are consistent with the Rural Public/Semi-Public zoning district. Staff believes these standards provided a good framework since they are intended to apply to quasi-commercial operations within the rural area. CL-AOC – Closed Landfill-Area of Concern Overlay District The third section of the ordinance creates an overlay district intended to provide notification to property owners of the information available related to the Areas of Concern. The current draft includes an entire parcel within the CL-AOC if either the MGAOC or GWAOC extend onto the property. State law requires that “a local government unit…shall incorporate [information received from the MPCA related to the Closed Landfill] in any land use plan that includes the affected property and shall notify any person who applies for a permit related to development of the affected property of the existence of the information and, on request, provide a copy of the information.” City staff believes an Overlay District is a good means to incorporate this requirement into the City’s land use plan as required by law. As proposed, the CL-AOC Overlay District would largely serve as a notification for property owners. The district would not include any special requirements, so all requirements of the underlying zoning district (almost all properties are zoned Rural Residential) would apply. The MPCA recommends that the City consider an increased setback for properties adjacent to the Landfill that would prohibit the construction of structures within the Methane Gas Area of Concern. The MPCA has identified the area within 200 feet of the buried waste on the landfill within the MGAOC. The MPCA’s Use Plan states: “The MGAOC is defined as the area of land surrounding a landfill waste footprint where the presence of certain activities, such as construction of enclosed structures, may be impacted or precluded by subsurface migration of methane gas. Methane gas is an odorless gas produced when municipal solid waste decomposes, and can be explosive in confined spaces such as basements when mixed in air. The MGAOC is used to inform the public about the risks to current and future land owners regarding certain uses they may want to consider. A portion of the MGAOC extends off the [Landfill] on to adjacent property to the north… Currently, methane gas is controlled at the Landfill but migration of methane off the property is possible, especially under frozen conditions and if the active gas extraction system were to unforeseeably shut down.” The map at the top of the follow page shows the MPCA’s MGAOC in yellow. Setback language is included in the CL-AOC district language for discussion purposes. As drafted, this setback would be 175 feet from the perimeter of the Woodlake Landfill property. Ordinance – Closed Landfill Restricted Page 3 of 4 August 8, 2017 and Closed Landfill Area of Concern Planning Commission Meeting The City Attorney has questioned whether it was the best course of action for the City to enforce a set back on behalf of the MPCA. If the Planning Commission and City Council support a setback to prevent construction within the MGAOC, the City could also discuss whether the setback should apply to the entire Woodlake Landfill property line, or only the portion which is adjacent to the MGAOC. For example, the City could apply the setback only to the property lines highlighted in green to the right. This setback, in connection with the standard setbacks of the rural residential zoning district, would effectively prohibit construction of structures within the MGAOC without adding an increased setback for much of the property surrounding the Landfill. Policy Discussion The City’s discretion within the ordinance is somewhat limited in order to be consistent with the Closed Landfill Use Plan and state law. The uses permitted on the Landfill property are described by the state. The City does have more discretion on the design and development standards (setbacks, height, etc.) and staff believes using similar regulations as the Rural Public/Semi-Public zoning district was reasonable. The City is required by law to incorporate information related to the Groundwater Area of Concern and Methane Gas Area of Concern into our land use controls. The City has discretion on how this is accomplished. The MPCA also recommends that the City consider a setback in order to prohibit construction within the Methane Gas Area of Concern. In addition to other matters within the ordinance which may be of interest to Commissioners or Council members, staff suggests discussion on the followings items. Extent of the Closed Landfill-Area of Concern Overlay District As noted above, staff believes the overlay district provides a clear means by which to incorporate the Use Plan and information regarding the MGAOC and GWAOC. If the Planning Commission and Council concur, the City would still need to decide how broad of an area should be covered by the CL-AOC overlay district. Staff sees the following options: • Map entire parcel within the CL-AOC overlay district if either the MGAOC or GWAOC is located on property – The MPCA has stated that the MGAOC or GWAOC may need to be adjusted over time. Mapping an entire parcel within the CL-AOC reduces the chance that a future change by the MPCA will necessitate the City needing to amend the zoning district. Property owners have raised concerns that a larger CL-AOC will raise more Ordinance – Closed Landfill Restricted Page 4 of 4 August 8, 2017 and Closed Landfill Area of Concern Planning Commission Meeting concern when they attempt to sell their properties beyond the concerns identified by the MPCA. • District boundaries match the area covered by MGAOC or GWAOC. The City could match the CL-AOC to the mapped GWAOC. Staff is concerned that doing so may lead to the need to amend the district boundaries in the future when the MPCA adjusts the MGAOC or GWAOC. • Boundary cover an area with a small buffer (perhaps 50 or 100 feet) beyond the MGAOC or GWAOC. This could be a “compromise” between mapping the entire parcel vs. only mapping today’s MGAOC and GWAOC. If the City includes a bit of a buffer, future changes may not necessitate changes to the overlay district. Required Setback on adjoining property The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss whether the City will require increased setbacks on adjoining properties from the Woodlake Landfill property. Staff summarized this discussion above, but some options appear to be: • Do not include increased setback requirement; Provide notification only • Require setback on two portions or property line adjacent to the waste footprint which cover the Methane Gas Area of Concern. • Require a setback around all portions of the Landfill property. Potential Actions Staff provided notice for a public hearing on the proposed ordinance amendment and rezoning for the August 8 Planning Commission meeting. In addition to the ordinance containing the regulations for the CLR and CL-AOC district, staff has also attached ordinances which would rezone the Woodlake Landfill property into the CLR zoning district and also map property into the CL-AOC Overlay District. Depending on the feedback from the Planning Commission, the CL-AOC ordinance can be adjusted with the recommended boundaries. Following the hearing, staff would recommend that the Commission discuss the items above along with any other matters of interest or items which are presented at the hearing. Following review, the following actions may be in order: 1. Motion to recommend approval of the Ordinance Regarding Regulations of the Closed Landfill-Restricted Zoning District and the Closed Landfill Area of Concern Overlay District 2. Motion to recommend approval of the Ordinance Rezoning Woodlake Landfill to the Closed Landfill-Restricted Zoning District 3. Motion to recommend approval of the Ordinance mapping property into the Closed Landfill-Area of Concern Overlay District. Attachments 1. Map Identifying Property to be rezoned to CLR and potential CL-AOC Overlay District 2. Draft Ordinance regarding the CLR and CL-AOC Districts 3. Draft Ordinance rezoning property to the CLR zoning district 4. Draft Ordinance zoning property into the CL-AOC overlay district 5. Woodlake Landfill Closed Landfill Land Use Plan (from MPCA) HAMEL HIGH WAY 5 5 PIONEER COUNTY ROAD 19TOMAHAWKTOWNLINEPARKVIEWCOUNTY RO AD 24 CHIPPEWA LEAWOODWILLOWLAKE SHORE SHIRE MAPLE COUNTY ROAD 11 WA LN U T PINE APACHEBOYERCOVEYWICHITACOUNTY ROAD 19WILLOWIndependence Peter Unnamed Spurzem Half Moon Winterhalter School Ardmore Unnamed Unnamed Proposed RezoningClosed Landfill-Restricted and PotentialClosed Landfill Area of ConcernOverlay District Legend Proposed Rezoning - Closed Landfill-Restricted Potential Closed Landfill AOC Overlay District Map Date: July 27, 2017 0 0.5 10.25 Miles WoodlakeLandfill Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE REGARDING REGULATIONS OF THE CLOSED LANDFILL-RESTRICTED (F.K.A SANITARY LANDFILL) ZONING DISTRICT AND THE CLOSED LANDFILL AREA OF CONCERN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 827.09 et. Seq. of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by deleting the existing stricken language in its entirety. SANITARY LANDFILL ZONING DISTRICT (SL) Section 827.09. Sanitary Landfill - Purpose. The Sanitary Landfill (SL) District is an area exclusively established to accommodate the use of land for the development and operation of sanitary landfills. Since this type of land use is so unique to the ecological setting of Medina and the provision of public services such as transportation so demanding, a special district delineation is called for. Within any district zoned SL in Medina, an extensive set of performance standards must be met through the application of a conditional use permit. Section 827.11. Conditional Use - Sanitary Landfills. Within the Sanitary Landfill District, no landfill shall be established or operated without a Conditional Use Permit. Said Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for a one year period, after which a permit renewal shall be required. The City Council may also require a performance bond, cash escrow, or letter of credit from the landowner or operator, to guarantee conformance with these regulations. Section 827.13. Information Required. The following information shall be provided by the persons requesting the permit: Subd. 1. Name and address of person requesting the permit. Subd. 2. The exact legal property description and acreage of area to be used. Subd. 3. The following maps of the entire site and to include all areas within five hundred (500) feet of the site. All maps shall be drawn at a scale of one (1) inch to one hundred (100) feet unless otherwise stated below: (a) Map A - Existing conditions to include: Contour lines at five (5) foot intervals. Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE Existing vegetation. Existing drainage and permanent water areas. Existing structures. Existing wells. Existing roadways and easements. (b) Map B - Proposed operations to include: Structures to be erected. Location of earthwork and fill operation to be mined showing depth of proposed excavation. Location of refuse disposal deposits showing maximum height of deposits. Location of machinery to be used in the mining operation. Location of storage of mined materials, showing height of storage deposits. Location of vehicle parking. Location of storage of explosives. Erosion and sediment control structures. Location of proposed roadways and easements. Type and capacity of equipment to be used. (c) Map C - End use plan to include: Final grade of proposed site showing elevations and contour lines at five (5) foot intervals. Location and species of vegetation to be replanted. Location and nature of any structures to be erected in relation to the end use plan. Subd. 4. A soil erosion and sediment control plan. Subd. 5. A plan for dust and noise control. Subd. 6. A full and adequate description of all phases of the proposed operation to include an estimate of duration of the operation. Subd. 7. A plan for fire nuisance and vermin control. Subd. 8. Any other information requested by the Planning Commission or City Council Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE Subd. 9. Estimated daily or weekly volume of garbage and other waste. Subd. 10. A plan or the submittal of assurances to the City from private or public sources satisfactorily addressing the issue of long term liability after landfill closure for the monitoring and protection of environmental quality. Subd. 11. A plan or submittal of assurances to the City from private or public sources satisfactorily addressing the issue of long term roadway maintenance during the operations tenure on those routes providing primary landfill site access. Section 827.15. Renewal of Permits. All property owners and residents with one thousand (1000) feet of the operation shall be notified of the annual conditional permit renewal request. Section 827.17. Use Restriction. The following regulations shall be observed by any person to whom a permit is issued by the City for the operation of a sanitary landfill. These regulations shall govern the operation of all City approved sanitary landfills and any failure to observe these regulations shall be sufficient grounds for the revocation of the permit by the Council. Subd. 1. All garbage and other refuse accepted by the landfill permit holder shall be thoroughly compacted by equipment of a size and weight capable of producing a downward or ground pressure of at least five (5) pounds per square inch. Such equipment shall have sufficient weight and capacity to carry out all necessary operations to the satisfaction of the enforcement officer. Sufficient auxiliary equipment shall be maintained on the site or otherwise available to permit operation in case of a breakdown. Subd. 2. Mixed refuse material shall be spread out on the working face of the landfill so that the depth does not exceed a maximum depth of two (2') feet prior to its compaction. Subd. 3. The areas shall be continually policed to prevent fire and the blowing of papers; shall be neat and sanitary at all times, and shall be covered at the end of each day's operation, as well as when wind conditions warrant it through the day, with sufficient material to prevent blowing papers and unsightly conditions. The size of the active face on which refuse is being currently deposited shall be kept to a minimum. Subd. 4. Cover material will consist of earth, loam, clay, sand or a mixture of at least fifty percent (50%) earth and other inert materials, such as ashes, cinders or gravel. A minimum depth of twelve inches (12") of compacted cover and final spread cover material shall be kept on all inactive faces of the landfill at all times. The active faces of the landfills should be covered at the end of each day's operation, or as otherwise directed by the Administrator. Subd. 5. When the landfill has been brought up to two feet (2') below the desired finished grade, it shall be covered with at least twenty-four inches (24") of compacted cover material graded and seeded in such a manner as to prevent erosion. Subd. 6. Where the "trench system" of sanitary landfill is used, successive parallel trenches Ordinance No. ### 4 DATE must be at least two feet (2') apart. Subd. 7. All garbage and refuse material existing on the site at the time the permit is issued either in the form of an open dump or any other form, shall be collected, compacted, and covered with cover material at least one foot (1') in depth if below the desired finished grade, or with inert material at least two feet (2') in depth at the finished grade. This cover operation shall be completed within fifteen (15) working days after the issuance of a special permit for the sanitary landfill. Subd. 8. The permittee or operator shall erect such temporary or permanent fences or take other measures as may be necessary to reasonably control blowing of paper and other materials from the landfill. Subd. 9. Any material salvaged from the landfill must be handled and stored in such a manner as to prevent rodent harborage and permit proper operation of the landfill. Such salvaged material must be removed to a location at least two hundred feet (200') from the working surface so as not to interfere with the compacting and covering. All salvaged material must be completely removed from the site every twenty-four (24) hours unless provision is made for temporary storage within an enclosed, roofed and rodent-proof structure approved by the Administrator. Subd. 10. Burning of any materials deposited in a landfill is expressly prohibited. Subd. 11. Adequate fire fighting equipment shall be available at all times on the site or the operator shall furnish the Inspector with proof of a fire fighting agreement between the operator and the local fire district. Subd. 12. No fill shall be placed in streambeds or other areas where streams would be obstructed or where erosion by the stream would remove cover material. There shall be no seepage or drainage of any material from the fill of such a nature as would constitute an odor nuisance, or health hazard, or pollute any water course. Subd. 13. The permit holder shall provide an access road, approved by the Administrator that is passable in all types of weather conditions to the dumping site. Subd. 14. The license holder shall also provide an auxiliary fill site available and ready for use during periods of heavy rain or snowfall, and when the area being filled and covered may not be reached because of said weather conditions. The permit holder shall also take precautions to eliminate excess dust in dry weather. Subd. 15. Insects and rodents on the site shall be controlled and exterminated as directed by the Inspector. Subd. 16. The permit holder shall cease operations and close the landfill between the hours of seven o'clock (7:00) p.m. and six o'clock (6:00) a.m. and on Sundays and holidays. Ordinance No. ### 5 DATE Subd. 17. All those provisions of Section 735, Mining and Land Rehabilitation, shall be followed in the development, operation and restoration of a sanitary landfill use. Section 827.19. Total Area Limitation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Section, no permit shall be issued and no rezoning applications shall be approved for the construction or operation of sanitary landfills or the expansion or modification of such facilities if the amount of land comprising the proposed, expanded or modified landfill when added to land comprising all other existing and closed landfills, whether or not operated under permit from the City, shall exceed one hundred ninety (190) acres. In calculating the amount of land in such landfills, all of the following shall be included: Subd. 1. All land which has actually been used for sanitary landfill purposes whether or not zoned for such use, and Subd. 2. All land either currently or previously zoned sanitary landfill (SL) including all wetlands, buffer acres, setback acres, internal roads and any other land in SL zones but not actually used for the placement of refuse. Section 827.20. Fees. Pursuant to Minn. Stat., Section 115A.921, the permit holder shall pay quarterly to the city a fee of fifteen (15) cents per cubic yard or equivalent weight of solid waste accepted and disposed of on the landfill site. The revenue derived from the fee shall be placed in the general fund for purposes of mitigating and compensating the city for the risks, costs, and other adverse affects of the sanitary landfill. Waste residue from energy and resource recovery facilities at which solid waste is processed for the purpose of extracting, reducing, converting to energy, or otherwise separating and preparing solid waste for reuse shall be exempt from one-half of the fee if there is at least an 85 percent volume reduction in the solid waste processed. Before any fee is reduced the verification procedures of Minn. Stat., Section 473.843, Subdivision 1, paragraph (c) must be followed and submitted to the Zoning Administrator. For the purposes of this section, six hundred (600) pounds of solid waste shall be considered the equivalent of one cubic yard. Section 827.21. Time Limitation. No rezoning shall be approved and no conditional use permit for sanitary landfill shall be granted for a period exceeding twelve (12) years. At the expiration of said period the zoning on the sanitary landfill site shall revert to its previous zoning classification or such other zoning classifications as may be determined by the City Council in the manner provided in this Code for rezoning of land. The applicant shall agree to the limitations provided in this section 827.21 by contract duly executed by authorized representatives of the applicant in a form satisfactory to the City Council. Section 827.23. Severability. Paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of Sections 827.09 through 827.23 inclusive are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this section shall be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not effect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections. Ordinance No. ### 6 DATE SECTION II. New Section 827.09 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is hereby added to replace the deleted language as follows: CLOSED LANDFILL-RESTRICTED (CLR) ZONING DISTRICT Section 827.09. Closed Landfill Restricted Subd. 1. Purpose. The Closed Landfill-Restricted (CLR) District is intended to apply to former landfills that are qualified to be under the Closed Landfill Program of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The purpose of the district is to limit uses of land within the closed landfill, both actively filled and related lands, to minimal uses in order to protect the land from human activity where response action systems are in place and, at the same time, are protective of human health and safety. This district shall only apply to the closed landfill’s Land Management Area, the limits of which are defined by the MPCA. This district shall apply whether the landfill is in public (MPCA, County, City, Township), Indian tribal, or private ownership. Subd. 2. Applicability. For purposes of this ordinance, the Land Management Area for the Woodlake Landfill, a qualified facility under the MPCA’s Closed Landfill Program, encompasses the whole Woodlake Landfill and is legally described as: That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as beginning at the southeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence northerly, along the east line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to a point distant 100.00 feet southerly from the northeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 96.00 feet westerly from said northeast corner; thence westerly, along said north line, to the northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence southerly along the west line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to the southwest corner of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence easterly, along the south line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to the place of beginning which lies westerly of the center line on Tomahawk Trail; and The North ½ of the West ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, subject to mineral reservations of record; and The South ½ of the West ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 8, Township 118, Range 23 subject to mineral reservations of record; and That part of the West ½ of the Northeast ¼ of Section 8, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said West ½; thence South along the West line of said West ½ distant 1830 feet to the center line of the Township road; thence bearing North 33 degrees 35 minutes East Ordinance No. ### 7 DATE from said West line 1000 feet along said center line; thence deflecting to the right 14 degrees 20 minutes along said center line 1036.4 feet to the East line of said West ½; thence North along said East line 290 feet to the North line of said West ½; thence West along said North line 1330 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO, the Southeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 5, Township 118, Range 23.; and The Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; and the Northwest ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; and the South ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼, except road; and the North ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; all in Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and ALSO the West 60 feet of Government Lot 1 (Southwest ¼), Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, lying North of Hamel, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Containing 194.1837 acres, more or less. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. The following use is permitted within the CLR District: Closed Landfill management. Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Accessory uses allowed in this district include outdoor equipment or small buildings used in concert with gas extraction systems, other response action systems, monitoring wells or any other equipment designed to protect, monitor or otherwise ensure the integrity of the landfill monitoring or improvement systems. Fences and gates shall apply under these provisions. Subd. 5. Conditional Uses. (a) The following conditional use is permitted within the CLR District: Solar Equipment, subject to the regulations described in Subd. 2 of City Code Section 828.09. (b) Conditional uses shall be limited to uses that do not damage the integrity of the Land Management Area and that continue to protect any person from hazards associated with the landfill. (c) Any application for a conditional use must be approved by the Commissioner of the MPCA and the City of Medina. Such approved use shall not disturb or threaten to disturb, the integrity of the landfill cover, liners, any other components of any containment system, the function of any monitoring system that exists upon the described property, or other areas of the Land Management Area that the Commissioner of the MPCA deems necessary for future response actions. Subd. 6. Prohibited Uses and Structures. All other uses and structures not specifically allowed as permitted uses, conditional uses, or that cannot be considered as accessory uses, shall be prohibited in the CLR District. Subd. 7. General Regulations. The following standards shall be observed, subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in the city code: (a) Minimum Yard Requirements Ordinance No. ### 8 DATE (i) Minimum Front Yard Setback: 75 feet (ii) Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 75 feet (iii) Minimum Side Yard Setback: 75 feet (b) Building Design (i) Maximum Building Height: Building height shall not exceed 35 feet. In the case that a structure is not equipped with a compliant fire sprinkler system, the maximum building height shall be 30 feet. (ii) Exterior Building Materials (1) Primary exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, fiber cement lap siding, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre-cast concrete panels. Decorative concrete shall be color impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and shall be patterned to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance. (2) A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or vinyl if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (3) Exterior materials shall not include galvanized/unfinished steel or galvalum/unfinished aluminum. (c) Outdoor Lighting. The preservation of natural darkness is a high priority within the rural area of the City. Lighting shall be limited to the amount necessary for public safety. Unless otherwise specified herein, outdoor lighting shall abide by the requirements specified in the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, Section 829. Lighting shall abide by the following requirements: (i) Lighting levels at property lines and 25 feet inside of the property lines shall be limited to 0.0 foot-candle. (ii) The City shall require active measures to be implemented to limit the intensity of lighting and also the amount of time which extensive lighting, such as parking lot lighting, is utilized. These measures may include, but are not limited to: shorter light poles, separately controlled lighting zones, lighting controls based on occupancy instead of timers, and lighting curfews. (iii) Parking and walkway lighting fixtures shall utilize full cut-off luminaries with no more than 10 percent of light output above the horizontal plane through the light source. (iv) Landscape and architectural lighting shall be aimed directly at the area of focus. Spill light shall be minimized through the use of narrow distribution luminaries and control devices such as louvers, refractors, barn doors, and glare shields. Subd. 8. Amendments. Any amendment to this ordinance must be approved by the Commissioner of the MPCA and the City of Medina. Ordinance No. ### 9 DATE SECTION III. New Section 827.11 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is hereby added to replace the deleted language as follows: CLOSED LANDFILL AREA OF CONCERN (CL-AOC) OVERLAY DISTRICT Section 827.11. Closed Landfill Area of Concern Overlay District Subd. 1. Purpose. The Closed Landfill Area of Concern (CL-AOC) Overlay District is intended to meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 4(b) in order to incorporate information into the City’s land use plan related to the Woodlake Landfill, which is operated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) under the Closed Landfill Program, and to incorporate information related to associated groundwater contamination and landfill gas migration. Subd. 2. Applicability and District Location. (a) The CL-AOC District is intended to apply to lands near the Woodlake Landfill which have been identified by the MPCA where: (1) the presence of activities that require the use of groundwater may be impacted or precluded by contamination from the landfill, or may cause the groundwater flow direction to change thereby impacting the user or others nearby; or (2) the presence of certain activities, such as construction of enclosed structures, may be impacted or precluded by subsurface migration of methane gas. (b) The CL-AOC District is an overlay district which applies to certain properties within the City in addition to the standard zoning regulations which may apply. All requirements, including allowed uses, yard setbacks, and development standards of the underlying zoning district shall apply except as explicitly modified by the requirements of the CL-AOC Overlay District. (c) The CL-AOC District shall apply to all parcels of land in the City which are fully or partially encompassed by either the Groundwater Area of Concern (GWAOC) or the Methane Gas Area of Concern (MGAOC) as identified by the MPCA in the Woodlake Closed Landfill Use Plan. These parcels include all parcels which are abutting or across the street from the Woodlake Landfill and also extends to approximately 1500 feet northeast of the Landfill and 350 feet to the south to encompass some property which does not abut the Landfill (d) The Zoning Administrator shall keep a map of the properties which are encompassed within the CL-AOC overlay district. Such map may need to be amended from time to time based on the direction of the MPCA. Such amendment shall follow the same procedure as zoning amendments. Subd. 3. Notification and Provision of Information. (a) The Zoning Administrator shall notify persons applying for a permit to develop property within the CL-AOC of the existence of information about the Woodlake Landfill and associated groundwater contamination and landfill gas migration. (b) The Zoning Administrator shall provide copies of such information upon request. Ordinance No. ### 10 DATE Subd. 4. Minimum Structure Setback (optional provision for discussion). In order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to reduce the potential explosion risk of migrated methane gas from Woodlake Landfill, the required yard setback for all buildings and structures within the CL-AOC district shall be increased to a minimum of 175 feet from the Woodlake Landfill, which is legally described in Subd. 2 of City Code Section 827.09. SECTION IV. Sections 827.13 through 827.23 of the code of ordinances of the City of Medina are hereby reserved for potential future use as follows: Section 827.13 – 827.23. RESERVED SECTION V. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this ____ day of _____, 2017. ______________________________ Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: ___________________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on the _____ day of __________, 2017. Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REZONE WOODLAKE LANDFILL TO CLOSED LANDFILL-RESTRICTED THE CITY COUNCIL OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The official zoning map of the City of Medina is hereby amended to change the zoning classification of the following legally described property from SL, Sanitary Landfill to CLR, Closed Landfill-Restricted as displayed on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A: That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as beginning at the southeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence northerly, along the east line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to a point distant 100.00 feet southerly from the northeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 96.00 feet westerly from said northeast corner; thence westerly, along said north line, to the northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence southerly along the west line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to the southwest corner of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence easterly, along the south line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to the place of beginning which lies westerly of the center line on Tomahawk Trail; and The North ½ of the West ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, subject to mineral reservations of record; and The South ½ of the West ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 8, Township 118, Range 23 subject to mineral reservations of record; and That part of the West ½ of the Northeast ¼ of Section 8, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said West ½; thence South along the West line of said West ½ distant 1830 feet to the center line of the Township road; thence bearing North 33 degrees 35 minutes East from said West line 1000 feet along said center line; thence deflecting to the right 14 degrees 20 minutes along said center line 1036.4 feet to the East line of said West ½; thence North along said East line 290 feet to the North line of said West ½; thence West along said North line 1330 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO, the Southeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 5, Township 118, Range 23.; and Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE The Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; and the Northwest ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; and the South ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼, except road; and the North ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼; all in Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and ALSO the West 60 feet of Government Lot 1 (Southwest ¼), Section 8, Township 118, Range 23, lying North of Hamel, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Containing 194.1837 acres, more or less. Section 2. The City of Medina Zoning Administrator is hereby directed to publish the ordinance and make the changes to the official zoning map of the City of Medina to reflect the change in zoning classification. Section 3. A copy of this Ordinance and the updated map shall be kept on file at the Medina City Hall. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. Adopted by the Medina City Council this _____ day of ______ 2017. CITY OF MEDINA By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on this ______day of ___________, 2017. Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE EXHIBIT A Map Displaying Property Rezoned to Closed Landfill-Restricted LOCATION OF WOODLAKE LANDFILL (PROPERTY TO BE REZONED TO CLR) Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING CERTAIN PROPERTY INTO THE CLOSED LANDFILL-AREA OF CONCERN OVERLAY DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The property within the City of Medina identified on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby designated as part of the Closed Landfill-Area of Concern (CL-AOC) Overlay District as described in the City of Medina Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City of Medina Zoning Administrator is hereby directed to publish the ordinance and make the changes to the official zoning map of the City of Medina to reflect this designation. Section 3. A copy of this Ordinance and the updated map shall be kept on file at the Medina City Hall. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. Adopted by the Medina City Council this _____ day of ______ 2017. CITY OF MEDINA By: Bob Mitchell, Mayor Attest: By: Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on this ______day of ___________, 2017. Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE EXHIBIT A Map Displaying Property Rezoned to Closed Landfill-Area of Concern FINAL CLOSED LANDFILL USE PLAN WOODLAKE LANDFILL MAY 20, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 2 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE GAS AREAS OF CONCERN ....................................................................... 2 CURRENT ZONING FOR THE LMA ................................................................................................................ 3 STATE BOND FINANCED PROPERTY ............................................................................................................ 4 MPCA’S LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA ...................................................................................................... 4 DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................... 5 DISCLAIMER ................................................................................................................................................ 6 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: MINN. STAT. §§ 115B.412, SUBD. 4 AND 9 APPENDIX B: SITE LOCATION MAP – WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX C: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX D: GWAOC – CLP GROUNDWATER AREA OF CONCERN - WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX E: MGAOC – CLP METHANE GAS AREA OF CONCERN – WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX F: CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT USE – WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX G: SOLAR ENERGY FARM USE – WOODLAKE LANDFILL APPENDIX H: CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED ZONING ORDINANCE TEMPLATE 1 CLOSED LANDFILL USE PLAN WOODLAKE LANDFILL INTRODUCTION In 1994, the Minnesota Legislature adopted the Landfill Cleanup Act (LCA) (Minn. Stat. 115B.39 - 115B.45) which created the Closed Landfill Program (CLP). Under the CLP, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is responsible for the cleanup and long term care of 112 closed, municipal, solid waste landfills throughout the State. The mission of the CLP is to manage the risk to public health and the environment that is associated with these landfills. Landfill gas migration and groundwater contamination can be serious issues at some landfills. These problems can pose a threat to the health and safety of those l iving or occupying land nearby. In addition, chemicals leaching from landfills can degrade groundwater and surface water resources surrounding them. The MPCA addresses the risk to public health and the environment at the closed landfills by undertaking cleanup actions, operating and maintaining remediation systems (engineered covers, gas-collection and groundwater-treatment systems) and by monitoring groundwater, surface water, and landfill gas. The risk to public health and safety is also mitigated by im plementing land-use controls that minimize public exposure to landfill hazards and protect the state’s response action equipment. In other words, future use of land at and around closed landfills needs to be planned carefully and responsibly. Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 9 of the LCA requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for each of these landfills and for local government units (LGUs) to make their local land use plans consistent with the MPCA’s plan for the site. Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 4 requires the MPCA to provide LGUs certain information about the landfill and for LGUs to incorporate this information in to their local land use planning. These statutes are provided in Appendix A. The MPCA considers these statutory requirements, when put together, as a Closed Landfill Use Plan (CLUP). The purpose, then, for preparing a CLUP for each landfill is to:  protect the integrity of the landfill’s remediation and monitoring systems;  protect human health and public safety at each landfil l; and  accommodate local government needs and desires for land use at the qualified facility with consideration for health and safety requirements. To meet the requirements of subdivision 9 of the statute, LGUs that have land -use authority must make their land-use plans for the landfill consistent with the MPCA’s plan for future use of, and obligations for, the facility. One way to accomplish this is for LGUs to make certain that their land -use designations and/or zoning ordinances are compatible with the MPCA’s future responsibilities and uses for the Land Management Area. To meet the requirements of subdivision 4 of the statute, LGUs must consider the information about the landfill’s contamination and methane gas migration in its land -use planning and also make this information available to those that want to develop the affected property. Also, LGUs may wish to adopt certain land-use controls in order to better protect public health and safety. 2 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Woodlake Landfill is located in the City of Medina, Hennepin County, Minnesota . A landfill’s Land Management Area (LMA) includes the property described in the Landfill Cleanup Agreement between the MPCA and the landfill owner/operator, and may include adjacent property that contains waste, adjacent buffer property (land acquired for the purpose of restricting use by the public due to landfill gas or groundwater concerns), and adjacent property where response action equipment is located. At a minimum, the LMA will be comprised of the property in the Landfill Cleanup Agreement. In addition, the LMA is the property that is subject to Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 9 of the LCA that requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for the landfill and with which the LGU’s la nd use plan must be consistent. The LMA for the Woodlake Landfill consists of about 194 acres described in the Landfill Cleanup Agreement and is shown in Appendix B and legally described in Appendix C. The Landfill began accepting municipal solid waste (MSW) in about 1946. The Landfill received a permit to accept MSW in 1971 and ceased accepting waste in 1993. The combined waste footprint of the two MSW cells is approximately 67 acres. The MPCA took over responsibility for the Landfill in 2000 when the MPCA and Landfill owner signed the Landfill Cleanup Agreement and the MPCA issued the Notice of Compliance for the Landfill. The property is currently owned by the MPCA. GROUNDWATER AND METHANE GAS AREAS OF CONCERN Groundwater Area of Concern The Groundwater Area of Concern (GWAOC) is defined as the area of land surrounding a landfill where the presence of activities that require the use of groundwater may be impacted or precluded by contamination from the landfill, or may cause the groundwater flow d irection to change thereby impacting the user or others nearby. The GWAOC is used to inform the public about the current and potential risks to users of groundwater contaminated by the landfill. In most circumstances this area is not equidistant around the site. The GWAOC is shown in Appendix D. The groundwater area of concern around Woodlake Landfill covers 517 acres. It is defined by both surface water features and groundwater features. There are 58 monitoring wells at the site. The site has both an unlined and lined cell. Flow beneath the unlined cell is currently flowing to the northeast in sand seams within the till aquifer. There is discharge from Phase 1 (the unlined area) to a wetland to the north. A buried sand aquifer is found 80 feet below ground surface and is protected by the unfractured part of the till. The area of concern does not extend beyond the railroad to the north since two buried sand monitoring wells installed in 2010 at the north side of the site have detections of arsenic below ha lf of the drinking water standard and indicate flow in the buried sand is to the west. A buried sand drinking water well is at the west boundary of the site with similar concentrations of arsenic. The area of concern includes buffer to the west of 560 feet, 358 feet on the south and 1,665 feet to the east because adjacent parcels are populated. 3 Methane Gas Area of Concern The Methane Gas Area of Concern (MGAOC) is defined as the area of land surrounding a landfill waste footprint where the presence of certain activities, such as construction of enclosed structures, may be impacted or precluded by subsurface migration of methane gas. Methane gas is an odorless gas produced when municipal solid waste decomposes, and can be explosive in confined spaces such a s basements when mixed in air. The MGAOC is used to inform the public about the risks to current and future land owners regarding certain uses they may want to consider. The MGAOC is shown in Appendix E. Soils in the vicinity of the Woodlake Landfill are generally poorly drained loams, clay loams, and muck. Depth to the groundwater table is approximately 5 to 125 feet below ground surface around the perimeter of the fill. The landfill waste footprint is about 67 acres total between the unlined cells (Pha se 1) and the lined cell (Phase 2). The two areas combined contain approximately 3,700,000 cubic yards of waste. The closest enclosed structure off the property is approximately 550 feet south of the waste footprint. A low permeability geosynthetic cover system was completed by the MPCA in 2007 on Phase 1 and in 2008 on Phase 2 using general obligations bonds. An active gas extraction system with 34 vertical gas extraction wells connected to an enclosed blower/flare unit was installed in 2007 on Phase 1. An additional 16 vertical gas extraction wells were installed on Phase 2 and connected to the same flare. There are 15 gas monitoring probes located around the perimeter of the waste footprint. A nest of three gas probes on the south side of Phase 1 had readings of methane greater than the lower explosive limit, prompting the installation of nine passive gas vents along the southwest boundary of Phase 1. The nested gas probes have gone to non-detectable methane concentrations following the installation of the gas vents. A gas probe on the north center side of Phase 2 has begun to have methane readings above the lower explosive limit following the Phase 2 cover completion. The remaining gas monitoring probes routinely have zero percent methane measured in them, indicating that there likely is no gas migrating off the property. Based on the proximity of occupied buildings adjacent to the Landfill, the low permeable soils in the area, the large mass of waste present in the L andfill, the potential for an extended shutdown of the gas extraction system due to unforeseen circumstances, and recognizing the potential for gas to migrate under seasonal low permeable (frozen) conditions, the MGAOC extends 200 feet beyond the waste footprint. It is important to note that these Areas of Concern can change over time. Therefore, updated information will be provided to the County when the existing information becomes obsolete or misleading. CURRENT ZONING FOR THE LMA The LMA for the Woodlake Landfill is zoned Sanitary Landfill District (SL). This district is an area exclusively established to accommodate the use of land for the development and operation of sanitary landfills. Since this type of land is so unique to the ecological setting of the City of Medina (the “City”) 4 and the provision of public services such as transportation so demanding, a specia l district delineation is called for. Within any district zoned SL in Medina, an extensive set of performance standards must be met through the application of a conditional use permit. Conditional uses: Within the Sanitary Landfill District, no landfill shall be established or operated without a Conditional Use Permit. Said Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for a one year period, after which a permit renewal shall be required. The City Council may also require a performance bond, cash escrow, or letter of credit from the landowner or operator, to guarantee conformance with these regulations. STATE BOND FINANCED PROPERTY The MPCA used proceeds from the sale of State general obligation bonds for capital costs of environmental response actions that MPCA undertook at the Landfill . As a result of this expenditure of State bond proceeds, the publicly owned property where the environmental response actions were taken became “State Bond Financed Property” as that term is defined by Minn. Stat. § 16A.695. As the owner of this State Bond Financed Property, the MPCA is subject to the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and any orders or rules adopted by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) under that statute. Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and the MMB Commissioner’s Third Amended Order Relating to the Use and Sale of State Bond Financed Property (the Order) impose certain requirements on any sale, mortgag e, or other disposition of State Bond Financed Property, or any lease or contract for the use or management of the property entered into by the MPCA Commissioner. The statutory requirements include, but are not limited to, obtaining the approval of the Commissioner of MMB before the MPCA Commissioner enters into any such transaction (sale, lease, etc.) with respect to the prop erty. In order to assure that the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and the Order are carried out with respect to all State Bond Financed Property, the MMB Commissioner requires that a Declaration be recorded on the property records indicating that any sale of the property may be subject to the MMB Commissioner’s approval. Such Declarations, pertaining to the LMA property were signed by the MPCA and filed with the Hennepin County Recorder on March 3, 2011 as document numbers A9630772, A9630773, A9630774, and A9630775. MPCA’S LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA The MPCA’s first and foremost responsibility regarding the Landfill is to manage the risk to public health and safety. It does this by taking response actions, maintaining the Landfill, and working with local governments to assure land use is commensurate with landfill conditions and MPCA’s obligations on the LMA, as well as the conditions on the affected land off the LMA. Therefore, land uses associated with the MPCA’s obligation to protect public health and safety take precedence over other possible land uses. The MPCA has identified land uses for the LMA. It has done so by considering the methane gas and groundwater areas of concern, the types and locations of response actions and associated equipment , 5 the amount of the LMA occupied by landfill waste, and local land -use desires. The land uses on the LMA that are acceptable to the MPCA are:  Closed Landfill Management; and  Solar Energy Farm. Appendices F & G show where these uses would be allowed within the LMA. Closed Landfill Management is the use associated with the MPCA’s responsibility and obligation to take necessary response actions on the property as provided in Minn. Stat. §§ 115B.39-43. DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS Land Uses on the LMA Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 9 requires all local land-use plans be consistent with the MPCA’s land -use plan for the LMA. The MPCA’s future obligations for the LMA conflict with the current local land -use plan; specifically the City’s Sanitary Landfill District for this property. The MPCA believes that most of the uses within the current zoning for the LMA are not compatible with the MPCA’s future responsibilities for the site as well as the risks associated with the Landfill . As a result, the MPCA recommends that the City adopt a new zoning district and ordinance for the LMA. The MPCA recommends the City adopt a zoning district called Closed Landfill Restricted (CLR) with an ordinance similar in form to the one included in Appendix H. The new zoning, however, should reflect the land uses identified above – Closed Landfill Management and Solar Energy Farm – and in Appendices F and G. The MPCA recommends that “Closed Landfill Management” be included as a permitted use for the entire LMA while “Solar Energy Farm” be included as a conditional use (conditioned upon location). Affected Property off the LMA Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 4(b) requires local units of government to incorporate information about the landfill and associated groundwater contamination and landfill gas migration into any land -use plans and to notify persons applying for a permit to develop affected property of the existence of this information and, on request, to provide them with the information. Certain land-use controls pertinent to groundwater use and well construction within the GWAOC currently exist to protect public health and safety. First, Minn. Rules Chapter 4725.4450, subp. 1 requires that a water supply well cannot be constructed within 300 feet of the Landfill. Second, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has the authority to approve the construction of drinking water wells. Therefore, the information pertaining to the GWAOC will be provided to MDH to assist them with their authority for approving the construction of potential new wells near the Landfill. A portion of the MGAOC extends off the LMA on to adjacent property to the north of the LMA. Currently, methane gas is controlled at the Landfill but migration of methane off the property is 6 possible, especially under frozen conditions and if the active gas extraction system were to unforeseeably shut down. Therefore, the MPCA recommends that the City of Medina implement a land use management tool, such as setbacks or an overlay, in order to address the MGAOC. DISCLAIMER The MPCA makes no representations or warranties to the user of the accuracy, currency, suitability, or reliability of the data presented in this report. Any recommendations made by the MPCA in this report are based solely on the data it has, or its contractors have, collected, and only from data collected at specific locations and times. Other sources of contamination or methane, unknown to the MPCA, could exist off the LMA property. The MPCA recommends that any person interested in developing property near the Landfill first consult with an environmental consulting or engineering firm, and/or an environmental attorney, regarding the possible risks associated with the Landfill. Site ContactsLand Manager: Engineer: Hydrogeologist: MetersFeet º Appendix B: Site Location Map - WOODLAKE SANITARY LANDFILL Created 2/14/2013 Waste Footpr int Designates the property thatis under the responsibility and control of the M PCA. Land Management Area 1:20,000 DISCLAIMER: The State of Minnesota makes no representations or warranties to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability or reliability of this data for any purpose. This map depicts a reasonable approximation of impacts from the landfill only and makes no inference about impacts from other potential sources. 0 280 560 840 0 680 1,360 2,040 Site Features Tom Newman Peter Tiffany Ingrid Verhagen W R I G H TWRIGHT A N O K AANOKA H E N N E P I NHENNEPIN C A R V E RCARVER S C O T TSCOTT Site ContactsLand Manager: Engineer: Hydrogeologist: MetersFeet º Appendix D: CLP Groundwater Area of Concern [GWAOC] - WOODLAKE SANITARY LANDFILL Created 2/14/2013 Waste Footpr int Monito ring Well!´ Designates the property thatis under the responsibility and control of the M PCA. Land Management Area 1:10,000 DISCLAIMER: The State of Minnesota makes no representations or warranties to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability or reliability of this data for any purpose. This map depicts a reasonable approximation of impacts from the landfill only and makes no inference about impacts from other potential sources. 0 140 280 420 0 340 680 1,020 Site Features Approximate area of the sub-terranean contaminated groundwater plume. Groundwater Plume An area where the groundwater may be affected by landfill contamination. Groundwater Area of Concern Tom Newman Peter Tiffany Ingrid Verhagen W R I G H TWRIGHT H E N N E P I NHENNEPIN A N O K AANOKA C A R V E RCARVER S C O T TSCOTT S T E A R N SSTEARNS M E E K E RMEEKERKANDIYOHIKANDIYOHI Appendix E: CLP Methane Gas Area of Con cern [M GAOC] - WOODLAKE SAN ITARY LANDFILL Site Contacts Land Manager: Engineer: Hydrogeologist: MetersFeet ºCreated 2/14/2013 Methane Area of ConcernArea surrounding the landfillthat may be impacted by subsurface migration of methane gas. Site Features "W Gas Probe Waste Footpr int Designates the property thatis under the responsibility and control of the M PCA. Land Management Area 1:10,000 DISCLAIMER: The State of Minnesota makes no representations or warranties to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability or reliability of this data for any purpose. This map depicts a reasonable approximation of impacts from the landfill only and makes no inference about impacts from other potential sources. 0 130 260 390 0 450 900 1,350 Tom Newman Peter Tiffany Ingrid Verhagen Site ContactsLand Manager: Engineer: Hydrogeologist: MetersFeet º Appendix F: Closed Landfill Management Use - WOODLAKE SANITARY LANDFILL Created 2/14/2013 Waste Footpr int Designates the property thatis under the responsibility and control of the M PCA. Land Management Area 1:10,000 DISCLAIMER: The State of Minnesota makes no representations or warranties to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability or reliability of this data for any purpose. This map depicts a reasonable approximation of impacts from the landfill only and makes no inference about impacts from other potential sources. 0 140 280 420 0 340 680 1,020 Site Features Closed Landfill Management Use Tom Newman Peter Tiffany Ingrid Verhagen W R I G H TWRIGHT H E N N E P I NHENNEPIN A N O K AANOKA C A R V E RCARVER S C O T TSCOTT Site ContactsLand Manager: Engineer: Hydrogeologist: MetersFeet º Appendix G: Solar Energy Farm Use - WOODLAKE SANITARY LANDFILL Created 2/14/2013 Waste Footpr int Designates the property thatis under the responsibility and control of the M PCA. Land Management Area 1:10,000 DISCLAIMER: The State of Minnesota makes no representations or warranties to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability or reliability of this data for any purpose. This map depicts a reasonable approximation of impacts from the landfill only and makes no inference about impacts from other potential sources. 0 140 280 420 0 340 680 1,020 Site Features Solar EnergyFarm Use Tom Newman Peter Tiffany Ingrid Verhagen W R I G H TWRIGHT H E N N E P I NHENNEPIN A N O K AANOKA C A R V E RCARVER S C O T TSCOTT 1 CITY OF MEDINA 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday July 11, 2017 4 5 1. Call to Order: Chairperson White called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 6 7 Present: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers, Aaron Amic, Dino DesLauriers, Kim 8 Murrin, Kerby Nester, Robin Reid, and Janet White. 9 10 Absent: None. 11 12 Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke. 13 14 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 15 16 No comments made. 17 18 3. Update from City Council Proceedings 19 20 Finke provided an update on the last two meetings of the City Council. 21 22 4. Planning Department Report 23 24 Finke provided an update from the Planning Department, noting that two new applications 25 had been received. He stated that one application is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from 26 the Excelsior Group for property north of Chippewa Road and west of Mohawk Drive and the 27 second is a variance request from McDonald’s for relocation of their trash enclosure, which is 28 being moved by Hennepin County for the CR 116 road improvements. 29 30 5. Public Hearing – Lunski, Inc. – Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan 31 Review for a 90-Unit Senior Assisted Living/Independent Living Community 32 and Office Building located North of State Hwy 55, South of Chippewa Road 33 and West of Mohawk Drive (PID #03-118-23-32-0007) 34 35 Sparks provided a summary of the request. He highlighted the changes that had been made to 36 the plan since the Commission last saw the request in the Concept Plan review phase. He 37 noted that there is some overlap in the commercial and business districts and therefore the 38 rezoning could be appropriate. He reviewed some of the comments from the Park 39 Commission in regard to park dedication and trails. He highlighted the proposed access and 40 private street. He stated that there was a lot of discussion with the proposed access point at 41 the Concept Plan review and the applicant has then moved the access point as far to the east 42 as possible to create additional spacing between the neighboring parcel. He explained that an 43 easement would be required for the trail to allow users of the sites to travel between the sites 44 on the trail. He noted that larger than typical drainage and utility easements would be 45 required for the private street. He stated that the private street falls within the outlot and 46 therefore the outlot would need to be owned by the association to ensure the road would 47 remain safe and up to standards. He stated that the City Engineer provided comments and 48 requested additional information on the traffic study that was completed. He stated that a fire 49 truck turnaround would be provided in lieu of a second emergency access. He reviewed the 50 proposed mix of the units which would include independent living, assisted living and 51 2 specialty/memory care units. He noted that the uses would need to be related with a 52 minimum age for the independent living as regular multi-family housing would not be 53 allowed in this zoning with the mix of assisted living. He reviewed the proposed parking 54 which would include a mix of underground parking and surface parking. He reviewed the 55 proposed building materials and design elements. He reviewed the proposed setbacks and 56 tree removal. He reviewed the landscaping plan proposed, which would restore some of the 57 trees removed. He noted that ornamental plants and shrubs would not count as replacement 58 trees. He stated that there are screening requirements and therefore they may want to see that 59 for the mechanical equipment and parking area. He noted that the landscaping plan would 60 need to be modified in order to meet the tree replacement, if that is the desire. He reviewed 61 the proposed signage, noting that you are not able to have a freestanding sign on an otherwise 62 empty lot. He noted that the specifications for the lights proposed to be used for the signs 63 would need to be known as well. He stated that there are not different demand times for 64 medical office and assisted living and therefore there should be sufficient parking for each 65 use and not a shared parking. 66 67 Reid stated that she believes the peak time for assisted living would be holidays and 68 weekends and during the daytime the number of residents and staff would remain static. 69 70 Sparks provided additional details on the engineering standard, and noted that because the 71 residents are retired, they are often home during the day and a higher number of staff is on 72 hand as well. He noted that there is not an ironclad number for the number of units 73 designated for independent/assisted/specialty units. He stated that the parking proposed 74 would likely be a workable number. 75 76 Reid asked if the office complex and senior living building would have separate owners. 77 78 Sparks believed that the developer would own both and have people run each business, but 79 noted that the applicant could provide that clarification. He provided details concerning the 80 wetland area on the site and the buffer that would be required. He noted that the Watershed 81 District and City Engineer have requested additional clarifications and modifications. He 82 stated that because the site is being built up, that would create additional slope and therefore 83 the Watershed District would require additional buffer. He noted that an average buffer 84 method could work in this situation, but that methodology would need to be provided. He 85 stated that the Watershed District has requested revisions to the plan which may cause 86 changes to the site. He noted that the City Engineer is also requesting additional information 87 for the WCA requirements and permitting. He stated that they would like the parking and 88 access drive to be controlled by the association. He stated that there are three different 89 requests that must be considered in a specific order. He noted that the rezoning would be the 90 first item to consider, with the Preliminary Plat to follow and then lastly the Site Plan review 91 with details provided for the Commission to consider for each step of the request. 92 93 DesLauriers asked what can be done to ensure there is an association. 94 95 Sparks stated that the City Attorney reviewed the draft association documents and made 96 suggestions for changes that would make the association strong. 97 98 Reid asked and received confirmation that the items recommended to be changed are 99 included in the proposed conditions. 100 101 Albers asked concerning the minimum number of surface parking stalls needed. 102 103 3 White stated that it would seem the City would have to know the ratio of mixed uses in order 104 to determine the appropriate parking requirements. 105 106 Reid noted that could be difficult as residents could begin as independent and transition to 107 assisted living within the same unit. 108 109 Albers stated that he has a lot of confusion with the parking. He asked if the City should 110 review their zoning requirements to determine a better standard. 111 112 Sparks noted that Medina does not have this specific use within their zoning ordinance which 113 can make it tricky. He explained that staff worked with the applicant using the parking 114 required for independent living apartments and then using the engineering study for ratios as 115 well. He explained that the parking requirement is designed to handle peak times. 116 117 Albers asked how many units were counted with the 2.2 requirement. 118 119 Sparks replied that one half of the senior living building was calculated as that ratio, 120 explaining that the office building was calculated with its own ratio. 121 122 Albers asked if the staff parking is included in the parking requirements. He stated that he 123 did not foresee more than one car per unit for the senior living facility and therefore it seems 124 like too many stalls. 125 126 Sparks explained that the calculation is not based on the residents having those vehicles, but 127 also includes staff and visitors. 128 129 Albers asked if there is a concern with the impervious surface. 130 131 Finke provided additional information on parking and proof of parking that could be provided 132 in lieu of providing the actual additional parking. He explained that the proof of parking 133 would need to be identified on the site and if additional parking is required, that area could 134 then be built out. He stated that it is in the best interest of the owner to ensure necessary 135 parking is being provided for the residents and guests. He noted that the larger assisted living 136 units may require more parking than the .4 slated as well, which may create a balance 137 between the independent and assisted living parking. 138 139 Dean Lunski, Lunski Inc., stated that they did incorporate the comments from the 140 Commission and Council during the Concept Plan to reduce the number of units from 135 to 141 90. He noted that a 5,000-square foot building was removed and the medical office building 142 was scaled down to better fit into the site. 143 144 Craig Hartman, Momentum Design Group and project architect, stated that they have looked 145 extensively into the parking for this site and with the different ratios, as the ordinance does 146 not address this type of use. He stated that the ownership has put a lot of time into the issue 147 of parking because he is most affected if the parking is not adequate. He stated that the 148 independent living units will be half of the senior living facility. He stated that the goal is for 149 residents to age in place and therefore the assisted living ratio will increase as time moves on 150 and the independent living residents age into assisted living. He reviewed the calculations 151 that they used to determine the parking number they believe to be sufficient, which is 111. 152 He stated that there will be documents through the association which allow the parking to be 153 shared between lots, but explained that the shared parking does not include a reduction in 154 parking. He explained that the shared parking would allow visitors to park in the medical 155 office parking area on high peak times, such as Christmas. 156 4 Jay Hill, Hill Engineering and civil engineer for the project, stated that there are some 157 wetland impacts associated with the project. He stated that this project would be the lowest 158 impact to the wetlands of the designs that they originally reviewed. He noted that a majority 159 of the wetland impacts would be for the access road on the west side. He stated that the City 160 and Watershed District have a variety of rules and regulations, noting that the two sets of 161 regulations do not always agree and therefore they are trying their best to meet the 162 requirements of both the City and Watershed District. He stated that they are proposing to 163 use wetland buffer averaging for their methodology. 164 165 Lunski stated that they do not believe that any of the comments would substantially impact 166 the project as designed and therefore they would ask the Commission to approve the project 167 with the recommended conditions. 168 169 Reid referenced the skyway connection, noting that the skyway appears to be white from the 170 south view. She stated that her concern is the visual integration between the two different 171 styles of buildings and would like to see the skyway less conspicuous. 172 173 Hartman agreed that the skyway materials would be in line with the rest of the development 174 and would be an approved material. He noted that the same masonry material from the senior 175 building would be used on the medical office building and the stucco colors would be similar 176 as well in order to integrate the two concepts together. 177 178 Murrin referenced the medical office building and the 100 parking stalls allocated. She noted 179 that a lot of the customers for the medical office building would be coming from the senior 180 living building and asked if that was considered in the parking calculations. 181 182 Hartman stated that the parking for the office building was designed per ordinance and did 183 not take that factor into account as the ordinance does not allow that. He stated that this 184 would be unique in that the two uses would connect through the skyway. He stated that there 185 will be crossover between the uses, but the medical office building would also see other 186 clients as well. He stated that it would be hard to gauge the percentage of crossover because 187 of insurance and preferences. 188 189 Lunski stated that the crossover design will be trending more now as that provides comfort to 190 the residents in the senior living portion to have medical clinics close by. He provided 191 additional details on how residents would be allowed to age in place in their unit as they 192 move away from independent living and towards assisted living. 193 194 Reid asked if there would be communal dining. 195 196 Hartman noted that the residents would have the choice of a full kitchen in their unit and then 197 would also have the ability to order in meals. 198 199 White opened the public hearing at 8:38 p.m. 200 201 No comments. 202 203 White closed the public hearing at 8:39 p.m. 204 205 Albers asked if the Commission felt comfortable pushing this forward to the Council with the 206 number of changes recommended or whether the applicant should address the changes and 207 come back to the Commission. 208 209 5 Murrin stated that she is comfortable with the item moving forward with the conditions, as 210 the applicant could address those items prior to City Council. She stated that she does like 211 the option for proof of parking. 212 213 Reid stated that the revisions should be made prior to going to City Council, as that will be a 214 thorough review. 215 216 DesLauriers stated that he was guessing and there was not a lot of time for the engineering 217 study as that came back July 6th and there were 43 comments. He stated that there are another 218 20+ comments from the Watershed District. He stated that there is a lot of work to do and 219 perhaps the applicant cannot do that prior to the Council. 220 221 White stated that she would like to table the request to see the changes come back before the 222 Commission. She stated that she thinks it is a great plan and she would like to be able to 223 comment on the items once the revisions are made, providing an example of the tree 224 preservation ordinance and wetland setbacks. She stated that there is a lot to preserve in 225 Medina and those are important issues that she would like to see prior to passing the item to 226 the Council. 227 228 Reid agreed that if the changes were made, that would allow the project to move quickly to 229 the City Council following the next review of the Planning Commission. 230 231 Murrin stated that if the applicant could make all the changes prior to the next Council 232 meeting, she would be in favor of passing this item forward. 233 234 Finke stated that these changes would need to be made prior to the Council review. 235 236 Albers stated that he would be in favor of tabling the request to allow the applicant to make 237 the changes as recommended prior to the approval of the Planning Commission. 238 239 Finke stated that a lot of the discussion is related to the Site Plan review. He noted that there 240 are three actions requested and the Commission could discuss the rezoning request tonight. 241 He noted that the current zoning is commercial and under the draft Comprehensive Plan the 242 zoning would be business. He stated that there is a reasonable overlap in the two zonings and 243 therefore it could be considered that business is not a huge jump from commercial. He noted 244 that in the past few months when the Council has considered rezoning ahead of the draft 245 Comprehensive Plan those requests were drastically different zoning requests. 246 247 Reid stated that she is okay with this request as the senior living would not be clearly visible 248 from Highway 55. 249 250 DesLauriers agreed in support of the rezoning. 251 252 Amic also agreed with the rezoning as this will create an opportunity for residents of Medina 253 to age in place in the community. 254 255 Murrin and Nester also confirmed their consensus with the rezoning request. 256 257 Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the rezoning. Motion 258 carries unanimously. 259 260 Finke noted that a change in notification would take place on August 1st and therefore the 261 Commission taking action on the rezoning will help the application move forward even if the 262 6 Commission decides to table the remaining two requests. He stated that staff would tend to 263 link the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan together. 264 265 Murrin stated that if the Commission is going to table the remaining two actions, she would 266 suggest waiting to discuss in further detail until the additional details are provided by the 267 applicant at the next meeting. 268 269 Reid stated that she likes that the applicant included the comments about the density of the 270 site in their review between the Concept Plan, and then adjusted their plans accordingly. 271 272 Motion by Albers, seconded by Reid, to table the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan review and 273 recommend that the applicant update plans to be consistent with the staff comments. 274 275 Further discussion: Amic noted that he would be in favor of allowing the item to move 276 forward with the conditions and therefore will be voting against the motion. 277 278 Motion carries 6-1. (Opposed: Amic) 279 280 White briefly recessed the meeting. 281 282 White reconvened the meeting. 283 284 6. Public Hearing – Buddy and Kim Snow – 2402 Hamel Road – Conditional Use Permit 285 to Construct a Second Principal Home on Rural Residential Property Over 40 Acres 286 287 Finke presented the request, reviewing the current conditions of the site through an aerial 288 photograph and reviewing the surrounding uses. He identified the proposed location for the 289 second home, noting that the home would share the existing driveway of the home already on 290 the site. He noted that a ghost plat is also required and included as that would show how the 291 property could be subdivided in the future should a future owner wish to do so. He stated that 292 the second home of the site would be limited in use to family members, employees or as a 293 guest house. He noted that primary and alternate septic sites are provided for both the 294 existing home and second home. 295 296 White opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. 297 298 No comments. 299 300 White closed the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. 301 302 Reid noted that the request exceeds all of the conditions. 303 304 Motion by Reid, seconded by Albers, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use 305 Permit request of Buddy and Kim Snow for a second principal dwelling at 2402 Hamel Road, 306 based upon the findings noted in the staff report and subject to the conditions in the report. 307 Motion carries unanimously. 308 309 7. 32 Hamel Road LLC – 32, 36, and 42 Hamel Road – Preliminary/Final Plat to Combine 310 Three Lots into One 311 312 Finke presented a request to combine three relatively small lots into one lot in the Hamel 313 area. He stated that the property is zoned Uptown Hamel 2 and identified the adjacent uses. 314 He stated that the applicant would like to combine the lots in order to provide additional 315 7 flexibility and improvements to the area. He stated that the City approved the lot 316 combination in 2009, but the previous landowner never filed the paperwork to finalize the 317 combination. He noted that the proposed lot combination would exceed the minimum lot 318 size. He stated that staff believes that the request meets the requirements and therefore 319 should be approved. 320 321 The applicant stated that he does not have any current plans, but is instead “paving the road” 322 for the future in order to provide more flexibility without crossing lot lines. 323 324 Motion by Murrin, seconded by Amic, to recommend approval of the Plat of Hamel Thirty 325 Two, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion carries unanimously. 326 327 8. New Email Address Check-In 328 329 Finke asked if there has been any trouble in making the conversion for email addresses. 330 331 Albers noted that he was successful in making the transition, but then had trouble linking it to 332 his phone. 333 334 Finke asked the Commissioners to attempt to make the change this week and ensure that they 335 were able to get access. He noted that there are additional options, such as forwarding emails 336 to a more used account, should they desire. 337 338 9. Approval of the June 13, 2017 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 339 340 Motion by Albers, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the June 13, 2017, Planning 341 Commission minutes with the noted correction. Motion carries unanimously. 342 343 10. Council Meeting Schedule 344 345 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and White volunteered 346 to attend in representation of the Commission. 347 348 11. Adjourn 349 350 Motion by DesLauriers, seconded by Murrin, to adjourn the meeting at 9:21 p.m. Motion 351 carried unanimously. 352