HomeMy Public PortalAbout10-14-2014MEDINA
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2014
7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24)
1. Call to Order
2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
3. Update from City Council proceedings
4. Planning Department Report
5. Approval of September 9, 2014 Planning Commission minutes
6. Public Hearing — Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Chapter 3,
Chapter 5, and Map 5-3 related to Staging and Growth
7. Council Meeting Schedule
8. Adjourn
POSTED IN CITY HALL October 10, 2014
c5
1 CITY OF MEDINA . 1r\Co
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes
4 Tuesday September 9, 2014
5
6 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
7
8 Present: Planning Commissioners Charles Nolan, Robin Reid, Kent Williams, Robert
9 Mitchell, Victoria Reid, and Janet White.
10
11 Absent: Randy Foote
12
13 Also Present: Council Member Kathleen Martin, City Planner Dusty Finke, Planning
14 Assistant Debra Peterson, and Planning Consultant Nate Sparks.
15
16 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
17 No public comments.
18
19 3. Update from City Council proceedings
20 Martin updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council.
21
22 4. Planning Department Report
23 Finke informed the Commission that the City hadn't received any new land use applications.
24
25 5. Approval of the August 13, 2014 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes.
26
27 Motion by Williams, seconded by White, to approve the August 13, 2014, Planning
28 Commission minutes. Motion carries unanimously (Absent Foote).
29
30 6. Dominium — 510 Clydesdale Trail — Mixed Use Stage I Plan for development of 26
31 affordable rental townhomes.
32
33 Sparks explained the application is requesting a Stage I phase plan which establishes uses,
34 residential density, and general site layout. He further explained that after Stage I, then Stage
35 II would be required and this stage would require building and engineering plans for the
36 project.
37
38 Sparks explained the request was for 26 townhome units and the Comprehensive Plan
39 guidance is Mixed Use Business and the zoning is Mixed Use (MU). He explained the
40 project has eight total buildings and the zoning ordinance allows for no more than 7 units per
41 acre.
42
43 Sparks explained the project was eligible for density bonuses because it included affordable
44 housing, had common open space, and that this type of construction was designed for
45 reducing noise. He stated that these bonuses give the project a maximum density of 7 units an
46 acre, or 26 units. Sparks explained that staff originally interpreted density to be net density
47 and not gross density. The applicant's attorney pointed out that the City's code does not use
48 the term "net" but only "acres." Staff and the City attorney discussed this issue and agreed
49 that, as written, the minimum area per residential unit in the MU district is based on gross
v,\.`ckz/(1
1
50 acreage. Staff believes that this was not what was intended, but is the way the code is
51 currently written. In this case, net acreage would result in a maximum of 25 units.
52
53 Sparks noted that the building design, parking, landscaping and buffer yards all appear
54 consistent with code requirements. He also noted that the site slopes down to a wetland and
55 some of the units won't have a lot of space in their rear yard, which makes the common open
56 space important.
57
58 The proposed landscaping and buffer areas meet the minimum standards.
59
60 Williams asked what the actual density of the project was as proposed. Sparks said it is right
61 below 7 units when considering gross acreage and just above using net acreage. Williams
62 asked where density bonuses come into play. Sparks said it helps the current proposal go
63 from 5 to 7 units an acre based on the density bonuses.
64
65 Williams asked how the City could be consistent with the Comp Plan if the density isn't
66 brought up to 7 units per acre. Sparks said it's an overall density within the land use.
67 Williams asked where and how will the City be able to increase the density to meet the
68 density needed. Sparks said there are other parcels out there to increase those density
69 numbers. Finke said the Uptown Hamel (UH) area has a requirement to increase density in
70 some areas. Nolan asked if in a more MU district the City would just be counting the
71 residential or would it be both. Williams said only the residential would be counted.
72
73 Mitchell asked if the building would be sprinkled. Sparks stated that the plans did not state
74 that they were, but suggested Mitchell ask the applicant for clarification. Mitchell asked how
75 the property would be platted to allow for each unit to be sold separately. Sparks said it
76 would be under one ownership as proposed.
77
78 Nolan said when he saw the application previously they had concern with the depth of
79 driveways and asked if that had been corrected. Sparks said they had improved the depth of
80 the driveways to meet the City's minimum requirements. Sparks also noted the trash
81 receptacles would also be able to fit in the garage, which had also been a previous concern.
82
83 Nick Anderson, Senior Development for Dominium, said this is the second time this has
84 come before the Commission. He said the intent of this new application was to make an
85 application that met all City regulations and under existing mixed use zoning so that a PUD
86 would not be required. They'd taken away the use of City owned lot adjacent. The majority
87 of the changes had been a reduction in density and making modifications meet all minimum
88 requirements. He said the buildings were not being proposed to be sprinklered as it is not
89 required under the state building code.
90
91 V. Reid asked how the commons area would be used. Anderson said they've provided more
92 playground space and the site would be well maintained and monitoring during business
93 hours. V. Reid said the City had an Open House and she was asked questions as to how the
94 clubhouse would be used. Anderson said a clubroom would be available to rent. It would
95 have a kitchen and seating areas. It would also be utilized for after school activities with help
96 of Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners (IOCP).
97
98 Public Hearing Opened at 7:33 p.m.
99
2
100 Holly Leurer of 4290 Wild Meadows Drive asked if the project was Section 8 or 42. She also
101 asked how the applicant would be able to monitor multiple families in a unit, such as those
102 with 4 bedrooms. She stated that various concerns were raised during the previous review
103 about how the applicant runs their projects, and stated that she does not see that anything has
104 changed except that Larkin Hoffmann is representing the applicant.
105
106 Anderson stated that they are not Section 8, but rather Section 42. He said they have a
107 maximum number of people based on number of bedrooms, which would be enforced and
108 that they would have a property manager on -site.
109
110 Anderson said within the staff report there were a number of letters from other Cities showing
111 support for their project, such as St. Paul and Lino Lakes. Nolan asked about the concerns
112 that were raised with the project in the City of Plymouth. Anderson said they had lost their
113 landscaping company and the issues weren't noticed right away. V. Reid asked what on -site
114 manager meant. Anderson said a Manager would be on -site 2-3 days per week.
115
116 Bob Belzer of Wild Meadows said he recently moved into the City and chose Medina
117 because of the current community. He said he is concerned with affordable housing coming
118 to the community and it would tax our City resources along with reducing property values.
119 He asked if the project will be maintained and what the policy would be for their tenants on
120 credit score. He raised concern over the use of our Police Force and the number of Police
121 calls it would generate. He said he's against the project and understands they have a law
122 firm supporting the project and he's happy to support legally against it.
123
124 Nolan asked Sparks to walk them through the mixed use zoning and how it worked. He said
125 there was some confusion between the Comprehensive Plan and Mixed Use (MU) and how
126 just residential could comply with MU and asked about staff's position. Sparks said the MU -
127 B land use was described in the staff report and that staff believes that a single parcel
128 developing with strictly residential was not inconsistent. Sparks noted the City reviewed an
129 application last month that was guided Mixed Use -Business and only one use was proposed.
130
131 Williams asked for clarification on how the MU district could be used for only residential, or
132 only commercial and still be consistent with the land use. Finke said the property is four
133 acres in size which is a relatively small proportion of the total land use. He said when the
134 City zoned the land areas within Mixed Use -Business, it took into consideration that many
135 sites were small and would need to have individual uses or combination of properties in order
136 to develop.
137
138 Chris Hilberg of 4559 Trillium Drive North said the Comp Plan should be readily available
139 and understandable. He said when reviewing the MU Guidance, it is MU- B and that the
140 application doesn't comply. He said he reviewed the language and handed out the definition
141 of MU -B to the Commission and staff. He said that if the term "opportunities" means
142 optional, then everything in the definition is optional. He also noted that it reads "two or
143 more of the following: residential, general business, commercial, or office." He explained
144 that the two or more uses are required but staff says only one use is acceptable. If that is the
145 case, it should read "one or more." He said once a fact is pointed out that the code is being
146 misinterpreted it must be discussed and decided on interpretation. He said in the packet
147 Finke says only one use on a single parcel is allowable, but after checking all minutes and
148 reports he never saw where the topic had been discussed
.
149 -1E.c,t r-- k �\2L`'�'` p c
-Pca\ -1 O cL%Jd
vYvC d--
3
150 Hilberg highlighted language on page 7-2 of the Comp Plan which states: "the development
151 of mixed -use zoning will need to include a minimum of two districts to address vertically
152 integrated mixed use (Mixed -Use Business), where residential space is above the commercial
153 space, and lateral mixed use (Mixed -Use) where commercial and residential building exist
154 together in the zoning district." He noted that there are two similar but distinct land uses.
155 The language on 7-2 clearly implies that Mixed Use -Business is to be vertically integrated.
156 Maybe that's not what we've done, and maybe that's not how we've interpreted it, but is it
157 what is said. If this it isn't what it means, then why is the language in there?
158
159 Hilberg then handed out a copy of Page 7-2 highlighting the following language: "the Mixed -
160 Use Business designation assumes a strong business component." He said he read the Comp
161 Plan from front to back and did see a few areas of flexibility, but land use within a site was
162 not one of them. The staff report says the other uses "surrounding" the Dominium project
163 make a mix in the area, but he didn't see that it was allowable per the Comp Plan. Hilberg
164 said that the correct thing would be for the applicant to request a Comp Plan amendment for
165 high density residential, but they want to skip that step. V. Reid asked if he would support
166 the CP Amendment. Hilberg said that is the correct process. He said it would be important
167 to review just the residential use and he believes Dominium doesn't think they really are a
168 mixed use. Hilberg provided a previous memo from Dominium that stated the project wasn't
169 a mixed use.
170
171 Frank Mignone of 3316 Red Fox Drive said that when Dominium pulled their application
172 previously it was really a back door approach. He said if the City or public had questions
173 tonight the applicant should have to answer them. Fifteen years from now they could sell the
174 townhome units individually. Dominium has no power over the City.
175
176 Nolan asked the public to be respectful in their comments and process.
177
178 Kimberly Murrin of 290 Cherry Hill Trail said she was concerned with multiple families
179 living on the property and asked if multiple families would be allowed in the same unit.
180
181 Murrin also commented that the letters of recommendations from other cities all ended with
182 the same comment in the letters and found it odd. She asked what Dominium's goal was for
183 developing the project. What would the cost be to add the fire sprinklers in each townhome
184 unit? She said it would help people feel safer in case someone was being careless. She asked
185 how the City would know if there was an actual demand for affordable housing in our area.
186 She went on to say that it would be great to know if we are actually helping people in the
187 local community. She further asked how the units would be advertised and if it would just be
188 to the local area or downtown. She wanted to know if they were proposing to bring people
189 out to Medina from downtown and thinks the City should get an answer. She asked if
190 Dominium would be getting property tax breaks. She said she sees hesitancy by the applicant
191 to answer questions during the Public Hearing process, which doesn't get the hearing off to a
192 great start, and she thinks that an open discussion should take place.
193 //15su -
194 Nolan said installing a sprinkler system is a building coMand the City can't require it if it's
195 not a code requirement. He also added that the applicant can choose how much input they
196 want to provide during the process, but stated meeting with neighbors to discuss concerns
197 was usually in their best interest and was encouraged.
198
199 Public Hearing Closed at 8:18 pm.
200
4
201 V. Reid asked what the difference was between Section 8 and 42. Anderson said Section 8
202 Housing was a direct subsidy for housing which was more popular in the past where the
203 government would pay a portion of the rent. Section 42 supports the construction cost of
204 project but the rents are fully paid by the tenants. There are income and rent limits set for the
205 whole metro area based upon 60% of the median income. For a family of four, the median
206 income is $80,000/year. The City of Medina is not providing any financial support in the
207 proposed application. Anderson also said he wasn't trying to avoid addressing some of the
208 questions, but rather the data is all available in previous minutes and documents and he would
209 rather keep the focus on the site plan.
210
211 Nolan said their charge as a Commission with the proposed application is rather narrow and
212 it's about density and land use. A concern was raised with the need for resources and that it
213 would need to be accounted for in the long range. Nolan said the subsidies used are Federal
214 and they are looking at the application no different than any other project.
215
216 Nolan asked Staff what the City of Medina's definition of "family" was and Finke said:
217
218 "Family — Family is any one of the following:
219 a. An individual;
220 b. Two or more persons related by blood, marriage or adoption and maintaining a
221 common household;
222 c. A group of not more than five unrelated persons maintaining a common household.
223
224 White asked Finke to clarify where in the packet it explained that the Planning Commission
225 and Council decided the Comp Plan designation and subsequent zoning for the property.
226 Finke said allowing a property to develop with only one use was discussed during the
227 Uptown Hamel discussion and that it was recognized that there was a number of small parcels
228 which would make mixing uses difficult. The zoning of this property was specifically
229 discussed since it was not as close to Uptown Hamel and that the MU designation was chosen
230 as an alternative.
231
232 Nolan asked if the City Attorney weighed in on the zoning and CP guidance. Finke said yes
233 it was all discussed at the time of the previous application and he concurred with the -.
234
235
�-- 236
237 Comp Plan. �1�
�J sac r �.t...-u
238 . k�e sai t e Commission should io us 6n roe and he thas
239 they should go through the City objectives without further discussion. The�Commission
240 agreed. Williams stated that going through the ge ese, it would appear:
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
information in the current staff report. 6-6 C_ � "'— .651-e/4-
Williams said he didn't agree with/Hilberg's comments and interpretation on page 7-2 of the
1. Site has limited open space or natural features to preserve.
2. The density meets code requirements based upon the applicant's proposed interpretation
which has been reviewe'the City attorney
3. The district is designed to be a type of development that is a transition, which this seems
to provide between the Medina Entertainment Center and the golf club and potential
residential to the north.
4. The buildings will have a sound buffer, and exterior design and landscaping appear to
meet requirements.
5. Site accessibility could be discussed by the Commission, but appears to be met.
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
6. The proposed development appears consistent with the City's Comp Plan goals, use of
resources, and the need for affordable housing.
7. It was acknowledged that there is a fear by some residents that the project would use too
much of the City's resources. •Thc Ce is3i
N e u t A/3 lr-yC-t-'w
CSe
Williams said, from looking at these objectives, he thinks the project should be approved.
R. Reid said she doesn't have any reason to assume this project would need more resources or
use of services than any other project. Nolan said discussion on use of too many resources
should be brought up when looking at the Comp Plan. This should have been considered then
and not now with an application. Providing affordable housing and diversity is a City goal.
V. Reid said it would be nice to have the developer rent to people from within the area and
pull in renters from the City and neighboring communities.
Finke suggested modifying condition #1 to read: "The plan shall be consistent with
requirements of the Mixed Use zoning district. Subject to density bonuses described in the
Mixed Use zoning district, the maximum number of units shall not exceed the density
permitted in the district."
Motion by Willi conded by R. Reid , to recommend approval of the Mixed Use Stage
I Plan Review for development of 26 affordable rental townhomes at 510 Clydesdale Trail
with the conditions noted in the staff report, except for the change noted to condition #1.
Motion carried unanimously. (Absent Foote)
Finke announced the Dominium application will be heard by the City Council at the October
7, 2014 meeting.
tft6l'Ar‘c'eLe,„)
0rv,
7. Charles Cudd De Novo — Preliminary Plat and Rezoning for 15 lot single family
residential development to be located east of Co. Rd. 116 and south of Hackamore Road
Finke presented the application explaining the project consisted of 15 single family lots and
the overall land area was 16.3 gross acres and a net area of 7.9 acres. The lots are guided
Low Density Residential and zoned RR-UR. The rezoning request is for R-1 Single Family
Residential zoning with a request for a variance to the maximum cul-de-sac length. A
Preliminary and Final Plat is also being requested. The public hearing is for the Preliminary
and Final Plats. Finke reviewed an aerial of the parcel and said the City reviewed a concept
plan for this property in June and the current proposal is quite similar. He said the Council
preferred the cul-de-sac designed to preserve a number of trees. The low density requires 2-
3.5 units/acre and the development is proposed to be 1.9 units/acre. The City may consider
exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural
features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Staff recommends that Lot 15 be an
Outlot until frontage is acquired. Staff recommends the preserved wooded area be placed
into an Outlot with protections established.
Finke explained that broader traffic impacts were included in the CR 116/Hackamore traffic
study with the Reserve of Medina previously.
Finke said approximately 50 percent of the trees were proposed to be removed and the Code
allows 20% without replacement. Staff recommends a tree waiver if the applicant can meet
the requirements of the waiver, since it would otherwise require 2398 inches in tree
302 replacement. He explained even if they developed the site with more density, they would
303 have to remove even more trees.
304
305 Finke said if the Commission was supportive of the rezoning and variances, the conditions
306 could remain as written. Mitchell asked if the tree waiver was added in the conditions. Finke
307 said yes it was condition #12. R. Reid asked which trees were being recommended to be
308 preserved. Finke said at the rear of lot 15, with the exception of trees being removed for the
309 Storm Water Treatment area.
310
311 Nolan said it's a 50 percent loss of trees with or without the homes. Finke said the tree
312 removal percentage assumes some tree removal in the pad areas. He said if there is support
313 for a tree waiver, it would need to be formalized approving building pads and not just lots.
314 Nolan said the homes will be placed where the rectangles are shown on the plan. Nolan
315 asked if a developer could expand the pad and take more trees in the future. Finke said trees
316 would have to be replaced if they exceed the proposed grading pad area, so yes. Two trees
317 per year are allowed to be removed without penalty. Finke said with the waiver it's possible
318 to place a condition to tighten up the restrictions to possibly not allow the two trees per year
319 without penalty within the development.
320
321 Finke explained lot sizes and lot widths. He said the minimum requirement is 90 foot width
322 lots and the applicant meets that requirement.
323
324 Mitchell wants to make sure that reducing the size of the lots is worth it. Finke said the lots
325 proposed exceed 90 feet. Williams asked concerning the tree waiver and if it would require
326 off -site planting and also wondered where the trees would be planted. Finke said the City has
327 an aggressive planting plan and could be accommodated. If not, the applicant could provide
328 money to the City for maintenance.
329
330 Nolan asked where the waterline would be located. Finke said they generally like to loop the
331 waterline. He said the waterline follows the road and loops to the west for future
332 development. They would be boring 8 feet deep and hopefully missing roots of trees during
333 the installation.
334
335 Richard Denman of Charles Cudd DeNovo presented their application and tree replacement
336 plan. He said running the road through gave them two more lots rather than the cul-de-sac,
337 yet the extended cul-de-sac saves many trees. He said the Variance is for the length of the
338 cul-de-sac. He said a cul-de-sac can serve 20 lots and their project only has 14 lots. They are
339 working with Toll Brothers and the City to resolve the frontage issue on Lot 15.
340
341 Williams said they gave up two lots to preserve the area of woods. He said if they would
342 have run the road through Lot 15 they would have gotten two more lots, but they would have
343 had to take down many trees and would then have to do tree replacement.
344
345 Nolan asked what the value of replacing 2000 trees would cost. Denman said about $100.00
346 an inch per City estimates.
347
348 Dave Nash, EVS Engineering, presented a recalculation of tree removal / replacement that
349 staff hadn't seen prior to the meeting. He said he reviewed the proposal of optional tree
350 removal minimums from the Nelson property and then the original Cavanaugh property and
351 came up with 3902 inches. He said in theory the number of inches needed for removal came
352 up to 185 inches plus the 194, making a total of 379 inches of replacement.
7
353
354 V. Reid questioned how the tree replacement was determined. Finke explained the 60 foot
355 width lots helped meet the minimum density allowed.
356
357 Nash said they are open to negotiation on the tree replacement. He said the watermain is a
358 requirement to be looped and the only other choice is to open -cut and take down more trees,
359 which they didn't want to do.
360
361 Public Hearing opened at 9:41 pm.
362
363 Steve Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods said he had two concerns. 1) The egress exiting out
364 of the Reserve of Medina, since their development has to drive through the Reserve now onto
365 Aster Road to get out onto County Road 116. He said he doesn't know how the Reserve of
366 Medina got planned, since they will now have 15 more homes that will have that many more
367 vehicles utilizing the access onto Co. Rd 116. He asked that it be considered if it was even
368 safe, since vehicles exiting the Reserve out onto 116 going south bound would block the cars
369 behind them wanting to go right/north since there isn't a turn lane for the vehicles to go right
370 (north) off of Aster Road . He asked what would happen if they had to suddenly evacuate the
371 area. He said the City keeps putting more and more houses accessing through the Reserve of
372 Medina Development which is of concern to him.
373
374 Secondly, Theesfeld said he was concerned with the volume of tree removal and the
375 possibility of the Commission giving a Waiver. He told the Commission that if they approve
376 of a waiver then they would have to approve one for every development; and if this was the
377 case then why do we have the requirement.
378
379 Public Hearing Closed at 9:46 pm
380
381 Williams said he didn't have an issue with the rezoning or Variance for the cul-de-sac length.
382 V. Reid asked about the two lots being developed separately and if it would provide more
383 flexibility if a PUD was used. She said she is concerned with 50% of the trees being removed.
384 Williams said that the arborist determined that the area being preserved is the best quality of
385 trees on -site and that the application should assume the two lots developing together. V. Reid
386 said she doesn't feel we should be giving the tree waiver. Mitchell discussed tree
387 replacements. Nolan said on the variance there hasn't been any comments from the Public
388 Works (PW) Department. Finke said it's not really the length rather than the emergency
389 access. R. Reid asked why we limited the length of the cul-de-sacs. Nolan asked if the PW's
390 absence of comments on the issue meant they were in favor of the cul-de-sac. Finke said PW
391 was fine with the length.
392
393 Denman said he was working on road frontage with Toll Brothers to find a solution for the
394 Outlot. The Outlot would turn into a buildable lot and hopes to have that resolved before it
395 gets to the City Council.
396
397 V. Reid said she wasn't in favor of the tree waiver. Nolan suggested the City work with the
398 developer to issue a partial waiver since the developer is preserving the most valuable area of
399 the site. Mitchell asked if the extensive use of retaining walls were to save more trees. Nash
400 said yes, the retaining walls were necessary to save trees. Nolan suggested a 50 percent
401 waiver. Williams asked for clarification of what a 50 percent waiver would entail. Nash said
402 it would equate to approximately 1200 inches and he thinks we should consider how the
403 applicant had been working with the City on redesigning the layout of the development.
8
404
405 Charles Cudd, applicant, said they met with the City Arborist and the proposed woodland
406 area to be preserved is the highest quality wooded area. He said they are losing two lots and
407 he doesn't feel they should have to do so much tree replacement since they don't think they
408 are benefited enough. He also stated that he doesn't feel 1200 inches of tree replacement is
409 realistic. He said the City Arborist supported this plan and to have to provide so many inches
410 of trees isn't balanced with what they are giving up in revenue. Williams said he would be
411 willing to go down to 1000 inches with the Waiver.
412
413 R. Reid said she is concerned with the traffic, but since the City has given the green light on
414 developing this site she thinks we have to make a decision.
415
416 Ryan Lindell of 565 Hackamore Road said you can't go south on 116.
417
418 Nolan asked that in the future when the City receives new subdivisions that the Commission
419 also gets in their packet a street map/area map of existing developments. He said it would
420 help to better understand the traffic flow in the area of the proposed project. He said they
421 can't require this developer to pay for traffic improvements at this point.
422
423 Motion by Williams, Seconded by R. Reid, to approve of the Charles Cudd DeNovo
424 Variance and Rezoning with the conditions set forth by staff with the exception of #8 in that
425 the applicant replace up to 1200 inches. Ayes by Williams, Mitchell, R. Reid, White, and
426 Nolan. Nay by V. Reid. V. Reid opposed the project since she was not in favor of a tree
427 waiver and the intensification of development and traffic. (Absent: Foote)
428
429 8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Potential amendment to the Staging/Growth Plan
430 regarding the pace of development in the City.
431
432 Finke informed the Commission that notification had been given to the public via a public
433 hearing notice and mailing.
434
435 Mitchell suggested the Commission take all the testimony and then table and bring it up at the
436 next meeting. V. Reid said she'd be comfortable with taking action.
437
438 Finke explained that there had been a reduction in growth recommended by the Metropolitan
439 Council. He said staff was asking if this was the time to revise the Plan. He reviewed the
440 current growth of residential and commercial. He said the current staging period had quite a
441 bit of capacity available yet. The updated Met Council Forecasts show the number of
442 households would reduce from 125 units per year to 60 units per year. He said it was the Met
443 Council Forecast change that led the City to decide to send out a City wide mailing and hold
444 Open Houses to seek feedback for the Commission and Council. Attendees were asked to
445 complete a questionnaire. Finke said at the Open Houses potential actions were provided
446 such as "Take no action"; "Take no immediate action"; "Expedite 2015-18 Comp Plan
447 Update"; "Remove flexibility (jump ahead provision)"; "Amend the Staging Growth Plan to
448 move property into later staging periods"; and to consider if "Commercial/business properties
449 should be part of the changes."
450
451 R. Reid said she remembered the "jump ahead" process, but asked why we had it. Finke said
452 it allows for flexibility. Reid asked Finke if he could put all the responses together rather
453 than separate and all be o bined. At minimum put them all on one page. Finke said "yes".
454
.1/41\ 6-4C thjtij—
455 Public Hearing Opened at 10:33 p.m.
456
457 Reg Peterson of 225 Hwy 55 said he owns land within the City. He was part of the CP
458 process, all the meetings and time he dedicated; and that now the City would potentially
459 change the Staging Periods concerned him. He said in 2003 163 homes were permitted. His
460 family came to the City in 1966 and felt it would develop in a week and didn't live to see
461 development. He said nothing in the City will change the traffic. Wayzata School District is
462 getting full and they said they have planned for development and will need to fill them. The
463 Met Council said they have plenty of capacity.
464
465 Peterson said the City budget was based on development coming in and it's needed to keep
466 up all the things we are funding. If it were to all stop, how would the City meet its budget.
467 He thinks the current CP is fine and will restart the new one when it's required. He is hoping
468 to leave the Comp Plan the way it is.
469
470 Fernando Vivanco of 4508 Bluebell Trail South said he had talked to a lot of residents that
471 live north of Hwy 55 and didn't think there was an antigrowth issue, but rather that the City
472 needed to look at infrastructure and if we are overcrowding. To better understand the
473 implications of the houses being built today and the ones in the future. He said he agreed
474 with V. Reid's comment to request the surveys from the Open House and ones received from
475 Resident's that didn't attend the Open House be combined.
476
477 Mark Czech of 660 Shawnee Woods Road informed the Commission that it's never a great
478 time to advertise for things such as Open Houses, so suggested the next time the City needed
479 resident input to send out a comment card in the City newsletter.
480
481 Elizabeth Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods Road said she agreed that the traffic wasn't just
482 a Medina problem. She asked that a motion be made that the area north of 116 be put in a
483 different Staging Plan.
484
485 Chris Hilberg said the City went from 125 residential units per year to 60 residential units per
486 year. He encouraged the Commission to recommend slowing things down.
487
488 Martin, council member, of 440 Pheasant Ridge Road said she would like to hear from
489 residents. She wondered if the City should be promoting commercial development rather
490 than residential. Steve Theesfeld said it was a fabulous idea since the biggest traffic jams
491 were earlier in the morning and evening rush hour.
492
493 R. Reid said conceptually the jump ahead five year rule should be eliminated. She felt the
494 situation had changed from the time it was adopted.
495
496 White said she didn't disagree with pushing the years out, but felt they still needed to discuss
497 some of the percentages or figure out which properties should be removed from the staging
498 plan. She said they should consider the majority of the comments from the Open House and
499 they should be residents and land owners. R. Reid said the survey is skewed. White said the
500 Met Council had given us the opportunity to amend the CP and thought we should. She said
501 she thinks they should only reduce residential and not commercial properties.
502
503 Finke said the study directed by City Council was directed towards the staging plan only. He
504 said next fall during the CP changes would be the time, rather than now to make the changes.
505
10
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
Williams thinks they should recommend expediting the CP process and modify portions of
the CP with various amendments wouldn't be a good process. He said a lot of assumptions
had changed since its creation and it will take time to make the necessary changes, but it
should be limited to residential.
Mitchell said he agreed with Williams. He said he met with the Met Council and that their
estimates were extrapolated data and they think our growth will be slower. He said he would
like the City to look at their data also since we've been waiting 50 years for the infrastructure
to come to the City so we can develop and now we're concerned. He said we could still
preserve the City with a rural atmosphere and we don't have to have a grid layout like
Plymouth where every road would be a through road. He said he's in favor of going slow
with new population growth with new people.
Nolan said he generally agrees with Williams and Mitchell. He has some concern with a
disjointed approach. He was part of the CP process and feels staging growth isn't just about
density arM cost of infrastructure . Before we
dislodge thk two plans we need to at least look at it as a point of consideration.
fA��5� -'
R. Reid said she is concerned with Mitchell's comment when he said the Met Council
thought we are going to be taking a breather on development coming in the future.
Nolan said Lennar was the tart -development, which then triggered more development ,
to come to the City. \S�>co� ,� k (AA L ",
R. Reid said if you livo a you wouldn't think the CP worked. Mitchell said they
raised enough money to continue with the growth. Everyone knows the schools were being
planned for large schools over the last 10-15 years. V. Reid said the Met Council is not
pushing us right now and we should ratchet down development. Remove the flexibility in the
staging plan.
Public Hearing Closed at 11:09 pm
Motion by R. Reid, Seconded by V. Reid, to approve the elimination of the jump ahead
option for all uses and to move each of the staging periods back five years for residential
only.
Mitchell felt the proposal was moving too quickly and the data we have is insufficient to
make that recommendation. Williams agreed with Mitchell and hoped Finke would review
this next month. Mitchell said further study was necessary and that with the public sentiment
over the topic the City should begin immediately reviewing the staging issue.
R. Reid amends motion, William seconded, to direct staff to draft language for future
discussion to eliminate the jump -ahead provision and move back each of the staging areas by
five years, except for Business, Commercial, and Industrial zoned properties. Ayes by R.
Reid, Kent Williams, V. Reid, and Janet White. Nays by Nolan and Mitchell (Absent Foote).
9. Farhad Hakim — 22 Hamel Road — Site Plan Review to construct an Apartment
Building and an Accessory Parking Garage.
Sparks presented the updated aspects of the application. One foot bump -outs on each side
drive aisle 22' wide was proposed and a hip roof added to the side (alternative could be flat
J
11
557 roof), with one foot of green space next to the garage. The applicant was also proposing to
558 enlarge the windows.
559
560 R. Reid asked why the rendering was three stories, but the plans show two. Sparks said they
561 originally went for three stories, but there was insufficient parking. They didn't want to
562 update the 3D rendering.
563
564 Stan Ross shows the attached stone and the horizontal lap siding.
565
566 Nolan stated that there had been some improvements. He prefers the flat roof since it does a
567 better job of modulations. The applied stone looks fine except on the corners.
568
569 R. Reid stated that it didn't seem normal to have stone all of the way up a two-story building.
570 She also noted that the windows seemed awfully small along the sides.
571
572 Mitchell said he prefers the white colonial.
573
574 Williams said he prefers the stone.
575
576 Nolan and Mitchel stated that they much prefer the dark colors.
577
578 Nolan inquired if there was an opportunity to add a landscaping island in the parking lot.
579
580 Motion by Mitchell, seconded by White, to approve the Site Plan Review with the
581 recommended conditions noted in staff report and to add a 7th condition requiring an accurate
582 color rendering be submitted, along with adding an additional landscaping island in parking
583 lot. Ayes: Williams, Mitchell, V. Reid, White, and Nolan. R. Reid opposed. R. Reid stated
584 it is not a good fit for Uptown Hamel. (Absent: Foote)
585
586 10. Council Meeting Schedule
587 Mitchell agreed to attend and present at the October 7, 2014 Council meeting.
588
589 11. Adjourn
590 Motion by Williams, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn at 11.42 p.m. Motion carried
591 unanimously (Absent: Foote).
12
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Weir and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: September 30, 2014
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates October 7, 2014 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) Dominium Affordable Rental Townhomes — 510 Clydesdale — Dominium has applied for a Stage I
Plan to develop 26 affordable rental townhomes on 3.85 acres. The townhomes would include rent
and income limitations because the developer has received pledges for funding through Minnesota
Housing. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the September 9 meeting and
unanimously recommended approval. The matter is scheduled for review at the October 7 City
Council meeting.
B) Hamel Place apartment Site Plan Review — 22 Hamel Road — Farhad Hakim has requested approval
of a site plan review to construct a 8 -unit apartment building at 22 Hamel Road. The applicant has
also requested that the City consider vacating a portion of an existing utility easement to allow the
structure in this location. The Planning Commission reviewed at the August 13 and September 9
meeting and recommended approval. The matter is scheduled for review at the October 7 City
Council meeting.
C) Woodland Hill Preserve subdivision — east of CR 116, north of Medina Lake Drive — Charles Cudd
De Novo has requested preliminary/final plat and rezoning approval for the development of 15 lots
on the 16 acres (7.99 net acres) immediately north of the Toll Brothers Reserve of Medina project.
The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing at the September 9 meeting and unanimously
recommended approval. The matter is scheduled for review at the October 7 City Council meeting.
D) Villas at Medina Country Club PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat — East of CR116, south of
Shawnee Woods Road — Rachel Contracting has requested approval of a subdivision to include 28
"villa" style single family homes and 20 larger single family lots. The matter was scheduled for a
public hearing at the August 13 Planning Commission meeting, but the applicant requested the
hearing be postponed to address staff concerns.
E) Capital Knoll Subdivision — south of Hamel Road, north of Blackfoot Trail, east of Arrowhead
Drive — Princeton Capital — the applicant has requested a subdivision of the existing 30 acres into
three rural lots — the property fronts on both Hamel Road and Blackfoot Trail. The Planning
Commission held a Public Hearing at the August 13 meeting and recommended approval. The City
Council reviewed at the Sept. 2 meeting and directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval. The
applicant has informed staff that they may want to shift property lines slightly to allow more room
for animal structures. Staff believes a slight shift of the property lines should not have much of an
impact and will wait for further information.
F) Property Resources Development Co. (PRDC) Comp Plan Amendment/PUD Concept Plan — West
of Willow Drive, southwest of Deerhill Road — PRDC has requested a Comp Plan Amendment to
reguide 90 acres from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential (2-3.49 units/acre) and also a
PUD Concept Plan for a 99 lot subdivision. The PUD Concept Plan is incomplete at this time and
will be scheduled for review when complete information is submitted. The Comp Plan Amendment
Public Hearing was delayed indefinitely at the request of the applicant.
G) Go2Print Media Site Plan Review — Go2Print Media has requested Site Plan Review approval to
construct an accessory storage building at 62 Hamel Road. The City Council adopted a resolution of
approval at the Sept. 16 meeting and the permit has been issued. This project will be closed.
H) St Peter and Paul Cemetery CUP — St. Peter and Paul church intends to expand their cemetery at
the southeast corner of County Road 19 and Hamel Road. Improvements include new access drives,
Planning Department Update
Page 1 of 2 October 7, 2014
City Council Meeting
landscaping, stormwater improvements and additional grave sites. The Planning Commission held a
Public Hearing at the. July 9, 2013 meeting and recommended approval. The City Council adopted a
resolution of approval at the September 2 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to finalize the
terms and conditions of approval before closing the file.
I) Wakefield Subdivision — 3385 County Road 24 — The Wakefield Family Partnership has requested
approval of a rural subdivision of 74 acres at the southeast corner of Homestead Trail and County
Road 24. The City Council adopted a resolution of approval at the September 16 meeting. Staff will
await an application for final plat.
J) Woods of Medina Preliminary Plat — Jeff Pederson has requested preliminary plat and rezoning to
subdivide 9.5 acres (8.8 net acres) at the intersection of CR116 and Shawnee Woods Road into 16
Rl single family lots. The request includes a vacation of a portion of Shawnee Woods Trail and a
partial waiver from tree preservation requirements. The City Council adopted documents approving
the requests at the January 7 meeting. Staff will await a final plat application.
K) Enclave at Brockton 4th Addn — Lennar has requested approval of the next phase of the Enclave at
Brockton, to include 18 single family homes. The City Council approved at the April 15 meeting,
and staff will work with the applicant on the conditions of approval.
L) Hamel Haven Final Plat — 805 Hamel Road — JJC Hamel LLC has requested final plat approval for
a proposed lot split. The Council granted preliminary approval back in 2011. The Council adopted
a resolution granting final plat approval on May 6. Staff will work with the application to complete
the conditions of approval.
M) Three Rivers Park/Reimer Lot Rearrangement — the property owners have requested a lot
rearrangement to allow a "land swap" of property which the Reimers own on the west side of
Homestead Trail and which Three Rivers owns on the east side of Homestead Trail. The City
Council reviewed at the August 7, 2013 meeting and adopted a resolution of approval at the August
20, 2013 meeting. Staff will work with the owners to finalize the conditions of approval.
N) Morrison Lot Split and Variance — Truxtun and Adrienne Morrison have requested to subdivide
their 18 acres at 1525 Hunter Drive into two lots. The City Council approved of the division at the
June 4 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to finalize the terms and conditions of the
approval.
0) D.R. Horton Stage I Plan — D.R. Horton has requested Stage I Plan approval for development of
Mixed Use property west of Arrowhead, east of Mohawk and north of Highway 55. The entire
property is approximately 84 acres in area (approximately 59 acres upland) and the applicant
proposes 85 single family lots, a 54 unit apartment building and 5 acres of commercial development.
The City Council granted Stage I approval at the January 21 meeting.
Other Projects
A) Comp Plan Revision Discussion — the Planning Commission reviewed the material from the study
of the Staging and Growth Plan and held a Public Hearing at the September 9 meeting. Staff has
attached the Planning Commission report for reference and to allow the City Council more time to
review the feedback from residents.
Following the Hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4-2 to direct staff to prepare a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Staging/Growth plan. The Commission directed that the
amendment should include:
1) Removal of the flexibility for residential property to "jump ahead" a staging period
2) Amending the Staging/Growth plan by placing all property guided for residential
development into a staging period one later than in which it is located currently.
The Commission also recommended that the City expedite its decennial Comp Plan update to the
extent possible. Staff intends to prepare the requested amendments for a Public Hearing, tentatively
for the October 14 Planning Commission meeting
B) Cable Build -out — staff continues to be involved with the analysis of information from Mediacom.
C) Tower Drive stormwater project — staff assisted in discussions related to land acquisition for
stormwater improvements.
Planning Department Update
Page 2 of 2 October 7, 2014
City Council Meeting
1 CITY OF MEDINA
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes
4 Tuesday September 9, 2014
5
6 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
7
8 Present: Planning Commissioners Charles Nolan, Robin Reid, Kent Williams, Robert
9 Mitchell, Victoria Reid, and Janet White.
10
11 Absent: Randy Foote
12
13 Also Present: Council Member Kathleen Martin, City Planner Dusty Finke, Planning
14 Assistant Debra Peterson, and Planning Consultant Nate Sparks.
15
16 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
17 No public comments.
18
19 3. Update from City Council proceedings
20 Martin updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council.
21
22 4. Planning Department Report
23 Finke informed the Commission that the City hadn't received any new land use applications.
24
25 5. Approval of the August 13, 2014 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes.
26
27 Motion by Williams, seconded by White, to approve the August 13, 2014, Planning
28 Commission minutes. Motion carries unanimously (Absent Foote).
29
30 6. Dominium — 510 Clydesdale Trail — Mixed Use Stage I Plan for development of 26
31 affordable rental townhomes.
32
33 Sparks explained the application is requesting a Stage I phase plan which establishes uses,
34 residential density, and general site layout. He further explained that after Stage I, then Stage
35 II would be required and this stage would require building and engineering plans for the
36 project.
37
38 Sparks explained the request was for 26 townhome units and the Comprehensive Plan
39 guidance is Mixed Use Business and the zoning is Mixed Use (MU). He explained the
40 project has eight total buildings and the zoning ordinance allows for no more than 7 units per
41 acre.
42
43 Sparks explained the project was eligible for density bonuses because it included affordable
44 housing, had common open space, and that this type of construction was designed for
45 reducing noise. He stated that these bonuses give the project a maximum density of 7 units an
46 acre, or 26 units. Sparks explained that staff originally interpreted density to be net density
47 and not gross density. The applicant's attorney pointed out that the City's code does not use
48 the term "net" but only "acres." Staff and the City attorney discussed this issue and agreed
49 that, as written, the minimum area per residential unit in the MU district is based on gross
1
50 acreage. Staff believes that this was not what was intended, but is the way the code is
51 currently written. In this case, net acreage would result in a maximum of 25 units.
52
53 Sparks noted that the building design, parking, landscaping and buffer yards all appear
54 consistent with code requirements. He also noted that the site slopes down to a wetland and
55 some of the units won't have a lot of space in their rear yard, which makes the common open
56 space important.
57
58 The proposed landscaping and buffer areas meet the minimum standards.
59
60 Williams asked what the actual density of the project was as proposed. Sparks said it is right
61 below 7 units when considering gross acreage and just above using net acreage. Williams
62 asked where density bonuses come into play. Sparks said it helps the current proposal go
63 from 5 to 7 units an acre based on the density bonuses.
64
65 Williams asked how the City could be consistent with the Comp Plan if the density isn't
66 brought up to 7 units per acre. Sparks said it's an overall density within the land use.
67 Williams asked where and how will the City be able to increase the density to meet the
68 density needed. Sparks said there are other parcels out there to increase those density
69 numbers. Finke said the Uptown Hamel (UH) area has a requirement to increase density in
70 some areas. Nolan asked if in a more MU district the City would just be counting the
71 residential or would it be both. Williams said only the residential would be counted.
72
73 Mitchell asked if the building would be sprinkled. Sparks stated that the plans did not state
74 that they were, but suggested Mitchell ask the applicant for clarification. Mitchell asked how
75 the property would be platted to allow for each unit to be sold separately. Sparks said it
76 would be under one ownership as proposed.
77
78 Nolan said when he saw the application previously they had concern with the depth of
79 driveways and asked if that had been corrected. Sparks said they had improved the depth of
80 the driveways to meet the City's minimum requirements. Sparks also noted the trash
81 receptacles would also be able to fit in the garage, which had also been a previous concern.
82
83 Nick Anderson, Senior Development for Dominium, said this is the second time this has
84 come before the Commission. He said the intent of this new application was to make an
85 application that met all City regulations and under existing mixed use zoning so that a PUD
86 would not be required. They'd taken away the use of City owned lot adjacent. The majority
87 of the changes had been a reduction in density and making modifications meet all minimum
88 requirements. He said the buildings were not being proposed to be sprinklered as it is not
89 required under the state building code.
90
91 V. Reid asked how the commons area would be used. Anderson said they've provided more
92 playground space and the site would be well maintained and monitoring during business
93 hours. V. Reid said the City had an Open House and she was asked questions as to how the
94 clubhouse would be used. Anderson said a clubroom would be available to rent. It would
95 have a kitchen and seating areas. It would also be utilized for after school activities with help
96 of Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners (IOCP).
97
98 Public Hearing Opened at 7:33 p.m.
99
2
100 Holly Leurer of 4290 Wild Meadows Drive asked if the project was Section 8 or 42. She also
101 asked how the applicant would be able to monitor multiple families in a unit, such as those
102 with 4 bedrooms. She stated that various concerns were raised during the previous review
103 about how the applicant runs their projects, and stated that she does not see that anything has
104 changed except that Larkin Hoffmann is representing the applicant.
105
106 Anderson stated that they are not Section 8, but rather Section 42. He said they have a
107 maximum number of people based on number of bedrooms, which would be enforced and
108 that they would have a property manager on -site.
109
110 Anderson said within the staff report there were a number of letters from other Cities showing
111 support for their project, such as St. Paul and Lino Lakes. Nolan asked about the concerns
112 that were raised with the project in the City of Plymouth. Anderson said they had lost their
113 landscaping company and the issues weren't noticed right away. V. Reid asked what on -site
114 manager meant. Anderson said a Manager would be on -site 2-3 days per week.
115
116 Bob Belzer of Wild Meadows said he recently moved into the City and chose Medina
117 because of the current community. He said he is concerned with affordable housing coming
118 to the community and it would tax our City resources along with reducing property values.
119 He asked if the project will be maintained and what the policy would be for their tenants on
120 credit score. He raised concern over the use of our Police Force and the number of Police
121 calls it would generate. He said he's against the project and understands they have a law
122 firm supporting the project and he's happy to support legally against it.
123
124 Nolan asked Sparks to walk them through the mixed use zoning and how it worked. He said
125 there was some confusion between the Comprehensive Plan and Mixed Use (MU) and how
126 just residential could comply with MU and asked about staff's position. Sparks said the MU -
127 B land use was described in the staff report and that staff believes that a single parcel
128 developing with strictly residential was not inconsistent. Sparks noted the City reviewed an
129 application last month that was guided Mixed Use -Business and only one use was proposed.
130
131 Williams asked for clarification on how the MU district could be used for only residential, or
132 only commercial and still be consistent with the land use. Finke said the property is four
133 acres in size which is a relatively small proportion of the total land use. He said when the
134 City zoned the land areas within Mixed Use -Business, it took into consideration that many
135 sites were small and would need to have individual uses or combination of properties in order
136 to develop.
137
138 Chris Hilberg of 4559 Trillium Drive North said the Comp Plan should be readily available
139 and understandable. He said when reviewing the MU Guidance, it is MU- B and that the
140 application doesn't comply. He said he reviewed the language and handed out the definition
141 of MU -B to the Commission and staff. He said that if the term "opportunities" means
142 optional, then everything in the definition is optional. He also noted that it reads "two or
143 more of the following: residential, general business, commercial, or office." He explained
144 that the two or more uses are required but staff says only one use is acceptable. If that is the
145 case, it should read "one or more." He said once a fact is pointed out that the code is being
146 misinterpreted it must be discussed and decided on interpretation. He said in the packet
147 Finke says only one use on a single parcel is allowable, but after checking all minutes and
148 reports he never saw where the topic had been discussed.
149
3
150 Hilberg highlighted language on page 7-2 of the Comp Plan which states: "the development
151 of mixed -use zoning will need to include a minimum of two districts to address vertically
152 integrated mixed use (Mixed -Use Business), where residential space is above the commercial
153 space, and lateral mixed use (Mixed -Use) where commercial and residential building exist
154 together in the zoning district." He noted that there are two similar but distinct land uses.
155 The language on 7-2 clearly implies that Mixed Use -Business is to be vertically integrated.
156 Maybe that's not what we've done, and maybe that's not how we've interpreted it, but is it
157 what is said. If this it isn't what it means, then why is the language in there?
158
159 Hilberg then handed out a copy of Page 7-2 highlighting the following language: "the Mixed -
160 Use Business designation assumes a strong business component." He said he read the Comp
161 Plan from front to back and did see a few areas of flexibility, but land use within a site was
162 not one of them. The staff report says the other uses "surrounding" the Dominium project
163 make a mix in the area, but he didn't see that it was allowable per the Comp Plan. Hilberg
164 said that the correct thing would be for the applicant to request a Comp Plan amendment for
165 high density residential, but they want to skip that step. V. Reid asked if he would support
166 the CP Amendment. Hilberg said that is the correct process. He said it would be important
167 to review just the residential use and he believes Dominium doesn't think they really are a
168 mixed use. Hilberg provided a previous memo from Dominium that stated the project wasn't
169 a mixed use.
170
171 Frank Mignone of 3316 Red Fox Drive said that when Dominium pulled their application
172 previously it was really a back door approach. He said if the City or public had questions
173 tonight the applicant should have to answer them. Fifteen years from now they could sell the
174 townhome units individually. Dominium has no power over the City.
175
176 Nolan asked the public to be respectful in their comments and process.
177
178 Kimberly Murrin of 290 Cherry Hill Trail said she was concerned with multiple families
179 living on the property and asked if multiple families would be allowed in the same unit.
180
181 Murrin also commented that the letters of recommendations from other cities all ended with
182 the same comment in the letters and found it odd. She asked what Dominium's goal was for
183 developing the project. What would the cost be to add the fire sprinklers in each townhome
184 unit? She said it would help people feel safer in case someone was being careless. She asked
185 how the City would know if there was an actual demand for affordable housing in our area.
186 She went on to say that it would be great to know if we are actually helping people in the
187 local community. She further asked how the units would be advertised and if it would just be
188 to the local area or downtown. She wanted to know if they were proposing to bring people
189 out to Medina from downtown and thinks the City should get an answer. She asked if
190 Dominium would be getting property tax breaks. She said she sees hesitancy by the applicant
191 to answer questions during the Public Hearing process, which doesn't get the hearing off to a
192 great start, and she thinks that an open discussion should take place.
193
194 Nolan said installing a sprinkler system is a building code and the City can't require it if it's
195 not a code requirement. He also added that the applicant can choose how much input they
196 want to provide during the process, but stated meeting with neighbors to discuss concerns
197 was usually in their best interest and was encouraged.
198
199 Public Hearing Closed at 8:18 pm.
200
201 V. Reid asked what the difference was between Section 8 and 42. Anderson said Section 8
202 Housing was a direct subsidy for housing which was more popular in the past where the
203 government would pay a portion of the rent. Section 42 supports the construction cost of
204 project but the rents are fully paid by the tenants. There are income and rent limits set for the
205 whole metro area based upon 60% of the median income. For a family of four, the median
206 income is $80,000/year. The City of Medina is not providing any financial support in the
207 proposed application. Anderson also said he wasn't trying to avoid addressing some of the
208 questions, but rather the data is all available in previous minutes and documents and he would
209 rather keep the focus on the site plan.
210
211 Nolan said their charge as a Commission with the proposed application is rather narrow and
212 it's about density and land use. A concern was raised with the need for resources and that it
213 would need to be accounted for in the long range. Nolan said the subsidies used are Federal
214 and they are looking at the application no different than any other project.
215
216 Nolan asked Staff what the City of Medina's definition of "family" was and Finke said:
217
218 "Family — Family is any one of the following:
219 a. An individual;
220 b. Two or more persons related by blood, marriage or adoption and maintaining a
221 common household;
222 c. A group of not more than five unrelated persons maintaining a common household.
223
224 White asked Finke to clarify where in the packet it explained that the Planning Commission
225 and Council decided the Comp Plan designation and subsequent zoning for the property.
226 Finke said allowing a property to develop with only one use was discussed during the
227 Uptown Hamel discussion and that it was recognized that there was a number of small parcels
228 which would make mixing uses difficult. The zoning of this property was specifically
229 discussed since it was not as close to Uptown Hamel and that the MU designation was chosen
230 as an alternative.
231
232 Nolan asked if the City Attorney weighed in on the zoning and CP guidance. Finke said yes
233 it was all discussed at the time of the previous application and he concurred with the
234 information in the current staff report.
235
236 Williams said he didn't agree with Hilberg's comments and interpretation on page 7-2 of the
237 Comp Plan. He said rental property is more of a commercial type use and considered the
238 application a mixed use. He said the Commission should focus on their role and he thinks
239 they should go through the City objectives without further discussion. The Commission
240 agreed. Williams stated that going through the purpose, it would appear:
241
242 1. Site has limited open space or natural features to preserve.
243 2. The density meets code requirements based upon the applicant's proposed interpretation
244 which has been reviewed by the City attorney
245 3. The district is designed to be a type of development that is a transition, which this seems
246 to provide between the Medina Entertainment Center and the golf club and potential
247 residential to the north.
248 4. The buildings will have a sound buffer, and exterior design and landscaping appear to
249 meet requirements.
250 5. Site accessibility could be discussed by the Commission, but appears to be met.
5
251 6. The proposed development appears consistent with the City's Comp Plan goals, use of
252 resources, and the need for affordable housing.
253 7. It was acknowledged that there is a fear by some residents that the project would use too
254 much of the City's resources. The Commission doesn't have enough information to
255 confirm such a claim.
256
257 Williams said, from looking at these objectives, he thinks the project should be approved.
258
259 R. Reid said she doesn't have any reason to assume this project would need more resources or
260 use of services than any other project. Nolan said discussion on use of too many resources
261 should be brought up when looking at the Comp Plan. This should have been considered then
262 and not now with an application. Providing affordable housing and diversity is a City goal.
263 V. Reid said it would be nice to have the developer rent to people from within the area and
264 pull in renters from the City and neighboring communities.
265
266 Finke suggested modifying condition #1 to read: "The plan shall be consistent with
267 requirements of the Mixed Use zoning district. Subject to density bonuses described in the
268 Mixed Use zoning district, the maximum number of units shall not exceed the density
269 permitted in the district."
270
271 Motion by William, seconded by R. Reid , to recommend approval of the Mixed Use Stage
272 I Plan Review for development of 26 affordable rental townhomes at 510 Clydesdale Trail
273 with the conditions noted in the staff report, except for the change noted to condition #1.
274 Motion carried unanimously. (Absent Foote)
275
276 Finke announced the Dominium application will be heard by the City Council at the October
277 7, 2014 meeting.
278
279 7. Charles Cudd De Novo — Preliminary Plat and Rezoning for 15 lot single family
280 residential development to be located east of Co. Rd. 116 and south of Hackamore Road
281
282 Finke presented the application explaining the project consisted of 15 single family lots and
283 the overall land area was 16.3 gross acres and a net area of 7.9 acres. The lots are guided
284 Low Density Residential and zoned RR-UR. The rezoning request is for R-1 Single Family
285 Residential zoning with a request for a variance to the maximum cul-de-sac length. A
286 Preliminary and Final Plat is also being requested. The public hearing is for the Preliminary
287 and Final Plats. Finke reviewed an aerial of the parcel and said the City reviewed a concept
288 plan for this property in June and the current proposal is quite similar. He said the Council
289 preferred the cul-de-sac designed to preserve a number of trees. The low density requires 2-
290 3.5 units/acre and the development is proposed to be 1.9 units/acre. The City may consider
291 exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural
292 features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Staff recommends that Lot 15 be an
293 Outlot until frontage is acquired. Staff recommends the preserved wooded area be placed
294 into an Outlot with protections established.
295
296 Finke explained that broader traffic impacts were included in the CR 116/Hackamore traffic
297 study with the Reserve of Medina previously.
298
299 Finke said approximately 50 percent of the trees were proposed to be removed and the Code
300 allows 20% without replacement. Staff recommends a tree waiver if the applicant can meet
301 the requirements of the waiver, since it would otherwise require 2398 inches in tree
6
302 replacement. He explained even if they developed the site with more density, they would
303 have to remove even more trees.
304
305 Finke said if the Commission was supportive of the rezoning and variances, the conditions
306 could remain as written. Mitchell asked if the tree waiver was added in the conditions. Finke
307 said yes it was condition #12. R. Reid asked which trees were being recommended to be
308 preserved. Finke said at the rear of lot 15, with the exception of trees being removed for the
309 Storm Water Treatment area.
310
311 Nolan said it's a 50 percent loss of trees with or without the homes. Finke said the tree
312 removal percentage assumes some tree removal in the pad areas. He said if there is support
313 for a tree waiver, it would need to be formalized approving building pads and not just lots.
314 Nolan said the homes will be placed where the rectangles are shown on the plan. Nolan
315 asked if a developer could expand the pad and take more trees in the future. Finke said trees
316 would have to be replaced if they exceed the proposed grading pad area, so yes. Two trees
317 per year are allowed to be removed without penalty. Finke said with the waiver it's possible
318 to place a condition to tighten up the restrictions to possibly not allow the two trees per year
319 without penalty within the development.
320
321 Finke explained lot sizes and lot widths. He said the minimum requirement is 90 foot width
322 lots and the applicant meets that requirement.
323
324 Mitchell wants to make sure that reducing the size of the lots is worth it. Finke said the lots
325 proposed exceed 90 feet. Williams asked concerning the tree waiver and if it would require
326 off -site planting and also wondered where the trees would be planted. Finke said the City has
327 an aggressive planting plan and could be accommodated. If not, the applicant could provide
328 money to the City for maintenance.
329
330 Nolan asked where the waterline would be located. Finke said they generally like to loop the
331 waterline. He said the waterline follows the road and loops to the west for future
332 development. They would be boring 8 feet deep and hopefully missing roots of trees during
333 the installation.
334
335 Richard Denman of Charles Cudd DeNovo presented their application and tree replacement
336 plan. He said running the road through gave them two more lots rather than the cul-de-sac,
337 yet the extended cul-de-sac saves many trees. He said the Variance is for the length of the
338 cul-de-sac. He said a cul-de-sac can serve 20 lots and their project only has 14 lots. They are
339 working with Toll Brothers and the City to resolve the frontage issue on Lot 15.
340
341 Williams said they gave up two lots to preserve the area of woods. He said if they would
342 have run the road through Lot 15 they would have gotten two more lots, but they would have
343 had to take down many trees and would then have to do tree replacement.
344
345 Nolan asked what the value of replacing 2000 trees would cost. Denman said about $100.00
346 an inch per City estimates.
347
348 Dave Nash, EVS Engineering, presented a recalculation of tree removal / replacement that
349 staff hadn't seen prior to the meeting. He said he reviewed the proposal of optional tree
350 removal minimums from the Nelson property and then the original Cavanaugh property and
351 came up with 3902 inches. He said in theory the number of inches needed for removal came
352 up to 185 inches plus the 194, making a total of 379 inches of replacement.
7
353
354 V. Reid questioned how the tree replacement was determined. Finke explained the 60 foot
355 width lots helped meet the minimum density allowed.
356
357 Nash said they are open to negotiation on the tree replacement. He said the watermain is a
358 requirement to be looped and the only other choice is to open -cut and take down more trees,
359 which they didn't want to do.
360
361 Public Hearing opened at 9:41 pm.
362
363 Steve Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods said he had two concerns. 1) The egress exiting out
364 of the Reserve of Medina, since their development has to drive through the Reserve now onto
365 Aster Road to get out onto County Road 116. He said he doesn't know how the Reserve of
366 Medina got planned, since they will now have 15 more homes that will have that many more
367 vehicles utilizing the access onto Co. Rd 116. He asked that it be considered if it was even
368 safe, since vehicles exiting the Reserve out onto 116 going south bound would block the cars
369 behind them wanting to go right/north since there isn't a turn lane for the vehicles to go right
370 (north) off of Aster Road . He asked what would happen if they had to suddenly evacuate the
371 area. He said the City keeps putting more and more houses accessing through the Reserve of
372 Medina Development which is of concern to him.
373
374 Secondly, Theesfeld said he was concerned with the volume of tree removal and the
375 possibility of the Commission giving a Waiver. He told the Commission that if they approve
376 of a waiver then they would have to approve one for every development; and if this was the
377 case then why do we have the requirement.
378
379 Public Hearing Closed at 9:46 pm
380
381 Williams said he didn't have an issue with the rezoning or Variance for the cul-de-sac length.
382 V. Reid asked about the two lots being developed separately and if it would provide more
383 flexibility if a PUD was used. She said she is concerned with 50% of the trees being removed.
384 Williams said that the arborist determined that the area being preserved is the best quality of
385 trees on -site and that the application should assume the two lots developing together. V. Reid
386 said she doesn't feel we should be giving the tree waiver. Mitchell discussed tree
387 replacements. Nolan said on the variance there hasn't been any comments from the Public
388 Works (PW) Department. Finke said it's not really the length rather than the emergency
389 access. R. Reid asked why we limited the length of the cul-de-sacs. Nolan asked if the PW's
390 absence of comments on the issue meant they were in favor of the cul-de-sac. Finke said PW
391 was fine with the length.
392
393 Denman said he was working on road frontage with Toll Brothers to find a solution for the
394 Outlot. The Outlot would turn into a buildable lot and hopes to have that resolved before it
395 gets to the City Council.
396
397 V. Reid said she wasn't in favor of the tree waiver. Nolan suggested the City work with the
398 developer to issue a partial waiver since the developer is preserving the most valuable area of
399 the site. Mitchell asked if the extensive use of retaining walls were to save more trees. Nash
400 said yes, the retaining walls were necessary to save trees. Nolan suggested a 50 percent
401 waiver. Williams asked for clarification of what a 50 percent waiver would entail. Nash said
402 it would equate to approximately 1200 inches and he thinks we should consider how the
403 applicant had been working with the City on redesigning the layout of the development.
8
404
405 Charles Cudd, applicant, said they met with the City Arborist and the proposed woodland
406 area to be preserved is the highest quality wooded area. He said they are losing two lots and
407 he doesn't feel they should have to do so much tree replacement since they don't think they
408 are benefited enough. He also stated that he doesn't feel 1200 inches of tree replacement is
409 realistic. He said the City Arborist supported this plan and to have to provide so many inches
410 of trees isn't balanced with what they are giving up in revenue. Williams said he would be
411 willing to go down to 1000 inches with the Waiver.
412
413 R. Reid said she is concerned with the traffic, but since the City has given the green light on
414 developing this site she thinks we have to make a decision.
415
416 Ryan Lindell of 565 Hackamore Road said you can't go south on 116.
417
418 Nolan asked that in the future when the City receives new subdivisions that the Commission
419 also gets in their packet a street map/area map of existing developments. He said it would
420 help to better understand the traffic flow in the area of the proposed project. He said they
421 can't require this developer to pay for traffic improvements at this point.
422
423 Motion by Williams, Seconded by R. Reid, to approve of the Charles Cudd DeNovo
424 Variance and Rezoning with the conditions set forth by staff with the exception of #8 in that
425 the applicant replace up to 1200 inches. Ayes by Williams, Mitchell, R. Reid, White, and
426 Nolan. Nay by V. Reid. V. Reid opposed the project since she was not in favor of a tree
427 waiver and the intensification of development and traffic. (Absent: Foote)
428
429 8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Potential amendment to the Staging/Growth Plan
430 regarding the pace of development in the City.
431
432 Finke informed the Commission that notification had been given to the public via a public
433 hearing notice and mailing.
434
435 Mitchell suggested the Commission take all the testimony and then table and bring it up at the
436 next meeting. V. Reid said she'd be comfortable with taking action.
437
438 Finke explained that there had been a reduction in growth recommended by the Metropolitan
439 Council. He said staff was asking if this was the time to revise the Plan. He reviewed the
440 current growth of residential and commercial. He said the current staging period had quite a
441 bit of capacity available yet. The updated Met Council Forecasts show the number of
442 households would reduce from 125 units per year to 60 units per year. He said it was the Met
443 Council Forecast change that led the City to decide to send out a City wide mailing and hold
444 Open Houses to seek feedback for the Commission and Council. Attendees were asked to
445 complete a questionnaire. Finke said at the Open Houses potential actions were provided
446 such as "Take no action"; "Take no immediate action"; "Expedite 2015-18 Comp Plan
447 Update"; "Remove flexibility (jump ahead provision)"; "Amend the Staging Growth Plan to
448 move property into later staging periods"; and to consider if "Commercial/business properties
449 should be part of the changes."
450
451 R. Reid said she remembered the "jump ahead" process, but asked why we had it. Finke said
452 it allows for flexibility. V. Reid asked Finke if he could put all the responses together rather
453 than separate and all be combined. At minimum put them all on one page. Finke said "yes".
454
9
455 Public Hearing Opened at 10:33 p.m.
456
457 Reg Peterson of 225 Hwy 55 said he owns land within the City. He was part of the CP
458 process, all the meetings and time he dedicated; and that now the City would potentially
459 change the Staging Periods concerned him. He said in 2003 163 homes were permitted. His
460 family came to the City in 1966 and felt it would develop in a week and didn't live to see
461 development. He said nothing in the City will change the traffic. Wayzata School District is
462 getting full and they said they have planned for development and will need to fill them. The
463 Met Council said they have plenty of capacity.
464
465 Peterson said the City budget was based on development coming in and it's needed to keep
466 up all the things we are funding. If it were to all stop, how would the City meet its budget.
467 He thinks the current CP is fine and will restart the new one when it's required. He is hoping
468 to leave the Comp Plan the way it is.
469
470 Fernando Vivanco of 4508 Bluebell Trail South said he had talked to a lot of residents that
471 live north of Hwy 55 and didn't think there was an antigrowth issue, but rather that the City
472 needed to look at infrastructure and if we are overcrowding. To better understand the
473 implications of the houses being built today and the ones in the future. He said he agreed
474 with V. Reid's comment to request the surveys from the Open House and ones received from
475 Resident's that didn't attend the Open House be combined.
476
477 Mark Czech of 660 Shawnee Woods Road informed the Commission that it's never a great
478 time to advertise for things such as Open Houses, so suggested the next time the City needed
479 resident input to send out a comment card in the City newsletter.
480
481 Elizabeth Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods Road said she agreed that the traffic wasn't just
482 a Medina problem. She asked that a motion be made that the area north of 116 be put in a
483 different Staging Plan.
484
485 Chris Hilberg said the City went from 125 residential units per year to 60 residential units per
486 year. He encouraged the Commission to recommend slowing things down.
487
488 Martin, council member, of 440 Pheasant Ridge Road said she would like to hear from
489 residents. She wondered if the City should be promoting commercial development rather
490 than residential. Steve Theesfeld said it was a fabulous idea since the biggest traffic jams
491 were earlier in the morning and evening rush hour.
492
493 R. Reid said conceptually the jump ahead five year rule should be eliminated. She felt the
494 situation had changed from the time it was adopted.
495
496 White said she didn't disagree with pushing the years out, but felt they still needed to discuss
497 some of the percentages or figure out which properties should be removed from the staging
498 plan. She said they should consider the majority of the comments from the Open House and
499 they should be residents and land owners. R. Reid said the survey is skewed. White said the
500 Met Council had given us the opportunity to amend the CP and thought we should. She said
501 she thinks they should only reduce residential and not commercial properties.
502
503 Finke said the study directed by City Council was directed towards the staging plan only. He
504 said next fall during the CP changes would be the time, rather than now to make the changes.
505
10
506 Williams thinks they should recommend expediting the CP process and modify portions of
507 the CP with various amendments wouldn't be a good process. He said a lot of assumptions
508 had changed since its creation and it will take time to make the necessary changes, but it
509 should be limited to residential.
510
511 Mitchell said he agreed with Williams. He said he met with the Met Council and that their
512 estimates were extrapolated data and they think our growth will be slower. He said he would
513 like the City to look at their data also since we've been waiting 50 years for the infrastructure
514 to come to the City so we can develop and now we're concerned. He said we could still
515 preserve the City with a rural atmosphere and we don't have to have a grid layout like
516 Plymouth where every road would be a through road. He said he's in favor of going slow
517 with new population growth with new people.
518
519 Nolan said he generally agrees with Williams and Mitchell. He has some concern with a
520 disjointed approach. He was part of the CP process and feels staging growth isn't just about
521 density and cost of infrastructure and how and when to plan the infrastructure. Before we
522 dislodge the two plans we need to at least look at it as a point of consideration.
523
524 R. Reid said she is concerned with Mitchell's comment when he said the Met Council
525 thought we are going to be taking a breather on development coming in the future.
526
527 Nolan said Lennar was the one to start development, which then triggered more development
528 to come to the City.
529
530 R. Reid said if you live in the area you wouldn't think the CP worked. Mitchell said they
531 raised enough money to continue with the growth. Everyone knows the schools were being
532 planned for large schools over the last 10-15 years. V. Reid said the Met Council is not
533 pushing us right now and we should ratchet down development. Remove the flexibility in the
534 staging plan.
535
536 Public Hearing Closed at 11:09 pm
537
538 Motion by R. Reid, Seconded by V. Reid, to approve the elimination of the jump ahead
539 option for all uses and to move each of the staging periods back five years for residential
540 only.
541
542 Mitchell felt the proposal was moving too quickly and the data we have is insufficient to
543 make that recommendation. Williams agreed with Mitchell and hoped Finke would review
544 this next month. Mitchell said further study was necessary and that with the public sentiment
545 over the topic the City should begin immediately reviewing the staging issue.
546
547 R. Reid amends motion, William seconded, to direct staff to draft language for future
548 discussion to eliminate the jump -ahead provision and move back each of the staging areas by
549 five years, except for Business, Commercial, and Industrial zoned properties. Ayes by R.
550 Reid, Kent Williams, V. Reid, and Janet White. Nays by Nolan and Mitchell (Absent Foote).
551
552 9. Farhad Hakim — 22 Hamel Road — Site Plan Review to construct an Apartment
553 Building and an Accessory Parking Garage.
554
555 Sparks presented the updated aspects of the application. One foot bump -outs on each side
556 drive aisle 22' wide was proposed and a hip roof added to the side (alternative could be flat
11
557 roof), with one foot of green space next to the garage. The applicant was also proposing to
558 enlarge the windows.
559
560 R. Reid asked why the rendering was three stories, but the plans show two. Sparks said they
561 originally went for three stories, but there was insufficient parking. They didn't want to
562 update the 3D rendering.
563
564 Stan Ross shows the attached stone and the horizontal lap siding.
565
566 Nolan stated that there had been some improvements. He prefers the flat roof since it does a
567 better job of modulations. The applied stone looks fine except on the corners.
568
569 R. Reid stated that it didn't seem normal to have stone all of the way up a two-story building.
570 She also noted that the windows seemed awfully small along the sides.
571
572 Mitchell said he prefers the white colonial.
573
574 Williams said he prefers the stone.
575
576 Nolan and Mitchel stated that they much prefer the dark colors.
577
578 Nolan inquired if there was an opportunity to add a landscaping island in the parking lot.
579
580 Motion by Mitchell, seconded by White, to approve the Site Plan Review with the
581 recommended conditions noted in staff report and to add a 7th condition requiring an accurate
582 color rendering be submitted, along with adding an additional landscaping island in parking
583 lot. Ayes: Williams, Mitchell, V. Reid, White, and Nolan. R. Reid opposed. R. Reid stated
584 it is not a good fit for Uptown Hamel. (Absent: Foote)
585
586 10. Council Meeting Schedule
587 Mitchell agreed to attend and present at the October 7, 2014 Council meeting.
588
589 11. Adjourn
590 Motion by Williams, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn at 11.42 p.m. Motion carried
591 unanimously (Absent: Foote).
12
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: October 9, 2014
MEETING: October 14, 2014 Planning Commission
SUBJ: Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Staging and Growth Plan; Projections
Background
At the July 15 meeting, the City Council directed staff to initiate a study of the City's Staging
and Growth Plan. This direction came following discussions related to concerns raised to the
City Council members of the rapid pace of residential development over the past few years, and
the impact that such development has on infrastructure and services. There were also
discussions related to the Metropolitan Council's adoption of the Thrive MSP2040 plan. The
Thrive documents include projections of population, household, and employment growth in the
various communities in the metropolitan areas. The projections show less growth in Medina
than was previously projected and planned for.
With these two factors in mind, the City Council directed staff to initiate a study of the
Staging/Growth Plan of the Comprehensive Plan. The study is intended to assist the Planning
Commission and City Council in determining whether to consider amendments to the
Staging/Growth Plan. The City Council specifically limited the scope of the study to the
Staging/Growth Plan. Matters related to planned land uses, the extent and location of the MUSA
(Metropolitan Urban Service Area), and so forth are planned to be discussed in the next few
years as the City updates the entire Comprehensive Plan.
Staff held two open houses and solicited feedback on the relevant issues in August. Information
was also posted to the City's website and feedback solicited from residents and property owners
who did not attend the open houses. Staff collected this information and provided additional
study, the results of which were presented at the September 9 meeting. The staff report from that
meeting is attached for reference (although the attachments are not included in order to reduce
printing. If you would like to see the attachments, please contact staff).
Following review and additional public comment at the September 9 meeting, the Planning
Commission discussed the information and directed staff to prepare a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment which would:
1) Remove the ability permitted in the current Comprehensive Plan for a property to "jump
ahead" one staging period.
2) Amend the Staging/Growth Plan to shift property (except Business, Commercial, and
Industrial) into the Staging period one later than currently located.
Proposed Amendments
Staff reviewed the Comprehensive Plan in order to assess where amendments need to be made in
order to implement the direction of the Planning Commission. The amendments will include:
Comp Plan Amendment
Page 1 of 4 October 14, 2014
Staging/Growth Plan; Projections Planning Commission Meeting
1) Map 5-3. The changes to the map (identified with black cross -hatches) shift all
property guided Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density
Residential, and Mixed Use to one staging period later. The "jump ahead" flexibility
is also referenced on this map and would need to be updated if amended.
2) Text of Chapter 5 (Land Use and Growth), page 5-19 where the flexibility to "jump
ahead" is discussed. At this point, the draft removes the flexibility for residential
development.
3) Table 5-F, which describes land uses within each Staging Period. Changes to this
table are necessary if property is shifted between staging periods.
4) Text of Chapter 3 (Community Background), pages 3-2 and 3-3. This language is
proposed to be amended to recognize the updated Metropolitan Council forecasts.
5) Table 3-A. This table is proposed to be updated to be consistent with the updated
(lower) Metropolitan Council projections.
6) Table 3-B. This table is proposed to be updated to be consistent with the updated
Metropolitan Council projections and the proposed changes to the Staging Plan.
7) Transportation, Sewer, and Water Supply Plans. Changes will need to be made to
tables and text throughout in order to be consistent with the proposed changes. These
changes are technical in nature and are based on math equations from the Staging
Plan amendments. Engineering staff will need to make these updates, and staff
recommends not doing so until the City Council has made a decision on the Staging
Plan amendments.
Table 5-F in the Comprehensive Plan describes the
gross acreage of each land use within each Staging
Period. The red -line changes shown provides some
context to the proposed amendments. However, staff
believes some additional detail is helpful. The table
to the right summarizes net area of each residential
land use within each Staging period. It also provides
an estimated number of residential units which could
be expected to develop within such property. It is
important to note that this can be seen as "capacity"
because the market will drive development and all
property will not instantly be developed the moment
the Staging Plan permits it. This table assumes the
Staging Plan is amended as directed by the Planning
Commission at the September meeting. If any
changes are made, it would need to be updated.
The graph at the top of the following page shows the
residential development capacity within the proposed
Staging Plan amendment compared to the updated
Metropolitan Council projections and the
development capacity within the existing Staging
Plan.
Comp Plan Amendment Page 2 of 4
Staging/Growth Plan; Projections
Net Acres
Estimated
# Units
Current Staging Period
Low Density Residential
45.7
91
Medium Density Residenti;
54.7
219
Mixed Use
7.0
28
Estimated Units:
338
2016-2020
Low Density Residential
32.2
64
Medium Density Residenti;
47.6
190
Mixed Use
43.4
87
Estimated Units:
341
2021-2025
Low Density Residential
132.1
264
Estimated Units:
264
2026-2030
Low Density Residential
32.2
64
Mixed Use
62.2
249
Estimated Units:
313
Post 2030
High Density Residential
75.3
753
Mixed Use
48.1
96
Estimated Units:
849
Residential Development Capacity - Number of Households
4,500
4,000
3,500
3 3,000
B 2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
i
♦♦i
0••
'/
/
�I
♦♦ ♦♦♦II -40
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
0111,
Actual Historical Growth
Existing Staging Plan
Updated Met Council Projections (2014)
Proposed Staging Plan Amendment
Although the existing Staging Plan references the goal of establishing a mix of uses between
Staging periods, when investigating the breakdown of uses in each, it is apparent that much of
the residential land uses were included in the earlier periods.
Additional Discussion Items
The Planning Commission provided general direction during the September meeting, which has
been incorporated into the attached draft amendment. Not surprisingly, preparing the
amendment to implement the direction has brought up additional specific questions for further
discussion.
Property/Uses Shifted to Later Period
The Planning Commission clearly expressed the desire to not include commercial/business/
industrial property in the shift to later staging period. The proposed amendment does not include
any changes to properties of these uses.
The proposed amendment does shift Mixed Use property to the subsequent Staging period. This
use was not listed specifically in the Planning Commission's recommendation.
The vast majority of development during recent years has been single-family detached
residential. There is a good deal of Medium Density Residential property which could currently
be developed to include other types of housing, but the City has not received many requests. The
Planning Commission and Council may wish to discuss whether the shifts in the Staging Plan
should exclude other types of residential development.
2001-2010 Staging Period
The Planning Commission discussed shifting property to the next later Staging period. There is
property that has not been developed that was included within the 2001-2010 Staging period.
Shifting this property a single Staging period would place it within the 2011-2015 period, which
would have no practical effect.
The properties includes 46 net acres of Low Density Residential property (-92 units), 55 net
acres of Medium Density Residential property (-193-360 units), and 7 net acres of Mixed Use
Comp Plan Amendment Page 3 of 4 October 14, 2014
Staging/Growth Plan; Projections Planning Commission Meeting
r
property. With the proposed amendment, this would be the capacity for additional development
prior to 2016.
Geographical Location/School District
The proposed amendment requested by the Planning Commission shifts all residential and mixed
use property to a later Staging period. The amendment does not differentiate based on location,
school district, or any other factor.
The current Staging and Growth plan speaks predominantly about an east -to -west progression
related to proximity to existing sewer and water infrastructure. This east -to -west progression
resulted in a great deal of property within the Wayzata School District being in the earlier
Staging periods, with little in future periods. Similarly, there is very little property within the
Rockford, Delano, or Orono school districts in the earlier staging periods, but large areas of these
districts open up in future periods.
"Jump Ahead" for Non -Residential
The Commission had discussed not changing the staging for non-residential property, but staff
was not certain if this is to include the ability to "jump ahead." As noted above, the current draft
leaves open the possibility for non-residential to jump ahead one time period. If the Commission
desires to remove the flexibility for all uses, the language will need to be updated.
Properties Under Review
The Planning Commission did not discuss whether property which is under development review
should be included in the amendment or not. Under the current draft, it appears that this question
would only be relevant for one property, which has received Mixed Use Stage I Plan approval
(the DR Horton mixed use development north of Highway 55 between Arrowhead and
Mohawk). Depending on how long the amendment takes for review, additional property may
come into play as well.
Potential Action
Staff recommends that the Commission hold a Public Hearing on the proposed amendment,
discuss the policy questions above and provide any additional direction to staff. The Public
Hearing noticed was published in the newspaper and placed on the City's website, but no mailed
notices were sent. Staff does not believe state law or City ordinance would not require mailed
notice in this case, but staff believes it is advisable to do so for the property proposed to be
changed and neighboring parcels within 350 feet. If the Planning Commission concurs, staff
would recommend that the Planning Commission continue the hearing to the November 12
meeting and staff will mail notices.
Attachments
1. Planning Commission report from 9/9/2014 meeting
2. Chapter 3 of Comprehensive Plan (proposed amendments are on pages 3-2 and 3-3)
3. Chapter 5 of Comprehensive Plan (proposed amendments are on pages 5-19 and 5-20)
4. Map 5-3 — Staging and Growth Plan (with proposed amendments)
5. Future Land Use Map (with proposed Staging Periods shown)
Comp Plan Amendment Page 4 of 4 October 14, 2014
Staging/Growth Plan; Projections Planning Commission Meeting
AGENDA ITEM: 8
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner
DATE: September 4, 2014
MEETING: September 9, 2014 Planning Commission
SUBJ: Comprehensive Plan — Staging and Growth Plan; Pace of Development
Background
At the July 15 meeting, the City Council directed staff to initiate a study of the City's Staging
and Growth Plan. This direction came following discussions related to concerns raised to the
City Council members of the rapid pace of residential development over the past few years, and
the impact that such development has on infrastructure and services. There were also
discussions related to the Metropolitan Council's adoption of the Thrive MSP2040 plan. The
Thrive documents include projections of population, household, and employment growth in the
various communities in the metropolitan areas. The projections show less growth in Medina
than was previously projected and planned for.
With these two factors in mind, the City Council directed staff to initiate a study of the
Staging/Growth Plan of the Comprehensive Plan. The study is intended to assist the Planning
Commission and City Council in determining whether to consider amendments to the
Staging/Growth Plan. The City Council specifically limited the scope of the study to the
Staging/Growth Plan. Matters related to planned land uses, the extent and location of the MUSA
(Metropolitan Urban Service Area), and so forth are planned to be discussed in the next few
years as the City updates the entire Comprehensive Plan.
Summary of Development Activity
As of the 2010 census, Medina had 1702 households, and a population of 4892. The City's
2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with Met Council mandates, planned for
approximately 2500 additional households over the 20 year time period, approximately 125 units
per year.
Since 2011, the City has granted at least preliminary approval for the development of 518 single
family lots and 41 townhomes as follows:
1) Enclave at Medina (2011) — 118 single family, 41 townhomes
2) Enclave at Brockton (2012) — 118 single family
3) Fields of Medina (2011) — 65 single family
4) Fields of Medina West (2012) — 64 single family
5) Reserve of Medina (2013) — 126 single family
6) Woods of Medina (2014) — 16 single family
7) Fawn Meadows (2014) — 11 single family
In addition to these approved developments, the following developments have been discussed:
1) DR Horton Stage I Plan (stage I plan approved) — 85 single family, 56 apartment units
2) Villas at Medina Country Club (preliminary plat pending) — 48 single family
Staging/Growth Plan
Page 1 of 5 September 9, 2014
Discussion Planning Commission Meeting
3) Dominium (stage I plan pending) — 26 affordable rental townhomes
4) 22 Hamel Place — (site plan review pending) — 8 apartment units
5) Woodland Hill Preserve (concept plan reviewed) — 4 additional single family
In terms of actual build -out, the City has issued permits for 309 residential units since April
2010. In 2013, the City issued a record number of permits, for 163 units. These new homes
have added an approximate $153,000,000 of market value to the City's tax base.
In comparison to the large amount of residential development and construction, the City has
experienced relatively little commercial development. Since April 2010, two commercial
projects have been constructed, adding approximately $5,000,000 of market value to the City's
tax base.
The new development discussed above are displayed on the enclosed map.
Updated Metropolitan Council projections/Process
During May of 2014, the Met Council approved of the "Thrive MSP2040" document. This
document includes household, population, and employment forecasts for each city in the metro
area for the next 25 years. The projections show substantially less residential growth in the City
than was forecasted in the 2010-2030 Comp Plan. The Met Council projects 1800 new
households between 2010-2040, approximately 60 units per year; half of the pace planned for in
the current Comp Plan. The City's historical growth and these projections are displayed on the
graph below:
3,000
z 2,500
2,000
1,500
1.000
Metropolitan Council Household Projections
er
.Actual Ffistorial Growth
• Original ProlectimK (2006)
— -' Updated Pro)ediom (2014)
These updated projections are one of the first actions taken by the Metropolitan Council in the
decennial Comp Plan update process. From these projections, the Met Council prepares system
plans for wastewater treatment, transportation, parks, etc., over the next eight months. The Met
Council plans to finalize these documents into city -specific system statements in September
2015. The release of these system statements triggers the City's requirement to update its Comp
Plan by 2018.
The City will be required to update its Comprehensive Plan sometime between September 2015
and the end of 2018. In the past, this has been a multi -year process with many open houses, task
force meetings, and additional public participation components.
Staging/Growth Plan
Discussion
Page 2 of 5 September 9, 2014
Planning Commission Meeting
The Met Council has decided that it will review Comprehensive Plan Amendments before
September 2015 under the updated population forecasts. However, until the various system
plans have been approved, amendments will be reviewed to make sure they are consistent with
the existing system plans.
Additional Development Capacity
In addition to the 559 residential units approved and the applications pending review, there is
additional property identified within the Staging Plan which can be developed at any time. This
includes approximately:
• 80 net acres Low Density Residential (160-250 units)
• 100 net acres Medium Density Residential (minimum of 350 units)
• 35 net acres Mixed Use (minimum 13 acres residential; 35-180 residential units)
• 100 net acres Business/Commercial land uses
Most of the property noted above is located within the Wayzata School District. Staff has
included the school district boundaries on the enclosed Future Land Use Map and
Staging/Growth Plan map for reference.
As discussed above, the City will have between fall 2015 to the end of 2018 to update the
Comprehensive Plan. Additional property would become available for development in 2016
under the current adopted Staging/Growth Plan. This property is identified in yellow on the
map. The property includes approximately:
• 137 net acres Low Density Residential (274-411 units).
• 116 net acres Business/Commercial land uses
The current Comprehensive Plan permits flexibility within the Staging/Growth plan. This
flexibility would permit a property to "jump ahead" one five-year time period under certain
circumstances. The 2021-2025 staging period includes approximately:
• 35 net acres Low Density Residential (70-210 units)
• 65 net acres Mixed Use (minimum 33 acre residential; 115-350 residential units)
• 60 net acres Business/Commercial land uses
Open House Feedback
Staff held two Open Houses to seek feedback from residents, businesses, and property owners on
the information provided above. Comment cards were received at the meeting and are attached
to this report. Approximately 60-70 people attended the open houses. Staff has summarized the
responses to the most quantitative questions on the cover page. Staff requested that Open House
attendees mark where they lived or owned property in order to display these geographically.
This map is attached for reference.
In addition to the forms submitted at the Open Houses, a good number of comments were
submitted from residents after the Open Houses, most of whom did not attend the Open Houses
but reviewed the information on the City's website. These are also attached. Many of these
people included their addresses so there is a sense of the location of many of the respondents.
The Planning Commission should draw its own conclusions from the comments submitted.
Generally, there was a fairly even mix of responses from attendees at the Open Houses, with the
Staging/Growth Plan
Discussion Planning Commission Meeting
Page 3 of 5 September 9, 2014
exception of commercial/industrial development. Few attendees believed the pace of
commercial/industrial development was too rapid or supported reducing the pace.
The comments submitted after the Open Houses were predominantly from Bridgewater residents
and overwhelmingly concluded that residential development was too rapid and should be slowed.
Many of these respondents also found that commercial/industrial development was too rapid.
Potential Options
As noted above, the City Council directed staff to prepare the study of the Staging/Growth plan
to determine if amendments to the Staging/Growth plan should be considered prior to the City
initiating the Comprehensive Plan update process.
Depending on the Planning Commission's recommendation and the Council's determination
whether action is necessary, there are various options available to the City. The following list
does not include all potential actions, but is meant to provide context and examples to consider.
If the Planning Commission and Council determine that amendments are not necessary at this
time, the following actions could be taken:
Take no action
The City could take no action and continue implementing the existing Comprehensive Plan.
As noted above, the City would begin an update of the entire plan during the fall of 2015.
Take no immediate action, expedite update process
As noted above, updating the Comprehensive Plan tends to take a few years and is due by
the end of 2018. The City could attempt to expedite the process to the extent possible while
still ensuring a robust public process. The City could begin some of the process in the near
term even before the fall 2015 release of the system statements.
There is some risk that work would need to be duplicated if one of Met Council's revised
system statements contained unexpected requirements for the City. However, staff believes
this is unlikely based on the information released in Thrive MSP2040.
Even under the best circumstances utilizing an aggressive schedule, staff does not believe
the City could have an updated Comp Plan before late 2016. This is largely related to at
least six months of review time likely by neighboring jurisdictions and the Met Council.
If the Planning Commission and City Council are interested in considering amendments to the
Staging/Growth Plan to reduce the "development capacity", the following actions could be
considered:
Remove flexibility in Staging/Growth plan
As referenced above, the current Staging/Growth plan includes flexibility for a property to
"jump ahead" by one five-year timeframe. For example, current regulations would permit a
property owner in the 2016-2020 timeframe (yellow on the Staging/Growth map) to request
Staging/Growth Plan Page 4 of 5 September 9, 2014
Discussion Planning Commission Meeting
development at this time. There are special requirements for such a request which are
described in the zoning code.
Removing this flexibility would mean less property would be eligible for development at
this time. It would also mean that on January 1, 2016, the property in the 2021-2025 staging
period could not request to "jump ahead."
If the Commission and Council want to consider this option, it may be worth discussing
whether removing the flexibility should apply to ALL land uses or if it should only apply to
certain uses.
Amend Staging/Growth plan to shift property to later Staging periods
The Planning Commission and Council could consider amendments to the Staging/Growth
plan which would delay when properties would be permitted to develop.
If the Commission and Council consider such amendments, there are many things to
consider. The amendments could be applied to all uses, or only uses. The amendments
could be centered on certain geographical areas of the City. Alternatively, the Commission
and Council could consider amendments on a parcel -by -parcel basis.
Based on the feedback related to commercial/industrial development, the Planning Commission
and City Council could also consider amendments to the Staging/Growth plan which would add
flexibility for the Staging of business/commercial properties. Staff does not believe there is
strong evidence that the slower pace of commercial/industrial development is a result of a lack of
land supply. However, if there is a belief that this may be the case, the Staging/Growth plan
could be amended to allow these properties to develop sooner.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the matters above and provide a
recommendation to the City Council on whether amendments to the Staging/Growth Plan should
be initiated, and generally what those amendments should be.
Attachments
1. Staging and Growth Plan (w/ School District Boundaries)
2. Future Land Use Plan (w/ School District Boundaries)
3. Map showing location of recent developments
4. Map showing location of Open House attendees
5. Summary of Comments Received
6. Comments received at Open House
7. Comments received after Open House
Staging/Growth Plan
Page 5 of 5 September 9, 2014
Discussion Planning Commission Meeting
Chapter 3: COMMUNITY BACKGROUND
Introduction
Medina was a part of the "Big Woods," a vast region of hardwood forest, broken only by lakes,
marshes, and streams. Its Dakota people lived on game, fish, berries, wild rice, and maple
sugar and traded with other bands in the region.
In 1853 the Traverse de Sioux Treaty opened up the region to white settlers, who were attracted
by the huge stands of timber and the availability of land for farming.
The first settlers arrived in Medina in 1855. On April 10, 1858, County Commissioners gave the
City an official designation as "Hamburg Township." Local residents preferred the name,
"Medina," after the Arabian holy city that was in the news that year. On May 11, 1858, 37
residents met in the home of Valorius Chilson and voted unanimously to change the name.
Medina graduated from township status to become a village in 1955 and was incorporated as a
city in 1974.
Medina's early European settlers were chiefly German, Irish and French-Canadian and had
names still common in Medina such as Scherer and Reiser; Mooney and Crowe; Hamel and
Fortin. The first generations tended to group according to their language ties and to help each
other through the long hard winters.
Townships were always divided into 36 sections, each consisting of a square mile. This meant
that the City of Excelsior extended beyond the north shore of Lake Minnetonka to Medina's
southern border. Excelsior's northern residents tolerated this inconvenience until 1868, when
Excelsior's north shore residents voted to become a part of Medina. This expanded Medina to
over 50 square miles.
In 1889, George A. Brackett led a successful drive to carve the City of Orono out of the southern
11 sections of Medina. Later, the City also ceded away land to Loretto, when it incorporated in
1940. Loretto had been platted since 1886 at the time the Minneapolis & St. Paul and Sault St.
Marie railroad came through.
The Hamel area of Medina was platted as a City as early as 1879, but its efforts to incorporate
failed, in part, because of the complication of straddling the borders of both Medina and
Plymouth. The town might have been called Lenz after Leander Lenzen, who built a mill in
Elm Creek and set up a post office in the name of Lenz in 1861. But when the Lange Hamel
family gave land to the railroad for the train depot in 1884 they asked that it be called "Hamel,"
and the name took root. To this day people still refer to this area of the city as Hamel.
Built on the road from Minneapolis to Rockford, Hamel was a busy town. At the turn of the
19th century Hamel boasted a school, two hotels, the Church of St. Anne's, a hall for the Ancient
Order of United Workman and numerous stores. The town decreased to its present size after
TH 55 bypassed it in the 1950's.
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
c ` 7 0.
MEDINA
Page 3 - 1
Community Survey
In 2006 the City of Medina conducted a community wide citizen and business survey to gauge
the interests and desires of the residents and business owners. The survey provided residents
and businesses the opportunity to rate the quality of life in the City, delivery of services and
their satisfaction with local government. The full report and responses can be found in the
official Medina Citizen Survey document prepared by National Research Center in September
of 2006 and is available for review at the Medina City Hall.
The survey focused on community and rural character and attempted to gain insight on what
rural quality included. The following information summarizes the survey:
• Approximately 80% of resident respondents rate their quality of life as good or
excellent.
• Approximately 75% of resident respondents felt that maintaining the City's rural
character is very important or essential.
• The major contributors to rural character include: presence of natural features, less
noise pollution, low crime rates and open spaces. The majority of resident respondents
felt that maintaining these characteristics is essential to maintaining the rural character.
• The top three reasons resident respondents chose to live in Medina are the rural
character, the location and the quality of life in general.
• Approximately 50% of resident respondents rated the natural environment, schools
neighborhoods and large lots as critical to their decision to live in Medina.
• 38% of resident respondents have lived in the community for less than 5 years, 20%
from between five and ten years and 42% for more than ten years.
• Resident respondents felt the quality of new residential development was excellent or
good.
• Some of the lowest rated community characteristics included: lack of sidewalks,
inability to travel by bike or walking, and lack of affordable housing options.
• Auto travel within the community was also viewed as excellent or good
• Resident respondents felt that growth was occurring at about "the right amount" in
recent years
• Resident respondents were focused on controlled and well -planned development as
important to the future of the community.
• Resident respondents felt that community involvement, quality city government and
city services are essential to the success of the community.
Population and Household Trends
Table 3-A below shows historical and projected population and household size data for the City
of Medina. The 1990, and 2000, and 2010 population and household data is from the U.S. Census.
The 2005 population and household estimates and the 2010 2030 2040 population and household
projections are from the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Regional Development
FrameworkThriveMSP2040 documents. The population of Medina was estimated by the
Metropolitan Council to be 4,770 people and 1,616 households in 2005. According to the
Metropolitan Council, the average household size is expected to continue to decline regionally
over the next 20 years due to an increase in the number of seniors and lifestyle changes.
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G% T Y O
MEDINA
Page 3-2
TABLE 3-A
Metro • olitan Council Forecasts
1990*
3,096
4,005
4,770
1,007
1,309
4;616
2,155
2,928
3,910
2000*
2005**
2010*"
5;800 4.892
2 001.702
5,500 3,254
2020"""
9;280
1-2x00
9_,42
3;-240
4-50
6,700
7,900
4,5$0
2030-
2040 —
3.500
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,Ceasus-2909*
Metropolitan Council Estimates**
Metropolitan Council Projections""
The City experienced relatively constant growth up to the 1990s before rapidly increasing in the
last 5 to 1015 years. This population trend will continue to increase as areas within the City
guided for urban residential densities are developed. The City had a population of 4,892 at the
time of the 2010 Census and Tthe Metropolitan Council forecasts a population of 5,800 in 2010,
9,200 in 2020 and 12,7009,000 in 2030 2040 which corresponds to a 30-84 percent increase over each
10 year period. Current development patterns suggest that the City may fall short of these
projections due to the 2007 housing slump.
Table 3-B below was developed based on the Guide Plan and Staging Plan developed as a part of
this Plan. This table demonstrates the City's projections for future growth in the community. The
City plans to grow and has anticipated a population of approximately 11,2119,000 in 20302040.
Although this population forecast is lower than that of the Metropolitan Council, the forecast is
based on a lower person per household estimate then utilized by the Metropolitan Council. If the
City utilized the same person per household estimate as the Metropolitan Council, the forecast
would be 98 percent of the Metropolitan Council forecast. The City has also projected much
lower growth in the number of unscwered households than projected by the Metropolitan
Council. This lower forecast is based on historical trends and an analysis of remaining undivided
property. In terms of severed households, the City forecast slightly exceeds Metropolitan
Council forecasts,
TABLE 3-6
Medina Po •ulation and Households Forecast based on Future Land Use
Total Po i ulation
Sewered
Unsewered
Total Households
Sewered
Unsewered
3096
1007
2745
3066 2838
2158
1848
705
604
2025
927
685
2445 2053
1050 987
715
6958 4922
2146 2024
2530 1856
740
8993 6801
22-181976
359-7 2547
765
7006
1994
2725
775
317 147%
20% -3%
410%176%
27% 8%
*2000 Sewered and Unsewered numbers are estimates based on US Census Data, exact sewer units is unknown.
**2005 population and households from 2000 US Census, employment from Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) estimates.
Source: 2000 US Census and City of Medina Data collected and processed in 2007.
Source: 2000 US Census and City of Medina Data collected and processed in 2007.
Chapter 3 — Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
% t V O
MEDINA
Page 3 — 3
Residential Development Activity
Table 3-C below shows the residential development activity in Medina from 2000 to 2006.
During this period, the City issued building permits for a total of 293 single family homes and
169 multi -family units. The majority of these single family homes were built in the Foxberry
Farms and Wild Meadows developments. The multi -family developments include the 87 -unit
Gramercy at Elm Creek Senior Cooperative, Medina Highlands, and the 18 -unit Argent Parc
condominium building located in the Uptown Hamel area.
TABLE 3-C
Medina Residential Buildin • Permits 2000-2006
$17,519,000
0
$0
2000
43
2001
21
$11,843,000
0
$0
2002
38
$30,000,000
22
$7,952,000
2003
43
$36,561,000
113
$23,548,000
2004
53
$33,355,000
16
$6,530,000
2005
50
$41,073,000
18
$3,180,000
2006
45
Source: City of Medina, 2007
$34,903,000
0
$0
Economic Overview
The economic health of a community contributes to a high standard of living and a desirable
place to live. Medina has a strong economy that is likely to improve as population increases.
The City has experienced considerable growth of its economic base and the addition of diverse
employment opportunities since the last planning cycle. Table 3-D below shows that
employment growth in the City of Medina increased 35.9% from 1990 to 2000. The
Metropolitan Council's initial projections indicated an increase of 87.8% between 2000 and
2010. However, due to the recent economic downturn, the City readjusted these numbers and
percentage increases accordingly. The availability of commercial and general business land
along the TH 55 corridor, adequate transportation and utility infrastructure and the proximity
of the City to the metropolitan area make Medina attractive to businesses. The City anticipates
that most business growth will serve Medina and surrounding areas.
TABLE 3-D
Ci of Medina Em • lo ment Growth and Forecasts
1990*
2,155
2000*
2.928
35.9
2007
3,940
34.6
2010**
5,100
29.4
2020**
6,200
21.6
2030**
7,200
16.1
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000*
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
T V o ,
MEDINA
Page 3 - 4
Employers and Employees
The City has approximately 150 employers that provide a range of industry and job choices.
The following table represents the number of establishments per industry in Medina as
provided in the 2002 Economic Census.
Table 3-E
Number of Establishments in
Manufacturing
Medina b Industr
22
14.6
Wholesale trade
28
18.7
Retail trade
12
8
Information
3
2
Real estate and rental and leasing
6
4
Professional, scientific and technical services
28
18.7
Administrative and support and waste management and
remediation services
21
14
Arts, entertainment and recreation
4
2.7
Accommodation and food service
11
7.3
Other services (except public administration)
15
10
Total number of establishments in City
150
100
Source: US Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census
51.6 percent of the total population over the age of 16 in Medina was employed in 2000. The
following table demonstrates the number of employees per industry. The industries that most
heavily employ Medina residents include finance, insurance, real estate and rental and leasing
(14.2%); education, health and social services (13.4%); manufacturing (13.2%); professional,
scientific, management and administrative support services (12.7%) and retail trade (11.3%).
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
Y p
MEDINA
Page 3 - 5
Table 3-F
Number of Em • lo ees b Indust in
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting and mining
Medina
9
0.4
Construction
200
9.7
Manufacturing
273
13.2
Wholesale trade
170
8.2
Retail trade
233
11.3
Transportation and warehousing and utilities
70
3.4
Information
63
3
Finance, insurance, real estate and rental and leasing
294
14.2
Professional, scientific, management, administrative, and waste management
services
263
12.7
Educational, health and social services
277
13.4
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services
118
5.7
Other services (except public administration)
60
2.8
Public administration
36
1.7
Total employed residents over 16 years old
2066
100%
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Major Employers
Most residents travel outside Medina for their jobs; however, employers within the City
provide a wide range of potential employment options to residents. The following table
identifies the major employers in the City:
Table 3-G
Largest Medina Employers
Polaris Industries
300
Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc
230
Hennepin County Public Works
225
Rockier Companies
200
Walter G. Anderson, Inc.
200
Temroc Metals, Inc.
130
ToI-O-Matic, Inc.
125
Intercomp Co.
75
Twinco/Romax Automotive
44
Target Corporation
36 full-time and 65-90 part time
Medina Golf & Country Club
35 full-time and 125 seasonal part time
Maxxon Corporation
35
Oil -Air Products
35
Clam Corporation
25
Source: City of Medina, 2006
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
c ` T Y °
MEDINA
Page 3 - 6
The table below shows that since 2000 there has been approximately $23,843,000 of commercial
development in the City. This growth occurred from expansion of existing businesses as well
as the location of new employers into the City including Target Corporation and Polaris
Industries.
Table 3-H
Medina Commercial Building Permits
(2000-2006)
2000
0
$0
2001
1
$400,000
2002
3
$1,795,000
2003
2
$1,263,000
2004
9
$4,519,500
2005
5
$9,353,000
2006
8
$6,513,000
Total
28
$23,843,000
Source: City of Medina, 2007
Economic Development Initiatives
The City created a Tax Increment Financing District (TIF District 1-9) in 2004 to provide public
improvement incentives for the redevelopment of properties within and around the Uptown
Hamel area. The TIF district consists of more than 60 parcels on both sides of TH 55 near its
intersection with Sioux Drive/CR 101. TIF funds have been used to fund public improvements
to entice development north and south of TH 55 in the Uptown Hamel area, including storm
water infrastructure in Uptown Hamel. Through 2007, redevelopment in Uptown Hamel has
been slow.
Investment Framework
In order to maintain a reasonable tax base, Medina will be working to off -set the large rural
residential areas with commercial and mixed use developments along TH 55. Commercial
development is a significant part of Medina's tax base plan. Map 3-1 Illustrates the amount of
taxes paid by residential and commercial properties in the City.
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G T v o A.
MEDINA
Page 3 - 7
Demographics
This demographic data has been extrapolated primarily from the 2000 US Census. If information
was collected from alternative sources, those sources are identified. The 2000 census is the most
up-to-date demographic information available and much of this information is already out of
date. However, the data is still relevant because it suggests trends of development and
characteristics of the population. Where more up-to-date information is available, regardless of
source, that information is included as a point of reference.
Household Income
The following table describes the household income levels of current residents in Medina in the
year 2000. 19.8% percent of the City population has income of less than $50,000 per year, 36.5%
between $50,000 and $100,000 per year and 43.8% over $100,000 per year.
Table 3-I
City of Medina Household Income
Less than $10,000
14
1.1
$10,000 to $24,999
42
3.3
$25,000 to $49,999
197
15.4
$50,000 to $74,999
255
19.9
$75,000 to $99,999
213
16.6
$100,000 to $149,999
229
17.8
$150,000 to $199,999
74
5.8
$200,000 or more
258
20.1
Total households that earned income in 2000
1,282
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
The following table indicates that the average household income in Medina is high relative to
the Hennepin County average. The median household income in Medina is $88,847 which is
158.6% of the median County household income. The mean or average household income in
Medina is $144,702, which is 188.7% of the mean County household income. The contrast
between the mean and the median household income levels in Medina is due to the high
numbers of Medina households with incomes that exceed $200,000 per year.
Table 3-J
Medina and Henne • in Coun Median and Mean Household Income
Median household income (dollars)
88,847
55,996
158.6%
Mean household income (dollars)
144,702
59,348
188.7%
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
Ty 0
MEDINA
Page 3 - 8
Level of Educational Attainment
The following table shows that Medina residents are well educated. Approximately 96.3% of
the adult population graduated from high school or higher and 44% of the population has
completed a Bachelors degree or higher.
Table 3-K
Medina Adult Resident Level of
No high school diploma
Educational Attainment
91
3.7
High school graduate (includes equivalency)
542
22
Some college, no degree
572
23.2
Associate degree
175
7.1
Bachelor's degree
737
29.9
Graduate or professional degree
346
14
High school graduate or higher
2,372
96.3
Bachelor's degree or higher
1,083
44
Total population 25 years and older
2,463
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Age
The table below shows that 34.3% of the population is 19 years old or younger, 31.5% of the
population is between 20 and 44 years old, 27.3% of the population is between 45 and 64 years
old and 6.9% of the population is 65 years or older. Residents of the City of Medina are almost
half male and half female.
Table 3-L
A • e of Medina
Under 5 years
Residents
270
6.7
5 to 9 years
367
9.2
10 to 14 years
434
10.8
15 to 19 years
303
7.6
20 to 24 years
119
3
25 to 34 years
316
7.9
35 to 44 years
827
20.6
45 to 54 years
712
17.8
55 to 64 years
380
9.5
65 years and over
277
6.9
Median age (years)
38
Total population
4,005
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
When planning future community facilities and housing options in the City, all of these age
groups must be considered. For example, as the population continues to age the demand for
senior lifestyle housing and activities within the City will continue to increase.
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G 7 " O
MEDINA
Page 3 - 9
School Enrollment
There are 1,286 residents in the City of Medina who are enrolled in school. Of these residents
8.7% are enrolled in preschool or kindergarten, 50.5 percent are enrolled in elementary school,
29.3% are enrolled in high school and 9.6% are enrolled in college or graduate school.
Table 3-M
•
•
Li or rnedma Jcnooi Enroiiment
Nursery school, preschool
97
7.5
Kindergarten
41
3.2
Elementary school (grades 1-8)
649
50.5
High school (grades 9-12)
375
29.2
College or graduate school
124
9.6
Total population 3 years and over enrolled in school
1,286
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Race
The table below indicates that 97.3% of the population are white, 0.5% are Black or African
American and 1.2 percent are some other race or two or more races.
Table 3-N
City of Medina Race
White
3,946
98.5
Black or African American
19
0.5
American Indian and Alaska Native
9
0.2
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
1
0
Some other race
7
0.2
Two or more races
23
0.6
Total Population
4,005
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G v 0.e
MEDINA
Page 3 - 10
Household Demographics
Approximately 85% of families have children under 18 years of age. Single householders make
up the next largest group with 11.2 percent. The average household size is 3.05 and the average
family is 3.31 people. Household averages are slightly higher than the Metropolitan Council's,
estimates which suggests that average household size will decrease as the population ages.
Table 3-0
Household
Family households
Demo • ra • hics
1,118
85.4
With own children under 18 years
615
47
Married -couple family
1,026
78.4
With own children under 18 years
558
42.6
Female householder, no husband present
56
4.3
With own children under 18 years
37
2.8
Non -family households
191
14.6
Householder living alone
146
11.2
Householder 65 years and over
37
2.8
Households with individuals 65 years and over
188
14.4
Average household size
3.05
Average family size
3.31
Total households
1,309
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Marital Status
69.5% of Medina residents are married; 23.8% are single and 6.7% are married but separated,
widowed or divorced. The number of married couples in the City of Medina is relatively high
as compared to communities in closer to proximity to either Minneapolis or St. Paul.
Table 3-P
Never married, single
701
23.8
Now married, except separated
2,047
69.5
Separated
5
0.2
Widowed
48
1.6
Divorced
145
4.9
Total population 15 Years and older
2,946
100
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G' S v 0
MEDINA
Page 3 - 11
Factors Influencing Development
Natural features within the City of Medina will substantially influence the feasibility of extending
municipal services and where and when development will occur. The City undertook an
extensive open space and natural resources initiative as a part of this plan. An Open Space Report
was prepared by an Open Space Task Force and is available for review at the City of Medina City
Hall. A summary of information in the Open Space Report follows.
I. Natural Features: significantly affect current and future development.
A. Lakes and Wetlands: Map 3-2 illustrates the Wetland Locations throughout Medina
and is based on Hennepin County wetland data records. Nearly 35 percent of the
land in Medina is wet, with many lakes, creeks and wetlands. These natural areas
affect where and in what intensity development can occur within the City. Upland
areas suitable for development need to be well planned to ensure that lakes, wildlife
and wetlands are not adversely impacted. The City completed a Functional
Assessment of Wetlands (FAW) in November 2007, which was developed to provide
guidelines for regulating and protecting these wetlands, and a comprehensive
inventory and assessment of existing wetland functions with the City. An overall
wetland classification map was provided as part of the FAW and is referenced at the
end of this section as Map 3-2.A
B. Floodplains: Map 3-3 identifies the FEMA designated floodplains found in Medina.
Minnehaha Creek, Elm Creek and Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watersheds have floodplains
that will limit development in Medina. Much of the floodplains cover the same area as
wetlands. Limited portions of these floodplains may be used for development, if
criteria for building elevations, floodproofing and filling can be met as outlined in the
City's Floodplain Ordinance.
C. Watershed District Boundaries: Map 3-4 identifies the three Watershed District
Organizations and boundaries inside Medina. Although not visible as landscape
features, these boundaries are significant because they define the direction of surface
water flow. The boundaries are commonly used as major parameters for development
of sewer interceptor and trunk lines. Each of the various watershed districts has its
own regulations for land development, and some require watershed board approval of
all water management plans for development proposals. The City has designated
itself as the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) responsible for reviewing development
proposals affecting wetlands.
D. Woodlands: Preservation of woodlands is important aesthetically, ecologically and
functionally. Woodlands provide wildlife habitat, prevent soil erosion, absorb runoff,
provide wind breaks, and define the patterns of streets and land use.
E. Soils: The United States Department of Agriculture's Soil Survey and Soil
Classifications are used to evaluate development proposals in Medina and to
determine the capability of on -site septic systems. Rural residential lots are required to
have at least 5 -acres of contiguous soils suitable for a standard sewage disposal system
as defined by Medina s Sewage Treatment and Disposal System Code. A significant
portion of the rural residential area of Medina contains soils that are considered
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
` T Y 0
MEDINA
Page 3 - 12
unsuitable for septic site development. The general soil conditions, therefore, establish
the intensity of unsewered development. Map 3-5 generally identifies the areas where
suitable soils are present in Medina.
F. Topography: Topography and steep slopes in the City will impact future and current
developments. Map 3-5 identifies areas considered as "Steep Slopes" and "Steep
Slopes with Grades Greater than 18 percent." Management and maintenance of steep
slopes and other topographic challenges will be critical to future development and
growth plans.
(REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
G T Y
G
MEDINA
Page 3 - 13
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Chapter 3 - Community Background
Adopted November 17, 2009
1 Vo
MEDINA
Page 3 - 14
a
Chapter 5: LAND USE & GROWTH
Introduction
Medina has significant natural resources, high -quality neighborhoods and areas for commercial
and retail development. The City's extensive wetlands and limited infrastructure availability
together with past community planning have contributed to its rural character. The metropolitan
area is a high growth area. Medina's rural charm makes it an attractive alternative to the more
intensely populated areas found closer to Minneapolis and St. Paul.
This chapter discusses existing and future land use patterns in the City.
2007 Existing Land Uses
The types of uses within the existing land use categories are described in Map 5-1 and Table 5-A.
TABLE 5-A
Existing Land Uses
Agricultural
Rural Residential
Single Family Large Lot
Single Family Small Lot
Multi -Family Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Public Semi -Public
Parks and Recreation
Open Space
Private Recreation
Undeveloped Land
Right-of-ways
4,490
........ .........
4,701
. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .
1,191
198
. .. . .... . ... ..... ..
16
.....................
245
472
260
2,612
208
357
620
682
3.9%
Lakes/Open Water
1,283
7.4%
Note: Wetlands are not excluded from each land use. There are approximately 4,871 acres of
wetlands in the City.
Agricultural Use includes farms and other parcels greater than five acres in size used primarily
for agricultural, pasture and rural purposes. A large percentage of the City is designated as
agricultural.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G v 0
MEDINA
Page 5- 1
Residential Use is divided into four designations:
Rural Residential consists of large tracts of land and homesteads, including hobby farms
and horse stables on parcels greater than five acres in size without City sewer and water
service.
Single Family Large Lot includes residential properties between 0.5 acres and 5 acres in size.
This designation does not differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots but does
include larger lot subdivisions.
Single Family Small Lot includes single-family residential properties less than 0.5 acres,
sewered.
Multi -Family includes apartment buildings, fourplexes, duplexes, condominiums and
townhouses and attached single-family homes.
Industrial Use is primarily in the TH 55 corridor and includes light industrial, office, warehouse
and manufacturing facilities.
Commercial Use is primarily in the TH 55 corridor. Businesses tend to be clustered in and
around the Uptown Hamel area and become more dispersed west of Uptown Hamel along the
existing sanitary sewer system. A large commercial/retail development north of TH 55 and west
of CR 101 anchored by a Target retail store opened in 2006.
Park and Recreation Use includes parks and public recreational open space. Baker Park Reserve
has a significant impact on planning due to its size and regional attraction, its effect on the City's
tax base and use.
Private Recreation Use includes areas used for recreational purposes held under private
ownership, including golf courses and a campground, but could be expanded to include other
recreational uses not publicly maintained.
Open Space Use identifies areas that are public or privately held including known conservation
easements, important preserved natural resources such as Wolsfeld Woods (SNA) and other areas
that are protected through active measures.
Public and Semi -Public Use includes City, county, or state owned property, churches,
cemeteries, and other similar uses. Most of these properties are community oriented and blend
into other land uses permitted in the supporting zoning districts.
Undeveloped Use identifies areas that are currently described as vacant. There are no known
agricultural uses or residential uses on parcels with this designation. This land is considered
available for development or is currently on the market. These areas also include unknown land
uses, or uses that do not fit into the land use designations identified.
Lakes comprise approximately 10.2 percent of the City and are identified in the land use
designations because of the obvious impact on surrounding development and land uses.
Wetlands are not identified on the existing land use map. However, wetlands and lakes play an
important role in the City because together they affect 35.4 percent of the City land and
significantly impact the City's ability to develop.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
MEDINA
Page 5- 2
Natural Features and Areas
The City contains many ecologically significant natural resource areas that provide value to all
residents by providing natural beauty and wildlife habitat, improving water quality and adding
to land values. These natural areas are described in further detail in the Open Space Report but
merit discussion from a land use and development perspective.
The City has an extensive network of wetlands and lakes that significantly impact the developable
areas in the City. The community has made conscious choices to preserve and protect the natural
areas and to improve their quality. For example, the City requires five contiguous acres of
suitable soils for development of properties for rural residential uses. These areas outside urban
services are guided for an average density of a 1 Unit/10 Acres. The larger acreages help preserve
open areas as well as prevent the deterioration of wetland complexes and lakes. Because 35.4% of
the land area in Medina is comprised of lakes and wetlands and many of these areas are under
private ownership, it is critical for the City to educate residents about the importance of
maintaining healthy wetlands, rain gardens, woodlands and lakes.
These natural features comprise the City's green infrastructure system: the City's natural support
system that promotes healthy sustainability of the community. As the City grows, the natural
areas will be a critical element of every decision -making process. The City undertook an
extensive natural resource and open space planning effort that will be the foundation for land use
decisions. The Open Space Report indicates the ecologically significant areas that require
protection and the areas that will be maintained as a part of the City's conservation network.
Solar Access Protection
Medina is committed to encouraging and promoting solar energy as a clean, alternative form of
energy production and reducing carbon -based emissions. Protecting solar access means
protecting solar collectors (or the location of future collectors) from shading by adjacent structures
or vegetation. Existing structures and buildings in the city generally do not present significant
shading problems for solar energy systems. Most single family attached and detached homes are
one or two stories and most multi -family, commercial, and industrial buildings are three stories or
less.
Solar energy systems and equipment are a permitted by conditional use in the Agriculture
Preservation, Rural Residential and Suburban Residential zoning districts only, whereas the
existing commercial and industrial districts are absent of any allowances for solar equipment.
The City intends to revise its land use controls by allowing "Solar Equipment" in all districts as a
permitted accessory use with specific performance standards. Additionally, the zoning ordinance
provides standards for the protection and establishment of these solar energy systems.
While these ordinance standards help protect solar access, it is not possible for every part of a
building or lot to obtain unobstructed solar access. Mature trees, topography, and the location
of structures can limit solar access. However, on most properties the rooftop of the principal
building would be free of shading by adjacent structures. Therefore, the majority of property
owners in the city could utilize solar energy systems, if they so desired, as a supplement or
alternative to conventional fuels.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G� 7 ~ C.r
MEDINA
Page 5- 3
i
Historic Preservation
The City of Medina currently does not have any sites or structures listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. The City of Medina has a strong interest in preserving
representative portions of its history. The City previously worked with the West Hennepin
Pioneer's Museum to restore the Wolsfeld Family cabin which was originally built in 1856. It is
thought to be one of the original homes in Medina. The city further commits to providing the
following general guidelines related to historical preservation:
• Partner with organizations that want to preserve historically significant areas, landmarks,
and buildings in Medina;
• Modify zoning regulations as necessary to help preserve areas that may be historically
significant; and
• Create an inventory of historically significant features, landmarks, and buildings in Medina
as they become known or identified.
Existing Growth and Neighborhood Patterns
Medina is located approximately 20 miles from downtown Minneapolis making it close enough to
commute but far enough to maintain its rural character. The City has developed commercial and
business parks in proximity to TH 55, Uptown Hamel and Loretto. The urban service area is
primarily focused along the TH 55 corridor. Residential uses have typically been developed at
rural residential densities with larger acreage lots. Urban service residential developments exist
within the community and help to diversify housing stock. Pockets of sewered development in
the rural areas of the community exist because their original septic systems failed and were
sewered subsequently to protect water and lake quality. The rural area of the community
continues to have individual septic systems and rural density development.
Residents have enjoyed the rural quality of Medina and have supported larger lot subdivisions in
the more suburban residential neighborhoods where sewered subdivisions are developed at or
below 2.0 units per acre. The existing suburban neighborhoods are independent of the rural
residential areas and typically not connected through traditional grid development but are
subdivided with curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs.
Infrastructure and the MUSA line have affected development and will influence the areas guided
to develop with increased density. The City has planned for growth and development by guiding
increased density near transportation corridors and other available systems. This pattern is
demonstrated on the Future Land Use Plan (Map 5-2). Analysis for water, sewer and
transportation planning can be found in the attached plans and appendices.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
% T Y °
MEDINA
Page 5- 4
Future General Land Use Policy Direction
The City continues to be primarily a rural community with opportunities for agricultural uses,
commercial and residential development and open spaces. These factors will continue to guide
development but will also include opportunities for diversification of land uses not presently
found in the community.
The City has guided future development and increased density along the TH 55 corridor to help
encourage sustainable land use patterns. Sustainability principles include proximity to existing
transportation systems and available infrastructure without leap -frogging into areas not currently
served by urban services. The majority of growth and development will be located in the areas
with urban services to maintain the rural character of the community and to use the
infrastructure.
The Future Land Use Plan is primarily an extension of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan area. The
areas guided for future development are within the 2000 service areas but phasing and available
land has been adjusted to reflect recent experience, growth and population projections. Although
the proposed plan is consistent with the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, changes occur within the
specific land use designations.
General Land Use Development Policies:
1. The Future Land Use Plan guides future development to strengthen, enhance, and protect the
City's rural character and natural environment.
2. Medina recognizes the historical development pattern as a framework for the City's future
land use policy.
3. Medina will guide growth in compact efficient locations to preserve open space and the rural
heart of the community.
4. The Planning Commission and Council will review each development proposal to ensure
consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
5. The staging plan will be referenced for all future development plans in the growth corridor
and shall guide future land use decisions to ensure availability and adequacy of services.
6. Medina will encourage commercial and business development to locate along the TH 55
corridor and retail and service opportunities to locate in mixed -use areas.
7. Developments will be required to provide buffers between incompatible land uses and will be
required to provide landscaping, berms, or other screening methods to ensure the integrity of
neighborhoods.
8. Ecologically significant natural areas will be protected using conservation easements and
other open space tools as identified in the Open Space Report.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G v 0 b
MEDINA
Page 5- 5
"
F u t u r e L a n d U s e P l a n P r i n c i p l e s
T h e P l a n g u i d e s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f M e d i n a t h r o u g h 2 0 3 0 , a n d w i l l b e u s e d t o i m p l e m e n t t h e
C i t y ' s g o a l s , s t r a t e g i e s a n d p o l i c i e s . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e P l a n i s t o c r e a t e a c o m m u n i t y w i t h t h e
f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s :
" A w e l l i n t e g r a t e d a n d p r e s e r v e d n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a n d o p e n s p a c e s y s t e m f o c u s e d o n
m a i n t a i n i n g t h e r u r a l h e a r t o f t h e c o m m u n i t y .
" H o u s i n g d i v e r s i t y a n d o p t i o n s w i t h i n t h e c o m m u n i t y i n c l u d i n g r u r a l , s u b u r b a n a n d
u r b a n d e n s i t i e s w i t h t h e m o s t c o m p a c t d e v e l o p m e n t g u i d e d a l o n g t h e T H 5 5
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r .
" O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r b u s i n e s s a n d c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t a l o n g m a j o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
c o r r i d o r s a n d i n t e r s e c t i o n s .
" A n e f f i c i e n t , s a f e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m .
" S u p p o r t o f a c t i v e l i v i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s s u c h a s a w e l l p l a n n e d p a r k s a n d t r a i l s s y s t e m s t h a t
a r e a c c e s s i b l e t o a l l r e s i d e n t s .
F o u r p h y s i c a l l a n d u s e e l e m e n t s a f f e c t t h e o v e r a l l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e c o m m u n i t y :
1 . S u b u r b a n a n d r u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n s a n d n e i g h b o r h o o d f o r m ;
2 . M a j o r r o a d p a t t e r n s ;
3 . O p e n s p a c e s a n d n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s ; a n d
4 . C o m m e r c i a l a n d b u s i n e s s d e v e l o p m e n t .
T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e s e e l e m e n t s w i l l i m p a c t t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m a n d c o m m u n i t y f a c i l i t i e s
a n d m a y n e e d r e v i e w a s a r e s u l t o f i n c r e a s e d d e v e l o p m e n t .
D e v e l o p m e n t P a t t e r n s a n d N e i g h b o r h o o d F o r m
" E n c o u r a g e o p e n s p a c e s , p a r k s a n d t r a i l s i n a l l n e i g h b o r h o o d d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e
s u r v e y i n d i c a t e d t h a t a h i g h q u a l i t y o f l i f e i s f o u n d w h e n r e s i d e n t s h a v e v i s u a l a c c e s s
t o g r e e n s p a c e s .
" C r e a t e n e i g h b o r h o o d s w i t h a v a r i e t y o f h o u s i n g t y p e s t h a t a r e w e l l c o n n e c t e d w i t h
r o a d s , t r a i l s o r s i d e w a l k s .
" M a i n t a i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f r u r a l n e i g h b o r h o o d s a n d p r o m o t e d e v e l o p m e n t p a t t e r n s
c o n s i s t e n t w i t h e x i s t i n g r u r a l r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t .
" R e c o g n i z e n e i g h b o r h o o d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d p r o m o t e n e w d e v e l o p m e n t c o m p a t i b l e i n
s c a l e , a r c h i t e c t u r a l q u a l i t y a n d s t y l e w i t h e x i s t i n g n e i g h b o r h o o d s .
" G u i d e d e n s i t y t o a r e a s w i t h p r o x i m i t y t o e x i s t i n g i n f r a s t r u c t u r e a n d f u t u r e
i n f r a s t r u c t u r e a v a i l a b i l i t y .
" C o n c e n t r a t e h i g h e r d e n s i t y d e v e l o p m e n t n e a r s e r v i c e o r i e n t e d b u s i n e s s e s t o h e l p
p r o m o t e w a l k a b i l i t y .
C h a p t e r 5 - L a n d U s e & G r o w t h
P r o p o s e d A m e n d e d O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4
t C
M E D I N A
P a g e 5 - 6
"
"
R o a d P a t t e r n s
" E n c o u r a g e d e v e l o p m e n t n e a r e x i s t i n g r o a d s a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t e r s e c t i o n s t o e n s u r e
e f f i c i e n c i e s w i t h i n t h e s y s t e m .
" C o n n e c t e x i s t i n g n e i g h b o r h o o d s w i t h i n f i l l n e i g h b o r h o o d s t o e n s u r e s a f e t y t h r o u g h
i n c r e a s e d a c c e s s .
" E s t a b l i s h c o l l e c t o r s t r e e t s w i t h g o o d c o n n e c t i o n s t h r o u g h t h e c o m m u n i t y ' s g r o w t h
a r e a s .
" P r o m o t e t r a i l s a n d s i d e w a l k a c c e s s n e a r r o a d s a n d t h o r o u g h f a r e s t o e n c o u r a g e m u l t i -
m o d a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c h o i c e s .
O p e n S p a c e s a n d N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s
" P r e s e r v e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o m m u n i t y a n d p r o v i d e e d u c a t i o n a l
o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o r e s i d e n t s t o h e l p t h e m u n d e r s t a n d t h e v a l u e o f n a t u r a l a r e a s .
" P r e s e r v e o p e n s p a c e s a n d n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s .
" S u p p o r t t h e g u i d e l i n e s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e O p e n S p a c e R e p o r t t o p r e s e r v e t h e C i t y ' s
n a t u r a l s y s t e m s .
B u s i n e s s D i s t r i c t s a n d C o m m e r c i a l A r e a s
" F o c u s s e r v i c e b u s i n e s s e s a n d d e v e l o p m e n t n e a r u r b a n r e s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s a n d a l o n g
t h e T H 5 5 c o r r i d o r a n d C R 1 0 1 a n d C R 1 9 .
" G u i d e c o m m e r c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t t o a r e a s a l o n g k e y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s , p r i m a r i l y
T H 5 5 .
" P r o m o t e b u s i n e s s e s w i t h i n m i x e d - u s e a r e a s .
" W o r k t o c r e a t e j o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n t h e c o m m u n i t y f o r M e d i n a r e s i d e n t s t o r e d u c e
t r a f f i c a n d c o m m u t i n g d e m a n d s .
C h a p t e r 5 - L a n d U s e & G r o w t h
P r o p o s e d A m e n d e d O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4
% T Y o
M E D I N A
P a g e 5 - 7
"
"
T h e G u i d e P l a n
M e d i n a ' s F u t u r e L a n d U s e P l a n , M a p 5 - 2 , i s s h a p e d b y t h e C i t y ' s G e n e r a l L a n d U s e D e v e l o p m e n t
P o l i c i e s , a n d t h e L a n d U s e G o a l s a n d S t r a t e g i e s i d e n t i f i e d i n C h a p t e r 1 w h i c h k e e p a l a r g e p o r t i o n
o f M e d i n a r u r a l a n d p r o t e c t t h e C i t y ' s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s w h i l e a c c o m m o d a t i n g c o m p a c t ,
s y s t e m a t i c g r o w t h i n s t r a t e g i c a r e a s .
T a b l e 5 - B b e l o w d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e e x p e c t e d 2 0 3 0 l a n d u s e s i n t h e c o m m u n i t y .
T A B L E 5 - B
F u t u r e L a n d U s e P l a n
A g r i c u l t u r a l ( A G )
R u r a l R e s i d e n t i a l ( R R )
L o w D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( L D R )
2 5 1 1 . 4 % 1 8 0 1 . 0 %
M e d i u m D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( M D R )
7 , 8 3 5 4 5 . 2 % 4 , 9 8 2 2 8 . 7 %
9 4 4 5 . 5 % 6 3 0 3 . 7 %
4 5 1 2 . 6 % 3 0 7 1 . 8 %
H i g h D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( H D R )
M i x e d U s e ( M U )
M i x e d U s e - B u s i n e s s ( M U - B )
D e v e l o p i n g P o s t - 2 0 3 0
C o m m e r c i a l ( C )
G e n e r a l B u s i n e s s ( G B )
I n d u s t r i a l ( I B )
C l o s e d S a n i t a r y L a n d f i l l ( S L )
P u b l i c S e m i - P u b l i c ( P S P )
P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n
P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n - R e g i o n a l o r S t a t e
P r i v a t e R e c r e a t i o n ( P R E C )
O p e n S p a c e ( O S )
R i g h t s - o f - W a y
L a k e s
W e t l a n d s a n d F l o o d p l a i n s
1 2 3 0 . 7 % 1 0 3 0 . 6 %
3 3 8 1 . 9 % 2 3 4 1 . 3 %
5 9 , 0 . 3 % 3 9 0 . 2 %
4 4 4 2 . 6 % 3 3 7 i 1 . 9 %
4 2 7 2 . 5 % 3 0 8 1 . 8 %
5 5 9 3 . 2 % 3 5 9 2 . 1 %
6 8 0 . 4 % 4 8 0 . 3 %
1 9 2
2 7 1
9 3
2 , 5 1 9
3 5 8
2 0 8
9 1 2
1 . 1 %
1 0 6 0 . 6 %
1 . 6 %
1 7 3
0 . 5 %
4 6
1 4 . 5 %
1 , 5 2 8
2 . 1 %
2 7 2
1 . 2 %
1 5 3
5 . 1 %
9 1 2
1 , 2 8 3 7 . 4 %
1 , 2 8 3
1 . 0 %
0 . 3 %
8 . 8 %
1 . 6 %
0 . 9 %
5 . 1 %
7 . 4 %
5 , 3 3 5 3 0 . 8 %
F u t u r e L a n d U s e D e s i g n a t i o n s
A g r i c u l t u r a l ( A G ) i d e n t i f i e s a r e a s w h i c h a r e p a r t o f t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n A g r i c u l t u r a l P r e s e r v e s
P r o g r a m a n d a r e r e s e r v e d f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l u s e s a s a l o n g - t e r m l a n d u s e . T h i s a r e a i s n o t
p l a n n e d t o b e s e r v e d b y u r b a n s e r v i c e s a n d a l l o w s n o m o r e t h a n o n e l o t p e r f o r t y a c r e s .
R u r a l R e s i d e n t i a l ( R R ) i d e n t i f i e s a r e a s f o r l o w - i n t e n s i t y u s e s , s u c h a s r u r a l r e s i d e n t i a l , r u r a l
c o m m e r c i a l , f a r m i n g , h o b b y f a r m s , h o r t i c u l t u r e , c o n s e r v a t i o n o f e c o l o g i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l
r e s o u r c e s a n d p a s s i v e r e c r e a t i o n . T h i s a r e a i s n o t p l a n n e d t o b e s e r v e d b y u r b a n s e r v i c e s
d u r i n g t h e t i m e f r a m e c o v e r e d b y t h i s P l a n a n d r e q u i r e s e a c h l o t t o h a v e f i v e c o n t i g u o u s a c r e s
o f s o i l s s u i t a b l e f o r s e p t i c s y s t e m s .
C h a p t e r 5 - L a n d U s e & G r o w t h
P r o p o s e d A m e n d e d O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4
G �� T v o ,
M E D I N A
P a g e 5 - 8
Developing Post -2030 identifies areas for future urban development in the City that will be
provided municipal sewer and water services. This area is primarily concentrated around the
City of Loretto and is presently planned for each lot to have five contiguous acres of acceptable
soils. The purpose of the Developing Post -2030 designation is to communicate the future
planning intentions to the community.
Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units
per acre and 3.49 units per acre which are served or are intended to be served by urban
services. The primary use in this area is single-family residential development. The areas
designated for low density residential uses are located near to existing low density residential
uses, natural resources and provide a transition between higher density residential districts and
the permanent rural areas of the community.
Medium Density Residential (MDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 3.5
units per acre and 6.99 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, and row homes. This designation provides a transition
area between the commercial and retail uses along the TH 55 corridor and the single-family
uses.
High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 7.0 units
per acre and 30 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services.
The primary uses will include duplexes, triplexes, town homes, apartment buildings and
condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. This designation
is identified in areas that are generally accessible to transportation corridors and commercial
uses.
Mixed -Use (MU) provides opportunities for multiple, compatible uses on a single site
including a residential component and one or more of the following: general business,
commercial, office and public semi-public uses in each case where the primary use is
residential. The areas designated with this land use will have residential densities between 3.5
units per acre and 6.99 units per acre over a minimum of half of the developable area. The
mixed -use areas are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services in the future.
Mixed -Use Business (MU -B) provides opportunities for multiple, compatible uses on one site
including two or more of the following: residential, general business, commercial, or office.
Residential densities in this designation will be between 7.0 units per acre and 45.0 units per
acre across the entire area and may include some vertically integrated uses. The mixed -use
business areas will be served by urban services.
Commercial (C) provides areas for highway oriented businesses and retail establishments; can
include commercial, office and retail uses; is concentrated along the TH 55 corridor and are
served or will be served by urban services.
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.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
C.
Y a
MEDINA
Page 5- 9
a,
Industrial Business (IB) identifies areas that are currently used for manufacturing or
processing of products and refers to lighter industrial uses in the community. The area is
concentrated on TH 55 to allow access to primary transportation corridors and is served by
urban services.
Parks and Recreation includes parks and public recreational open space. Baker Regional Park
has a significant impact on planning due to its size and attraction to those living outside of the
City.
Private Recreation (PREC) refers to areas that are currently used for recreational uses, are held
under private ownership including a campground and golf courses and could be expanded to
include other recreational uses that are not publicly maintained. Limited numbers of
residential uses will be included within this land use designation.
Open Space (OS) identifies public or privately held property protected as open space and
includes known conservation easements, significant preserved natural resources and other
areas that are protected through active measures.
Public Semi -Public includes governmental, religious, educational, and cemetery uses.
Rights -of -Way (ROW) refer to all public or private vehicular, transit, pedestrian, or rail rights -
of -way.
Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) identifies an area that was previously used for a sanitary landfill
but is now closed. The land is owned by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and
special land use regulations apply to the property.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
t iv °.
MEDINA
Page 5- 10
3.
Net Residential Density
The residential land uses described above creates a wide range of housing options. The Future
Land Use Plan allows a fairly broad range of densities within the sewered residential land uses.
The following tables illustrate a possible range of net residential density within the sewered
residential land uses.
TABLE 5-C
Net Residential Density
(Assuming Lowest of Density Range)
Existing LDR 486
346
55
291
1.7
Existing MDR
Existing HDR
497
140
181
17
17
2
164
15
3.0
9.3
Future LDR
678
598
259
339
2.0
Future MDR
501
270
126
143
3.5
Future HDR
616
106
18
88
7.0
Future MU2
408
338
105
116
1162
3.5
Future MU -B3 273
59
20
393
1 Acres Undevelopable include wetlands, floodplains, and steep slope
2 The Mixed Use (MU) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over at least half of the developable area
3 The Mixed Use -Business (MU -B) land use requires residential units ecLuivalent to the minimum density over the entire developable area
Existing LDR 486
346
55
291
1.7
Existing MDR
Existing HDR
497
140
TABLE 5-D
Net Residential Density
(Assuming Middle of Density Range)
181
17
17
2
164
15
7.0
3.0
9.3
Future LDR
915
598
259
339
2.7
Future MDR
715
270
126
143
5.0
Future HDR
880
106
18
88
10.0
Future MU2
580
338
105
116
1162
5.0
Future MU -B3 390
59
20
393
1 Acres Undevelopable include wetlands, floodplains, and steep slope
2 The Mixed Use (MU) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over at least half of the developable area
3 The Mixed Use -Business (MU -B) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over the entire developable area
10.0
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
c 7 " o
MEDINA
Page 5- 11
Land Use Policies by Area
The following section provides policies for land use designations and is categorized into
generalized subsections with the following land uses: Rural Designations, Urban Service
Designations, and Public Semi -Public Designations. The policies for each category as provided
below directly support the goals and strategies outlined in Chapter 2.
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 good, 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.
Rural Designations
The rural designations include Agricultural, Rural Residential and Developing Post -2030. A
large percentage of the community falls into these two 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 2005 Metropolitan Council
Regional Framework 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
Proposed Amended October 2014
` % Y o
MEDINA
Page 5- 12
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 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 Developing Post -2030 land use. The City will continue to utilize a five -
acre contiguous suitable soils requirement in order to pursue this objective. This
requirement has maintained the required density for the past decade (see Table 5-E
below) and the City will monitor rural subdivisions and adjust regulations in the event
the density is consistently exceeded.
TABLE 5-E
Density of Rural Subdivisions 2000-2008
Winchester Hills
3
15.7
5.2
Wild Acres
3
75.0
25.0
Dahl 2nd Addn
2
23.3
11.6
Leawood Farms
9
212.0
23.6
High Pointe Ridge
3
51.4
17.1
Beannact Farm
3
42.1
14.0
Parkview Knoll
2
72.6
36.3
Unplatted
2
24.8
12.4
Willow Hill Preserve
4
31.2
7.8
Tuckborough Ridge
7
47.8
6.8
Fox Path Farm
2
27.4
13.7
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
` � 7 0 4.
MEDINA
Page 5- 13
t
r
9. Continue to enforce five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems per
development site, but consider exceptions for open space developments that protect
natural features and put land into permanent conservation. Within the Metropolitan
Council's long term sewer service area (see Map 5-4), these exceptions will not be
allowed to result in development with a density in excess of one unit per ten gross acres.
10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Developing
Post -2030 land uses during this planning cycle.
11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant
natural characteristics.
12. Determine lot sizes by soil types and conditions as defined in the City's on -site septic
system requirements.
13. Protect property within the City's Developing Post -2030 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 landowners to participate in the protection and conservation of significant
natural resources.
Urban Service Designations
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)1 principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low
impact development design standards.
1 LEED defined under Chapter 7 - Implementation (pg. 7-8)
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
C. Ty 0
MEDINA
Page 5- 14
5. Protect urban residential areas from excessive noise, odors, and illumination.
6. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public
facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth
strategies.
7. Restrict commercial development to areas designated in this Plan.
8. Limit industrial activities, including agri-business facilities, to the urban commercial or
industrial park areas.
9. Protect property within the City's 2030 MUSA boundary from development prior to the
provision of urban services that will hinder future division.
10. Create more 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.
11. Promote attractive, well -maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with
adequate facilities and open space.
12. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety.
13. Allow for a variety of housing types with a range of economic affordability in the urban
residential areas.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. Require standards for site improvements that ensure compatibility with adjacent
residential areas.
17. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic
enhancement and safety.
18. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to
reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development
characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
7 VC. C
MEDINA
Page 5- 15
Mixed -Use
The mixed -use designations focus on integrating a mix of uses to help promote housing and
commercial diversity within the community. Such mixed -use designations are concentrated
along the TH 55 corridor to promote a more compact development pattern in proximity to
existing infrastructure and will include residential and commercial components with ratios of use
determined by topography and market conditions. Mixed -use areas are all located in the urban
service area.
Objectives:
1. Allow a mix of residential and commercial uses to co -exist on adjacent parcels as well as
within the same structure or on the same parcel.
2. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for a mix of residential and
commercial uses on parcels that preserve the City's open space and natural features.
3. Consider alternatives for meeting parking requirements including parking in the rear of
buildings, shared parking, on -street, underground, or ramp parking.
4. Use building standards that enhance and maintain the small town heritage and
traditional small-town look including brick facades, traditional street lighting, overhangs
over the sidewalk, boardwalks, and the like.
5. Involve residents, businesses, community groups and other stakeholders in the planning
of these areas.
6. Create master plans for mixed -use areas to ensure integration of uses and responsiveness
to adjacent land uses.
7. 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.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
V O A
MEDINA
Page 5- 16
Commercial Uses
The previous objectives outlined referred to urban land uses with a residential component. The
following objectives refer to commercial and industrial land uses that are connected to or planned
for urban services.
The Urban Commercial area is along the TH 55 corridor and will support businesses to benefit the
residential areas to the north and south and commuters who travel on TH 55. Businesses will
provide a variety of retail products and services mixed with light industrial/warehouses and
smaller offices.
Objectives:
1. Provide convenient and attractive shopping and services to meet the needs of City
residents.
2. Avoid multiple access points to collector and arterial roads.
3. Encourage businesses that benefit the local community by providing employment
opportunities offering convenience goods and services, utilizing high quality design, and
having limited impact on public services.
4. Require commercial activities that serve the broader metropolitan market to have access
to a regional highway or frontage road.
5. Regulate the impact of commercial development along the border between commercially
and residentially guided areas to ensure that commercial property has a minimal impact
on residential areas.
6. Regulate construction to ensure high quality, energy and resource efficient buildings and
to promote such Green Building standards as LEED Certifications or the State of
Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines: Buildings, Benchmarks and Beyond (B-3)
standards.
7. Encourage construction that enhances the visual appeal of TH 55 corridor.
8. Create or update standards that promote a more rural appearance, or create campus style
developments that protect ecologically significant areas and natural features.
9. Require frontage roads that do not directly access TH 55 corridor.
10. Require developments to provide frontage roads as shown conceptually in the
transportation plan.
11. Require conditional use permits for manufacturing, processing, cleaning, storage,
maintenance and testing of goods and products in order to prevent adverse affects to the
City and its residents.
12. Use the site plan review process to ensure that commercial and industrial uses are
compatible with neighboring future and existing uses, and with the adjoining public
streets and highways. PUD's may be used to help accomplish this policy.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G` T V A
MEDINA
Page 5- 17
Public and Semi -Public Land Use
Public and Semi Public uses including golf courses and wastewater treatment facilities exist in
both the urban and rural areas.
Objectives:
1. Achieve a balanced framework of public uses and private development.
2. Set aside land for parks and preservation of ecologically significant natural resources to
meet a wide variety of recreational, educational and functional needs as defined and
discussed in the Park, Trails, and Open Space chapter and the Open Space Report.
3. Provide a trail system connecting parks, open space and other public uses.
4. Provide space for some public and semi-public uses in urban areas. These could include:
churches, recreation areas, and public service facilities such as post office, fire stations,
libraries and utility structures.
5. Continue to pursue conservation and preservation of wetlands, woodlands, ecologically
significant natural resources and other open space, as appropriate.
6. Protect wetlands, as they provide wildlife habitat, preserve open space, improve water
quality and provide water storage areas for the City's storm drainage system.
7. Protect the shoreline of lakes, creeks and wetlands from development.
8. Utilize existing regulatory tools and supplement as necessary to allow these types of lands
to be preserved or protected for public use.
9. Require public and semi-public zoning to complement the character of surrounding land
uses.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
c. iv
� .b
MEDINA
Page 5- 18
Staging Plan
The staging plan is tied to infrastructure plans, including water, wastewater and transportation,
to ensure that services are provided to new residents and businesses in an efficient and cost-
effective manner.
The staging plan, Map 5-3, utilizes flexible staging boundaries to direct where and when
development should proceed within the City and is built on the following principles:
• Compact growth will occur along the TH 55 corridor to ensure the preservation of the
rural heart of the City.
• Growth will proceed in an east -west pattern to develop efficiently the City's
infrastructure, including sewer and water.
• The City shall promote contiguous growth within the urban service areas to provide
efficient and cost-effective services to residents.
• Growth should encompass a balance of land uses to provide residential and business
areas for development throughout the planning period.
• The staging plan identifies staged increments of 5 -year periods and provides some
flexibility for non-residential development between adjacent staging periods.
Development shall be limited to a maximum of one staging increment beyond the
existing staging period, and will be tied to an incentive based points system (see
Chapter 7; Growth Strategy, Page 7 - 4).
These principles are developed based on known development constraints related to existing
water and sewer infrastructure. When development is proposed, the City will review the
staging plan for consistency with the water and sewer plans attached as appendices to this
document. The following are some of the constraints to be considered when guiding
development:
• There is presently capacity for approximately 160 additional water units through 2009,
which needs to include a variety of growth options over the short-term planning
timeline. The construction of additional wells and water storage facility will increase
the availability of water units.
• The City's sewer infrastructure has capacity for approximately 2,000 additional units
that is expected to be adequate through at least 2015.
• The City plans on developing the water system to match the Guide Plan which stages
growth through 2030 and may include the development of a well field in the western
area of the urban service boundary that may allow growth near Loretto.
• Sewer improvements will be required to meet 2030 projection population growth.
The following table describes the land use allocation by 5 -year staging increments and is a
guide for the City when developing infrastructure and future planning efforts.
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
7 V 0 4.
MEDINA
Page 5- 19
Table 5-F
Land Use in 5 -Year Increments
(acres)
acres)
(acres)
(acres)
(acres)
acres)
Residential Uses
-Rural Residential 2.5 acres or less
-Rural Residential 2.5 -10 acres
-Rural Residential 10-40 acres
- Rural Residential 40+ acres
1U/10A
1 U/40A
TBD1
1U/10A
1U/40A
-Agricultural 40+ acres
Subtotal Unsewered
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
2
212
212
212
212 i 212
2197
2207
3591
1835
3661
1755
2217
3691
2227 i 2237
0%
1.8%
3721 3751
4.5%
1715
1675
1635
-10.9%
1U/40A 251
8086 8086
3.49
346
3.5
6.9
181
High Density Residential (HDR)
7
30
17
Mixed Use (MU)2
3.5
6.9
Mixed Use — Business (MU -B)3
7
Future Developing Areas
Commercial Uses
45
1U/10A
0
5
2501
600
326
251
8086
21
713
637
451
358
21
251
251
251
0%
8086
911
711
451
8086
944
905
451
8086
0%
944
451
57%
38%
80
59
80
59
21
166
21 123
21
59
166
59
486 0%
238
59
323 198%
0%
1954
1372
Commercial (C)
General Business (GB)
Industrial (IB)
246 256
982
771
444
646
-77 67%
349 380
92 i 92
214 I 375
380 427
67%
480 558
507%
25
25
68
68
68
68
172%
Institutional Uses
Public Semi -Public (PSP)
Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreation —
Regional/State
Private Recreation (PREC)
Open Space (OS)
Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL)
271 271 271 271 271
271
0%
93 93 93 93
2519
2519 2519 2519
358 i 358
358
93
2519
358
93
0%
2519
0%
358 i 358
208
208
208 i 208
208 i 208
0%
0%
192
192
192
192
192
192
To be determined later for cluster/open-space developments. Density in excess of one unit per ten acres will not be allowed within
Metropolitan Council's long term sewer service area.
2 This land use require a minimum 50% of the developable property includes a residential component within the density range
The Mixed Use -Business (MU -B) land use requires residential units equivalent to the minimum density over the entire developable area. The
MU -B "Existing 2008" acreage is based on the approximate area which has been developed consistent with the Objectives of the MU -B land
use.
0%
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G ` 7 ~ ° a
MEDINA
Page 5- 20
The staging plan supports the timing and planning for future improvements and recognizes the
existing limitations of water and sewer systems in 2007.
Objectives
• The constraints on growth over the planning period ending in 2030 are related to water
and wastewater infrastructure capital improvements. The City shall develop a capital
improvement plan to address these needs and to monitor development and phasing in
an appropriate way.
• The City shall evaluate the creation of a well field in the western portion of the urban
service area.
• The City shall develop a system for evaluating developments within the urban service
area to help prioritize developments that are consistent with the goals of the City.
• The City will promote low impact development, conservation development and
environmentally sustainable design.
(REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
G T V o .
MEDINA
Page 5- 21
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth
Proposed Amended October 2014
T V o A
MEDINA
Page 5- 22
OUNTYROAD 11
COUNTY ROAD 24
Map 5-3 MEDINA
Staging and Growth
Urban Services Phasing Plan
Ell
Ell
WA
Developed 2008
2001-2010
2011-2015
2016-2020
**2016-2020
2021-2025
**2021-2025
2026-2030
**2026-2030
Post 2030
**Post 2030
Met Council LTSSA
**Note: Crosshatched areas are proposed
to be amended from an earlier staging
period to the period indicated.
There are several critical infrastructure
milestones that will control growth including:
- The existing water infrastructure has
capacity of approximately 160 units
available until 2009.
- The sewer constraints shall limit
development to 2,000 units without
improvements.
Generally, the Phasing Plan demonstrates that
development shall proceed in an east to west
pattern. This phasing plan allows flexibility for
non-residential development between adjacent
phases to allow for property infrastructure
planning and development.
The Grey area reflects the area identified by
the City to be developed Post 2030.
The Met Council has identified the LTSSA
for potential future access to urban services.
No services are planned during the timeframe
covered by this Plan.
Proposed Amendment: October 2014
Scale: 1:30,000
Map Date: October 9, 2014
'• -� !!! !!! lS !1J 111 JJ
2( r-
aa 3iaaataa®a�aa,aaaaaaa
J 2
MEDINA
Future Land Use Plan
With Phasing Periods
Rural Residential
Agriculture
Developing -Post 2030
Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 U/A
Medium Density Res 3.5 - 6.99 U/A
High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A
Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 U/A
Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 U/A
Commercial
General Business
VAIndustrial Business
Private Recreation (PREC)
Parks and Recreation
P -R - State or Regional
Open Space
Public Semi -Public 0 U/A
Closed Sanitary Landfill
Right -of -Way
Staging Period
ssnaaE 2001-2015
Wa�a�s�iP
2016-2020
2021-2025
2026-2030
Post -2030
Note: Phasing periods shown are as proposed
in amendement requested by Planning
Commission.
Scale: 1:30,000
Map Date: October 9, 2014