Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
12-09-2014
MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 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 November 12, 2014 Draft Planning Commission minutes 6. Public Hearing - Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Amending the Staging/Growth Plan, Community Background Chapter, Land Use and Growth Chapter, the Comprehensive Sewer Plan and the Water Supply and Distribution Plan. 7. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code related to Assisted Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, Housing with Services Establishments, and Similar uses. 8. Rachel Contracting — PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat to develop 48 single family residential lots along the north and west portions of Medina Golf and Country. 9. Council Meeting Schedule 10. Adjourn POSTED IN CITY HALL December 5.2014 Date: C, , T Y MEDINA Name of Speaker: 14 Comment Card + = Am 1.4 el -.1. _...m,"7 Public Forum Agenda Item 4 ta-.Le) i (please print) Address: • 5 j 1..bI"j- - :.by' Telephone (optional): Representing: -6e--- ( 7.L -�' z _,L d o P Agenda Item (list number Comments: 'T., and letter): 57?1-, 7,,_t .-1-,-, t-*- p ✓°_,,-,,, z_, -t- e...„.... -; LLG, l i't-h v^r_,a7't` r2-(-" -t7 e'... i-y (1c g1 T 1 .5 .1›.--...47-t` Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes Date: c t t Y O F Comment Card Public Forum i Agenda Item MEDINA . Name of Speaker: SC e ;`/ e.,.4 Q- { S "--) ( lease print) (' Address: V-2 S k It-9----Ple Iv1--e c.M U 6 O T ; -.-) �-. �s a I Telephone (optional): Representing: Agenda Item (list number and letter): /1 gcwe,d Comments:. `• , >19 c, .), r C CL 6,L X . 1-0)2 Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes Date: 7 G x T Y Q F Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: e;c__ lia1fiA._ Public Forum Agenda Item e (please print) Address: (0 O 5 ,,-. S /er? Telephone (optional): 7 (� ; - v78 "‘ y6s Representing: e,,, se t„) 1�P Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: i,,.-6,i4 0,,_ r. ,,.J )i,Qpa,eJ Tcrof6SeA Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes Date: x T Y t Comment Card MEDINA Nam e of Speaker: ''?L4-. I+re�=Sc-r 42 Public Forum Agenda Item (please print) Address: b 06' 5µ41,„N- E,�. tAl 0 e.) 0_5 Telephone (optional): Representing: 5 r `"� Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: Approach the podium to speak Meeting Rules of Conduct MEDINA • Please indicate if comment card is for the Public Forum or an Agenda Item in upper right hand corner. • Please fill out card and provide a brief summary of comments. • Please turn in the card to a staff member who will pass the card to the Mayor. The Mayor will call on you to speak when it is your turn. • Please approach the podium when called on to speak. While Speaking Please give name and address Please indicate if representing a group Please limit remarks to 3 to 5 minutes 1 CITY OF MEDINA 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 4 Wednesday November 12, 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, Janet White, and Randy Foote. 10 11 Absent: None 12 13 Also Present: Mayor Elizabeth Weir, Council Member Kathleen Martin, Planning Consultant 14 Nate Sparks, City Planner Dusty Finke, and Planning Assistant Debra Peterson. 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 Nolan said he would like to hear the Councils view on the Staging/Growth Plan in the 23 upcoming future. Martin explained issues of tax base, traffic, and owners of property. 24 25 4. Planning Department Report 26 Finke informed the Commission that staff hadn't received any new applications. 27 28 5. Approval of the October 14, 2014 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes. 29 30 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Foote, to approve the October 14, 2014, Planning 31 Commission minutes with the changes noted. Motion carries unanimously. 32 33 6. Rachel Contracting — PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat to develop 48 single 34 family residential lots along the north and west portions of Medina Golf and Country 35 Club. 36 37 Sparks presented the application explaining the General Plan is the second stage of the PUD 38 process and the preliminary plat. During the concept plan in April, the applicant had 39 proposed 54 units which had been reduced. The site is currently zoned for Public Recreation, 40 with an exception of the southeast corner zoned high density residential. The application 41 would zone the entire property to PUD. 42 43 Sparks said twenty-eight of the units were proposed to have side loaded garages and wouldn't 44 face the street. The applicant was asking for a reduction in setback from the front yard 45 setback requirement. The applicant also requested to deviate from the lot width in the R2 46 zoning district, and to increase the hard cover requirements from 50% to 60%. Sparks said 47 the golf course has very minimal hardcover. Within the R1 zoning district the applicant 48 requested a deviation from the front and side yard setbacks. 49 50 Sparks explained with a PUD the applicant can deviate from City regulations if it's found to 51 be acceptable and meeting the purpose of the PUD. 1 1 52 53 Williams asked for clarification of the use of a PUD. Sparks explained that staff itemized the 54 underlying zoning district as a comparison for the Commission. Williams asked if the 55 existing zoning was relevant to the analysis. Sparks said it was relevant. V. Reid said the 56 property is zoned Public/Semi Public. Nolan said the Commission is really looking at the 57 requirements of the PUD. Nolan explained if an applicant wanted to reduce setbacks it's 58 called a deviation rather than a Variance. V. Reid said she was having a difficult time 59 understanding the Public/Semi Public zoning and R2 as it relates to the PUD and residential 60 zoning districts. 61 62 Williams asked how staff determines that the R2 zoning district was appropriate for this 63 application. V. Reid asked how staff concluded that the Public/Semi Public zoning should be 64 changed to a PUD with underlying Residential zoning. 65 66 Sparks explained the applicant proposes residential. Under the Public/Semi Public zoning 67 classification Private Recreation is allowed with some residential. The site would continue to 68 have recreational uses and the PUD would tie it all together as one development around the 69 golf course. Nolan pointed out that the golf course had the ability to develop high density at 70 the S/E corner of the property and asked how it would have access. Sparks explained it 71 would not run south, but rather up Evergreen Road to County Road 101. He said they are 72 supposed to look at the project as an improvement and when looking at the SE corner he's 73 looking at a golf course with no deforestation of trees. He asked what the negatives were; 74 comparing it to the high density in that SE corner to suggest the proposed project is an 75 improvement. 76 77 Sparks said in the General Plan things are more technical since the PUD is its own zoning 78 district. The new road from Meander to Shawnee Woods Road is proposed to be wider due 79 to the number of driveways along the road which would resolve concerns. Sparks said the 80 parking would be on the non -parking driveway side. Sparks explained some concern was 81 raised with the three tight curves proposed which do not meet the City's preferred 30 mile per 82 hour design. The applicant had provided turning templates depicting vehicle motions through 83 these curves which appear to allow vehicles and trucks to move through these curves 84 adequately, although it will be at a low rate of speed. 85 86 Sparks said tree replacement was not required for the proposed development. Williams asked 87 if all the trees on the golf course were part of the calculation. Sparks said yes the lot was 88 looked at as a whole. Williams and V. Reid asked for better clarification of tree removal and 89 how it's calculated. Sparks explained that the ordinance allows each time an area develops 90 the applicant/owner gets a certain percentage of removal for redevelopment. Finke clarified 91 that the ordinance has an initial site development removal percentage for the overall 92 development of the site which would include this application. Finke said they used the initial 93 development standard and if further divided later, they would then have a lesser amount to 94 remove without replacement requirements. The initial removal is higher, taking into 95 consideration streets and utilities. 96 97 Nolan asked if the use of a PUD was appropriate. Sparks said "yes" a PUD was appropriate. 98 Sparks explained the trees in the N/E corner were proposed to be preserved and a "pass 99 through park" approximately 8000 square feet would be in that same area. The park would 100 apply towards their park dedication requirements. 101 Sparks reviewed the "Purpose" Section of the PUD with the Commission and public. 102 Williams asked if the Commission should look at the PUD standards in a way that the 103 development standards wouldn't be required under a standard subdivision/zoning. 2 104 R. Reid said it wasn't appropriate to call the Villas townhomes when they were detached 105 single family homes. She further asked why staff felt the small remote park wasn't 106 necessary. Sparks said staff felt a larger park for the area was thought to be better than a 107 "pass through park." 108 109 V. Reid asked for clarification of the Country Club remaining and what could happen if the 110 golf course went under. Mitchell explained the Country Club would have to apply for a PUD 111 Amendment. 112 113 Foote asked if we had a certain criteria to review open space. Sparks said yes the City had 114 maximum hardcover requirements. Nolan said the first step in zoning is to look at what's 115 better, the current zoning or the proposed, how it would get access, and then to decide if it 116 was an improvement for the City of Medina and what the negatives may be in comparison to 117 the existing situation. He further explained the street would go through Evergreen and bypass 118 the Cherry Hill Development. He asked staff if access would go through the Dominium 119 property to the south. Finke said "no." Nolan asked how staff would look at how this section 120 of the land is better to be the high density area rather than open space as a golf course. How is 121 this development an improvement from what is there today. What is driving the lack of 122 screening and a three foot buffer with a fence. He said he was curious if staff had any 123 comments on the topic. Sparks said the idea is to have houses back up to the golf course. 124 125 Charles Cudd of Charles Cudd De Novo explained from a macro standpoint as a builder the 126 project layout is what they want to do for access to the site and to take advantage of the golf 127 course views. The villas along County Road 116 are one level housing without a second 128 story and aren't attached. He said they developed Medina Highlands and it's a very popular 129 development. Detached Villas are much more sought after than attached. The outside 130 maintenance for the proposed project would be taken care of similar to an attached townhome 131 development would be. Since there is no other golf course in Medina, the type of housing is 132 different from what else is available in the City and they think their proposal is really a good 133 one. The buyers moving into a development such as this are typically Country Club 134 members, which supports the golf course. The proposed development is more geared towards 135 an empty nester type buyer. They typically don't leave during the rush hour, don't burden the 136 schools and are an asset to the community. Williams asked what made the units "empty 137 nester homes." Charles Cudd of Charles Cudd De Novo explained the homes would be 138 mainly one level living, with a master bedroom/bath on the main floor. Some of the homes 139 would provide lower level space. The lots aren't great for families with kids. 140 141 Chuck Alcon representing Rachael Contracting explained that when they met with City staff 142 at their pre -application meeting they were told to apply for a PUD. The Concept Stage was 143 reviewed by the Commission and Council in April and May of this year. Alcon said they feel 144 they listened to the requests of the Commission and Council and have made the changes 145 asked of them. He explained the density was shifted over to the west side, lot four at the SE 146 corner, and was completely eliminated which preserved the trees. Wetlands would not be 147 impacted, and access onto County Road 116 was approved by Hennepin County. The 148 problem with County Road 116 isn't a specific development problem, but rather an area 149 issue. Alcon said if any of the Commissioners wanted to accompany him at the Catholic 150 Church at 6:30 a.m. the next morning at 10/50th he'd be happy to show them where the traffic 151 problem was coming from. He said City staff was working very hard with Hennepin County 152 and MnDot on a short and long range plan for roadway improvements, specifically turn lanes. 153 He said staff reports were acceptable to them. 154 155 Foote asked what the spacing was between the homes in Block One. Alcon said homes have 156 either a 5 foot or 10 foot side yard setback, but would have a total of 15 feet between homes. 3 157 Williams asked what was being done with the traffic issue. V. Reid asked the applicant why 158 they decided not to give buyers privileges to the golf course. Alcon said it was a private club. 159 Cudd said some owners will have ability to purchase membership. 160 161 Williams questioned traffic. Weir explained Council member Martin met with Senator David 162 Osmek and they are working on increasing the left hand turning capacity by 30% during each 163 light cycle which reduces the 3/4 mile backup to what should be expected at an intersection. 164 The fix is temporary, but will help in the interim. 165 166 White said the applicant was asking for deviations in each of the blocks and asked the 167 applicant to explain why. White said she had more of an issue with the front yard setback 168 deviations. Rick Denman of Charles Cudd De Novo explained the garage was closer to the 169 street, but the actual physical portion of the house was 45-54 feet away from the front 170 property line. He said the area with reduced front yard setbacks didn't have homes across the 171 street. Nolan commented on the close side yard setbacks since they were only proposing 15 172 feet between homes. Charles Cudd said the distance between the actual homes would stay 173 the same yet the reduction in setback would allow for greater turning radius. He further 174 added they had some constraints with the project being on a golf course since they need to 175 have larger back yards. White said Cudd answered her questions about block one, but asked 176 why they were proposing a reduced side yard setback in Block 3. She said the reduced 20 177 feet between homes, rather than the 25 feet, weren't as aesthetically pleasing as the homes 178 across Shawnee Woods Road that had larger lots and greater front yard setbacks. Cudd said 179 the properties across the road were guided R-1, Single Family Residential. 180 181 Nolan asked why the applicant was proposing a fence to be set back only three feet from the 182 neighboring lots at the NW corner of the property. How was it desirable to have a three foot 183 setback to the fence? Marty Campy, project Engineer, said they thought it was appropriate. 184 He said they are proposing only a three foot separation in a 200 foot length area. The lots to 185 the north are 200+ feet deep and he didn't feel it would be an intrusion to those lots. 186 187 Mitchell asked if the road parallel to County Road 116 was public. Finke said it was public. 188 Mitchell asked what the use would be for the 10 feet for right-of-way (ROW). Finke said the 189 ROW is typically used for utilities. Mitchell asked if they were giving enough ROW to 190 widen County Road 116. Finke said yes. 191 192 Scott Peterson, President of Medina Golf and Country Club, said the importance of the 193 development is significant. With over 2000 members, including all family members, the par 194 3 is significant for long term viability of the country club. He said the par 3 is to teach family 195 members how to golf and not get in the way on the other course. He said there's been some 196 talk about golf courses failing, but they are very financially strong. Their membership is 197 committed to making the investments back into the country club. 198 199 Nolan said there were areas of no tree removal to areas of heavy tree removal and for every 200 lot removed from east to the west end changes the trees impacted. 201 202 Peterson said specific options were available for the sale of the golf course land following an 203 old option agreement for the country club and the development. Nolan asked what the net 204 effect was to move a section of the golf course. Peterson said close to 500,000.00. 205 206 Public Hearing opened at 8:50 p.m. 207 208 Eric Voltin of 630 Shawnee Woods Road said he lived directly across from the proposed 209 Block 3 on the plan. His concern was primarily the woods proposed to be removed which 4 210 would be equal to the length of two football fields. At one of the last City Council meetings 211 an Arborist was brought in and was describing the Old Growth Forest and he read the Old 212 Growth Forest Code to the Commission. He said numbers 3, 5, 6, and 9 wouldn't meet the 213 requirements. He asked the Commission to not allow the applicant to develop Block 3. The 214 request for front yard deviations was to accommodate the golf course and nothing for the 215 City, which violated the PUD. 216 217 Mark Czech of 660 Shawnee Woods Road said he had obvious concerns regarding the rate of 218 growth in Medina. M. Czech said the City Attorney had written a letter of opinion and the 219 easement of Shawnee Woods Road and they were close to having an agreement with 220 Hennepin County. M. Czech said being close to having an agreement is not the same as 221 having an agreement. He informed the Commission that he hadn't heard anything about 222 compensation to neighboring land owners for tree loss that would occur due to the installation 223 of the proposed curb and gutter for the project/roadway. 224 225 Jo Janssens of 690 Shawnee Woods Road said he agreed with his neighbors. 226 227 Heather Czech of 660 Shawnee Woods Road said she supported her neighbors. She said 228 she's a business owner and understands why Rachel contracting wants to develop. She said a 229 lot of trees are being removed and they are all beautiful Maples. She said it's one of the few 230 places that have old forest and should be left alone (Block 3 of the proposed project should 231 not be developed). 232 233 Elizabeth Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods Road said she supported her neighbors. She said 234 the trees actually hang over the road and are beautiful and it's the only area in Medina like it. 235 She said the proposed development would totally destroy them. 236 237 Public Hearing closed at 9:03 p.m. 238 239 Nolan asked what the house design would be for Block 3. Cudd said the area was designed to 240 be lookouts. Nolan said a lot of trees were proposed to be removed for grading and it 241 appeared that it was being done to increase the height of homes. He asked the applicant to 242 address the reason for extensive grading and if the use of retaining walls would reduce the 243 grading. He further asked what considerations were being given in terms of conservation. 244 Marty Campion said generally they are to move the water away from the homes to the 245 wetland that is behind them. Retaining walls wouldn't facilitate the water to drain 246 appropriately. He said they could put a swale along the back property line to try and keep 247 water as far away from homes as possible. He said if they moved the swale further to the 248 north more trees would be saved, but then it would be harder to get the water away from the 249 homes. 250 251 Nolan would like the applicant to consider swapping out a lot to reconfigure hole number 11 252 and shifting some of those 8 lots out of the heavier tree area. He said the applicant's points 253 were well taken, however the project would facilitate a significant amount of tree loss. Nolan 254 said he understands the economic expense of moving a hole, but it happens all over the 255 country for modernization and maintenance and if there was a way to do it, it would reflect 256 kindly with the neighbors. 257 258 Marty Campion pointed out that they had already eliminated developing in the N/E corner to 259 save trees and put in the park. Peterson, President of the Country Club, explained that when a 260 golf course has to change one hole then the rest of the holes wouldn't be the same and then 261 they would have to change all the grass on the course. Nolan said it should at least be 262 considered. 5 263 264 Mitchell asked why the park was so small and who'd end up owning it. Campion said the 265 ownership would be transferred to the golf course and the suggestion of the smaller park was 266 a request of the Commission and Council during the Concept Stage Review. 267 268 Williams said the first thing was to determine if the project should really be a PUD. Finke 269 asked the Commission to consider where the density should be placed on the property. Nolan 270 said he is comfortable with the proposed side load garages being closer to the street; however 271 he is concerned with the lack of buffer and the eight lots. He also said he felt the plan was 272 better than developing high density in the SE corner of the site and that Charles Cudd builds 273 beautiful homes. 274 275 Williams said nothing he's heard says developing in the SE corner is beneficial and has an 276 issue with lots 1-8. V. Reid said she didn't want to see the woods removed and was 277 concerned with the traffic flow out of the development flowing through "The Reserve." V. 278 Reid said she doesn't see them meeting the criteria/purpose for PUD approval. 279 280 White agreed with the comments being made by the Commissioners and said it goes back to 281 the original comments made that they don't want the woods cut down. At minimum, Block 282 three should not be allowed to develop. She further felt that the development along County 283 Road 116 was too dense and appreciated that the builder would build beautiful homes; 284 however it would just be too much housing on the overall environment and would just be too 285 congested. White further said she didn't think the project qualified for a PUD. Foote also 286 added that he didn't think it qualified for a PUD either. 287 288 Nolan asked the applicant if they wanted a vote from the Commission or if they wanted to 289 come back with changes. Cudd said they wanted the Commission to vote since the PUD was 290 recommended by City staff. 291 292 Motion by Williams, seconded by Foote, to recommend denial of the PUD General Plan 293 and Preliminary Plat based on the development not meeting the "Purpose" standards of 294 Chapter 8., Section 827.25 Subd.3., 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 of the City's Zoning Code. Motion 295 approved unanimously. 296 297 298 7. Dominium — 510 Clydesdale Tr. — Mixed Use State II Plan for development of 26 299 affordable rental townhomes. 300 301 Sparks presented the application. The project has eight buildings varying with 2-4 units in 302 each building. They are right at the 7 units per acre for density and the applicant qualified for 303 density bonuses. The discrepancy of how the density is interpreted is forth coming. 304 305 Sparks said the application meets the technical performance standards. The applicant was 306 requested to block views and an additional recreational feature for older kids be added, which 307 was done. The layout would be only on one lot. The watermain through the site would be 308 public and an easement would be needed. The public safety department is considering 309 drafting a crime free multi -family housing ordinance. Such an ordinance would apply to this 310 development, as would any potential future rental housing licensing program. 311 312 As proposed, the project meets the general standards of the ordinance. Staff does want 313 additional recreational features added to the site. 314 6 315 R. Reid asked what the Crime -free multi -family housing ordinance included. Sparks said it 316 could be things like background checks, or ordinances could require shrubs not to be planted 317 against the building so people can't hide in them. He said there are different concepts and 318 staff would have to review them because they would be different based on each community. 319 320 V. Reid asked if the number of people allowed to live in one unit would be part of the 321 requirement and Sparks said the definition of "family" in the zoning ordinance would have 322 restrictions. If the City adopted a housing program they could have other restrictions. Martin 323 said the City Attorney did weigh in on redefining family and he said it was a tricky thing to 324 do. 325 326 Nick Anderson of Dominium said the pine trees and fence requested were added. The 327 additional open space for older kids was not done. They wanted to keep the space more of an 328 open space and allowed to be more flexible than to be restricted to one recreational use. 329 Mitchell asked for occupancy standard. Anderson said the corporate policy is two people per 330 bedroom. They said if a stricter ordinance was required by the City they would be willing to 331 comply. Mitchell asked if there were sidewalks to Target. Finke said yes. 332 333 Public Hearing opened at 9:57 p.m. 334 335 Public Hearing closed at 9:58 p.m. 336 337 Motion by Williams, seconded by R. Reid to recommend approval of the Mixed Use Stage 338 II Plan for development of 26 affordable rental townhomes subject to the 13 conditions noted 339 in the staff report. Motion carries unanimously. 340 341 342 8. Wealshire, LLC — Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Amend Future Land 343 Uses from Low Density Residential to General Business at the NW corner of 344 Mohawk Dr. and Chippewa Rd. 345 346 Finke presented the application explaining the request was for a future memory 347 care facility for a portion of the property. He explained the City had a lot of 348 discretion in the decision when considering a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 349 He said Mohawk Drive at Hwy 55 was restricted to right-in/right-out. Future 350 land use to the south would be commercial. Future land uses to the north, east, 351 and west are low density residential. He said staff supports the application, and 352 asked. the Commission to consider the items mentioned in the staff report. 353 354 V. Reid said the Staging Plan shows the property to be available for development 355 in 2016-2020. Finke said the property is in the 2016 Staging Plan and the City 356 hasn't adopted a change to the Staging Plan yet to increase those years. V. Reid 357 said she has concern with reviewing an application prior to discussion of the 358 Staging Plan. R. Reid asked if just purchasing a portion of land. Applicant said 359 they would consider purchasing more land if the City supported an Assisted 360 Living Project in that location as a future phase. 361 362 Nolan said the Met Council had proposed reducing the projections of housing. 363 Finke said the proposal met requirements. 364 365 Tom Wiskow, President/Owner of Wealshire of Bloomington, said he'd been in 366 the medical business for 48 years and the City had an obligation to their residents 367 to provide for senior housing. At the age of 82 typically people will have some 7 368 form of dementia. They plan to break ground in May and have the facility open 369 in June of 2016 if approved. 370 371 Corey Wiskow explained the exterior and interior layout of their project in 372 Bloomington and an overview of their Rogers development. He said the Rogers 373 development is surrounded by commercial and residential and is a one level 374 building. Exterior pictures were shown to the Commission of their assisted 375 living facility that was multiple stories. He said the City of Rogers gave them 376 TIF money for their assisted living facility. If Medina wanted a senior campus 377 they would be open to the idea. 378 379 Nolan asked why the applicant didn't choose land that was zoned appropriately. 380 Corey Wiskow said Joe Cavanaugh wanted 2.7 times the price for land zoned 381 appropriately. He said they looked at land with the correct zoning along Hwy 55, 382 but Hwy 55 was of concern to them from a safety standpoint. Being located on 383 Hwy 55 wouldn't be good if a resident got out of the facility and walked out onto 384 that roadway. 385 386 Public Hearing opened at 10:20 p.m. 387 388 Nolan acknowledged letter provided to the City from a Brian and Renee Stevenson. 389 390 Don Atkinson said he lives directly north of the subject property. The Public 391 Hearing sign location which was displayed by the City makes it appear that the 392 development being proposed is along Hwy 55. He said he wouldn't like to see 393 development north of Chippewa. Currently there is an old driveway along 394 Mohawk and he wondered where the project would access. He asked if the 395 setbacks for the project would be similar to an animal structure which is 150 feet. 396 He said he's not prepared for the property to be rezoned. 397 398 Shelly Swanson of 1800 Katrinka Road said the right -in and right -out onto Hwy 399 55 would be a concern and questioned when the road was planned to be put in. 400 Chippewa roadway completion leading to Arrowhead would be a necessity. She 401 didn't think the project was feasible until Chippewa Road was extended to 402 Arrowhead Drive. 403 404 R. Reid asked if their project would be a single story facility. T. Wiskow of Wealshire said it 405 would be one story. He said the only time it would be multiple stories is if the City asked 406 them to construct Assisted Living; otherwise they would be residential in appearance and all 407 one level. Finke said that it's not a condition of the land use. The logical zoning is Business 408 Park which does allow a two story building, but no taller than that. R. Reid said she liked a 409 one story building so that it would blend in with the surrounding area. 410 411 R. Reid and Mitchell said they liked the one story building. Nolan said he liked the proposed 412 project. Nolan said the problem he's having is how the applicant is going about it. He said 413 the applicant could go into many other properties zoned Business District, Business Park, 414 Mixed Use district and High Density Residential District. The first question is why ask for 415 rezoning when we have so much land already appropriately zoned. He said he liked the 416 development and that it's a nice transitional development, but General Business opens up the 417 floodgates too much. In Medina, single family homes start at $600,000.00 and up and would 418 be a good transition to the use being proposed. The property requesting rezoning is 20 acres 419 and they are only proposing to use 10 acres. If the rezoning was tied with the building 420 certificate, the City still has the other 10 acres. He encouraged the applicant to look at other 8 421 properties that their use would fit better in; and mid density residential is not the same cost as 422 Hwy 55 business zoned property. He would rather look at the application as mid density 423 residential rather than business; that way if the applicant didn't end up developing the entire 424 20 acres, the City ends up with a nice transition which he sees as Business Park. T. Wiskow 425 said staff recommended the General Business zoning. 426 427 Nolan asked Finke why General Business. Finke said to your point he thinks the regulations 428 for the Business Park adopted would have less intensity than medium density. He said it's 429 certainly valid to say something different. He said if the Commission was to look at the 430 Business Park District and its general requirements it actually has more screening 431 requirements than would a medium density development. He feels it builds in better 432 protections. He further explains the Comp Plan guidance is General Business, but the actual 433 zoning would be Business Park. 434 435 Nolan asked Finke to tell the Commission what uses would be allowed in the Business Park 436 District. Finke said Light Warehouse, manufacturing, and office uses with substantial 437 setbacks from residential. There would be limitations as to where loading docks could be 438 located. 439 440 R. Reid feels the zoning district isn't a good fit. V. Reid said it's a wonderful addition to 441 Medina, but she thinks there should be a good transition and would prefer it in a different 442 location. Foote said he likes the use, but had concern with the General Business zoning. 443 444 Finke suggested the idea of amending the zoning ordinance to allow the use in the R-1 zoning 445 district as a CUP. Nolan said it would depend on where it is. Finke said ok. Mitchell said it 446 would be similar as churches and schools. Finke said restrictions could be placed on the use 447 to limit the areas allowed. Nolan asked how many units the applicant would construct. T. 448 Wiskow said the one in Rogers was 80 units in phase One and in the second phase another 82 449 units, for a total of 162 units just for Dementia care. In Bloomington they had 130+ units. 450 For the proposed project they would initially construct 80 units and within 6 months that 451 would be filled. They then would break ground on another addition with 75-80 more units, 452 with 160 units maximum, which would all be Dementia care. He would construct 453 underground parking for staff. Nolan asked what the traffic flow would be and T. Wiskow 454 said very minimal. R. Reid said traffic flow would be very low. 455 456 Weir asked if the City did have a potential memory care facility in Uptown Hamel that didn't 457 happen. One of the issues was there weren't stoves in the rooms and asked if it counted 458 towards residential development for SAC determinations. Finke said this facility wouldn't 459 have SAC units required for each residential room. 460 461 The Commission discussed adding the use to an R1 residential zoning district. Nolan 462 summarized that the Commission liked the use and how to deal with it. V. Reid said she 463 loves the use, but was unsure of the site. Foote doesn't have a problem with the use, but 464 preferred a better zoning designation and would like to keep it in its location. V. Reid asked 465 how narrow could memory care be defined to include it in the Rl district. Mitchell would 466 like to approve something and push it forward and find a new location. Nolan said he'd like 467 more clarification. V. Reid asked to table the application. Weir asked how it would work 468 with the future staging plan if it is Rl and not General Business. R. Reid felt they needed a 469 little more time to consider the application. T. Wiskow said they need to break ground by 470 May of 2015. They are scheduled to go before the Council in December. He said they could 471 give an additional month if the Commission needed the additional time. 472 9 473 T. Wiskow said the project would bring 240-250 jobs to the City; not fast food type jobs, but 474 nurses. Williams suggested keeping it R1 and do it as a CUP. 475 476 Public Hearing closed at 10:31 p.m. 477 478 Motion by Mitchell, seconded by Nolan, to recommend approval of the Comp Plan 479 Amendment from Low Density Residential to General Business, but to encourage staff and 480 the City Council to analyze if alternative land use or zoning tools could allow for the 481 proposed use and have less chance of unintended impacts on surrounding residential 482 properties. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: None) 483 484 485 9. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Amending the Staging/Growth Plan, 486 Community Background Chapter, Land Use and Growth Chapter, the 487 Comprehensive Sewer Plan and the Water Supply and Distribution Plan. 488 489 Commissioners noted that it was getting late, that there did not appear to be anyone present 490 for this hearing, and that the Commission may be better off tabling the discussion on the 491 Staging Plan until the following meeting when they are less tired. 492 493 Public Hearing opened at 11:13 pm. 494 495 Public Hearing closed at 11:14 496 497 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Foote to Table the Comprehensive Plan Amendment until 498 the December meeting. Motion carries unanimously. 499 500 501 10. Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code related to Brew pubs, 502 Tap Rooms, Microbreweries, Nano -Breweries, and Similar uses. 503 504 Public Hearing opened at 9:15 p.m. 505 506 Zack Ward, applicant, said he is looking to open up a micro -brewery company. One 507 comment is the maximum of 50 percent of tap room and brewery in the ordinance. Finke 508 clarified someone can do a brewery and just brew without a tap room. Ward said his 509 concerns were satisfied. 510 511 Public Hearing closed at 11:18 512 513 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by White to recommend approval of the ordinance to amend 514 Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code related to Brew Pubs, Tap Rooms, Microbrews, Nano - 515 Breweries, and Similar uses. Motion carries unanimously. 516 517 518 11. Council Meeting Schedule 519 Mitchell agreed to attend and present at the November 18, 2014 Council meeting. 520 521 522 12. Adiourn 523 Motion by White, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Motion 524 carried unanimously. 10 AGENDA ITEM: 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: November 5, 2014 MEETING: November 12, 2014 Planning Commission (Reprinted for December 9, 2014) SUBJ: Comprehensive Plan —Staging and Growth Plan; Projections Public Hearing Background The Planning Commission has held two public hearings and discussed the study of the Staging and Growth Plan as well as potential amendments. The Commission continued the public hearing to the following meeting so that notice could be mailed to affected property owners and owners within 350 feet. The Commission also requested feedback from the City Council. The reports from the September and October Planning Commission meetings are attached, including the proposed amendment. City Council Discussion The City Council discussed the potential amendment at their October 21 meeting, and an excerpt from their meeting minutes is attached. The Council had discussion fairly similar to that of the Planning Commission. The City Council recommended that any property with a Stage I approval should not be amended to a later timeframe. The Council also concurred that a mailed notice was appropriate. The Council suggested that another matter to consider may be to even out the land uses among the Staging periods. Two Council members believed it was important to enact an amendment to the Staging and Growth Plan relatively soon, and prior to the City's full consideration of the next decennial update. Land Use by Staging Period Following the feedback from the City Council, staff analyzed the planned land uses by Staging Period. The table to the right summarizes the total net acreage planned for development in the existing Comp Plan. The far right column shows the amount of acreage which would need to be included in each of the four Staging Periods (2009-2015, 2016- 2020, 2021-2025, 2026-2030) if the goal was to divide the land uses equally across each period. Net Acres (All Periods) Acreage per Staging Period Low Density 391 97.75 Medium Density 169 42.25 High Density 75 18.75 Mixed Use 202 50.5 Commercial 89 22.25 Business 318 79.5 Staging/Growth Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 1 of 3 Nov. 12, 2014 (Reprinted for Dec. 9, 2014) Planning Commission Meeting The following table shows the net acreage of each land use within each of the Staging Periods (prior to consideration of any amendments). The second column under each Staging Period shows the amount that the aggregate acreage of each use exceeds (or is short of) that which would be expected if there were equal amounts of acreage in each Staging Period. Planned Land Use by Staging Period (Existing Staging Plan) 2009-2015 2016-2020 2021-2025 2026-2030 Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Low Density 227 129.3 132 163.5 32 97.8 0 0.0 Medium Density 169 126.8 0 84.5 0 42.3 0 0.0 High Density 0 (18.8) 0 (37.5) 0 (56.3) 75 0.0 Mixed Use 92 41.5 0 (9.0) 62 2.5 48 0.0 Commercial 32 9.8 12 (0.5) 0 (22.8) 45 0.0 Business 81 1.5 105 27.0 60 7.5 72 0.0 The following table shows the same information, if the proposed amendment to the Staging Plan (delaying all residential and mixed use property by one Staging Period) were to be adopted. Planned Land Use by Staging Period (w/ Proposed Staging Plan Amendment) 2009-2015 2016-2020 2021-2025 2026-2030 Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Net Acres Deviation Low Density 195 97.3 32 31.5 132 65.8 32 0.0 Medium Density 121 78.8 48 84.5 0 42.3 0 0.0 High Density 0 (18.8) 0 (37.5) 0 (56.3) 75 0.0 Mixed Use 92 41.5 0 (9.0) 0 (59.5) 110 0.0 Commercial 32 9.8 12 (0.5) 0 (22.8) 45 0.0 Business 81 1.5 105 27.0 60 7.5 72 0.0 These tables illustrate the fact that the existing Staging Plan places much of the residential development in the earliest Staging Periods. This is the case even if the City proceeds with the proposed amendment to the Staging Plan. If leveling out the uses within each Staging Period is the goal, this analysis would suggest: 1) An excess of Low Density and Medium Density residential land uses are still within the earliest Staging Plans 2) The existing phasing of Mixed Use property is actually fairly constant under the existing Staging Plan and the proposed Amendment would cause this land use to be more heavily loaded in the later Staging Periods. Staging/Growth Plan Page 2 of 3 Nov. 12, 2014 (Reprinted for Dec. 9, 2014) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Planning Commission Meeting Additional Matters for Discussion Flexible Staging Periods (Ability to "Jump Ahead" ) The Planning Commission originally discussed removing the ability for a property to "jump ahead" and develop one Staging Period early. In subsequent discussions, it was pointed out that developing early is tied to an incentive -based system which requires such a development to exceed general City development standards. This suggests that it may be preferable to have increased delays within the Staging Plan, but continue to have flexible Staging Periods. Concentration of Development A number of Commissioners have touched on this point, but staff believes it is worth repeating. Commissioners have wondered if, in addition to concerns related to the overall amount of residential growth, much of the concern relates to the fact that such a high proportion of the growth is concentrated in a small geographical area. A number of Commissioners and Council members have pointed out the fact that the proposed amendment would not have much of an effect on this. In order to address this concern, the City would need to delay development in the eastern portion of the City more than a single Staging Period. Conclusion The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are attached at the back of this report. Staff has also included previous reports on this subject for reference, but not all attachments. If anyone would like any of this information, please contact me. The Commission tabled this matter and continued the Public Hearing to the November 12 meeting. Following the Hearing, staff seeks direction on the proposed amendments. Attachments 1. Excerpt from October 21, 2014 City Council minutes 2. Summary of Planning Commission discussion at October 14 meeting 3. September 9, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report (w/o attachments) 4. October 14, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report (w/o attachments) 5. Proposed amendments to Chapter 3 6. Proposed amendments to Chapter 5 7. Proposed amendments to Map 5-3 Staging/Growth Plan Page 3 of 3 Nov. 12, 2014 (Reprinted for Dec. 9, 2014) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Planning Commission Meeting Medina City Council Excerpt from October 21, 2014 Meeting Minutes Comprehensive Plan — Staginq and Growth Discussion (8:26 p.m.) Finke provided the report requested by the City Council earlier this summer in regard to the staging and growth plan. He noted that the City Council requested that staff study the staging and growth plan in regard to the rapid rate of growth and the impact that growth has on infrastructure and services, as well as the recently reduced Metropolitan (Met) Council projections for 2040. He noted that public meetings were held to discuss the issue. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended, on a vote of 4-2, to direct staff to prepare a Comprehensive Plan amendment, which would remove the ability for a property to "jump ahead" and to amend the Staging/Growth Plan to shift priority. He displayed the current Staging/Growth Plan as well as that recommended for amendment by the Planning Commission. Martin noted that it had been mentioned that properties already in discussion for development not be included for movement. Finke agreed those properties would not be pushed back to the next staging period. He briefly summarized the growth activity within the City recently, and that planned and/or approved, as well as the reduced projections from the Met Council. He also reviewed the current staging period capacity as well as the capacity that would be allowed under the proposed amendment recommended by the Planning Commission. Martin referenced the CIP for the next five years and asked which development capacity would most accurately match the CIP. Finke stated that the CIP would most likely fall between all of those lines as it is more accurately developed with the actual rate of growth assumption, rather than assuming all property available for development would develop in their staging time, as is done with the capacity. Martin confirmed that amending the Comprehensive Plan would not interfere with the CIP. She asked specifically if slowing the rate of growth would interfere with budgeting. Johnson noted that staff would review the projections to ensure that budgets and staffing levels would be in -line with what is needed. Finke stated that this exercise has shown that the current staging plan is rolled out on an east to west basis and explained that plan ended up front and tail loading residential development substantially. He advised that the staging for residential was loaded mostly into the 2001 and 2011 staging periods, with commercial focus for the 2016 staging period. Weir agreed that information was very beneficial as the Council may not have wanted to place both of the residential areas within a desirable school district in the first two staging periods. She stated that the desire has been for low density residential and questioned how realistic the leveling out is at the end of that staging period because the medium density and mixed -use areas have not been as desirable. Finke stated that if there is a demand for low density residential, and not a large supply of land, the City would most likely see additional requests for single family balanced with a smaller area of the site to be used for medium density in order to balance the density of the site. 41 Medina City Council Excerpt from October 21, 2014 Meeting Minutes Pederson believed that it is important to look at the fact that the police and fire departments are operating fully and the City still has one of the lowest tax rates of the 16 surrounding communities. He acknowledged road repairs which were also made through recent development activities rather than forcing that improvement cost upon the residents. He also acknowledged the other benefits the City has received such as a water tower site and park. He stated that while the City desires commercial development, that development cannot be successful without residential development as well. Weir agreed that there have been many benefits received through development. Pederson stated that he was unsure on the issue of the "jump ahead", stating that there are also additional benefits gained through allowing "jump ahead" and acknowledging that the Planning Commission would recommend reducing that period from five years to possibly two or three years. He stated that interest rates may increase and the desire for residential development may not be as high in the future. Martin noted the traffic concern regarding the congestion on County Road 101 and County Road 116 would not be affected by this plan. She advised that the Commission also discussed that even if the growth were slowed in Medina that does not mean that growth would be slowed in neighboring communities, which would still place further burden on the traffic congestion. Weir stated that the point had also been made regarding the growth in the Wayzata School District, noting that Medina is only a small portion of the School District. She stated that other communities within the Wayzata School District will continue to grow and the School District is prepared for that growth. She stated that disallowing the "jump ahead" would have an impact on property owners that may have planned for that and noted that there are benefits to the additional conditions required under the "jump ahead". She believed that the development would slow as the available parcels move out of the Wayzata School District, which is happening now. Finke acknowledged that the majority of property within the Wayzata School District was included in the first staging period. He also mentioned a memory care development that could move forward. Weir stated that she could be persuaded to consider this study within the context of the Comprehensive Plan for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan rather than amending the current Plan. Pederson agreed that the information could simply be used to develop the new Comprehensive Plan. Finke stated that the new Comprehensive Plan could not be submitted to the Met Council prior to the end of 2015, as the system statements would not be available until September 2015. He noted that even after the Plan is submitted by the City in 2017, there is still a ten-month period of review that is required. Weir believed that based upon her experience that mid 2017 would be a good estimate of when the Plan would be enacted. Martin questioned if the Met Council could state that they would not consider an amendment as the system statements are not yet available. 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from October 21, 2014 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that the Met Council has stated that they will entertain amendments during this time period based on the reductions. Martin stated that she would be inclined to amending the Comprehensive Plan in order to delay some of the growth, provided that it does not interfere with the active development. Anderson agreed with the comments made by Pederson that the Council should be wary of slowing growth. He stated that he attended the Planning Commission meetings and stated that he would support some level of amendment as recommended. Weir asked for additional opinion from Finke in regard to reducing the "jump ahead" from five years to two or three years. Finke stated that to limit the "jump ahead" to two to three years could have some benefits as the "jump ahead" properties would not directly compete with the current staging period. Bob Belser stated that it is evident to him that there is a tremendous amount of growth that has occurred in Medina and is planned for development. Weir stated that while the development seems sudden, the current rate evens out the development that did not occur during the recession. Belser questioned how roads and infrastructure would be affected and paid for. Weir advised that the new homes pay taxes, which fund those improvements. Belser referenced the growth of the households and the importance for affordable housing and asked how those are meeting the needs of the current employers within the City. Weir stated that developers are not interested in developing that type of housing in Medina. Belser referenced an idea that had been brought forward regarding two-year increments for development and another idea that could deal with the train traffic. He stated that he believed the City would implode with the current rate of growth and that the growth rate should be slowed through a moratorium. He believed that the interest rates would remain low for a long time and that there would be a benefit to delaying development. Joe Cavanaugh Jr. referenced the Cavanaugh property and Weir confirmed that property would remain in the current staging period. He also referenced the memory care development and believed that would be a great addition to the City that would not impact the traffic rates. Weir stated that the Council is split in their decision as two members would be in favor or waiting while the other two would be in favor of an amendment. She asked for additional information regarding reducing the "jump ahead" period. Mitchell stated that he would not want to see development simply stop abruptly and agreed that perhaps the best way to slow growth would be to reduce the staging period from five years to two to three years. Weir stated that perhaps smaller "jump ahead" periods would be a good compromise. 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from October 21, 2014 Meeting Minutes Martin agreed that could be a compromise. Weir stated that her goal is to even out growth for budgetary and staffing purposes. Finke agreed that the goal to take the next 25-30 years of growth and design a staging plan which would approximate a fairly level achievement could be a very manageable action. He agreed that could be investigated as an option. Weir noted that anyone who has submitted an application or Concept Plan would remain in the current staging period. Finke confirmed that the Council would be in agreement with providing notice to the property owners discussed by the Planning Commission. 4 Summary of Planning Commission Discussion The Commission held a public hearing and then discussed the proposed amendments to the Staging Plan. At the hearing two developers voiced concerns about the financial impact of having to pay taxes on property that they cannot develop, and suggested that the traffic and school concerns were overstated. Two homeowners expressed concerns about the effect of over -development on infrastructure, rural character, and traffic. Mayor Weir advised the Commission to consider the potential budgetary impact of any proposal to delay development. Council member Pedersen pointed out that the traffic problem on County Road 116 is due in part to traffic coming from I-94 to Highway 55, and traffic that is currently being detoured off 101. Following the comments at the hearing, Commissioners discussed the proposed amendment. Following is a summary of the discussion: • Appeared to be consensus that recent pace of development has been too rapid and that the City should take action to level out growth. • A number of Commissioners believed time was of the essence and evaluating the Comp Plan in its entirety would take too long. • At least one Commissioner felt strongly that more facts and data should be considered before adopting the proposed (or any other) comp plan amendment. Suggested a task force to identify the problems/concerns; identify alternatives (and potential outcomes, consequences); • The following subjects were identified as important for consideration: transportation capacity, school district impacts, sewer/water infrastructure, natural resource preservation, budgetary implications • Commissioners concurred that it would be appropriate to mail notices to affected property owners and those within 350 feet prior to considering amending the staging plan. • Commissioners felt it would be helpful for the City Council to provide feedback on this issue before the Commission continues forward to further consider any action. • Some Commissioners pointed out that, even with the proposed amendment, there would be significant amounts of property available for development. • Some Commissioners noted that the proposal does not affect any property near County Road 116 so would have no effect on the traffic concerns, which is one of the major objectives noted for the amendment. • After early discussions about removing the "jump ahead" provisions, some Commissioners suggested that it may be better to leave these in place because it incentivizes development practices which exceed regular standards. • Commissioners discussed only considering the existing 2011-2015, 2016-2020 and 2021- 2025 timeframes, since the 2026-2030 staging period would not be able to develop prior to the updated Comp Plan being in force. " S o m e C o m m i s s i o n e r s d i s c u s s e d a n i n t e r e s t i n c o n s i d e r i n g n a r r o w e r S t a g i n g p e r i o d s ( t w o - o r t h r e e - y e a r p e r i o d s , p e r h a p s ) . " O n e C o m m i s s i o n e r n o t e d a f e e l i n g t h a t t h e r e w e r e t w o M e d i n a s ; t h e a r e a w h e r e a l l o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t w a s p l a n n e d a n d i t w a s o k t o g i v e w a i v e r s t o d e v e l o p e r s . . . a n d t h e r u r a l a r e a w h i c h i s t o t a l l y o f f - l i m i t s . " M o s t C o m m i s s i o n e r s s u p p o r t e d t r e a t i n g M i x e d U s e p r o p e r t y i n t h e s a m e w a y a s r e s i d e n t i a l , s i n c e a t l e a s t ' / 2 i s r e q u i r e d t o b e r e s i d e n t i a l a n d t h e p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s h a v e b e e n f o r o n l y t h e r e s i d e n t i a l p o r t i o n s t o m o v e f o r w a r d . " S e v e r a l C o m m i s s i o n e r s s t a t e d t h a t p r o p e r t i e s w h i c h h a v e a p p r o v e d S t a g e I P l a n s s h o u l d n o t h a v e t h e i r S t a g i n g p e r i o d a m e n d e d . C o m m i s s i o n e r s d i d n o t b e l i e v e a C o n c e p t P l a n r e v i e w s h o u l d b e e n o u g h t o e x c l u d e a p r o p e r t y f r o m t h e a m e n d m e n t . 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 P 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 a 3,000 g 2,500 2,000 1,500 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 i 6' rr or r ♦♦dOP MIMI MD 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 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 d 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: 1 2,5 Metropolitan Council Household Projections 1911 1995 >axl 7a15 101.0 2015 2020 2016 -2030 1035 2040 Actual Historical Growth :. — Original Projections (2008) ••• Updated Projections (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 Page 3 of 5 September 9, 2014 Discussion Planning Commission Meeting 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 Excerpt from Chapter 3 (only amended pages) 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 FraniewefkThriveMSP2040 documents. The population of Medina was estimated by the Metropolitan Council to be 1,770 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 T MEDINA Page 3 - 2 Excerpt from Chapter 3 (only amended pages) TABLE 3-A Metroaolitan Council Forecasts Growth and Forecast Population : Households Employment 1990* 3,096 1,007 2,155 2000' 4,005 1,309 2,928 2005** 477-7-0 1,616 3,940 2010' 57500 4.892 2,1001.702 5,500 3.254 2020*** 9;288 3,240 600 2030*** 12,700 450 7,900 2040*** 9.000 3 500 4.580 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census -2000* 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 2302040. 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 unsewered 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 sewercd households, the City forecast slightly exceeds Metropolitan Council forecasts, TABLE 3-B Medina Population and Households Forecast based on Future Land Use Total Population 2030 200020n- 20302040 Sewered 3096 2158 2745 3056 2838 6958 4922 8993 6801 7006 317 147% Unsewered 1848 2025 2445 2053 2446 2024 22481976 1994 209/0 -3% Total Households Sewered Unsewered 1007 705 927 4860 987 2530 1856 3697 2547 2725 410%176% 604 685 715 740 765 775 27% 8Y *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 MEDINA Page 3 - 3 Excerpt from Chapter 5 (only amended pages) The Guide Plan Medina's Future Land Use Plan, Map 5-2, is shaped by the City's General Land Use Development Policies, and the Land Use Goals and Strategies identified in Chapter 1 which keep a large portion of Medina rural and protect the City's natural resources while accommodating compact, systematic growth in strategic areas. Table 5-B below demonstrates the expected 2030 land uses in the community. TABLE 5-B Future Land Use Plan Land Use Designation Gross Area Net Area Acres Percent Acres Percent Agricultural (AG) 251 1.4% 180 1.0% Rural Residential (RR) 7,835 45.2% 4,982 28.7% Low Density Residential (LDR) 944 5.5% 630 3.7% Medium Density Residential (MDR) 451 2.6% 307 1.8% High Density Residential (HDR) 123 0.7% 103 0.6% Mixed Use (MU) 338 1.9% 234 1.3% Mixed Use - Business (MU -B) 59 0.3% 39 0.2% Developing Post -2030 444 2.6% 337 1.9% Commercial (C) 427 2.5% 308 1.8% General Business (GB) 559 3.2% 359 2.1% Industrial (IB) 68 0.4% 48 0.3% Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) 192 1.1% 106 0.6% Public Semi -Public (PSP) 271 1.6% 173 1.0% Parks and Recreation 93 0.5% 46 0.3% Parks and Recreation - Regional or State 2,519 14.5% 1,528 8.8% Private Recreation (PREC) 358 2.1% 272 1.6% Open Space (OS) 208 1.2% 153 0.9% Rights -of -Way 912 5.1% 912 5.1% Lakes 1,283 7.4% 1,283 7.4% Wetlands and Floodplains 5,335 30.8% Total City 17,335 17,335 Future Land Use Designations Agricultural (AG) identifies areas which are part of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program and are reserved for agricultural uses as a long-term land use. This area is not planned to be served by urban services and allows no more than one lot per forty acres. Rural Residential (RR) identifies areas for low -intensity uses, such as rural residential, rural commercial, farming, hobby farms, horticulture, conservation of ecologically significant natural resources and passive recreation. This area is not planned to be served by urban services during the timeframe covered by this Plan and requires each lot to have five contiguous acres of soils suitable for septic systems. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Proposed Amended October 2014 G , T V o , MEDINA Page 5- 8 Excerpt from Chapter 5 (only amended pages) 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 G T v 0 MEDINA Page 5- 19 Excerpt from Chapter 5 (only amended pages) Table 5-F Land Use in 5 -Year Increments Land bee Designation Allowed Ra l .ensi es Min Max Existing 2008 ` 2010 20115 2020 2025 2030 %Change 2010-2030 Residential Uses (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) -Rural Residential 2.5 acres or less -- -- 212 212 212 212 212 0% -Rural Residential 2.5 -10 acres 1U/10A TBD1 2197 1 2207 2217 2227 2237 1.8% -Rural Residential 10-40 acres 1U/40A 1U/10A 3591 3661 3691 3721 3751 4.5% - Rural Residential 40+ acres -- 1U/40A 1835 1755 1715 1675 1635 -10.9% -Agricultural 40+ acres -- 1U/40A 251 251 251 251 251 0% Subtotal Unsewered 8086 8086 8086 8086 8086 8086 0% Low Density Residential (LDR) 2 3.49 346 600 713 637 911 711 944 905 944 57% Medium Density Residential (MDR) 3.5 6.9 181 326 /151 358 451 451 451 38% High Density Residential (HDR) 7 30 . 17 21 21 21 21 123 486% Mixed Use (MU)2 3.5 6.9 0 80 166 166 239 338 323% Mixed Use — Business (MU -B)3 7 45 5 59 59 59 59 59 0% Future Developing Areas 1U/10A 2501 1954 1372 982 771 444 -77% Commercial Uses Commercial (C) 246 256 349 380 380 427 67% General Business (GB) 92 92 214 375 480 558 507% Industrial (IB) 25 25 68 68 68 68 172% Institutional Uses Public Semi -Public (PSP) 271 271 271 271 271 271 0% Parks and Recreation 93 93 93 93 93 93 0% Parks and Recreation — Regional/State 2519 2519 2519 2519 2519 2519 0% Private Recreation (PREC) 358 358 358 358 358 358 0% Open Space (OS) 208 208 208 208 208 208 0% Closed Sanitary Landfill (SL) 192 192 192 192 192 192 0% Lakes 1,283 Wetlands 0 Floodplains 5,335 Total City 17,335 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 3 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. Chapter 5 - Land Use & Growth Proposed Amended October 2014 t Y C MEDINA Page 5- 20 COUNTY ROAD 24 Map 5-3 G , 0 A MEDINA Staging and Growth Urban Services Phasing Plan Developed 2008 2001-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 **2016-2020 2021-2025 **2021-2025 2026-2030 **2026-2030 1 Post 2030 j 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: November 2014 Scale: 1:30,000 Map Date: October 31, 2014 1 AGENDA ITEM: 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: December 5, 2014 MEETING: December 9, 2014 Planning Commission SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment — Nursing Homes, Assisted Living Facilities, and Similar Uses — Public Hearing Background At the November meeting, the Commission reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request from The Wealshire, LLC related to a proposed Memory Care Facility at the northwest corner of Mohawk and Chippewa. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Amendment, but also expressed interest in reviewing the zoning regulations related to these uses. The City Council reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and directed staff to prepare a resolution approving of the request. As such, no changes to the City's zoning ordinance would be necessary for the sake of the applicant's request (although the property will need to be rezoned following formal adoption of the Comp Plan Amendment). However, the Commission's discussion suggested that further discussion of the regulations may be warranted. Existing Regulations Current City regulations list Nursing Homes, Assisted Living Facilities and Similar Uses as permitted uses in the following zoning districts: Business, Business Park. The code lists them as conditional uses in the following districts: Mixed Use, Uptown Hamel -1, R-3 (Mid Density Residential), R-4 (Limited High Density) and R-5 (High Density). Smaller assisted living facility (six or fewer residents) are allowed in all residential districts because state statute requires it. Within the mixed use and higher density districts, these types of uses the following specific limitations in order to limit potential impacts on adjacent residential properties. Subd. 3. Assisted Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, and Similar Uses. (a) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection with an arterial roadway; (b) structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the combined floor area of all structures shall not exceed an amount equal to 30 percent of the lot area; (c) parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility, expected guest visitation and the likelihood of residents owning vehicles. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district; (d) sufficient outdoor plaza and recreational areas shall be provided; Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 2 December 9, 2014 Nursing Homes, Assisted Living, Similar Uses Planning Commission Meeting f (e) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (f) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. The requirement to be within 1,500 feet of an arterial roadway limits the property on which these uses may be located. Additionally, the footprint and floor area limitations are fairly limiting. Staff believes these limitations are appropriate within a lower density residential setting, but question if they are necessary in districts where higher density housing is permitted. As noted above, the uses are currently not permitted in single family districts. The Commission and Council could discuss such expansion, but staff would recommend upholding the floor area limitations and requiring proximity to major roadways. These uses are not currently allowed in Commercial districts in the City. The Planning Commission and City Council discussed the matter back in 2012, and decided that there was a potential that adjacent commercial uses may adversely affect these uses. The concern was that the City was setting up a situation where complaints would come from the nursing home facility which would not be expected if two strictly commercial activities were adjacent. One potential protection against this conflict would be to require the Nursing Home/Assisted Living Facility to have larger setbacks and buffers, so to limit impacts from neighboring commercial uses. This would be more equitable than requiring the higher standards for uses which are adjacent to the Nursing Home/Assisted Living Facility. At that time, the Council decided the better course of action was to not allow the uses in Commercial districts. Direction Requested Staff seeks direction from the Planning Commission and Council related to the regulations. As noted, staff believes it would be worth considering a reduction of restrictions in the Mixed Use and higher density residential zoning districts. The attached draft ordinance shows how these changes could be accomplished. The Commission and Council may also discuss whether to allow these uses in lower density residential districts (with conditions to protect adjacent residential properties) or commercial districts (with conditions to protect the subject property from adjacent commercial activity). Attachments 1. DRAFT ordinance Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 2 December 9, 2014 Nursing Homes, Assisted Living, Similar Uses Planning Commission Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### AN ORDINANCE REGARDING NURSING HOMES, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES, AND SIMILAR USES; AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I. Section 841.4.05 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 841.4.05. Supplemental Requirements for Specific Uses within the R-3, R-4, and R-5 Residential Zoning Districts. In addition to the general standards specified for conditional uses in section 825.39 of the City Code and other requirements of this ordinance, the following uses shall not be permitted unless the city council determines that all of the specific standards. contained in this subdivision will be met: Subd. 3. Assisted Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, and Similar Uses. (a) shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from intersection , .i♦h . arterial adway; (b) structures shall cover no more than 20 percent of the lot, and the combined floor arca of all structures shall not exceed an amount equal to 30 percent of the lot area; (c) parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility, expected guest visitation and the likelihood of residents owning vehicles. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district; (d) sufficient outdoor plaza and recreational areas shall be provided; (e) exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (f) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. SECTION II. Section 842.2.07 of the code of ordinances of the city of Medina is amended by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 842.2.07 (MU) Supplemental Requirements for Specific Residential Uses. Subd. 2. State Licensed Residential Facility or housing with services registered under chapter 144D, serving 16 or fewer persons Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE intersection with an arterial roadway. (b) Shall not be operated within a townhome or multiple family structure. (c) Parking requirements shall be based on the number or residents at the facility as well as the number of employees. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district. (d) The facility shall meet licensing requirements as required by law. (e) The city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. Subd. 3. Assisted Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, and Similar Uses (a) Shall abut an arterial roadway or abut a collector roadway no more than 1,500 feet from an intersection w:th arterial r aaway all structures shall not exceed an amount equal to 30 percent of the lot arca. (c) Parking requirements shall be based on the number of employees of the facility, expected guest visitation and the likelihood of residents owning vehicles. Parking for residents of the facility shall be enclosed or underground, consistent with the requirements of the zoning district. (d) Sufficient outdoor plaza and recreational areas shall be provided. (e) Exterior building materials shall consist of the following materials: brick, natural stone, stucco, Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, copper, glass, decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative block, and/or decorative pre -cast concrete panels. A maximum of 20 percent of the vertical building exterior may be metal or fiber cement lap siding or other materials approved by the city, if used as accent materials which are integrated into the overall building design. (f) The city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the surrounding area. SECTION III. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the Medina city council this day of , 2014. Elizabeth Weir, Mayor Attest: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the South Crow River News on the day of , 2014. Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE Independence Map 5-2 MEDINA Future Land Use Plan Guide Plan Rural Residential Agriculture Developing -Post 2030 Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 U/A Medium Density Res 3.5 - 6.99 U/A High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 U/A 11111 Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 U/A Commercial 1111 General Business Industrial Business Private Recreation (PREC) In Parks and Recreation - P -R - State or Regional Open Space 11111 Public Semi -Public 0 U/A , Closed Sanitary Landfill Right -of -Way 4 *This map is not perfectly precise. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified. Last Amended: May 21, 2013 (CPA 2030-4) Adopted: November 17, 2009 UTM, Zone 15N, NAD 83 Scale: 1:30,000 AGENDA ITEM: 8 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231 .2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT To: Medina Planning Commission From: Nate Sparks Date: December 3, 2014 Re: Villas at Medina Country Club General Plan PUD / Preliminary Plat File No: LR-14-138 Application Date: June 6, 2014 Review Deadline: January 24, 2015 (extended) COUNCIL REVIEW The City Council reviewed the General Plan PUD and Preliminary Plat for the Villas at Medina Country Club at their December 2, 2014 meeting. The Plan reviewed by the Council incorporated the recommendation of the Park Commission to include additional parkland. The applicant offered a park of 8.8 acres in the northeast corner of the site, as part of the PUD, exceeding the required dedication of 2.17 acres. Noting that the plan had been changed from what the Planning Commission reviewed, the City Council has referred this application back to the Commission. The Commission should consider this change and determine if there are any changes to the formal recommendation. Most of the information included in this report is the same as reviewed by the Commission at its November meeting. The new information includes: 1) a summary of the Council's discussion added at the end of the report; 2) a summary of the Park Commission's recommendation was added; 3) additional information was added regarding the interplay of Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and PUD standards because of the questions raised by the Commission at the November meeting; and 4) an additional written public comment was added. BACKGROUND / GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Rachel Contracting LLC and the Medina Golf and Country Club have made an application for a General Plan Planned Unit Development & Preliminary Plat to develop the northern and western edges of the golf course. The applicant proposes 43 residential parcels, 35 of which are to access off of a new road that enters the site from County Road 116 and then runs north to Shawnee Woods Road. The remaining 8 units are proposed to access directly off of Shawnee Woods Road, which the applicant proposes to reconstruct easterly from the point the southern access road connects. The lots in the western side of the proposed development are similar to the City's R2 District while the lots in the north portion of the development are generally similar to the R1 District. The applicant also proposes parkland in the northeast corner of the site. The City reviewed a PUD Concept Plan earlier in the year. Minutes from the Planning Commission and City Council are attached. Many of the comments from the Planning Commission and Council members related to the substantial tree removal on the northern portion of the proposed development and impacts to adjacent property to the north. Within the updated plans, the applicant has removed development from the far eastern portion of Shawnee Woods in order to reduce these impacts. This resulted in a reduction of 8 proposed lots. The applicant proposes to dedicate this 8.8 acre area to the City. SUBJECT SITE The subject site is the Medina Golf and Country Club, east of County Road 116, north of Highway 55 and south of Shawnee Woods Road. The golf course consists of four separate parcels in Hennepin County records. The entirety of the golf course property totals about 226 acres. The applicant is proposing to plat all four properties. About 207 acres are being platted as a single parcel to contain the golf course. The new residential portion of the site is about 19 acres in size. The project is bounded by the golf course to the south and east. A bermed outlot is proposed adjacent to County Road 116. The Foxberry Farms neighborhood is located across County Road 116. Across Shawnee Woods road is property guided for a Low Density Residential land use, but currently developed with rural lots approximately 5 acres in size. To the north on the west side is the property preliminarily platted as "Woods of Medina." COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ ZONING The four parcels of the golf course are guided for Private Recreation in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that "limited numbers of residential uses" may be included in areas designated as such. Three of the four parcels are zoned Public/Semi-Public. The southeastern parcel is partially zoned Public/Semi-Public and partially zoned Multiple Family Residential. The Multiple Family Residential zoning applies to the par -3 nine -hole course to the southeast of the existing clubhouse, approximately 13.5 acres in area. For this project, all four parcels of the golf course will be rezoned as a Planned Unit Development. The residential zoning for the southern portion of the site will no longer be in place. The remainder of the PUD would allow for the continuation of the golf course and related uses. This would be the extent of uses permitted by the PUD, unless the applicant would apply for a PUD amendment in the future to allow for additional development. The City would need to consider such development in the same manner as this proposal. No specific number of units or density requirements were assigned to this land use in the Comprehensive Plan, so the City's zoning regulations (standard or PUD) would determine the number and density of residential units based on the broader objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. However, the City is required to ensure that its zoning designations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Because no zoning amendments were made for the par -3 following adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the implication is that the 13.5 acres of multiple family residential zoning would be consistent with "limited residential uses," The proposed project site for calculating residential density is about 17.3 acres. This takes the 18.5 acre residential development site and deducts the area for County right-of-way dedication, wetlands, and wetland buffers. The resulting density is about 2.5 units per acre. A Planned Unit Development is intended to allow deviations from the strict standards of the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate unique development plans. Generally, a PUD is reviewed in relation to an underlying zoning district which the City has previously put in place for a land use. Because the Comprehensive Plan does not specify what area or proportion of the golf club property may be put to "limited residential uses," it may be helpful to first consider what type(s) of zoning (single-family, small single-family, multiple family) would be appropriate to implement "limited residential uses," and what 2 portions of the site those zoning districts would apply. After the zoning types are determined, it is easier to determine if a PUD is an appropriate zoning tool. PUD GENERAL PLAN REVIEW Proposed Development Plan As noted above, the current zoning is for Multiple -Family Residential in the southeastern 13.5 acres of the site with the remainder being Public/Semi-Public, which allows for private outdoor recreation such as the golf course. The applicant's request would alter this zoning and the entire site would be zoned Planned Unit Development. The details of the PUD are essentially R2 zoning on the western edge of the site along County Road 116 and R1 zoning on the north along Shawnee Woods Road. The remainder would remain allowed as open space and golf course. It should be determined if City Officials are comfortable with this general development plan related to layout and land uses, especially related to Private Recreation Land Use allowance for "limited residential uses." Proposed Lots & Buildings The development is divided into three blocks. Block 1 is the largest number of units (28) on the western side of the property. Block 2 is the lots in the north on the western side. Block 3 is in the north central. A previous version of the plan included a Block 4 in the north east that has since been removed in order to preserve trees. Block 1 The proposed lots within Block 1 are generally similar to the City's R2 standards of 60 feet in width, 90 feet in depth, and 8000 square feet in area. The proposed plan deviates from the R2 standards by having lots that are slightly less than 60 feet wide. There are also side loaded garages that are reduced to 14 feet from the right-of-way. The typical R2 standard requires a 20 foot setback for side loaded garages. With the 50 foot wide right-of-way and the 30 foot wide street, this would result in the buildings being 24 feet from the actual public roadway surface. The side and rear yard setbacks are consistent with R2 standards. The driveways to the side loaded garages in Block 1 are between 1 and 3 feet to the property lines. The City's driveway ordinance in Section 400.11 allows for side loaded garages to have driveway setbacks of 5 feet to the property line provided the driveway is not within a drainage and utility easement. In this case, the driveway is proposed within the easement. A waiver would be necessary for this type of alignment and could be built into the PUD approval. Block 2 The parcels in Block 2 are proposed to be over 75 feet wide and about 100 feet in depth or more. The parcels are all over 10,000 square feet in size. The houses are setback from the sides 5 feet on the garage side and 10 feet on the other, consistent with R2 district standards. The front setback (to garage) is proposed at 25 feet. The R2 District requires a 30 foot setback to street facing garages. The impervious surfaces appear to be about 30 — 35%, which meets district standards. The houses provided for these parcels are the "Slab on Grade Villas" with street facing garages. Three of these parcels are proposed as 'slab on grade' while four are not. As noted above, the lots in Block 2 are generally similar to R2 District lots. Across the street is development ("Woods of Medina") that is zoned R1. This would typically require a buffer yard with an opacity rating of 0.2. The applicant has not provided such a buffer yard consistent with the ordinance because there is not sufficient space to do so. The Planning Commission and Council may wish to 3 discuss is it would be preferable to require standards more similar to R1 for these lots (perhaps greater side setbacks), in recognition of the zoning of the property to the north and lack of buffer yard. Block 3 The proposed lots in Block 3 will be across Shawnee Woods Road from existing rural residential property. These parcels are similar to the City's standard R1 lots that are required to be 90 feet wide, 100 feet deep, and 11,000 square feet in area. The houses intended for this block are the "Villa Custom Home." The parcels are proposed with a front yard setback of 25 feet to the garage. The Ri District requires a 30 foot setback to street facing garages. The proposed side yard setbacks are 10 feet. The R1 District requires a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet with an aggregate of 25 feet. Outlot A The applicant is proposing a berm in Outlot A adjacent to County Road 116. The berm generally starts 10 feet from the surface of the road and extends to about four to six feet in height above grade. There is a screening fence proposed on the berm and plantings. There is no sidewalk proposed for the north -south section of road along the berm. There is an access through the berm with a trail connecting to the trail along the County Road. Outlot B The Park Commission recommended the City accept the applicant's proposed dedication of Outlot B for park dedication purposes. This parcel is 8.8 acres in area, exceeding the minimum standards required for land dedication. Transportation System The site is proposed to be accessed off of a proposed new road at the Meander Road and County Road 116 intersection. At the entrance to the development, there are two outbound lanes and one inbound. The road is proposed with a 30 foot surface at the City's request with parking only allowed on one side. This road is intended to turn northward once it enters the site and run parallel to the County Road. The road extends to the northern edge of the subject site and then curves east and runs along the southern edge of the property preliminarily platted as "Woods of Medina". The road then makes a turn northward to join Shawnee Woods Road. After Block 3, the road ends in a temporary cul-de-sac. The new road design has three tight curves that do not meet the City's preferred 30 mile per hour design. The applicant has provided turning templates depicting vehicle motions through these curves. It appears that vehicles and trucks can move through these curves adequately, although it will be at a low rate of speed. As part of this development, the applicant will be reconstructing a portion of Shawnee Woods Road as a full urban section with curb and storm sewer. A sidewalk to match the sidewalk from the Woods of Medina is proposed, as well. The Shawnee Woods Road right-of-way was granted through easement over the southern 60 feet of the properties north of Shawnee Woods Road. Questions were raised by the owners to the north related to ability of this easement to be used for the proposed reconstruction of Shawnee Woods Road. The City Attorney has reviewed and is of the opinion that the concerns raised would not prevent use of the easement. Their comments are attached. The City Subdivision Ordinance states that lots with frontage on two parallel streets shall not be permitted except: 4 (i) Where lots back on an arterial street in which case vehicular and pedestrian access between the lots and arterial street shall be prohibited. Such double frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at least 20 feet in order to allow space for screen planting along the back lot line. (ii) Where topographic or other conditions render subdividing otherwise unreasonable. Such double -frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at least 20 feet in order to allow space for screen planting along the back lot line. To avoid double frontage lots within the recently approved Woods of Medina preliminary plat to the north of this site, the applicant has provided a three foot wide outlot with a privacy fence. The privacy fence is proposed in lieu of the typical buffer yard. If City Officials feel the fence is unnecessary, it may be advisable to convert this outlot into right-of-way. Through the PUD process, the City could approve of a plat which deviates from the prohibition of double frontage lots even without the outlot. Staff does not believe there is sufficient depth in the northwest corner of the site to locate the street in a way which does not create double frontage lots, unless the homes were shifted off of the golf course and the street to the south of the homes. In previous subdivision reviews in this vicinity, concerns have been raised about traffic volumes on County Road 116. As noted previously, this property is currently zoned for denser residential development that would access off of Evergreen Road to County Road 101 to the east rather than onto County Road 116 as proposed. Utilities The applicant is proposing to bring sewer and water into the site from the Meander intersection into the site and to continue north through the development. Water is proposed to connect with the proposed system for the Woods of Medina. The City Engineer has provided comments. Water Resources There are several wetlands on the site. The buffers plantings will need to be provided as required by Section 828.43 of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Engineer's Office has reviewed the wetlands and the buffer locations and found them to be acceptable. There is stormwater ponding being proposed on the golf course. There will need to be the proper rights of access and easements to ensure proper maintenance. The agreements will need to be provided and the proper easements will need to be placed over these features. Many of the lots have both a foundation drain system and a backyard drain system. This may be an acceptable arrangement provided the system is constructed properly and there is sufficient access. The City Engineer has provided comments. In previous development proposals for this site, it was stated that there was a high water table in this area. The applicant is proposing full basements for each unit. The City Engineer requested geotechnical information to determine the water table elevation. The applicant provided a geotechnical report supporting the development that has been reviewed by the City Engineer's office and found to be acceptable. Tree Preservation & Replacement The applicant is intending to use the four parcels in their entirety for the purposes of tree preservation calculations. A tree inventory was conducted in 2006 for a previous development plan which was in a 5 similar area to the residential development proposed with this plan. A portion of the heavily wooded area in the east was not inventoried but estimated based on the tree density in an adjacent area. Then a tree inventory was provided for the trees on the golf course. The City's arborist has requested the applicant add 12% to the total to account for growth. A golf course tree inventory was provided as the applicant intends to use these trees as preserved trees for the development. This totals 59,369 inches of trees. The plan calls for 7,562 inches of removal, which is 12.7%. The tree preservation ordinance allows for 15% removal. The applicant will need to remove trees in the Shawnee Woods Road right-of-way in order to construct the proposed improvements. For this reason, the Shawnee Woods Road right-of-way should be considered to be part of the development site. The trees in this right-of-way should be included in the tree inventory, and calculated in the amount of removed trees. Buffer Yards The ordinance requires a buffer yard to be placed along County Road 116. The portion across the road from Foxberry Farms is required to have an opacity of 0.3. The remainder is required to be 0.1. The buffer yard planting plan for the outlot adjacent to County Road 116 generally conforms to the minimum planting requirements. The ordinance requires at least 50% of the required plantings to be placed on the exterior side of the fence. This would require 1794 planting points for the 0.3 opacity section to be on the outside of the fence and the plan shows 1535 in this location. A buffer yard of a 0.2 opacity rating is required in the northwestern portion of the site adjacent to the Woods of Medina development. As noted previously, this buffer yard is not provided in a manner consistent with the minimum requirements of the ordinance. The ordinance requires a minimum width of ten feet. In much of this buffer yard, it is only 3 feet in width. Front Yard Trees The R1 and R2 Districts require two front yard trees for each lot. In some cases, the City has permitted the second tree to be in the backyard for narrower R2 parcels. There are four lots lacking a second tree. In one case a tree is actually within the right-of-way. Staff recommends a condition to bring this landscaping into compliance with City requirements. Park Dedication / Park Commission Review Originally, the applicant proposed a 0.19 acre passive park in the northeast corner of the site with the balance being cash -in -lieu. The required land dedication for this proposal would be about 2.17 acres. The Park Commission reviewed this proposal at their November 19th meeting. At this meeting, the applicant proposed a larger 8.88 acre (4.7 buildable acres) park in the northeast corner of the site. This would be dedicated to the City and include a heavily wooded area and wetland. The Park Commission recommended that the City accept this dedication. Also, the Park Commission recommended that the applicant provide an 8 foot wide trail in lieu of a sidewalk from Shawnee Woods Road to County Road 116 and along the east side of County Road 116 to Meander. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW In Section 827.25, the City states the purpose of a planned unit development. It states that the PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 6 1) Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2) Higher standards of site and building design. 3) The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4) Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5) Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6) A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7) An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8) A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. PUDs are not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles. 9) A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW In Section 820.22 Subd. 10 it states that in the case of all subdivisions, the City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the following findings are made: 1. That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Section 820.28. 2. That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimum lot size standards. 4. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. STAFF REVIEW The applicant is proposing a Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat that would allow for residential development in the areas adjacent to the golf course. It is common for recently created golf courses to have housing along the course in a similar manner. Currently, on the southeast comer of the golf course property there is about 13.5 acres zoned Multi - Family Residential which allows for duplexes, townhomes, and apartment buildings. As part of the proposed PUD, the straight zoning for this area to be developed in this fashion would no longer be in place, and the use would be identified as golf course. 7 The proposal connects the Meander Road intersection with Shawnee Woods Road with a new street. It also provides an updated urban roadway for a portion of Shawnee Woods Road. The development along Shawnee Woods Road is proposed to be similar in nature to what is expected to be developed in this area in the future. A Planned Unit Development is intended to allow deviations from the strict standards of the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate unique development plans. Generally, a PUD is reviewed in relation to an underlying zoning district which the City has previously put in place for a land use. Because the Comprehensive Plan does not specify what area or proportion of the golf club property may be put to "limited residential uses," it may be helpful to first consider what type(s) of zoning (single-family, small single-family, multiple family) would be appropriate to implement "limited residential uses," and what portions of the site those zoning districts would apply. After the zoning types are determined, it is easier to determine if a PUD allows for a unique development plan. The proposed plan seeks multiple flexibilities to accommodate the development. The PUD process is not intended as a tool to merely create custom zoning standards for a more convenient development plan. The applicant is seeking flexibility from City standards for front yard setbacks on all lots, driveway setbacks and impervious surfaces in Block 1, the buffer yard requirements (double frontage issue) for Block 2, and side yard setbacks in Block 3 in order to accommodate this development. The applicant is intending to provide more parkland than otherwise required as part of the PUD, as well. The applicant did not propose 8.8 acres of park dedication to the City when reviewed by the Planning Commission. The general layout and uses within the plan do not seem to conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and are not greatly incompatible with the neighboring land uses (with the possible exception of the northwest corner of the site). City Staff generally finds that this plan could be considered acceptable and consistent with the intent of the PUD District and Comprehensive Plan if all conditions of approval are addressed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission initially reviewed the plan at their November 12`" meeting and recommended denial of the request. The Commission did not believe the application met the intent of the PUD District. Namely that #3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the purpose statement were not met. There were comments of concern offered by individual Commissioners related to the tree removal for Block 3, traffic congestion, and that the proposal exceeded the intent of "limited residential" in their interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission should review the revised plan and determine if this recommendation is changed. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Since the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the size of the park has been increased from 0.19 acres to 8.88 acres. As noted above, the Council has referred the plan back to the Planning Commission due to this change. The City Council also offered comments regarding the application. It was expressed that the development should be phased with the construction on Block 3 being the final phase of development. It was suggested that the setback to Shawnee Woods Road for the lots in Block 3 should be increased to 35 feet. The curb of the north side of the reconstructed Shawnee Woods Road should be in the same location as the edge of the gravel to avoid further encroachment to the north. It was also stated that the Council wanted to ensure that all possible steps were taken to ensure that Blocks 2 and 3 drain south. 8 ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission should review the revised plan and determine if it changes the recommendation forwarded to the City Council. If the Commission were to recommend approval, Staff would recommend that it be forwarded to the City Council with the following conditions: 1. The four parcels of the golf course are to be zoned PUD. The City parkland shall remain Public/Semi-Public. 2. Association documents shall be provided. 3. Wetland buffer planting plans shall be provided. 4. The buffer yard planting plan shall be revised to meet the standards of Section 828.31 including but not limited to, minimum plantings on the exterior of the fence. 5. The tree inventory shall include the trees within the Shawnee Woods Road right-of-way. Tree calculations related to the City's tree preservation ordinance shall include these trees. 6. Two trees on each lot consistent with R1 and R2 District standards shall be provided for in the landscaping plan. 7. Ponds in the golf course used for drainage by this development will require access easements and maintenance agreements. 8. The final design of the street and trail in the northwest corner of the site shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 9. All comments from the City Attorney, City Engineer, and Hennepin County should be addressed. 10. The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall include the conditions described in this approval as well as other requirements by City ordinance or policy. 11. The Applicant shall obtain necessary approvals and permits from the Watershed District, Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Metropolitan Council, and other relevant agencies. 12. The application for final plat shall be submitted to the City within 180 days of preliminary approval or the preliminary plat shall be considered void, unless a written request for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. 13. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Attached Exhibits: A — DRAFT City Council Minutes — December 2, 2014 B — City Engineer's Comments C — City Attorney Comments re: Shawnee Woods Road D — Hennepin County Comments dated July 11, 2014 E — Letters from Neighboring Property Owners (2) F — Additional letter from neighboring property owner G — Exhibit showing Villas of Medina with Woods of Medina H — Applicant's Narrative I — Building Elevations & Plans 9 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes Villas at Medina Golf and Country Club General Plan PUD/Preliminary Plat (8:31 p.m.) Pederson recused himself from the discussion. Anderson asked the developer to consider tabling the matter to reconsider by the Planning Commission. He explained that the City Council defers, to a large extent, to the Planning Commission as they hold that group in high regard. He advised that the Planning Commission unanimously denied the request but has asked to review the plans again. He noted that this is a revised plan and believed that would benefit the developer for the Planning Commission to review again. He advised that this would require that the developer grant the City a time extension. Weir felt that the Council could act on what is presented because it is a different plan. Martin asked where the timeline stands. Sparks reported that the currently timeline expires on January 5th and advised that if that path were followed a 60 day extension would be needed. Chuck Alcon, Rachel Contracting, stated that they would like to hear the input of the Council before responding. Weir stated that this is a different plan than what was reviewed by the Planning Commission, noting that 8.8 acres of mature woodland would be given to the City to preserve. She referenced a Lennar development where the City was able to preserve half of the woodland area and believed this to be a similar situation. She stated that if two acres of woodland were lost, 8.8 acres of nice woodland would be gained. She stated that she would like to move forward rather than delaying the request through another round in the Planning Commission. Sparks presented an application to place some residential uses along the edge of the golf course. He explained that a PUD would allow for mixed uses in order to achieve something that meets the intent of the ordinance. He stated that this development proposed 43 residential uses, 35 of which would be located along a roadway that would be created that would be considered villas or detached townhomes. He stated that 28 of those units would have side loading garage doors, while the other units on the northern portion would have street facing garage. He advised that there would be eight more regular style single-family homes along Shawnee Woods Road. He advised that a park of just under nine acres in size is also proposed. He stated that the Concept Plan included 54 units, which have been decreased in order to preserve the woodland area. He reviewed the Comprehensive Plan land use, noting that the property is guided private recreation and would allow limited amounts of residential uses within the land use designation. He noted that the par three golf course is actually zoned multi -family residential. He explained that the applicant is requesting to rezone the whole property, both the private recreation and multi -family residential, to PUD. He stated that there are some standards of which the applicant is seeking flexibility in order to provide this type of development with the existing use, the golf course. He provided sketches of the design for the villas proposed for block one, which would also include a buffer yard and 30 -foot wide street surface with parking allowed on only one side. He reviewed the design proposed for block two, explaining that the street would backup to the Woods of Medina development which would create double frontage homes. He advised that the developer would propose a buffer space with privacy fence and noted that the Woods of Medina lots are very deep and heavily wooded. He referenced block three in which the developer is proposing a low -density R-1 type housing, with flexibility. He advised that block four would be recommended as park to preserve the woodland area. He stated that the tree preservation ordinance allows for removal of up to 15 percent, noting that the application as proposed is around 12.5 percent tree removal. He advised that a ponding are would be proposed as well as extensive storm system and drain tiles proposed behind the homes which would be 1 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes maintained by the homeowners association. He stated that as proposed the development plan could work to address the water issues currently on site. He confirmed that the Planning Commission did not review this version of the plan, noting that the park has been increased from under one acre to 8.8 acres. He stated that by ordinance two acres of park would be the adequate park dedication and noted that the additional park would be in return for the additional flexibility requested. He was unsure if the changes to the plan would have an impact on the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the request. He stated that if the Council feels that this would meet the PUD requirements he would recommend approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Martin stated that the Park Commissioner reported that the Park Commission was very pleased with this version of the plan and mentioned a trail connection to the nearby retail area. She asked for additional information. Finke stated that was not part of the recommendation of the Park Commission but presumed that connection would be along the east side of the property. He advised that the item was not included in the proposal or recommendation. Martin asked if there were innovative approached or low impact development practices being incorporated into the plan. Kellogg stated that he would not call the approaches innovative but would call them unique. He advised that the villas would have a drainage system in the backyard that would travel to a stormwater pond. He stated that the plan allows for filtration as the soils do not allow for infiltration. He did not feel that the plan goes above and beyond but would meet the requirements. Anderson confirmed that a land use would need to be found appropriate and then it would need to be considered whether a PUD would also be appropriate. Finke advised that this is a unique situation as there is a fairly broad designation within the land use. He stated that the developer is attempting to show that the goals of the PUD ordinance are being accomplished. He stated that the applicant could have moved forward on another option but chose to formalize the limited residential of the golf course in conjunction with the PUD. Martin stated that the southeast corner of the site is currently zoned for higher density residential and is about 13.8 acres in size. She questioned the land area consumed by the lots, setback buffers and new roads proposed on the north and west sides. Sparks estimated 21 acres with the pond, and 17 to 18 acres without the pond area. Marty Campion, project engineer, referenced the innovative approach to stormwater management and stated that there has been discussion with reusing the water in the ponds for irrigation. Alcon stated that in the future if the golf course develops the trail could be extended to the south. Rick Denmin, Charles Cudd de Novo Homes, stated that six years ago they had worked with a different developer on the same site. He stated that they had great success with Medina Highlands, which has the same buyer profile. He stated that the luxury empty nest buyers is a great niche for them and is not being served in Medina right now. He stated that in Medina Highlands they constructed attached homes, while these would be detached homes. He stated that the average lot in block one average about 25 percent larger than the R-2 zoning district. He stated that the same side yard setbacks are proposed which meet or 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes exceed the R-2 zoning district. He explained that the side loading garages look much better from a streetscape aspect and provide more privacy between the street and front door. Weir referenced the eight units on Shawnee Woods Road and questioned if the depth of the lots on block three could be reduced to save additional trees. Denmin stated that perhaps but that would require the setback in the front to be shortened. He was unsure how that would affect drainage. Campion explained that the tree cutting in that area has been reduced but is necessary in order to facility drainage. Martin questioned if there would be a possibility to setback the homes further from the right-of-way with the additional tree cutting in that area. Campion confirmed that would be possible to set the homes back further but advised that would not save additional trees in the front because of the grading that will occur. He confirmed that the homes could be setback further from the roadway without losing additional trees. Anderson confirmed that the homes could be moved 30 to 35 feet from the right-of-way. Campion confirmed that could be done, noting that at a certain point additional trees would be lost. He believed that the homes could be setback an additional ten feet without losing additional trees. Alcon referenced the staff report, noting that the tree preservation has been reduced to 12.5 percent, which is below the 15 percent allowed. He advised that the wetlands on the site will not be disturbed and the stormwater will be management entirely onsite. He advised that there will be a homeowners association and believed the landscaping comments could be accommodated on the final plans. He identified the 8.8 tree preservation park would be adjacent to the Wild Meadows area that is also preserved creating a contiguous preservation area. He highlighted the benefits he believed that the PUD would create and asked that the City Council approved the request. Weir stated that granting the PUD would allow open space and for the golf course to continue. She highlighted golf courses in other communities that are being sold and developed. She stated that if the open space is going to remain there needs to be something innovative, such as this, in order to do that. She noted that the homes will be very high end and attractive and stated that although the double frontage would not be ideal, the privacy fence and landscaping would be attractive. She questioned if grading and tree cutting for block three could be delayed until the other two blocks are complete, which would allow for additional privacy for the existing homeowners. Steve Theisfield, 600 Shawnee Woods Road, stated that his concern is that the comments have been made that the four homeowners on Shawnee Woods will be selling. He stated that the four homeowners have approached developers and have been told that it would not be cost effective to develop those properties because of the tree preservation ordinance. He stated that the homeowners spent a lot of money investing in their properties in order to prepare for the proposed zoning. He recognized the desire of the golf course to preserve the par three golf course but believed that the Council is responsible for preserving the investment of homeowners. He commended Charles Cudd for their presentation but did not believe that this request meets the intent of a PUD. He referenced the raised height along the Shawnee Woods Road for those lots and had concern that additional drainage would be sent onto their properties. 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes Eric Volten, 630 Shawnee Woods Road, stated that he has spoken out against the loss of the trees. He believed it to be a false argument that in order to preserve the trees in the park area, trees in this area need to be cut. He did not believe that the landowner has rights to develop that area of the property. He stated that the application has only changed in a small way, as there had not been development planned in the tree preservation area before. He did not believe there was additional tree preservation planned in this version. Mark Zek, 660 Shawnee Woods Road, stated that they are all aware of the issues and concerns regarding this proposal. He stated that although many questions have not been answered, the reason they are here tonight is to determine if the application meets the intent of the PUD ordinance. He stated that the Planning Commission has found that the application does not meet the intent of the ordinance and believed that the Council, appointed by the residents of the City, should stand behind the decision of the Planning Commission. He explained that decisions involving the entire community are not left to one entity and that is why the system of checks and balances, including the Planning Commission, has been developed. He asked that the Council support the recommendations of the Planning Commission and deny this request. Martin questioned how wooded the lots of the four homes along Shawnee Woods Road are. Zek advised that the tree line extends to the roadway. Anderson confirmed that the all the properties of the four homes continue south of the roadway. It was also noted that edge of the properties include a road and sidewalk easement. Jill Volten, 630 Shawnee Woods Road, referenced the cul-de-sac placement and was curious why that would be designed in that manner. She referenced the southeast corner of the property zoned for development and questioned why the applicant is not limited to that are for development. Elizabeth Theisfield, 600 Shawnee Woods Road, referenced the discussion where the homes along Shawnee Woods Road would be setback from the road further and questioned if the road could then be moved towards those properties in order to split the roadway. Martin explained that the road easement exists and the homes in existence along Shawnee Woods Road purchased those lots with the easement in place. Batty stated that this is an a -typical situation but is not unique. He stated that the City obtained that easement in 1977 for street and utility purposes. He stated that typically when property is platted the area would be split between two properties but noted that it is not unique that a full right-of-way be taken from one property, when that property develops first. He referenced the vacation of a portion of the easement along Shawnee Woods and stated that would have no impact along the remainder of the easement. He stated that the City can use the easement for the purpose granted, which is street and utility. Kimberly Muran, Cherry Hill resident, stated that this is an opportunity for Rachel Contracting to build luxury townhomes, which would move development from the par three and would result in luxury townhomes. She stated that if this is not done it is unknown the quality of multi -family residential that would develop on the par three site. She stated that this area is zoned for development and will develop. She explained that this development placement would also assist the country club, which she believed was a benefit to the community. She explained that by moving the growth to the proposed site would assist the country club, which provides a gathering place and jobs. She advised that if the country club fails that area will be developed and this would place the development where it would make the most sense. She believed that this would benefit the greater good of the community. She stated that if people 4 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes do not want more growth in the community the zoning should be reviewed as the Comprehensive Plan shows the area zoned for development. She stated that the contractor has made some concessions in order to assist in the process. Heather Zek, 660 Shawnee Woods Road, emphasized that development is marching on. She believed that the development is moving ahead prior to the traffic problems being solved. She stated that the development to the north of the City is impacting Medina as well. She believed that additional infrastructure would need to be in place before additional development is added. Scott Pederson, President of Medina Golf and Country Club, stated that over the last several weeks the City Council has received calls and emails in support of the development. He stated that this is a great compromise solution that Rachel has worked diligently in reducing the footprint and loss of trees and worked with the golf course to preserve the par three and remove the housing from that area. He stated that this application would solve all of the issues on that parcel in one project. He recognized that this would place homes on both sides of the Shawnee Woods Homes in existence but believed that this is a terrific outcome for all parties involved. Moved by Anderson, seconded by Weir, to briefly recess the meeting at 9:43 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Weir reconvened the meeting at 9:47 p.m. Weir stated that this is a different application but believed there were increased benefits to the City. She stated that she could consider sending this back to the Planning Commission if the item could be on the agenda for the Planning Commission the following week and back before the Council at their next December meeting. Finke advised that the requirements for a public hearing have been met and believed it was in the ability of the City Council to send the application back to the Planning Commission for consideration without an additional public hearing notice. Batty agreed that the statutory requirement for a hearing have been met. He stated that it is probably that most people interested in this issue are in this room and staff could make an effort to notify anyone that may be interested. He advised that once the initial public hearing notification is made there is not additional notice sent to follow up on the item. He stated that a good faith attempt could be made but did not think there would be a legal problem. Weir stated that she would not like to slow down the developer as they have been a great listener and have accommodated requests. She appreciated the ability for the Planning Commission to consider the request again. Batty referenced the timeline date of January 5th. Finke explained that normally once the Council reviews the issue they direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval to be approved at the next meeting, which would be January 6th. He advised that the Council could direct staff to prepare the resolutions at this time, pending the input of the Planning Commission, and action could be taken at the December Council meeting. Weir confirmed that Alcon would be in agreement with this direction. 5 Medina City Council Excerpt from DRAFT 12/2/2014 Meeting Minutes Martin confirmed that there will be improvements to that section of Shawnee Woods Road along with this development. She also confirmed that the roadway surface will not be wider than the existing roadway. Don Rachel explained that the sidewalk will be on the south side of the roadway and further expansion needed would occur on the south side of the roadway. Alcon confirmed that this would be referred to the Planning Commission for their review the following Tuesday and back to the Council the following Tuesday with an extension of the review period to January 6`h. He agreed with this route. Anderson recognized that this may not be the most favorable decision but believed that it would be important to involve the Planning Commission in review of this plan. Weir referenced the idea to delay the disturbance along Shawnee Woods Road unit blocks one and two are well along their way. Anderson stated that he would like additional information on the zoning that would be used for blocks one and two. Batty clarified that the property would be rezoned to PUD for the entire site. Martin stated that she would encourage dialogue with the neighbors regarding whether they would like the development delayed or whether they would like it all completed as fast as possible. She felt it would be beneficial to see additional front yard setback for block three to 35 feet, with the exception of lots one and eight. She also wanted affirmation that when the roadways are completed that there would not be any road improvements caused to the northern boundary of the existing roadway. She also asked for affirmation from Kellogg in consultation with the applicant and that drainage proposed for blocks two and three to ensure that all drainage flows south and does not flow to the properties to the north. She believed that the spirit of the PUD ordinance is met with this development, with some tweaking. She was hard pressed to believe that this would not be an appropriate PUD development and advised that a lot of concessions have been made by the developer. She thanked the residents for their input and noted that you do not always have control over what occurs on the other side of the street, noting that this is a high quality developer. Moved by Martinson, seconded by Anderson, to table the request to allow for a review of the Planning Commission and to come back before the Council on December 16, 2014. Motion passed unanimously. Pederson rejoined the Council. 6 WSB 11111111 •t „ engTeering• planning- onvironlnentr?i• construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 November 3, 2014 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: Villas at Medina Country Club General Plan and Preliminary Plat WSB Project No. 2712-030 Dear Dusty: We have reviewed the revised General Plan and Preliminary Plat submitted October 24, 2014, for the Villas at Medina Country Club site. The plans propose to construct street and utility improvements to serve a 43 unit detached townhome/single family home development along the north and west perimeters of the Medina Country Club. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters. 1. The preliminary plat should be signed by a licensed land surveyor. 2. Outlot A at its narrowest width (3 -feet) does not provide adequate width to construct the proposed fence, install the Arborvitae plantings, allow room for the sanitary sewer and provide for snow storage. The plans should be revised to allow for the proposed improvements and snow storage. 3. The parcel area table for Block 2 shown on Sheet 3 shows there are 6 lots in Block 2. The preliminary plat shows 7 lots in Block 2. The table should be revised to show 7 lots and the associated calculations should be updated. 4. Sanitary sewer service inverts should be at least 4 -feet below the low floor elevation. Lot 6, Block 2 should be revised to meet this requirement. 5. The sanitary sewer pipe grade between MH-15 and MH-16 is shown at 0.26%. This grade should be revised to at least the minimum allowable grade of 0.40%. 6. The sanitary sewer invert at MH-20 is shown incorrectly as 1007.03 and should be revised to 1006.54. 7. We recommend the Maintenance Access Section shown on Sheet 11 be revised. We recommend the accesses be 12 -feet wide and paved. If the City permits a natural surface such St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com Villas at Medina General Plan and Preliminary Plat November 3, 2014 Page 2 as sod we recommend the section be revised to include a green pavement section utilizing a manufactured product such as Grasspave or an equivalent. 8. The maintenance access to the pond at the south end of the sight is nearly 17%. The access grade should be revised to be 10% or less. 9. The maintenance access between Lots 13 and 14, Block 1 is approximately 13% and should be revised to 10% or less. 10. The maintenance access shown along the north lot line of Lot 28, Block 1 needs to be relocated outside of the wetland buffer area. The access should be extended across Lot 28 within a 20 -foot wide easement to the upstream storm manhole (YD 15). 11. The foundation drain and yard drain systems should be at least 4 -feet deep to help insure they function year round. 12. The foundation drain system piping should be solid wall PVC at least 8 -inches in diameter with wyes stubbed to each property. 13. It is unclear why the foundation drainage system for Block 3 extends into Lot 8. It appears this system could terminate on the common lot line between Lots 7 and 8. 14. The inverts shown for the foundation drain systems on Blocks 2 and 3 are incorrect and should be revised. 15. Proposed lookout elevations should be shown on the grading plans. 16. Proposed driveway grades should be added to the grading plans. 17. The City generally discourages retaining walls within drainage and utility easements and also walls that cross lot lines. The proposed retaining wall shown across Lots 12 — 17, Block 1 does both. The City should review and determine if this wall is permissible as shown. 18. Rear yard grades should be a minimum of 2% and a maximum of 5%. Many rear yards in Block 1 do not meet this requirement. The grading plan should be revised to meet this requirement and minimize the possibility of perpetually wet rear yards. 19. The watermain along Shawnee Woods Road should be extended easterly and connected to the existing watermain stub from the Wild Meadows subdivision. 20. The plans should include storm sewer pipe lengths and grades as well as rim and invert elevations. 21. Additional detail should be provided for the proposed gravity foundation drain system. Details such as pipe lengths, pipe grades, pipe sizing calculations, frost protection, etc. should be provided with future plan submittals. 22. Additional comments from our water resources group are attached. Villas at Medina General Plan and Preliminary Plat November 3, 2014 Page 3 23. Additional comments responding to the September 10, 2014 Braun Intertec letter are attached. Please contact me at 612-209-5113 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Tom Kellogg Cc Nate Sparks (email) A Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 WSB �1 rJ er?uJroIN7)L'r t7?• Co:'7S>'rti bo; 701 Xenia Avenue South Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Earth Evans, P.E. Water Resources Project Manager WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: 10.30.14 Re: Villas at Medina Country Club Stormwater Management Plan Review City Project No. LR-14-138 WSB Project No. 2712-03 We have completed a preliminary review of the stormwater management plan for Villas at Medina Country Club development in Medina, MN. The site is located east of CR116 adjacent to Medina Country Club. The development was previously reviewed on 7.24.14. Documents provided for review include the following: • Hydrocad and PondNET modeling dated 10.22.14 • Grading and Utility Plans dated 10.22.14 These plans were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's Stormwater Design Manual and general engineering practices for stormwater management. 1. Future submittals should include storm sewer sizing calculations. 2. The plan as submitted does not meet the City's filtration requirement. We have discussed this with the developer's engineer and he indicated that they are proposing to provide a filter bench in the SW pond. A detail should be provided that indicates how the filter shelf will be constructed and calculations regarding the sizing are required for review. 3. The City requires that either 2 -feet of separation be provided from the EOF to the low opening or evaluation of the back-to-back 100 -year event. The EOF for the proposed SW pond and golf course pond is at elevation 1000.9 over the low point on the proposed road. The EOF then continues northwesterly at 999.3 over CSAH116. Based on the EOF elevation of 1000.9, the freeboard requirement is not met for lots 1-20, Block 1. Therefore the developer's engineer is proposing to provide separation based on the back- to-back 100 -year event. The back-to-back HWL is 995.4. Based on this HWL a St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K. 02712-030Wdmin\Docs\Villas at Medina Country Club_I02914_doc Villas at Medina 10.30.14 Page 2 minimum of 0.6 -feet of separation is provided for the lower level of the properties and 2.6 -feet of freeboard is provided to the low opening. Please provide calculations to verify the HWL. 4. Indicate on the plans the upstream and downstream invert, pipe size and slope for the proposed outlet from the existing wetland north of Shawnee Woods Road in order to confirm that the existing HWL and discharge rates are maintained. 5. The EOF for the Woods of Medina development is indicated to be provided at elevation 1014.1. However, the EOF flow path continues west and it appears to cross into the Villas of Medina road section. The EOF should be maintained off the proposed road section and within the rear lots of the Woods of Medina. 6. The proposed development requires extensive rear yard storm sewer which poses a maintenance concern. 7. A detail should be provided for the outlet control structure (OCS-1). 8. There does not appear to be sufficient separation between the draintile where it daylights from the rear yards of Block 1 and the proposed storm sewer between STMH-16 and STMH-13 9. Provide calculations to verify that sufficient capacity is provided from STMH-16 to STMH-13 for the discharge from the existing golf course pond. 10. Sheet 18 shows two additional ponds to be constructed in the golf course. Based on discussions with the developers engineer the proposed outlet for the ponds is through existing draintile. 11. EOF routes and elevations for road low points should be indicated on the plans. K:-02712-010'Admm`.Does Villas at MMina Country CIu6_102914.doc WSB - i, t1 E fl3 phr itnj• e,'lviroi ! ?t• co §t!LIvi,v;; 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 Memorandum To: Tom Kellogg, P.E., City Engineer City of Medina From: Ole Olmanson P.G. Sr. Environmental Scientist WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: October 30, 2014 Re: Villas at Medina Country Club Geotechnical and Drainage Review City Project No. LR-14-138 WSB Project No. 2712-03 In response to the Braun Intertec letter dated 10/2/2014 regarding their review of the geotechnical reports and WSB response letter, the following points were considered: • Hydrostatic groundwater level will likely be 10-15 feet below the lowest planned basement floor grade. • Regardless of the soil origin onsite, the clay content of the soil can lead to conditions of poor drainage and perched groundwater conditions. • It is possible that water bearing sand lenses or seams will be encountered during construction. • Some areas of fat clay exist that will need correction. Our findings conclude: • If proper construction and drainage practices are followed as recommended in the Braun letter, structures can be successfully built and occupied in this environment. We also examined whether the current drainage for the existing homes north of the proposed development would be adversely altered due to grading and trenching activities associated with this project and whether neighboring wetlands could be affected. • The existing soils exhibit poor drainage and therefore it is unlikely that grading and trenching activities would adversely impact the soil's already poor drainage characteristics. This indicates that nearby homes and neighboring wetlands, which reside in the same poorly drained soils, will not be affected by construction activities. • Surface runoff altered by a change in elevation would be localized and handled by a properly designed storm water system. Villas at Medina 10.30.2014 Page 2 We agree that the Braun letter addresses all major concerns regarding groundwater impact on the proposed development and that the recommendations put forth in that letter are appropriate and effective solutions. We find that based on the soil boring information and local soil survey, area surface and groundwater drainage, which is already poor, cannot be further degraded to the point of negatively impacting neighboring homes or wetlands. Kennedy Graven CHARTERED To: Dusty Finke Douglas D. Shaftel 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9248 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax dshaftel@kennedy-graven.com http://www.kennedv-graven.com MEMORANDUM From: Doug Shaftel Re: Villas at Medina Country Club: Shawnee Woods Road easement Date: 11/4/14 Several property owners have objected to the proposed Villas at Medina Country Club development. As part of the development proposal, access to eight residential lots from County Road 116 will be through Shawnee Woods Road. In their written objections, the owners argue that the City cannot legally permit this use of Shawnee Woods Road. This memo analyzes the merits of their legal arguments. It contains no comment on policy issues or analysis of zoning issues related to the development. ISSUES The owners appear to raise the following three issues in their written submissions.' 1. Would the City be abandoning its street easement if it vacates a portion of Shawnee Woods Road in conjunction with the recording of the Woods of Medina plat? SHORT ANSWER: NO 2. Would the City be exceeding the scope of its street easement if it allows the use of Shawnee Woods Road to access eight additional residential properties? SHORT ANSWER: NO 3. Would the City be violating the terms of the Shawnee Woods Road easement if it permits construction of drive way connections to the improved road over what is currently unimproved right-of-way? SHORT ANSWER: NO The author reviewed the August 7th, 2014 letter of Howard Roston, attorney for the objecting owners, and the objecting owners' undated document titled "Proposal For Changes to Villas at Medina Country Club." 1 FACTS This memo discusses what this author believes a court is likely to do if faced with the following facts; the analysis and conclusions may change should any be incorrect or if additional facts are presented. In 1977, presumably as a condition of a subdivision application, the then property owner (Enterprise Properties, a co -partnership) of an approximately 27 -acre property granted "a permanent easement for street and utility purposes" 60 feet in width to the city of Medina (the "1977 Easement"). Lying within this easement is what is now known as Shawnee Woods Road. Between 1978 and 1993, five houses were constructed on the five separate lots located to the north of the easement (the "Northern Properties") and which abut the road. Shawnee Woods Road currently provides access from the five developed lots to County Road 116. Although the road terminates at the driveway to the eastern -most lot, the easement extends another 300-350 feet to the eastern boundary of the original 27 -acre property. In 2013, the City received a plat application for the development of the western -most of the Northern Properties (the "Woods of Medina" development). That plat provided for the vacation of a portion of Shawnee Woods Road, resulting in a cul-de-sac just before the road connects to County Road 116. The plat further dedicates a street connection between Shawnee Woods Road and Poppy Trail, a new road constructed as a part of the Reserve of Medina development, located just to the north of the Northern Properties, and which connects to County Road 116 at a location several hundred feet north of the existing Shawnee Woods Road connection. The City conditioned the partial vacation of Shawnee Woods Road upon the recording of the final Woods of Medina plat. The City recently received an application for a proposed development called the Villas at Medina Country Club (the "Villas" Development), which includes the creation of, among other things, eight lots to the south of Shawnee Woods Road (the "Southern Properties"). The owners of the Northern Properties (the "Northern Owners"), except Jeff Pederson, have objected to this development. ANALYSIS 1. Would the City be abandoning its street easement if it vacates a portion of Shawnee Woods Road in conjunction with the recording of the Woods of Medina plat? The Northern Owners suggest that the City's grant of the preliminary plat for the Woods of Medina development, which included the conditional approval of a vacation of a portion of Shawnee Woods Road, evidences an intention to abandon Shawnee Woods Road. To abandon an easement, there must be both an extended period of nonuse and conduct evidencing an intention to abandon the property.2 The City's conditional vacation of Shawnee Woods Road is not evidence of an intention to abandon the entire road. The vacation resolution 2 Richards Asphalt v. Bunge Corporation, 399 N.W.2d 188, 192 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). 2 requires as a precondition of vacation final plat approval and recording of the Woods of Medina plat. Once the Woods of Medina plat is recorded, Shawnee Woods Road will connect to Poppy Trail, which connects to County Road 116. Therefore, the partial vacation of Shawnee Woods Road evidences only an intention to consolidate two access points to County Road 116. Moreover, to have abandoned a road, the City must have not used it for a lengthy period of time.3 Because the City has been plowing and otherwise maintaining Shawnee Woods Road, the City could not have abandoned it.4 2. Would the City be exceeding the scope of its street easement if it allows eight additional residential properties to use Shawnee Woods Road to access County Road 116? The Northern Owners argue that the 1977 Easement was only intended to accommodate "rural large lot development", and therefore cannot be improved into a "full urban section with curb and storm sewer." The scope of an express easement (in contrast to a prescriptive or implied easement) is controlled by the express terms of the easement. When the express terms are ambiguous, to understand the intention of the parties courts will examine extrinsic evidence.5 In interpreting an ambiguous easement, courts will strictly construe the easement against the grantor.° Courts also generally interpret express easements granted for public use fairly broadly.' The property owners have not identified and I am aware of no Minnesota case in which a court has limited an express public street easement to only rural use. The first question presented here is whether the phrase "street purposes", as used in the 1977 Easement, unambiguously encompasses the use of the easement to access eight residential lots that abut the street, but are smaller than the Northern Properties. An easement is ambiguous when its terms are susceptible to more than one interpretation. "The primary purpose of [public] streets is use for travel by the public, and this refers not alone to the adjacent property owners, nor to the inhabitants of a particular subdivision, but to the whole people."8 The proposed eight residential lots will abut Shawnee Woods Road and be in the adjacent subdivision. Therefore, a court would likely conclude that the phrase "street purposes" in the 1977 Easement unambiguously includes the proposed use of Shawnee Woods Road to access these lots. But even if a court were to decide that "street purposes" was ambiguous and consider extrinsic evidence, it is difficult to imagine that the grantor intended to limit the street to rural use when it 3 See e.g, Hickerson v. Bender, 500 N.W.2d 169 (1993) (abandonment of access easement after 20 years of nonuse). 4 Abandonment of the road easement is also inconsistent with the Northern Owners' interests. If the easement has been abandoned, then the Northern Owners could not access County Road 116 with obtaining a private access easement over Jeff Pederson's property. 5 Scherger v. Northern Natural Gas Company, 575 N.W.2d 578, 580 (Minn. 1998). 6 Id See e.g., Washington Wildlife Preservation, Inc. v. State. 329 N.W.2d 543, 547 (Minn. 1983) (railroad easement encompasses use of easement area for public trail); see also Cater v. Northwestern Telephone Exchange, 63 N.W. 111 (Minn. 1895) (road easement encompasses the installation of telephone lines). 8 11 McQuillin Mun. Corp. §30.156 (3d ed.), quoting Yarrow First Associates v Town of Clyde Hill, 403 P.2d 49 (Wash. 1965). 3 failed to explicitly say so in the easement. To date, the Northern Owners have presented no evidence supporting their interpretation of the easement's scope other than the fact that the Northern Properties' are larger than the lots under consideration. There may be a set of facts in which the City authorized the use of a 60 -foot street for a purpose so inconsistent with the surrounding uses that it exceeded the easement's scope. But this case does not present them. A court -imposed distinction between streets easements limited to rural residential development as opposed to urban residential development would have significant public policy implications. Most plats include dedication language "for street and utility purposes" identical to that used in the 1977 Easement. Therefore, such a ruling would raise the specter of any property owner of platted land in a developing area arguing that the street abutting her property was only meant to facilitate rural uses, an arguably unintended obstacle to new development or redevelopment. 3. Would the City be violating the terms of the Shawnee Woods Road easement if it permits construction of connections to the improved road over what is currently unimproved right-of-way? The Northern Owners suggest that the City would violate the terms of the 1977 Easement if it permits the construction of driveways connecting Shawnee Woods Road to the Southern Properties. The current version of the Villas development includes a sidewalk that would abut the shared property line between the Northern and Southern Properties. Just north of this sidewalk will be a strip of land separating Shawnee Woods Road from the sidewalk. The Northern Owners appear to argue that because they own the underlying fee interest in this unimproved strip of land, the Southern Owners could not legally cross it. As the successors in interest to the grantor of the original easement, each of the Northern Owners does own the fee interest to the segment of the 1977 Easement that abuts her or his property.9 However, the fee owner cannot use the property encumbered by the street easement in any way that would unreasonably interfere with the use of the easement area for street purposes.1° One of the fundamental purposes of a street is to provide access to abutting property owners. Every owner of property that abuts a public street has a right of reasonably suitable and convenient access to the street in at least one direction.11 Therefore, the City not only can provide access to the Southern Properties, but it must. Because access to the street by abutting owners is a fundamental part of the City's use of the easement for street purposes, the Northern Property owners cannot interfere with the provision of such access. DDS 9 See Edgewater Cottage Ass 'n v. Watson, 387 N.W.2d 216, 218 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986) (when the original grantor owned the property up to and including the street, then the owners who obtained title from that grantor own the fee interest underlying the street). 1° Minneapolis Athletic Club v. Cohler, 177 N.W.2d 786 (1970). 11 Hendrickson v. State, 127 N.W.2d 165, 171-72 (1964). 4 Hennepin County Public Works Transportation Department Public Works Facility 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340-5421 July 11, 2014 Ms. Debra Peterson Planning Assistant City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Re: Preliminary Plat Review — Villas at the Medina Country Club Southeast Quadrant of CR 116 and Shawnee Woods Road Hennepin County Plat Review No. 3346 Dear Ms. Peterson: Phone: 612-596-0300 Fax: 612-321-3410 Web: www.hennepin.us Minnesota Statutes 505.02, 505.03, and 462.358, Plats and Surveys, allow up to 30 days for county review of preliminary plats abutting county roads. The preliminary plat for the Villas at the Medina Country Club was received by Hennepin County on June 12, 2014. A previous concept plan for this development was reviewed by the county in February 2014. The majority of the comments provided by the county on the concept plan have been incorporated in the preliminary plat. The Villas at the Medina Country Club development was also included in the traffic analysis that was completed by WSB & Associates in April/May 2013. A letter with the county's comments for the Reserve of Medina and area developments was provided to the city on April 24, 2013. The comments provided in that letter remain valid for the Villas at the Medina Country Club preliminary plat review. Based on our current review, the following comments are provided: Access - As shown on the preliminary plat, two new access roadways are proposed. One access is proposed on CR 116, directly across from Meander Road. This access meets the county spacing guidelines of '/ mile to Foxberry Farms Road, immediately to the north. The county supports the proposed alignment of this access (directly across from Meander Road). The current daily traffic on CR 116 is 8,400 vehicles per day with a posted speed of 55 mph. With the proposed full access at CR 1 16/Meander Road, the county recommended full left and right -turn lanes on CR 116 for traffic operations and safety purposes. In response to this request, turn lanes are proposed for this development and are shown on the Preliminary Street and Storm Overall Plan (sheet 11 of 33). The turn lanes and tapers are acceptable as proposed. However, the county will want further review of the roadway, signing and striping layout plans as they are developed. In addition, in the notes, please modify the last note (7) to refer only to turn lanes by deleting the text "and by-pass lanes." The second access is proposed on the north side of the property to Shawnee Woods Road. Consistent with Woods of Medina plat, it is our understanding that the existing access to CR 116 from Shawnee Woods Road will be vacated. An t_ c;ual Oppo:turlrty Lnzployor Right -of -Way - The current half right of way for CR 116 along the property is 40 feet (centerline to property line). Consistent with the right of way recommendations for previous neighboring plats. the county recommended 25 additional feet to provide a total half right of way of 65 feet to accommodate a future 4 -lane roadway with turn lanes and a multi -use trail. This requested dedication is shown on the preliminary plat as 10 feet of additional right of way and 15 feet of trail/utility easement north of Meander Road. South of this roadway, 10 feet of additional right of way is shown, but the 15 -foot trail and utility easement is not identified. The county recommends dedication of the full additional 25 feet along the entire length of the property. In addition, the county's preference would be to dedicate as much of the 15 feet (currently shown as trail/utility easement) as roadway right of way, if this is possible with setback requirements. There is an existing trail on the west side of CR 116. The installation of a multi -use path on the east side of CR 116 is shown on the plat, which will provide a pedestrian/bike connection from this development to cross CR 116 at the Hackamore Road signalized intersection. This will help to address the county's safety concerns for pedestrians and bicyclists thatmay wish to cross CR 116 at Meander Road. Please note, the county will not support a crosswalk at this uncontrolled intersection due to the current high traffic speeds and volumes. Traffic Impacts - The traffic study completed for the Reserve of Medina identified numerous roadway improvements along CR 116, including the eventual reconstruction of this roadway to provide two through lanes in each direction at Hackamore Road with left and right -turn lanes at intersections along the corridor. The county currently has no projects identified in the approved Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or maintenance projects planned in this area. Therefore, the city and/or developer(s) would need to provide funding for the necessary improvements. While we understand that these improvements are not solely due to this development, we suggest that the city partner and coordinate with neighboring communities, including the county, to determine the larger scale traffic improvement funding and needs, such as additional through lanes on CR 116. Permits — Please inform the developer that all proposed construction within county right-of-way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Permit questions can be directed to Steve Groen at (612) 596-0337 or steven.Proen(a tennenin.us. Please contact Bob Byers (612) 596-0354, robert.bvers(ai2/tennenin.us or Carla Stueve (612) 596-0356, carla.stuevaltennenin. us for any further discussion of these items. Sincerely, James N. Grube, P.E. Director of Transportation and County Engineer cc: Plat Review Committee Mark Larson, Hennepin County Survey Office Fredrikson & BYRON, P.A. August 7, 2014 Jo and Erin Janssens 690 Shawnee Woods Road Medina MN 55340 Steve and Elizabeth Theesfeld 600 Shawnee Woods Road Shawnee Woods Road Medina MN 55340 Mark and Heather Czech 660 Shawnee Woods Road Medina MN 55340 Eric and Jill Voltin 630 Shawnee Woods Road Medina MN 55340 Re: Villas at Medina Country Club PUD Concept Plan Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: Thank you for asking me to comment and provide my opinion on the Villas at Medina Country Club PUD Concept Plan ("Plan"). I have reviewed the information your group provided to me including the concept plans and the Planning Report (as recently revised). I have also reviewed relevant portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. It is my legal opinion that the Plan is inconsistent with the City's Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. It is further my opinion that the City Council has considerable discretion to deny the PUD and zoning approvals needed for the Plan. ZONING AND LAND USE As noted in the Staff report, the applicant proposes to develop 48 single family homes and "villas" in a very dense urban style residential development. The subject property is zoned Public/Semi-Private and guided "Private Recreation." The proposed project would be entirely inconsistent and in violation of both the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. According to the City's Zoning Code: Attorneys & Advisors main 612.492.7000 fax 612.492.7077 www.fredlaw.com Fredrikson & Byron, P.A. 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 4000 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1425 MEMBER OF THE WORLD SERVICES GROUP OFFICES. AWorldwide Network of Professional Service Providers Minneapolis / Bismarck / Des Moines / Fargo / Monterrey, Mexico / Shanghai August 7, 2014 Page 2 Section 826.69. Public/Semi-Public - Purpose. This district shall serve areas of public ownership or related semi-public uses or open space, conservation, or recreation. Section 826.71. (PS) Conditional Uses. Within any Public/Semi-Public District, no structure or land shall be used except by conditional use permit for the following uses: Subd. 1. Outdoor recreational and open space uses operated by a governmental agency or conservation group, homeowners or private association and facilities for making same useful to public or association. Public lands, schools, parks and municipal buildings. Subd. 2. Conservation uses including drainage control, forestry, wildlife sanctuaries, and facilities for making same available and useful to public. Subd. 3. Agricultural uses. Subd. 4. Nature study areas and arboretums. Subd. 5. Private/Institutional outdoor recreational activities. As is readily apparent from the plain language of the zoning code, no residential uses are permitted in this district as a matter of right or by conditional use permit. Consistent with the zoning code, the City's Comprehensive Plan, which is the City's long term guiding document, defines "Private Recreation" as follows: 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. A dense R-1 style residential development with small urban style lots is inconsistent with both the language and the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan. Under existing Minnesota law permitting a use that violates the City's Zoning code would be unlawful and grounds for immediate legal action. Likewise, the Comprehensive Plan is intended to be the guide tool for long term land use and zoning decisions of a City. For example, in the League of Minnesota Cities' Handbook (the handbook extensively relied upon by almost all Minnesota cities) summarizes this as follows: August 7, 2014 Page 3 In essence, a comprehensive plan is an expression of the community's vision for the future and a strategic map to reach that vision. Comprehensive planning is not mandatory in cities outside the seven -county metropolitan area. However, comprehensive planning is an important tool for cities to guide future development of land to ensure a safe, pleasant, and economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities. LMC Handbook, Chapter 14, Section I.A. Indeed, "once a plan is adopted, it guides local officials in making their day-to-day decisions and becomes a factor in their decision -making process." Id The Comprehensive Plan for the property at issue envisions uses such as golf courses and limited residential development, not urban type development. There is nothing "limited" about the proposed Plan. The City planner correctly recognizes that the proposed Plan is inconsistent with both the zoning code and the comprehensive plan and, therefore, suggests a rezoning to a PUD. Importantly, however, the City is under absolutely no obligation to change the zoning for the property for a development that is inconsistent with its long term stated goals of the City. To the contrary, a decision to rezone a property is entirely a legislative determination. Minnesota Courts have consistently held that "when a municipality adopts or amends a zoning ordinance, it acts in a legislative capacity under its delegated police powers." Beck v. City of St. Paul, 304 Minn. 438, 448, 231 N.W.2d 919, 925 (1975). See, also, Sun Oil Co. v. Village of New Hope, 300 Minn. 326, 333, 220 N.W.2d 256, 261 (1974); Alexander v. City of Minneapolis, 267 Minn. 155, 125 N.W.2d 583 (1963). As a legislative act, a denial of a rezoning must be upheld unless opponents prove that the classification is unsupported by any rational basis related to promoting the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare, or that the classification amounts to a taking without compensation. A Court's function is not to decide whether a City's decision to refuse a rezoning is reasonable, but only whether the City had any legitimate basis, even if debatable: Even where the reasonableness of a zoning ordinance is debatable, or where there are conflicting opinions as to the desirability of the restrictions it imposes * * *, it is not the function of the courts to interfere with the legislative discretion on such issues. Sun Oil Co. v. Village of New Hope, 300 Minn. 326, 334, 220 N.W.2d 256, 261. Denying a rezoning to a PUD would be well within the broad discretion afforded to the City. Conversely granting a PUD would be inconsistent with the City's PUD requirements. The City has numerous PUD requirements, but most notably a proposed "PUD shall be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan." City Zoning Code, Section 827.27. As stated above, the proposed Plan simply is not consistent with the Private Recreation guiding in the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, a PUD cannot be granted. August 7, 2014 Page 4 While the City simply should not grant the PUD at all, if it is inclined to do so, the City's PUD ordinance entitles the city to impose other standards as the Council deems necessary and reasonable. City Zoning Code, Section 827.29. The standards that the City should consider and should impose include those items necessary to protect and preserve the rural and open nature of the area. Among other things, the City should require larger lots more consistent with the neighborhood, greater setbacks and the preservation of significantly more trees. Moreover, as any development is going to burden the existing homes in the neighborhood, the City should require that any new road be located entirely on the property proposed for the development, not your private property. THE USE OF THE ROAD The City planner concludes that the existing easements for Shawnee Woods Road do not prohibit the use of the right-of-way to serve the properties for the proposed development. The City Planner, as is reasonable, relies upon advice of the City Attorney. I understand that you have not been provided a legal analysis, so it is difficult to evaluate the legal conclusions. However, the legal issue is whether or not the parties who drafted the easement intended the road to be used for a dense urban style development. An easement created by express grant is a contract, the scope of which depends entirely upon the construction of the terms of the grant. Lindberg v. Fasching, 667 N.W.2d 481, 487 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). There is nothing in the easement documents that indicate such an intent and as homeowners you would be well within your rights to challenge in Court the scope of the existing easements. Indeed, while some further investigation is required, should the City decide to allow development along Shawnee Woods, the current residents may consider bringing a lawsuit against the City regarding the scope and intent of the easement and whether or not the easement has been abandoned. Buck v. City of Winona, 271 Minn. 145, 151, 135 N.W.2d 190, 194 (1965). It seems apparent that Shawnee Woods Road was dedicated and constructed for rural large lot development, not for the use as a "full urban section with curb and storm sewer" as indicated in the City planner's report. The additional traffic, noise, debris and disturbance likely exceeds both the plain language and scope of the existing easements. CONCLUSION The proposed plan is inconsistent with the City's Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan and PUD requirements. It also likely exceeds the scope of the easement for Shawnee Woods Road. The City Planning Commission and City Council should entirely deny the proposed Plan because it is illegal. August 7, 2014 Page 5 Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. 1 would be happy to assist in the future resolution of this matter. Since / t ect D , : 612.492.7441 Email: hroston@fredlaw.com HAR/ras/51060218_1 1 PROPOSAL FOR CHANGES TO VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB Background The residents of Shawnee Woods Road ("Residents") do not support the recently proposed PUD application by Rachael Contracting, LLC and the Medina Golf and Country Club, specifically because it calls for destruction and dense development of the heavily wooded northern perimeter of the Medina Country Club property, directly across from the Residents. Compromise Proposal 1. Residential development only in Blocks 1 and 2 of the PUD application along the West and Northwest corner of the golf course. No residential development in Blocks 3 and 4 and dedication of those blocks of heavy woods as permanent open space. (PUD map on pg 7) (Recent Development: Per Dusty Finke, Rachael Contracting LLC, has indicated its intent to drop the residential development of Block 4 from the PUD application, so development of heavily wooded Block 3 may be the only outstanding issue.) 2. Leaving intact the right/ability for additional residential development in the area of the southeast corner of the golf course that was previously approved for residential development. (The City has stated that if the PUD was approved, no future development of any Country Club land would be allowed.) The Medina Country Club was already the subject of a privately funded loan/bailout' due to financial _ distress in the mid 80's. That funding/deal from 30 years ago has actually resulted in the land purchase option that the applicant is trying to exercise by way of this PUD. By preserving the right to develop the southeast corner of the subject property there would be a source of potential future income in case of future financial distress. The proceeds could be used to stave off a closing of the course (of the likes that recently happened to the Lakeview Golf Course in Minnetrista) and might be used to keep intact the 18 hole championship golf course, club, pool and tennis facilities. 3. No improvement of Shawnee Woods Road. By developing only Blocks 1 and 2, the planned road through those sections could join into the already scheduled -to -be -improved -via -other - development of the western area of Shawnee Woods Road. The applicant would no longer need to bring utilities to, or improve the portion of Shawnee Woods Road, in Blocks 3 and 4 of the PUD, resulting in cost -savings to Rachel Contracting and the Medina Country Club. 2 4. No development of Blocks 3 and 4 would result in cost -savings to Rachel Contracting and the Medina Country Club in reduced tree -removal as well as the city ordinance required tree replacement costs. 5. No development of Blocks 3 and 4 with dedication of that area as open space will result in tax benefits to Rachel Contracting and the Medina Country Club. 6. The City has money in its park budget to purchase land and preserve open space. The City should consider using such funds to reduce the cost of non -development of Blocks 3 and 4 to. Rachel Contracting and the Medina Country Club. 7. Avoidance of potential litigation: Leaving intact the ability to develop the southeast corner now or in the future results in a net gain of development rights on the subject property while simultaneously fulfilling the objectives of: the published Comprehensive Plan Community Vision, Goals and Strategies; the requirements for a development proposal to meet the PUD criteria; the published Future Land Use Plan Principles; and the published Open Space and Natural Resource Priorities. By preserving the rural wooded area and character of neighborhood in Blocks 3 and 4, the Residents would be satisfied and would have no need to consider other legal options. City Request for Alternative Proposal As a neighborhood, the Residents have actively voiced our opinions at each of the planning commission and city council meetings that have addressed this PUD application as well as city staging meetings. We have also met individually with council members and city planner Dusty Finke to walk the proposed development and detail our areas of concern. We recently met again with a council member and Dusty Finke to discuss what reasonable changes could be made to the PUD application that would make the proposal align with: the published Comprehensive Plan Community Vision, Goals and Strategies; the requirements for a development proposal to meet the PUD criteria; the published Future Land Use Plan Principles; and the published Open Space and Natural Resource Priorities. After being encouraged to do so by city council and city planner, we have formalized the proposed changes in this document. Rationale and Supporting Facts for the Proposed Changes The golf course consists of four separate parcels in Hennepin County records. The entirety of the golf course property totals about 226 acres. Rachel Contracting and the Medina Country Club are proposing to plat all four properties. The only portion of the subject property that has pre-existing zoning for residential development is situated in the southeastern corner (Please see pg 5 for identification on map). In the comprehensive plan, it is shown that the future land use guide plan (pg 6) for the entire subject property is Private Recreation (PREC). The PREC designation allows for "Limited numbers of residential uses" as described in the comprehensive plan. The applicant has requested that the city consider their request to change the location of residential development from the southeast corner of the subject 3 property to instead develop the western and northern wooded perimeter (Map on pg 7). There are several problems with this request. As part of the comprehensive plan the city completed an assessment of open space and natural resource priority areas within the city. This map (shown on pg 8) has identified the heavily wooded areas that comprise Blocks 3 and 4 in the PUD application as priority open space areas and are color coded as "Moderate to High Quality Natural Areas". One of the primary objectives of the Future Land Use Plan is to implement it with the knowledge gained from the areas identified as open space/natural resource priorities to "Ensure that the PUD Ordinance allows the City to preserve parkland, wetlands, woodlands, ecologically significant natural resources, and open space". The southwest corner of the subject property, the original place identified for residential development, is not identified as priority open space. As such, the applicants' request to move residential development from the southeast corner (an area with no priority open space conflicts) and instead develop Blocks 3 and 4 (identified by the city as priority open space areas) is not compatible with the objectives of the Future Land Use Plan / Comprehensive Plan and violate the purpose of the PUD Ordinance. Furthermore in his August 7, 2014 Consultant's Report, Nate Sparks concluded: The City Engineer has noted several concerns about water and drainage on the proposed development site. The Engineer does not believe this application should be approved prior to the resolution of these issues. In addition to the concerns regarding drainage, portions of the proposed development site are heavily wooded which will have a fair amount of tree removal. Concerns related to these environmental conditions were voiced by Commissioners and Council members during the Concept Plan review. **** A Planned Unit Development in intended to allow deviations from the strict standards of the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate unique development plans. The proposed plan seeks multiple flexibilities to accommodate the development. However, the PUD process is not intended as a tool to merely create custom zoning standards for a more convenient development plan. The current PUD plan does not clearly meet the goals outlined in the purpose statement of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance. The design of the development could be more innovative and more of an attempt to preserve the natural character of the site should be made. **** For this reason, Staff recommends denial of the request to rezone the property to PUD. As the Residents' Attorney, Howard Roston of Fredrickson and Byron, P.A. has pointed out: [Title City is under absolutely no obligation to change the zoning for the property for development that is inconsistent with its long term stated goals of the City. To the contrary, a decision to rezone a property is entirely a legislative determination. **** [G]ranting a PUD would be inconsistent with the City's PUD requirements....The proposed Plan is not consistent with the Private Recreation guiding in the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, the PUD cannot be granted. Further Considerations The Shawnee Woods Road right-of-way was granted through easement over the southern 60 feet of the Residents' properties. The purpose of this easement was to allow the Residents access to County Road 4 116. The City Council agreed to the vacation of a portion of that easement along the property owned by the Woods of Medina in order to be able to develop the western portion of the Shawnee Woods Road. A question remains whether vacation of part of the easement has resulted in the abandonment of the entire easement, since the purpose for the street is no longer intact. Further, because the property under the easement is owned by the Residents, if Blocks 3 and 4 were developed some property south of the driving surface of the street would actually be owned by the Residents. This likely would cause conflict with potential new owners of property in Blocks 3 and 4. Moreover, given that most roadways are split between property owners, to place the entire road serving both the Residents and Blocks 3 and 4, solely on the Residents' property, is inherently burdensome and unfair. The Residents' attorney has opined: [T]he legal issue is whether or not the parties who drafted the easement intended the road to be used for a dense urban style development. ****[S]hould the City decide to allow development along Shawnee Woods, the current residents may consider bringing a lawsuit against the City regarding the scope and intent of the easement and whether or not the easement has been abandoned. Buck v. City of Winona, 271 Minn. 145, 151, 135 N. W.2d 190, 194 (1965). It seems apparent that Shawnee Woods Road was dedicated and constructed for rural large lot development, not for the use as a 'full urban section with curb and storm sewer," as indicated in the City planner's report. The additional traffic, noise and debris and disturbance likely exceeds both the plain language and scope of the existing easements. Request We are asking your consideration and support for the outlined compromise changes herein as necessary revisions to be made to the PUD application by Rachel Contracting, LLC and the Medina Country Club before approval. If support is received from the City Council and City Planner we intend to contact the applicant and request amendment of their PUD in accordance with the compromise set forth herein. Sincerely, Jo and Erin Janssens 690 Shawnee Woods Road Medina, MN 55340 Steve and Elizabeth Theesfeld 600 Shawnee Woods Road Medina, MN 55340 Mark and Heather Czech 660 Shawnee Woods Road Medina, MN 55340 Eric and Jill Voltin 630 Shawnee Woods Road Medina, MN 55340 **Please note that Shawnee Woods Road resident and Medina City Council member Jeff Pederson's views and opinions are not represented in this letter as he has recused himself from this project due to possible conflict of interest. 5 MA Not RN RN NW. cad Block 2 VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB MEDINA, MN Blocks 3 & 4 PROJECT LOCAT:CN Block 1 I. RN*. -t. t MIT 14* CAMPICN ENGINEERING SERVICES. NC. • WI 1,y..,.i..;t ..., 4m P..4• o.w c.,.r. .:Y Y ip fax 74411.-41.1 1-1••• •cat..• ,.re. 1, •... w.4.•w.N 4. ..w. .•.. ..ms. w«ww .. OW ..".1=w wRm A. Southeast Corner INDEX Men IXN INMI M CT St M. n (*. MN 55520 PROM (xT) 424 -IN E4RL CAMRON ENCRORt4D SfINICS NC. O MUM ca ( CEWU MARL PWN. MN 55359 RINSE (797) 479 UYM 1faEC -5E7!'J9t14fMWgN $AIX 1N 9.N tNi SUMAC LW ,xtMiff MUM ROR t 1100NI OM11 fRRM Rtrt Its ROC.IMOIO)A MN 15410 PAW VIM M1-1455 Mf/tIP16 OE9Wr ICE RM4 CRRML ro'v ON& 115152C111==== GOVESIDS vn:Ruas N I. ININESCIA 01151MK I Of EW6POR(A7pN S7h' M MEMO= A FOR 6 OORUClMIr WIN BOW AND SUPRENINTA.I t. COY @BS9EM ASSC IATON Of KW= ICFAW MANN MRS SPONK 11CK ENROL x an Cf MINN SWOONS SftCR XRCNS ANp DW 4.1 Af t PUGNItt ItatA•4. MN MO W. t.+s AND CRO RE NIL RE OaWlm NIN R 7NE Cd67R1CO0f1 Of ON ROW. wit ii::"iY i�lL�•��`2i1P3 il•L: -;,-r•-..... ir;11 C7717(. 111111 111111111111/11E7lir.7iTr7 alVTIN m•a iYf•f: .1.^.:'n:ii:i!:.3Efii. ]•F fJ-T^t.:iai. i..I,,. i•l,�i"i7a•;1-i:,::7•i� iL!f:.:>>;'-^1.iy :�til"I ,,.::11 I,'_i:•a:U: ilk _LET•, •..•..•. • 4i.:)...T7I7 7115 _i_• 1.•'.:2:.4...:2.'..1a.•. ... i-•i iTf•Go,r c•. .ivo:PR_ .:i.. ,,.1■;,,7V.ma::ur.7fla•'TIR:7i f.17+7^w' 1. '79l �.\�:E:ll11r. 79'ti'� :i' 7:1••0 • 7�', ii i FiI .TT'- 7.i1Fii:.' 1'.'! ,,N, m1d• fia,i 17:V ►^1:117Mi iiiEZ?=`.Ju 4MAII?SICCIC #i i1.=Ii=:312:.'.flli$171`11111111,111/114 ••' tiat1,6 i1L:1Q:;•::1w�7 4�317�'tf•PiTq 11'11.!11!:, .1 •:!I7..jtm� T' i:��li;:. r • ;fin- •'1.7n10, :3e i7L3(2-. ifal:.lL' lc7fL:3L':4 VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN COVER SHEET SHEET NI 1 Cr33 SHEE'S Ra.C.N.1 13-040 LA'fE18/04N2014 6 Map 5-2 MEDINA Future Land Use Plan Guide Plan Rural Residential - Agriculture Developing -Post 2030 Low Density Res 2.0 - 3.49 U/A ® Medium Density Res 3.5 - 6.99 U/A ® High Density Res 7 - 30 U/A 11111 Mixed Use 3.5 - 6.99 U/A - Mixed Use - Business 7 - 45 U/A - Commercial - General Business Industrial Business Private Recreation (PREC) ® Parks and Recreation - P -R - State or Regional -_= Open Space - Public Semi -Public 0 U/A Closed Sanitary Landfill Right -of -Way *This map is not perfectly precise. Actual boundaries may vary, and should be field verified. Last Amended: May 21, 2013 (CPA 2030-4) Adopted: November 17, 2009 UTM, Zone 15N, NAD 83 Scale: 1:30,000 7 RC an 1199 4 7 f 11 12 13 17 16 12 11 On.IO 28119111/2 is f/A/1022 » MOW 00. 009 61 w01 WO OM 1° Y OU 14 12 10 9 B TURN LANE DETAIL ACM: I-. 5101111 WOW Slat I RCP CIMS 9 121132 C96I01 NOM LOW\ K OOP M V 900 ons, 9.44 Y[pailY ADM 6100111112 1/000 woo RAI RR NOO la .N N1 MY MCA AUK 4.0211,2112KR*INR Of IA 6RIa M CR IY 6 afsf 1' C0 E OEit W 161 Ran 00 11 W 10 I SI11NIR 61009 NIO 110.120 1[01112110.4120I1[01112110.4120 MOM 1.0/ 1. 1. I 910 M OW RN I.0.6 .10 DMA 11222 COMA W11m 1 D M 110 0009 DOM ■ F191 0 1 1aI W MK OD KM COOM03 M NN caw9lm A lIE IIDMIMIIIMM ARCEI. t.11a UNE NO 17-146$ Ines Slat r fNISW1ElmMO Mt MUM IWO DIDIStet.. W Etw LEGEND 190909161 YOM + memo WWI :1011 WPM) STOP 9a 1 111020101 ro nwe DM --D>- WPM/ Oa1a SOfN -013 - MEPOSIM U n1U PM. 144v. .44N6 Aaf rI91 110 999413 CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • ,_,Imo, 6a Amor N.r 04144.. PA O. H. Yob moo" • .egrw.r...••. 10•I..44.01, 1.1 pa. A•00* A•I4- fq•...0r. mar 4• f1Oa1 44M-U.+� 441 :b yY0f •I 10GAM •••••10 AIWA. AI.fw P. C•n.. -1N. I IOWA Q.1£ VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY STREET 8 STORM OVERALL :•.Ec1 �o 13-040 SHEET NO. 11 DE 33 SHEETS 06304/2014 a.ws wramMow. C<+a MR Ca OC +...wa......r« lOrtgoi. Medina Boundary Roads """\-• U.S. Highway 'Th•—i State Highway County or Local Road 41111 Areas Already Protected Eh Moderate to High Quality Natural Areas all Wetland Systems and Connections Lakes Streams and Ditches Southeast Corner Medina mYi ASSESSING OPEN SPACE PLAN PRIORITY AREAS: COMPOSITE MAP 7-2 Block 3 Block 4 0 0.5 1 Miles IMEI Planning llemmunAy Rnnu a lageOkOplft Coop, 8 PROJECT NARRATIVE VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB OCTOBER 24, 2014 Executive Summary- Rachel Contracting is proposing a four parcel residential PUD project, on the periphery of the Medina Golf and Country Club, which supports the City's Comprehensive Plan and City policy for open space, trails, and natural areas. Responding to the City's concerns about the environmental impact to the NE corner of the project, as expressed by the Planning Commission and City Council members during the Concept Plan review, this PUD/Preliminary Plat significantly modifies the previous Concept Plan: • Block 4, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, previously in the NE corner, has been completely eliminated along with the associated road, cul-de-sac and services thus preserving this natural area. This action significantly reduces the tree removal in the area and retains the natural environment of this NE area. • The remaining density has been substantially reduced from 48 to 43 lots with a density shift to the west and northwest portion of the plat and minimal density on the northern property border. • A passive park has been added in the NE corner with benches to enjoy the natural wooded environment in this NE corner of this plat. • Very minor deviations to the underlying zoning standards for garage setbacks and driveway locations, to support the product offerings, are more than offset by the lot areas that exceed square foot minimums, the additional road width to 30' with single side parking, and the major reduction in tree removal which is now 2.5% less than the allowable removal amount. • The PUD complies with the "limited residential use" noted in the Comprehensive Plan and also complies with the criteria for a Planned Unit Development, Section 827.25. Rachel Contracting, LLC is proposing a Planned Unit Development of four contiguous land parcels adjacent to and east of County Road 116 and within the western and northern boundaries of the Medina Country Club. The four parcels total approximately 226 acres. Residential development is proposed for portions of PID's 01-118-23-31- 0001, and 01-118-23-32-0001. Of the 226 acres, approximately 14.46 acres, 6.0%, will be used for 35 villa and 8 single family residential lots, park, and out lots and 4.1 acres will be used for new right -of way; the remaining 207.4 acres will be sold to MGCC which intends to preserve the existing open space as part of its long term operation of the golf course. This sale to MGCC will also solidify and stabilize golf course operations over the next 45 years. City sanitary sewer and water will be utilized 1 (private wells will be installed for villa/custom home irrigation), a city street, trail and sidewalks, and turn lanes will be constructed, storm water management will be on -site, and private utilities will be underground in a joint trench. Construction will begin as soon as possible after plat approval and continue to completion in one phase. The development of these 43 proposed residences will provide for the continued use of the golf course as a private recreation area and open space and will not impact the use of the adjacent properties which are now developed or in the development stage. Concept Plan Revisions: A Concept Plan was reviewed by the Park Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council in the April/May 2014 timeframe. Changes incorporated into this Preliminary Plat as a result of comments provided by the City are as follows: • A major and very significant change has been made to this plat, the elimination Block 4, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. • The plat has been substantially revised to provide for R1 development standards as requested for Block 3, immediately across from the larger 5 acre parcels to eventually blend with future development of these parcels. • A passive park with benches has been added in the northeast corner as requested. • The cul-de-sac in the northeast corner has been eliminated along with the road extension and utility services past the eastern end of Block 3. • The center island at the Meander entrance has been removed as requested by Public Works and two out lanes and one in lane are now proposed. • The pond proposed for the wetland in the northwest corner has been removed; there are no impacts to the site wetlands. • Additional geotechnical field data has been collected, analyzed and provided to the City Engineer along with detailed explanations of the storm water management system for the site and the villas; this additional data satisfactorily responds to all engineering comments received as a result of the plan review. An additional access point to the Block 1 storm water management system in the rear of the villas has been added. • Sanitary sewer flows to a single connection at Meander, as requested. • Sidewalks have been added along the northern boundary line to provide the trail connection from Shawnee Woods Road. • An out lot has been added in the NW corner thus eliminating the double frontage lots, as requested. In addition, screening has been added along this northwest corner, contained entirely within the property boundaries of this plat, even though the lots to the north are very deep and contain heavy tree cover which cannot be removed in order to comply with tree preservation requirements for that plat, see enclosure 5) for the proposed screening. • The density has been reduced by 11 lots from the 54 proposed in the Concept Plan; this results in an 20% reduction in density previously proposed in the 2 Concept Plan; in addition, this density reduction from the allowable range of 87- 219 units from the southeast parcel is dramatic and very significant. The density has also shifted more to the west and northwest as requested. • The product offerings now include single family custom homes in Block 3 in addition to the villas previously proposed and now present in Blocks 1 and 2. Response statements relative to other comments received during the Concept Plan review follow and are still included in this plan. • County Road 116 Access -This plan was reviewed by the jurisdictional authority, Hennepin County, on February 25 2014 at their site plan meeting. A previous traffic analysis was completed and their comments were included in their April 24, 2013 letter to the City which included comments on future area developments; those comments are valid for this development and are discussed following their specific review comments provided in their email of March 21, 2014. The County approved the proposed alignment and location access on CSAH 116 with the addition of turn lanes which are included in this plat. Their request for additional Right -of -Way has been incorporated into the plat design. Two out lanes and one in lane have been added to the design. The traffic issue on CSAH 116, especially at the morning commute times, is recognized but it is not the responsibility of this development to resolve that issue caused by numerous other communities and developments to the North nor should the City deny this plan for an access approved by Hennepin County. It is understood that the City recently met with County and State representatives and there is a temporary solution to the stacking issue by merely re -stripping the 116/55 intersection to provide for two left turn lanes. This is essentially the same solution for the left turn lanes as designed in the final intersection improvement project except the thru and right turn lanes will be combined for now. This is also the solution incorporated in most all of the North/South intersections with Highway 55 to the east of County 116. • Shared Driveways- This platting action will result in single, not multiple, family residences, each privately and individually owned. The villas have a plateau which facilitates ease of parking and turnaround with the side loaded garages, which in themselves are not conducive to a shared driveway approach. The driveways enter into the street which has an additional width to 30' and which allows parking on only one side providing excellent sight line visibility. Multiple shared driveway agreements are not workable or practical for the products proposed and negates the private ownership of lot, residence, and driveway. The individual driveways are necessary for the products and ownership concepts being proposed by this PUD and do not present a safety issue. • Streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm water management- The enclosed plan sets define the proposed grading, storm water management, street, turn lanes, and utilities construction for the project. Previous planning and engineering staff comments have been incorporated into the plans. The design for the joint trench small utilities will be forwarded when available from the lead utility. The center island at the entrance off County Road 116 has been removed and the entrance modified for one "in lane" and two "out lanes". Storm water management will be accomplished totally on -site and, working with MGCC, certain areas of the golf course will also be improved. 3 " W a t e r T a b l e - E n c l o s u r e s ( 7 ) , ( 8 ) , a n d ( 9 ) , t o m y l e t t e r o f J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 4 p r o v i d e d u p d a t e d g e o t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n . T h e s u m p c o l l e c t i o n s y s t e m d e t a i l w a s p r o v i d e d i n e n c l o s u r e ( 9 ) . T h e s i t e b u i l d i n g l o c a t i o n g r a d e s a r e b e i n g r a i s e d t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e g r a d i n g a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o c e s s w h i c h w i l l d i r e c t t h e s t o r m w a t e r a w a y f r o m t h e s t r u c t u r e s a s n o t e d i n t h e g r a d i n g p l a n . H a u g o G e o t e c h n i c a l S e r v i c e s l e t t e r o f J u l y 1 5 , 2 0 1 4 a n d B r a u n l e t t e r o f S e p t e m b e r 1 0 , 2 0 1 4 p r o v i d e f u r t h e r d e t a i l e d a m p l i f y i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i n r e s p o n s e t o c o m m e n t s r e c e i v e d f r o m t h e C i t y E n g i n e e r r e g a r d i n g g r o u n d w a t e r l e v e l s a n d p e r c h e d w a t e r c o n c e r n s ; B r a u n c o n c l u d e s , " T h e r e f o r e i t c o n f i r m s o u r o p i n i o n t h a t p r o p e r d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s c a n m i t i g a t e a n y p o s s i b l e w a t e r p r o b l e m s " . T h e C i t y h a s a l s o b e e n a u t h o r i z e d t o o b t a i n t h e i r o w n g e o t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t , a t t h e D e v e l o p e r ' s e x p e n s e , t o r e v i e w t h e e x t e n s i v e g e o t e c h n i c a l d a t a p r o v i d e d , i f n e c e s s a r y . " P a r k s a n d T r a i l s - T h e p r o p o s e d t r a i l a n d s i d e w a l k c o n n e c t i o n s s u p p o r t t h e t r a i l p l a n i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n . A P a s s i v e P a r k , 8 , 2 7 5 s q u a r e f e e t , 0 . 1 9 a c r e s , h a s b e e n a d d e d i n t h e n o r t h e a s t c o r n e r a s r e q u e s t e d ; t h i s w i l l a l s o s e r v e a s a t r a i l h e a d f o r e x p a n s i o n o f t h e t r a i l s y s t e m t o t h e n o r t h . T h e s e a r c h a r e a s f o r p a r k l a n d i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n d i d n o t i d e n t i f y a n y o f t h e s e p a r c e l s a s b e i n g i n a n y o f t h e s e a r c h a r e a s . A t r a i l a l o n g t h e e a s t e r n p a r c e l b o u n d a r i e s h a s n o t b e e n p r o p o s e d d u e t o t h e i m p a c t o n t r e e p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d t h e d e s i g n a t e d w e t l a n d w h i c h w o u l d h a v e t o b e c r o s s e d ; a n y t r a i l i n t h i s a r e a i s a l s o a l i a b i l i t y i s s u e d u e t o t h e c l o s e p r o x i m i t y o f t h e g o l f c o u r s e . T h e f o u r p a r c e l s h a v e a n a r e a o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 2 6 a c r e s ; t h e b u i l d a b l e a r e a i s 1 8 . 5 6 a c r e s e x c l u d i n g t h e p r o p e r t y t o b e r e t a i n e d a n d d e d i c a t e d a s o p e n s p a c e a n d t h e d e s i g n a t e d w e t l a n d s . R a c h e l C o n t r a c t i n g i s p r o p o s i n g a c o m b i n a t i o n o f l a n d a n d c a s h t o s a t i s f y t h e p a r k d e d i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t ; t h e l a n d i s t h e 0 . 1 9 a c r e s f o r t h e n e w p a r k , c a s h c r e d i t f o r t r a i l c o n s t r u c t i o n a l o n g C o u n t y 1 1 6 a n d f r o m B l o c k 3 t o t h e p a r k p l u s t h e p a r k a m e n i t i e s , w i t h t h e b a l a n c e i n c a s h . " V i l l a s / S i n g l e F a m i l y C u s t o m H o m e s - T h e t y p i c a l b u i l d i n g e l e v a t i o n s a n d f l o o r p l a n s h a v e b e e n p r o v i d e d t h a t s h o w t h e l o c a t i o n a n d s i z i n g o f t h e 2 8 v i l l a l o t s i n B l o c k 1 ( 1 i s s l a b o n g r a d e ) , t h e 7 v i l l a l o t s i n B l o c k 2 ( 3 a r e s l a b o n g r a d e ) , a n d t h e r e m a i n i n g 8 s i n g l e f a m i l y c u s t o m h o m e s s i t e s i n B l o c k 3 . T h i s w e s t e r n a n d n o r t h e r n p o r t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y w a s s e l e c t e d t o b e s t m e e t t h e p r o j e c t d e s i g n g o a l s a n d p r o v i d e f o r t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e d r i v i n g r a n g e a n d P a r 3 w i t h o u t i n t e r r u p t i o n a n d w i t h o u t m a j o r g o l f c o u r s e r e - c o n s t r u c t i o n o r d i s r u p t i o n i n g o l f c o u r s e o p e r a t i o n s . T h e 4 3 h o m e s i t e s w i l l b e p a r t o f a H o m e o w n e r s A s s o c i a t i o n b u t e a c h c u s t o m h o m e a n d v i l l a w i l l b e p r i v a t e l y o w n e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d e x c e p t f o r c o m m o n a r e a s w h i c h w i l l b e m a i n t a i n e d b y t h e a s s o c i a t i o n ; a c c e s s w i l l b e v i a i n d i v i d u a l d r i v e w a y s , r e q u i r e d f o r t h e g a r a g e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e v i l l a s . S i t e l i n e s a t t h e e n t r a n c e o f t h e p r i v a t e d r i v e w a y s t o t h e c i t y s t r e e t a r e e x c e l l e n t . T h e H O A d o c u m e n t s t h a t w i l l g o v e r n t h e a s s o c i a t i o n w i l l b e p r o v i d e d f o r C i t y r e v i e w a t F i n a l P l a t . " D e n s i t y - T h i s P U D c o n s i s t o f 4 s e p a r a t e p a r c e l s w h i c h a r e g u i d e d a s P r i v a t e R e c r e a t i o n i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n ( P R E C ) . T h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n s t a t e s t h a t " l i m i t e d n u m b e r s o f r e s i d e n t i a l u s e s " m a y b e i n c l u d e d i n a r e a s s o d e s i g n a t e d . T h r e e o f t h e f o u r p a r c e l s a r e z o n e d P u b l i c / S e m i - P u b l i c ; t h e s o u t h e a s t e r n p a r c e l i s p a r t i a l l y z o n e d P u b l i c / S e m i - P u b l i c a n d p a r t i a l l y z o n e d M u l t i p l e F a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l . 4 Enclosure (9) to my letter of June 7, 2014 depicts the approximate area for the guided residential development (12.1 acres). Staff recommends a PUD re -zoning so that the resultant residential zoning of the southeastern parcel can be transferred to the northern parcels for this development. The acreage of the southeastern parcel zoned MR is estimated at 12.1 acres; townhouses with a density of one dwelling unit per 6,000 square feet would result in 87 units and for multiple family dwellings, the density could be as high as 219 units, at one unit per 2,400 square feet. Thus the potential transfer of density to the northern parcels should be in the range of 87-219 units if an equal exchange of density is to be achieved. Density considerations must also incorporate other objectives of the Comp Plan such as open space, preservation of natural resources and the protection of the current use of the majority of the property i.e. the Medina Golf and Country Club. When these design criteria are applied to the northern parcels, a very narrow and irregularly shaped new land parcel is defined that now must accommodate this density transfer. After this macro design criteria is applied, then the requirements for storm water management, Right -Of Way, trails, roadway, lot dimensions, setbacks and product offering must be added to the design effort to accommodate the density transfer in a fair and reasonable manner. Referring to the proposed plat; the units begin at the southernmost available area on the western property boundary and continue along the northern available areas to the end of Block 3, single sided along the new roadway; the roadway is positioned to accommodate new Right -of Way, a trail, and a berm on the western area and a roadway on the northern area. With the elimination of Block 4 the density has shifted to primarily the western and northwestern boundary areas. The density of this plan is 43 lots over a net developed area of 17.31 buildable acres, 2.5 units per acre, or 49% of the lower density range potential in the SE corner (87 units) and 20% of the higher range of possible density in the southeastern parcel (219 units), respectively. This major reduction of density for this PUD, from that originally planned, should be given due consideration. • Deferred Open Space Recreational Taxes- The four tax parcels are enrolled in the "Minnesota Open Space Property Tax Law" Minn Stat 273.112, which requires a 7 year payback if part of the property is removed. In this case approximately 18.35acres will be removed and the balance of the acreage will be re -enrolled in the program. The tax penalty for this removal is estimated at $250,000 to $260,000 and, while this is not a City concern, it is a major cost element to the Developer and should be recognized. • Tree Preservation- Map 7-2 in the Comprehensive Plan designates these four parcels as being partially in an area which is designated a moderate to high quality natural area including the small portion on the northern boundary and the larger area along the eastern boundary adjacent to Wild Meadows; also this designation is applicable to the Woods of Medina to the north and recently platted. Enclosure (12), to my letter of June 7, 2014 shows the DNR classification of this area as a Grade B forest on the eastern boundary and a grade B/C on the northern boundary; the area 5 to the east in Wild Meadows is also classified Grade B and the area all along the northern boundary, which includes 5 acre lots and the Woods of Medina, appears to be an extension of the same forest thus the same classification grades can be assumed although not graded on this exhibit. Our "Forestry Specialist" essentially agreed with the DNR grade classification. The baseline for the tree preservation calculations is based on the area of all four contiguous parcels, the lot size prior to the subdivision action. Referring to enclosure (10) of my letter of June 7, 2014, a tree inventory of significant trees was completed along with an analysis of density for those areas not previously inventoried; the results, in significant tree caliper inches, follow: o Included in Otto inventory- 16,621 o Inventoried on the golf course- 26,273 o East area estimated based on tree density- 15,264 o Total significant tree inches- 58,158 After an initial review of this data, the City Arborist recommended a 12% growth factor for the Otto and east areas and discounted several trees in the golf course inventory. After applying these factors to the numbers above, the revised significant tree caliper inches are as follows: o Otto inventory 18,616 o Golf Course 24,939 o East 17,096 o Total significant tree caliper inches 60,651 o Inches to be removed 7,562 o Removal % allowed 15.00% o Removal % 12.46% o Allowed removal caliper inches 9,098 o Caliper Inches under allowed amount with revised plan 1,536 The golf course also intends to spade relocate several trees to fill in gap areas; these saved replacement inches will not be known until later but will add to the inches saved on this PUD. In addition, each new lot will receive two trees per the code requirement and the landscaping plan shows substantial additional trees and shrubs along the berm • General- A title opinion was previously provided (my letter of February 18, 2014) along with a detailed description of parcel interests and a formal letter of support was provided from the Medina Country Club (my letter of March 17, 2014). • Summary- This PUD supports the major objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan, preserves high quality natural resource areas, manages the storm water on - site, and maximizes the use of existing infrastructure. The flexibility allowed in a PUD approach was used only to support the products planned for construction and major improvements to other requirements of the underlying zoning, such as lot size, 6 have been incorporated into the design. The final plan offers a uniquely configured upscale residential area on the periphery of the golf course, preservation of wetland areas, advancement of the trail system, and the best management of the natural areas and tree preservation requirements. Density has been substantially reduced and re -positioned. This proposed PUD meets all criteria specified in the City code. 7 December 3, 2014 Dear Planning Commission Members: I am writing because I will be out of town on Tuesday, December 9th and therefore unable to attend the planning commission meeting to share my thoughts on the Villas at the Medina Country Club. You unanimously voted to deny approval for this project at your November meeting. Since then, the developer has made some changes to the plan. The City Council discussed the new plan at their December 2 meeting, and they seemed to express support for the project. However, they would like to give you a chance to review the new proposed plan so that everyone can be on the same page and act in agreement and uniformity. As we all know, the developer (Rachel) is requesting that the four parcels that make up the Medina Golf & Country Club (MGCC) be considered a PUD, so that he can build on Hwy 116 rather than the par 3 course at MGCC, which is already zoned as residential. Approving the Villas project is the best course of action for the following reasons: It allows MGCC to keep its par 3 course — the homes can be built on the "out of bounds" area instead, which isn't currently being used and is open land. • It ensures that there will not be any development on the par 3. Logistically, how can homes even go in on the par 3 without causing major issues? Hwy 101 has the same traffic problems that Hwy 116 is experiencing. • It preserves "green space" in our community, as the land can remain a golf course. • It helps MGCC continue to operate and retain members. The developer has agreed to sell the par 3 land to MGCC, and MGCC already has financing worked out to make it happen. Without the par 3 course, membership is less desirable and the Club may lose members and/or not attract new members. If the Club faces financial difficulty, this "green space" will likely be sold and more development will go in here. It's in the City's best interest to help MGCC stay in business. Here are several reasons that MGCC is an asset to our community, and we should help preserve it: • It pays taxes (which helps pay the city's bills) • It provides jobs in our community • It is "green space" • It's a place for people to gather together and get to know each other • It provides recreation • The club has a good reputation in our community and provides recognition for our city The developer has agreed to many requests, including adding in ponds, trees, and giving the city almost nine acres for a park. He is trying to compromise. Can we do the same? I am not in favor of an abundance of growth in our community and would prefer our city to remain more rural by only allowing limited and controlled growth. However, in certain situations I feel that growth is necessary for the greater good of our city. I understand that the handful of homes on Shawnee Road may be adversely affected by the Villas development, but if the par 3 is developed, hundreds of homes will be adversely affected and the entire community will be adversely affected if MGCC fails. If we deny the Villas request, I'm also concerned about what sort of development will be proposed on the par 3 land. Will it be an apartment building rather than the luxury townhomes? But we won't be able to deny a clean application to build on the par 3 since it's already zoned for residential development. There is a bigger issue here. Just as many weren't in favor of Dominium building on the lot behind the Medina Entertainment Center, a developer could just as easily build on the par 3 course right now by providing a tidy application. To effectively control the growth in our city, we need to review the comprehensive plan and re -zone areas as necessary to eliminate the opportunity to build housing developments in areas where it doesn't fit or make sense. Until then, our hands are tied. Please vote "yes" to the Villas at Medina Country Club. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Kimberly S. NUrrin Medina Resident i- 368005 WILD Early right—of—way line of Co. Rd Na 116 R. S003Y59'W 982.92 50090'451 1349.97 /!I The Wetly extentlon— of the most Early the of Lot 3 Aud. Sub. 241 50113 01"W 135585 Noe of the NW V4 of Sec 12 _ LING GREENheo e BUS`N1 SS CEN7ER j W / 1/4 of Sec E. line of the West 40.00 r ---feet of the SW 1/4 of Sec 1 111 MEDINA MEADOWS i EOXBERRY+l . FARMS ------- NOODO'4b1g 2698.35 ----_------ MEADO/✓S S003t159'W 266agi— 6 the of the SW 1/4 of Sea 1 CDLOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN V4' •V-0. 1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN WALE: w' • ro, (i UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE 114. • P•0' 1 " 8 ' - 9 1 2 ' . 1 0 3 1 4 i 9 ' 4 1 2 R o u g h O a A p t I R o u g h o t g h 9 1 I . . . . . I , ' f& \ = 7 l , , r p i - t 4 _ _ 1 / \ , / 1 1 1 I ! I r ��. I / \ / / / \ \ , f& 1 l " \ / / \ ��/ 1 \ \ J / I E D E 1 2 I i , L 1 0 3 1 4 9 . 4 1 2 R o u g h W O R o u g h D I D h g t X m O 0 m m r - 0 U t i q p . * g . Z W �� I F D A T E D R A W N : C U S T O M E R P L A N R E V I E W : R F I F A D R A W N B Y : R E V I S I O N S / I S S U E D A T E S T I N A R F R B I F N C E F O R M e d i n a V i l l a A A D D R E S S : X X X X X M E D I N A , M N L O T N o _ X B L O C N o _ X D D B N n _ 9 5 7 1 P R O J E C T . M E D I N A V I L L A A 1 1 . 4 . 1 9 . 1 1 e " O r l W O R N . , R E I M E e n u s E E U C l R E v W E L T e V e e . W O I N C T N T I P a t A M T R W B i E I E L A V E M I ' J C F R R E I A Y E G F T I C B T A M C I W " � e t 4 O C h a Y s C u d d D e N o v o . L L C n A f . n E A R E , . P M E M a P } S W C 1 0 M t l l E I X W A O K A l e 1 . 0 1 4 " 1 1 " A G E O U K 1 7 P e a c o M b l e C N N C 1 - t , L t / C U D O + E e . N C > V O A R C H I T E C T U R A L D E S I G N - B U I L D 1 5 0 5 0 9 n d 5 4 4 7 S A w . N ��" u N , Y N S W " 6 1 2 - 3 7 3 8 0 2 0 p h o n e d e g 5 O e c m m n 84'•10' 314' 7'-0' 12'.1' 13'.01N' 6'•10' e'4P W. XC-0• R OH DOOR ICA33318 ICA33318 18.0'W.X 847 H.Olt DOOR MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN GAB NEATER move DN480 • 2.4' FRONT PORCH MAIN HALL W000Y-4 V! STUDY W000'94177 r r EGRESS WINDOW I I -; BELOW — H - MASTER CLOS GPTIV.4 za,ma DN 7R 076£ LAWN33W0 18W6133270 ICA3366E R NONLEA e STEEPING TUB R. 70'/34' MASTER RATH WET -4W ICA3355 EL ICA1371 ETL 20'DEEP BUFFET -j --bINtN1 RbdM--� 10.4IQ' GREAT ROOM W000110,4 12 ICAL369 E4 ICA3359 EL lAWN1377 UWN3377B LAWN 78 38"TY u4 CC_ ICA3371 ET 81190 GAB !REPLACE 3`-4• 9'•4' $` 16'-4• 38'.O FINISHED SQ. FT.: 1'848 GARAGE SO. FT.: 888 TOTAL LEVEL 80. FT.: 2,712 (INCLUDING STAIRS) 1/e= P-0" e fi 8 2 6 SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL A-1 Tale Shad A.2 oLowaalloel Floor Plan A-3 1,1 lfk*r7lm A-4 Roof Pk A-5 ��r�yvl.e6 Ekvetia A4 Rev8Ug61 EMTuom A-7 OldiS6 il7)R Wall A4 Wks Eli LAI:A.s:eDachewl Ei pre EINtecal 1-2 Ie%AM Gnatku 1.3 INaiorEleoAaull A-3 UPTNP,: V a -v ILIZ w . 1 1 _L, ,.W. <+ r 0 83'-0• 2'-0' 36'43 46'-6 !qh E07E78 WINDOW \ WELL ' 769 E R1 ICA3769 EL UNEXCAVATED O O BEDROOM 62 CPTI64 !r 74754' 46'.6 LOWER BATH T .E/•.I or r—\ UP17R Q7dr II II II 1 2,4SB'F PAIR BEDROOM 61 CPTIr4 W. T.V. MEDIA I REC. ROOM CPTl6'41? LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 114' =1'-0" FINISHED SQ. FT.: 1,462 UNFINISHED SQ. FT.: 236 TOTAL SQ. FT: 1,896 (NOT INCLUDING STAIRS) 6: 1 20 a yy co w O W L 73 2 0 SHEET INDEX ARCHITECTURAL T3 Tide Shad A•I Emulation Km A.3 Nii6lndLA-cadB= PIE Fk 711 Ad Roof Pln A.5 FrontLa811e,71ms A-7 Uld7Sntii' T Wall A-8 Building kdicas &1 Status, C-1 Lora ',milk -W.1 E-2 [ El1701 1-1 hdnlas flenWas 1-2 teem E1r & , 13 lama Fk7A7:ei7 • A-2 SHEET NO: PROJECT LOCATION 1 N0. 11!04/2014 DATE PER ON qtr AZT jCAMPION ENGINEERING 41:1 SERVICES, INC. VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB MEDINA, MN • Civil Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Oreek Centr, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plan, MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-5172 Faa 783-479-4242 E —Mall: mcanploMk:anploneng.com y cart l that h s pion, specifico r report has been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Martin P, Campion —Lie. 4 19901 Date: OWNER/DEVELOPER RACHEL PROPERTIES DON RACHEL 4125 NAPIER CT NE ST MICHEAL, MN 55376 PHONE (763) 424-1500 EMAIL ENGINEER CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. MARTY CAMPION 1800 PIONEER CREEK CENTER MAPLE PLAIN, MN 55359 PHONE (763) 479-5172 EMAIL MCAMPIONOCAMPIONENG.COM SURVEYOR SUNDE LAND SURVEYING LLC LENNY CARLSON 9001 E BLOOMINGTON FRWY SUITE 118 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420 PHONE (952) 881-2455 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OUTWORKS DESIGN DAN SJORDAL PHONE (612) 360-5757 EMAIL DANOOUTOWRKSDESIGN.COSL GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS: 1. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" LATEST EDITION AND SUPPLEMENTS. 2. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM) STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION. LATEST EDITION. 3. CITY OF MEDINA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS 4. AU. APPUCABLE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS AND ORDINANCE WILL BE COMPUED WITH IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT. INDEX SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION 1 COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT (OVERALL) 4 PRELIMINARY PLAT — WEST 5 PRELIMINARY PLAT — NORTHWEST 6 PRELIMINARY PLAT — NORTH 7 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (OVERALL) 8 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN — WEST 9 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN — NORTHWEST 10 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN — NORTH 11 PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER (OVERALL) 12 PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER — WEST 13 PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER — NORTHWEST 14 PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER — NORTH 15 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (OVFRALL) 16 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN — WEST 17 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN — NORTHWEST 18 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN — NORTH 19 PRFI IMINARY STORM WATFR POLI UTION PREVENTION PI AN (OVERALL) 20 PRELIMINARY STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN — WEST 21 PREUMINARY STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN — NORTHWEST 22 PRELIMINARY STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN — NORTH 23 PREUMINARY TREE SURVEY 24 PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY — WEST 25 PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY — NORTHWEST 26 PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY — NORTH 27 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN (OVER ALL) 28 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN — WEST 29 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN — NORTHWEST 30 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN — NORTH 31 DETAILS 32 DETAILS 33 DETAILS VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN COVER SHEET PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 1 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 a. _ 1; Nw 0 0 7/4 err - • a �• °%• < 7m°aeea t: t4 : 6:1;;;;'*? OF OF SEC. 0 SEC. 1 11/04/2014 DALE pER CRY RENEW CAMPION ENGINEERING 41'1 SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering • Land Planning 11100 Pioneer Creek Canter, P.O. Boa 249 Maple Prom. MN 65369 Phan.: 763-479-5172 Fait 793-479-4242 E —Mal: maanpronOoanplaneng.com 0 ss. 0 0 12 - . a ° �8g:®e aria°° •e 881 • e 1 E i I hereby c.rty y that this plan, specification a report has bean prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lawn of the State of Mkmesota. Martin P. 99malen —Lk. 1 19901 Doter 0 O O 0 X LEGEND --1811 CORRUGATED METAL PIPE/F.E.S. ❑ STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN MANHOLE SANITARY SEWER MH TEST PIT POWER POLE MAIL BOX FENCE EDGE OF BIT EX CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER O , TREE-DEcDOUS TREE —CONIFEROUS EXISTING CONTOUR —MINOR EXISTING CONTOUR— MAJOR EX WATERMAIN ROW & PROPERTY UNES NOTES: 1. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY OTTO ASSOCIATES (2005) 2. BOUNDARY SURVEY BY SUAVE LAND SURVEYING (2014) 3. WETLANDS DELINEATED BY KJOLHAUG D lRONMOi1A. SERVICES, INC 4. SEE SHEET 3 FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION d 4 Wa GROW SCALE IN FEET VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN EXISTING CONDITIONS PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 2 OF 33 SHEETS _GAT 1/04/2014 LOT 1 BLOM 4 OF C O SEC. 1 ,v o SEC . of C 0 PARCEL 1 158.86 AC S Ihe of the SW 1/4 of Sea 1 S89 2587.91 -45uuL PARCEL 3 32.83 AC N. the of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 12 Jnar LJ AV W I4.r• AZp4N4 Welly lino of Afpano 2nd Add sEc% qD°/n0v l t a C Iarrrurnrw, PARCEL 2 34.25 AC fis most Hy 1h.41 Lot S Sub. Aud of the of Sea 1 LAW S894471 -W 1088.37 • Rion A 0 9 PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS PARCEL 1: THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHP 118, RANGE 23, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, WHICH UES EAST OF THE WEST 40 FEET OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER. PARCEL 2: THAT PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 118, RANGE 23, LYING EASTERLY OF THE MOST EASTERLY UNE OF LOT 3, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 241, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINN., AND THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF SAID MOST EASTERLY UNE TO THE NORTH UNE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER. PARCEL 3: THAT PART OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 118, RANGE 23, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH UNE OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE MOST EASTERLY UNE OF LOT 3. AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 241, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINN.; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE MOST EASTERLY UNE TO THE MOST NORTHERLY UNE OF ALPANA SECOND ADDITION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID MOST NORTHERLY UNE AND ITS WESTERLY EXTENSION TO THE WEST UNE OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST UNE TO 114E POINT OF BEGINNING, WHICH UES EAST OF THE WEST 40 FEET OF SAID NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER. SE corner of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 7.T 114 R. 23 ofcorner of the NW 1/4 S.c. Z1 4 R 23) Parcel Area Table Parcel # Block No. Area 1 BLOCK 1 10966 3 BL00K 1 11196 4 BLOCK 1 9618 5 BLOCK 1 9569 8 BLOCK 1 9425 7 BL00(1 9153 8 BLOCK 1 9162 9 BLOC( 1 9192 10 81.008 1 9428 11 BLOCK 1 9640 12 BLOCK 1 9711 13 B100(1 11064 14 81.00(1 9717 15 BLOC( 1 10289 16 BLOCK 1 10555 17 BLOCK 1 9989 18 BLOCK 1 9494 19 BLOC( 1 9843 20 BLOCK 1 10072 21 BLOCK 1 9848 TOTAL AREA = 225.94 ACRES OUTLOT A OUTLOT B LOT 1, BLOCK 4 2.41 AC 0.19 AC 207.38 AC TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: BLOCKS 1-3 11.84 AC OUTLOT A 2.43 AC OUTLOT 8 (PARK) 0.19 AC NEW CSAH 116 ROW 0.85 AC LOCAL STREET ROW 3.25 TOTAL 18.56 A NET DEVELOPED AREA: GROSS AREA -NEW CSAH 116 ROW -OUTLOT B (PARK) NET AREA 18.35 AC 0.85 AC 0.19 AC 17.31 AC NET DENSITY = 43 UNITS/17.3 AC = 2.5 UNITS PER ACRE NOTE: SEE SHEETS 4-6 FOR DETAILED PRELN16WtY PLAT INFORM/310N VILLAS: (BLOCKS 1 & 2) FRONT. BLOCK 1 -14' BLOCK 2-25' SIDE - 5' AND 10' (WINDOW WELL IN 5' SB) REAR - 20' SINGLE FAMILY (BLOCK 3) FRONT - 25' SIDE - 10' REAR -20' WETLAND BUFFER - 25' SETBACK FROM BUFFER - 15' EXISTING ZON9IG - PU8JC/SEMI PUBLIC & MULTI FAMILY RESEIEN1k1L PROPOSED ZONING - PUD IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCUTATK]N- VILLA LOIS Typical Villa. Dec k and Driveway Area (SF ) Smallest lot Area (5F) Impervious Surface Area Parcel Area Table Porcel # Block No. Area 22 BLOCK 1 10591 23 BLOCK 1 11181 24 BLOC( 1 11286 25 BLOCK 1 11432 26 BLOCK 1 11190 27 BLOCK 1 11198 28 BLOC( 1 15981 Parcel Area Table Parcel / Block No. Area 1 BLOCK 11718 2 BLOC( 2 11890 3 BLOC( 2 11650 4 BLOCK 2 11080 5 BLOC( 2 10661 6 BLOCK 2 10840 7 BLOCK2 11658 BLOCK 1 810(8 2 4.200 3.600 9.153 10,661 46% 34% Parcel Area Table Pared # Block No. Area 1 BLOC( 3 15000 2 BLOCK 3 17647 3 BLOCK 3 17606 4 BLOC( 3 17564 5 BL00( 3 17523 6 BLOC( 3 17481 7 BLO0( 3 16685 8 BLOC( 3 14309 a --- -r_r- �JI toyr_r-r- a tor..—. a r_r-r- ,D 5 Ji08 _ 9 , J108 Z TYPICAL SETBACK DETAIL (VILLAS BLOCK ) c r r 10 r_I_ ----, ---� r 10 r r 10 J,0 o --J0_==— —L J1o_-- TYPICAL EASEMENT DETAIL (VILLAS BLOCK 1) 0 ail II 0 0 1 4 r �I 10 5L TYPICAL EASEMENT & SETBACK DETAIL (VILLAS BLOCK 2) 5+00 6+00 ---7 -1 —.-i ) 5,5 r 1 r 1,�L 1 I ICI 25 —...•I I 4 r-- I 1 -11 L. I 70K6S �0 -1+-10 I LOCK TYPICAL EASEMENT & SETBACK DETAIL (SINGLE FAMILY BLOCK 3) Na 11/04/2014 DATE F R CITY REMEW Cgir CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering a Lend Planning 1800 Pioneer (reek Center, P.O. Sox 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone 763-479-5172 Foe 753-479-4242 E -Mail meampbn0oakgbneng.aem 1 hereby certify that this peon. eped9ootlon Of report hoe been prepared by me or under my direct superadon and that I am a duhr Raneed Professional Engineer under the Tmw of the State of 'Minnesota. Martin P, Oamelan -Ut, 14 14441 Dose — VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT OVERALL PROJECT N0: 13-040 SHEET NO. 3 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 CLNTFR L11 /V/L U//VH IVIL/ UUVV.3 WM 4W F OXBLRRY�k Ts WM 0 0 0 0 0 -------------------- DRAMLICE & t1nJrc EASEMENT N. 1 0966 SF L • •••.. 9 2+00 205 • 2 0942 SFI • 57 57 •1 3 I 1196 SF• 29 • 3+00 57 n96184 SF i 42 L 10' ADDED ROW 4+00 57 5 I =19569 SF 58 t-15. TRAIL & UTUIY EASEAEHf 54 6 19425 SF • 59 5+00 _57_ -19 7 153 SF L__- 58 —DRAINAGE & tMLITY EASEMENT. DP 3+00 35 r "x19428 10 5 7+00 8+00 PROPOSED ROAD 9+00 1 —23 s7 r... 13 _ 49 IL. 6B F—.. 3 —f-1 57 L.— F* --2o' ACCESS 10 51 [_.- EASEMENT. .,..4.1......:I 1: 1 1 I 1 J• 12 - 13 1 • I $19640 iF • SF : — 711 SF 1 . 11064 SF —197117 SF I ='0289 71"h0555 I 1 L--- L L_-- Li L__ 57 r5 43 _ 25 7 SS LEGEND DRAINAGE & UiIUIY EASfAENT — • • — BUILDING AND/OR WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK WEILAND BUFFER 5, SF OUTLOT A 11+00 \12+00 82 1 I . 1 ' I ;1 17 9969 SF' 55 Al18 19494 SF 1 58 st_11 1 :Al 19 1 19843 SF • 1 L 71 52 .• �� 1 1 I I . 1 I I I I I 1 20 110072 SF : 32 38 59 14+00 49 _ 11 G":.•-1 I 22 • .10591 SF �I 1 57 1 23 1181 SF 53 13 F11 I L p so Isis GRAPHIC SCALE W FEET 11/0412914 DAZE PER CITY RENEW CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering • Lana Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Pleas, MN 58359 Phone 763-479-5172 Fox: 763-479-4242 E —Ma! maampionOcamploneng.com 1 hereby certify that this plan. specification or report hoe been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed ProNnlona, Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Martin P. Camolon —LW. / 19901 Date: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 4 OF 33 SHEETS DA11/04/2014 3ERRY /IS 40 WOODS OF MEDIAIA O -0+00 26+78 1+00 E%IS11NG ROM & U TU1Y EASEMENT SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD 40 O co r 15' TRAIL. & ••••r-10ED' ADD ROW O J 1- O • 22+00 n 23+00 8 24+00 25400 OUTLOT A PROPOSED ROAD — - 26 77 VEF91 II 2 1:11890 SF 5 70 X25' WETLAND BUFFER 97 3 11650 SF X87 20' MINIENANCE ACCESS EAsaerT SEE SHEET 13. ACCESS TO BE COfE OUTSIDE OF BUFFER 6 dr' .••••• o — ��•'i 815BUFFER 15981 SF 192 \ I cA I 1 II I L.JJ 27 11198 SF it J m 26 11190 SF J 199 V) nl' 25 11432 SF 1 J J 200 : � 24 i ! 11 11286 SF LJ 195 10' (TYP.) f1 23 1' - 11181 SF 1 --- J ------ 187 1r 21 z� • 9848 SF I 1 ----- 187 ' 90 a V) 2 78 23 r i 4r- 11080 SF � DENOTES DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT .39 r3-1. ._?\ 32 If ••—,+ 11: t 11 5 1. 10661 SF 26+00 27too r 69 1; 1 r I • 6 11 10840 SF I: J 52 J 30 113---- 7 11658 SF , Lam' 67 0 LEGEND DRAINAGE & UT1LIIY EASEMENT — • • — BUILDING AND/OR WETLM) BUFFER SEIBACK WETLAND BUFFER GRIPING SCALE a FEET 1 NO. 11/04/2014 DAZE WER CITY RE,EW RITgr CAMPION ENGINEERING az SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering a Lend Planning 1600 Pioneer Creek Center. P.O. Box 249 Maph Phan, MN 55359 Phone 763-479-5172 Foe 763-479-4242 E—Md: meamplonSoamphneng.com 1 hereby certify that this pion, specification or report hoe been prepared by me or under my *eat supervision and that 1 am o duly Bceneed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota %Alp P. Comm -L c. 9 19901 Dote: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTHWEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 5 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 -louse Gar 017.27 J - -ex. conc. d/w edge of gravel //' / —T/ Q __mar. T -----4}DD ----1_ Ex. 18 "CMP N.Inv=1017.31 S.In v= 1016.69 90 Ex.metol pipe W..Inv=1019.72 E. In v=1019.80 _Top of water e/ev=1017.34 -ex. bit. d/w- 1 Ex. 12 "CMP W.1nv=1019.41 E. In v=1019.03 cosmic RWIITtf0A11UIY EASEICNT 1pi•80 SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD _____-____�_ Ex. 18 ""CMP - N.In v= 1016.74 S. I n v=1016.86 0 1— I 93 I \15000 SF \\'\ 1 13 r 90 2 T/S2TSF �J ILi L 90 1 J r 3 HH' 90 90 I I— —1 II 1 DRAI I I I I�—� urMY EAS�.ks 7/56T TAIrgr 90 90 r 90 f— • yJ 6 17481 SF 90 90 r 1 Ttar pi IV • • 0 0 4"tile EL=1011.880 90 In 11 a I: 1- I 8 14309 SF 1 )1 I /Q} a--- 4"tile EL =1012.75 4"tile 0 _ EL =1012.78 NWL SURFACE AREA Pond 4"tile EL=1012.95 =1021.42 -grovel approach / 1 / ▪ TEMPORARY CUL DE -SAL / EASEMENT N.Inv=1017.68 S.lnv=1017.60 LT � rr.C)Cv- =1021.74 -FF.EIev =1020.43 0 Ex. House o' z 25 O o 0 O 25' UTILITY 1') EASEMENT 82 .30. 05 y 25.00— / 500:380..14 Ig OUTLOT 8 8231 82 585 0 r, • 0 \ \ LEGEND OPMMr,E & UTLITY EASEMENT — • • — BUILDING AND/OR WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK wERM1D BUFFER o w tqo CRAPIeC SCMF N FEET 11A 4/2014 1.E. CITY RE>AER DATE =S1ION CAMPION ENGINEERING 411 SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Canter, P.O. Box 249 Mop& Ptak% MN 85389 Phone: 793-479-5172 Fax 783-479-4242 E -14c& moamp&nhanplonong.cam hereby certify that this pion. specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Mlnneeota. Martin P. Canalon -Oa i 19901 Da* VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 _SHEET NO. 6 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 FAT ly 1 .11 ND, 11/04/2014 DATE PER CITY RENEW I I I I I 1 W0/ DS MEDIA I I i I I r i 2 letCAMPION ENGINEERING AEA SERVICES, INC. .w,.. n.r,0nre (4i 2 i • Civil Engineering • Lend Planning 1600 Pioneer Greek Centr, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain. MN 55359 Phonic 763-479-5172 Fee 703-479-4242 E—Sa9 meampbn•camploneng.com I hereby certify that this pion, specification or report hoe been prepared by me or under my direct euperrbbn and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the love of the State of Minnesota. ._Martin P, Campion —Lla. f 11941 Dem I n,- ;;;,, h "Pry; I NOTES: 1. ALL WATERNNN SW1LI. BE 8" PVC C-900 0818. 2 AU. WATERIIAN SHAD. HAVE 7.5 FEET MINDRAI COVER. 3. ALL PVC SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SOR 26 OR SDR 35 SEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS. 4. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40. 5. WATER SERVICES SHALL BE 1' PVC HDPE 6. PROVIDE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 94 COMPUANCE WITH MtOOT 'TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS -FIELD MANUAL' LATEST REVISION, FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN CSAH 116 AND SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 7. DOSING UTRITY LOCATORS AND ELEVATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 1. 2. GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS: MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECWIGQIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION LATEST EDITION AND SUPPLEMENTS. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM) STANDARD LEGEND • PROPOSED smarm MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM SEWER MANHOLE PROPOSED STORM SEWER CATCH BAN PROPOSED WATER GATE VM.VE PROPOSED HYDRANT >- PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER - PROPOSED WATERMNN »- PROPOSED STORM SEWER GIVPHIC SCALE M FEET VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN OVERALL PRO. CT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 7 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 coNrccT TO EXISTING 12• WM DTI DT> DT> RIM: t IN V:9 POND NWL-990.76 HIE -993.90 o rho CONNECT TO EXISRNG EX. MH-1 :1001.34 E INV-980.00 SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAN TO BE DNEC11ON#L BORED ACROSS COUNTY ROAD 116 LL -996.0 NV -991.0 - LL -9962 NV -991.0 CO. LL -596.2 INV-99 .0 STATE AID 251' of 8' P O 0. • PVC LL -996.2 6N-991.8 LL -996.2 NV -991.8 MH-5 14:1003.98 INN990. t. W/---- 6 GV_ 10 INV-992.7 •^7.9 -993.9 MH-6 ILI:1005.83 INV:991.00 J1�998.5 INV-994.5 ELEV, TYP INVERT > > '.LL -998.8 INV-994.8 NOTES: 1. ML WATERMNN SHALL. BE 8" PVC C-900 DR18. 2. ALL WATERMNN SHALL HAVE 7.5 FEET MINIMUM COVER. 3. ALL PVC SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE 50R 26 OR SOR 35 SEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS. 4. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHILL BE 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40. 5. WATER SERVICES SHALL BE 1" PVC HOPE. 6. PROVIDE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL N COMPLIANCE WITH MNDOT "TOPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS -FIELD WNUAL" LATEST REVISION, FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN CSAN 116 AND SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD MGR OF WAY 7. EXISTNG UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SWILL BE VERIFIED N FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS: 1. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION- LATEST EDITION MID SUPPLEMENTS. 2. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCMTION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM) STANDARD t9 M14- 7 14:1005.99 _ .. INN 993.00 LL -999.7 NV -995.7 LEGEND PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM SEWER MANHOLE PROPOSED STORM SEWER CATCH BASH PROPOSED WATER GATE VALVE PROPOSED HYDRANT >- PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER -I - PROPOSED MERMAN »- PROPOSED STORM SEWER MH-8 ROA:1008.' NV: 995.61 LL -1000.5 6N-996.5 I- MN RIM:1008. INN 996 jy1 of 8 1000.7 6N-996.7 0 60 1Q0 ORAPIrC SCALE N FUET 1 NO, 11/04/2014 DATE PER OTT RENEW CAMPION IA ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering •Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Canter. P.O. Born 249 Maple PM% MW 55359 Phonic 763-4711-5172 Fmk 763-479-4242 E -Maio doom hereby certify that this plan, specification or report has been prepared by me or under my *het tupeMeion and that I am a duly Ileeneed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. Martin P. Campion -Uo. / 19901 Date: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN WEST PROJECT N0: 13-040 SHEET NO. 8 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 (.0 / V -- H -11A RI 010.00- 998.86 RIM: IN 9RAPrIC SCALE M FEET .15 MH-12 RIM: 1010.57 PV: 999.51 LL- 1012.8 NV -1003.5 U.1012.0 28 28 MN -1000.0 LL-i1D1.5 26 IM/ -998,5 25 LL- 1002.1 MH-10 'i LL -1001.8 MN -997.8 LL -1001.6 23 6N-997.8 �. 13 22 MN -997.3 -10' MN 7-1 2 LL -1012.8 MN1003.5 L_J 3 CONNECT TO DOSING 8'PVC 1111 (PER ( OF L EONA PREUMINORY PINTS) 1111-13 LI:1016107 INN 1000.73 MH-14 :1020.11 INV:1001.39 191 , RBA: 1018.r 4 1AH-16 .-RIM: 1116.00 -2_19)01002.38 PROVIDE SEWER & WATER SERVICE TO SOUTH GOLF, COURSE, COORDINATE LOCATION WITH GOLF COURSE LL- LOW LEVEL ELEV, TYP INV- SERVICE INVERT ELEV, TYP HYD W/ MH-17 6 GV :1017,98 NOM: 1. ALL WATERMAN SHALL BE 8' PVC C-900 DR18. 2. ALL WATERMAN SHALL HAVE 7.5 FEET MINIMUM COVER. 3. ALL PVC SWARM' SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 OR SOR 35 SEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS. 4. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 4' PVC SCHEDULE 40. 5. WATER SERVICES SHALL BE 1' PVC HOPE. 6. PROVIDE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL IN COMPLNNCE WITH MOOT IDIPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS -FIELD ANNUAL' LATEST REVISION. FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN CSAH 116 AND SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 7. EXISTING U1RJIY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHALL BE VERFIED N FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS: 1. MINNESOTA DEPARIMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION' LATEST EDITION AND SLEPLEYENTS. 2. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MIN6CSOTA (CENA) STANDARD 1 70x65 LL -1016.0 INV-1012.0 11:1020. 0 65 4 LL -1016.0 •-DT> CT) • DT> DT> • <10 LEGEND • PROPOSED SNITARY MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM SEWER MANHOLE 61 PROPOSED STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN PROPOSED WATER GATE VALVE PROPOSED HYDRANT > PROPOSED SAMTARY SEWER -I - PROPOSED WATERMAN ->>- PROPOSED STORM SEWER LL -1016.0 NV -1012.0 12 11 '10 B 1 N0. 11/04/2014 DAZE PER CITY RENEW CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • CM Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain. MN 65359 Phone: 763-479-5172 ram 763-479-4242 E-Mok mcamplon•oampioneng.com 1 Mushy sertI1y that this plan, specification or report has been prepared by ms or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly licensed Presoaked Engineer under the 10y of the State of Minnesota Muth P, Camplor -Lk. 1 19901 Dote:: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN NORTHWEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 9 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 MH-17 -RIM:1017.98 O INY.19.91•• 1 .1 7065 LL -1016.0 I ...,0 1 I -f0-1 70,65 LL -1016.0 PN-1012.0 MH-18 IM:1020. 0 LL -1016.0 INN -1012.0 •- OT: OT> • OT> 0T> • <14 v v U.-1016.0 INV-1012.0 70x65 -19 R91:1"2.29 INV. 1 45 70x65 LL -1016.5 PTV -1012.5 <10 <10 • <10 <10 NOTES: 1. ALL WATERWUN SWILL BE 8" PVC C-900 DR18. 2 ALL WATERMNN SHALL HAVE 7.5 FEET MINIMUM COVER. 3. ALL PVC SIi6T RY SEWER SWILL BE SOR 26 OR SOR 35 SEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS. 4. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40. 5. WATER SERVICES SHALL BE 1" PVC HOPE. 6. PRONDE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL IN COMPLIANCE WITH MNDOT "TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS -FIELD MANUAL" LATEST REVISION. FOR AU. CONSTRUCTION WITHIN CSAN 116 AND SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 7. EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS: 1. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" LATEST EDITION AND SUPPLEMENTS. 2. CRY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM) STANDARD 70x65 LL -1016.5 INN -1012.5 • <10 <10 6565 U.-1017.2 NV -1013.2 • LEGEND PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM SEWER MANHOLE PROPOSED STORY SEWER CATCH BASIN PROPOSED WATER GATE VALVE PROPOSED HYDRANT >- PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER -1 - PROPOSED WATERMA N »- PROPOSED STORM SEWER TEMPHYD 1Wi! W/6' GV GV MH-20 RIM: 1020.00 NV:1006.54 �-SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMANI SERVICE COORDINATE LOCATION WITH GOLF COURSE LL- LAW LEVEL ELEV. 1YP MN- SERVICE INVERT EIEV, 1YP 1 I eft 0 S0 Apo GRAPHIC SCALE N FEET 11A14/2014 DAZE PEER CITY RUED CAMPION ENGINEERING 01 SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering •Lad Planning 1600 Planer Creak Center, P.0. BOX 249 Ma* Pbh WI 53359 Phone 763-475-5172 Fees: 765-479-4242 E -Mack nKemplornikamplone g.com I hereby certify that this plan. specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct .up.Msion and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. Martin P. Campion -Uc. 9 19901 Dots: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 10 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11 /04/2014 OF 6 11 5 I hereby certify that this plan, specification r report has been prepared by me or under my direct suprr4Yon and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. SEC. 10 18 17 16 15 NOTES 1. ALL STORY SEMIER SHALL BE RCP CLASS 3 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2NSTALL ONE SIRP (2) OF SOD MIND CMS YIEDMTELY AFTER BACKFL NO. 3.NSTALL 6' STEEL FENCE POST. BURIED 3' N GROUND. AT ALL STORM SEWER STUBS. 4.CENTER NE OF STREET ADJACENT TO CR 116 I5 OFFSET 1' WEST OF CENTERLINE OF TIE RIGHT OF MAY. S.SHA1W EE MOODS ROW SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED FROM LOT 7. BLOCK 2 10 THE FAST PLAT LK AS SNOW 6.ALL EXISTING DRIVEWAYS ALONG SHAWNEE WOODS ROW SHALL BE REPAIRED N KM TO AN EQUAL OR BETTER CONDRION AND CONNECTED TO THE RECONSTRUCTED STREET. 7.TUNN LAVE AND BY-PASS LANES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ON CSAH 116 AT THE MEANDER ROAD INTERSECTION. 15:1 TAPER 0 12' 1705RNG- STRIPPNG. TYP PROPOSED STRIPPNNG. TYP n '.. EXISTNG BIT. EDGE MEANDERZ ROAD BIT. SHOULDER 12' EXISTING STRIPPING, 1W PROPOSED STRIPPING, TYP EXISTNG BIT. EDGE 0 n 0 03 • to'� 15:1 TAPER 55:1 TAPER TURN LANE DETAIL ,�, -.. CRAPMC SCALE M FEET LEGEND PROPOSED STREET UGHT PROPOSED STREET SKIN PROPOSED STOP SIGN PROPOSED NO PARKING SIGN PROPOSED STORM SEW PROPOSED ORANLIII.E LAWN 4' TOPSOIL e CLASS 5 GRAVEL GRASSPAVE OR EQUAL MAINTENANCE ACCESS SECTION 11/04/2014 DAME 13ER CITY REVEEI CAMPION ENGINEERING I SERVICES, INC. • Civil EngIMedng • Land Planning 1600 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Ptah, MN 55359 Phone 763-479-5172 Fax: 793-479-4242 [-Mat me npionecor pploneng.cnm Monti P. 0592100 -Lig_11 16901 Dati: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM OVERALL PROJECT N0: 13-040 SHEET NO. 11 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 POND NWL-990.76 HWL-993.90 MAINTENANCE ACCESS, TYP STMH-13 RIM: 994.6 INV: 988.90 LEGEND PROPOSED + PROPOSED LIGHT A PED RAMP-..`.. -... .... STOP SIGN, TYP STMH-16 RIM:994. INV: 989.00 9N-992.5 DT 9N-992.5 T PROPOSED STOP SIGN PROPOSED NO PARKING SION » - PROPOSED STORM SEWER - DT)-- PROPOSED DWINDLE X996.0 REMOVE DRIVEWAY AND GRADE TO DRAIN RDIOVE-Et CULVERT - - -8g-k1001.80 N INV IN:994.7• E INV IN:997.02 V-. T99 0- STMH-17 14:994.00 INV: 989.10 STMH-18 14: 994.00 INV: 989.80 anar < - •. nr-no, 58' 0 0.35% YD 18 IM: 996.00 INV: 993.00 58' 0 0.3 au .11.11i< •�er� ' • 4% 58' 0 0.34% C814H 8 RIM: 1002. 50- INV: 998.22 < CO 7 IN .995.69 CBMH 27 CBMH 29 M:996.23 I21MW 28.. IM:996.80 Y0 16A INV:993.40 -, M: 996.10 INV: 993.60 INV. 993.20 :998.10 INV.993.80 YD 2 114:997.40 INV:994.40 NO 1 IM: 997.10 INV: 994.10 -IV V » >'i -Iv FOUNDATION DRAINAGE DETAIL NOTE: LOT 28, BLOCK 1 MO LOTS 1-3 BLOCK 2 ARE SLAB ON GRADE AND Wu NOT BE CONNECTED TO THE FOUNDATION ORMMGE SYSTEM YD 4 IM:998.50 INV: 995.20 YD 3 Of: 998.50 INV: 994.90 4' FOUNDATION COMMIE GRAVITY DRAIN WYE YD 5 -RIM: 998.80 INV: 995.50 FOUNDATION DRAINAGE PIPE (6'-8' TYP) 4'3 DEEP NOTES: CBMH 30 Ilk 999.10 INV: 995.80 K LL -999.7 CO 9 V: 996.70 YD 6 14:999.20 INN 996.10 REAR YARD DRAINAGE TO BE INSTALLED WITH 3' MINIMUM COVER RIM:1005.30 INV IN:998.26 E INV IN:1001.02 5998.28 1�To 2+00 YD 7 14:999.70 INV: 996.40 LL -1000.3 CO 10 .997.40 :1000.10 INV: 996.90 CBMH 31 114: 999.90 INV: 996.60 1. AU. STORM SEWER SHALL BE RCP CLASS 3 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.INSTALL ONE STRIP (2') OF SOD BEHIND CURB IMMEDIATELY AFTER 3.INSTA L 6' STEEL FENCE POST, BURID 3' 91 GROUND. AT ALL STORM SEWER STUBS. 4.0041E%JNE OF STREET ADJACENT TO CR 116 IS OFFSET 1' WEST OF WATERLINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY. 5.SNAWNEE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED FROM LOT 7, BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST PLAT L91E AS SHOWN. 6.ALL E>a5TING DRIVEWAYS ALONG SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE REPAIRED IN KIND TO AN EQUAL OR BETTER CONDMON AND CONNECTED To THE RECONSTRUCTED STREET. 7.11.1101 LMTE AND 8Y -PASS LANES SHALL BE CCISTRUCTED ON CSAII 116 AT THE MEANDER ROAD INTERSECTION. B.ORA94ILE COLLECTION SYSTEM SHALL BE SOLID WALL PVC PIPE MOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYP CBMH 8 IM:1006.80 INV: 999.40 ._1000.7r. CO 11 .997. 67' 0 0.44% YD 9 114:1000.30 INV: 997.30 RIM:1007.30 N INV IN:1000. E INV IN:1003.02 S INV OUT:1002.48 58' O • 11 INV: 997.90 YD 12 RIM: 1001. INV: 998.20 Y0 10 114:1000.60 INV: 997.60 OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SOUTHWEST POND -"" WEIR TO 8E POURED IN PLACE OR PRECAST. NO SLIDE IN WEIR WALLS. PLAN VIEW 3' ORIFICE NWL CONTROL r 48' PROFILE 1 GRAPHIC SCALE N FEET F,L 990.76 NWL NO. 11/D4/2014 DATE DER COY DDREVIEWP R�VI'�6NSr CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • CMI Engineering a Land Planning 1800 Pinner Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Pb1. MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-5172 Fad 763-479-4242 E -Mork maamplaneaanplaneng.00m I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report has been prepared by ms or under my dkeat s peMebn and that 1 am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lame of the State of Minnesota. Martin P. CoLrokn -Lk. 9 19901 Dote: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER PLAN - WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 12 OF 33 SHEETS DA11/04/2014 .r 'RY < i MATH 13 RIM:1009. INV:1005.10, RI 14 RIM:1 INV:1••3.7 8" * E BITUMINOUS• TRAIL S H-7 '.. RIM: 1010. INV:1032.90 031,111 10 INV 1002.10 C31IIH 9 RIM:1007.30 N INV IN:1••.• E INV IN:1 ' •x.02 S INV OUT:1000.48 \\ CBMH 14 i-RIM: 1010.00 / INV:1005.90 LL -1012.8 CO 15 INV:1007.40 -MAINTENANCE ACCESS. TYP (CONSTRUCTED OUTSIDE OF WETLAND BUFFER) 1.1-1012.0 . I o LL -1003.0? - CO 14 26 INV:1000.10 24 11 1001 A CBMH 15 RIM: 1015. INV: 1008.70 11-1010.0 CO 17 INV:1008.10 b' CONCRETE SIDEWALK AT CK OF CURB 11-1013.3 CO 16 INV:1007.70 6, 23" LL -1001.61 c C8-3 .1007.30 --- -4 1 1 10E1003.30 ft4 996. LL -1001.3. YD 15 RIM: 1005.80 INV: 1002.80 YD 14 M: 1002.50 INV: 999.50 CBMH 33 IM:100203 V* INV: 999.20 • 13 YD 13 M:1001.80 INV: 99&80 ci vo 1. CBMH 32 RIM: 1001.60 INV: 998.50 YD 11 YD 12 IM:1001.40 INV: 998.20 3 / MOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB k GUTTER. TYP 17.3' O 0.92 26+00 HP CO 18 INV: 1008.50 CBMH 16 RIM:1020. INV:1010.30 F] 6 LL -1014.5 L CO 19 INV:1009.50 WOODS OF MEDPIA EX SIDEWALK N -- SSDK TIP TREET U6H -Pl? LL -1014.2 _CO 20 INV:1012.00 C8-5 RIM:1016. INV:1012.50 CBMH 17 -RIM:1018.00 INV:1011.60 PEO RAMP, TYP 28+76 eb H 18 :1016.50 INV:1012.20 STOP SOX TYP 76' 0 0.79% LL- LOW LEVEL ELLV, TYP 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK 1' OFF PROPERTY LNE »4 -1 V »» 3 7 FOUNDATION DRAINAGE DETAIL, NOTE LOT 28, 8LDC1L 1 AND LOTS 1-3 BLOCK 2 ARE SLAB ON GRADE AND W11 NOT BE CONNECTED TO THE FOUNDA110N DRAINAGE SYSTEM -'H V V 4' FOUNDATION DRANRLE GRAVITY DRAIN WYE FOUNDAD Ni DRAINAGE PIPE (r -e PVC. TYP) 2.5'-3' DEEP LL. INV I LEGEND PROPOSED STREET LIGHT ♦ PROPOSED STREET 51,71 +' PROPOSED STOP SIGN _L PROPOSED NO PARKING SIGN »- PROPOSED STORM SEWER -CID- PROPOSED DRAWEE NOTES: 1. ALL STORM SEWER SWILL BE RCP CLASS 3 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.INSTALL ONE STRIP (2') OF SOD BEHIND CURB IMMEDIATELY AFTER 8ACKF1WNG. 3.INSTALL 6' STEEL FENCE POST, BURIED 3' IN GROUND, AT ALL STORM SEWER STUBS. 4.CENTERUNE Of STREET ADJACENT TO CR 116 IS OFFSET 1' WEST OF CENTERLINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY. 5.SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED FROM LOT 7, BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST PLAT LNE AS DOWN. 6. ALL EXISTING DRIVEWAYS ALONG SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE REPAIRED M KIND 70 AN EQUAL OR BETTER CONDITION AND CONNECTED TO 1HE RECONSTRUCTED STREET. 7.TURN LAZE AND BY-PASS LANES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ON CSAH 116 AT THE MEAGER ROD INTERSECTION. &DRAITLE COUECIION SYSTEM SWILL BE SOLD WALL PVC PPE PRO.ECT NO: 1 NO. 11/04/2014 DAZE PER CITY REVIEW CAMPION ENGINEERING n: SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-5172 Fax: 763-479-4242 E-Md: meonplon0oomploneng.com I hereby certify that this pion. specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct aupe'AMen and that I am a duly named Professional Engineer under the Iowa of the State of Minnesota. Martin P. Campion -L10.1 19901 pate: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER PLAN - NORTHWEST 13-040 SHEET NO. 13 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 -2400-1 CB -8 RIM: 1019.60 MV: 1015.80 MOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYP q 1 1 ti NV 1017.3 <4C <a TES 1 T 84(��j -1 7+-0T-2-16 +00 1 lrGO o.6x rOZtOi 4_1.C% SAWNEE WOODS P�OAD < < < < < < < < 1 1 1 70x6 LL•1018.0 \ x1018.8 \ r--- 1� -R M:1019 '70x65 21RV.1015. II L IIIVDCO 21 1 INV.1014.00 1 1 J L No 11/04/2014 DATE PER CITY KNEW LL -1016.0 711,65 3 20' ORANAGE &- I TIMMY EASEMENT ( I LL -101&0 x10 1078.5 I z L_---- 8.5 V .V. r REPLACE 70x65 4 unu LL -1018.0 X10185 J CULVERT &0x65 5 L LL -1016.0 10,8.5 70x65 6 LL -1016.5 L X1018.5 T) --0T) f Dl) --DT) E10-<10 �E10---E10 10410-410 123 � �--- 1 1024 --- -2-5- INV:1013.50 ryLNJgj�;1013.703 I INV:1013.90 I I 1 CO 22 INV:1013.80 1 1 J BMV 10133 J I 1 FOUNDATION DRAINAGE I I I I 1 1 I I L J L J v V �V -Iv FOUNDATION DRAINAGE DETAIL NOTE: LOT 28, BLOCK 1 AND LOTS 1-3 BLOC( 2 ME SLAB ON GRADE AND NU. NOT BE CONNECTED TO THE FOUNDATION DRAINAGE SYSTEM CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. 4' FOUNDATION ORMMTLE GRAVITY DRAM WYE FOUNDATION ORI1 AGE PIPE (6 -r TYP) 2.5 -3 DEEP • Civil Er, neefing •Latta Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Centre P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, 1N1 55359 Phone 793-479-5172 Fax 793-479-4242 E-Mak moanlpion0eamplonenq.can ✓ 70x65 7 8' CONCRETE SIDEWALK. 1' OFT PROPERTY LNE LL -1016.5 L 1018.5 1 110---E10 `CO 28 INV:1014.10 •WE I � _J L - LL -1017.2 2 I- -CO 27 / INV:1014.50 L � J Imarun 1 hereby certify that this pion, peelLtlon or report has been prepared by ms of under my direct super lion and that 1 am a duly Engineer Professional Engine under the aw of the State of Minnesota P. Comolen -Lk. 0 19901 Date: r /7 GRADE DITCH TO DRAM TQ EXISTING, CULVERT END CONC CURB R GUTTER , 13 DOMING GRAVEL DRIVE.. MATCH EXISTING STREET ELEVATION 1+03 TEMPORARY GRADE DITCH TO DRAIN CUL-DE-SAC & EASEMENT LL- LOW LEVEL ELEV. TYP VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN 1 8' WIDE WOOD CHIP TRAIL 8 0 PART( OUTLOT B S2 LEGEND PROPOSED STREET LIGHT -1- PROPOSED STREET SIGN PROPOSED STOP SIGN 1 PROPOSED NO PARKING SIGN »- PROPOSED STORM SEWER -DT).- PROPOSED DWINDLE NOTES: 1. ALL STORM SEWER SWILL BE RCP CLASS 3 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.NSTALL ONE STRIP (2') OF SOD BEHIND CURB IMMEDIATELY AFTER BACIO'N11NG. 3.NSTALL 6' STEEL FENCE POST, BURIED 3' IN GROUND, AT ALL STORM SEWER STUBS. 4.CEMERUNE OF STREET ADJACENT TO CR 116 I5 OFFSET 1' WEST OF (ENTERUNE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY. 5.SHAWNEE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED FROM LOT 7. BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST PLAT LNE AS SHOWN. & ALL EXISTING DRIVEWAYS ALONG STANCE WOODS ROAD SHALL BE REPAIRED N KIND TO AN EQUAL OR BETTER CONDITION AND CONNECTED TO THE RECONSTRUCTED STREET. 7.TURN LANE MA BY-PASS LANES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ON CSAH 118 AT THE MEANDER ROAD INTERSECTION. 8.DRNNTILE COLLECTION SYSTEM SWILL BE SOUD WALL PVC PIPE PRELIMINARY STREET & STORM SEWER PLAN - NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 14 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 3 der 4 7 6 11 1 5 12' 13 POND GRADING HOLE NO. 10 SEE SHEET 18 10 18 17 16 14 15 CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE DIGGING.` Q(7PIWR STAIF (NF CM 1 TAN 077 AREA 651-454-0002 MN. TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166 GENERAL NOTES 1. CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY N111 AU. APPUCABIE GOVERNING CODES. 2. 111E CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOD PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERIES DURING 711E CONSIRUC110N PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR MILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO TIE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING TIE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF 1165 PROECT. 3. I E CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT ALL APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATOR OF EXIS11NO UTILITIES. IT SHALL BE THE RESPOSIBIUTY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL UTUTIES WHICH CONFLICT NTH TIE PROPOSED IFROVEMGINTS SHORN ON THE PLANS. THE LOCA110NS OF SMALL moms SHALL 8E OBTAINED 8Y 711E CONTRACTOR BY CALLING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL ([t-600-252-1166 4. SAFETY 140110E TO CON1RAC N ACCORDANCE NTH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CCtS19U0110N PRACTICES. 119E CONTRACTOR MILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON TIE JOB SITE. INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. TES REQUIREMENT NLL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LAMED TO NORMAL WORIWG HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION RENEW CF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT WEDDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES 61. ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTOR SITE 5. THE CONTRACTOR STALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES. WARNING SIGNS. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. FLAGMEN AND IJ0RT5 TO CONTROL 1191 MOVEMENT OF 1RAFFC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTRICT AU. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTOR ACTN71ES TO AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS 7. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED 8Y 719E OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR STALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTES AND INSPECTORS NCH THE SONS ENGINEER 0. THE SITE HAS NOT NECESSARILY BEEN DESIGNED 10 BALANCE THE ON —SITE MATERIALS. AFTER THE STE GRADING IS COMPLETE. IF EXCESS 50L MATERIAL EXISTS. TIE CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF —SITE N A MANNER ACCEPTABLE TO THE OWNER AND T# RECLEANING AGENCIES. 9. 17 IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSBIUTY THAT ALL SURFACE VEGETATON AND ANY TOPSOIL OR OTHER LOOSE. SOFT OR OTHERNISE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BE REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING PADS PRIOR TO PLACEMDIT OF ANY DMBM6(MENT AS DIRECTED BY THE SOLS ENGINEER 10. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. DEBARMENT MATERIAL PLACED IN THE BUILDING PADS SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE NTH THE SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD AS OUTUNED IN MN/DOT 2105.3F1. 11. TOLERANCES oAREAS %MIC H ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION. UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE DECREER. b.TCPSOL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS M NCH OF TIE SPECIFIED T#009155. 12. ALL DISTURBED UNSIRFACED AREAS ARE TO IMMEDIATELY RECEIVE FOUR INCHES OF TOPSOIL, SEED AND MULCT AND BE WATERED MIL A HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. 11 PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE OR GUTTER UNE F CURB. 14. CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST AND/OR OUT EXISTING PAVEMENT AS NECESSARY TO ASSURE A SMOOTH FIT AND CONTINUOUS GRADE ALONG MATCHING PAVEMENT AREAS AND/OR CURBS 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSURE POSTIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE BUILDINGS FOR AU. NATURAL AND PAVED AREAS. 16. 111E CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DEWAIERNO A5 REQUIRED TO COMPLETE 1111 SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION OR A5 DIRECTED 8Y THE SOILS ENGINEER. 0AUTOI/ NOTES THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTEITE5 AS SHORN ON THESE PLANS IS BASE) ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES AND. MERE POSSIBLE. MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN TIE FIELD. THE INFORIMATON IS NOT 70 BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE DC CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT ALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION or 01131ES. 17 SHALL BE 119E RESPONSBIUTY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTUTIES WHICH COIIFUCT NTH THE PROPOSED 1PROVEIENTS SHOW ON THE PLANS. THE LOCATIONS OF SMALL UTU11ES SHALL BE °BTANED 8Y THE CONTRACTOR BY CALLING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 800-252-1168 OR 651-454-0002. NOTE: EON'S SMMLL BE A MINIMUM OF 5' WRIE Q H -P2 DENOTES HAUGO SOIL BORINGS BB -ST -8 DENOTES BRAUN SOIL BORINGS 0-950.00 11- 950.3 LL -942.3 WO X941.8 DENOTES GARAGE ELEV DENOTES TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEV DENOTES LOWER LEVEL. ELEV DENOTES HOUSE TYPE (WALKOUT) LOW OPENING FOR ALL HOUSE TYPES tS 0.5' ABOVE BACK YARD GROUND ELEV. DENOTES GROUND ELEV Q+ _ L T GRAPHIC SCALE N FEET 11/04/2014 DAZE PEN 0TY RENEW DESCRIPTION CAMPION it ENGINEERING 1 SERVICES, INC. • C1M1 Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center. P.O. Bea 249 Maple Plain. MN 55359 Phone 763-471-5172 ram 763-479-4242 E —Nair mcenpionScrploneng.com 1 hereby certify that this plan, specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct .uprr.lon and that 1 am a duly licensed Professional Englnw under the ows of the State of Minnesota. Martin P, CIMMSE —1.14, 41 19901 Dat6: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN OVERALL PROJECT N0: 13-040 SHEET NO. 15 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 100• :1 1000 11/84/2014 108 FILTRATION BENCH DRANTI E, TTP rn 15" POND OUTLET INV=989.50 30" POND OUTLET - INV=989.15 s, 30" CVP. / :,6 t =/ NW.lNV 987.18 /. FLOWS TO SE..INV=988.46 fq WETLAND AT ELEV 980* 3+CO m 1.17% 15" CMP INV=989.7 30" CMP, INV=98 0 0 080 FILTRATION SHELF DETAIL 15" POND OUTLET INV=989.79 POND GRADING HOLE NO. 7 8 99i70"9 get ors ANNG WALL 1-910.5 0 89065 -x it u- x II 17 El I 12 s n iii§ ti t5 I 16 s 3• 13 :I 14 R !:Jb. to �RETAINING WALL T=1006.0 RETNNNG WALL 8=1002.0 T=1006.0 — — - -- 8-100$,5-- 8 — — — 100q J . 1004 RETAINING WALL T=1006.0 8=1002.5 10'-0' ENC TV 4' HOPE CORRUGATED DRAINTLE WITHOUT SOCK WRAP WITH NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE NOTE: EOF'S SHAH BE A MNAMIM OF 5' WOE H -ST -1 DENOTES HA UGO SOIL BORINGS Se -ST -8 DENOTES BRAUN SOIL BORINGS 008 1890.76 NWL FILTRATION TREATMENT VOLUME —z-- GRAPHIC SCALE N FEET CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering a Lend Planning 1800 Planer Creels Center, P.O. Bas 249 Maple Plain, MN 55369 Phone: 763-479-5172 Foe 763-479-4242 E -Mail: maamplonooamploneng.oan I hereby certify that this pan, specification or report hos been prepared by me or under my direct eupeMWan and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the law of the State of Minnesota _Martin P. Gamakn -Lk. A 19901 Oats: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 16 OF 33 SHEETS J 11/04/2014 /w CAMPION ENGINEERING AZ SERVICES, INC. G-1012.5 TF-1012.8 S00 LO G-1011.5 TF-1011.8 LL -1003.0 LO ■ 0-1011.0 TF-1011.3 LL -1002.5 0-1010.6 TF-1010.9 11-1002.1 1.0 0-1010. TF-1010.6 LL -1001.8 0-1009.8 -1010.1 -1001.3 I hereby certify that this pion. specification or report hos been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. • CMI Engineering • Lind Planing 1600 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain. MN 55359 Phone 763-479-5172 Rae 783-470-4242 E-Mak meampknOoanplaneng.cam 1018 3 0-1013.0 TF-' 1013.3 500 1014 • G-10183 TF-1018.8 11-1010.0 LO *AO P. Campion -VC 111901 Qote: ter" N N \ N N 1014.1 ii30/ WOODS OF 0-1021.5 W-1022.5 11-1013.7 WO 26+00 sip G-1023.0 TF-1023.3 11-1014.5 1.0 Er. CP Rim =1070. 7::1 Pored Writer £!e4'= 7i;7.5.88 27+C• 2.18 T♦w1023.0 11-1014.2 MLO 1 DORA STEP 7.0 1016 1 1 11 11 1008 1006 -0+00 10 -28+76 __ilII0- Ex. Huus FE. Gar =1017.27 -1(`" w1 OGiS l� jl 00 1 n 1016 �h • 'qa 0000. 70 6 G-1 iF-1024.8 -1018.0 2 ADO: STEPS GARAGE) 81018.5 1016 X074 NOTE EOF'S SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 5' WIDE ,S0B.461dStNlDEX 9 H ST -f DENOTES NAUOO 501L BORINGS 68 -ST -8 DENOTES BRAUN SOIL BORINGS o 50 tQ0 GRAPHIC SCALE 91 MET VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN NORTH WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 17 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 0 e- ,l -✓v.7 0 1016 8 woods ex. ;; cv c. d,/w • 1017.02 1016 .7 edge of ,/cal 70x65 G-1023.5- TF-1024.5 LL -1016.Q LD } k 00 r 8.5 02 Pond i 70x65 3 0-1023.9 1T-1024.6 LL -1016.0 10 (1 .SOT 54 GOMM x •18.5 clev-10'?34 woods ex. bit 8./4 - JI 4 \\1 ReAk-n...�, .'.�L/�.ti 70x65 5 G-1024.5 TF-1024.8 LL -1010.0 10 x1018.5 ✓V` 70665 6 0-1025.0 TF-10253 v ,5LO T)---0 Q —(.Lp • (1 OCK 3 x1018.5 '018.5 B -ST -6 P. 65x65 6 0-1024.5 W-1026.0 LL -1017.2 LO _ N2 GARAGE) 1,9 ,070 rrrvvY '022 * • a7' 70x75 7 G-1025.0 TF-10253 LL -'016.5 10 1008 1012 D 1014 7 woods-; - -FF.EIev Po � = %021 42 l'ed 1 'l ood^ 0.6% 0 (77701<,h W0 l5 114-03 ( 7, Shed - Ho,'s ;02L4 4.3 1e l a c. OUTLOT B PARK DETAIL B' WIDE W000 CHIP TRAL NOTE: LOCATE TRAIL AND BENCHES TO NOT IMPACT TREES --- edge of Wood= POND GRADING HOLE NO. 10 I NOTE: tors SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 5' WADE .508...1=82.-1= Q H ST -I DENOTES HAUGO SOL BORINGS H99 -ST -8 DENOTES BRAUN SOL BORINGS 0 01Qo COMIC SCALE IN FEET 11/04/2014 RENEW 02. DAZE CAMPION ENGINEERING AV SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering • Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone 763-479-5172 Fad 763-479-4242 E -N013 moamplontIcanplaneng.aam 1 hereby certify that this plan, specification or report hoe been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 ern a duly licensed Professional Engines under the Wirt of the State of Minnesota. P. Camplon -Lk. 119901 Dote: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 18 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 1016 998 1002 Cr 1074 NO. 11/04/2014 DATE pER CITY NEVIEM 7 N Q 9r 6 5 ,006 ,002 SFr, 10 8 ,000 gel a e roB7sfr ken' - 13 18 d1' See ti ,' a0-85 9. a a s?. .wad a a o "�' ram o- m, 6" ;-r, ao.'ba..cr- a o ,z-. 3z 1 16 r ry 01. 14 7 15 ,020 o1. 10,0 1010 TREE DATA No. of Caliper Trees Inches(1) Otto Associates Tree Inventory 1,211 18,616(2) Golf Course Tree Inventory 1,377 24,939(3) East Portion of Site 970 17,096(2) TOTAL (1) 3,558 60,651 Inches Removed 7,562(2) Removal Percentage 12.5% (1) Refer to Tree Inventory Submittal For Calculations and Inventories (2) 2006 Inventory + 12% (3) Per 8/7/2014 NAC Report - No Increase Included for Growth Golf Course Tree Inventory Performed By SkyCourse GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET CAMPION ENGINEERING Al SERVICES, INC. • CN I Engineering • Laid Pluming 1000 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 240 Maple Ploln, MN 55359 Phone 703-479-5172 Fax: 763-479-4212 E -Mal rtwarnplonlicamplonengoorn Leby certify that this plan, specification port has been prepared by me ar my direct auperlAelan and that a dulyy licensed ProMelonal Engineer the taws of the State of Minnesota. P. CamDten -Lie. ) 19901 004: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY TREE SURVEY OVERALL PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 23 OF 33 SHEETS on 11/04/2014 CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. POND NWL=990 76 HWL=993.90 • CNiI Engineering • Lend Planning 1800 Pkn.er Creek Center. P.O. Sex 249 Maple Plain, MN 58588 Phone: 783-470-5172 roc 783-479-4242 E-Malk meampionOcamplan.ng.carn I hereby certify that this pion. p.dneotwn or report has boon prepared by rM or under my direct aip•M.lan and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the Wee of the State of Minnesota Martin P. Campion -toe i 19901 q+00 15 11 1 12 - ` �3... 14 TREES TO BE PRESERVED VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 24 OF 33 SHEETS 1°A 11/04/2014 1.0% 22+00 1012 11/04/2014 4 -spruce "pinex 6p 5"pinn 4 pi 4 pin 13 -maple O8"maple 08 -maple race ©8'map/e, ce 0 1014 ,6'mr9e 26+00 Hp 27+C0 2.12.1 y. top 077p TREES TO BE PRESERVED 1/4 1008 1006 1004 'qz x1018.5 1 1016 OF 11 70x65 Of 8 543 61 7066ro ao K es, 12 TEMP C62.1715 °C) t5 02634: O'er o° y' 0. x21,0 Cam+ se� or. : R co, LJ e TPA— TREE PROTECTION FENCE Otal CROW SCALE IN FEET CAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering •Land Planning 1800 Pioneer Creek Center. P.O. Burr 24S Maple Plate MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-5172 Fax: 763-479-4242 E—Ma8: RKamploniksamploneng.e I hereby certify that this pion. specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the lap of the State of Minnesota. Merlin P. Carte* —IJc. 4 1990] Date; VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY NORTH WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 25 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 2+00 3+00 7-1 70665 m 0-1022.3 TF-1024.8 L-1016.0 0(2 ADD. STEPS N GARAGE) N15000 1SF8'S 10 ci 1016 11/04/2014 13E.R CITY RENEW DATE OESCR9 011 1 70x65 G-1023.5 TF-1024.8 LL -1016.0 LO 2xi018.5 '6 6 ,a��p._o �Sl 7610.57 14"maplel�ii ° lJ� V'• t71� 1 (S�! 14-mcpi tJ ' d'"`�L7 -nay c..°11 7N 7 e1a0 » - V m� �nb rt �rr 18"maple 0�1 570640ot2r'" 10044,04.0 Q rt 041 VV m 7s ObI� erN �: 129.•1`/ f1 /116"el 16'ma CJ �' 094 O(no V l! O V 1 16 el�r1✓ CQ�t6 TREES TO BE PRESERVEEi p • 4 mo le Oat fa rR ' a� 1 1 n�6 Qe{�_ , cle�r CJ� 9 7 tJ vt A 650(5;4 G n 8:. 70x65 23.9 of f �14.8 j G- 0 TF 1016.0 5x7019 7523 S X0/1 01062- L/ri» /�'�•r m2 /VT' 176 V 60 16 (`'��6T 75 2,c77 Om 1IjAj Crow gm �R( Um r di 11 762 052 \f %/{f ‘•;1 (f U 055 Owe 1fa a,�atGe Less 8j 1181 121 121. 10 adl6 DQ Cwt �� Aet r:1 6 O » 16` TREE 12- 20mop/, 0 0. 13 TP Om? O. . 12 maple 533; ( 'l! , de0 Oncecos lr?o 682 to IQ V n $ tJ 6 inoplb� �,� 1 � 1 oe � fs p� j� �) 117 1t ia2 788 187 I 1 IfD tae 14 maple( • .tip 11 z•�,fee�° r(j�I��:.l0es OIssC7 at 1160 0262 i `d1•1 012.4 24=0 12„0 0284 VI 2?""mgp/e 1B`mapllq, 22`mapl 20 mcpp�e 12"mo{p7e44 14`ma•� 12"mop a 14`mople 7 4260 f 36 2r6 ,,2 >me - f v is 1 20 , a24,E 71 6~ TP 12 L • 2274 6J273 276 66 G-102 TF-10 LL -1016.5 7. 7 0-1025.0 Tr -1025.3 LL -1016.5 5x65 0 Y_ G-1024761 JVe' 1 Tr -1026.0 e� LL -1017.2 /5 21 14� 1 DD. STEP15 1N GARA 11 (J•j) ., fir T�(���(�;[r��, - �v pj tin 7J f "7 N' 1551206150,0147 I,t �+iC) � s '6h 1 V t_ 0 92110• _ ___ (2 c5 1 I0 1pt7 f07 2204 1,31e. t �1ss V �'� 991e86642607(7602, tag) J� �f � .. v 0(`D:1TT_•1'(�L/ 077 1 V �iR7 o �� Vp [�rm7 fae� t " lo` f12r�82D t p V 0 (56 (��.4 fit (fl ' 0UTLOT Q.�{2 < f "' ppp in D777(jjj�l0.. �7 $231 \;/ Of110. II „957 z57.555-7 �f y� Y_ ,..45-v$3."4) ^��'[�{�r,Q'm/�lr° it5:57 -, CIS 70M �20D ,11{{77 �� ', _�115J f31 . .. aes ..wiep- . 1mIChil�t0afl/�7 F.l ned�Jde I 0— �1/RQ taD�tsr 8„.7881 ae (� r� 24 rnop2n n D. a �p V r • D66eC] f ruos 1Q map/e 14` ogle. i l Com ru 49 f 45 11, (JJJj31 r 200 �;1w• ... � 82 15 TREE PROTECTION FENCE 121 1 )121e fz 7 2710,YY_22s 1270 0 60 100 GRAPHIC SCALE of FEET itCAMPION ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. • Civil Engineering a Land Planning 1600 Pioneer Creek Center, P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone 703-479-5172 fax: 763-479-4242 E-Mak maanponOcamplonsng.com I hereby certify that this pion, specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I an a dciy licensed Professional Engineer under the lees of the State of Minnesota. Month P. Campion -Lk. 9 19401 Oat VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 26 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 • 2 1 1 I I 1 1 I I ,...T 1. 1 1 �LL]L ii J, IL. Jam,. 6 17 5 Bart Sd1.OM CM= 1E111113111111 1101:3113111iiiik, 71, E0 !I.._4 /Ala OO mOriiirN. 00 mEll Iliac 'J _._.4 I� iirI 00 ��'r •, WE EN ECM li-ii116 l.. '1....l r,A— MIEN iaroiawhir'-- 1113 Ell 001.1 ' L. ..l. 111..,1..04 wECMEll J 00 IJY.N`.n. MECO KM©rmildirirmiiiirisimiCCIIICE ICI CEA 00kiwi 1, 1313 COI harmliimmiimiiiiirl ©0 m0 KZ El mCZI ICE min 00 Illothieramoulrimill m0 00‘l.."4 41.11..,mim0 0©wY.N.E�.ILE.:MErm MONO SCALES FEET PLANTING DETAILS PRIME OUT M.141ECIED MM0E1 IEOE LAMAS MAW. ammo AND MEOW M MA DA1"T (MAX OR TO FIRST MAKS O 0110M OF SONE 3' MIL) ROTS N1a4D. STAMP ROOTS nifilftigagatatif% Na/ P OSTS PLACE 3 POSTS EOUEMDNT IR M0 MD ORME ROM W EL SEEM TREE 10 POSTS 0414 W IPM POLIPROPI DE OR POLIES NBC NN O.. 1 Ai SIDE STRAP. SEEK SISPPMO 8 CALLED AN. MAP MOM GOOUNDLOW WINO 10 /EST MANGE& 101111 S DAP MIMING SOTS 100081 PLANT M WM mown EAOOSL SOIL HOER TO MEMOS S1MaND FOR NURSERY STOCKFM IMMRM HALL NM WI ROOT BALL S UNISSIUNDED SAM. O =PAC= SOL MOOD MIMMO TRIM NATURAL OROROIE M14 AIMED 911 COME PLANTING NOTES MAC OUT 11100111MT MAME& LEAVE MAGOS MALL SUMO AND MAIMS O MANDATORY /d1 OK 11101 O AIL DEMONS 1118 AM TOP CAMS I MOSE MOUND 00111) O TO PIM.1Ngl NOTE" OF SEI M 5 OW UMW/ 8101. STAMM PODS TON 2'RY 11Mlm IMO OR PAM O SIR MICAS" P'OO& RACE 3 PORT 0a0S1A111 PISUD AND WOK ROOT IMO SERE THE TO POSTS MN ti LSO Pa11R0/RDC O 81418041110 ow- t r ME SOON. PLACE P 0014 OF WOO MULCH ma PINT PITS - 00 MOT POE AMINO MIK /am Y our IMMO SAIL S A0041 PLANT M 0414 SPECIFIED MOSEL SOTS. SWAM MO MID BOTTOM Of NOL SEMI To AMERICAN SIMOMD 1" COMM SOCK FOR MIMS BALD SO. 1T ROOT HALL " UNDISMINED NMSOL " COMACIEO SM. MOUND MOWS. Um NANO/ N81015 E OM MONO aR "HOE REPOSE OaRMNER. SET SOL MASS O COMPACTED SOL MOUND MATOMO MOMS AMMO MOSCOW 81 8140 CRAM ALL "AMINO RSS SMALL MEM {• a 011081 MIA04 NO TED WAVER PANG. MOE ALL NAMING R0TIM AMMO MOOT M EM ADMAMII 10 JAI N MCA: � O SDMD NOTION M N AOMI. east. M 0414 FEND 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER ORE CALL' (654-454-0002 or 800-252-1766) 70 !TRIM LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR 70 INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MAIE1IAL. 2 ACTUAL LOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL /S SUB.ECT TO F/ETD AND SITE CONDITIONS 3. NO PLANTING IIL BE INSTALLED (NIX ALL GRALVI40 AAD CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN CO PLE1ED W 111E IMMEDIATE AREA 4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY DE LANDSCAPE ARa47ECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BD AND/OR QUOTE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. a CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TWO YEAR WARAN7EE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS DE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE DATE OF THE LANDSCAPE 48 7E075 OR MINERS WRITTEN N ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANING REPLACOIEHT PLANT MA GENIAL SHALL HAVE A ONE TEAR GUARANTEE CDAM/ENODM UPON PLANTING a ALL PLANTS 70 BE SPECIMEN GRADE; MINNESOTA-CROMN AND/OR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE 7D BUT /S NOT LAVED BY THE FOLLOING STANDARDS: ALL PLANTS SHALL EE FREE FROM D/SEAS5. PESTS WOUNDS 5CARS, ETC. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTEEABLE GAPS; HOLES, 0 DEFOR*TES. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD MUNCHES ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE WAN; HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABJSAED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO MOTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN S3. 7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOOV (AN9 2607-2004 0R MOST CURRENT VERSION) 810011048/754101 921 AND TYPE SPECIFIED. a PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER STANDARD ANSI PLANTING PRACTICES 9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT 91E PROPERLY HEEL -IN MATERIALS M< NECESSARY, TEAWORARY ONLY. 10 PRIOR TO PLANING FELD VERWY THAT DE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT DE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP 7REE FINIS IS NOT THE CASE; SOL SHALL BE REMOVED DOM TO DE ROOT COLAR/ROOT FLAP WEN THE BALLED t BURLAP TREE IS PLANTED THE ROOT COLLAR/ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE 77. OPEN DOA OF BURLAP ON B4 MATERIAL$ REMOVE P05 ON POTTED PLANTS. 15 PRUNE PLANTS AS NEGi55ARY - POTS STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND 10 CORRECT POOR BRANCHING 73, MAP ALL 9,4007H -BARKED TREES - FASTEN 1CP AND 13017014 REMOVE BY APRIL 157 14. STAKING OF TREES OPTIONAL; REPOSITION. PLUMB AND STAKE F NOT PLUMB AFTER ONE TEAR. 15. TIE NM FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL. BE 051ERAWXD UPON STE SCI. CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCM7ECT FOR DE HEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS. 16. BAOICFBL .SOX 10 ADHERE 10 MN/DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3677 (SELECT TOPSOIL. BARROW) AND 7O BE (951N0 7CP SOL FROM STE FREE OF ROOTS ROOKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH,, SUBSOIL DEBW5, AND LARGE WEEDS UNLESS WOOED OTHERWISE 17. ALL SIRE PLANTING BEDS (IW7HMN SILO AREAS) SHALL HAZE N® BARRXR FABBG 4' OF SHREDDED HAROMOAO BARK MULCH AND VALLEY -VIN BLACK DIAMOND (OR EQUAL) POLY EDGAIG 11E EDGING BULL BE PLACED 4TH SMOOTH CURVES AND AT LEAST 3• FROM DE CEDERS OF EVERGREEN was UTILIZE 0.815 AND SOE1WILKS FOR EDGING MERE POSSIBLE PARKING LOT ISLANDS 10 BE SODDED 041)4 SHREDDED HANID000D BARK MIXCII AROUND ALL TREES AND SHRUBS MULCH 7o 1,1,41121 DIVING CONDITIONS (MERE APPUCAB.E). 16. FOUR NIME5 OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD BARK MULCH SHALL BE USED MOUE ALL TREES WINN nor" AREAS 11 SHREDDED 444808 XO BARK WWI 4' DEEP SHALL BE PROVIDED N ALL PLANTING BEDS ADJACENT 70 SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEMATS 20. ALL LOTS AND WESTERN BERM TO BE 5000ED UNLESS OTHERM5E NOTED. SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX ALL S00 AREAS BULL 8E PREPARED arm 4' or TOPSOIL AND RAKED 70 REMOVE DEBRIS AND ENSURE DRAINAGE SLOPES OF S1 0R GREATER SHALL BE STANZA DISTURBED AREAS (NOT ASSOCIATED WIN PONDMNC OR WETLAND BUFFERS) OUTSIDE OF LOTS 10 BE SEEDED 44114 1NDOT 25-151 TURF GRASS SEED MIX PORONG AREAS AS NOTED ON PLAN TO BE SEEDED I7H MNOOT .13-261 (STLRMWATER SOUTH AND NEST), AND DISTURBED AMMO BUFFERS To 8E SEEDED WIAPPROTH 33-262 (DRY SWALE/POIND) MRDOT SEEDING MANUAL (2074) SHALL APPLY 10 THE PREPARATION. INSTALLATION. SEEDING RATE; MPLLCPWIG AND VAL 21. PROVIDE AMMG41701 TO ALL PLANTED AREAS ON STE IRRIGATION/ ILL 85 DESKiN/$L/XD BY LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TV PROVIDE SHOP DRA*MIGS IM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR 70 INSTALLATION OF PR/CATION SYSTEM. ALL INFORMATION ABOUT INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING CAN BE CBTAWED FROM DE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 22. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UI1X DE PLANT /S FUMY ESTABUSED OR IRRIGATION SYSTEM /5 OPERATIONAL OMMER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR 23. REPAID REPLACE 0R PROVIDE SOD/SEED AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO DE SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION. 24. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE 10 PROPERTY FROM PLANING OPERATIONS AT N0 COST TO OMEN 1 NO. 11/04/2014 PER CITY REVIEW DATE RE1A9 oNs mi 011 o.rn SNna4I. A I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct supervision vision and that I an a duly hhceneed Landscape Architect under the Ides of the State of Mlnnes0to. Oa % SJordal -Lk. # 22321 Date VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE OVERALL PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 27 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014 STATE AID + + + + + + + • �r;'• :•• +++ +++ +++ ++++ + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + ++ + ,•, + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + I.° + + + + + ++ . + + + + : + + + + + + + + + + + + + ': ++ + +1• 9 zo u in urg G HI('HWAY NO. BLOCK 21 0 eo 1100 MA IC SCALE M FEET 01) pm S,rr.Lt. htl I hereby certify that thla plan. specification or report has been prepared by me or under my direct super islon and that I am o duly licensed Landscape Architect under the Mrs of the State of Minnesota. Oan Sjorda1 —Uc. f 22321 Date VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 28 OF 33 SHEETS GATE: 11/04/2014 11 )XBERRY kRMS )AD MANIC SCALE M fi[T 1 N0. 11/04/2014 PER CITY RENEW DATE Ati 014 Ilan Son -LA AX1 1 hereby certify that this plan, specification or report hae been prepared by me or under my direct supervision vision and that 1 an o duly licensed landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dan SJordaaell —Lk. di 22321 Date: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE NORTH WEST PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 29 OF 33 SHEETS DA 11/04/2014 SIIAWNCC WOODS ROAD 2 NIA 3 3 JM 7 4 2 BL 5 4CK 3 11 12 3 NM L-- 7 8 13 H ti OUTLOT 8 w 11/04/2014 PER a1Y N0. DAZE Ran Sprat. ♦Sl 1 hereby may that this pan, specification or report has been prepared by ms or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly kissoof Ms S of Landscape Architect under the Dan Sp dd —Uc. 22321 bats: VILLAS AT MEDINA COUNTRY CLUB RACHEL PROPERTIES MEDINA, MN PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE NORTH PROJECT NO: 13-040 SHEET NO. 30 OF 33 SHEETS DATE: 11/04/2014