Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
10-09-2012
M.EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY OCTOBER 9, 2012 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Approval of September 11, 2012 draft Planning Commission minutes. 6. Public Hearing - Toll Brothers, Inc. - Requests Concept Plan Review of 125 single family residential homes on an 80 acre parcel located east of County Road 116 and south of Hackamore Road known as the Gorman Farm property (PID 01-118-23-21- 0004). 7. Public Hearing — Jacob Moser — Requests Variances to construct a new home in the Urban Residential (UR) zoning district along Ardmore Avenue (PID 18-118-23-24-0154). 8. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8, Section 825 of the Medina City Code related to Variances. 9. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8, Section 833 of the Medina City Code related to Public Buildings in the Industrial Park District. 10. Council Meeting Schedule 11. Adjourn POSTED IN CITY HALL October; 5, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crosby and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: September 13, 2012 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates September 18, 2012 City Council Meeting Ordinance Updates A) Wind Turbine/Renewable Energy Ordinance — The City Council enacted a moratorium on Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS) at the June 5 meeting and authorized a study on the matter. Staff has studied the existing regulations and prepared a report and potential ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission reviewed at their July 10, August 13, and September 11 meetings and provided direction, including direction to remove WECS from the list of uses allowed in residential districts. Staff will present the ordinance for City Council review at the September 18th meeting. B) Industrial Park Ordinance — staff is considering recommending changes to the Industrial Park zoning district with regards to building material requirements for structures utilized by governmental units to store materials. The City Council has indicated that they may support installing a "cover -all" building to store sand/salt at the new Public Works facility, which is not currently permitted by City Code. Land Use Application Reviews A) Enclave at Brockton final plat — south of Hamel Legion Park, east of The Enclave — The City Council granted preliminary approval at the July 17 meeting. The applicant has now requested Final Plat approval. Staff is conducting a preliminary review, and the item is tentatively scheduled for Council review on October 2. B) Woods of Medina Concept Plan, Toll Brothers — Toll Brothers have submitted a concept plan for review for a 125 -lot single-family subdivision on the Gorman Farm property east of County Road 116 and south of Hackamore. The item is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing at the October 9 Planning Commission meeting. C) Moser Variance — Jacob Moser has requested variances in order to construct a home on an existing vacant parcel in the Independence Beach Area (east of Ardmore Ave at the intersection of Balsam St. Requested variances are from the setback requirements from the ordinary high water level of Lake Ardmore, the front property line, and from an unused right-of-way. The item is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing at the October 9 Planning Commission meeting. D) Tamarack Ridge Preliminary Plat — Property Resources Development Co. has submitted a preliminary plat for an eight lot rural subdivision on approximately 80 gross acres northwest of the existing Deerhill Road between Willow Drive and Homestead. The applicant is contesting the suitable soils map as part of the application. Staff has determined that the application is incomplete for review and awaits additional information before scheduling a Public Hearing at a Planning Commission meeting. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 September 18, 2012 City Council Meeting E) Buckley Wind Energy Conversion System (WECS) CUP — 1582 Homestead Trail — Hanna Buckley has applied for a CUP to construct a 189 -foot wind turbine on their property and the application is incomplete for review at this time. The City Council has established a moratorium on the review, approval and construction of WECS and authorized a study on the City's regulations of this use. Review of the CUP cannot proceed until the moratorium expires. Additional Projects A) Mapping for Girl Scout Day of Service — staff has been working with Councilmember Weir to provide maps to local Girl Scout groups who intend to place stickers on catch basins which show that they drain to water bodies. B) Met Council listening session — staff attended a session with Councilmember Peterson kicking off the Met Council's planning process for the next round of Comprehensive Plan updates. The Met Council is holding these sessions before they start working on their vision. Their intent is to have a draft of the 2040 development framework by the end of 2013. C) Zoning Enforcement (lighting code violation) — staff sent an enforcement letter to two commercial properties related to lighting installed on signs without proper City approvals which may also violate the luminance and illumination standards of City Code. These lights appear to have been extinguished. Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 September 18, 2012 City Council Meeting 1 CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION 2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 3 Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4 5 6 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Charles Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners Robin Reid, Randy Foote, Kent Williams, 9 Kathleen Martin, V. Reid, Charles Nolan and John Anderson. 10 11 Absent: None 12 13 Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke 14 15 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 16 17 No public comments. 18 19 3. Update from City Council proceedings 20 21 Finke updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council. 22 23 4. Planning Department Report 24 25 Finke provided an update of upcoming Planning projects. 26 27 5. Approval of the August 13, 2012 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes. 28 29 Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Anderson, to approve the August 13, 2012 30 minutes with noted corrections. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: None) 31 32 6. Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code 33 related to Wind Energy Conversion Systems, solar panels, and geothermal heat 34 sources. 35 36 Finke stated that the staff report summarizes the major policy questions which remain 37 open. He stated that the Commission had recommended prohibiting WECS in 38 residential districts at their August meeting, and had recommended limitations in 39 teens of capacity and height. He noted that the ordinance was amended to allow for 40 either monopole or lattice towers. He directed the Commission's attention to the 41 minimum 300 foot setback requirement, as it was more restrictive than most 42 ordinances. 43 44 Public Hearing opened at 7:26 p.m. 45 1 1 Clarkson Lindley (1588 Homestead Trail) stated that his understanding is that the 2 Commission's recommendation was to disallow WECS in residential areas. He was 3 supportive of that and did not oppose allowing them along Highway 55. 4 5 Elizabeth Weir questioned if the Commission may want to discuss the limitation of 6 one WECS per lot, especially relating to shorter, helix turbines. Also, she wondered 7 if micro -wind may improve over time. 8 9 Public Hearing closed at 7:31 p.m. 10 11 V. Reid stated that she support allowing micro -wind on residential property. It is not 12 the Commission's role to consider the economies. Smaller turbines seem consistent 13 with rural character, they really are fitting. She would support large setbacks, but 14 thinks the City should be more open to renewable energy and property owners 15 attempting to be more self-sufficient. 16 17 Williams stated that he agrees with the old-timey windmills. He was concerned that 18 if you open up the door that something unintended may come in. Williams stated that 19 the City should wait until there is more demand. 20 21 Commissioners discussed the potential of allowing more than one shorter WECS on a 22 parcel, but maintaining the limitation of one per lot for WECS over 50 feet in height. 23 24 Finke inquired if the Commission was open to a reduced setback requirement for 25 shorter WECS. The consensus of the Commission was that this would be acceptable. 26 27 Motion by Williams, seconded by Anderson to recommend approval of the 28 ordinance with the following changes: 1) allowing up to two WECS per lot, 29 provided one of them is 50 feet in height or less; and 2) reducing the setback 30 requirements for WECS 50 feet in height or less to 100 feet. 31 32 Motion by V. Reid, seconded by Martin to amend the motion to recommend 33 allowing WECS within the Rural Residential zoning district under the following 34 circumstances: Minimum lot size 20 acres, maximum 50 feet in height, 35 minimum of 100 foot setback, and which shall be located within 100 feet of home 36 or barn structure. 37 38 Williams stated that he opposes the amendment. Although he agrees that existing 39 traditional turbines may be consistent. New ones are not consistent with this. He also 40 stated that the amended ordinance is supportive of renewable energy and it does not 41 need to be expanded further. 42 43 Foote agreed with Williams and stated that he does not believe that potential impacts 44 for residential properties are worth opening the door. 45 2 1 Anderson stated that he agrees with Williams and Foote, and added that the City 2 should be open to reconsidering in the future. 3 4 Nolan stated that he agrees with Williams and Foote, and added that he is concerned 5 with the clutter of non -operating turbines, especially when the production of 6 electricity is so limited. 7 8 Nolan called for a vote on the amendment. 9 Motion to amend failed 2-5 (in favor: V. Reid and Martin). 10 11 Nolan put the main motion to a vote. 12 13 Motion carried unanimously. 14 15 10. Council Meeting Schedule 16 Anderson agreed to attend the September 18 City Council meeting 17 18 11. Adjourn 19 20 Motion by Williams, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn at 8:32 p.m. Motion carried 21 unanimously. (Absent: None) 3 AGENDA ITEM: 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: October 4, 2012 MEETING: October 9, 2012 Planning Commission SUBJ: Toll Brothers — Woods of Medina — Concept Plan Review — 525 Hackamore Road (S of Hackamore, East of CR 116) — Public Hearing Review Deadline Complete Application Received: June 20, 2012 Review Deadline: August 19, 2012 (60 -day) Summary of Request Toll Brothers, Inc. has requested review of a Concept Plan for a potential single-family subdivision of the "Gorman Farms" property located east of County Road 116 and south of Hackamore Road. The property is approximately 80 acres is gross area and approximately 65.3 net acres. The applicant proposes 125 single family homes in the concept plan layout. The Concept Plan Review process allows the City to provide comments to an applicant before they complete full engineering designs. The applicant will have the opportunity to take the feedback from this process and incorporate it into a preliminary plat submittal. That process will include more specific engineering information, including a traffic study. The property is guided Low Density Residential (LDR) and requires a net density of 2.0-3.49 units/acre. The applicant's conceptual layout results in a net density of approximately 2.1 units/acre, taking into consideration property which the applicant proposes to dedicate to the City for park purposes. The applicant's concept plan is arranged consistent with the R1 zoning district, which is intended to implement the LDR land use. The property is currently farmed. There is a large wetland located in the northwest portion of the site and eight smaller wetland basins along the perimeter of the site. There is a three acre area of trees surrounding the homestead and also stands of trees along the perimeter of the site. An aerial of the site can be found at the top of the following page. One of the primary reasons that the applicant has applied for a Concept Plan Review is to receive feedback on whether the City is going to require land to be dedicated for a public park and, if so, where that land will be located. This decision may cause the applicant to make significant changes in the layout of the site. Comprehensive Plan As mentioned previously, the property is guided Low Density Residential. The Comprehensive Plan defines LDR as follows: Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Page 1 of 6 October 9, 2012 Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Low Density Residential (LDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 2.0 units per acre and 3.49 units per acre which are served or are intended to be served by urban services. The primary use in this area is single-family residential development. The areas designated for low density residential uses are located near to existing low density residential uses, natural resources and provide a transition between higher density residential districts and the permanent rural areas of the community. Proposed Site Layout The lots proposed in the concept plan appear consistent with the RI zoning district standards and the applicant has stated that they intend to meet these standards. The lots all appear to exceed 90 feet in width and 11,000 square feet in area. Following is a summary of the requirements of the R1 zoning district: Rl. Requirement Minimum Lot Size 11,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width 90 feet Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet Front Yard Setback 25 feet Front Yard Setback (garage) 30 feet Side Yard Setback (combined) 25 feet (15 & 10) Side Yard (corner) 25 feet Rear Yard Setback 30 feet Max. Hardcover 40% Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Concept Plan Review Page 2 of 6 October 9, 2012 Planning Commission Meeting The applicant proposes to develop the site beginning adjacent to County Road 116 and heading east and north in phases. The development is proposed to begin in the west because this is where a sewer connection is available. The applicant proposes to dedicate 4.69 acres for a public park in the northeast corner of the site. The applicant also proposes to dedicate a trail corridor in the southeast corner of the site which would be able to extend through the trees and continue south to Shawnee Woods Trail. The applicant identifies a trail along "Street B" which would connect Hackamore to County Road 116. The concept plan provides connections with surrounding property that is planned for future development. This will allow connections between neighborhoods and also limit the access points on County Road 116 and Hackamore Road. Staff believes there may be an opportunity to provide two connections to the properties to the north rather than the single connection shown. A sketch of the potential location can be found below: 1 Appr. 125 feet (req. lot depth) i 1 Appr. 125 feet r , �' -r-'' `�ti a\ (req. lot depth) Cu" rwi — n The streets within the concept plan are fairly straight along the south and east sides of the development. Staff recommends that opportunities are reviewed to alter the alignment for traffic calming and visual improvement. Wetlands There is a large wetland located in the northwest portion of the site and eight smaller wetland basins along the perimeter of the site. The applicant proposes to fill three of the small wetlands (approximately 650, 3000 and 4000 square feet) in their entirety and approximately 14,000 square feet of impacts on the large wetland in order to connect Street B to the north. The applicant will need to request Wetland Conservation Act approval for these impacts. Upland buffers will be required adjacent to the wetlands on the property. The applicant appears to have shown these widths correctly, but will need to mitigate for the buffers lost adjacent to the impacted wetlands as well. Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Page 3 of 6 October 9, 2012 Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting FEMA floodplain maps show a potential 500 -year floodplain over the large wetland on the property. Staff recommends that the applicant provide additional information related to culverts and overflow locations in order to better establish an elevation for this floodplain and whether there are concerns related to grading. Streets The applicant proposes a right-of-way width of 50 -feet internally. This is consistent with The Enclave and The Fields of Medina, but will need to be analyzed in relation to streets and utility when the plans are prepared to more detail. Staff recommends requiring a traffic study to determine what improvements will be necessary on Hackamore Road and County Road 116 in order to support this development. This traffic study must include planned development in Corcoran as well as Medina. Staff has discussed the possibility of the City Engineer completing this study and the applicant reimbursing the cost. Right-of-way needs for Hackamore and County Road 116 will be determined depending on the improvements required in the traffic study. Sewer/Water The concept plan shows sewer being extended from Foxberry Farms in order to serve the development and water being looped between Foxberry and Wild Meadows. This is consistent with the City's sewer/water plans. Staff recommends requiring the developer to install the sewer as deep as possible in order to serve as many properties along Hackamore Road as possible. This will reduce the number of homes which may need to be served by lift stations. The applicant is aware that the City does not permit lawn irrigation systems to be connected to City water and is planning to irrigate from the stormwater ponds on the sites, and to supplement the ponds with irrigation wells. Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review The applicant has submitted a conceptual grading plan, but intends to refine following concept plan comments. The current concept shows significant import of fill, but the applicant's engineer believes they can bring the site closer into balance when plans are more complete. Because this is a concept plan, the applicant has not submitted drainage calculations. The plan identifies conceptual stormwater pond locations, but does not identify improvements which would meet the City's volume control requirements. Future development plans should include calculations to show that proposed improvements are consistent with the City's Surface Water Management Plan and Stormwater Management ordinance and meets volume control and rate control standards. Public Works and the City Engineer strongly recommend that the City require a separate pipe system into which foundation draintiles can discharge. Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Page 4 of 6 October 9, 2012 Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting Tree Preservation, Buffer Yards and Landscaping It appears that a substantial number of trees will be removed around the homestead and along the tree lines. A fairly large stand of trees will be preserved around the wetlands in the southeast corner of the site. The preliminary plat will be subject to the City's tree preservation ordinance, which requires replacement if more than 15% of the significant trees are removed. The concept plan submittal did not include substantial information related to landscaping. Standard City ordinances would require two trees per single-family lot and would require bufferyards with a 0.1 opacity along County Road 116, 0.2 opacity along the eastern property line and 0.3 opacity along the southern property line and Hackamore Road. Park Dedication According to the concept plan, the site 79.97 gross acres with 11.76 acres of wetlands. The buildable area of the site for the purposes of park dedication would be 68.21 acres. The City's subdivision regulations requires up to 10% of the buildable property to be dedicated for park purposes, or 6.821 acres. The City may also choose to accept cash in -lieu of all or a portion of this land dedication in an amount equal to 8% of the pre -developed market value. Staff approximates this at $500,000, but it will be determined more precisely during the preliminary plat review. The applicant proposes 4.69 acres for a park in the northeast corner of the site. Approximately 0.56 acres of this area is wetland, and would not count towards park dedication requirements. Staff recommends that, if the City requires dedication of park land, the City should maximize the contiguous area of the land dedicated. Staff recommends discussion related to the location of the park. Perhaps an area more central to the property would be more convenient. Additionally, the northeast corner of the site has a bit of a slope, and it appears that flatter topography may better suit recreational activities. Staff recommends discussion on the trails shown on the concept plan and in the City's trail plan. Specifically, the Commission may wish to discuss whether trails should be required in some or all of these areas, or whether sidewalks are sufficient. The Park Commission reviewed and recommended that the City not require property for a City park on this property. The Park Commission believed private amenities are sufficient for this neighborhood, and noted that Foxberry and Wild Meadows both have existing private amenities. The nearest public park would be the Fields of Medina park which will be developed in the near future, which is approximately a mile away from the western edge of the subject property. The Park Commission recommended a trail along Hackamore in order to begin a connection between the trails on County Road 116 and County Road 101. Purpose of Concept Plan Review According to Section 825.63 and Section 825.71 of the City Code: "Concept plan review serves as the basis for informal conceptual discussion between the city and the applicant regarding a specific land use proposal. It is designed to assist the applicant in preparing a formal land use application for the city's consideration. The purpose of the concept plan review is to identify significant issues, suggest design considerations and discuss requirements of the city's official controls. Concept plan review is optional, not mandatory, for qualified applicants. Concept plan Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Page 5 of 6 October 9, 2012 Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting review is for the purpose of discussion and comment only. Any opinions, comments or observations provided to the applicant by the city staff, planning commission or city council shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the proposed project. The applicant may not infer any future approval of a formally submitted land use application based upon the concept plan review and no vested rights shall accrue as a result thereof." Staff Comments Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City Council begin by discussing whether the City should require property for a park on this property. Depending on this feedback, the applicant will likely need to significantly change the layout. In addition to feedback on this question, staff provided a number of comments throughout this report, and the main points are summarized below for convenience: 1) The preliminary plat and development plans shall be consistent with relevant City regulations and meet the standards of the RI zoning district. 2) The applicant shall provide for a traffic study to determine necessary improvements, which shall be installed at the applicant's cost. 3) The site layout should save as many trees as possible along the perimeter of the site. 4) The applicant shall provide two connections to the properties to the north, each approximately a distance equal to a lot depth from the boundaries of the properties. 5) Street alignment shall be reviewed so determine if curves can be added to the streets. 6) The applicant shall submit the wetland delineation for review and approval and apply for Wetland Conservation Act approval for any proposed wetland impacts. 7) The applicant shall submit information requested by the City Engineer to determine what limitations, if any, shall be enforced relative to the 500 -year floodplain. 8) The applicant shall install the sewer pipes as deep as possible in order to limit the number of homes to be served by lift station. 9) The applicant shall submit stormwater plans along with the preliminary plat which meet the City's surface water management plan and stormwater maintenance ordinance. 10) The applicant shall submit plans acceptable to the Public Works Director for the discharge of footing draintile/sump pump drainage. Attachments 1. Engineer's Comments 2. Narrative from Applicant 3. Potential house elevations 4. Concept Plan received by the City 9/7/2012 Toll Brothers - Woods of Medina Page 6 of 6 October 9, 2012 Concept Plan Review Planning Commission Meeting WSB h Engineering • Planning • Environmental • Construction X A.ccuc'iufrc, /rfc. September 20, 2012 Mr. Dusty Finke Planner City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: City Project: The Woods of Medina, L-12-090 WSB Project No. 2065-210 Dear Dusty: 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We have reviewed the concept plan submittal dated September 7, 2012, for The Woods of Medina subdivision. The plans include street and utility improvements to serve 125 proposed single family homes. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters. 1. The proposed sanitary sewer is shown discharging to the Foxberry Farms sanitary sewer system. The City should review the Foxberry Farms sewer system to verify there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed Woods of Medina site. The analysis should include reviewing pipe and lift station capacities. 2. The plans propose to directional drill gravity sanitary sewers at 1% grades. Our experience has shown that drilling gravity sewers at grades less than 2% can be problematic. We recommend the grades for all directionally drilled gravity sewer be increased to at least 2% or the pipes be installed using the open cut method. 3. The plans show a roadway connection to Hackamore Road and also to County Road 116. The ultimate build out of this site will generate a significant number of new trips onto these two roadways. A traffic study should be completed to analyze what impacts this subdivision will have. At a minimum the study should review necessary improvements to Hackamore Road and County Road 116, roadway intersection locations, possible sight distance issues, and overall impacts to the transportation system. 4. Proposed grading shows slopes steeper than the 3:1 maximum the City allows in some areas. The grading plans should be revised so that no slopes exceed the 3:1 maximum allowed. 5. The City should review whether or not a trail along Street A should be added to the plan set. 6. The proposed lots shown along the north side of Street A and south of Outlot C will for all practical purposes have no back yard. The applicant should consider revising the site layout to provide a useable backyard space for these lots. Minneapolis • St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K A02065-210\AdminDoes\The Woods of Medina Concept Plan Review-092012.doc The Woods of Medina September 20, 2012 Page 2 7. The City does not allow municipal water to be used for irrigation. Final plans should include an irrigation plan and details that demonstrates how the system will work. 8. All water main stubs should end with a hydrant. 9. More detail should be provided for the proposed water main connection along Hackamore Road. 10. The City should review the proposed street stubs to verify they are located in the appropriate locations. 11. The City should review the proposed park dedication shown on the plans. The areas shown as park dedication are generally wet and we would anticipate poor soil conditions. Please contact me at 763-231-4865 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. /074 /541_, Tom Kellogg K \02065-210\Admin\Docs\The Wood. of Medina Concept Plan Res ie..-092012. doe rothers America's Luxury Horne Builder® Gorman Farm PROJECT NARRATIVE SEP 7 2012 Toll Brothers, Inc. ("Toll") is proposing a residential development for the 80 -acre parcel east of County Road 116 and south of Hackamore Road — The Gorman Farm. The project will consist of 125 detached single family homes and one amenity package lot including a pool house, pool, and tot lot. An attractive landscaped corridor along Country Road 116, as well as an entrance feature will greet prospects, neighbors, and homeowners as they approach and pass by the project. The proposed plan compliments the surrounding land uses and utilizes the constraints of the site with innovative design ideas. Ownership The property is currently owned by Gorman Farm, LLC. Plat Name The Woods of Medina. Developer Toll will be the sole developer of this project. Toll is a national, publicly traded (NYSE: TOL) developer/home builder founded in 1967. Toll currently operates in 20 states and has successfully developed five projects in the Twin Cities - Maple Grove, Eagan, Prior Lake, and Eden Prairie. Project Financing Toll fiinds 100% of its projects with existing cash reserves or with the use of its existing credit facility. Zoning Classification The existing zoning classification is RR-UR. The proposed zoning is R1 -Single Family. Variances Requested The proposed plan does not require any variances. Existing Land Use The property is currently being actively farmed. Phasing and Construction Schedule The project is planned to be developed in two phases. Development will commence at the west entrance adjacent to County Road 116 and continue east. Phase I will include approximately 50% of the project, and Phase II will include the balance. Development Method Toll will be the sole operator of the project. This includes procuring approvals, development of the project, as well as sales and construction of the homes. The homes will be sold to individual buyers. New York Stock Exchange • Symbol TOL Corporate Office 250 Gibraltar Rd. • Horsham, PA 19044 • (215) 938-8000 tollbrothers.com Legal Instruments A homeowners association will be established that will be charged with collecting monthly dues to manage the common area maintenance, trash/recycling removal, and amenity package. Single Family Detached Architecture Toll will offer multiple detached single-family home designs, each with multiple and unique elevations. The exterior materials of the homes will include a combination of masonry components (brick/cultured stone), stucco, and fiber cement siding. In addition to the standard floor plans and elevations, Toll offers it's homebuyers a wide variety of pre -designed and priced options to customize their homes to meet their individual tastes and needs. Please see the enclosed sample elevation and floor plan renderings. Pool House Architecture A pool house consisting of an entrance breezeway, male/female restroom with showers, storage room, pool equipment room, and covered patio will be constructed. The exterior materials of the pool house will include cultured stone and fiber cement siding. See the enclosed rendering of a similar pool house built by Toll in our Northeast Region. Signage An entrance monument will be located on the out lot north of the County Road 116 entrance. The monument will be professionally designed and will be maintained by the project's home owners association. The monument will feature the community name, be constructed with masonry products, and landscaped appropriately. Lighting Lighting will include a lighted entrance feature with up lighting and standard street lights per city requirements. Disposition of Excess Land The net area of the property is 65.31 acres. 5.94 acres will be conveyed to the City for a future park that will include ball field(s), tot lot, tennis court(s), parking lot, and trail. Water and Wetlands The field wetland delineation is completed. The delineation report is in process. Soils Braun Intertec is currently completing a Geotechnical Evaluation of the project. Conceptual Plans for The Woods of Medina Medina, Minnesota Presented by: Toll Brothers, Inc. — CO NSULTANT CONTACT LIST: DEVELOPER/OWNER TOLL BROTHERS, INC. 1440 STEEPLECHASE LANE EAGAN, MN 55122 TEL 651-365-0601 FAX 651-365-0605 CONTACT: ALEX M ARTIN GEOTECHNICAL BRAUN INTERTEC 11001 HAM PSHIRE AVENUE S. MINNEAPO LIS, MN 55438 TEL 952-995-2000 FAX 952-995-2020 CONTACT: HENRY VLOO, PE CIVIL ENGINEER M FRA INC. 14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140 PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 TEL 763-476-6010 FAX 763-476-8532 CONTACT: MATTHEW DUENWALD, PE SURVEYOR MFRA INC. 14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140 PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 TEL 763-476-6010 FAX 763-476-8532 CONTACT: MARCUS HAMPTON, RLS LANDSCAPING M FRA INC. 14800 28TH AVENUE, SUITE 140 PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 TEL 763-476-6010 FAX 763-476-8532 CONTACT: KEVIN TEPPEN, RLA VICINITY MAP NO SCA LE —SHEETINDEX SHEET DESCRIPTION C1.01 1 TITLE SHEET C2.01 I EXISTING CONDITI ONS PLAN C3.01 CONCEPT SITE PLAN C4.01 CONCEPT GRADING PLAN C6.01 CONCEPT UTILITY PLAN infra 1 engineering suweying planning energy 14800 2811 Ave. N, Ste 140 Ply mouth, Minnesota 55447 (7631 476 .6010 telephone (7631 476.8532 facsimile vrw w.mla.com Client TOLL BROTHERS, INC. ? oil 'Br oth ers ) Project THE WOODS OF MEDINA L ocation MEDINA, MINNESOTA Certification I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct s up ervision and that I am a duly licensed professional ENGINEER under the la ws of the state of Minn esota . Matthew R. Duenwald R egistration No. 45403 Date: 09/07/2012 If approblecontact us f0 a wet sig ned copy of this plan whi ch is a vailabl e upo n request at MFRA, Plymo uth. MN office. Summary Designed: MRD Draw n:IN Approved: MRD B ook / Page: Phase: CONCEPT Initial Issued: 09/07/2012 Revision History No .Date By Submittal / Revision Sheet Title TITLE SHEET Sheet No. Revision C1.01 Project N o. T0L19393 O HACKAMORE ROAD - - 1 \N 1... I\ I / /-1- � ^' - , ..,' �� -�\ /\\ ` 1 �\ \ \ 1.1 �, 1 , \ \\\ I . ..._. ..1 I I \ \`\ 9020 R Cf6MEA120 201UND r'- 91 IMR4 BN 9/4/2012 p 5/4 500-YR FLO ODPL AIN FEMA FLOOD MAP ZONE X (SHADED) I 1 COLE Or 201499190-44 n.0J10 BY IOU ON 9/4/2012 I I 1 I I 1 HACKAMORE ROA / s0 3 101 %0 EDa BE 1EUNE .s1m rc nu n By WM ON 9/4/2012 T .' YR. 4 V 4) i/ err j� 59 tee14/ Y 7b /1 s • 5 11 00:.1 - LEGEND • FOUND MONUME%— 1- p SET M ONUMENT o—>-0 — O ELECTRIC METER 0—>> —• —_... ,_... ....._... LIGHT >> 2_1 L_1 AIR CONDITIONER 0--vt� 0 —GUY ANCHOR 0—ur 6 HANDICAP STALL — 06 UTILm P OLE —ow — • GUARD POST _• BOLLARD —+— _._._ - SIGN a E060 CC On)[A1W MEn'No 9) 1089 CN 9/4/2012 WATERMAIN SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER FLARED END SECTION ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER TELEPHONE PEDESTAL GAS METER OVERHEAD WIRE CHAIN LINK FENCE IRON FENCE WIRE FENCE WOOD FENCE EASEME NT LINE SETBACK LINE RIGHT OF ACCESS CONCRETE CURB BUILDING LINE BUILDING CANOPY BITU MINOUS SURFACE CONCRETE SURFACE LANDSCAPE SURFACE DECIDU OUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE PROPERTY SUMMARY L Subject prop erties address is 525 Hackam ore R oad, its property identification number is 0111823210004. 2. The gr oss area of the subject property is 79.97 Acres or 3,483,412 Square Feet. 3. The subject property is zoned RR-UR, per the City of Medina's zoning map, dated January 20, 2010. NORTH 0 120 240 SCALE IN FEET fra engineering suiyeying planning energy 14800 2801 Ave N, Ste 140 Pymougt Minnesota 55447 (7631 476.6010 telephone (7631476,8532 facsimile www.mfra.com Client TOLL BROTHERS, INC. cBr others Project THE WOODS OF MEDINA Location MEDINA, MINNESOTA Certification I hereby certify that this plan, Specificati on or report was prepar ed by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly lic ens ed professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state of Minnes ota. Matthew R. D uenwald Registrati on No .45403 Date: 09/07/2012 If applicable, c ontact us for a w et sign ed c opy of this plan which is available upon request at MFRA, Im. , Plymouth , MN office . Summary Designed: 1090 Drawn: IN Appr oved: men Book/ Page: Phase:CONCEPT Initial Issu ed: 09/07/2012 Revision Hist ory No. Date By Submittal / Revision Sheet Title EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN Sheet No. Revision C2.01 Project No. T0L19393 Se p 07.2012 -1,14,rn- E«,ra.939ae .R1,3 201 p 0 z 0; U M ONUMENT SIGN i ONUMENT 516N _. ._.__... ._ . _ .......__.... _ ..........__ __.........._ .---- _.. .........-- -. ...._ ..._ .... _.........__...---_.... moryuMENrsiyrys HACKAMORE ROAD 64 m. =R SNRMWATER/ POND OUTLOT WETLA ND IMPACT 3,897 SF 0.09 AC I I J___J__—J.. __I__L____y/ V/ \ „-_....... N1. STRE A .1 EXISTING TREELINE TRAIL r WETLAND IMPACT 11,4505F 0.26 AC OUTLOT C 30 WETLAND BUFFER ITYPI 15' BUFFER SETB ACK 090) 15BU FFER SETBA CK (TYP) STREET H WETL AND IMPACT 2,626 5F 0.06 AC OUTLOT ( TO Bf oBmuTep([a F+lw ) `LI WTI TI FL, UWILD IL J�a �� St 8 3/9 `.: /` " /// WETLS NT IMPACT 3,091 SF 007 AC 20' WETLAND BUFFER (TY0I 0 3 3 3 1J 8T NTUMINOUS - LEGEND PR OP OSED EXISTING PR OPERTY LIMIT CURB & GUTTER EASE MENT BUILDING RETAINING WALL WETLAND LIMITS TREELINE - DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY AREA GROSS SITE AREA LESS WETLAND LESS WETLAND BUFFER NET SITE ARE A 3,483,412 SF 79.97 AC 512,389 SF 11.76 AC 126,040 SF 2.89 AC 2,844,983 SF 65 .31 AC AREA TO BE DEDICATED FOR PARK OUTLOTS E & F 204,382 SF 4.69 AC TRAIL 54,280 SF 1 .25 AC TOTAL PARK DEDICATION 258,66216 5.94 AC DEVELOP MENT DENSITY (EXCLUDING PARK AREA) 126 UNITS / 59 .37 AC = 2.12 UNITS/ACRE LOT SUMMARY NUMBER OF LOTS OUTLOTS SETBACKS FRONT YARD REAR YARD SIDE YARD SIDE YARD AT CORNER MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE ZONING EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING 126 30 FEET 30 FEET 25' COMBINED (15'/10') FEET 25 FEET 90 FEET 11,000 SF RR-UR R1 DEVELOPMENT NOTES A. ALL DIMENSI ONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT. B. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE BACK OF CURB TO BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED . BACK OF CURB I5 SHOWN GRAPHICALLY ONLY. C. ALL AREAS ARE R OUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FO OT. D. STREET N AMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY. E. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED OVER ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES AND UP TO THE HIGH WATER LEVEL OF ALL PONDS F. STREET B RIGHT OF WAY IS TO BE 60 FEET IN WIDTH. THE REMAINING STREET RIGHT OF WAYS ARE TO BE 50 FEET IN WIDTH . G. THE STREET SECTION SHALL BE 28' BACK TO BACK . EXISTI NG TREELINE EXISTING TREELINE NORTH 0 120 240 SCALE IN FEET infra engineeringsu rveying planning energy 14800 2881 Av e 8, 018 140 Plymouth Minnesota 55447 17631 476.6010 telephone [7631 476.8532 facsimile www.mfra .co m Client TOLL BROTHERS, INC . ( 'T oll Broth ers Project THE WOODS OF MEDINA Location MEDINA, MINNESOTA Certification I h er eby certify that this plan, specifi cation or report was prepared by me or und er my dir ect sup er vision and th at I am a duly lice nsed professi onal ENGINEER u nd er th e laws of the state of Minn es ota. Matthew R. Duenwald Registration No .45403 Date: 09/07/2012 If applicable, contact us f ora wet signed c opy of this pla n which is available upo n request at MFRA , I nc ., Plymouth, MN office. Summary Design ed: MRD Drawn: IN Appr oved: Mai, Bo ok/ Page: Phase: CONCEPT India' Issued: 09/07/2012 Revision History N o.Date By Submittal / Revision Sheet Title CONCEPT SITE PLAN Sheet No. Revision C3.01 Pr oject No. T0L19393 r4,,mO ,tCTSVO U9 (\C....a3n,30 ,. WETL AND MP IACT 4057 0.26 AC, WETLAND IMPACT 11 3, 897 SF --17.,` 0 09 AC WETLAND IMPACT 3,091 SF 0.07 AC r OUTLOT H ., ,nac / I //,*.20,,,i 20' WETLAND BUFFER ( PCP) LEGEND PROP OSED EXISTING PROPERTY LIMIT CURB & GUTTER STOR M SEWER DRAINTILE BUILDING RETAINING WALL WETLAND LI MITS TREELINE SPOT ELEVATION C ONTOUR RIP RAP OVERFLOW ELEV. S OIL BORINGS 0-- N -' 1 0- 0 -0 00000000000 962 .5 962.5 x .•+DF xxx z - WETLAND SUMMARY WETLAND IMPACTS MITIGATI ON REQUIRED (T O BE OBTAINED FR OM WETLAND BANK) 21 ,064 SF 42,128 SF NORTH 0 120 240 SCALE IN FEET fra engineering surveying planning energy 14800 28th Ave. 8, Ste 140 Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 f7631 476 .6010 telephone (7631 476.8532 facsimile www .mfra .com Client TOLL BROTHERS, INC . 'Toll Br others Project THE WOODS OF MEDINA L ocation MEDINA, MINNESOTA Certificati on I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct super vision and that I am a duly licensed professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state of Minnesota. Matthew R. Duenwald R egistration N o.45403 Date: 09/07/2012 I applic able , conta ct us for a wet si gned copy of this plan which is available up on req uest at INFR A, Inc., Plymouth, MN office. Summary Designed: MR D Drawn: 16 Approved: MRD Book / Page: Phase:C ONCEPT Initial Issued: 09/07/2012 Revisi on History N o.Date By Submittal / Revision Sheet Title CONCEPT GRADING PLAN Sheet No . Revision C4.01 Project No. T0L19393 " E r W A T E R I ! W . w t J I s 0 1 1 . 0 2 ^ , _ 1 1 ��1 �� \ . . I N V f l 2 1 . 9 , c l \ 1 1 1 \ \ r . e ^ D I E C T I O N A L O R E \ 0 l E C S A N . S T U B \ 1 1 1 1 8 1 , 9 8 0 . 0 I �� 8 ^ W O S T U B I \ \ O U T L A L M H - 0 3 I N V - n . 2 1 9 9 3 . 2 I N V " 9 2 2 . 4 S T R E E T B E C W A T E R M A I N S T O R M W A T S R P O N D O U T L O T I S T O R M W A T E R P O N D 8 " W A T E R M A I N r �%�% _ �%` �%�% M N 2 M n 2 I N V 9 9 6 . 1 3 N V N 9 ) . 3 8 ^ S A N . S T U B _ 8 , I N V = 9 9 5 . 2 W M S T U B - 3 0 N V = 1 0 0 1 . 0 S T R E E T B , I I I I I K O K I O R E , R O A D 8 . W A T E R M A I N / " - % - - m . . . ` _ _ ` t I t I I I 7 7 i T . _ . . . . . . . I S T R E E T H a ^ w M s r u B f a ' W A T E R M A I N A N S T e ��5 : N 5 W R �� N V = 9 9 3 . 1 U B I - 1 - L _ r . . L 1 . O U T L O T ( T O H E D E d u T E p T o C r O 1 L % / 1 / " 1 I i n 7 r I T I T 1 1 , ' I I I - - _ - \ ' , , - o f U H V u = 1 1 : 1 1 L I I ; ; C 4 ' / / y ��, r M N - ] A % / I 9 9 0 . ` f R ��F T S T O R M W A T E R P O N D M K 2 8 N W 1 0 0 3 . 0 . ' M N 1 2 I N V = 9 8 2 . 0 M N 2 9 I N V = 1 0 0 6 . 0 M N - 1 9 A I N V = 9 9 8 S T R E E T G W A T E R M A I N 0 1 , 1 0 0 3 1 L E G E N D P R O P O S E D E X I S T I N G C U R B & G U T T E R S T O R M S E W E R 0 - �%�% - I I S A N R A R Y S E W E R 0 - �% I P F O R C E M A I N ( S A N . ) 0 - �% n l �%- 0 W A T E R M A I N E A S E M E N T D R A I N T I L E G A S L I N E E L E C T R I C T E L E P H O N E U D U E U T � D D 4 3 O 0 O O o n ' o 0 9 b 0 0 0 U G U T N O R T H 0 1 2 0 2 4 0 f r a e n g i n e e r i n g s u r v e y i n g p l a n n i n g e n e r g y 1 4 8 0 0 2 8 t h A v e 6 , S t e 1 4 0 P l y m o u t h , M i n n e s o t a 5 5 4 4 7 ( 7 6 3 1 4 7 6 . 6 0 1 0 t e l e p h o n e ( 7 6 3 1 4 7 6 . 8 5 3 2 f a c s i m i l e w o v . m f r a . c o m C l i e n t T O L L B R O T H E R S , I N C . 3 6 1 1 ' B r o t h e r s - ) P r o j e c t T H E W O O D S O F M E D I N A L o c a t i o n M E D I N A , M I N N E S O T A C e r t i f i c a t i o n I h e r e b y c e r t i f y t h a t t h i s p l a n , s p e c i f i c a t i o n o r r e p o r t w a s p r e p a r e d b y m e o r u n d e r m y d i r e c t s u p e r v i s i o n a n d t h a t I a m a d u l y l i c e n s e d p r o f e s s i o n a l E N G I N E E R u n d e r t h e l a w s o f t h e s t a t e o f M i n n e s o t a . M a t t h e w R . D u e n w a l d R e g i s t r a t i o n N o . 4 5 4 0 3 D a t e : 0 9 / 0 7 / 2 0 1 2 I f a p p l i c a b l e , c o n t a c t u s f o r a w e t s i g n e d c o p y o f t h i s p l a n w h i c h i s a v a i l a b l e u p o n r e q u e s t a t M F R A , I n c . , P l y m o u t h , M N o f f i c e . S u m m a r y D e s i g n e d : M R D D r a w n : 1 5 A p p r o v e d : M R D B o o k / P a g e : P h a s e : C O N C E P T I n i t i a l I s s u e d : O a / 0 2 / 2 0 1 2 R e v i s i o n H i s t o r y N o . D a t e B y S u b m i t t a l / R e v i s i o n S h e e t T i t l e C O N C E P T U T I L I T Y P L A N S h e e t N o . R e v i s i o n C 6 . 0 1 S C P 0 7 2 0 1 1 . 1 U , . , . 2 1 a , v 6 o l E c , s T o u 9 a u . 3 g 1 - C 6 0 1 . n n d . , g S C A L E I N F E E T P r o j e c t N o . T O L 1 9 3 9 3 T VC. Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: 19i.;Z4 K, k -Ft j S c c,t,.(S,,,,t (please print) Address: "Z 67 ; C - Sic., S C 1 P2 --ti-- .., Telephone (optional): Representing: ,2 c_ Agenda Item (list number and letter): 19( 4). - e / - i /s' z• 3- 2 / , `" 4 Comments: - ' i fs_c_."Q.43 ,,,,,...a-- l A.;9. "` se -;"4- 0-(' -- j - 0. .v3 S i`.,v .1e'�'.�-. e -a--) ,,,,,4- lr rA-4 ` c%2--1 ctc.-t.E / 2t,' <•�" de" alt .0-1 Ie,C, / , , K n_ s dr <; ---)---9, kr e L; -, jyc,!) 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 \ t Y Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: Public Forum Agenda Item x.612= L._611 -a✓`, f J l /(p ease print) Address: �'7(;"---) / .S ;(/�� 4 f C(:) —c € -- Telephone (optional): Representing: l Agenda Item (list number and letter): />>> o (0 Com ents: ,� y 1 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 G ‘ T V Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: � --)0 (� 4VS Cam' " Public Forum Agenda Item Address: 2) LIB n (please prim ` (^ Telephone (optional): 4[ Z- — 3 &A ( T Representing: tA)/ L-6 WI 0901"-i 5 -- Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: %�� N l� Pc) Ys Z 1 ' 4 !!-- ))/71/ i `1'r'-- + i L.- /1,i -77O'' 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 G , t V o Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: 1 eb C 4 ✓� �/t Public Forum Agenda Item 32..-2 /(fs 67- 42 —/Address: N C �T"-�� Telephone (optional Representing:Jo ail,74,4 u4 - Agenda Item (list number and letter): 6' 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 G % T Y MEDINA Name of Speaker: I iI Comment Card V C/4n4‘tAAJvLe-c___- Public Forum Agenda Item (please print) Address: _ () )00 k Telephone (optional): Representing: Agenda Item (list number and Comments: letter): C.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 G, T Y o Comment MEDINA l l I Name of Speaker: Z= c- k L- V l + Card Public Forum Agenda Item (please print) Address: 3 0 5 �.Jrue,e : Cl ( , Telephone (optional): Representing: Agenda Item (list number and letter): Comments: Zre.tL_ /,n¢ ti SC kiLAAIV 5 r)c,, - aV ,c) CkeelareA roc?, 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 , , T Y Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker: C //-/c- r = `= Public Forum Agenda Item - _,- (please print) Address: () S1/,1c,.-,-,,-c- cjoc,^S Telephone (optional): Representing: Se -c f Agenda Item (list number and letter): T c -)c: c c `_ /4-€).c.Va i,1 c',- o.>.5 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 7 Y 0 A crook. Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: ' O 3 ( ,i. $ 5 /U S' (p ase print) Address: 6 7o Cka tti) 4 0 (I- 3 Telephone (optional): 6 1'2 L(8 / l G Representing: /1/L, 7 ' e t 4 (-mot ,,,,,,,,_ wv,ic�f v1e L.i141-,c,.1-1.4vck. ` Agenda Item (list numbe . nd letter): C Com nts: ( c e„ ,,, ' A,,rrri c ,, r 1, •,.,.,z, I Vt 4. w' 6. o ,w.. 4,, G - - • s r,A.v- r.,.' tot S' 0Y--Ni p,, 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 T Y o c% Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item ,�, MEDINA Name of Speaker: zeckl c\iitAddress: ^:A (per E; t�plb eL� c,,__,„,_____ Telephone (optional): 41 Z--' 2i7cr C) lc' Representing: 1A f Vf, 'vA-054 (7)/1- ( Gt .s —'I,' 'S Agenda Item (list number and letter): 4 -1 1 i/b-3 N. f '' -1 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 G t V Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA Name of Speaker: I TJ w-[GS�,f-c.4.,., 1 p Address: ti1-t 7 j (please print) ( F Telephone (optional): Representing: S e /c Agenda Item (list numlief"a2d letter): —F4/ 15 t & f - 0.1 h 42/ . 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 G, t V o A Comment Card MEDINA Name Speaker: 1 --,o Public Forum Agenda Item '---p of -e:�. Fr. r,, lei-: -L c-3 (please print) Address: 5.5- (- _ w vG_ 1. Telephone (optional): 7‘, - 7 4Z- 4 -cc Representing: rog_: LL/e- Agenda Item (list number and letter): b Comments: j-iovtl v,1 k w -Fr-ti A 1— d---> , rz- _mac !?S 72 1'- r r►Prlov 'tE?-c t< zrciz-Tyl ( 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 MEDINA Name of Speaker: Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item Y 1 i'' f fl LI (p1ase print) Address: (,9 -J tAQ0_ (.. mu 12€. gcl Telephone (optional): Representing: �€ I R. Agenda Item (list number Comments: t\o� ,V and letter): W \\ 11 Cc�'-'�Pc t- our pc\o �,r ri C ik 5°L`J rh '%'v5 iZ aL- `l In Wovevy�ievL** r Sit 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 G% 7 Y O F Comment Card MEDINA Name of Speaker` ti t-,—i \.C.,::2,\,\, ,-- C ', r '� Public Forum Agenda Item ^\ �1�(\u _L\. (please'rint) Address: _N �-) J \\Ci\C_ \(4`t1(N. 31..CN Telephone (optional): Representing: C, Agenda Item (list number and letter): lam.. Comments:'.) \ `a,�\-N4",,, s.;;., `. _ t;spr\ . 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 G , ? V O R Comment Card Public Forum Agenda Item MEDINA r ID Name of Speaker: rr' _) p, 7 Splease print) Address: 7/6 ,`j ) :'d!!'L' Telephone (optional): Representing: 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 AGENDA ITEM 7 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONS:ULTAN.TS, 1,NC, 1 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, M N 55422 Telephone: 763.231 .2555 Facsimile: 763.231 .2561 planners@nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Medina Planning Commission Scott Johnson, City Administrator FROM: Nate Sparks, Consulting Planner DATE: October 3, 2012 RE: Moser Variance Request FILE NO: L-12-089 INTRODUCTION Jacob Moser has made a request for a variance from the front yard, wetland buffer, and lake setbacks to construct a house on an unaddressed property on Ardmore Avenue. The applicant is proposing to construct a 2.5 story house that is proposed to be 15 feet from the right-of-way of Ardmore Avenue, 15 feet from the undeveloped Palm Street right-of-way, 55 feet from Lake Ardmore, and 10 feet from the Upland Wetland Zone buffer. ANALYSIS Zoning Ordinance/Comprehensive Plan The site is zoned UR, Urban Residential and is guided for a Medium Density Residential land use in the Comprehensive Plan. The site is also located in the Lake Admore Shoreland District, which is classified as a Recreational Development lake. Site The site is an unaddressed parcel of land located on Lake Ardmore. The parcel is north of the undeveloped Palm Street right-of-way and across the street from 2945 Ardmore Avenue, which is located at the intersection of Ardmore and Balsam Street. Originally the parcel was three platted lots, as the legal description is Lots 9, 10, and 11 of Block 21. The parcel was combined into one and compares to the Urban Residential & Shoreland District standards thusly: Standard Requirement Moser Parcel UR/Riparian Lot Area 9,000 sq. ft./ 20,000 sq. ft. 18,520 sq. ft.* Width at ROW Setback 60 feet 120 feet Width at Lake Setback 75 feet 125 feet Lot Depth 100 feet 105 feet * Parcel created prior to the adoption of the current Shoreland Ordinance Moser Variance Page 1 AGENDA ITEM 7 Adjacent to this property, the elevation at the edge of the improved road surface is 968 feet. This drops to 966 at the front lot line and to 964 at the 30 foot line. About 60 feet into the property, the 500 year floodplain elevation of 962.7 is reached. The 100 year floodplain is 962.3. The Ordinary High Water mark for Lake Ardmore is 959.8 and is located about 115 feet from the center of the front property line. Adjacent to Lake Ardmore there is a wetland area that is delineated on the survey provided by the applicant. This wetland area is about 30 feet in width along the lake. The wetland is an "Other Preserve" designation on the Wetland Management Classification Map, meaning there must be an average 35 foot wide buffer with a minimum of 25 feet. Proposed Construction Mr. Moser is proposing to construct a two-story walk out house on the parcel. The footprint of the proposed house, porch, and garage is 1,859 square feet. The applicant is seeking variances for setbacks to the Ardmore Avenue right-of-way, undeveloped Palm Street right-of-way, Lake Ardmore, and the Upland Buffer Zone. Standard Required Proposed Ardmore Avenue ROW 30 15 Palm Street ROW 30 15 Lake 75 55 Upland Buffer Zone Setback 15 10 Impervious Surface Max 25.00% 13.41% Structure Height 2.5 stories / 30 feet 2 stories / 26.8 The proposed location of the house is towards the southern side of the property. There are drainage concerns on the northern property line as the water drains from Pine Street to Lake Ardmore. This location allows for the drainage way to be preserved. In order to accommodate the construction of the house, the applicant is proposing to raise the elevation of the property near the right-of-way. The applicant estimates between 400 and 500 cubic yards of fill will be needed. This will allow for the garage to be placed above the grade of the road allowing for a 4% driveway grade. The applicant states that by placing the house on grade, the driveway would have a negative grade. Tree Preservation There are a total of 36 significant trees on the site. For this type of development, there is an allowance for removal of 20% which is 7 trees. The applicant is proposing to remove 10 trees, which would be over the allowed removal. Thus, tree replacement is required. The average size of tree being removed is 19 inches in diameter. Therefore, the applicant must replace the equivalent of three 19 inch trees, which is 57 inches in total. The applicant shall be required to present a tree replacement plan pursuant to the requirements of Section 828.41 and provide the requisite security as a condition of any approval and prior to the issuance of any building permit. Wetlands As mentioned, there is a delineated wetland adjacent to Lake Ardmore. The applicant is required Moser Variance Page 2 by Section 828.43 to provide a 35 foot wide average buffer to the wetland. This buffer is not allowed to be less than 25 feet in width. There is a required setback to the Upland Buffer Zone established by this average buffer of 15 feet. The applicant is proposing a setback of 10 feet. The applicant is required to provide Upland Buffer Zone Markers, easements over the Upland Buffer Zone, and a vegetation plan as a condition of any approval and prior to the issuance of any building permit. This information could be created in consort with the Tree Replacement Plan mentioned above. In exchange for the reduced setback to the Upland Buffer Zone, the applicant will need to exceed City standards found in this Section. At minimum, this may be accomplished by placing a standard drainage and utility easement along the northern property line and by providing an extra easement over the actual wetland and lake portions of the property. Building Height The proposed house is a 2 story walkout and 26.8 feet in height. The maximum standards for the UR District are 2.5 stories and 30 feet in height. Driveway The applicant is proposing a side loaded garage and bringing a driveway through a portion of the undeveloped Palm Street right-of-way. The setback from the Ardmore Avenue right-of-way is proposed to be 15 feet, matching the front setback. The applicant will need to receive a right-of- way use license from the City Council in order to utilize part of this undeveloped right-of-way for the driveway. This will protect the City's interests in case the right-of-way was to be opened and will also protect other possible uses for this right-of-way. Staff Review For reviewing a variance request, the Planning Commission must consider the following criteria: (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (c) A variance may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. In order for a practical difficulty to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the city shall consider, among other factors, that the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and that the variance does not confer on the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not Moser Variance Page 3 created by the landowner. (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. With strict application of all requisite district standards, there is a very small amount of buildable area (about 400 square feet) on the parcel. The 75 foot setback to Lake Ardmore actually intersects required setback to Ardmore Avenue. It is impossible to build a house and garage meeting the minimum building standards within the buildable area of this parcel. Without some relief from these standards, this legally created parcel would not be allowed any use. The main consideration remaining is whether or not the applicant proposing to put the property to a reasonable use that is within the "essential character" of the neighborhood. In order to determine this, a general survey of the neighborhood (2935 to 2992 Ardmore) was conducted. There are houses ranging in size from a small 682 square foot house at 2955 Ardmore Avenue to a larger 2000+ square foot house with a 1000 square foot garage at 2992 Ardmore. The proposed house would have a building footprint of 1763 square feet with a 96 square foot porch, which lies within the range. In 2000, the house at 2992 Ardmore Avenue received a similar variance to construct a house 51 feet from the lake and 15.5 feet from the right-of-way. This house and its garage has a larger footprint than is proposed by the applicant. Houses at 2972 and 2982 Ardmore Avenue are about 45 — 50 feet from the lake and about 40 feet from the edge of the road pavement, which is somewhat similar to the request by the applicant. The applicant is proposing to fill the property to raise it to allow for the garage to be of a higher elevation than the road. This will give the property owner the ability to have a two-story walk out, which would be different than the other homes on the lake side of Ardmore Avenue, as they have similar appearances from the lake as they do from the street. The other parcels are more flat to the lake than this site, however, the other parcels have more of a manicured lawn to the shore while this site has wetlands and vegetation. RECOMMENDATION The subject site is an impossible property to fit a conforming house on. The lake setback, wetland buffer setback, and the two front yard setbacks create a very small buildable area. This clearly creates a "practical difficulty" in putting this property to a reasonable use. Other properties within the area are developed with similar sized houses with somewhat similar setbacks. Staff does question the need for the extra fill to raise the height of the area for the house. The applicant contends that this is necessary to keep the garage from being lower than the road. Perhaps this could be done with less fill. As proposed, the applicant's submittal appears to be a reasonable use for the property. A recommendation of approval could be given to the Council provided the following conditions are met: Moser Variance Page 4 1. The applicant shall prepare a tree replacement plan. 2. The applicant shall prepare an Upland Buffer Zone vegetation plan. 3. The applicant shall provide a conservation easement over the Upland Buffer Zone. 4. The applicant shall provide drainage and utility easements over the north, south, and westerly 10 feet of the property. 5. The applicant shall provide an additional easement over the wetland and lake areas of the parcel. 6. All plans and easements shall be provided and accepted by the City prior to the issuance of any building permit on the property. 7. The City Engineer shall approve the grading plan prior to the issuance of any building permit. 8. The applicant must receive an undeveloped right-of-way use license as prepared by the City Attorney for the driveway location. 9. The driveway location shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building or driveway permit. Attachments: Exhibit A — Neighborhood Property Survey Exhibit B — Survey showing Setback Requests Exhibit C - Applicant Narrative Exhibit D — Certificate of Survey — Jacob Moser Exhibit E — Exterior Elevations Exhibit F — Floor Plans Moser Variance Page 5 Exhibit A - Neighborhood Property Survey Photo of property Details from County Records 2935 Ardmore Approx. 1880 sq. ft. building footprint Approx. 55 feet to pavement 2942 Ardmore Approx. 1600 building footprint. 2 stories Approx. 44 feet to pavement 2945 Ardmore Approx. 1300 sq. ft. building footprint 2 stories Approx. 55 feet to pavement Subject Site Proposed: 1859 sq. ft. building footprint 2 story walkout Approx. 34 feet to pavement 55 feet to OHW Moser Variance Page 6 2955 Ardmore Approx. 700 sq. ft. building footprint Approx. 45 feet to pavement 2971 Ardmore Approx. 1650 sq. ft. building footprint 2 stories Approx. 42 feet to pavement 2972 Ardmore Approx. 2450 sq. ft. building footprint Approx. 40 feet to pavement Approx. 50 feet to OHW 2982 Ardmore Approx. 1540 building footprint (house) 572 sq. ft. garage 2 stories Garage appox. 40 feet to pavement House approx. 45 feet to lake Moser Variance Page 7 2985 Ardmore Approx. 2100 sq. ft. building footprint Approx. 35 feet to pavement 2992 Ardmore Approx. 3000 sq. ft building footprint 2 stories 51 feet to lake 15.5 to Ardmore right-of-way Approx. 40 feet to pavement Moser Variance Page 8 8 BOX 1t12 ELM cb cP $ SUG it 1 MA PLE ,ate BAsswaaD—.. 0-8-811 R MAPLE is surER t& DOS ED ELEVATIONS (VERIFY) 1SEMENT = 964.3 P OF FOUNDATION = 972,1 kRAGE = 969.8 RST FLOOR = 973.8 EXHIBIT B 88 04s14- E "10:00 • �- 1 1 25' .MINIMU M BUFFER . I 1 1 .1 1 ' I"=30' .... .... ...... v \, 15' BUFFER SETBACK E , , .�\ i \\\ % 75' LAKE SETBACK 12 �L DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: NARRATIVE October 4 2012 Dear planning commissioners, Hello my name is Jake Moser and I am requesting set back Variances for the construction of a single family home on my property on Ardmore Ave. The property is a lot of record but has practical difficulties to construct a home without Variances The property has additional set back requirements then a typical lot would have, which include a greater setback from the lake, a wetland setback, a wetland buffer setback, and a setback from the wetland buffer to the home. These setbacks along with standard front and side yard setbacks make this property practically impossible to build on without variances. The enforcement of the City's Zoning Ordinance would not allow me to construct a home on the lot without variances. Practical difficulties exist with the lot that was not created by me as the land owner and I am proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. The construction of a modest home, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the area. Please consider my request for variances to construct a new single family home on property on Ardmore Ave. Thank You, Jacob Moser Property Ow CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR JACOB MOSER OF LOTS 9, 10, & 11, BLOCK 21, INDEPENDENCE BEACH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 9 N 88°4f14" E 1$9.00, 0 t7 m 0 0 1 71 I �Sr 72 - r 4 44 I 1 q, l5e 8 BOXELZ ER 0 F Ok } 1 B 112 ELM 1 6.00, 22.00 H 8 s 4/./ $oql aJ� H ag 9 H p SUG , 15.00 IMAPV 8 Q } 19.67 \p 12- 969.8 G 13. \� 1 l9 7. 130 swvt MAPLE - •10BASSWOtiD--. \ I \ 23'1-I TR/P( } i-I-t- , . } 1 BUFFER il 1 re.s/C P!'‘ 4614 �R 1 <F�R I MIN ... ......... --\ ...... \ \5� 7B I LAKE \\ \\ P4�R I \\\ \ \ 1 -\t--i 1 \\\ ARDMORE to \ I4 - I \ \9S1 'S,� �gec \ \ i"v' \ 1 ro, �oRra \\Nj o , \ \ t \ I1NOF er'fi'L \oGR O —11 6 SIW012MAPLE - X6%21, 11oo, 18 SILVER MAP ` -CRA/,t^ PROPOSED ELEVATIONS (VERIFY) 1) BASEMENT= 964.3 2) TOP OF FOUNDATION = 972.1 3) GARAGE = 969.8 4) FIRST FLOOR = 973.8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Lots 9, 10, and 11, Block 21, INDEPENDENCE BEACH o : denotes iron marker 961.5) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum 967.5 : denotes proposed spot elevation denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum denotes proposed contour line : denotes tree to be removed Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. 35 trees on site, 10 to be removed, 9/35 = 28.6% This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, existing topography and 100 year flood line thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed house and driveway. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. NOTE: 500 year flood elevation is 962.7 • INCREASE IN BUFFER FROM 35 FT. 990+- S.F. DECREASE IN BUFFER FROM 35 FT. 990+- S.F. F 60.00 g17L6 3 „9Z,09o£0 S PROPOSED HARDCOVER: HOUSE = 1763 SQ.FT PORCH= 96 SQ.FT. DRIVE= 625 SQ.FT. TOTAL= 2484 SQ.FT. 12 2484 / 18520 X 100 = 13.41% HARDCOVER LOT AREA ABOVE OHW= 18520 SQ.FT. REVISED 9-7-12 TREES WITHIN GRADING LIMITS SHOWN REVISED 10-1-12 ADDITIONAL TREEA SHOWN, BUFFER LIMITS REVISED 0 GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, SITE PLANNERS 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 952-473-4141 12-202 A 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super- vision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 1275 SCALE 1"=30' • 8-17-12 DATE 9-7-12 10-1-12 JOB NO. 12-202 A i 9 m 0 G) m O m W 0 O -o II 8 BO L1 ER I '12 ELM $ SUG AAP N 88°4 14 " E 1$9.00, 19.67 , 12 969.8 1.13 .33 - M APLE 010 BASSWOOD -- 46 -S1 -N/20 MAPLE ER 18 SILVf•11A P.L PROPOSED ELEVATIONS (VERIFY) 205/< gsti RMio \ <F ti5'VLl , 12 John Fri Ljl One horse `roduction5 design prociucncn performance 888/424-9 772 These drawings are design concept only. Responsibility for all information here in is by the general contractor. Conform to State and Local Codes. Copyright © 2011 John j'ribyl, �nc_ lu_ 1111Y11 4 M ■1eiurrwr1ssu'111� � aigo! am arum $61.11111•Ma aiimii +.aoarm000mr.a11 __ •vw�Nrua C' l The original purchaser of the plan, # is granted a limited nonexclusive and nontransferable license to build one, and only one, structure using this plan. (Jse of this plan to build more than one home is prohibited. The plan may not reproduced or transferred without the express written permission from the copyright owner.These plans are protected under the Federal Copyright Laws. Project General Contractor OAT! 4mnt 1...levatio.n 1ri 1'-0" Kg Kigkt levation 1/8"=15-o15 Kear r levati • - 1/8"=15-O" Left levation ASPHALT 5111NGL_f_,7 #ASPtA=T i'LLT wICL SHIELD STARTER /2" 0513 5111 ATHING w/CLIP5 PROVIDE v)00 VL.NTILATION 50% SOFFIT 50% RIDGE OR ROOF MANUFAC i LIKv.K DESIGNED TRUSS W/7 1/+ Y TELL ALUMINUM 5,111 I i s FACIA 2 x 6 alb I"AC VERIFY EXTERIOR FINISI 1 HOU5EWRAr 25/52bILDRIT' SYITAP-IING (OPTIONAL L o 05h) 2 X 6 5T(.1 D5 0 1 6" O. C. 5 1/2 bA_F1.. IR%LILATON R 9.0 (OPTIONAL o KAY FOAM) tOLDRIMJ01,51-!N 1 1/2" FOR 1 ThERMA\ (SCAL ALL SEAMS) 1/2" 2 x 6 TREAT'D .71LL rLAT[_ w/ SILL SEALER ANCHOR 5TK AF5 h1PK SPE.C5 ,OPTIONAL 1/2" K 10" ANGIOR bOLT5 ® 6'-o" O.C. WATERPROOFING DRAINTIL' 111,466 WIi R.vr/Va. 101-v+/1/ts CR055 SECTION 1/9.."=1 i-o» -J 0 (-y)2f 10 µN LC$S r' Teaz,a IVAN 2-. c poor 1/+"= 1 a_O" J r4 {�r.01 PPLR Lv•L LAN az� pocor 1 /4" j �_O" 5�-0" -+ rte _ 1 I __72444......-m.. r2 .-..r,_ H1 1 -= �1 P P 0 P\ v Lower [evej /4-"=14-0" e --C A-- -c??\\ .-L.'cz-_-, 11,,,17 .coiney ;� S�'r�t�^i✓v�. <<hAi 6 / -3 -/k4'3 U%/t1 LEO/ ro/0 L �/r7or�ict,e(rfriiv ,CoM 01-m-'70 mcvi( ��1a(u�y Maik.4iltAl thei ✓ Nltd) r. Cool AGENDA ITEM: 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: October 5, 2012 MEETING: October 9, 2012 Planning Commission SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment: Variance Provisions — Public Hearing Background In 2011, the legislature amended State Statute related to how the City is required to process variances to the zoning ordinance. This amendment was completed because of the State Supreme Court's decision in Krummenacher vs. City of Minnetonka which interpreted earlier language in a way which severely limited a city's ability to grant variance except in cases when there was absolutely no way to use the property without a variance. The amended statutory language establishes the criteria to be considered while reviewing variances. Staff does not believe the City's existing language is directly in conflict with the new statute, but does nonetheless recommend an amendment in order to bring it more in line with statute. Following is the language copied from state statutes related to variances [State. Stat. 462.357 Subd. 6(2)]: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 2 October 9, 2012 Variance Procedures Planning Commission Meeting variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance." The League of Minnesota Cities prepared a report for its member cities as well as a model ordinance. This information is attached for review as well. Ordinance Amendment The attached ordinance amends the City Code to be in line with the new language of statute. It establishes the "five part test" for variances: • Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? • Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? • Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? • Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? • Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? The language recommended by staff does provide a bit more guidance related to the "reasonable manner" test. This language was maintained from the existing code and directs the Planning Commission and City Council (acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals) to consider two specific factors: 1) whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty; and 2) whether granting the variance confers any special privileges upon the applicant. Attachment 1. DRAFT Ordinance 2. Information from League of Minnesota Cities Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 2 October 9, 2012 Variance Procedures Planning Commission Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### An Ordinance Amending Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Variances The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I: Medina Code Section 825.31 is amended by adding the underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows: Section 825.31. Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Subd. 1. Establishment. A board of adjustments and appeals is established. The city council shall serve as the board of adjustments and appeals. Subd. 2. Powers. The board of adjustments and appeals shall have the following powers: (a) to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the zoning administrator or any other person in the enforcement of this ordinance; and (b) to hear requests for variances pursuant to Section 825.45 of the City Code. -the literal provisions of this ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with granting of a variance melns the property in city's land use controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, nd the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terns of this ordinance. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for rth sheltered construction, as defined by statute, when in harmony with this ordinance. The board shall not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. Subd. 3. Staff Liaison. The zoning administrator shall serve as staff liaison to the board of adjustments and appeals. The zoning administrator shall prepare reports and information for Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE the board, and may attend its meetings and participate in hearings or discussions held by the board but shall not vote on any item before the board. Subd. 4. Procedures. The board of adjustments and appeals shall consider all matters before it at a public tneetinbheariug upon such notice as is required by statute or this ordinance. The board shall make its decision within a reasonable time and shall serve a copy of its order upon the appellant or petitioner by mail. The board may establish procedures for the conduct of proceedings before it. The board shall provide for a record of its proceedings which shall include the minutes of its meetings, its findings and the action taken on each matter heard by it, including the final order. The board shall make no decision on an appeal or petition for a variance until the planning commission has had a reasonable opportunity, not to exceed 60 days, to review and report to the board regarding the appeal or petition. SECTION II: Medina Code Section 825.45 et. seq. is amended by adding the underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows: VARIANCES Section 825.45. Variances Criteria for Granting VaFinnc Subd. 1. A variance from the provisions of the zoning ordinance may be granted by the board of pppeals and adjustments consistent with this section,_pursuant to Minn. Stat. section 462.357, subd. 6, as it may be amended from time to time. Subd. 2. Criteria for Granting Variances. (a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. ------------- --- ------------ (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (c)A.variance may -he granted when the_applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute- a practical difticulty.-In_order for a_practical difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use thepropertyin a reasonable manner the board shall consider among other factors whether the variance requested- is the minimum,. variance which would alleviate_the_practical difficulty_ and whether the --variance confers- uponthe--applicant anv special privileges that ----- -------- ---- --------- are denied to the owners of other lands, structures. or buildings in the same district: (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner., and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Subd. 3. No variance may permit any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE property in the zone where the affected. person's land is located,._except that the city may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. issued to provide relief to the landowner where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or unique conditions to the property owner in the use of the land. No use variances may be issued. A variance may be granted only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist: (a) Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property since enactment of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Ordinance. (c) That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (d) That granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special , (f) The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Ordinance or to property in the same zone. Section 415 A7. Procedure -011 arianccs. Subd. 44. Procedures for the review of Variances. (a) Application materials. The person applying for a variance must fill out and submit to the Zoning aoning Admibistfatefadministrator a variance request form. The applicant shall submit the following information along with the request form: (1) A site plan must be attached at a scale large enough for clarity showing the following information: (aj) Location and dimensions of lot lines, buildings, driveways, and off-street parking spaces; (bi) Distances between buildings and front, side, and rear lot lines; principal buildings and accessory buildings; and principal buildings and principal buildings on adjacent lots; (eiii) Location of any signs, easements, underground utilities, septic tanks, tile fields, water wells, or similar features; Ordinance No. ### 3 DATE (iv) Existing topography of the site and area within l 00 feet of the property boundaries with contours at 2 -foot intervals. including lot corner elevations; (y)_ Proposed gradint _plan with contours at 2. -foot intervals; and (vi) Other information required by City Code. (42) A survey, if requested by the Zoning zoning ^ dministratoradministrator. (3) A narrative describingthe requested variance and describing how the applicant believes the criteria described above have been satisfied. (4) Any other information requested by the zoning administrator, the planning commission, or the Board in order to allow reasonable review of the requested variance. Su'rrtb)_The planning commission must hold a meeting on the proposal and may provide a recommendation to the board. For land located in the RR, RR -1, RR -2, RPS or RR-UR zoning districts, notice of the meeting must be mailed at least 10 days prior to the meeting to owners of property located within 1000 feet of the outer boundaries of the land to which the variance will be applicable. For land located in any other zoning district, notice shall be mailed at least 10 days prior to the meeting to owners of property located within 350 feet of the outer boundaries of the land to which the variance will be applicable. The notice must include a description of the land and the proposed variance. Su-hd-3.1 L After and recornrnendation by the planning commission has completed its review or after 60 days have elapsed since the commission began its review, the variance must be referred to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may grant, deny or condition approval of the variance on such terms as it considers reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare and to limit the impacts created by the variance. Such conditions may; includeing a limit on the period of time the use benefiting from the variance may exist or operate. Conditions shall be directly related to and shall bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals must make its decision within the time period prescribed by state law. The applicant shall be notified of the action taken. Subd .(d) Any variance granted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is valid for one year following final action by the Board and must be used within such period of time. After such period, the variance is null, void and of no effect unless the Board grants an extension upon request by the variance holder prior to the expiration of the year. Prior to granting any extension, the Board must find that the owners of neighboring properties will not be adversely affected by the extension. A variance is deemed to have been used if, prior to the expiration of one year or such extension as the Board may grant, a building permit has been issued and over fifty percent of the work has been performedwork has begun. Section 825.47, RESERVED. SECTION III: The ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication. Ordinance No. ### 4 DATE Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2012. T.M. Crosby, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the South Crow River News this day of , 2012. Ordinance No. ### 5 DATE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 2011 Variance Legislation The changes, which are now in effect, may require some cities to change ordinances or statutory cross-references. After a long and contentious session working to restore city variance authority, the final version of HF 52 supported by. the League and allies was passed unanimously by the Legislature. On May 5, Gov. Dayton signed 2011 Minnesota Laws, Chapter 19, amending Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subdivision 6 to restore municipal variance authority in response to Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24, 2010). The law also provides consistent statutory language between Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462 and the county variance authority of Minnesota Statutes, section 394.27, subdivision 7. In Krummenacher, the Minnesota Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the statutory definition of "undue hardship" and held that the "reasonable use" prong of the "undue hardship" test is not whether the proposed use is reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence of the variance. The new law changes that factor back to the "reasonable manner" understanding that had been used by some lower courts prior to the Krummenacher ruling. The new law was effective on May 6, the day following the governor's approval. Presumably it applies to pending applications, as the general rule is that cities are to apply the law at the time of the decision, rather than at the time of application. The new law renames the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise retains the familiar three -factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. Also included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan." Learn More Read more about variances in: Land Use Variances: Frequently Asked Questions In addition, the new law clarifies that conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: (651) 281-1298 ST. PAUL, MN 55103-2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG In evaluating variance requests under the new law, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions: • Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? • Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? • Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? • Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? • Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? Some cities may have ordinance provisions that codified the old statutory language, or that have their own set of standards. For those cities, the question may be whether you have to first amend your zoning code before processing variances under the new standard. A credible argument can be made that that the statutory language pre-empts inconsistent local ordinance provisions. Under a pre-emption theory, cities could apply the new law immediately without necessarily amending their ordinance first. In any regard, it would be best practice for cities to revisit their ordinance provisions and consider adopting language that mirrors the new statute. Attached are a collection of sample documents reflecting the 2011 variance legislation. The attached samples include a draft ordinance, application form, and findings of fact template. While the attached materials may contain provisions that could serve as models in drafting your own documents, your city attorney would need to review prior to council action to tailor to your city's needs. Your city may have different ordinance requirements that need to be accommodated. If you have questions about how your city should approach variances under this new statute, you should discuss it with your city attorney or contact Jed Burkett, LMC land use attorney, at jburkett@lmc.org or (651) 281-1247, or Tom Grundhoefer, LMC general counsel, at tgrundho@lmc.org or (651) 281-1266. Jed Burkett 06/11 2 Attachment I. Sample Variance Ordinance City of Mosquito Heights ORDINANCE NO. 2011-xx ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES An ordinance providing for the issuance of variances within the City of Mosquito Heights. The City Council of Mosquito Heights ordains as follows: SECTION 1. BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS SUBD. 1. The Planning Commission shall be the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for this city, and as provided by Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.354, subd. 2 shall have the powers granted under Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.357, subd. 6, as they may be amended from time to time. SECTION 2. VARIANCES SUBD. 1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.357, subd. 6, as it may be amended from time to time, the Planning Commission, acting as a Board of Appeals and Adjustments, may issue variances from the provisions of this zoning code. A variance is a modification or variation of the provisions of this zoning code as applied to a specific piece of property. SUBD. 2. A. Variances shall only be permitted (i) when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and (ii) when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. B. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. SUBD. 3. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that (i) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; (ii) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. SUBD. 4. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The 3 board may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE SUBD. 1. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of Mosquito Heights on this 31st day of May 2011. Approved: Mayor Attested: City Clerk This sample is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your city attorney for specific advice on how to tailor to your city's needs. 4 Attachment II. Sample Variance Application CITY OF MOSQUITO HEIGHTS VARIANCE APPLICATION A. Applicant's Name: B. Address (Street, City, State, ZIP): Telephone Home: Work/Cell: C. Property Owner's Name (If different from above): Telephone Home: Work/Cell: D. Location of Project: E. Legal Description: F. Description of Proposed Project: G. Specify the section of the ordinance from which a variance is sought: H. Explain how you wish to vary from the applicable provisions of the ordinance: I. Please attach a site plan or accurate survey as may be required by ordinance. J. Please answer the following questions as they relate to your specific variance request: 1. In your opinion, is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Yes ( ) No ( ) Why or why not? 2. In your opinion, is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? Yes ( ) No ( ) Why or why not? 3. In your opinion, does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? Yes ( ) No ( ) Why or why not? 4. In your opinion, are there circumstances unique to the property? Yes ( ) No ( ) Why or why not? 5. In your opinion, will the variance maintain the essential character of the locality? Yes ( ) No ( ) Why or why not? The Planning Commission must make an affirmative finding on all of the five criteria listed above in order to grant a variance. The applicant for a variance has the burden of proof to show that all of the criteria listed above have been satisfied. The undersigned certifies that they are familiar with application fees and other associated costs, and also with the procedural requirements of the City Code and other applicable ordinances. Applicant's Signature: Fee Owner's Signature: Date: Date This sample is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your city attorney for specific advice on how to tailor to your city's needs. 6 Attachment III. Sample Findings of Fact Template CITY OF MOSQUITO HEIGHTS MOSQUITO COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 11-XX RESOLUTION ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR (APPROVAL/DENIAL) FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION OF (APPLICANT) AT (ADDRESS) FACTS 1. (Applicant) is the owner of a parcel of land located at (Address), Mosquito Heights, Minnesota; and, 2. The subject property is legally described as found on Exhibit A; and, 3. (Applicant) has applied to the City for a variance to build (Proposed Project) as described on Exhibit B 4. The proposal would vary from (Ordinance Requirement) in that it would (Deviation Sought). 5. Following a public hearing on the application, the Mosquito Heights Planning Commission has recommended (approval/denial) of the variance on (date). 6. The City Council of the City of Mosquito Heights reviewed the requested variance at its Meeting of June 9, 2011. 7. (Provide more facts about the project as necessary and relevant). APPLICABLE LAW 8. Minnesota Statute Section 462.357, subd. 6 provides: a. Variances shall only be permitted (a) when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and (b) when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. b. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that (a) the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; (b) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and (c) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 7 9. City Ordinance allows variances if (Cite to relevant City variance standard, if applicable) 10. City Ordinance requires (cite to applicable ordinances, including that being varied from). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 11. The requested variance (is/is not) in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance because... 12. The requested variance (is/is not) consistent with the comprehensive plan because .. . 13. The property owner (does/does not) propose to use the property in a reasonable manner because... 14. There (are/are not) unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner because... 15. The variance (will/will not) maintain the essential character of the locality because .. . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mosquito Heights, Minnesota, that the application to issue a variance to allow (Applicant) to build (Proposed Project) so as to deviate from (Ordinance Requirement) is hereby (Approved/Denied). Adopted by the City Council of Mosquito Heights on this 9th day of June 2011. Approved: Mayor Attested: City Clerk This sample is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your city attorney for specific advice on how to tailor to your city's needs. 8 AGENDA ITEM: 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, City Planner DATE: October 5, 2012 MEETING: October 9, 2012 Planning Commission SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment: Public Buildings in Industrial Park zoning districts Public Hearing Background The City has entered into a purchase agreement to purchase the property at 600 Clydesdale Trail with the intention of renovating the building for the Public Works and Police facilities. During discussions related to the renovations of the property, the City Council discussed options for storing salt/sand for streets. Currently, there is a canvas hoop building located in the Public Works yard for such storage. The building material standards of the Industrial Park zoning district prohibit such a structure. Staff believes it may be a stretch to say a practical difficulty exists in order to justify a variance. If the City is supportive of this type of structure, staff recommends that the City legislate its policy through an amendment to the ordinance. Ordinance Amendment The attached ordinance allows Public Buildings to construct an accessory structure which does not meet the material standards of the district. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City Council discuss whether they support limiting such allowances only to Public Buildings. Staff has recommended a number of conditions and limitations on these accessory structures. These limitations are meant to restrict the situations in which these structures will be allowed. Some of these may be adjusted if the Planning Commission and City Council support these structures for uses beyond Public Buildings. The conditions and limitations in the draft ordinance are as follows: (i) The structure shall only be used to store sand, road salt, gravel, fill materials, dirt, and other materials used in the construction or maintenance of roads, trails and other public infrastructure. (ii) The footprint of the structure shall not exceed 4,000 square feet. (iii) The height of the structure shall not exceed the greater of the following: 25 feet; or the height of the principal structure. (iv) The structure shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from all property lines, 200 feet from public right-of-ways, and 200 feet from residential property. (v) The visual impact of the structure shall be minimized through appropriate means, such as berming, landscaping, and other screening techniques. (vi) The accessory structure shall not be considered outside storage as regulated within this chapter. Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 2 October 9, 2012 Public Buildings in IP District Planning Commission Meeting The draft ordinance also removes a clause from the ordinance related to limitations on sewer usage in the Industrial Park zoning district. This limitation was drafted in 2001, when the City was faced with capacity limits in terms of discharging sewage to the Met Council system. Construction of the Elm Creek Interceptor in 2004-5 has made this limitation no longer necessary. The City has removed this clause from other commercial districts, and staff recommends removing it from the IP district as well. Attachment 1. DRAFT Ordinance Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 2 October 9, 2012 Public Buildings in IP District Planning Commission Meeting CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ### An Ordinance Amending Section 833 of the Code of Ordinances Regarding Public Buildings in the Industrial Park Zoning District The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows: SECTION I: Medina Code Section 833.03 is amended by adding the underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows: Section 833.03. Conditional Uses. Within the Industrial Park District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. (1) Public Buildings of a non industrial nature/use (2) Transit Station or Stop (3) Hospital (4) Hotel / Motel (5) Physical Fitness Clubs (6) Animal Hospital (veterinary) (7) Laboratories (8) Publishing Firms (9) Showrooms (10) Essential Public Utility and Service Structures (11) Business and technical schools which are post secondary (12) Warehousing and Distributorship (13) Telecommunications Tower as defined in the section titled Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement of the Medina City Code (14) Adult establishments as defined in section 645 of the Medina City Code (15)Manufacturing and assembly of the following light industrial products and products excluding: metal plating; teflon coating or similar plating or coatings requiring high temperatures; the use of heavy or other drop forges or heavy or other hydraulic surges or devices capable of detection (vibration) at the property line. (List of specific uses excluded, to be inserted in final copy of ordinance) (16) Manufacturing and assembly of the following other products excluding: tanning, the use of heavy or other drop forges or heavy or other hydraulic surges or devices capable of detection (vibration) at the property line. (List of specific uses excluded, to be inserted in final copy of ordinance) Ordinance No. ### 1 DATE SECTION II: Medina Code Section 833.06 is amended by adding the underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows: Section 833.06. RESERVED Sanitary Scw . With:., the Industri 1 park District the maximum allowed waste water flow is 750 gallons per day, per net acre (for purposes of this section, net acres equals the total arca of the lot, minus wetlands and open water.) SECTION III: Medina Code Section 833.07 Subd. 3 is amended by adding the underlined material and deleting the stricken material as follows: Subd. 3. Design and development standards — conditional uses: The following design and development standards are identified for the uses listed below. Additional standards may be identified during the review and approval process, due to the particular characteristics of each site, the proposed development of the site, and the uses on adjacent property. (a) Public Buildings-ef .-industrial-uEse (I) Uses must meet the provisions of the most similar use. Mixed uses must meet the requirements of the mixed uses. (1)(2) An accessory structure which does not meet the material standards of the zoning ordinance my be permitted as part of the conditional use permit review_provided such structure meets the following standards: (i) The structure shall only be used to store sand, road salt, gravel, fill materials, dirt, and other materials used in the construction or maintenance of roads, trails and other public infrastructure. (ii) The footprint of the structure shall not exceed 4,000 square feet. The height of the structure shall not exceed the greater of the following: 25 feet; or the height of the principal structure. (iv) The structure shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from all property lines, 200 feet from public right-of-ways, and 200 feet from residential property. (v) The visual impact of the structure shall be minimized through appropriate means, such as benning, landscaping, and other screening techniques. (vi) The accessory structure shall not be considered outside storage as regulated within this chapter. SECTION IV: The ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the city council of the city of Medina this day of , 2012. T.M. Crosby, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator -Clerk Published in the South Crow River News this day of , 2012. Ordinance No. ### 2 DATE