Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout08-10-2021 Planning Commission PacketMEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2021 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL (2052 County Road 24) 1. Ca11 to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Public Hearing — Medina Townhome Development LLC — 1432 County Road 29 - Planned Unit Development General Plan for 23 unit townhome development — PID 3011823220004 6. Public Hearing — Stelter Enterprises LLC — 500 Hamel Road — Preliminary Plat for 17 -unit detached villa development on 6.5 acre (approximately 5 net acres). PID 1211823310048 7. Public Hearing — All Energy Solar — 2382 Hamel Road — Conditional Use Permit for installation of 112 panel solar array — PID 0911823340002 8. Approval of July 13, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 9. Council Meeting Schedule 10. Adjourn POSTED AT CITY HALL August 6, 2021 $ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director DATE: July 29, 2021 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates — August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Rolling Green Business Center PUD Amendment — 801-855 Meander Ct — Rolling Green Business Park Association, Inc. has requested an amendment to the PUD regulating development of the site to allow additional service/retail uses on the site. The PUD currently only permits office uses. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 13 meeting and recommended approval. Staff intends to present to the Council on August 4. B) Prairie Creek Preliminary Plat — 500 Hamel Road — Stetler Enterprises has requested preliminary plat approval for a 17 -unit villa development. Staff is conducting a preliminary review and a public hearing will be scheduled when complete, potentially at the August 10 meeting. C) Medina Townhomes —1432 Baker Park Road (County Road 29) — Medina Townhome Development LLC has requested a Planned Unit Development General Plan and Site Plan Review for 23 rental townhomes on 2 acres north of Highway 12, east of Baker Park Road. A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for the August 10, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. D) 2832 Hamel Road — Solar Equipment CUP — All Energy Solar has requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for installation of a 112 -panel ground mounted solar array with an area of 2,328 square feet. A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for the August 10, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. E) Deer Hill Preserve 5th Addition — Deer Hill Road, east of Homestead Tr. — Property Resources Development Corporation has requested final plat approval for eight of the lots within the Deer Hill Preserve development. City Council is tentatively scheduled to review at the August 17 meeting. F) Sign Ordinance Amendment — Ditter Heating and Cooling has requested that the City consider amending its Sign Ordinance to increase the allowed height and size of freestanding signs within the Commercial -General zoning district adjacent to a state highway — A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for the September 14 Planning Commission meeting. G) Ditter Heating and Cooling Site Plan Review_ 820 Tower Drive — Ditter Heating and Cooling has requested a Site Plan Review for an approximately 5,000 square foot addition to its building. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to review at the September 14 Planning Commission meeting. H) Weston Woods Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan — east of Mohawk Drive, north of Highway 55 — Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) has requested a Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan for development of 76 twinhomes, 42 single-family, and 33 townhomes on the Roy and Cavanaugh properties. The City Council adopted documents of approval at the January 5 meeting. Staff is coordinating permitting for construction of Chippewa Road and will await final plat application. Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting I) Cates Ranch Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning — 2575 and 2590 Cates Ranch Drive — Robert Atkinson has requested a change of the future land use from Future Development Area to Business, a staging plan amendment to 2020, and a rezoning to Business Park. The application is incomplete for review, and the City has requested additional materials. J) Adam's Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning — Pioneer Trail Preserve — These projects have been preliminarily approved and the City is awaiting final plat application. K) Johnson ADU CUP, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery — The City Council has adopted resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of approval in order to complete the projects. L) Hamel Haven subdivision — These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plat is recorded. Other Projects A) Wolsfeld Woods Ravine Stabilization — staff met with MnDNR staff along with Minnehaha Creek Watershed. Over the past few months the DNR has been increasingly indicating that they believe any work within the SNA is contrary to the goals of the SNA and state rules, even if the work is intended to reduce erosion and reserve nutrient pollution to the lake. In addition, the DNR has formally classified the woods as "Old Growth," which places even further restrictions on impacts to tress. Staff is concluding that work within the SNA will not be feasible. Minnehaha Creek staff is consulting with the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to confirm that we will be able to shift the funding to another project around this lake. If BWSR indicates this is a possibility, staff intends to work with Minnehaha Creek and adjoining private property owners to identify feasible project(s). B) Chippewa Road/Arrowhead Drive — Staff has been revieing the proposed roundabout alignment for the Chippewa Road/Arrowhead Drive intersection from George Stickney, potential developer of property east of Arrowhead Drive. C) Uptown Hamel Stormwater credits — Staff has been reviewing stormwater approvals for the Uptown Hamel Stormwater Improvements. It appears that additional stormwater improvements will likely be required for new developments in Uptown Hamel because of updated stormwater regulations since the ponds were constructed in 2006. Staff is attempting to quantify how credits from what was constructed could be allocated. D) Intern — Colette Baumgartner — Colette has joined the Planning staff as an intern for the year. She has already been working on a number of projects and is training on the day-to-day operations of the City, especially permits, which will be a great help! Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 August 4, 2021 City Council Meeting MEDINA POLICE DEPARTMENT 600 Clydesdale Trail Medina, MN 55340-9790 p: 763.473.9209 f: 763.473.6858 non -emergency: 763.525.6210 MEMORANDUM Emergency 9-1-' TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Jason Nelson, Director of Public Safety DATE: July 29, 2021 RE: Department Updates Chief Nelson has been on vacation the last two weeks. Patrol: The following are updates of Patrol Officers between July 14, 2021 and July 27, 2021: Officers issued 10 citations and 19 warnings for various traffic offenses, responded to 4 property damage accidents, 1 personal injury accident, 8 welfare checks, 12 medicals, 8 suspicious calls, 11 traffic complaints, 16 assists to other agencies, 15 business/residential alarms. On 07/14/2021 officers along with Loretto Fire Department responded to a report of a wire down in the 3300 block of Highway 55. It was discovered that a tree had fallen onto a nearby powerline which caused the wire to come down. Wright Hennepin Electric was requested to respond to the scene to make the line safe. On 07/14/2021 officer responded to assist Corcoran PD with a possible attempted burglary of a residence. A resident reported an unknown person came to their door and attempted to open it. The area was checked but the suspect was not located. On 07/15/2021 officers were dispatched to a verbal domestic in the 300 block of Clydesdale Trail. Upon arrival and speaking with those involved officers learned a domestic assault had taken place earlier at a residence in Corcoran. Corcoran was called to respond to take the domestic report. While officers were waiting for Corcoran PD to respond, a male who was reported to have been involved pulled into the lot. In speaking with that party, the officers discovered that he was intoxicated and was placed under arrest for DWI. Corcoran PD came and took the domestic report. Medina officers processed the DWI arrest. On 07/16/2021 officers responded to a residence in the 500 block of Clydesdale Circle on a help call. A female called 911 reporting she needed help and needed an ambulance but would not say anything else. When officers arrived they found two small children in the home and a female standing in the garage who would not respond to any questions. The female appeared to be having a mental health issue. North Ambulance arrived and the female was ultimately transported to the hospital for evaluation. A Reserve Officer picked up the children's grandmother to come and watch the children while their mother was away. On 07/18/2021 officer was dispatched to a reported structure fire at Lakeshore Park. Upon arrival it was discovered that the trash cans, porta-potty, and wooden enclosure were all on fire. Loretto Fire Department arrived and put out the fire. The structure and items within the enclosure was a total loss. Neighbors heard large fireworks being set off in the area shortly before the fire was reported. It is not known if the fire was intentional or accidental at this time. On 07/19/2021 officers responded to 2800 block of Shire Drive on a theft report. Catalytic converters were stolen from several trucks left parked in the parking lot. These types of thefts have been increasing in numbers in the metro area due to how easy it is to sell to scrap dealers and the amount of money that the criminals get for each item. On 07/21/2021 a juvenile employee was arrested from a business in the 700 block of Highway 55 after it was discovered that she was scratching lottery tickets without paying and then cashing in the winners. The suspect was booked and released from our office to relatives. On 07/24/2021 officer and Hamel Fire Department were dispatched to the 500 block of Medina Road on a report of male unconscious and CPR in progress. It was learned that a male working at a house under construction collapsed and stopped breathing. CPR was continued and multiple shocks were administered by an AED. Unfortunately, despite all the excellent efforts of first responders the patient was declared deceased upon arrival at the hospital. On 07/24/2021 officer was dispatched to a personal injury accident involving a bicycle in the 3700 block of Hamel Road. Upon arrival officers learned a westbound vehicle on Hamel Road did not see an eastbound bicycle and made a left-hand turn in front of the bicycle causing a collision. The bicycle rider sustained minor injuries from the accident. On 07/26/2021 officer responded to assist Maple Grove PD with a vehicle that was failing to pull over southbound on County Road 101. The Medina officer assisted with a felony stop of the vehicle once the driver finally stopped. The driver was arrested by Maple Grove Police. On 07/27/2021 officers and Hamel Fire Department were dispatched to a person passed out at a business in the 3900 block of Arrowhead Drive. When officers arrived they learned medical responders at the business had started CPR on the subject. The subject had regained a pulse and was breathing on his own by the time North Ambulance arrived on scene. The patient was transported to the hospital. Investigations: Investigating a theft from a residence in the city of Loretto. This has been an on -going issue between a mother and her son. The son had been pawning items throughout the metro. I am collecting additional evidence before I submit the case to the Hennepin County Attorney's office for charging. Investigating a theft from Target involving an adult female. I learned from Asset Protection that the female has committed similar thefts in the last few months. The investigation is on -going. Received a report of a sexual assault that occurred approximately 4 years ago in the city of Medina. The alleged assault also involved pictures that were taken of the victim by the suspect. The victim provided a statement, and I am making attempts to locate and interview the suspect. The investigation is on -going. In December of 2020, I submitted an administrative subpoena to obtain a suspect's records for the app, "Cash App". On July 20th, 2021, I received those results from that subpoena. I will be making attempts to interview the suspect and then submit my case to the Hennepin County Attorney's office for charging. Investigating a report of a burglary of a home that is under construction in the city of Medina. Numerous tools were taken from the construction site. Physical evidence was collected from the scene. The investigation is on -going. Received a report of a theft of three catalytic converters from a business. The suspect left no physical evidence at the scene. The business captured the theft on their surveillance cameras. I sent out a crime alert with information about the suspect. Completed a background check for a public works seasonal employee. There are currently (15) cases assigned to investigations. MEDINA CITY OFFICE 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN 55340-9790 ADMINISTRATION 1 PLANNING & ZONING 1 PUBLIC WORKS P' 763.473-4641 f 761.43.9359 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING: SUBJECT: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council Steve Scherer, Public Works Director July 29, 2021 August 4, 2021 Public Works Update STREETS • The Medina Road shouldering project has been paved, the process went very well, and work was completed in one day. Public Works will have some recon work to do after the asphalt has cured. • Work has begun on Highcrest and Oak Circle. Public Works replaced three catch basins along the roadway as they had deteriorated over the many years of use. Next, we will repair soft spots, then we will be ready for pavement. • Inspections are in progress for Phase I of the Reserve of Medina. This is the final walk through for the Toll Brothers portion of the project. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • On July 16th the DNR declared a drought warning for the entire state because of the high heat and lack of rainfall. This means we are required to implement our water use plan, with the goal to reduce water use to 50% above January levels. Should the DNR determine Minnesota has entered the "Restrictive Phase" we will have no choice but to mandate restrictions on water use. Additional information is included in the packet, and I will have a presentation at the council meeting. • Our Water Operator will be on medical leave for the month of August. Even though we are cross trained in this area, there will be a learning curve for the rest of the crew. I have a lot of knowledge in this department since operating our water system was my job prior to moving into the Director position. • The new computer software programs for the water treatment plant are approximately 90% complete. The software is also installed onto our surfaces (laptops) so we can monitor the plant remotely. PARKS/TRAILS • A small portion of trail on Hunter Drive was replaced along with the parking area at Medina Morningside. • Work has begun at Hunter Lions Park (court replacement and ballfield relocation). The ballfield structures have been removed. The court and storm sewer have been staked, so we are ready to begin just as soon as the pipe arrives. 1 PERSONNEL • Public Works is actively searching for a suitable replacement for the vacant Maintenance Technician position. • Jeff Bursch has joined the team as a part time worker and is a big help. 2 AGENDA ITEM: 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director DATE: August 4, 2021 MEETING: August 10, 2021 Planning Commission SUBJ: Public Hearing — Medina Townhome Development LLC — 1432 County Road 29 — PUD General Plan and Site Plan Review Summary of Request Medina Townhome Development LLC has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) General Plan Review and Site Plan Review for a proposed 23 -unit townhome development at 1432 County Road 29, north of Highway 12 and east of County Road 29. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below. The aerial shows existing land uses and describes planned land uses as follows: • The City of Maple Plain is west of County Road 29. The Haven Homes senior project is under construction to the northwest • Baker Park Reserve is located to the east and northeast • Property to the southeast is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) development. • The lot north of the subject site includes an existing single-family home and is guided for potential HDR redevelopment • Commercial property is located to the south The site is approximately two acres in size and currently includes an existing home and garage. The site slopes down to the east and includes moderate tree cover. Concept Plan Review The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a concept plan for a 24 -unit project this spring. Excerpts from the minutes of those meetings is attached for reference. The Planning Commission and City Council were initially concerned with how tight the site plan was and with circulation. Following the removal of a unit, adjustments to the site, and improvement of architectural design, feedback generally was open to the flexibility of the PUD to reduce the southern setback. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning The subject site is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) development and zoned R4 (Residential Multiple Family). The HDR land use and R4 zoning district allow townhome and multi -family development with a density between 12-15 units/acre. Staff has attached the Vision and Community Goals, the general land use principles, and objectives of residential land use from the Comprehensive Plan. The criteria for reviewing a PUD include determining whether the PUD meets these objectives better than a development following the general ordinance standards. PUD Purpose/Information The applicant has requested rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as an alternative to developing under the R4 zoning district. A PUD provides flexibility to the underlying zoning requirements in cases where the City determines that such flexibility better serves the purpose of the PUD ordinance and other City objectives. Purpose of a Planned Unit Development According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 2 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high -quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low -impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. Proposed General Plan The plan proposes 23 townhome units amongst four structures. This density would be at low end required within the HDR land use and R4 district. The applicant has indicated that they would intend to offer the townhomes for rent. The R4 zoning district is intended to implement development in the HDR land use. As noted above, a PUD allows "deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards" to serve the purposes described in the PUD ordinance. To analyze whether to approve a rezoning to PUD, the City compares the request to the expectations of the underlying zoning designation. The applicant has requested the PUD for primarily for flexibility from the setback requirement to the new public street along the south of the property. The applicant has stated that this flexibility is necessary to obtain the minimum density of 12 units/acre with townhome units. The applicant states that townhomes could not be developed at this density without some flexibility through a PUD. The alternative would likely be for a 3 -story multi -family structure, which the applicant argues is not be economically viable at this scale. The following compares the concept to the R4 district requiremen R4 Requirement Proposed Townhomes Minimum Net Area per Unit 3400 s.f. 3922 s.f. Maximum Net Area per Unit 3650 s.f. 3922 s.f. Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 20 feet Arterial Road setback 50 feet 50 feet from existing ROW (33' from additional ROW) Local Road Setback (new road on south) 40 feet 20 feet Private Road Setback (internal driveway) 25 feet 19 feet - drive to garage Minimum Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 50 feet Max. Hardcover —w/o wetlands and ponds 70% 67% Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 3 of 9 PUD General Plan August 10, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting The applicant proposes a density of approximately 10.95 units/acre, just under 12 units/acre, which is the lower end of the density range required in the HDR land use. The Comprehensive Plan allows the city to consider flexibility to the density standards as follows: "exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use." 23 -units falls within this allowed -10% flexibility. During the concept plan review, staff's impression was that the Planning Commission and City Council believed the reduction would be appropriate to provide townhome development at this density while taking into account the site constraints. The applicant has indicated that they will agree to rent at least two of the units at 80% of the area median income (AMI) to help provide options at a lower rent point. The remaining units would be market rate rents. Architectural Design Renderings of the proposed townhomes are attached. The minimum standards of the R4 district include: • Accent materials — minimum of 20% of any facade facing a street shall be accent material • Garage door elements — if garage doors occupy more than 50% of horizontal facade facing a street, additional elements are required • Building modulation — buildings are required to be modulated at least once per 50 feet. This may include varying building height, building setback, building orientation, roof pitch, roof design, or significant differences in building materials/design. The applicant proposes fiber cement siding as a primary material. The applicant has proposed 20% of the total exterior materials as stone accents. Approximately 33% of the western facade would be stone and 25% of the southern facade would be stone accent. In addition, the applicant has included fiber cement board and batten accents. The applicant has included overhangs and railings to provide a porch appearance for the units facing the new public street to the south. Staff believes the proposed architectural design appears to complement the existing structure west of County Road 29 fairly well. Garage doors are proposed to occupy over 60% of the linear facade of the structures facing interior to the site. The Planning Commission and City Council can discuss whether the existing architectural elements of the building are sufficient, or if elements such as windows should be added to the garage doors as well. Tree Preservation, Buffer Yard and Landscaping Although the site is not wooded, it is a residential lot with moderate tree cover throughout. There are 32 significant trees on the property and the applicant proposes to remove all the trees except five trees along Baker Park Road. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 4 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting The City's tree preservation would allow 11 (35%) of the trees to be removed without replacement. Replacement beyond this amount is required on an inch:inch basis. Because of the large size of the trees on the site, this would result in 452 inches of replacement trees. Section 828.41 Subd. 7 provides for a waiver of a portion of the replacement when "an applicant has exhausted all reasonable design options for a Development Site." Staff acknowledges that most of the trees would need to be removed to develop this site at the density identified in the Comprehensive Plan, especially the large trees scattered throughout the center of the property. Staff believes it is appropriate to consider some amount of waiver. It may be possible to preserve some additional trees along the perimeter of the site if the property was developed with a three-story multi -family building. If the City considered just the 15 trees around the perimeter of the site and allowed for 35% removal, it would result in 120 inches of replacement trees. Staff believes the remaining trees would need to be removed for any design at this density. The minimum landscaping requirements of the R4 district are based on the perimeter of the development site and are described to the right: Min Req Proposed Overstory 22 29 Ornamental 11 14 Shrubs 36 121 A bufferyard with an opacity of 0.1 is required along the adjacent street. The existing trees proposed to remain and proposed shrubs meet this minimum requirement The applicant has proposed a privacy fence along the northern property line. Although the minimum R4 standards would not require this fence, the Planning Commission and Council believed it was important as part of the consideration of the PUD because of the adjacent single- family home. The City could consider requiring architectural, landscaping, berming, fencing, and other elements beyond the minimum standards as part of a PUD. Wetlands and Floodplain The site contains no wetlands or floodplains. Transportation/Parking The City's transportation plan anticipates a new public street along the south of the property, which is intended to provide access to the future development property to the east, and to loop south to connect with the driveway from Holiday and the multi -tenant retail building to the south. In the future, this loop will provide full access to the commercial properties when Hennepin County constructs a median in County Road 29 at the Highway 12 intersection. The applicant proposes to construct the roadway to the point where it turns south off the property. The remaining portion of the loop is anticipated to be constructed by the development to the east. Hennepin County has recommended that the City obtain an additional 17 feet of right-of-way. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to grant the right-of-way as part of the public Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 5 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting benefit of the PUD even though a subdivision is not being proposed, which is how the City is usually able to require right-of-way. However, the structures are proposed 50 -feet from the existing right-of-way, which is the minimum setback from an arterial roadway in the R4 district. Staff recommends that the setback from the new right-of-way be allowed at 33 feet. The applicant proposes a right -turn lane from the new road onto County Road 29 which appears to align with the width of the street east in Maple Plain. Staff recommends that the roadway width be increased east of the turn lane to accommodate the turn radius around the curve to the south and to provide flexibility for future street extension. The applicant proposes a sidewalk along the south of the property. Staff recommends that the sidewalk connection be provided to the southern terminus of the street to allow for connection to the property to the east. Staff also recommends that pedestrian ramps to be provided to the southeastern quadrant of Baker Park Road and the new street. The property immediately north of the subject site is guided for HDR redevelopment. During concept plan review, staff had recommended that the site be designed to provide opportunity for access to the north to reduce the need for access onto County Road 29. Staff does not recommend requiring an access easement at this time, but to try to avoid locating buildings in a way which would prevent access north. For example, the two owners could come to an agreement to share access. Staff's impression is that the Planning Commission and City Council did not place a high level of importance on this in comparison to some of the site constraints. As currently designed, access to the north would not be practical. Staff believes it may be possible to shift the 5 -unit building and parking to the northwest of the site to provide for this flexibility. The Planning Commission and Council can discuss this matter. City code requires a minimum of 6 guest parking spaces (0.25 per townhome unit). The applicant has proposed these stalls along the entry drive. Staff also recommends that the applicant meet the recommendations of Public Safety and the Maple Plain Fire Department regarding "no parking" signage, curb radii, and emergency vehicle circulation. Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water service from County Road 29 to serve the townhome units and to stub the mains to the north and east. Water in this area of the City is provided by the City of Maple Plain. The City prohibits lawn/landscaping irrigation from using City water. Staff would recommend that stormwater re -use be considered. If the City of Maple Plain allows the applicant to connect a lawn irrigation system to their water, staff would recommend that it be allowed. The City Engineer has provided review comments, and staff recommends a condition that these comments be addressed. Staff also recommends that the hydrant locations be evaluated with Maple Plain Fire to determine if it possible to reduce the amount of water main under the internal driveways. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 6 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Stormwater/Grading Review The applicant proposes a filtration basin in the southeast corner of the site and an underground filtration system under the driveway. The City Engineer has provided review comments, and staff recommends a condition that these comments be addressed. Staff also recommends that the stormwater improvements be sized for the potential future trail along the west of the site. Park/Trails/Multi-Modal The applicant proposes a small "tot -lot" playground within the project and a sidewalk along the new road. The nearest park is located approximately 1/2 mile to the northwest at the Orono School Early Learning Center in Maple Plain. Staff recommends additional recreational amenities as part of the amenities of the PUD. This may include something like a basketball hoop or similar amenity. Staff has engaged with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District to determine whether a trail connection should be constructed along the west of the subject property. There is an existing trail in Maple Plain on the west side of County Road 29. However, there is a trail access into Baker Park 800 feet north of the site east of Main Street. At the very least, the trail would provide a connection to the property to the north. Three Rivers Park owns most of the property to the north and has not indicated whether it will construct a trail connection. At the very least, staff recommends that sufficient right-of-way or trail easement be provided for a future trail, that capacity be provided in the stormwater system, and that the grading plan provide a convenient bench for future construction. The Park Commission and City Council can discuss whether construction of the trail should be required as consideration for the PUD. Review Criteria/Staff Comments The City has a great deal of discretion when reviewing a PUD because it involves a rezoning, which is a legislative action. A PUD should only be approved if it achieves the purposes of the PUD district (described on pages 2-3), the Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. The PUD process allows flexibility to the general zoning standards to result in a more desirable development than would be expected through strict adherence to the requirements, which in this case are the R4 requirements. The process provides flexibility which is ultimately at the discretion of the City. Such flexibility often cuts in both directions, certain aspects of the development may not meet the general standards while other exceed minimum standards. The flexibility provides the opportunity for collaboration in site design because the City can request adjustments which may be seen as preferred, but would not be required under general standards. When considering the PUD, it is important to compare against the development likely to occur under the standard R4 zoning district. The PUD is not being compared to lower density development or no development at all. The high level of discretion applies to use of the PUD process, whereas the City would have a lower level of discretion if a development was proposed at a similar density range which met the standard zoning requirements. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 7 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting In this case, it appears that the primary flexibility being sought through the PUD is to reduce the front setback to the new street to the south. The applicant describes how they believe the proposed General Plan meets the objective in their narrative, which is attached for reference. The applicant argues that the PUD allows for development of the site with rental townhomes while still meeting the City's density requirements for the site. They indicate that this type of development is viable for the site and market and more desirable than development of the site under the R4 standards, which would likely need to be a taller multi -family building. A Site Plan Review has comparative low level of discretion. As described in Section 825.56, the purpose of a Site Plan Review is to "determine whether it is consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance, including the applicable development standards and the purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located." Conditions may be applied to a Site Plan Review approval to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, or to ensure compliance with relevant ordinance requirements or policies. In this case, the Site Plan Review is contingent upon approval of the PUD. If the Planning Commission and City Council find that the proposed General Plan of Development achieves the purposes of the PUD ordinance and other relevant objectives of the City, Staff would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall enter into a development agreement satisfactory to the City which shall include the requirements described below as well as other relevant requirements of City ordinance or policy. 2) The applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans received by the City on July 27, 2021, except as modified herein. The design of all improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing construction. 3) The applicant shall provide a letter of credit prior to any site construction in an amount recommended by the City Engineer to ensure completion of the required improvements. 4) The applicant shall grant drainage and utility easements over all utilities, stormwater improvements, and drainageways. 5) The applicant shall provide 120 inches of replacement trees. Replacement may consist of on -site planting, credit for larger landscaping trees, and payment of $100 per replacement inch to the City's environmental fund for reforestation and woodland management. 6) The site design shall meet the recommendations of Public Safety and Maple Plain Fire with regard to emergency vehicle access and circulation. 7) A privacy fence shall be provided along the northern property line adjacent to the existing single-family lot. 8) The width of the public roadway shall be increased as recommended by the City Engineer. 9) The applicant shall agree that two of the units (or one if the number of units is reduced to 22) is reserved for rental at or below 80% AMI. 10) The applicant shall update plans to extend the sidewalk connection along the new public street to the south and to provide pedestrian ramps at Baker Park Road. 11) The applicant shall provide additional recreational amenities and design the site to accommodate a future a trail along County Road 29. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 8 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting 12) The applicant shall update hydrant locations to reduce the amount of watermain under proposed private improvements, subject to approval by the Fire Marshal or Maple Plain Fire. 13) The applicant shall address the comments of the City Engineer and shall be subject to review and approval by Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed, and other relevant agencies. 14) The Applicant shall provide title documentation and abide by the recommendation of the City Attorney with regard to title matters and recording instructions. 15) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the preliminary plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Attachments 1. Excerpt from Comprehensive Plan 2. Excerpt from 2/10/2021 Planning Commission minutes 3. Excerpt from 2/16/2021 City Council minutes 4. Excerpt from 3/16/2021 City Council minutes 5. Excerpt from 4/20/2021 City Council minutes 6. Engineering Comments dated 8/5/2021 7. Applicant Narrative 8. Plans Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 9 of 9 August 10, 2021 PUD General Plan Planning Commission Meeting Excerpts from Comprehensive Plan Community Vision The following statement provides a vision of the community for the future and the resultant goals and strategies. Medina is a community united by a common goal: to sustain and enhance the quality of life of its residents. Medina will protect its significant natural resources and open space throughout the City, while honoring its rural heritage and fostering safe and well -designed neighborhoods, places of recreation and destinations for citizens to gather. Development within the City will be commensurate with available transportation systems, municipal services and school capacity. Community Goals The following Community Goals are derived from the Vision Statement and inform objectives and strategies throughout the various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. • Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of the community to promote the rural character of Medina. • Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources throughout the community. • Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly approaches to planning, engineering and development. • Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate regionally forecasted residential growth, desired business opportunities and achievement of other Community Goals. Such development and growth shall be at a sustainable pace proportionate with capacity of schools and transportation, water supply and wastewater infrastructure available to the City. • Spread development so that it is not geographically concentrated during particular timeframes. • Promote public and private gathering places and civic events that serve the entire community. • Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community recreational facilities, connect neighborhoods, and encourage healthy lifestyles of its residents. • Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives. • Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that complements the residential areas of the City. • Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of the City's police department and coordinate with its contracted volunteer fire departments. • Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes, retaining a skilled and efficient staff and long-range planning and financial management. Future Land Use Plan Principles The Future Land Use Plan guides the development of Medina through 2040, and will be used to implement the City's goals, strategies and policies. The Plan is guided by the Vision and Community Goals as furthered by the following principles: Development Patterns and Neighborhood Form • Encourage open spaces, parks and trails in all neighborhood developments. Surveys indicate that a high quality of life is found when residents have visual access to green spaces. • Create neighborhoods with a variety of housing types that are well connected with roads, trails or sidewalks. • Maintain the integrity of rural neighborhoods and promote development patterns consistent with existing rural residential development. • Recognize neighborhood characteristics and promote new development compatible in scale, architectural quality and style with existing neighborhoods. • Stage residential growth to minimize the amount of adjacent developments which occur within the same time period. • Guide density to areas with proximity to existing infrastructure and future infrastructure availability. • Concentrate higher density development near service oriented businesses to help promote walkability. • Consider planned development in surrounding communities when making land use decisions in the City. Road Patterns • Recognize regional highway capacity and planned improvements, along with use forecasts, as major factors in planning for growth and land use changes. • Establish collector streets with good connections through the community's growth areas. • Promote trails and sidewalk access near roads and thoroughfares to encourage multi - modal transportation choices. • Consider opportunities to improve north -south travel within the City. Open Spaces and Natural Resources • Preserve natural resources throughout the community and provide educational opportunities to residents to help them understand the value of natural areas. • Preserve open spaces and natural resources. • Protect wooded areas and encourage improvement of existing resources and reforestation. Evaluate existing woodland protections and supplement as necessary. • Support the guidelines identified in the Open Space Report to preserve the City's natural systems. Business Districts and Commercial Areas • Focus service businesses and development near urban residential densities and along primary transportation corridors. " Provide connections between residents and commercial areas and promote businesses within mixed -use areas. " Work to create job opportunities in the community for Medina residents to reduce traffic and commuting demands. " Emphasize service and retail uses which serve the needs of the local community and provide opportunities for the community to gather. " Support business development with a corporate campus style which provides open spaces and protects natural resources. High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 and 15.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. Residential Uses Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use. 3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary. 4. Regulate land within the Mixed Residential land use to provide opportunities for residential development with a density in excess of 8 units/ acre. Flexibility is purposefully provided within the land use to support opportunities for a single project to provide both low- and high- density housing or for multiple developers to partner on independent projects within a Mixed Residential area. 5. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low impact development design standards. 6. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth strategies. 7. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan. 8. Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to the provision of urban services that will hinder future division. 9. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes, conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City's open space and natural features. 10. Promote attractive, well -maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. 11. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. 12. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. 13. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 14. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking, green space, landscape buffering and height limitations. 15. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 16. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required. 17. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space. 18. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD's in exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi -family units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources. 19. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood. 20. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods and to maintain public health and safety. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 02/9/2021 Meeting Minutes Public Hearing — Medina Townhome Development LLC —1432 County Road 29 — Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Finke stated that the proposed concept includes 24 townhomes on approximately two acres, bordering Maple Plain. He stated that the subject site is guided for high density residential development and zoned R4, which allows for 12 to 15 units per acre. He stated that the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process intends to provide flexibility in return for achieving other City objectives and/or public benefit. He identified the adjacent property uses and zoning. He displayed the proposed site plan, noting that the applicant proposed four six -unit buildings. He compared the site layout to the R4 zoning regulations, noting that the primary flexibility requested would be a reduction to the setback to the new road to the south from 40 feet to 20 feet. He stated that the proposed density is just under 12 units per acre which would be reasonable for a site of this size compared to the density range of the underlying zoning district. He stated that the applicant would be open to reserving two units out of the 24 as affordable units, for those making 80 percent of the area median income or less. He displayed the proposed elevations, both front and back. He stated that staff would recommend that at least the minimum architectural standards be met with additional elements added to the units closest to the public roadway. He noted that staff would also suggest a privacy fence to the north to buffer from the existing single-family homes. He provided details on the proposed roadway that would be built to provide access into the site. He noted that staff suggests that the roadway to the south be widened in order to allow better circulation. He stated that staff would also suggest additional guest parking because of the small size of the driveways. He stated that perhaps the ability to provide access to the property to the north be shown as well in the case of future development. Piper asked if the public road continues and circles around the back of the shopping area to the gas station, would it eventually end up being part of the future high density residential to the east of those structures. Finke replied that the road would be partially constructed on the future high -density parcel to the east and therefore would be required as improvements for that development. Sedabres asked if the requirement for the six parking spaces could be accommodated while maintaining the proposed density. Finke replied that it is possible that the parking could be located along the entry drive, otherwise the units may need to be resized in order to accommodate the parking and maintain the density. Sedabres referenced the property to the north and asked how many additional units could fit on that property under that standard zoning. Finke replied that property is approximately .5 acres in size and therefore would equate to six units but noted that there may be dimensional constraints and therefore less units could be approved. Nielsen asked if the setback proposed to be reduced to 20 feet from 40 feet would be further impacted by the desire for the road to the south to be wider. Finke replied that the setback is measured to the right-of-way line and therefore the road could be widened within the existing right-of-way without impacting the setback further. Shane LaFave, representing the applicant, introduced the members of his team that are present tonight. He stated that they see a need for rental housing for families in this area as there is not a large supply but there is a demand in this part of the community. He stated that the townhome concept would align with 1 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 02/9/2021 Meeting Minutes the density recommendation for the site. He described the challenges of attempting to fit all the required elements into the site but believed that this concept maximizes the land to its full potential. He stated that the townhomes would be three to four bedrooms and therefore they anticipate families and have included a tot lot amenity. He stated that the PUD is requested for the setback requirement as they do not feel they could provide this number of units without that flexibility. He believed that this development would be attractive to families that want to live in the community but could perhaps not afford to purchase or would prefer to rent. Nielsen asked for input on the mention of two affordable housing units. LaFave replied that they are comfortable designating two units at the 80 percent median income level. He stated that would lower the rent amounts from those identified in the proforma but would not be a large difference. He recognized that there is a need for that in the metro area and understands the need and desire for that. Popp asked if the applicant has insight on how the rental demand for that area has changed in the past five years. LaFave replied that they completed a market demand assessment but noted that does not go into the history of the demand and instead estimates the current demand. Popp asked and received confirmation that the property is within the Orono School District. Piper referenced the six additional guest parking stalls recommended by staff and stated that it would seem those would need to be included and asked if the developer is committed to finding space for them. LaFave replied that staff did share that concern prior to the meeting, and they do recognize the need for that parking. He stated that the other potential would be to cap the drive lanes and provide parking in those areas. Josh Mckinney, representing the applicant, stated that there are a few options available that would be viable for guest parking and provided additional details on those potential locations. He stated that they would further explore those options as they go further into the design. Nielsen referenced the comment related to the south facing side of the buildings and asked for input from the developer. LaFave replied that the comment is well received. He noted that in the first iteration they did not have the sidewalk connecting but they recognized the comment of staff to make that more pedestrian friendly. He stated that they will continue to enhance those entrances to the townhomes to look more like front entries, which could include improving the materials, as they proceed with design. He stated that they are motivated to make it look nice and therefore they are not concerned with accommodating those comments from staff. Nielsen asked if there are any suggestions from staff that the applicant would be concerned with incorporating. LaFave replied that it would be tough to provide the connection to the property to the north. He stated that if they attempted to guess where a drive lane would go to the north, it would most likely eliminate the tot lot and impact the privacy fence. He stated that it would be difficult to anticipate what could/would be 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 02/9/2021 Meeting Minutes developed on that site and would not want to see an amenity removed from this site in the interest of guessing on what could happen on the property to the north. Popp referenced the preservation of trees mentioned in the staff report, noting the two areas suggested that could be practical to preserve and asked for input from the applicant. LaFave stated that they like the visual and noise barrier that trees provide and therefore are motivated to keep all the trees they can on the west. He stated that the area to the east would be dependent upon grading and concrete pouring. He stated that if that can be done without damaging tree roots, they would like to preserve those trees. Mckinney agreed that they would like to maintain the number of trees that they can as that provides additional separation from Baker Park Road. He asked the Commission to consider the context in which this is placed. He stated that there may be a need to remove trees within the boundary, but Baker Park will maintain its trees. Nielsen opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Robert Braun, 1472 Baker Park Road, commented that he would support the concept for a privacy fence as well as preserving trees when possible near the property line. He commented that the buildings and patios would be near the property line and would want to ensure that there is not an impact to his property from hardcover runoff. He also asked about patio lighting and potential impacts to his property from that lighting. Finke replied that stormwater runoff would be a consideration that would be addressed through the formal plan process and would be looked at carefully to ensure the runoff does not impact adjacent properties. He stated that lighting from individual units would not be regulated but stated that could perhaps be addressed through the PUD if that is a concern. Mr. Braun asked the rental value for the properties. LaFave replied that they would anticipate rents around $2,000 per month. Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. Grajczyk commented that he likes the townhome concept for this property, recognizing that it is becoming a more popular area for growth and development. He stated that architecturally, he agrees with the need for a change on the south side of the building along the road, as well as widening that road. He commented that the driving and parking space between the buildings is tight and could see that as an issue for future residents having enough space to back out and get through and would prefer to see something with a little more space that is driver friendly. Piper echoed the comments of the previous Commissioner in that this site is awfully tight for traffic coming in and out. She also prefers the guest parking be provided. She stated that as long as the applicant can meet the City requirements, she supports this moving forward. Popp agreed with the direction of the staff comments to be incorporated into the plans moving forward. He stated that he supports the preservation of trees on the east and west. He stated that he also supports the additional architectural elements on the units facing the road to the south. He stated that the additional parking spots would increase the tightness of the site. He referenced the potential access to the north and stated that it would seem difficult to do that without removing another valuable element such as 3 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 02/9/2021 Meeting Minutes the tot lot. He stated that he would prefer the additional separation and tot lot. He stated that this appears to be a valuable development that would align with the City's goals. He referenced the comment related to lighting, which is a valid concern from that resident. Rhem echoed the comments of the previous Commissioners. He stated that staff did an excellent job with their comments and appreciated the applicant for agreeing to incorporate those elements. He stated that this is a great potential development that aligns with what the City is attempting to achieve in its Comprehensive Plan and therefore is very supportive of the request. Sedabres stated that overall, he supports this design as it fits within the R4 standards and appreciates the openness of the developer to provide affordable housing units as that is something the community definitely needs. He echoed the comments related to architectural design on the south and potentially the west sides. He stated that he considered what the local area looks like, noting that the stone fits within the R4 district and adjacent developments. He stated that perhaps additional materials are used to break up the lap siding from east to west. Nielsen agreed with the comments expressed by the Commission thus far. She stated that this appears to be a great design for this property. She noted that she would like to see the two units for affordable housing, if possible, and some sort of downcast lighting on the north side to ensure that does not impact the neighbors to the north. LaFave appreciated the feedback from the Commission tonight. He stated that they will find space for the guest parking and will be cognizant of the vehicle spacing overall. He stated that it appears that perhaps the connection to the north is not needed if they can preserve greenspace and provide the tot lot as an amenity. He stated that they will also think carefully about architecture and the materials they propose, especially on the south side. Finke stated that the intent is to forward this concept to the City Council at its meeting next week. 4 Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Meeting Minutes Medina Townhome Development LLC —1432 County Road 29 — Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan Review (7:15 p.m.) Finke presented a Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for the subject site and displayed an aerial photograph of the site, identifying the adjacent property uses. He explained that the property is zoned as R-4 and noted that the PUD would allow for flexibility of the underlying zoning in return for providing additional benefits that meet other goals of the City and provide a more desirable development. He displayed the proposed site plan of six buildings each with four units for a total of 24 units. He stated that there would be construction of a public street to the south, as identified in the City's transportation plan. He stated that the proposed density of the site is just under the 12 units per acre specified by the R-4 district. He noted that the City would have to make the decision as to whether that density would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that staff believes that the development would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as it is near that density range and only a two -acre site. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan also speaks to some flexibility from the density based on elements in the Code, which could reduce that density to 22 units for the two -acre site. He stated that the applicant believes that some flexibility would be needed from the R-4 district in order to provide townhomes on the site, such as the flexibility on the front setback. He noted that the alternative would allow for construction of an apartment or condominium building that would have additional height in order to put the same number of units on a smaller footprint. He stated that the applicant also notes that they would be willing to reserve two of the 24 units for rent at 80 percent of the median income level in order to achieve a portion of the City's goals for workforce and affordable housing. He provided a rendering of the proposed structures and reviewed the details of the proposed elevations as well as the comments of staff and the Planning Commission. He noted that at the Planning Commission meeting a neighboring property owner requested a privacy fence to provide a buffer between the patios and his property. Martin asked for input on the site layout and architectural design. Reid stated that she sees a missed opportunity, noting that if the garages were flipped to face the outside and front entrances facing the center that would create a center commons area that would help to create a sense of community. She believed that more innovative architecture is needed for the project as the garage side looks ordinary and the patio and front door side would be unacceptable. She did not believe that this would meet the requirements of a PUD as she did not see any planning or architecture that would justify a PUD. Finke commented that staff would need to see what that design would look like, noting that the question would be how the other bank of townhomes would be accessed. Martin commented that Reid presented an interesting concept and asked if the developer could provide input on that suggestion. She stated that she would like to see greater accent materials and a better design with more curb appeal. She stated that she also agrees with the staff and Planning Commission recommendations. Cavanaugh asked where the six guest parking stalls would be located. Finke replied that the guest parking was a staff recommendation and has therefore not yet been shown on the plan. He noted that the applicant suggested a few potential locations for the guest parking and confirmed there would be sufficient space to add parking in those locations. Cavanaugh asked where the snow would be stored. 1 Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Meeting Minutes Finke replied that the applicant can address that question. Cavanaugh stated that the units have short driveways and if snow is stored at the end of the road it would make it difficult for end units to turn their vehicles around. He stated that he would be keener to reach the density of 24 units or changing the product offered. He stated that the second layout includes an option of six units per building. Martin asked the square footage of the interior of the units. Finke stated that he can attempt to pull that information out of the plans. Martin stated that perhaps the square footage of the units could be reduced to achieve the density. Cavanaugh agreed that the units seem large and perhaps the unit size could be reduced to meet some of the standards. Finke estimated about 2,200 square feet per unit. Albers stated that in reviewing the layout he is concerned with the setback of only 20 feet from the local road. He stated that he also echoes the comments of Reid that there is something lacking in terms of architectural design. DesLauriers stated that he is very concerned with the 20 -foot setback and would like to find a way to better meet the required 40 foot setback. He asked for clarification on driveway length. Finke replied that the distance would depend upon how the townhome units would be platted. He stated that in other townhome developments in the community the distance is more likely to be 27 feet from garage to the drive aisle, whereas this would propose 22 feet. He stated that this development would propose a wider drive aisle between the units than would be required, which would balance that out. DesLauriers stated that he would like to see the maximum hardcover percentage for the site too as it appears to be out of compliance. He asked what 80 percent of the median income would equate to for the affordable housing units. He stated that he is also concerned with snow storage and parking for guests as there is not much room in the driveways. Martin asked if the public street would provide opportunities for guest parking as well. Finke replied that the public street would most likely not provide options for parking because of the curved alignment of the street. Martin commented that if the units each have three or four units, the available garage space and parking on the site seems tight. Reid noted that the neighboring retail area is lightly used and typically has excess parking. Martin commented that there would not be a legal right for the townhome residents to park in that area but perhaps a cross parking easement could be secured by the applicant. 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Meeting Minutes Finke commented that the current Metropolitan Council figures show a three -bedroom unit at 80 percent of the median income for the area to be approximately $2,100 per month. DesLauriers asked if the affordable housing units could then be charged rents of up to $2,100. Finke confirmed that to be true noting that the other units could have a higher rate if the market demanded. DesLauriers stated that during the Planning Commission meeting the comment was made by the applicant that they would anticipate rents around $2,000 per month and asked if the affordable units could then have higher rates than the other units. Martin stated that there are concerns with how the units work on the site in light of parking needs and snow storage as well as concern with the architectural presentation of the units. She stated that the Council also agrees with the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission but would like to see additional elements added in order to enhance the curbside appearance. Reid stated that this is an opportunity for have a lovely townhouse development and does not want to miss that opportunity but does not believe this would qualify for a PUD. Finke provided a summary on the infrastructure proposed including the roadway. He stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its meeting the previous week and Commissioners generally supported the townhome use and some flexibility in the setback in order to support that use. He noted that Commissioners also expressed similar concern in the tightness of the site as additional guest parking will need to be incorporated as well. He stated that the City does have a great deal of discretion when reviewing PUD's and noted that it is important to compare a PUD proposal to the underlying standards rather than to alternative land use or no development. He stated that part of that consideration is how many items are being requested for flexibility. He noted that in this case the main flexibility is the front setback, as the other elements generally meet the zoning requirements. He noted that the intent is for the Council to provide comments tonight and no formal action is requested tonight. Martin noted that there is a tot lot proposed, but sometimes the people that need some space are adolescents and was unsure if a sports court or other similar type of amenity could be provided, recognizing the tightness of the site. DesLauriers stated that it was noted that there may be sidewalks connecting in the future and asked for details. Finke replied that the comment was to provide the sidewalk/trail connections along the western portion and through the site along the public roadway in order to provide a connected network. Shane LaFave, representing the applicant, expressed appreciation for this opportunity to gather input from both the Planning Commission the previous week and the Council tonight. He stated that they see the most demand in this area for families to have a rental option in Medina and within the Orono School District. He stated that there is a huge demand but lack of supply for rental housing. He noted that three- and four -bedroom units would provide that opportunity for families and advised that they would be happy to show that market demand with the Council. He stated that they are attempting to target those families that have a need for rental units with three or four bedrooms. He commented that the affordable units would be a maximum of 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/202] Meeting Minutes $2,100, or whatever the market demands, and the affordable units would never be more expensive than the other units. He stated that they are proposing 24 units on the site in order to meet the Comprehensive Plan requirement for density. He stated that if the setback were not reduced, they would only be able to fit 18 units on the site. He stated that they would need flexibility either from the setback requirement or the density requirement in order to make this type of project feasible. He stated that the guest parking arose during the input from the Planning Commission and they have not yet had a chance to update the plan but agree there needs to be guest parking and room for snow storage. He noted that the updated plans would also include more dimensions in order to provide additional information. He confirmed that they would also work to improve the design, noting that these plans are only at about five percent completion and confirmed that they would improve the architectural design as they continue to work on the plans. Martin expressed appreciation for the presentation from the developer along with the staff analysis and review by the Planning Commission. 4 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Meeting Minutes Medina Townhome Development LLC —1432 County Road 29 — Planned Unit Development PUD) Concept Plan Review (7:56 p.m.) Johnson stated that the applicant adjusted their plan based on the input received by the City Council at a February Council meeting. Finke stated that updated architectural renderings were provided along with guest parking and a privacy fence shown on the plans. He recognized that this is still a concept plan review but stated that the applicant is requesting input from the Council on the changes made and whether the Council would support a PUD before moving forward with formal application. He displayed the updated site plan identified the guest parking stalls that were added. He stated that staff raised concern with the western stalls but noted that there are other location opportunities. He stated that the privacy fence was also added to the north. He reviewed some of the architectural elements that have been added to the elevations following the previous review. He stated that the Planning Commission felt that a PUD would be an appropriate tool to provide a townhome development that meets the density identified within the Comprehensive Plan. Cavanaugh recognized the guest parking that was added. He noted that the driveways look very short in length and it could be difficult to back out of a garage and make the turn with the guest parking when there is snow. He asked if the drive and parking layout makes sense to staff, specifically whether there would be enough room to make the backing motions. Finke replied that the distance between the townhomes in the center area is equivalent to the minimum in the parking lot design, specially 60 feet between the two buildings. He recognized that it would be tight, but vehicles would be able to circulate. He stated that the proposed density is at the low range identified in the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that under the Comprehensive Plan there is language that could allow ten percent less density in return for additional benefit or open space, noting that increased vehicle circulation could fall under that category. Cavanaugh commented that if a family has three vehicles, two could be parked in a garage and one would need to be in the driveway, which would make it tight for the end units. He stated that he would tend to prefer a high -density apartment building on this type of site. DesLauriers asked if the applicant would be short one space for guest parking. Finke confirmed that to be true but noted there would be additional opportunities to add guest parking. DesLauriers commented that the two end stalls appear to be about five feet from the sidewalk of the townhomes which is tight, as is the overall development. He referenced the townhome closest to the road and asked if the right turn lane would be a mandatory requirement. Finke commented that the left turn was thought to be the primary maneuver and as the traffic on CR 29 continues to increase there may be some backups and the thought was to let the right hand turns to get by. Stremel confirmed that staff reviewed this from a traffic standpoint and determined that those two turn lane configurations would be most beneficial in this location. 1 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Meeting Minutes DesLauriers commented that there would be 20 feet from the townhome to the road which concerns him in terms of safety. He commented that this is a very tight development on this site and agreed that perhaps this site would be more appropriate for a high -density apartment. Albers stated that he agrees with the concerns raised thus far by the previous speakers. He asked if the affordable housing units would equate to a building or the units within a building. Finke replied that it would be two of the 24 residential units. Reid commented that if these are three- and four -bedroom units that would assume they would be occupied by families with children. She asked where those older children would recreate. She also questioned whether this would qualify for a PUD but believed the City boxed itself in zoning this parcel for high -density. She stated that she would personally prefer townhomes but understands that an apartment would perhaps better fit the site. Martin agreed that this development is too boxy and tight without amenities for the residents. She was also concerned with vehicular movement on the site. Shane LaFave commented that the feedback seems to be consistent in that the Council is not in love with this presentation. He stated that the target audience for this development would be for families with children. He noted that there is a density requirement within the Comprehensive Plan that limits the development on one side and other zoning requirements that limit them on the other end. He asked what the Council would support on this site. He stated that if the Council is looking for multifamily housing in terms of apartments it would be difficult to find a developer for that type of product on this site and therefore the site would remain vacant. He noted that this plan would provide rental housing for families, which is a need in this community. Reid commented that three and four bedrooms seem large as many single-family homes do not have that many bedrooms. She stated that perhaps these be two- and three -bedroom homes instead which would ease up some space on the site. LaFave commented that half of the units would be four bedrooms and the remainder would be three bedrooms. He stated that there is a limited number of rentals for four -bedroom homes, but that is a need for some families. He recognized that it takes up space but commented that there is an incredible need for that product. Cavanaugh commented that he has a few four -bedroom rentals within Medina and has not been overwhelmed with interest. He stated that rowhomes may be a better fit for this site. DesLauriers agreed that perhaps two -to -three -bedroom units would be a better fit for the site. He noted that an apartment building could utilize underground parking. LaFave commented that underground parking is very expensive and only makes sense on large scale apartment developments. He noted that this site is limited in size. Martin commented that the Council appreciates the developer bringing this forward and would like to see additional rental housing in Medina. She believed that it would make sense to reduce the number of bedrooms to free up some space. She did not believe there would be support for the development as proposed under a PUD. 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Meeting Minutes Cavanaugh thanked the applicant for this proposal and hoped that the developer could make adjustments based on the feedback and bring something else back. Reid commented that she does not believe that this would meet the criteria for a PUD. Albers agreed with the comments of Martin. He noted that this is the second proposal for this parcel and stated that perhaps the City should review the zoning to determine if there would be more appropriate zoning that would support development. Finke agreed that it has been identified that even at the minimum density it would be difficult to develop this site. He stated that this parcel was identified for the City's minimum requirements for high density housing within the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that perhaps because of the circumstances of the site, the City could state that perhaps eight units an acre would be a better fit. He believed that the City could still technically comply with the high -density requirements but was unsure how the Metropolitan Council would respond. Martin agreed that this piece should be reviewed in context to the neighboring retail and park properties. Reid commented that she did not think the math would ever work on a property of this size and noted that she would not want to see anything over two stories on this site. She stated that she would support reexamining the zoning of this site. 3 Medina City Council Excerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes Medina Townhome Development LLC —1432 CR 29 — Planned Unit Development (PUD) (7:27 p.m.) Johnson stated that this was before the Council in both February and March, noting that the plan has been revised to address comments reducing the number of units, increasing greenspace, and providing additional recreational opportunities. Finke stated that the previous feedback from the Council raised concerns related to circulation, parking, and a desire for increased greenspace on the site. He stated that the applicant proposed to reduce the number of units by one, which provided additional parking opportunity and greenspace adjacent to the recreational amenity. He displayed the proposed plan and identified the location of the unit which would provide the parking opportunity. He also identified the additional greenspace adjacent to the tot lot. He stated that the surrounding recreational amenities were also identified by the applicant as there was a comment that there was a lack of recreation internal to the site. He reviewed the external amenities including Baker Park and a park one half mile from the site in Maple Plain. He stated that the subject property and property to the east are part of the limited properties in Medina identified for high density residential. He noted that the site is also across the street from the express bus service stop. DesLauriers referenced the table in the staff report related to maximum hardcover and asked if that information would be provided in the future. Finke confirmed that because this is a Concept Plan, that information is not yet available. He believed the calculation would be met but simply is not part of this review. Martin commented that after the last few discussions, she realized that the previous proposals for this land had not come before this current Council and therefore she was unsure if the current members of the Council had the background on this parcel, the challenges it presents for development, and the other proposals the property owner has considered. She noted that there is a long history of the property, to which the property owner and staff could speak and which spans at least five years. Shane LaFave, developer, thanked the Council for reviewing this concept for the third time in order to hopefully provide an improved plan. He stated that he lives about 10 minutes north of this site and has three young children, while his business partner lives about two minutes from the property and also has three small children. He explained that they are local and have strong opinions on the area and how the property should be developed. He stated that he also has knowledge of affordable housing, what the market demands are, what would fit on the property, and how their vision could fit with the requirements and vision of the City. He stated that this site is two acres with a density requirement of 12 units per acre, along with setbacks and other limitations. He stated that there was a third -party rental study completed that shows there is a high demand for rental opportunities for families in this area. He stated that some families cannot afford to purchase a home, or perhaps have something on their credit that does not allow for a purchase and therefore rental would be their option. He recognized the previous comments related to reducing the number of bedrooms or size of the units but explained that families need space to operate and have their own spaces. He stated that these units are designed to provide sufficient space for families with children that need extra bedrooms and space. He stated that in this suburban environment families also need garages and room to move around. He stated that there are many recreation amenities and opportunities external to this site and not everything needs to be provided internal to the site. He stated that the goal is to have people in this development interacting with the community. He stated that even with the removal of the unit they would still meet the density requirement specified within the 1 Medina City Council Excerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes Comprehensive Plan. He believed that the parking situation has been improved which provided additional greenspace adjacent to the tot lot and provided additional room for snow storage. He stated that in order to make this vision happen they would need assistance with the setback, to which they would propose through a PUD. He stated that the PUD would allow them to meet the Comprehensive Plan requirements while providing rental opportunities for families in the community. He believed that this project would be an asset to the community, providing more diversity to the housing stock options, and would bring more families and energy to this part of Medina. He stated that they have attempted to limit their requests to the City to the setback. DesLauriers appreciated the applicant coming back with the expanded tot lot and increased parking. He stated that he likes the changes that have been made. Mr. Palm, property owner, stated that he has been involved in this site for the past eight years. He stated that three years ago they brought a proposal forward and were held off by the Council related to the updating of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the property was ultimately guided for high density housing. He stated that during the past few years he has heard comments that the City does not want to see a three-story structure adjacent to the park. He stated that this is a two -acre site, and this plan meets the density requirements as closely as it can. He stated that this is a great location adjacent to the park and other area amenities. He hoped that there would be more support for this project after all the amendments and thought that was put into this Concept Plan. Reid commented that she was on the Planning Commission when Palm came in with the first proposal and all subsequent proposals. She believed that the applicants are doing the best they can to meet the requirements on this small site. DesLauriers stated that he was also a member of the Planning Commission and recognized the frustration that Palm has experienced throughout this long process. Martin commented that she is intrigued by the passion of the developer to bring this housing product to the community. She recognized that this would be a different element for a PUD as it would not preserve a natural resource but would instead create a housing type that achieves an objective of the Comprehensive Plan to have a variety of housing product options available to residents. She stated that she appreciates the concessions that were made by the developer to address the previous comments of the Council along with the input related to the market conditions and reasoning for the larger units. Cavanaugh commented that he would want to ensure there is a good plan for snow removal going into the submittal process to ensure that the snow would not impede on driveway access and traffic flow. Reid commented that the applicant has done everything they could do to meet the requirements. She agreed improvements were made and she is comfortable with the plan. Albers agreed with the comments thus far. DesLauriers also echoed the comments thus far. He commented that the changes made have been great and agreed that rental units are needed. Martin confirmed the consensus of the Council to support the Concept Plan. She noted that future submittals should address the staff comments included in the packet. 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes LaFave thanked the Council for their cooperation and input, noting that he believes it has resulted in a better plan and he looks forward to bringing forward a full and complete submittal in the future. Palm also thanked everyone for their patience and input throughout this process. 3 WSBENG.COM 0 coco 701 XENIA AVENUE S August 5, 2021 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan — Engineering Review City Project No. LR-21-287 WSB Project No. 017473-000 Dear Mr. Finke: wsb WSB staff have reviewed County Road 29 Townhomes Concept PUD plan submittal dated July 27, 2021. The plans propose to construct 23 multi -family units (townhomes) on a 2 acre parcel. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. General 1. Any work within Hennepin County right of way will require a permit. The applicant shall also meet the requirements of the County's plat review committee. 2. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and required turn around space as required by the City Fire Marshall. 3. Plans show grading and improvements on adjacent property. Provide agreements and easements as necessary to show that the work is approved outside of the property boundary. Site Plan & Streets (03.01) 4. With future submittals, identify the proposed street ROW/easements and note the widths on the site plan. Based on the information provided, it appears the intent is for the shared access to be a public street with the remaining portion of the roadways within the site will be private and so no easements have been proposed. In progress. 5. The applicant will need to coordinate with the property owner directly to the south for the planning and construction of the proposed public/shared access to CR 29. o Lengthen the taper for the proposed right turn lane to a minimum of 7.5:1 or a minimum of 100ft at the public/shared access location. Modify the width of the proposed lanes with a 12' left/through lane and 13.5' outer lane widths to face of curb. o Widen the northerly curb line the full length (eliminate right turn lane taper) and extend in a straight alignment to the east. Stripe the turn lane similar to where the curb was located. K:\017473AOOWdmin\Docs\2021-07-27 Submittal\_2021-08-05 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.doc, City of Medina — CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 2 o Consider creating more of a "T" intersection with the westerly leg Teeing into a north -south roadway that lines up in a straighter alignment. This may provide more flexibility for a future roadway connection to the east for the future development. o Show more of CR 29 and the existing access to the west and how the proposed shared drive will line up with Gateway Boulevard. Show more of the existing southerly commercial site and how the proposed shared driveway will connect at that location as well. o Add dimensions to the narrower east/west and north/south section of the shared roadway. The north/south section of the shared roadway into the exiting commercial site does not appear to be wide enough. Provide a minimum of 36' wide roadway connection. 6. With final plat/plan submittals provide a signing and striping plan with callouts for specific striping and signage types. 7. City design standards require horizontal and vertical curve lengths to meet a 30 MPH design speed, at minimum. Provide a profile drawing for the proposed public/shared access with final plat/plan. 8. The plan needs to include trails, sidewalks, or other pedestrian amenities that connect all of the units. See the City Planners comments on pedestrian access and mobility requirements. In progress, see additional comments from City Planner. Although the City will not require the construction of a trail along CR 29, grading should be proposed that would allow the future construction of a 10' wide trail section. Widen the pedestrian curb ramp to accommodate a 10' wide trail. Grading and Erosion Control (C4.01) 9. Provide EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway. 10. Provide topographic survey that extends 50 feet beyond the limits of the proposed development. Complete. 11. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the buildings, add drainage arrows for flow direction away from buildings. 12. Maintain all surface grades within the minimum of 2% and maximum 33% slopes. Vegetated swale grades shall be a minimum of 2.0%. Show directional arrows and percent grades on final plat/plan submittals. 13. Include stabilized construction entrance. 14. An NPDES permit must be submitted to the City prior to start of construction. 15. A full review of erosion/sediment control will be conducted with the final plat/construction plan submittal. Utility Plan (C5.01) 16. With future submittals show the existing sewer and watermain system including the nearest existing hydrants, valves, and manhole locations. 17. The City of Medina's sanitary sewer system serves the existing site from the west along CR 29. K:\017473-OOO\Admin\Does\ 2021-07-27 Subnuttal\_2021-08-05 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx City of Medina — CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan— Engineering Review August 5,2021 Page 3 18. The City of Maple Plain's water system serves the site. The final design shall meet the City of Maple Plain watermain design standards. Confirm whether or not a permit from the City of Maple Plain will be required. A review of valve locations will be provided with future plan submittals. 19. Watermain looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. Consideration of further watermain looping needs and stubs for future phases or other adjacent developments will be required and reviewed with future submittals. With this in mind, at minimum the City will require that the internal site watermain is extended to the northerly property line with a stub and temporary hydrant, Complete. 20. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the City Fire Marshal. 21, The City will require that each unit have a separate water/sewer service. Each water service shall have a separate curb stop (shut-off). With future submittals show proposed sanitary sewer/water service lines and stub invert elevations on plans; the City requires a minimum depth of 4' from low floor elevations. After discussion with the City Staff, a single mainline water and sewer service pipe to each set of buildings is acceptable, but within each building the water service shall be separated and either metered individually or have the option of adding a meter in the future (if sold as separate units). In progress, a final review of the service connections will be conducted with final plat/construction plan submittals. 22. Gravity sewer is being proposed to serve all units within the development. The City's typical standard is to place sewer a minimum of 10' below the surface (18" vertical separation below the watermain). 23. Any public sanitary sewer or watermain shall be encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert of the utility with a minimum of 20' centered on the utility. City staff will determine which sewer/water mains will be considered "public". 24. With final construction plans, if basements are proposed with the townhomes, the City will require draintile or other connections for sump pump discharges. A separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharge system should be considered. Complete, no basements are proposed. 25. Where any sewer pipe (storm or sanitary) crosses the watermain, include a note saying "Maintain 18 -Inch Separation, 4" Rigid Insulation". Provide dimension notes in various locations between the watermain and storm/sanitary sewer. Construction Details (C.8.01) 26. Add typical street section(s) details to the plans meeting the City's standard, at minimum. The current site plan shows all of the bituminous pavement being "heavy-duty", confirm intended pavement design. The final street section shall be designed by a registered geotechnical engineer for the specific soil conditions found on the site. 27. Include a typical section/design on the plans for the proposed retaining walls. Submit retaining wall engineered designs for walls 4 -feet or greater. 28. With final plat/plan submittals include the City standard details for the pertinent improvements proposed. K:\017473-000Wdmin\Docs\2021-07-27 Submittal\_2021-08-05 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx City of Medina — CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 4 Traffic & Access 29. Based on the proposed site plan the anticipated traffic generation would be 176 daily trips, 11 AM peak hour trips and 13 PM peak hour trips, assuming 24 townhomes on the site. 30. Any access to CR 29 will be controlled by Hennepin County; full access to the proposed development and the existing retail site to the south shall be combined into one location between the existing retail and the proposed site. The proposed plan shows a shared/public access to CR 29 with two lanes exiting (one left and one right lane) and one lane entering. 31. We understand the existing shared access to the retail site and Holiday will remain open with the proposed development. However, the access will need to be converted to a right-in/right-out in the future when development to the east is proposed, in accordance with Hennepin County requirements. These improvements will need to be coordinated with the property owner to the north and west. 32. A traffic analysis/study should be submitted with assumptions of the existing, proposed, and future development(s) to determine whether when turn lanes will be required at the shared access on CR 29. The analysis should also include what level of future development will trigger the need for construction of the turn lanes. Additional comments may follow from the City (either Maple Plan or Medina) and/or Hennepin County based on the final concept plan submitted. In -progress by WSB. Stormwater Management 33. Please include they HydroCAD model with future submittals for verification of modeling. 34. The development will need to meet the City's volume control requirement to capture and retain onsite 1.1" of runoff from the net new impervious surface. By satisfying the volume requirement the water quality requirement is considered met. Follow the City's Stormwater Design Manual for alternative credits towards the volume requirement if infiltration is not feasible. 35. Filtration is being proposed on site. Medina requires 1.1" of run off over new impervious. Current calculations only account for 1.0" of rain fall. Current abstraction does not meet the requirement. The future trail will need to be considered in the impervious surface coverage calculations. Please provide calculations for conformity with city standards. 36. The applicant needs to provide rational for why other BMP's are not available within this site. Filtration is the last option and others must be explored before filtration is allowed. 37. The development will need to meet the City's rate control requirement, which states that post development discharge rates must be less than or equal to existing conditions discharge rates. 38. Provide runoff rates for all discharge points on the site. Please break the overall numbers out into individual drainage areas. 39. Show maintenance access to all stormwater facilities. 40. Include EOF for the filtration basin including a stabilized EOF 41. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District) and the applicant shall submit for the required permits. K1017473-000Wdmin\Does\2021-07-27 Subnuttal\_2021-08-05 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx City of Medina — CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 5 Wetlands 42. A wetland delineation was approved for the site in 2017 and concluded there are no wetlands present (NOD No. WF-17-089). The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City's standards. We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet. Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer K:\017473-000Wdmin\Docs\2021-07-27 Submittal\_2021-08-05 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx PUD and Site Plan Approval Submission —1432 Co Rd No 29, Medina, MN 55359 Statement on compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan calls for the following: • _Minimum of 951 new households • 244 Units of higher density housing • Minimum overall average density of 3 homes/acre • provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives • Nigh density housing planned in the southwest corner of the City Our proposal ►neets all of the objectives listed above and is in direct alignment with the Comprehensive Plan. Our proposal is to provide 23 rental townhomes on 2 acres of land, which gives a density just under 12 units/acre. The townhomes will consist of both three - bedroom and four -bedroom homes that will be rented to families in need of rental housing (includ ing 2 units limiting rents at the 80% AMI level). The driving factor behind this use type is the lack of rental housing options for families in the area. In addition to contributing to the density and new development objectives. this rental opportunity will help the City to provide a more diverse array of housing. options at a wider range of costs. Statement describing the PUD and the market it is intended to serve: Currently this 2 acre property is used as a vacant single family home, garage, and land. The proposal is to remove the single family home and garage and construct 23 new townhomes (4 buildings), some private outdoor space and recreational area, as well as a new public road. Site design will also take into account the grading changes on the property as well as the need for stormwater management. The townhomes will consist of both three -bedroom and four -bedroom homes that will be rented to families in need of rental housing (including 2 units limiting rents at the 80% AMI level). The driving factor behind this use type is the lack of rental housing options for families in the area. A 3`d party rental housing demand assessment was conducted by Viewpoint Consulting and it estimated the unmet rental demand for the primary market area surrounding this site is 168 units. Construction of new rental townhomes will help meet that unmet demand. While we understand that sometimes PUD's are applied for as a means by which to deal with wetland requirements or tree conservation, our intention is to use the PUD designation as a vehicle by which we can meet the Comprehensive Plan recommendations while at the same providing a rental opportunity for larger families. While the number of bedrooms in each unit could be reduced, and therefore the footprint of the buildings, it would result in the exclusion of larger families as potential renters. We believe having units with larger bedroom counts allows families with kids to have the living space they need while also benefiting from the local schools, parks and amenities Medina has to offer. Once construction is completed the site will have density just under 12 units/acre. The proposed use of rental townhomes and density of almost 12 units/acre fits within the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. To further address Section 827.25 of the City Zoning Code, rental townhomes are not something that currently exists in abundance in Medina. In order to make this project a reality and make it comply with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan a PUD is needed. Provision of these townhomes will allow for those who for various reasons cannot purchase a home in Medina to still live in this community, thereby helping to meet the demands for all styles of economic expansion (Subd. 1). Without a PUD the density recommendation on this 2 acre site is not physically or economically feasible, so the classification of a PUD allows for a higher and better maximization of the site (Subd. 2), which in the long term is a better use for the City (per the Comprehensive Plan) with the expected growth. The completion of this project also includes constructing an access road to the 14 acre parcel located immediately to the SE of the subject property, which will make development of that parcel more feasible and convenient (Subd. 6). Without a PUD, the setback requirements in the underlying zoning code would require this project to be less than 23 units, which means it would not meet the density recommendation, which in theory would mean it cannot move forward. A 23 unit project meets the density recommendation, maximizes the use of the site area, and allows for more diversity of housing options to be offered in the City (Subd. 8 and 9). We have done all that we can to minimize the exceptions asked for, and although we are asking for the PUD the only exception we are really requesting is a lesser setback length from the SW building to the entry drive. Statement on total number of units and square footage. There will be 23 total units with a square footage of 27.980. Describe public or private open spaces: Part of the site plan includes some private outdoor space which will include a playground and seating area. We also have room for guest parking, snow storage, sidewalks connecting out to the future trail along Baker Park Road, and numerous trees/landscaping. Additionally, we will be constructing a new public entry drive which will better allow for future development on the land to the southeast of our site. Restrictive covenants: Two of the units will have rents limited to the 80% AMI level. t General Plan of Development for Medina Townhomes Medina, Minnesota Presented by: Medina Townhome Development, LLC. CONSULTANT CONTACT LIST: DEVELOPER/OWNER MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC. TEL 949-439-8425 JOSHSANDERSON@ EDINAREALTY. COM CONTACT: JOSH SANDERSON ARCHITECT KAAS WILSON ARCHITECTS 1301 AM ERICAN BLVD E BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 TEL 612-879-6000 CO LLINK@ KAASW I LSON.COM CONTACT: COLLIN KAAS GEOTECHNICAL CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING, INC. 414 37TH AVE N ST. CLOUD, MN 56303 TEL 320-774-3500 VERDEGAN@CHOSENVALLEYTESTING.COM CONTACT: COLBY VERDEGAN CIVIL ENGINEER SAMBATEK 12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300 M INNETONKA, MN 55343 TEL 763-476-6010 @SAMBATEK. COM CO NTACT: SURVEYOR GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. 445 WILLOW DR N LONG LAKE, MN 55356 TEL 952-473-4141 E RI CD@ G RON BE RGASSOC. COM CONTACT: ERIC DAGGETT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SAMBATEK 12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 TEL 763-476-6010 JMCKINNEY@SA MBATEK.COM CONTACT: JOSH MCKINNEY VICINITY MAP NO SCALE SHEET INDEX SHEET DESCRIPTION C1.01 ICOVER SHEET _ C3.01 I SITE PLAN C4.01 I GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PL AN C5 .01 UTILITY PLA N _ C8.01 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS L1.01 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1 .02 LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND NOTES ATTACHED ALTA / NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY PREPARED BY GRONBERG AND ASSOCIATES, INC. DATED JANUARY 17, 2017. G OVERNING SPECIFICATIONS CITY ENGINEER'S ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (2013) MNDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR C ONSTRUCTION (2018 EDITION) kambatek www. sambatek.com 12800 Whitewater Drive, Sulte 300 MMnetonka, MN 55343 763.478.6010 telephone 763.476.8532 facsimile Engineering !Surveying I Planning I Environmental Client MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC. Project MEDINA TOWNHOMES Location MEDINA, MN 1432 COUNTY ROAD 29 Certification Summary Designed: KB Drawn:16P Approved: JED Book / Page: Phase: PRELIMINARY Initial Issu ed: 06/30/2021 Revision History No.Date By Submittal / Revision 6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPME NT SUBMITT AL 7/27/2021 PALL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE Sheet Title COVER SHEET Sheet No. Revision C1 .01 Mang LL RaEEnu 2,171.0,0.1u RR,v22»< 2.EOYER, Pr oject No. 22471 o=—=!!! �� — �aH�R — o .. � D— 50 THF SU BSU RFACE LOWRY INFO RM/J . SHO WN ON 1ELRN E IS U OURI LIMON LEV EL O. THIS QUALM LEVEL WAS UMW,. Lir7170Px[R52Ai ox[w N,Hx �sm.t71rn G ocuGaNED FM OR AR FRIO/RE to EMOR Y LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AN D ALL MOORSUxDEmfRDUHD A HD m. RIOPM. azRr If CONIRA CTOR MO UNTERS OM ORRIN TO WOR M TO SME, 14 OP SHE MO O, Nom.. THE ENGINEER WIN IN F LOCATO R. SIM, LEGEND PROPERTY LIMIT CURB & GUTTER EASEMENT BUILDING RETAINING WALL 000000000 WETLAND LIMITS TREELINE SAWCUT LINE SIGN PIPE BOLLARD NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS PER ROW KEY NO TE PROPOSED O a EXISTING STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVING HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVING CONCRETE PAVING CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT BY OTHERS (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS) DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY A REA GROSS SITE AREA BUILD ING SETBACKS FRO NT YARD REAR YARD SIDE YARD ZONING EXISTING ZONING PRO POSED ZONIN G 95,114 SF 2.18 AC 50 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET PROPOSED TOWNHOME 7,300 S.F. FFE=1001.0 PROPOSED TOWNHOME 7,300 S .F. FFE=1001.0 N H TOT LOT m -DEVELOPMENT NO TES 1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT. 2. A LL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLES S OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. CO NTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMEN T GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT "GUTTER OUT' WHERE WATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER A REAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS "G UTTER IN" CURB. COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR. 4. A LL AREAS ARE RO UNDED TO THE NEA REST SQUA RE FO OT. 5. ALL PARKING STALLS TO 8E 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UN LESS O THERWISE INDICATED. 6. CONTRACTO R SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLA NS FOR EXACT LO CATIONS AND DIMENSIO NS OF EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS. 7. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIG N DETAILS 8. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR UGH T POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FO R EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHT POLE. 9. REFER TO FINAL PLAT FO R LOT BOUNDA RIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, A ND LOT DIMENSIO NS. 10. A LL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS A LONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONG ITUDINAL SLOPE OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLO PE OF 2.08% (1:48). THE MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA RO UTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY TH E ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT AND COORDINATE WITH 011601NG CONTRACTOR. PROPOSED TOWNHOME 7,300 S.F. FFE=1000.0 PROP OSED SUBSU FILTRATION SYST 100 -YE AR HWL=99 BOTTO M ROCK = 992 BOTTO M SAND = 989.5 270 LF 6" DRAINTILE PROPOSED T OWNHOME 6,080 S.F . FFE=1000.0 — PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN = 100 -YEAR HWL-992.39 - BOTTOM POND =989.00 _ . . — BOTTOM SAND =986.50 260 LF 6" DRAINTILE -KEY NOTES A. BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS) B. B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER C. B-6186CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER D. FLAT CURB SECTION E. CONCRETE SIDEWALK F. SEGMENTAL BLOCK RETAINING WALL G. ACCESSIBLE RAMP H. ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING I. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN 1. TRANSFORMER K. 60" FENCE L. CONCRETE STEPS AND HANDRAIL N ORTH 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET Sambatek www.sambatek.com 12800 Whltewater DINe, Sulfa 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343 783.476.8010 telephone 763.476.8532 facsimile Enpineerinp I Surveying I Planning I Environmental Client MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC . Project MEDINA TOWNHOMES Location MEDINA, MN 1432 COUNTY ROAD 29 Certificati on Summary Designed:MB Drawn:JGP Approved: AE B ook / Page: Phase: PRELIMINARY Initial Issued:o6/30/2021 Revision History No . Date By Submittal / Revision 6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PL AN OF DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL 7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE Sheet Title SITE PLAN Sheet No. Re vision C3 .01 R-4 R-4 11. "NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS A5 REQUIRED BY CITY. 12. STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY. ,.12,.202E 2.27 w.:maH LAPRO,ECCA l2.,11EADW.:n ShorE.W.ntssH E. e.R Project No . 22471 1 '.. PROTECT EXISTING T IPROTECT EXISTING TREES , I PROTECT EXISTING TREES t 998.5 I 997.6 1 1 II 1 1 1 y1 1 ti g1 t yyLI i � 1 00g.l 999.30. IP1^,P3 999.30. 99' ,14 999,38 99 11„ 50 -999999 998 EPEE St18.0... a unurc INFO netel,05 SMO W11 ON ' MEV BA NS:Se U1111, PUN ,. LEVEL P. THIS P ONE LEVEE WAS DETERM INED AC CORDING TO IEEE GUID ELINES Di MO/o 6 7414 vuGUIDELINES 7O C,9 o[ 0,0* THE OWE1.o aA NIE :88 o 75 TOE NG ER IGOPMLR SIATEo rvc Eo n MHH Ll'iT t;HI MIS OR MITT FUTUR E TO MERLE LC.11 MD PR E AVE ME MOAll ,rt ,u TIES IUNDERGRWHD AHD OVLRIIMEAN eTauswrve o N.B./ CON TIZA CE041 ENCOUN TER S ANY 0.41 'MI WITH IN ENE Sri, NE OR SHE SHALL NOLIEV THE E.INEEP WIN THE LOCA TOR. SIZE. IFEEnR1,140 T EL 11LE UNE IS A CT IVE NO DRAM EILIE SHA LL BE BIEL 6.0 WIT IO UT APPROVAL FRO M THE PROJECT ENGINEER- PROPERTY LIMIT CURB & GUTTER STORM SEWER DRAINTILE BUILDING RETAINING WALL WETLAND LIMITS TREELINE SPOT ELEVATION CONTOUR RIP RA P OVERFLOW ELEV. SOIL BORINGS SILT FENCE INLET PROTECTION PRO POSED 10-N-1111 - PPP - kb. - 902.5 <=i EOF '�V� 9025 ME • •SFE • r.SFr• EXISTING 907.5 X moon. PROPOSED TOWNI j 7,300 S. F. / FFE=1001.0/ 999.7 T/W: 999.15 B/W: 998.50 TOT LOT 999. 36. 1000. 04 ,499.7 998.77. T/W: 996. 67 B/W: 996. 10 9870. y9, LEGEND / / / PFOPOSED TOWNHOME 5oP 7,300 S. F. FFE=1001.0 999 504- - T/W: 994. 60 8/W: 994.60 999. 83 / T/W: 994. 60 B/W: 990.60 ♦ \� \� \ y$ 990 8 99 85 1000.a PROPOSED TOWNHOMEI 7,300 S.F. FFE=1000.0 999.8 999.30. PROPOSED UBSURFA CE FILTRATION SYSTEM 100 -YEAR HWL 995.27 BOTTOM RO CK = 992. 00 BOTTOM SAND = 989. 50 / 270 LF 6" DRAINTI LE PROPO SED TO WNHOME 6,080 S.F. FFE=1000. 0 PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN 100 -YEAR HWL :992,39 BOTTOM POND = 989, 00 BOTTOM SAND = 986.50 260 IF 6" DR819711E 999.83_ 997,9 989 988 987- 1000, T/W: 999. 15 B/W: 995.15 T/W: 994.00 B/W: 990. 04 T/W: 998. 57 B/W: 994. 59 T/W: 998. 00 8/W: 994.00 T/W: 993,5D B/W: 989.50 It 1 T/W: 996.00 B/W: 992.00 T/W: 991 ,451 B/W: 987,45 T/W: 997.34 B/W: 996 .67 1 TAY: 996.77 B/W: 992 ,77 _GRADING NO TES 1 PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION. SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG PROPOSED CURB DENO TE GUTTER GRADE. 2. CONTRACTO R SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT ANDCO NSTRUCT "G UTTER O UT. WHERE WATER OWNS A WA Y FROM CURB. A LL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRU CTED AS'GUTTfR ler CURB. 3. ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A M AXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 5%(1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAM PS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CRO SS SLO PE OF 2. 08% (1:48). M AXIMUM SLO PE IN ANY D IRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE IN 2 08%(1:48). CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY TICE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF TH ERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN TH E FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING CONTRACTOR. 4. CO NTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPO NSIBLE FO R ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PRO PERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. 5. SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRA CTORS. INACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, CONTRA CTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE LO B SETE, INCLUD ING SAFETY OF ALL PERSO NS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORM AL WORKING HO URS. THE DU TY OF THE ENG IN EER OR TH E DEVELO PER TO CON DUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE 15 NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY M EA SURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SHE. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQU IREMEN TS OF TH E O WNER' S SOILS ENG INEER ALL SOIL TESTING SHA LL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. CO NTRACTO R SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TEST S AND INSPECTIO NS WITH THE SO ILS ENGINEER. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPO RT HA S BEEN CO MPLETED BY: COM PANY: CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING, INC. ADDRESS: 41437TH AV E N, ST. CLO UD, MN 56303 PHONE: 320774-3500 DATED: FEBRUARY 20, 2017 CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SOILS REPORT. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE DEWATERING AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTIO N. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, ATEST WE/ S HALL BE PERFORMED ON THE STREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE 50113 SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER . REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AN D WILL NOT PASS A TEST R OLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL C OST TO THE OWNER. 10. CONTRA CTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE F OR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTI ONAL SONS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVE MENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS , 11. EXISTING TREES AND OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AND/OR ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT ARE OF PRIME C ONCERN TO THE CONTR ACTOR'S OPER ATIONS AND S HALL BE A RESTRICTED AREA . CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT TREES TO RE MAIN AT ALL TI MES. EQUIP MENT SHALL NOT NEEDLESSLY BE OPERATED UNDER NEARBY TREES AND EXTRE ME CAUTION SHALL BE EXERCISED WHEN WORKING ADJACE NT TO TREES . SHOULD ANY PORTION OF THE TREE BRANCHES REQUIRE RE MOVAL TO PERMIT OPERATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PR OFESSION AL TREE TRIMMING SER VICE TO TRIM THE TREES PRI OR TO THE BEGINNING OF OPERATION. SHOUL D CONTRACTORS OPERATIONS RESULT IN THE BRE AKING OF ANY LIMBS , THE BR OKE N LIMBS SH OULD BE REM OVED IMMEDI ATELY AND CUTS SHALL BE PROPERLY PROTECTED TO MINIMIZE ANY LASTING DA MAGE TO THE TREE. NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION BY THE ENGINEER . COSTS FOR TRIMMING SERVICES SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND NO SPECIAL PAY MENT WILL BE MADE. 1, EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FR OM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXC AVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. CONTR ACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPRE ADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPS OIL SHALL BE PL ACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDI NG PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS . CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT ARE AS , WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6INCHES . RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6I8146S.NCHES. 13 . TRENCH BORROW CONSTRUCTION: IF ALLOWED BY THE OWNER, CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE 'TRENCH B ORROW ' IN AREAS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER IN ORDER TO OBTAIN STRUCTURAL MATERIAL . TREES SHALL NOT BE REM OVED OR DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF THE EXCAVATION, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. THE EXCAVATION SHALL COM MENCE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE LIMIT OF THE BUILDING P AD. THE EXC AVATIO N FROM THIS UMIT SHALL EXTEND AT A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 1 FOOT HORIZ ONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (1:1) DOWNWARD AN D OUTWARD FROM T HE FI NISHED SURFACE GR ADE ELEVATION . THE TRENCH B ORROW EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED TO THE PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION, AND SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDA NCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE QUALITY COMPACTION METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MN/DOT SPECIFIC ATION 2105.362. SNOW FENCE SHALL BE FURNISHED AND PLACED AL ON G T HE PERIMETER OF THE TRENCH BORROW ARE A WHERE THE SL OPES EXCEED 2 FOOT HORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (2:1). 14. FINIS HED GRADING SHALL RE COMPLETED, C ONTR ACT OR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED T OLERANCES, WITH UNIF ORM LEVELS OR SL OPES BETWEE N POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISHED GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECO ME RUTTED, ERODED OR H AS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. All AREAS DISTURBED BY TICE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIO NS SH ALL BE RESTORED TO E QU AL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION 0R TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK. 15. TOLERANCES 15. a. THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SH ALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE , OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELE VATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. 15.6. THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURF ACE ELE VATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.10 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELO W, THE PRESCRIBED ELEV ATION AT ANY POI NT WHERE ME ASUREMENT IS MADE. 15.c. THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGR ADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEV ATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0 .10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEV ATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE . 15. d AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY T HE ENGINEER. 15.e. TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS. 16 . AFTERTHE SITE GR ADING IS C OMPLETED, IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF 501L MATERIAL EXISTS , CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACT OR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE. 17. C ONT RACTOR SHALL DETER MINE THE LOCATION OF ANY HAUL RO ADS T HAT M AY BE REQUIRED TO C OMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL I NDICATE HAUL ROADS ON EROSI ON AND SEDIMENT CO NTR OL -SITE MAP" , CONTRACTOR SHALL C OMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY OF EACH ROADWAY. CONTRACTOR SHALL P OST WHA TEVER SECURITY, A ND COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE REQUIRED BY EACH GOVERNING AUTH ORITY OF EACH ROADWAY. 18. FILL PLACED WITHIN THE BUILDING PAD AREAS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH HUD/FHA P600000RE5 AND DATA SHEET 79G. 19. RETAINING WAIL(S) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF MODULAR BLOCK MATERIAL CONTR ACTOR SHALL SUB MIT TO THE ENGINEER AND LOCAL AUTHORITY CERTIFIED ENGINEERING DRAWINGS, DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND SOIL BORINGS. THE CERTIFIED ENGINEER FOR THE RETAINING WALL15) SHALL PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENT , AND A LETTER CERTIFYIN G THE INSTALL ATIO N OF THE WARNS) WAS CONSTRUCTED IN CONF ORMANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. NORTH 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET kSambatek www.sambatek.com 12800 Whitew 8ter DM, Sub 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343 763.476.6010 telephone 763.476.8532 facsi mile En8Yleerkq I Sullying I Penning I Fi nkmFenW Client MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC . Project MEDINA TOWNHOMES Location MEDINA, MN 1432 COUNTY ROAD 29 Certification Summary Designed: KB Drawn: 'GP Appro ved: JEB Book / Page: Phase: PRELIMINARY Initial Issu ed:06/30/2021 Revision Hist ory N o. Date By Submittal / Revision 6/30/2021 MIL GENERAL PL AN OF DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL 7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESP ONSE Sheet Title GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet No. Revision C4 .01 Project No. 22471 .a E 1PRmECTslu4n,9EISCWESEteNLI247..cA GMDUIC. /1 / 1 1 \ I \I \ '\ I I\ WAT8 FTO EXISTING WATERMAIN WITH 8" TEE & GTE VALVE (FIELD V IFY) YD 500 RE=999.00 IE=996.11 YD 50 RE=999. - IE=995. 5 YD SO RE -999. 0 IE=996. 1 30 LF-8 " STMSWR@ .00% \ / CB 104 RE=999 .45 IE=994 .45 N 53 LF - 8" STM SWR @ 2.0096 i -e- a -a- -✓ -�� -o - - - HYDR ANT -6"GATE V ALVE \ WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION PROPOSED TOWNHOME 7,300 S .F. FFE=1001.0 .414 / / /23 LF - 8" PVC 25CH 40 @ 2.00% S4NIIT ARP SEWER / SERVICE / 0 =990 .46 'hYDRA NT 98 LF 12 " 6" 44TE VALVE ST M SWR @ 0.7596 1 1 1 1 V V / y I CBMH 103 RE=999 .45 18=993.72 -N N 115LF-12 " STM SWR @ 0.75 % / F CATE MAI PROPOSED TOWNHOME 1/,300 S .F. FFE=1001.0 7 7 1 I I 4 4 4 2111.F - 8" PVC 50R 26 @ 2.0096 \ CO NNECT TO EX IS. TRASA IVITARYSYST EM MH 01 RE=998.05 PIE SUBSUR FACE O lIDT V IN FORM,. ED ACCO RDING TO TIN GtlItt LINES OF E/C 3e02 iON LED 'SIAnouo G UIDELINES TNY x BCOLLECTIHIS xANo DE.wiCTION OFETISTING SUIRSURiACE UTILITY DA TA: ENE AND/OR SUN:ONTRACOR SSHA LL D E14o:xNEs.E, EXA CT TLwMON OF ALL OS TINO B OOR NCOMMENN ONGGWO RK ByCO`iiuIN r THE POTIFICT IENO CEENTER1,60AUD STAT EO ONE FOR NlN ESO T MINNESO TA). EDn HAD RHERTA DErACrCrCrt ANDPRESEwi Am ARTUITU'll s,I'l'I GRDuE ANOwEXI 'AD E IF TNE CON TRA CTOR EN COUNTERS AN Y DRAIN TILE WITHIN TNE SU, ME OR SKE SM.. NO TIFY THE EN GINEER WTTN THE INvERT AND IF ENE TILE UNE AC-riVE. NO DRAIN TILL SHAU RE BA CKER. VOINO VI APPROV AL FROM TH E PRO JECT EN GINEER IF SMALL BF THE SHOWNONTHE OE TN TNE TRA CT OR TO RELOCATE A LL EXISTING UT ILITIES WHICH COR FU, WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEM ENTS LEGEND PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER STORM SEWER 0-N-1�A� SANITA RY SEWER FORCEMAIN (SAN. ) pp�-Q WATERM AIN p4- 1 EASEMENT DRAINTILE -OFF-FFF- GAS LINE ELECTRIC AIL TELEPHONE Vr EXISTING 1. CBMH 101E RE 998.72 10-994.72 VIC ECONNECTION \ 23 LF-8 "PVC SCH 40@2 .00% \ SANITARY SEWER • 108 LF-8"PVC SDR 26 @2.00% IE=988 .30 MH 04 RE=999.05 IE=987.84 , 39 LF-8 "PVC - CBMH 101A RE=998.32 \ \ I0=994.43 58 LF 12" STM SWR @ 1.00% HYDRANT 6" GATE VALVE 8" WATERM AIN TEE AND PLUG L4 / / 4 / 1 MN 05 RE 000 .48 W ATERM AIN SERVICE CONNECTION 24 L0 - 8" PVC SCH 40 @ 2.00% SANITARY SEWER SER VICE IE=990A8 iCBMH 105 RE =998.49 IE�992.86 PROPOSED TOWNHOME 7,300 S .F. FFE=1000 .0 N N 25 LF - 12 " STM SWR @0.75% i1 s- WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION 42 LF - 8" PVC SCH 40 @ 2.00% SANITARY SEWER SER10-988VICE �- .68 24 LF - 12' STM SWR @ 2 .0096 CBMH 101 RE=998.00 'IE =99 .50(E) 1E-993.63 (S) IE =993 .95 (W) 10 LF - 15" STM SWR @2.00 % STMWITH 10 00 PROP OSED FILTR ATION BASIN WITH SUMP AND&AFL BAFFLE= 100 -YEAR HWL = 992.39 - / RE=995.50 _ B OTT OM P OND = 989.00 \� X -IE=991.30 BOTTOM SAND =986.50 FES 100 \ 260 LF 6" DRAINTILE _ - . 1E=991.00 15 LF-15 " - STM SWR @2.00%.- --�-- 32LF-8"PVC SDR 26 @ 2.00% MH 03 RE=998.84 IE=987.06 /100 -YEAR HW L = 995 .27 / BOTT OM ROCK =992.00 B OTTOM S AND = 989.50 270186 " DRAINTILE / /� \�� ••CBMH 106 • PROP OSED SUBSURFACE RE=998.49 I FILTRATION SYSTEM IE=994'49 HYDRANT 6" GATE VALVE V PROPOSED TOWNHOME 6,080 S.F. FFE=1000 .0 VV \ OLF - 12 " TM SWR @0 .5096 FES 202 0 =988.50 DC510 IE=999.00 IE=99500 W) IE=98890)E) DRAINT LE IE = 989.50 51 LF - 12 " STM SWR @ 1.0096 MH 02 RE=999.15 IE=986.42 CBMH 1018 RE=998.75 10=994 .14 62L -8"PVC SDR 26 @ 2.00% \ / 7 7 7 1 1/ 20 LF - 12 " CST M SWR @0.50% / FES 202 IE=986.40 CBMH 201 . RE =992.00 IE = 986.501E) DRAINTILE IE = 986.50 / UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS" AS PUBLISHED BY THE CITY 5. ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESO TA (CEAM), EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS. 1. 1. ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREM ENTS. 1.2. CONTRACTO R SHALL NO T O PEN, TURN OFF, INTERFERE WITH, OR ATTACH ANY PIPE OR HOSE TO OR TAP WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHO RIZED TO DO 50 BY THE CITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE THE LIABILITY OF CONTRACTO R. 1.3. A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATIO N OF 18 INCHES AND HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10 -FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS 15 REQUIRED AT ALL WATERMAIN AND SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS. 2. ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN CEAM SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS MO DIFIED HEREIN. 2.1. A LL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. 2.2. ALL SANITARY SEWER TO BE PVC SDR-35, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2.2.1. ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665. 2.3. A LL WA TERMA IN TO BE DUCTILE IRO N - CLASS 52, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2.3.1. A LL WATERMAIN TO HAVE 7.5 -FEET OF COVER OVER TOP OF WATERMAIN. 2.3.2. PROVID E THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER CITY STANDARDS. 2.4. ALL STO RM SEWER PIPE TO BE SMOOTH INTERIOR DUAL WALL HDPE PIPE WITH WATER TIGHT GASKETS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2.4.1. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE FOR ROOF DRAIN SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665. 2. 5. RIP RAP SHALL BE M,, /DOT CLASS 3. COORDINATE ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTION LOCATIONS A ND INVERT ELEVATIONS WITH MECHANICAL CO NTRACTOR PRIO R TO CONSTRUCTION. ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTIONS (STORM, SANITARY, WATER) WITH FIV E FEET OR LESS COVER A RE TO BE INSULA TED FROM BUILDING TO POINT WHERE 5 -FEET OF COVER'S ACHIEVED. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTI ONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY D AMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURI NG THE C ONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY D AM AGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT . 6. SAFETY NOTICE TO C ONTR ACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, C ONTR ACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE J OB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERS ONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE W ORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORM AL WORKING HOURS . THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF CONTRACTOR'S PERF ORMANCE I5 NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE RE VIEW OF THE ADE QUACY OF CONTR ACTOR'S S AFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE . ]. ALL AREAS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY B OUNDARIES THAT ARE DISTURBED BY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED IN KIND. SODDED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED WITH 6 INCHES OF TOPSOIL PLACED BENE ATH THE SOD . 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESP ONSIBLE F OR PROVIDING AND M AINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAG MEN AND LIGHTS TO C ONTR OL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC C ONTROL DE VICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI ON ST AND ARDS. 9. ALL SOILS TESTING SHALL BE C OMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER. EXCAVATI ON FOR THE PURPOSE OF REM OVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE 50115 EN GINEER. THE UTIUTY BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL C OMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER . CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED S OILS TESTS AND SOIL INSPECTIONS WITH THE S OILS ENGINEER. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HAS BEEN C OMPLETED BY: COM PANY: CHOSEN V ALLEY TESTI NG , INC . ADDRESS: 414 37TH AVE 5, ST. CLOUD, MN 56303 PHONE: 320-774-3500 DATED: FEBRUARY 20, 2017 CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS SOILS REPORT. 10. CO NTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT 2COPIES OF SHOP DR AWIN GS FOR MANH OLE AND CATCH BASIN STRUCTURES TO ENGINEER . CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW 5 WORKING DAYS FOR SHO P DRAWING REVIEW. 11. CONTRACTO R A ND MATERIA L SUPPLIER SHALL DETERMINE THE MINIMUM DI AMETER REQUIRED F OR EACH ST ORM SEWER STRUCTURE. NORTH 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET www.sambatek.co m 12800 Whitewater Drive, Suite 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343 763 .476 .6010 telephone 763 .476.8532 facsimile Engineering I Surveying I Planning I Environmental Client MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC . Project MEDINA TOWNHOMES Location MEDINA, MN 1432 C OUNTY ROAD 29 Certification Summary Design ed: 'TB Draw n:L OP Approved:1E8 Book/ Page: Phas e: PRELIMI NARY I nitial Issued: 06/3 0/2321 Re visi on History N o.Date By S ubmittal / Revision 6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL 7/27/2021 MIL CM COMMENT RESP ONSE Sheet Title UTILITY PLAN Sheet No. Revision C5.01 Project No . 22471 Mn,2021 uTPm U,.,.m.n Lwno,ECrsUumCA MCM ....201 CS UM .0 col 7.2021228, ,224.1-I1HSm<.g ® W)+5C'RsRnrj —**-61,0-4. , v® v®®dim AM ®®ono Mk ©j v©;` WAXY W©v©O tiplko "6 a 0:,:' °o ". a�w ro°°./._o �i. .. ©.,,,, o, QO Q Pn\� �1°,`°:' e"®�' MX ®Ark IN v ir Mi7 12/ PRO POSED TO WNHOME 7,300 S.F. FFE=1001.0 TOWNHOME . �,_© ® ,300 S. F. /y� m YY FFE=100©, �1 �I ,. ,, Lam, i �► tar o,© ter) olICF4 IIIP"'11116 Ev ° ate olive- °cvr:.v ® 1�E ° v©o �•10, ° WAM Ark AiM1 Ain AM I o x:11 ©�PM/ vv v© PRO PO SED TOWNHO ME1 7,300 S.F. FFE=1000. 0 PROPOSED TOWNH 6,080 S F FFE=1000. 0 � ® ® 42IX D '7 u wv ono �- a r -L O Oio uh WX r 10i MOW BUILDING RETAINING WALL WETLAND LIM ITS TREELINE LANDSCAPE EDING STO RM SEWER SANITARY SEWER FO RCEMAIN (SA N.) RR YA RDDRAIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE • • SIGN PIPE BOLLARD RIPRAP Yf 000000000 ====== DECIDUOUS AND CONIFEROUS TRESS: ONE TREE PER 60 FEET OF LOT PERIMETER SHALL BE REQUIRED. ORNAMENTAL TREES: ONE TREE PER 120 FEET OF LOT PERIM ETER SHALL BE REQUIRED. SHRUBS: ON SHRUB PER 40 FEET OF LOT PERIMETER. 4. A MINIMUM OF 8 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ARE WITHIN PARKING AREA SHALL BE LA NDSCAPED PLANT SCHEDULE TR EES COD E BOTANI CAL/C OMMON NAME CO NY CAI spf On O AB 603,0ema nl! wremn Blare / Autumn 63,333we 016 2.5,1 OCM A,erabeenanBam,3,ng /Armstrong Freeman Maple B&B 1=,1 a �� irl BB B erw a C ully TM/H em ag e 8,0 BSB as vl 3 .� � w rp eew.mayp v. Farg o TM/ Dakota PmlMde Bi rch eaB zal 13 CONIFERS CODE BOTANICAL/C OMM ON NA ME C ONY GL Sa 0Tr 0 OF wle>bammea/FlaIaam Nr 666 B 6 0 TT Thu,taer,demaMTech, /Te ch nyArbr otae BBB B OR N TREES CODE BOTANICAL/COMM. ..ME COAT GI . Off ((1 sa nel anmea ,er nademn aom mn B onary ../Agum n&Blume sennceber mHyd.a,gea eae 1aI g90� TH p an N„Ma,abm. / n, d w xyd,an,ea B a B , .25 '� L " .0 1nsarelata/JapaneseTreeLAC BBB 2,1 SHR UBS CODE ,D1ANKAE/COMMON NAME COW 0 CO C orms ,em. Nreman aCom pact /Dwarf Red Twig D og .* 50 rl B. Honeys uckle 5 gal 18 ODE xpra e eew ulaua'Ja ne '% to e, x Wangea S gal 12 GDW Salm p urpur ea N ana' / Dw arf Arctic SMllew seal GRA SSES CODE BOT ANICAL/COMMON NAME CUNT COKFG C al arnagr ostse aeuralora cod Foerne r' l L oathe,' Re ed Grass 1galxD5 PERENNMLS CODE BOTANIC. /COMMON NAME CONY S MA .. .... Mou nd /Sil ver Mond M ena, ga 1m NG Genmu n.e anubryl en e,Mam /BlMo vo Oa nesb,ll 1 gal 178 asx HmtaX Regal spl en dor' /Plantain uN 1 gal 145 • ssH H..M. s em Ana s .b.m,a e/ma nn,n My meal 12 O W HL LUNNsp Rat an OdstanWhtte/rlwbtanWhite S,eeGav3eather 1 gal m ORS Perowl.at nplalolu P PRSplreTM/IrtekSplre Rumen 386 1 gal 21= ORWbe d g Gold,trur n/Black Eyed Susan 1gal 110 GROUND C OVERS C ODE BOTANIC AL/COMMON NAME mxT . v� T� pEg jY;}: 131 is MN DDTse ed MlK25-131 /Low Malmenance;owemla Seed ii { i�ra z61 MNDOTSe.d MI.33 261/ Ponds and Wer Area Seed RNN Turf Sod Highland S od/Sod ROCK MULCH - 2" LIMESTONE ROCK, COLOR: BUFF W/ FABRIC. 4" DEPTH BETWEEN WALLS. Sambatek www. sambatek.com 12800 W14tew ater Drive, Sub 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343 763.476.6010 telephone 763.476.8532 facsi mile Engineering I Surveying 'Planning I Environmental Client MEDINA TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, LLC. Pr oject MEDINA TOWNHOMES Location MEDINA, MN 1432 COUNTY ROAD 29 Certificati on I h er eby certify that this survey, pla n or rep ort was prep ar ed by me or under my direct s upervisio n a nd that I am a d uly Li cens ed LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT under th e l aws of the State of Minnesota. 1091 MM/DD/YYYY This rfai Af%F s n o[ valid unl ess wet: g eed in bl ue T.IE app bl , c onta ct us for a won sign ed copy or this sur vey whichis available upon request at Sambatek Mi nnetonk a MN offic e Summary Designed:1E8 Drawn: MP Approved: AB Book / P ag e: Phas e: PRELIMI NARY Initial Issued:06/3 0/2021 Revisi on History No. Date By Submittal / Revision 6/30/2021 MCI GENERAL PL AN OF DEVEL OPMENT SUBMITT AL 7/27/2021 MLL CITY CO MMENT RESPONSE Sheet Title LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet No. Revision L1.01 Project No. 22471 BA KER PA RK RO AD SITE PLAN 1" = 40'-0" Kaas v ilson architects SITE PLAN KEY O PRIVACY FENCE O RETAINING WALL O TOT L OT O STORMWATER RETENTION 40' 3 L.. UNIT 4-0 10 I \ IN 7A. kaas wilsan architects P ro II UNIT 5-0 — 1 II II LL. . III LEVEL 1 3/32" = 0 0 UNIT 4-0 P P1 III UNIT 5-0 1 II III L PI II II I LEVEL 1 - TYP. TOWNHOUSE (6-PLEX) 0 UNIT 4-0 Cr r UNIT 5-0 0 4 N Medina Townhome Development 05/30/2021 3 O 3/3LE2" 2EL FA Ty kaas wilson architects LEVEL 2 - TYP. TOWNHOUSE (6-PLEX) 4 Medina Townhome Development 05/:30/2027 EXTERIOR M ATERIALS Mate rial Ma rk Descriptio n 4. 1 CULTURED STO NE Area 3,983 ft2 Percentage 20% 7.1 HORIZONTAL CFB LAP - LINEN OR SIM 7,676 ft2 38% 7.2 VERTICAL CFB BOARD & BATTEN - 8,118 ft2 40% WHITE 8. 1 WINDO W GLAZING 341 ft2 2% 20,119 ft2 I L. kaas wilson architects Image EXTERI OR MATERIALS Medina Townhome Development 06/30/2021 7.2 7 .2 7 .1 7.2 7.2 7.1 7 .2 7 .2 7 .1 7.1 4. 1 O SOUTH ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0" ONORTH ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0" O WEST ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0" Pr V \ vA. 7.1 4.1 7.2 7.1 7.1 4.1 4 .1 7.2 7.1 ® EAST ELEVATION 1/16=10 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (6-PLEX) Medina Townh ome Development kaas wilso n architects 06/30/2021 " AGENDA ITEM: 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director DATE: August 6, 2021 MEETING: August 10, 2021 Planning Commission SUBJ: Stetler Enterprises LLC 500 Hamel Road  Prairie Creek - Preliminary Plat and Variance  Public Hearing Summary of Request Stetler Enterprises, LLC has requested review of a preliminary plat for development of a 17 -unit villa project at 500 Hamel Road. The applicant has also requested a variance to increase the maximum front setback from Hamel Road. The subject property is located north of Hamel Road, across from Elm Creek Drive. The property is approximately 6.7 acres in size (4.9 net acres), is currently vacant and guided and zoned Uptown Hamel. The northern portion of the site slopes down to a wetland, and the western portion of the site includes a stormwater pond which was constructed by the City to treat stormwater from the site and property to the west. Rainwater Nature Preserve is located east of the site, with Uptown Hamel further east. Single family homes are located to the south and fourplexes to the southwest. The property to the west includes warehouse uses. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning The su bject pro perty is guided Uptown Hamel in the Comprehensive Plan and zo ned Uptown Hamel (UH). The purpose of the Uptown Hamel district is "to create a disti ncti ve Uptown H amel area that is an attractive, pedestrian -friendly, mixed -use t own center, by usi ng building facades, porches, walkways, landscaped plazas, lighting, signage, la ndscaping and parki ng to blend retail, office, higher -density housing, specialty shops, a nd gathering spots into a u nified and v iable community. " Uptown Hamel allows commercial development, residential de velopment with a net density between 4-20 units/acre or a combin ation of co mmercial and residential development . Concept Plan R eview The Planning Commissio n and City Coun cil reviewed a Concept Plan Review back in the spri ng . Excerpts from the meeting minutes are attached for reference . Proposed Site La yout The applicant pro poses 17 single -level villa units accessing a private road which wo uld loop through the site. The villas along Hamel Road would have fr ont entrances and porches toward Hamel Road with rear loaded garages. The table below summarizes the proposed layout with the requ irements of the UH district. UH Requirement Proposed Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling 2904 s. f. 9865 s .f. Maximum Lot Area per D wellin g 10,890 s.f. 12,555 s.f. (or 9865 s .f. after s ubtracting 80% of pond area) Minimum Lot Size N/A 5650 s.f . Min imum Lot Width N/A 55 feet Minimum Lot Depth N/A 106 feet Min. Fron t Yard Setback 0 feet 25 foot (to curb of internal street) 30 feet (Hamel Rd) Max. Front Yard Setback 10 feet 30 feet (Hamel Rd) Rear Yard Setback As necessary 140 feet Side Y ard Setback 8 feet (or 0) 8 feet Max Height 50 feet Approx. 20 feet Max. H ardcover 90% 50% of net area The site includes approx imately 4.9 n et acres an d requires a residential density of 4-20 units/acre. This would equate to a minimu m of 20 u nits on the s ubject property. The western 1.5 acres of site is a stormwater pon d an d filtration basin that treats stormwater from a broader area to the west in addition to the subject site. The subject site accounts f or less than 20% of the total drainage area to the pond, so staff believ es it is reaso nable to subtract a significa nt portion of the pond area from the net acreage since it reduces the usable portion of the site to treat water from other properties. If the Plan nin g Commission and C ouncil agree, this would result in the net acreage of the site bein g reduced to 3.85 acres. This would result in a proposed de nsity of 4. 4 u nits/acre. Stelter En terprises — 500 H amel Ro ad Preliminary Plat Page 2 of 10 August 10, 2021 Planni ng C ommission Meeting • Variance — Maximum Front Yard Setback The Uptown Hamel district requires buildings to be set close to Hamel Road and establishes a maximum setback of 10 feet to the street. In this case, there is a 30 foot wide Metropolitan Council sewer main easement north of Hamel Road. This easement prevents the buildings from being located closer than 30 feet to Hamel Road. The applicant has proposed to set the homes as close to the easement as they can and requested a variance. Section 825.45 establishes the following criteria for the review of variances. The applicant describes in their narrative how they believe the criteria are met. Staff has summarized potential findings below each criterion: 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. The applicant is proposing to place the structures as close to Hamel Road as permitted by the existing easement. The garages are rear -loaded, and the structures are proposed to include porches on the street -side even though they will be set further back. Staff believes these design elements attempt to be in harmony with the intent, even if constrained by the easement. (b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff does not believe the variance is inconsistent 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 difficult to be established, all of the following criteria shall be met: (1) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; The applicant proposes to locate the structures as close to the street as permitted by the easement. Staff believes any construction on the site would necessitate a variance. Staff believes the applicant is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and The easement allowed for construction of a Met Council sewer main which serves the public interest. Staff did not investigate whether the easement was part of a condemnation or a willing sale by the property owner. If was granted at a time when the required setbacks on the property were larger. Staff believes the existing of the easement is unique to the property and it is fair to conclude that the plight was not caused by the landowner. Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Preliminary Plat Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 10 August 10, 2021 (3) The va rian ce, if granted, will not alter the essential char acter of the loc ality . The homes south of Hamel Road are in a diff erent zoning district and setback at least as far as the proposed structu re. As such, staff believes it could be argued that allowing the variance may be more in keeping with the character of nearby property. Staff recommen ds approval of the variance to increase the maxim um setback of the str uctures to Hamel Road to 30 feet. Site Plan Rev iew The Uptown Hamel zon ing district requ ires a Site Plan Review for any new constr uction . This is generally because the Upto wn Hamel district anticipates predomi nantly c ommercial a nd m ulti- family projects. Staff has incorporated aspects of the Site Plan Review process into this re view . Although specific buildin g plan s an d elevations are not yet provided because the de veloper intends to sell finished lots to builders, ex ample architectural designs are provided. Staff recommends that a Site Plan Review not be required for each home in the subdivision if staff determines that the proposed buildings are consistent with the design submitted . A Site Plan Rev iew has comparative low level of discretion . As described in Section 825.56, the purpose of a Site Plan Review is to "determin e whether it is consistent with the requirements of the zonin g ordinance, in clu ding the applicable development standards and the purpose of the zo nin g district in which the property is located. " Conditions may be applied to a Site Plan Review approval to protect the pu blic health, safety, and welfare, or to e nsure complia nce with relevant ordinance requirements or policies. In this case, conditions will be included within the subdivision approv als. Architectural D esign The applicant proposes to sell fin ished lots to a couple of builders and does not have specific building plans at this time. The applicant has provided concept ual building ele vations, which are included in their narrativ e. The Uptown Hamel district inclu des the following architect ural requirements . Staff believes that the standards generally con template commercial and m ultifamily structures more than si ngle- family detached v illas. • Materials. Exterior materials shall consist of o ne or more of the following: natur al brick, stu cco , sto ne, wood, glass, or commercial grade fiber cement lap siding with a wood appea rance which is installed per manu facturer 's specific ations. Tre ated or anodized meta l ma y be used for trim. The applicant proposes engin eered wo od or fiber cement sidi ng as the main material with sto ne and shake accents. • Genera l. All n ew buildings, structures, expansions, remodeling, and development plans sh all conform to these design standards and be compatible and compleme ntary to the buildings pro po sed to be reta ined downtown. Elements of compatibility incl ude, b ut are not limited t o: Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel R oad Prelimin ary Plat Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 10 August 10, 2021 building height, form, mass and bulk, fenestration, exterior material appearance, color, exterior material durability, detailing, setbacks, landscaping, exterior lighting and site improvements. • Building - Street. Building design shall make the street visually more interesting, functionally more enjoyable and useful and economically more viable. Buildings, porches, and plaza spaces shall be designed to bring the building and its activity more in contact with the street. The applicant proposes front entries with sidewalks connecting to the trail along Hamel Road. The Planning Commission and City Council can provide additional feedback on the proposed design. • New Building and Major Expansions. New buildings... should be compatible with adjacent and nearby buildings. Buildings shall be designed and oriented consistent with this ordinance, proposed use of the property, uses on adjacent properties and nearby amenities. Buildings shall be designed and oriented so as not to detract from one another or vistas. Views from the residential areas should be protected. Where these views exist, partial loss of the view may be an unintended but justified result when development takes place consistent with other provisions of this ordinance. Entrances shall be placed for easy access from the street. Utilities shall be placed underground and meters and transformers shall be hidden from view. • Integrate — Coordinate. New buildings, structures, remodeling and expansion shall be integrated and coordinated with development on abutting property. Elements for integration and coordination include, but are not limited to, sidewalk and pedestrian ways and their continuity; site lighting; site access; building orientation; building entrances... Staff believe the proposed design in consistent with these general requirements. • Porches (Overhangs — Canopies — Arcades). Porches, which overhang into walks, are one of Uptown Hamel's trademarks. These features should be preserved, enhanced, and improved. New commercial structures on Hamel Road and Sioux Drive are expected to be designed and constructed with these features. The applicant proposes porches and road -facing main entries for the homes along Hamel Road. The porches are further off Hamel Road because of the Met Council easement. • Fenestration — Modulation. Windows and openings shall be generous, especially on the street side, and their placement and design shall express the pedestrian- friendly, livability of the town center. ... Buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 40 feet in frontage to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or building materials/design. At the street level, at least 30 percent of the facade should be glass in windows and doors. These requirements are written with larger structures in mind, since the proposes structures themselves are not much wider than 40 feet. Staff believes the design is consistent with the intent. • Plazas. Plazas or small extensions of the sidewalk into or on private property are encouraged especially at key focal points and selected locations. Plazas will serve as a unifying link between businesses and sidewalks. The design and form of the plazas shall accommodate social and business interaction, provide a setting for buildings, sidewalks and other plazas, and should accommodate sitting, watching and in some instances outdoor food services. Plazas shall include special pavements (for example, concrete brick pavers or exposed Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Preliminary Plat Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 10 August 10, 2021 aggregate), decorative lights and decorative trees, shrubs and flowers with emph asis on pro viding a variety of co lo r, tex ture, and fo rm throughout the ye ar . ... Decorative fences and walls will be used to delineate spa ces and to accommodate grade cha nges . Plaza f urnit ure is encouraged including benches, drinking fo untains, bike racks, waste c ontai ners, ki osks, and deco rative signs an d plaqu es. Monu ments and sc ulpt ure will be encouraged e.g. clock t owers, gazebos, water fou ntains, etc. .. . " No plazas are proposed, but staff believ es this locatio n is likely not a prime location for such amenities. It is on the far west en d of Uptown Hamel, across from si ngle-family homes. Rainwater Park is just to the east and provides better opportunity for gathering. Transportation/Pedestrian /Trails/Park Dedication The applicant proposes to loop a private road through the site, with an access point across from Elm Creek Drive an d another adjacent to the pond on the west of the site . The applicant proposes a 28 -foot wide street through the villas, which is the standard width for City streets in n eighborhoods. This width cou ld accommodate parki ng on one side of the street. The City Code requires a setback of 2.5 feet for driveways in Upt own Hamel . The proposed driv eway meets this setback with the ex ception of the very southeast comer of the site . Here, the driveway is adjacen t to the property line to better alig n with Elm Creek Dri ve. Staff believes waiv ing the setback at the intersection to align the intersectio n is in the public i nterest, provided the property owner to the east is willing to pro vide a temporary constr uctio n easement to allow for constru ction. Ideally, this access at Elm Creek Drive wo uld be able to be shared when the property to the east redevelops as well. Staff's understanding is that the devel oper and property own er have had some discu ssion s abou t this possibility. Upon formal application, the City Engineer recommends that a turning analysis be pr ovided to verify emergency vehicles will be able to navigate the c urves and a sightli ne analysis be provided at the driveways. The City Engineer has in dicated that and increased volume of traffic from the developme nt should n ot impact the tran sportation system an d wo uld n ot necessitate turn lane co nstruction. The applicant pro poses to construct a trail along the south of the project. Staff recommends that the trail lo cation be adjusted to be as close to the edge of the right-of-way as possible, to provide flex ibility for fu ture recon struction of H amel R oad. The City reviewed park dedication for the subject site when it was split from the la nd to the east back in 2019. At the time, the City determined that no la nd wo uld be req uired for park dedication, but rather a cash -in -lieu fee of $3500 per unit, which would amount to $59,500 for 17 units. Soils/Buried Debris A significant amount of buried construction debris has bee n identified on the site. A Phase I and Phase II Env ironmen tal A ssessment were completed in 2006-2007 . The Assessments identified buried construction debris on the site. Soil borings and water sampling identified some locations which exceeded Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), arsenic a nd other chemical which were Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Preliminary Plat Plan ni ng Commission Meeting Page 6 of 10 August 10, 2021 measured. In addition, when the City excavated for the ponds in the western portion of the site, tiles which contained asbestos were encountered and had to be disposed of properly. The applicant has indicated that they are aware of the potential challenges posed by the debris and soils conditions on the site and they have made design decisions in an effort to limit disturbance of the debris field. The applicant proposes to utilize slab -on -grade construction with piers rather than footings to minimize disturbance. Utilities were located to avoid the debris to the extent possible. The applicant has submitted a remedial investigation report and Response Action Plan which describe special procedures for construction on the site and how to address testing, handling, and if necessary, disposal of materials. This Plan is under review and staff recommends a condition of approval that it address any City comments. Stormwater/Grading Review Stormwater management was provided for the site through construction of the Stormwater pond in the western portion of the site as part of acquisition of the easement area. The applicant proposes to raise the eastern portion of the site to maximize the area which is able to drain to the pond. The eastern -most portion of the site cannot drain to the pond. The applicant is proposing to install additional curb and stormsewer along Hamel Road to capture additional off -site run-off to offset the eastern portion of the site. The application is subject to review by the Elm Creek Watershed, which is underway. Staff recommends a condition that the applicant address the comments of the City Engineer and Watershed. Wetlands/Floodplain There is a wetland along the northern portion of the site which also has a floodplain with a base flood elevation of 974.6. No wetland or floodplain impacts are proposed. The developer of the subject site is required to provide a small area of floodplain mitigation adjacent to the wetland to off -set the installation of a driveway on the eastern portion of the site (east of 492 Hamel Road). This property was subdivided from the subject site in 2019 and installation of a driveway will necessitate some fill within the floodplain of Elm Creek. To off- set this fill, the property owner agreed that the developer of the subject site would mitigate the floodplain. An upland buffer with an average width of 30 feet will be required adjacent to the wetland. Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water through the site to serve the units and proposes to provide a water stub to the property to the east. The City Engineer has reviewed and provided comments, and staff recommends a condition that these comments be addressed. Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Page 7 of 10 August 10, 2021 Preliminary Plat Planning Commission Meeting Tree Preserv ation and La ndscaping The Uptown Hamel zoning district does n ot require specific landscaping pla ntings . A mi nimum of 5% of the site is required to be lan dscaped, anticipating m ore of a "downtown" de velopme nt form. There are 108 trees on the site, mostly consisting of volunteer trees such as bo xelder and cottonwood. The City's tree preservation would allow 37 (35%) of the trees to be removed without replacement. The applicant proposes to remov e 73 trees. Replacement beyond the allowed amount is required on an inch:inch basis. Because of the large size of the trees on the site, this would resu lt in 441 inches of replacement trees. Sectio n 828.41 Subd. 7 prov ides for a waiver of a portion of the replacement when "an applicant has exhausted all reasonable design options fo r a Development Site." Staff ackn owledges that most of the trees would need to be removed to devel op this site at the density identified in the Comprehensive Plan, especially the cotto mwood and b oxelder trees scattered throughout the center of the property. Staff believ es it is appropriate to consider some am ount of waiver . It may be possible to preserve some addition al trees along the wetland edge, b ut e ven though are gen erally volu nteer trees. The applicant is proposing 277.5 inches of tree planting as part of the la ndscaping plan . Staff believes this planting provides sufficient tree replaceme nt based upo n the allowed density in U ptown Hamel and accounting for the fact the trees on the site are recent volunteer trees . City Code generally prohibits the use of domestic City water for use in law n irrigatio n systems . Gen erally, a n eighborhood utilizes stormwater reuse from ponds for irrigation purposes. Because this property is utilizing a City stormwater pond for treatment, this will req uire additional consideration. The City's water supply o rdinance allows for waivers from the irrigatio n prohibition where properties are served by a City stormwater system. City staff recommends that, if possible, an irrigation system be installed to reuse water from the City stormwater pond west of the site. At this time, the applica nt has not provided detail to allow for this. If it can be shown that irrigating from the City pond is not practical, staff would recommend that irrigation systems be permitted on City water . Rev iew Criteria/Sta ff Recommendation Section 820.21 Su bd. 10 establishes the following criteria for the re view of s ubdi visions: "I n the case of all subdivision s, the City shall den y approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combin ation of the following findin gs are made: (a) That the proposed subdivision is in conflict with the general and specific plans of the city, or that the proposed subdivision is premature, as defined in Secti on 820.28 . (b) That the physical characteristics of this site, includi ng but not limited to topography, vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage a nd retentio n, are such that the site is not su itable for the type of de velopme nt or use co ntemplated. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not meet minimu m lot size standards. Stelter Enterprises — 500 H amel R oad Preliminary Pla t Planning Commission Meeting Page 8 of 10 Aug ust 10, 2021 (d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. (f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or private streets, easements or right-of-way. If the Planning Commission and City Council make any of these findings, a subdivision should not be approved. Staff recommends approval of the variance and preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City, which shall include the conditions described below as well as other requirements by City ordinance or policy. 2. The Applicant shall submit a letter of credit in an amount of 150% of the cost of site improvements to ensure completion. 3. The Applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans dated 8/3/2021 except as may be modified herein. The Applicant shall address the comments of the City Engineer, Elm Creek Watershed, and other relevant staff and agencies and the conditions noted herein. 4. The applicant shall update construction plan to locate the trail further north and as close to the edge of the right-of-way as possible. 5. Subject to the applicant entering into an agreement with the property owner allowing disturbance upon the property to the east, a limited waiver is hereby granted for the southeastern portion of the driveway to be located less than 2.5 feet from the eastern property line to better align with Elm Creek Drive. 6. The Response Action Plan (RAP) and Contingency Construction Plan (CCP) shall be subject to review and approval by the City and any other relevant agencies. 7. The Applicant shall install "no parking" signs are recommended by the City Engineer and Fire Marshal to allow adequate emergency vehicle circulation. 8. The applicant shall provide required floodplain storage as described in the development agreement for Raskobs Elm Creek Addition. 9. Subject to agreement with the City, the development shall utilize the stormwater pond to the west for reuse for lawn irrigation if practical. If it is demonstrated that it is impractical to utilize the pond for reuse, the homes within the subdivision shall be permitted to connect lawn irrigation systems to the City water system, pursuant to Subd. 3(b)(ii) of Section 710.75. 10. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the wetland protection ordinance upon the residential development site, including provision of easements, planting of vegetation and installation of signage. 11. Park dedication shall be provided as cash -in -lieu fee of $3500 per unit. 12. Building materials and design shall abide by the requirements of the Uptown Hamel zoning district and shall be consistent with the architectural design examples received by the City on 7/23/2021. 13. A site plan review of each building within the development site shall not be required as described in Section 825.55 of City Code. However, each building shall be subject to Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Page 9 of 10 August 10, 2021 Preliminary Plat Planning Commission Meeting administrative review by City staff for consiste ncy with the site plan which accompanies the plat, relevant requirements of City Code, a nd the co nditions noted herein . 14. The A pplicant shall obtain approvals from of Elm Creek Watershed, Min nesota D epartment of Transportation, Minnesota Departme nt of Health, Pollutio n Control Agency, Metropolitan Cou ncil and any other releva nt agencies . 15. The A pplicant shall su bmit a title commitment at the time of final plat application and abide by the recommendation s of the City Attor ney with regard to title matters and recording instructions. 16. The final plat shall be filed within 180 days of the date of this resolution or the approval shall be considered void, u nless a written request for time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council. 17. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the co st of reviewing the plat, construction plans, and other relevant docume nts. Potential Action If the Plannin g Commission finds that the variance criteria have bee n met and that the criteria for su bdivision denial have not been , staff would recommend the following actio n: Motion to reco mmend a ppro val of the variance and preliminary plat for Prairie Creek, su bject to the terms a nd conditio ns n oted in the staff rep ort [with the following amendments. .. ] Attachments 1. Excerpt from 4/12/2021 Plann ing Commission min utes 2. Excerpt from 4/20/2021 City Council minutes 3. Engineering Comments dated 8/5/2021 4. A pplican t Narrative 5. Plat an d Plans Stelter Enterprises — 500 Hamel Road Page 10 of 10 Aug ust 10, 2021 Preliminary Plat Plan ning Commission Meeting Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 4/13/2021 Meeting Minutes 2. Public Hearin — Stetler Enterprises LLC — 500 Hamel Road — Concept Plan Review for 17 -Unit Villa Development — PID 1211823310048 Finke presented a request for a concept plan review for a 17 -unit detached villa development proposed at 500 Hamel Road. He stated that the subject site is just over six acres in size with 4.9 net developable acres. He provided details on the current zoning and allowed density for the site as well as details on the surrounding properties and uses. He presented the concept plan which includes a looped private road to go between the two rows of villas. He provided details on the general layout, density, setbacks, and existing easement. He stated that the developer would create sellable lots for a builder to buy construct upon. He stated that examples of the intentions of the developed product have been provided within the packet. He reviewed the allowed building materials and design elements included with the Uptown Hamel district. He noted that the sketch provided by the applicant seems to be consistent with those requirements. He noted that staff provided comments related to infrastructure within the report. He noted that the low volume of traffic would not be anticipated to create issues for Hamel Road, compared to the density that could be supported on the site. He reviewed the recommendations related to the suggested trail connection. He stated that the stormwater pond on the site to the west was developed to support this development as well. He stated that both phase one and phase two environmental assessments were completed for the site and both note various levels of debris buried on the property, some of which includes hazardous material and therefore best practices should be in place during construction to allow monitoring, sampling, and proper disposal of hazardous materials. He stated that the utility installation would cause the deepest excavation because the homes are proposed to be slab on grade. He stated that any development on this site would need to address these issues and therefore it would be helpful to have someone on board on behalf of the applicant to lead those actions. He welcomed any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Stetler, applicant, welcomed any input the Commission may have on the site. He noted that he has been talking with staff and reviewing options for the site for the past four to five years. He stated that he has attempted to develop an approach that would minimize the soil correction issues on the site and the need to dig in the debris. He stated that he has done a number of projects ranging from five lots to 115 lots throughout the metro area and has experience with this type of project. He noted that while this has challenges, so have other projects that they have been able to successfully navigate. He stated that if they receive positive input and decide to move forward, he would hope to select a final builder and provide a clear example of what the elevations would look like as they would move forward with preliminary plat. Piper asked the price point that would be anticipated for the homes. Stetler replied that these would be single-family homes and would estimate a range in price point would begin in the upper $400,000's and go up from there. Piper asked if there is a hill to the north that goes down to Highway 55. Stetler commented that the site seems fairly level other than the slope towards the wetland. He commented that he has not studied the topography to the north. Sedabres commented that there was a reference to an alternative 30 twinhome concept and asked if that is still under consideration. 1 Medina Plann in g Commission E xcerpt from 4/13/2021 Meeting Minutes Finke stated that the applican t originally submitted a concept that included 30 twi nhomes, with essentially the same layout with narrower lots. He stated that was withdraw n in preparation for the hearing and in response to the market deman d for villas . Stetler commented that in discussion with people familiar with the area and real estate, the appetite for twinho mes was n ot nearly as great as sin gle-family villas . He comme nted that the builders he spoke with had much more interest in the villa prod uct and therefore they withdrew that pla n and chose to move forward with the villa product. Sedabres referenced the 30 -foot setback due to sewer and asked if that is specific to this property or something that exists throughout U ptown H amel. Finke replied tha t issue exists for this property and the two to the east. Galzki asked if there is concern that on ce the homes are built a nd sold that notificatio n should be provided related to the u nderlying debris field. Finke commented that he is not aware of n otificatio n that is req uired, noti ng that the phase one and phase two assessments wou ld be public record. He stated that he could inquire further about potential notification requ iremen ts of those records, but he was not aware of any. Nielsen commented that she is also concerned with the debris on the site . She stated that staff laid o ut sev eral recommen dations and asked if the applicant agrees with those recomme ndations . Stetler commented that in general he does not have issues with the staff recomme ndati ons but would like to contin ue discussions with the City Engineer related to the placeme nt of the watermain . He stated that there is buried building debris on the site and six feet of clean fill on top of that, which exceeds the requirement for a top barrier by the MPC A. He stated that the MPCA views this as a brownfield and if there is a v iable way to leav e that in place, they favor that as opposed to digging it up and movin g it somewhere else. He stated that if the material is dug up it needs to be properly disposed of and replaced with clean fill. He stated that the builders he has spoken with are familiar with this type of con struction that would minimize disturbance to the debris field . He was hopeful that his engin eer an d the City Engin eer could review the watermain placement if this mo ves forward . Nielsen asked if Stetler would be comfortable with his family living on this site. Stetler confirmed that he would be comfortable with that as the material is safely below six feet of clean fill and there are no con cern s with leeching. Gra jcz yk commented that the debris issue has his attention a nd asked if there are any groundwater mo nitoring wells near this site. Finke replied that there are no monitoring wells at this point. He stated that the testing that has been done and City ex cav ation for the pon d on the west side had similar constraints. He stated that the City disposed of hazardou s material that was excavated in a similar process that would be followed for this project. Nielsen o pen ed the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. No comments. 2 Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from 4/13/2021 Meeting Minutes Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:35 Galzki commented that he lives in the neighborhood south of this proposed development and therefore has his own personal concerns related to the development as a whole. He stated that he does have concern with the debris field and excavation for utilities. He commented that he would like to see an extension of the trail and potentially some curb and gutter in order to maintain consistency from west to east. He commented that this is an active, pedestrian friendly area and that trail connection would help to alleviate concerns. He stated that it will be nice to see drainage plans and stormwater reports if this moves forward. Grajczyk commented that he would agree that it would be nice to see additional details but recognized that this is a concept plan review. He stated that he would also support the trail as mentioned. He stated that he likes the architectural features in the examples and believed those would fit well with the surrounding homes. He stressed the importance of safety and noted that he is concerned with the buried debris and disturbance that would occur when burying utilities. He stated that he would feel more comfortable if there were a clay cap to help seal and contain the debris and provide better segregation for those that will live above it. Piper commented that she agrees with the statements made thus far and noted that she is also concerned with the buried debris. She asked if the City could require a clay cap/cover. Finke stated that he cannot provide an answer to that question. He stated that there are guidelines in place for development and was unsure if the City could go beyond those requirements. He stated that he could report further on that if the applicant chooses to move forward past this concept. Piper referenced the square footage of the lots and asked if there would be a restriction on the size of the home that would be built on the smaller lots. Finke stated that there would be 16 feet between the units and the units would be set back 25 feet from the internal road, or 30 feet where the sewer easement exists. He stated that Uptown Hamel allows for significant coverage and higher density compared to other areas of Medina. Piper stated that she agrees with this so far and is eager to see more detail. Popp commented that he agrees with many of the comments made thus far and echoed concerns with safety already mentioned. He referenced the design considerations and stated that it is important that as someone approached the Uptown Hamel district from the west, this would be the first impression of the area someone would get and therefore the view should be pleasing. He stated that he would like to see a sidewalk/trail on the north side of Hamel Road in order to support the vision of a walkable community. He stated that if the easement moves forward he would like to see additional enhancements that would make it aesthetically pleasing greenspace. He stated that he is eager to see how the applicant will address landscaping and greenspace. He stated that his primary focus rests on the safety concerns that have already been raised. Rhem commented that if this moves forward the largest element will be how the debris field will be mitigated and recognized that more details would be provided in the future. He stated that he would support the reduction in setback because of the sewer easement. He stated that to him, it would also make sense to exclude the pond in terms of density. Sedabres thanked the applicant for reviewing this recognizing the constraints and challenges of the site. He stated that the concept of what Uptown Hamel will become is interesting and this would be 3 Medin a Planning Co mmission E xcerpt from 4/13/2021 Meeting Mi nutes the first developmen t since the regulation s were cha nged. He stated that he had in mind less of the detached single-family residen tial an d more matching the urba n downtown visio n with brick facade and mu ltiple stories or height differences. He stated that he would feel this site could even support more density. He stated that perhaps single-family reside ntial would be okay on the west side, but the group should then consider where mixed use development would fit within the o verall district. Nielsen stated that she shares the con cern with the soils b ut trusts that would it be mediated . She stated that if the applican t agrees with staff recommendatio ns she would s upport this movi ng forward. She also stated that she would support removing the po nd from the de nsity c alc ulatio n and co nfirmed the consen sus of the Commission will that element as well as the reduced setback because of the sewer easement. Stetler thanked the Commission for the comments and input tonight . He noted that he started looking at this for an apartment building site but as he looked at the site more a nd more, with the single- family to the south and townhomes to the west, it appeared that a lower de nsity reside ntial project would fit better into those su rroundin gs. He believed that this wo uld be a nice addition to the area. He noted that because of the setbacks this pa rcel would ne ver provide a true, close to the street urba n feel. He hoped that the engineering staff can look creatively in order to attempt to limit rooting aroun d in the debris field to the extent possible related to the watermain design and placement. N ielsen than ked the applicant for bringing this forward and noted that this seems to be a nice plan for the lot. Finke commented that the intent wou ld be to bring this forward to the Cou ncil for comme nts at its next meeting. 4 Medina City Council Excerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes Stetler Enterprises LLC — 500 Hamel Road — Concept Plan Review (9:12 p.m.) Martin noted that Cavanaugh will be recusing himself. Cavanaugh commented that he does not have financial interest in this matter but does have ownership in the adjacent property and has submitted comments as a private resident on this matter and therefore will recuse himself. Johnson stated that the applicant has brought forward a Concept Plan for a 17 -unit villa project at 500 Hamel Road. Finke identified the subject site and adjacent land uses. He stated that the Uptown Hamel zoning district allows for residential, commercial, or a combination of those uses. He stated that the Concept Plan proposes 17 detached villa units with a circle driveway and provided additional details on the proposed site layout. He noted that the Uptown Hamel district anticipates structures with reduced setbacks, closer to the street, therefore there is a maximum front yard setback. He stated that in this case there is a sewer easement north of Hamel Road which would prevent construction within that easement and therefore the applicant proposes to place the buildings on the edge of the easement line. He reviewed the density guiding for the property which would equate to between 20 and 98 units. He stated that there are five net acres for the subject site, but the pond to the west accounts for 1.5 acres of the five. He explained that the pond was constructed by the City with a road improvement project as a regional benefit. He noted that the subject site only accounts for 20 percent of the drainage managed by the pond. He stated that staff believes it reasonable to account for the fact that the pond is oversized to manage drainage from other sites in addition to the subject site and therefore the pond area could be removed from the density calculation. He stated that the Planning Commission agreed that it would make sense not to count the larger pond area against the property owner in terms of density, as the property owner provided the easement for the pond. He stated that conceptual drawings were provided for the villas but noted that the applicant proposes to prepare the lots to sell to builders and therefore the renderings are meant to inform the construction for the lots. He provided details on the private roadway and noted that because 17 units is on the low end of the density range, it would not be anticipated to cause any impacts to traffic on adjacent roadways. He stated that staff recommends a trail along Hamel Road with improved pedestrian connections. He noted that comments addressing sewer, water and stormwater were included in the packet. He stated that there were phase one and phase two environmental assessments completed on the property which identified buried construction debris on the site, some of that material was found to be hazardous. He stated that the City came across similar materials when digging the pond on the western portion of the property and therefore followed the proper process for disposal of those materials. He stated that staff recommends development of a response action plan and contingency construction plan for any construction on the site to ensure that issue is being monitored and material is disposed of in the proper manner. He stated that the applicant is familiar with the process and additional funding that may be available for that purpose. He stated that the City received input from the property owner to the east (Cavanaugh), which stated that they would prefer higher density on the parcel. He stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its meeting the previous week and there was discussion related to the buried debris and proper disposal of material. He stated that Commissioners supported the increased front setback because of the utility easement and believed it made sense to reduce the acreage of the pond in terms of density. He stated that one Commissioner questioned whether the villa product was in line with the broader vision for Uptown Hamel and believed this would be an opportunity for more dense development given the lack of property designated for high density land uses. 1 Medin a City Council E xcerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes Martin commented that she struggles with the issue of density, noting that she was hoping to see the rowhouse concept on this parcel. She hoped that with a villa product perhaps more architectural details could be added than original anticipated by the zoning district. She asked for details on the front and back of the homes. Finke commented that there are not renderings of the rear of the units and perhaps the applicant could better address that. Mr. Stetler commented that the rear lots would have a more traditional look . He stated that they would want to have a nicer presentation from the street which would be seen from Hamel Road. Martin received confirmation that the elevation within the packet would be seen from Hamel Road and the uncolored elevation would be seen from the private drive. She asked for details on what would be seen as someone drives the private drive, whether they would see porches or garages. She asked if the porch would look out onto asphalt and the backs of the other row of homes. Stetler commented that in order to have the private drive provide access for all the homes, garages would need to be on the rear side of the homes for those facing Hamel Road and the front side of the home for those on the othe r side of the road. He noted that backyards could also have porches or patios and lawn space. Martin asked why this style was chosen over a rowhouse style. Stetler commente d that he has been looking at this property for four or five y ears and has spoken with realtors and builders. He commented that there are so many complexities to the site, including be adjacent to residential. He stated that he looked at rowhomes previously and did not receive much support from realtors and builders and therefore decided to look at this type of product. He stated that because of the construction process that is necessary on this site with the buried debris, it is easier to construct a slab on grade villa compared to a rowhom e. Reid asked the definition of a villa as opposed to a single-family home, whether th e difference is slab on grade or setback related. Stetler replied that typically a villa is single level living . Albers asked if the excavation of the debris is required or whether there would be disclosure if the material is left in place. He commented that he is unsure whether he would want to purchase a home built on a dump. Stetler commented that he has spent a lot of time researching this issue and talking with the MPCA. He stated that the debris field is buried under six feet of clay fill which exceeds the requirements of the MPCA. He explained that when Highway 55 was worked on in the past there was re moval of a commercial building and they back ed up to the swamp and buried that. He stated that the approach to build on helical piers would eliminate substantial digging into the debris while still providing a substantial building foundation . He stated that he is working closely with builde rs familiar with the use of helical pie rs and therefore they have a really good approach to building without disturbance to the debris. He noted that the most significant debris field will fall under the roadway. He stated that most of the debris is brick, concrete, wood, etc. He provided additional details on the process he would follow involving the MPCA and noted 2 Medina City Council Excerpt from 4/20/2021 Meeting Minutes that part of that would involve an environmental covenant which would state property owners will not dig past a certain depth. He stated that he would be comfortable disclosing the information to buyers. He was confident that if this moves forward to preliminary plat, he will have a builder on board and could provide more detailed elevations. DesLauriers asked the projected selling price for the units and square footage of the units. Stetler replied that the build box would allow for a fairly large footprint but believed they would target between 1,800 to 2,000 square feet with a price range most likely in the upper $400,000's and above. DesLauriers asked if there would be any support under the road or things that should be considered in the future related to degradation of the road. Stetler commented that the site has been settling for some time and provided additional details. He stated that a liner could be used to provide additional support. DesLauriers commented that he would support the requests related to the pond and setback. He stated that obviously debris is a concern and something the applicant seems educated about. He stated that he likes the product and would be a good fit for Uptown Hamel. He stated that he likes the concept and looks forward to additional detail in the future. Martin appreciated all the comments from the Council and wanted to ensure some architectural compatibility and something that makes the homes look like separate residence. She commented that the separate homes would most likely best blend with the existing homes across the street and as a transition into Uptown Hamel. Stetler commented that there is a tremendous amount of upfront cost because of the components that are not typical. He stated that he wanted to make sure that the Council is on board with the site design so that there are no surprises if he comes back with a preliminary plat. He stated that he would be more than happy to work in advance of that on the product design to give the Council and staff more information on that. He explained that he wanted to ensure there was support for the concept before he expends significant resources moving forward. Martin commented that the devil is in the details and therefore the Council cannot commit to something it has not seen. She stated that she would want to see additional details on the back row and what the homes would look like from different view and whether it would be a pleasing streetscape. She stated that if the end result is pleasing and acceptable there would most likely be a green light. She stated that it seems the Council is okay with the density and concept but wants to ensure it fits well in this area of Uptown Hamel. Stetler thanked Martin for the guidance and stated that he is willing to take that input and run with it. 3 wsb August 5, 2021 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Review City Project No. LR-21-294 WSB Project No. 017878-000 Dear Mr. Finke: z z z SUITE 300 WSB staff have reviewed Hamel Road Villas Concept plan submittal dated July 23, 2021. The plans propose to construct 17 single family units with "villa style" detached townhomes at 500 Hamel Road. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina's general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. Preliminary Plat & General 1. Provide a vehicle turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and provide any required turn around space(s) as required by the City Fire Marshall. In -progress, turning movement diagram provided (Sheet C2.2), awaiting Fire Marshall review and approval. 2. City staff will provide comments on the landscaping plans separately from this review. Existing Conditions & Demolition Plan (Sheet C1.1) 3. Note what is the current status of the forcemain on the plans. Has this been abandoned? Will it stay in -place with the project? In -progress, the applicant is researching status. 4. Downstream sanitary sewer manhole text is covered up by other text, review for text conflicts on plan. Complete. 5. There are "X's" over storm manholes on the westerly portion of Hamel Road. Unless these are proposed to be removed, please eliminate the text. Complete. 6. Show locations of pavement to be removed/replaced with utility connection within Hamel Rd, Complete. Site Plan (Sheet C2.1) 7. The plan does not include trails, sidewalks, or other pedestrian amenities that connect all of the units. In addition to providing this plan, the applicant will be required to install a RA017878-OOOWdmin\Does\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Prelim Plat - Engineering Review.docx Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Review Au gust 5, 2021 Page 2 bituminous trail along Hamel Road. See additional comments provided by the City Planner on pedestrian access and mobility requirements. In progress, in general the plan has been updated to show a trail on Hamel Road, but the applicant will also need to consider how a trail connection east of the lot can be connected to the widened shoulder along Hamel Road. In progress, the applicant has proposed the extension of the trail utilizing concrete curb along Hamel; City staff will need to review the design with the final plat submittal. 8. The applicant will be required to show how runoff from Hamel Road will be conveyed along the edge of the read, This may require grading of a swale or the installation of concrete curb adjacent to improve conveyance of runoff to the east. Complete . 9. On street/site plan include signing locations and callouts for specific signage types . Provide No Parking signs for the curves of the proposed roadway. 10. Provide hatching/notes and a legend pertaining to the pavement types proposed. . including the location of the pavement replacements for the utility connections in Hamel Rd. There also appears to be a double line for the curb edge . confirm if this was in error, Complete. 11. Hamel Road is a Municipal State Aid Street, provide dimension of lanes on both sides. The City will need to confirm geometrics/dimensions meet State Aid Standards. 12. The trail width has changed, correct dimension notes . A pedestrian curb ramp is not needed at the private driveway to the east; consider how the concrete curb wraps around this radius to avoid crossing the trail. Grading, Drainage, and Erosio n Contro l (Sheet C3 .1) 13. Add storm sewer structure/FES rim/invert elevations to grading plan. 14. The City requires two feet of freeboard from structure low openings to 100 -year high water levels and EOF's. The HWL cf the adjacent basin is 983.26 and the EOF is 985. Therefore, the minimum low opening for adjacent structures is 987, Complete, 15. Provide/label EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway . Label EOF at infiltration pond outlet. 16. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the lots. Complete . 17, Maintain all surface grades vrithin the minimum of 2% and maximum 33 % slopes. Vegetated swale grades shall be a minimum of 2 .0 %. Shaw directional arrows and percent grades on future submittals. Add percent slope to all side yard swales to verify that they meet the 2.0% minimum slope requirements. 18. Draintile will be required within the roadway each direction from a low point catch hasin up to within 50 feet of a high point, Cleancuts will be required at each end and every 150 feet down the line. 19. A redundant set of BMP's will be required adjacent to the wetlands such as a second row of silt fence or bio-roll. Show additional erosion control blanket for the disturbed slopes adjacent to the wetlands greater than 6:1. K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Prelim Plat - Engineering Review.doc x Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 3 20. Retaining walls are being proposed greater than 4' in height. For walls greater than 4' in height a design provided by a structural engineer will be required to be submitted for review. A safety fence will also be required for walls greater than 4' in height. 21. The contouring across the trail will need to be cleaned up to show a cross slope just upstream from the ped ramp, currently it shows what would appear to be a swale section over the trail. 22. With the new curb being proposed along Hamel Road, there will be a point of concentration with the discharge into the ditch on the adjacent property which may cause erosion or detrimental effects; there will be much more flow/velocity to this location with the proposed development. Consider methods to control erosion and/or collect this flow to avoid overland flow/discharge into the ditch. 23. Include any piping or roof drains from the homes to show how drainage is being collected and directed to the stormwater BMP's. The model assumes that the roof areas are being directed to the existing stormwater pond to the west. Based on the architectural elevations provided, it is not clear how this will be achieved without some sort of common collection system in the rear yards, front yards, or both. MN SWPPP Notes (Sheet C3.2) 24. A full review of erosion/sediment control will be conducted with the final plat/construction plan submittal. 25. An NPDES permit must be submitted to the City prior to start of construction. Utility Plan (Sheet C4.1) 26. The watermain improvements will require approval from the MDH. The sanitary sewer improvements will require a permit from the MPCA. Provide completed and approved permit documents with final construction plans. 27. With future submittals (final plat) provide plan/profile drawings for watermian, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer. 28. With future submittals show the existing sewer and watermain system in more detail including the nearest existing hydrants valves, and manhole locations. Show proposed watermain, sanitary sewer mains, service locations. hydrants and valve locations. A hydrant will be required at the end of the watermain stub to the east. Complete. 29. The City will require that each unit have a separate water/sewer service Each water service shall have a separate curb stop (shut-off). With future submittals show proposed sanitary sewer/water service lines and stub invert elevations on plans:: the City requires a minimum depth of 4' from low floor elevations. Complete. 30. Watermair; looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. Consideration of further watermain looping needs and stubs for future phases or other adjacent developments will be required and reviewed with future submittals. Complete. With this in mind, at minimum the City will require that the internal site watermain is extended to the easterly property line with a stub and temporary hydrant, Complete. K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Prelim Plat - Engineering Review.docx Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engin eering Rev iew August 5, 2021 Page 4 31. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the City Fire Marshall. Provide an exhibit of hydrant coverage with a maximum of 250' radius. A review of valve locations will be provided with future plan submittals. In -progress, hydrant influence map provided and coverage appears adequate, but confirmation from Fire Marsh all still pending . 32. City's typical standard is to place sewer a minimum of 10' below the surface (18" vertical separation below the watermain). Where this depth is not feasible, the City will allow an 8' depth; depths less than 8' will require review on a case -by -case basis and require insulation and/or insulated pipe, at minimum. With that in mind, the applicant is proposing to place water and sewer utilities at depths of 4-6 feet below the surface to avoid underlying fill conditions (various forms of debris from the demolition of a building). There is inherent risk in placing utilities at depths of less than 8 feet due to winter/freezing conditions . The City will require that watermain is placed at a minimum of 8 feet deep but allow sewer to be placed no less than 6 feet deep with proper insulation methods. In -progress, the applicant is showing insulation over the sewer between MH 2-3 and MH 3-4; A final review will be conducted when plan/profile drawings are provided. Spacing/clearance requirements of the MN Health Department for watermain and sewers will need to be met. In -progress, a final review will be conducted when plan/profile drawings are provided. The City's standards also require that sanitary sewer manholes are placed outside of the roadway pavement areas in the adjacent boulevard Complete. 33. The underlying fill conditions (various forms of debris from the demolition of a building) will require that a geotechnical evaluation is provided that includes a specific bedding/support evaluation of utility piping systems (watermain, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer). Buried debris can continue to break down over time causing settlements and otherwise provide poor foundation conditions. The applicant proposes to directionally drill water services . This inethod of installation will not ailo;w the proper bedding materials to he placed. In addition, the buried debris may contain brick, block, and concrete chunks that will now a drill head to pass. Complete, it is understood the applicant is no longer considering directional drilling of the utilities . 34. Any public sanitary sewer and watermain shall he encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert cf the utility with a minimum of 20' centered on the utility. Confirm this is maintained where sender main is proposed in the front yards especially in the location of MH 3. Complete. 35. With final construction plans, if basements are proposed with the villas or townhomes. the City will require common dralntilecollection system for sump pump discharges . If foundation drains are proposed to he separate from the sump discharge. a separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharae system should be considered. Complete, homes will be slab on grade. 36. Where any sewer pipe (storm or sanitary) crosses the watermain, include a note saying "M aintain 18 -Inch Separation, 4" Rigid Insulation" . Provide dimension notes in various locations between the watermain and storm/sanitary sewer. In -progress, a final review will be conducted when plan/profile drawings are provided . 37. Show existing sewer structure rim/invert elevations on the utility plan . It is not clear with the proposed connection to the existing system the depth of the existing sewer line and whether a drop structure will be required. Based on the proposed invert elevation of MH 1, an outside drop will be required, note on plan and provide detail . K:\017878-000\Admin\Does\2021-08-03 Su bmittal \_202I-08-05 Pra irie Cree k Villas Pr elim Plat - Engineering Revi ew.d ocx Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 5 38. Confirm the grade of the proposed sewer pipe between MH 1 and MH 2 will not exceed standard pipe velocities. Complete. 39. Provide note for pipe size, type, and grade between CB 212 and CB 213. The applicant should have a contingency plan to collect this drainage if the proposed storm sewer is in conflict with private utilities within the boulevard. 40. For the proposed roof drain collection system, the line -type arrow direction is backwards in most cases. Provide invert elevations, grade percentages, and additional cleanout locations. Add a note to the extension to the roof drain locations to the effect of "Connect to roof drain down -spout locations with construction of homes". 41. The City would prefer STMH 201 to be a CB along the curb line to the north of the pedestrian curb ramp. Civil Construction Details (C7.1 - C7.3) 42. Include typical section details for street, trail, sidewalk meeting the City's standards. The final street section shall be designed by a registered geotechnical engineer for the specific soil conditions found on the site. 43. Include a typical section/design on the plans for the proposed retaining walls and safety fencing. 44. Provide a detail for the sanitary sewer manhole outside drop. 45. A full review of standard details will be conducted with the final plat submittal. Traffic & Access 46. Based on the proposed site plan the anticipated traffic generation would range from 139 daily trips, 9 AM peak hour trips and 11 PM peak hour trips with the 19 unit Villa proposal to 220 daily trips, 14 AM peak hour trips and 17 PM peak hour trips with the 30 unit Townhome proposal. Complete, acknowledged by applicant. 47. Hamel Road adjacent to the site is a local Municipal State Aid Street. The existing roadway has a 25ft two lane rural cross section with no shoulders. The roadway has a posted 30mph speed limit, Complete, acknowledged by applicant. 48. Two site access driveways are proposed. With the low site traffic generation. the 30mph posted speed limit and moderate traffic volume on Hamel Road there would not be a need for turn lanes in to or out of the site at the proposed driveways. However, consideration of widening Hamel Road to include a shoulder would provide improved safety. Complete, acknowledged by applicant. 49. A sight line analysis should be completed at both driveway intersections on Hamel Road and included considerations for landscaping and monument sign locations, if applicable. Stormwater Management 50. According to FEMA flood plain maps Zone AE 100-yr flood fringe encompasses much of this site. The floodplain elevation that applies to this parcel is 974.6. Please show floodplain elevation on future plan sets. The city requires compensatory storage at a 1 1 ratio for any filling the in the floodplain. K:\017878-000\Admin\Dors\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Prelim Plat - Engineering Review.docx Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Rev iew A ugu st 5, 2021 Page 6 51. When this parcel split in 2018, there was floodplain fill on the eastern parcel that was not mitigated at that time. This fill amounts to 3,312 cf. Previous grading plans show this migration amount on the western parcel . This should be incorporated into the site development plans: Add a label to where this is being proposed . 52. The development will need to meet the appropriate standards for Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. Please submit approved permit information to the city . The grading indicates that much of the side yard drainage is directed to the outside edges of the property and bypassing collection/conveyance to the stormwater ponds (Lots 1-8 Blk 1, Lots 4-9 Blk 2). Consider options to collect this drainage for treatment in order to meet the requisite City standards; In progress, it appears individual stubs have been provided to each home location. A final review will be conducted with invert/percent grade information is provided. Volu me Control (Complete) 54 Per city of Medina standard 1.1 inches of runoff from net new impervious surfaces must be captured and retained onsite. Provide calculations of new impervious and how much is being treated by each BMP. Required Volume (ftA 3) = Impervious Surfaces (SF) ` 1.1 (in)* 1,12 (ft/in) Required Volume (ft^ 3) = 76,975(SF) * 1 .1 (in) ' 1/12 (ft/in)= 7,056 CF Currently the site is accounting for 6,394 CF 55. Provide additio nal volume control onsite to meet city requirements Additional BMPis could include pervious pavement for the trail, filtration, or underground storage. Consult Medina`s Design guidelines for specific bmp s and the allowable credit. Include all onsite impervious including future trail. sidewalks. and entrance drives and update impervious totals. 57. This development drains to a regional wet pond/filtration basin system constructed in 2015. The regional basins were designed to meet rate control and water quality requirements for this site. The ponds were designed to assume that 80% (2.7 acres) of the buildable portion of this parcel would be impervious surface. Provide detailed impervious surface information for the proposed development to ensure that the proposed impervious is less than 2.7 acres, In -progress, routing of the storm sewer will need to convey runoff directly to the wet pond (not the filtration basin). 58. Include any piping or roof drains from the homes to show how drainage is being collected and directed to the stormwater BMP's. Based on the architectural elevations provided , it is not clear how this will he achieved without some sort of common collection system in the rear yards, front yards. or both. In -progress. applicant is proposing Rate Control (Complete) 59. Post development discharge rates must be less than or equal to existing conditions discharge rates for the 2 -year (2.5 -inch), 10 -year (4 3-inchi and 100 -year (7 3 -inch) Atlas 14 MSE 3, 24 -hour storm events. Provide calculations of each discharge point from the site t0 enfy that disci are reduced. g ! C1,C 7 K\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Pr elim Plat - E ngineeri ng Review.docx Prairie Creek Villas Preliminary Plat — Engineering Review August 5, 2021 Page 7 Provide updated rate control calculations taking into consideration the additional impervious from the sidewalks, trails, and entrance drives. Water Quality (Complete) 62. For new development, the water quality control standard shall be considered satisfied if the volume control standard has been satisfied. If it is infeasible to meet the volume control standard due to site constraints the proposed BMP will need to detain and treat sufficient volume of stormwater to achieve a phosphorus load reduction of 20% from existing conditions using and approved BMP. Modeling 63 Provide modelling to show existing conditions and proposed conditions for the site. In - progress. HydroCAD model provided. but will require updating to address remaining comments. Wetlands 64. The wetland boundary must be extended through all project parcels. The boundary shown on the current site plan is what was delineated in 2018 OA/F-18-113) but does not accurately extend around the entire \:+;etland complex, Complete. 65. The wetland is classified as a Manage 1 by the City of Medina and will require a 30 -foot average (20 -foot minimum) buffer. The location of the buffer, including buffer monument signs, and revegetation plan must be shown on the site plan around the full extent of the wetland within the project parcels. The location of the buffer monuments must also be shown on the wetland buffer plan. 66. If either permanent or temporary impacts to wetlands are proposed, an approval from the Wetland Conservation Act will be required. The applicant has stated there will be no proposed wetland impacts with the project. 67. Wetland buffer vegetation must consist of acceptable natural vegetation and cannot contain turf grass. Permanent turf establishment currently shows the use of MnDOT seed mix 25-151, a turf grass mix. Disturbed areas of the buffer must be seeded with a native vegetation mix, such as Mix 33-261. The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City's standards. K:\017878-000\Admin\Does\2021-08-03 Submittal\_2021-08-05 Prairie Creek Villas Prelim Plat - Engineering Review.docx Prairie Creek Villas Prelimin ary Plat — Engineering R ev iew August 5, 2021 Page 8 We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail . Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet . Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-08-03 Submittal \_2021-08-05 prairie Creek V illas Prelim Plat - Engineering Re view .d ocx Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review and Variance SUBMITTED TO City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 PREPARED PREPARED BY Landform Professional Services, LLC 105 5th Ave S, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Landform°, . . . and Site to Finish° are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services LLC 4 - -- TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Site Plan and Preliminary Plat 1 Variance 1 Summary 2 Contact Information 2 f& Introduction On behalf of Stelter Enterprises, LLC, Landform is pleased to submit this application for site plan and preliminary plat approval to allow subdivision of 500 Hamel Road (PID 1211823310048). Our development plan includes a plat to create 17 lots for single family villa homes served by a private drive. We are excited about the improvements proposed for this site. Site Plan and Preliminary Plat We are requesting approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide the existing property into 17 lots and two outlots. There is existing contamination present on the site shown on the draft Phase I submitted. The contamination was avoided wherever possible by adjusting utility locations and placing the homes on helical piers to avoid footing excavation. We are looking to reduce the utility trench width within the contamination area below the 10 -foot requirement and would welcome collaboration with the city engineer and staff to accommodate this change. The site plan shows compliance with the zoning district standards in Section 834 as demonstrated on sheet C2.1 of the plan set. Homes will be traditional rear -load homes and will be slab on grade served by a private drive that is 24 feet wide at the access points and 28 feet wide where the units access the drive. The landscape was done utilizing the R2 district standards for plantings, however zoning standards call for landscaping of plazas which are not present in the plan. The net usable area shown on the site plan is 3.68 acres which means the site is being developed at 4.6 net units/acre. This is consistent with the density range for the Uptown Hamel zoning district. Variance We are requesting City approval for a variance from Section 834.06 Subd. 4. We are requesting approval by the City. Specifically: 1. To allow a setback of 30 feet for lots 1-8, Block 1 along Hamel Road where a maximum setback of 10 feet is allowed. We have reviewed the request in accordance with MN law and City ordinance standards in Section 825.45 Subd. 2 and find that the ordinance standards have been met. Specifically: 1. A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The variance is consistent with the purpose and intent of the ordinance which is to create an attractive and pedestrian -friendly environment. The proposed homes are connected to the pedestrian environment with sidewalks and will include attractive homes, meeting the intent of the ordinance. Included as an attachment is a description of how each of the design standards has been met for the homes. 2. A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The development is consistent with the comprehensive plan Uptown Hamel (UH) land use by developing with a permitted use at a density which falls within the 4 to 15 units per acre identified for the district. 3. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. In determining if the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, the board shall consider, among other factors, whether Prairie Creek Subdivision, Medina, MN BLP21001 July 23, 2021 1 the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulty and whether the variance confers upon the applicant any special privileges that are denied to the owners of other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district; The property owner proposes to use the property for single-family villa homes, which is a per mitted use in the district. The increased setback variance is the minimum variance necessary to move the homes out of the existing drainage and utility easem ent adjacent to Hamel Road, which prevents ho mes consistent with the setback requirement from being built. Therefore, the use of the property is in a reasonable manner given the existing restrictions that prevent the landowner from complying with the zoning standard. 4. The plight of the landow ner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and The property proposed to be developed is restricted by an existing drainage and utility easement for a sanitary force main. The easement is a circumstance unique to the property that was not created by the landowner and it prevents the homes from being located in compliance with the 10 -foot maximum setback standard. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality as the homes are still connected to Hamel Road with sidewalks to promote and encourage a walkable environ ment . Summary We respectfully request approval of the Site Plan and Preliminary Plat to allow subdivision of the 500 Hamel Road property into 17 lots for single family villa homes. Contact Information This document w as prepared by: Kevin Shay Landform 105 South Fifth Avenue, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Kevin Shay at kshay ot7landform.net or 612.638.0228. Prairie Creek Subdivision, Medina, MN BLP21001 July 23, 2021 2 i ♦ AREA LOCATION MAP DEVELOPER 0 LANDFORM 2021 MEDINA, MINNESOTA ABBREVIATIONS NORTH NO SCALE 100 YR A.B. AD A ADD D ADDL. ADJ. AHU ALT. ALUM. A1030 A001000 ARCH AUTO AVG. B C. BM' BFE &T T BLDG BM BSM T. CF. G.FS. 00. C. J. C L. CO. 0 0.0. ay. 0B M/ GE CENT. CIP C MP CON . CONN. CONST NTT. CO. COMB. COP. CU. D.5. DEG. DEMO. DEPT. DET. DIA. DIAL. DIM DIP ON DWG E. J. E.O. E.o S E W. U. ELEC ELEV. ENTER ENGR E00R. 80 EOUIP. EON EXIST. EXP. F8/ F B.O. F.C. FD. FDc F V. FB FBWO FBLO FN.ON. FES FFE FLR FT. OR 0 FUT. G. B. GC G AL. GALV. aE GR HP. HDPEP HA. FIOR11. H V800AC 00 E. or IE O. OR (-) NFO. 00. NSUL. !N. F. Angle And At 100 Year Flood Elevation Anchor Bah Area Drain Air Co dtionirg Unit Addendum Additiona l AcIacen,/Add, Ain 1 Alternate U1111 ANminum Anodized Appro ximate Ardile cl/Ardileclu ral Automatic Average Back of Cub Bottom of Wel Basement Flo or Beaton &lumino us(Aspharoc) Bolting Be ndrnark Basement Bnt Cubic Feet Cube Feet Per Second Comer Guard Co ntrol Joni Ce nteni,e Con cre te Masonry Un it Cleeno ul U.S. Nmy Co rps Of Engine ers Cub0 Yards Catch Basin Catch Basin Manhole Cem ent Cast Iron Pipe Comgated Meta l Pipe Concrete (Portland) Co nnection Consw obon Continuos Contractor Co pper Cu bic Dawn Spout Degree Dem olition /Demolish D40,trnenl Dea i Diameter Diagonal Iron Fipe Down Dawdig East 6paresn Joint Em ergency O verawe Emergency Ov erflow Sw ale Each Way Each EL. Elevation EkcI c al Eleva tio n Eme rgency Engineer Entrance Equal Equpne nl Equivalent 000,09 Expans00 Furnis h an d Instal Furnished by Others Face of Cub Floor Drain Fire Department Co nnection Field Verify Full Basement Full Basement Walk Out Full Basem ent Look OM Foundation Fared End Section Finished Flo or Boyd en Flo or Foo t Future Gra de Bre ak General Contractor Gallon Galvanized Garage Floor Elevation Gass Grade Height High Pant High Dens ity Polyethylene Pre Height Honzontal He al ing, Ven tilation, Air Cadbon irg Hydrant de Dimension OR Itlenafic alion me n Elevation de s formation nlel Ele vation surEle riven Elevation Joint ow Pant/baud Petroleum LB. L&U LB. LB. LT. MAINT. M4S. MAX MECH MED. 4R. MIN. MISC. MOD.T M0. M3L. NO. OR I NOM NTS NNE 0 O. G. O. H. OH OHNL OPNG. ()RIG P. C. P. I. PN P. L.OR PA P.O.B. PS. F. P.S. I. P.T. PV C. PV r. PE PER. PREP. PREP. PROP. PROP. PVC 018 . WTR QTY. RAD. RE RD. R.E. R0. R P. RC R5. RSD RE. REINF, REDO REV. RGU ROW OR RAN S. S. F. SEC. SECT. SE SEWO SNTFR. SIM. SCOT. SPEC. SO. SSD STMH STD. STRUCT. SVM. TR TAV TEMP. 1) T J. TMR TYP. U. NO. V.B. 01. V LF. VER. VER. VEST. W COPT. WI W F. WI WO WO VER. WP 10 YR Pound Local Governm ent Unil Pound Longitudinal Lehi /Lghbrg Maintenance Masonry Male el Maximum Mechanical Medium Ma nufacture r Manhole Maim um /Minute Msce laneous Minnesota De8edmenl Of Transportation Module / Modular Muaon North Not In Contras Numbs Nominal Not o Shale Normal W ater Elevaton level Normal W ater Lent On Center Cukke Dimension Ove rhe ad Ekstra Ove rhea d 00*8,y high Oaten Level °Penn Ppna l of Curva Nne Pant of Inlestt8on Post IMab r Valve P roperty Lire P ant of Beginning Pounds Per Square Fool Pounds Per Square Inch Pomp of Tangen cy Pan, of Vend Gaveloe Pant of Vertical Interse.Eon Pont of Venial Tangency Polye thyl e Pedesta l /Pe de strian Perforated Premrebon Protect Pres sed PolyN irM-CNonde(Pping) Pavement Wader CluaMsy Radu Rader Rim Eleabon (Casting) Roof Dram Remove Easing Rough Opening Radius Pant Reinforced Concrete Ppe Rough Slab Roof Storm Drain Regarding Reinforc ed Required Reu nio n/Re vrsed Regulatory Go ve rnment Unil &ghl of Wa y South Square Feet Sanitary Sewer Sedan Sale Entry /Side Eat Split Entry Walk ON Side Eat Walk Out Sheet Sender Sea lant Spe aficots n Square Subsurface tr ain Storm Sewer M anhole Standen] Struchaal Symmelrd Thic0,ess Top of Rim Top of coal Temporary Thick/Thickness Tooled Jon i TAI H dish, Unless Noted OMe0wse Vapor Banner Vertical Curve Verify In Fe ld Verify Veroal Vestibu le Width Worang Po int Welded W ee Fabric Wlh Witho ut Walk rt Welland W aterproof 0008 ght Yard Year PRAIRIE CREEK MEDINA, MINNESOTA SYMBOLS EXISTING DESCRIPTION NEW DESCRIPTION 120 MAJOR CONTOUR 123 M INOR CONTOU R SPOT ELEVATION 0 2505 L 1TST5 8 -SAN > 6- NTR O - NT - FO UE IEIG4T, TYPE ❑ 0 0 • k 0 O ❑T 2) 6• LT 0\ 0 • BUILDING CANOPY/OVERH ANG CONCRETE BITUMINOUS LANDSCAPING GRAVEL PAVING BLOCK PAVING BLOCK STORM SEW ER LINE SANITARY SEW ER LINE WATER MAIN OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UNDERG ROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC GAS LINE CONCRETE CURB FENCING RETAINING WALL SET 12 X 14' IRON PIPE IRON M ONUMENT FO UND SURVEY DISK (BENCHMARK) POWERPOLE GUY WRE GUARD POST G AS METER TRANSFORMER WATER SHUT-OFF VALVE TRAFFIC SIGN FUG POLE LIGHT POLE TREES TREE LIME MANHOLE CATCH BASIN FIRE HYDRANT W ATER VALVE FLARED END SECTION MAILBOX NO TE NU MB ER MEASURED DISTANCE DISTANCE PER RECORDED PUT SOIL BORING 120_ 12345 X Orr ME tr CIE DD 0 00% to I 1 0 FES STS �» RIPRAP X508 , FM - RD-» - G4TEVALVER �WT • HYD FIRE I C.0 -X-SSD--- GA5 - TELE CAN MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION BUILDING CANOPY0VERHANO UND ERGROUND STRUCTURE CONCRETE CONCRETE CURB EDGE OF PAVEMENT FENCING GUARD RAIL CONCRETE RETAINING W ALL MODULA R RETAINING W ALL FIELDSTONE RETAINING W ALL EXIT LOCATION LIGHT STANDARD POWER POLE SLOPE DIRECTION CATCH BASIN M ANHOLE BOLLARD STORM SEWER SANITARYSEW ER- WASTE FORCE MAIN ROOF DRAIN SYSTEM W ATERMAIN FIRE LINE (E SEPARATE) FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION SOIL SUBDRAN GAS NNE -UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC -UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE-UNDERGROUO UND ERGROUrWCABLE/TV LAWN SPRINK LER SLEEVE EROSION CONTROL SYMBOLS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION i 1/1/11/11/1/1111//1 - / • \ or SILT FENCE COMPOSTED 00G INLET PROTECTION DRAW ING SYMBOLS SYMBOL DESCRIPTIO N NOTE REFERENCE PARKING STALL COUNT LARGE SHEET DETAIL COORDINATE PONT REVISION- ADDENDUM, BULLETIN ETC. REVISED AREA (THIS issu E) LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lo 15 of Audbls Subdivision No. 241, Hennepin Coun ty, Mn rie oo8, a ¢a0ng to the plat there of cc file or of reco rd in the office of the Register of Titles In and fm said Co unty, except as Maws (1) The South 20900 feet of le Wes1209.00 fee o1 that pan of lot 5 lying Ea sery of a Ina dawn al argh, angle to the South Ina a mid Lo t 5 from a pant thereon cider', 403.000 feet Westerly of the Southeast caner of said Lel5as treasured al ong said South line. (2) Begioen,g at the N ortheast corner of sad Lot 5. the nce Sid aloglhe East line of said Lot 5 o a point of intersection wilha line whic h Ls garde! ee6 and 30.00 Fee l &lent So uthea y (mea sure d at right angles) from the North li ne dead L ot 5, th enc e We sterly along sa id la st menbon od para llel line a &danc e of 58800 feet, then ce Northerly al 0001 angl es a distance of 30.00 feet to the North lne of said Lot 5: thence Easterly alo ng the North Lee of said Lots lathe dace of begin ni ng. BENCHMARK OW NER STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 1450543rd. Avenue Nat, Pymouth, MN, 55446 TEL 612-325.7414 CONTACT: FRED STELTER PROJECT CONTACTS CIVIL ENGINEER LANDFORM 185 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513 MINNEA POUS, MN 55401 TEL 812.252-9070 CONTACT TODD OLIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT LANDFORM 105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 513 MINNEAPOLIS , MN 55401 TEL 812-252-9070 CONTACT: JOSH POPEHN SURVEYOR LANDFORM 105 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 513 MINNEAPOUS, MN 55401 TEL 612-2525070 CONTACT: LARRY HUHN CIVIL 1 LANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX & REVISION MATRIX SHEETS ISSUED BY DATE h N M 78 11 SHEET NO DESCRIPTION 8 0 0 00 .1 C62 01 .1 C2.1 C2.2 C3 .1 C3 .2 04 .1 C7.1 07.2 C7.3 11 .1 L21 L7.2 TITLE SHEET X X X PREUMINARY PLAT X X X EXISTING CONDITIONS DEMOLITION PUN X X X SITE PLAN X X X VEHICLE MANEL NERING X X GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING & EROSION CONTROL X X X IAN SWPPP NOTES X X X UTILITIES X X X CML CONSTRUCTION DETAILS X X X CIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS X X X CIVIL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS X X TREE PRESERVATION PLAN X X LANDSCAPE PUN X X L ANDSCAPE DETAILS X X CERTIFICATIONS I HEREBY CERTIFY T HAT THIS PLAN , SPECIFICATION, OR REP ORT WAS PREPARED BY NE OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AN D THAT I AMA DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE L AWS OF THE STATE OF MNNE50TA. RAN DALL C. HEDLUN D, PE. LICENSE NUMBE R 19576 DATE . 10( MONTH YEAR I HEREBY CERTIFY T HAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REP ORT WAS PREPARED BY M: OR UNDER MY DIRECT SI RERWSION AND T HAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARC HITECT UNDER THE L AWS OF TIE STATE OF MINNESOTA. JOSHUA K. PCPEHN, R.L A. LICENSE NUMBER 44803 DATE )0MONTH YEAR Know wh o's Below . CaII before you dg. STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd. Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL 612425.7414 MUNICIPALITY G C E Y MEDINA manErmi PRAIRIE CREEK MEDINA, MINNESOTA ISSUE / REVISION HISTORY C ONT. - INCIPEEP FO R MN P1:1100.14510PY DATE RE NE W al AM 2021 gasoaY aro<F CERTIFICATION VISI BL E MS SHEE T Il\SBEEN REPRODUCED BEYOND INTE NDED PEADABOITY Mr IS NO 1.11654 VAUD D OCUMEN T PLEASE CON DUCT ME N OW. REPAST KICCI ONAL DOCUMENTS CITY RESUBMITTAL AUGUST 3, 2021 • • LANDFORM From Site to Finish • • A • 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252.9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: landf orm .net FILE NAME 0001BLP21001.DWG PROJECT N0. BLP21001 TITLE SHEET C0.1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION DEVELOPER 00 h 03 03 EX ST. POND W BASIN 100-` R HWL= 982.9 NWL=980. 0 V 118=974.0 Q' rb 0 © LANDFORM 2027 L=740.82. R =79B0 A=4° 07.00• A r s SOO LINE \ ftN 'E L; .'; , .wraRaa4rgFf�O w fT nem a,v ana \WET I / I 1 I 6 I I I I I I 1 I I / � 1 .2 X8'2 3.07••x. 4 42 q HAM EL ROAD ELM ' 9• 0 Benchmark f — J \CO MPANY WET \7 I11 11 l l I/ 11 11 11 IL_ RIDE -wET T�r4 i Lot 1, Block 1, RASKOBS ELM CREEK ADDITION, Aoc urdrg b the recorded plel !hereof, Hennepin Couny, Minn ea ola. BENCHMARK Tap n ut of Irydrant at farthe est qu ad -ant of Ham el Road and EH Creek Drive. El evation= 978.93( NAV088) AREA SUMMARY TOTAL SITE AREA . 292,825 S F. =6 R AC . WETLAND EASEIENTT AREA 132370 SF .. 304 AC. ( DELINEATED WETLAND. 90124 S.F. =2.06 AC.) RIGHT OF WAY AREA 05 F =00 AC. NET AREA . 160,455 SF. -368 AC TOTAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS = 17 NET DENSITY = 46 UTA ZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARY THE P ROPERTY IS ZONED LPTOWN HAMEL pH/ BUILDIN G SETBACK INFORMATION IS AS FOLL OWS. FRONT YARD . 10 FT. REAR =N/A SIDE -8 FT LOT COVERAGE 114ORf4ATION IS AS FOLLOWS . LOT AREA MMMJM= 59045 F = 0.07 ACRE LOT WIDTH MINIMU M= N/A TOTAL Siff AREA- 292825 SF = 672 ACRES LOT AREA TABLE Parcel Are a Table Parcel # Lot/Block Are a 1/1 8384 2 2/1 8365 3 3/1 8648 4 4/1 8669 5 5/1 8428 6 6/1 8014 7 7/1 7585 8 8/1 8288 9 12 6517 10 2/2 6472 Parcel Area Table P arc el # L ot/Bl ock Ar ea 11 3/2 6436 12 4/2 6492 13 52 6529 14 6/2 6939 15 7/2 7053 16 8/2 7056 17 92 6877 18 OutlotA 23537 19 Outlet B 142534 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS' . (NOT TO SCALE) 1 —7 7— I _L� 10 J L10 BEING 7 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, UNLESS OTIERWSE SHOWN, AND 10 FEET N WIDTH AN D ADJOINING mart OF WAY LINES 0 0E55 OTHERWISE SHO WN Know what's Below. Call before you dig. 0 50 100 NORTH STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd. Av enue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL 612325-7414 Y MEDINA PROJECT PRAIRIE CREEK MEDINA, MINN ESO TA ISSUE I REVISION HISTORY ISSUE /PENSION REVIEW 23.2021 Chlirn nn. M be ry IF RE MG.,. SEN . FOVIi MELT, AB OVE A PE N OT VISIBLE MS SHEET. ..FEN REM MOOED RE YOM IHTEICED MY MO IS NO LON GER AV.° C .C.IENT PLE ASE CONTACT CITY RESUBMITTAL AUGUST 3, 2021 • • • • LANDFORM From She to Finish t • a • 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: la ndform.net FILE NAME COO2BLP21001 PROJECT N0 . BLP21001 PRELIMINARY PLAT CO.2 T BASIN R HW L= 982.9 WL= 980.0 Q T M= 974,0 Q m 05 N GENERAL NOTES 1. FOR CONSTRUCTION STAKING AND SURVEYING SERVICES CONTACT LANDFORM AT 6122529070. SITE PLAN NOTES 2 OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION W ITHIN OR USE OF, PUBLIC RIG HT-OF-W AY. 3 TFE DIGITAL FILE, WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE ENG INEER, SH ALL BE USED FOR STAKING. DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN TFE DRAWING S AND THE DIGITAL FILE SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, AS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS, AND THE DIGITAL FILE, 6HALL BE COMPARED TO TFE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS PRIO R TO STAKING. 4 BUILDING LAYOUT ANGLES ARE PARALLEL WITH OR PERPENDICULAR TO THE PROPERTY LINE AT TFE LOCATION INDICATED. 5. DIAENSMS SHOWN ARE TO BACK OF Cl9 B. ZONING AND SETBACK SUMMARY THE PROPERTY 15 ZONED UP TOWN WANEL (U1) BUILDING SETBACK INFORMATION IS AS FOLLOWS. FRONT YARD =10 FT. REA R =N/A SIDE 8FT. LOT COVERAGE INFORMATION IS AS FOLLOWS LOT AREA MINIMUM= 29045 F = 0.07 ACRE LOT WIDTH MINIMUM = WA TOTAL SITE AREA = 292,825 SF.. 072 ACRES AREA SUMMARY EXISTING PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TOTAL 292.825 S F. 0 SF. 6.72 AC . 000 AC. 6 .72 AC. 100.0% 1010% 00.0% 292,825 SF PROPOSED PERVIO US 216,425 5F. 497 AC , IM PER VIOUS TOTAL 292,825 S.F. 76,400 S.F, 1 .75 AC. 73 .9% 26.1 % 100.0% Parcel Table Parcel# LOT/BLOCK Area 1/1 8827 2 2/1 8749 3 3/1 9032 4 4/1 9053 5 5/1 8812 6 6/1 8398 7 7/1 7969 8 8/1 8715 9 1/2 6376 10 2/2 6105 Know what's Below . 6.72 AC. NORTH Call before you dig. 0 50 100 DEVELOPER STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd. Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL 612-325-7414 MUNICIPALITY t Y O A MEDINA PROJECT PRAT RI E CREED MEDINA, MINNESOTA ISSUE) REVISION HISTORY DATE ISSUE fRE,1510.1 wcb cryx, as Rning 121. CERTIFICATION C0 TIE 31.07JIIE SEAL OP H. LANES MERIN AB OVE APE H OT I... TY MO IS HO LON6Di DOCUMENT. PLEASE COM. - THE MINN , 701.1.1,0 0111 0.. DO CUMEN TS CITY RESUBMITTA L AUGUST 3, 2021 • • L A NDF ORM from Site to Finish • • • • 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252.9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: l andform.net FILE NAME C201BLP21001 PROJECT NO. BLP21001 SITE PLAN C2.1 Parc el Table Parcel# LOT/BLOCK Area 11 3/2 6081 12 42 6136 13 5/2 6165 14 672 6574 15 772 6688 16 872 6691 17 9/2 6522 18 O.L. A 23964 19 O.L. B 141967 20 TOTAL SITE 292825 LEGEND SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY GENERAL NOTES 1 Formremxlion Malang and snweying se contact Landlor m al 612.2529070. DEVELOPER EXIST. POND WET BASIN 00-YR FIN/LE 982.9 NM, 980.0 BIM =974. 0 SAW CUT E. PAVEMENT L11r SAW CUT Ex PAVEMENT ELM 972.7 0 w W U IL 04 TAN )31%X8 BAN *C O( p47t Inlet Profecla, Sit Fence Vehicle Tracking Pad Erosion Control Blank et Ty Out Curb Pavement Sa wed Comlruction Limits Top of Wail Bol bm of Wall ilk .lu J JET Bea. 1.5901n. ft. 1 ea . SILT FENCE (M 0 SSMH o EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES 2. Instal permel5 sediment controls prior to b egin ning work and maintain for duralun of constmclnn. Rem ov e controls after areas m xrbutir9 .off ere permanentlyslabized and disp ose of offsi te. E> Instal inlet protection W% moo RD or CG models as appropriate , or approved equal. Meat., protection until protect rs s6 Wrzed. 4. Limit s oil 6s9r Wice to the grading,miter shown. Schedule operations to minimize length of expma e of dslunbed ar eas. Marmgemenlpaclnc es sh own are the minimum require ment. Install and maintain adrHanel c ontrols as work proceeds to prevent erosion and c ontrol s elan., f amed by wind or water . 6. Refer to S WPPP Notes on Sheet C3.2 for additional requirements. C ontract or sh al pee n swim., laden water from enle nng the fi8raton I infiltration system unl the site a compleley stabiied. 8 Al e/posed s oil areas shall stabilized Immediat ely fopea sal erasion in that po tion of the site whereo 18a9on has leap/anti/ a permanently c eased. See Landscape Sheets for per manent mud and landscape establishment. 10. Scrape a4xc.l streets dean daily and s weep dean weekly. 9. 11. Seed, Sod, Much a nd Fertilizer she/ meet Be following Sp aofia0 ons, as modified. Item Spedfica9on Numb er Sod 6N00T 3878 Seed MJD0T3876 IM TYPE 22.11188 30.5 L13/AC -Temporary Erosion Control MN TYPE 25151 • 120 LB/AC- Permanent Turf Mlle MNDOT3882 MOOT TYPE 1 (t 2 TON/AC Disc Anchored) MNDOT 3881 MJD0T2575 MJDOT3885 G enerel pb.m.l Erosion Control Blanket M DOT TYPE 3N GRADING NOTES 12. Contact AN service for field k.tion of services 72 hours prior to beginning grading. 13. C teclmd rep ort has nol yet t een received, i1 coif bepro,ded once obtained Remove t opsoil torn gr ating areas and sKKlpie sufficient qu anty f or reuse . Materials may be mined from la ndscape areas for us e 14. m si te and repl aced with exc ess organic eaten, with po, o, O wner epppval . 15. R emov e surface and ground water from ...bons. Provideinital lifts of stable foundation matenal ifegwsd sets are wet and unst able. 16 R ough grade Buddrg Pad to 12 eddies bel ow Finished Floor Elevation (FEE). 17 . Ref er to Structural Sp edfiatans for earth work r eq uir ement f or butlding pads. 18. Mlndependent Testing Firm shall verify the removal of organic and unsuitable soil , sow oared.. and compaction and pr ovide pmrodc reports to the O wner. 19 Race and c ompact N .no 48 thicknesses matched to sod type and co mpaction equipment to obt ain specified compaction throughout the Mt 20 Co mpact cohesive soh o paved areas to 95 % of maximum dry densi5, Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) except the lop 3 feel whet, shall be c omp acted k 100%. Compact to 98% de nsity wh ere fill depth exceeds 10 fe el . The sods shall be wthm 3% of cptrmum 90. 009 content . In granular sat aN porticos of the enbananent shall be c ompacted b not less than 95% of Modfied Pmc kr Dersiy(ASTM D1557). 21 Coo,&,Ie 0.M NchleeOral for bu4drg sla p batiore. Slopes sho wn on adjacent w alls and pavement should continue over 01090 PAVING NOTES 22 Spot Ekelons at a times mdcate 9 M,oes ones noted other wise . See Shoal C41 for rim elevations of catch ba lm. 23. Grades bet ween proposed spot ekvatons shall be antnuous and nonvarable . Spot Elevations shall gwem oercentaur Ines. 24 . Me et and Mak5 exst . curb. Trexit on as needed. ID P ang Sed ue BO minous Paving (Light Duty) E Bituminous P aving (Trail) c. Con crete Walkways d. Match eesting pavement section. Ar menbte Routes steal have a maximum cross slope of 2.00% and a maximum running slope of 5.00%. Adjust al slm clure nms to math pavement elevations . 26 27 DE NOTES MENAGE AUDI Y v EA g WI N DENOTES WIN nDG BUUTING TEES SOC K 5,0 ON GR. DENOTES BUILDING SETBACKS L r L__ BLK1 /j -/ 5 108.3 SOG LF=101.0 G1.108.5 1 DENOTES PROPOSED LOT CORI. NApma DENOTES DRAINAGE FL OW REAR ELEVATION BANDING TYPE INNIMUIFIBMER ENT ELEVATION FROM GARAGE flOOR ELEVATION DRP T DENOTES DISTANCE GARAGE noon W DROPPED 60004181,150)3 DENOTES paW WAYSLOES O MAIN STREET xOha^^� LOCANON INDICATED BY DRIVE WAY . TYPICAL LOT DETAIL NO SCALE NORTH STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd . Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL 612-3257414 MEDINA PROJECT PRAT RI E CREEK MEDINA, MINNE SOTA ISSUE 1 REVISION HISTORY CO NTACT NEWI TER FOR ANN KIPP ESTOP/ ISSUE /RE NS. RE NEW IF AIN Nil 21 ELTON NNW, /Oil vimko C ry RENNW AI IF NE SIONFTURE SEAL CR FOUR LEES OINECTIE ABO VE ME NU, CITY RESUBMITTAL AUGUST 3, 2021 • • • • LAN D From Site 8o Finish FORM • • • • 105 South Fifth Avenue T el: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: landf orm .net FILE NAME C301BLP21001 PROJECT NO. BLP21001 GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL C3.1 Kn ow what's Below . CaII Won you dg . 0 50 100 GENERAL NOTES DEVELOPER 8 TO 12 CU. YRDS RIP -RAP CL. 111 FES 210 AN= 980. 00 Concrete Fla red En d Section DETAIL 5708 DETAIL. STO-9 C01 FES 100 INN= 980.00 21' RCP APRON DETAIL. ST08 DETAIL STO-9 CBBH 211 RIM. 984.72 474 (E). 983.34 IN N 98014 2X3 R-3067-6 DETAIL STOB MR1 RIM 985.25 INL(M 975. 11 INN (EXIST )- 970.35 48. DIA 9-1642.8 CITY DETAIL 5AN81 BUILD MH 1 OVER EXISTING 8' PVC SAN. SEW ER 447 RIM 986.00 1NL1E) 97821 INN. 978.11 48• DIA 8-1642-B CITY DETAIL SAN SERVICE INN/ 984. 0 243'-21' RCP 400:50 SAN .ERVICE N 23 C909 PVC ATERI 2 SAN SERVICE NV 985 CB 212 RIM 984.72 p. ML (E)'. 980. 61 8' x8'WETTAP 405980. 41 CON NECTION 2.5808 R -3067-V DETAIL STO-4 11Y0. 6'GV. 8 BOX 816' TEE „-- SANS RVICE / SAN SERVICE INN'. 98 .O - INN 85.0 CLEAI.IOLT (TYP.) !. / 22.5• BEND HYD. . V. . G. V. 8 BOX 8' TO 6' RED. STMT 101 RAT 98885 '1110 (El 980.85 R-78429 DETAIL ST0.1 0 MH3 RIM.986.68 INL (E) 979. 17 100 97901 - 48' DIA 9-1642-B CITY DETAIL SAN -01 SAN SERVICE INV:9848 C821399 41 984. 00 214.98133 26 BOX R-1642.8 DETAILSTO-1 SAN SERVICE INN 983.8 SAN SERVICE INN'. 984.5 CB5H 102 RIM. 965.44 UM - 98/.72 t' 4!.88132.: 48.094 R -3067-V8 DETAB:VTO-4 CB 103 RIM. 98544 INN . 981. 83 2x3 BOX R-3067-VB DETAIL STO 6 SAN SERVICE IM/ 9838 SAN SERVICE ilN 983.8 AN SERVICE 9844 CB 203 RIM 97907 INN 976.12 2X3 BOX R -3067-V DETAIL STOB SANITAR SEW ER INSULATION SAN SERVICE JNV.984.0 , SAN SE • ICE INN 984.4 1125 BEND, 818- W ETTAP CONNECTION 818' TEE 25° BEND 5'-12 RCP @OAO. CBMH 202 RIM 979 WL(W). 976. 02 INV. 976.02 4V DIA 9-3 067-7 DETAIL STO-4 STWM 201 RIM 98012 11,L(N) 97568 INN 97588 9-1642-& ._ DETAIL STD -1 12•RCP FES 200 %tip •0.70% 10 807580 17 RCP A ARON DETAIL ST68 . .. DETAL' ST0.9 8 TO 12 CU . YRDS . RIP -RAP CL . III 0 1. Fo r construction Malang and aun myirg services contact Landtorm al 612.252.9070. UTILITY NOTES 2. PVe Materwls W aterman n Water Servos Sania ry Sew er Sanitary Sew er Serv ice Strom Sewer 6' DIP Class 52 -Hydrant Leads, 8' P /C C900 Mainline (ANSI A2151IAW WA CI51) 7' Cape Type K (ASTM B88) Curb Slop shall be adusted to an elevation d2 below finished grade. See delai SER-01. 8' PVC SDR 35 (ASTM. D3034, D2665. 8 F891) 4' P VC SCHEDULE 40 (ASTM. 0178. 03034. 02665. F891) RCP 12• -18• CLASS 5 (ASTM C76) Final slam sewer desgn wi be eWmitkd with trial plat. RCP 21. CLASS 4 (ASTM C76) RCP 24'-08' CLASS (ASTM 076) 3 Contact UI &y Se once poviders forfield location of services 72 hours prig to beginning. 4 Contracto r to fiend venly 4Cation a nd e leva tio n of all Wily pants of co nnection prior to constructgn of any proposed unities. Contracto r 19 notify Engineer imm edaky if hoe o a ny 4svepan 9. 5. Contra. tc. pothole a/ ufility crossIngs pnor to construction of new utildms to verify depths of e xplin g Imes Contact Engine er immediately If any o*8ON are 6scweed 6. Reside mea ns and measures to p oled ar4aml property from damage daring u6bly installation. 7 Ppe lengths shown a re from ce nter of structu re to cents of slr6Nre or end of end section. 8. Install tracer wire withal non-conductive utilties in acco rdance with CM of Mein Sta nd ards. 9 Connect to City Lnilities in accordance with CA), of Medina Standards. 10 Contact Steve Scherer, City of Medne Public W orks Deparhned. at 763. 473.8842 ter Wet Tap inspection. 11. Main tain 75 Feel of cov er on wa te r. 12 Where sanaa ry sewe r and storm sewer cro ss the wa temain, maintain 18 -inch minimum outside separation at sewer crossingsw,N4 ' rgq insula00n. Center elen gths N mantle greatest separation between joints, 13. Sanitary sew er w ith depths of 6 minmam mu st be mutated. 14. Co ntact Steve Scherer City of Mein Poblic Wets Department, at 763473.8842 terflusNng and pressure test inspections . pin ts and co nn ec9onsin the slam sewer system shall be gastight or waterlght. Approvedrealenl nbber pints must be used lo make 15. watertight co nnec tions 6 manholes. ca tc h basins a nd other slwcNres . 16. Catch basin in curb andgut1r are supped 2inhes below the gutt er grade. Refer to Detai STR -038STR .04 on Sheet C7x 17. Com pact co hesive sob in paved areas to 95% of maxi mu m Ay dandy, Standard Aala(ASTM D618) ex cept th e lap 3le et wlr ch shall be compacted to 100%. compact to 98% density where N depth exceeds 10 feet The soil shalt¢ within 3%of oµmum moistur e content In granular sots a0 portions of the embankment shall be compacted to not less than 95%d Mad ded Proctor Density (AST M D1557). 18 Actusl struc tures to final grade where dsturbed. C omply with requirements of UN4y . Meet requirements tar traffic loading in paved areas. 19 Rock m ettle in infiltration or *n on systems shall be angular, non calcar eous rock 20, Coadnak with p104ak Wiens to mantle electis natural gas, and c ommuni cations servic es. 21. DOH * Merman and MPCA sa nitary s ewer exlen annorm's wi be appled for at finalplal appro val . Maintain 18 -inch separation, 4' n9d iu4aton between watamain and sewer. NORTH STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd. Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL612-325-7414 MUNICIPALITY X T Y Cr MEDINA PROJECT PRAIRIE CREEK MEDINA, MINNE SOTA ISSUE / REVISION HISTORY C ONTACT MOWER fOli ANY PRI OR .510111' DATE RE NE W 12 AlN2011 03 AUG MI PreinGle *I. ce xwman to cry Ppd Avnbal CERTIFICATION !FT,. SIONAIIFE. SEAL OP FOUR LANES DIRECTLY ABOVE. MOT PEA DMILM AND IS NO LONGER A YAW DOCIAIE Nr . PLEASE COMM, CITY RESUBMITTAL AUGUST 3, 2021 • • L AND F OR M • • • • From Site to Finish 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax. 612-252-9077 Web: l andform.net FILENAME C401BLP21001 PROJECT NO. BLP21001 UTILITY PLAN Know What's Below. Call before you do . 0 50 100 C4.1 Lo ose,*Sat w» repo noso n. re* e nwen n.a...e nose . .... TREE PRESERVATION NOTES TREE PRESERVATION TABLE 1 Tree replace ment ratio is ore c allernth p e,me ire* of removed sgnlficant trees and lost trees. 2 To Sgnrfirml Trees Inventoried: 109 Abed Sgm6cant Tree Removal (10%). 10 Total Sgnificent Trees Rem ove 72 See Sheet 1201 for Tree Replacement LEGEND X 0 Existing Tree vnT Tr ee Tag Lost Tree Ducal Rool Zoned preserv ed tre e (esti male . mho 15) SF Fence NORTH Tree /4 94 4.911. ORM Con diti on L ost Cott onw ood Go od Good Cott onwood Good Good Good Cotto nwood Good BoxeNler BoK elder VI pl ow 90 Go of 12 bulder G oof G ood 160 Good B ould er Good 11 Wdl ow G ood W Row 160 Inte ntonallybkanY• not used ...my C ottonwo od cott onw ood 140 Go od 19 0 Good 110 26 14 0 Good 22 0 C otto nwood Good 111.e. Ronan 19 0 C ottonw ood 17 0 Cotto nwo od 100 Boulder Boulde r Go od Poplar G ood Bonier 160 Go of Cotto nw ood G ood 41 Itorelder 41 Good Boulder Good Po oier wood G ood D ozel de r 19 0 Good 250 Good C otton woOd Good Wiley Good B ow 106 Good Good Goof C on ood Good Good 62 C ott onwood 105 63 Good Cottonwood 110 Go od 65 Cott om wood G oof Cotto nwood 14 .0 Good bxel der 19 .5 Boulder G oad Box older 12 0 Goof Bo xeid er 140 11 bz elder Cottonw ood Cottonwood Goof 105 Good Cott onwood 150 C ott onwood 74 Good Cott onwood 14 0 Good G ood 160 Cott onwood Go od 89 Bov eld er 110 Boulder 250 65 Good 200 Go od Go od l oaeldw 110 Good Itmeldn 100 Good 19 0 Good 93 G ood Boulder 110 95 Bo xeldw Good 97 Ilmelder 68 G ood 99 Good 105 Good Good 110 DEVELOPER STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd . Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 TEL 612-325-7414 ;-/k44 MEDINA PRAIRIE CREEK M EDI NA, MINN ESOTA ISSUE I REVISION HISTORY CONTACT ENGINEER P OO.. MOP .5701.11 ISS UE /99,951 011 REVIEW 131. Crya..e. ar •r.cq CERTIFICATION n .c aBownBE BEAL CP F OUR 1 .11195 DI RECTS AB OVE BREHM- AM BLE 11•5 SHEET INS BEEN REPP OD UCED BE1014,1N11.15 TE M OWER 10 REOUES190 01110. 00011.1E/415 . CITY RESUBMITTAL JULY 23, 2021 • • • • LANDFOR M From Site to Finish • • • • 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: landlorm.net FILE NAME L101BLP21001 PROJECT NO. BLP21001 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN L1.1 Know what's Below. Ca ll before you d y. 0 50 100 105 145 Cotton wood 107 Good 108 C otto nwo od 160 Go od 105 Good r..mim•ane St ef.. .eeym na won melts a Lod*. riar.uw5v nn . uC . LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE DEVELOPER EXIST. POND WET BASIN 100-06 MI, 982.9 MM.= 980. 0 BIM. 974.0 © IA NDFORM 2021 'a EVERGREEN TREES O 0 C OD E ssOTANICAL NAMF COMM ON NAM E MATURE SQE PLANTING 517E A CRU 6 Acerrubu m Red Maple 60'Hx40'W 2.5" Cal. ALFA 7 Ace r x fre eman ii 'Armstron g' Annsbong Freeman Maple 801 8 x 15' W 2. 5" C al. ACXF 4 Ace rxfre eman ll' Sien na' Sienna Glen Maple 66' 4440'W 2.5. Cal, BENI 6 Be tide nigta 'BNMTF' TM Dun Heat River Birch 60'H x 50'W 2.5' Cal. CEOC 3 Ce lls ocdderaala Common Hac kben y 50'8 x 50' W 2. 5" Cal. GTID 8 Gledilsia irlacanthos inermis 'Cra ves TM Street Keeper Hon ey Locust 45' H x 20'W 2.5" Cal. GTI5 3 s le ditsia lnacanlhos inermis 'Shade maste r Shademaster Honey Locust 45' 11 x 40'W 2.5' Ca l. QU81 7 Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oa k 55'H x 55'W 2.5' Cal. QUEL 6 Quercu s elbpeoidalb Northern Pin Oak 60H x 50'W 2.5" Cal. UAPR 7 L mus amencana'Prin ceton Princeton Ame rican Elm 60'H x 40' W 2.5' Cal. CODE su' BOTAN ICAI NAMF COMM ON NAM F MATURE 5I7F PLANTING SQL ABCO 9 Aces concokr White Fir 30'8 x 20'W NHL JUVI 11 Juniperusvirginiana Easte rn Red Cedar 45'H x20 'W 6' Ht . RIDE 16 Picea (Sauce ' Densata' Blac k Hills Spruce 45 'H x 20'W 6' 6. THOC 18 Thuja ocddenlalis American Arborvitae 40'H x 15'W 6 HI. LANDSCAPE NOTES 1 Land rspe Contactor shal visit the sit prior tosubmittng a bid to become familiar will to site conditions . Contact UtiM Serv ice pravgas for feb location of semces 72 hours prior to beginning. Crordnale vs talaton rn th Contractors performing related work 4. Pant matnal shat conform to me American Assosabon of Nurserymen St and ards and be of hardy stock, free fr om disease, intestab on, damage, a nd dsfgtraton. For d.cr.arxy b etween the rurrt er of pa nt on the Sdr edle and the raft er sham on the Drawing, the Drawing shall govern. 5. Al existing deciduous and coniferous trees are to betii mmed of dead wood and pruned to a n at ural uniform shape . 6. Pbntrg sal shall consist of 4 pans topsoil 101 pan peat humus, with 3 pounds ofemnmercial fed/leer aided per atx yard 0 Spread a mi nimum of 4 miles of topsoil and sod al turf areas disturbed by Conatucton. 8. Se e Wei s for depth of pla nting soil . 9. Fello w current M6 DOT Seeding Manual for panting imlvctor s for establshmenl ofnat.a seed and provide coordnalan for rep uted erosion prevention and sediment control. 18 Nato seed shall be of Minnesotaorgin andcedfied by the Min nesota Crop Improve ment Assoce9on(MCIA). Provide venlyog d ocumenbinn to the Own er 30 days minimum prior to installation. 11 . Mtimum t ee saes at pla nting, per sty code, sh al be 2 calperinches f or deadaus te es, and 46 height f or c oniferous trees. LANDSCAPE PROVIDED Fouroverslory bees per unit have been pr ovided One tree per lot is loca bd wlhin 15 feel of the fronllot be . TREE REPLACEMENT Tree Loss and Replacement Calculation Total vgnificanl tees on si t. 109 Allo wed Tree Re move/ (1096 of total). 10 Total Lost 74 Trees Losl minus a bw ed removal 64 Tod Tree sb Repl ace ( number of Trees): 64 Replace ment Rec yiremen5 for every 1 c aliper inch lost,1 c aliper Inch must be ptnled Tod caliper I nche s to r eplace (sun of 84 free s): 826.5 Number of Replacement Trees Ream -n4 Bas ed on Parana We Flaming Sire Remainder Trees to be paid es tae (C*'e, Inch) Numberol Trees (based on panting 108 tre es on site) 20 410 302 2.5 328 216 30 274 180 Tod Replacement T n. Provided on sit e: 111 LEGEND Turf kfiDOT Seed Ma 33261 Seed al ral e o135 bstaae Knotlll, whars Below. NORTH Call bororo yo u dig. 0 50 100 STELTER ENTERPRISES, LLC 14505 43rd. Avenue North Ptymoulh, MN 55446 TEL 612-325-7414 ba t Y p A %.0 MEDINA PROJECT PRAIRIE CREEK MEDINA, MINNE SOTA ISSUE 1 REVISION HISTORY CATE tSSIJE /REVISION PNE W 12 J J111011 PrsIm Pld MI. le fly n AA An Ciy new4 CERTIFICATION 'FINE SIONCIAL SEAL OR F OUR UNES DIRECTLY MOVE MOOT NW. . MS S.,. BEEN REPROD UCED BEYON D I NTEN DED KAM *, NO IS HO LC.. VALI D DOCUME NT. PLEASE CO NTI.C7 CITY RESUBMITTAL JULY 23, 2021 • • LANDF ORM From Site to Finish • • • • 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Web: l andf orm .net FILE NAME 120141P21001 PROJECT NO. BLP21001 LANDSCAPE PLAN L2.1 JiilIii1Ni �ii..11®�M. 1!111.1 ,ItIliY1�11I Ills IN Stone Mix. Country C edg e:stor o Wheut<ir w • 20% Ech o Ricigcr (ipto A R ON7F Soffit, Gables, Po Posts & G arage Buck 1 MEd Stained Front Door LTr.i•``sv 01.410111 w+ a (WW2 s+r®r MO WI r'"e. .inr w Mai n Body, Mtn & Acc ents • "� Garag e Doors White w.14 ..r r+.110 -'^- ()pi on 13 ARCTIC WHITE Ifirn. Soffit ch Pc s•-, & Det ails ■r .ate ,.•. •w.a►. r. 6Lsn Y a� ON '�` J..♦ W V' •o' RJO. rar • ...0 wrr11►e WHIT M.c, n Body, Shakers At G able Vent Exterior Proposa 1 Scheme AGENDA I IBM: 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Colette Baumgartner, Intern; through Planning Director Dusty Finke DATE: August 5, 2021 MEETING: August 10, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting SUBJ: Public Hearing — Steve Lerum — 2832 Hamel Rd — Conditional Use Permit Summary of Request All Energy Solar, on behalf of property owner Steve Lerum, has requested a conditional use permit related to ground mounted solar panels. The applicant desires to install a 112 panel solar array on his property at 2832 Hamel Rd. The array would occupy 2224 s.f. and produce approximately 60,649 kWhs annually. Conditional Use Permit Review The applicant proposes to install two solar arrays, each having a footprint of 1112 square feet on northwest comer of their lot. The equipment would have a capacity of 24.92 kW and the panels would have a total surface area of just over 2700 square feet. The subject property is located at 2832 Hamel Rd and is 19.7 acres in size. The property surrounding the site is zoned Rural Residential. Two of the six lots adjacent to the property are currently occupied by residents, and the others are either vacant or farmland. An aerial of the site and surrounding lands can be found above. Current city regulations permit ground -mounted solar equipment with a footprint less than 1500 square feet in all rural residential zoning districts, subject to certain standards. Ground -mounted solar equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet require a conditional use permit. Review Ground -mounted Solar Equipment Standards Section 825.09 of the City Code establishes general criteria which apply to all Ground -mounted Solar Equipment. Staff has provided potential findings for each criterion in italics. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted in the Agricultural Preservation, Rural Residential, Rural Residential -Urban Reserve, Rural Residential -1, and Rural Residential -2 zoning districts. The subject property is in the Rural Residential zoning district. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall only be permitted on a parcel which is five acres or greater in area. The subject property is 19.7 acres in area. • Solar Equipment shall only be allowed as an accessory use on a parcel with an existing principal structure and electric production shall not significantly exceed anticipated electrical use on the property. The primary use on property would remain as residence for Steve Lerum. The anticipated production is expected to provide a 137% offset of the annual residential electrical use. The excess load is sized to cover a pump for a pool on the property that uses a large amount of the electrical load in the sunny months. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from all property lines. The Solar Equipment is proposed to be 100 feet from the northern and western property line and hundreds offeet offset from other property lines. • The equipment or device may not exceed a height of 15 feet. The height of the equipment will vary depending on grade, but is generally below 12 feet and will be under 15 feet at all locations. • Landscaping or other means of screening shall be installed adjacent to the rear and sides of the Solar Equipment to limit visual impacts of the structural supports. A minimum of one shrub per 10 linear feet or one tree per 30 linear feet shall be required. Landscaping or screening shall have an anticipated mature height of at least 75% of the height of the Solar Equipment, but shall not be required in front of solar panels. This requirement may alternatively be achieved through fencing, existing vegetation, or similar measures. There is existing vegetation along the western and northern property lines. The applicant has not proposed additional planting and believes existing vegetation is consistent with the intent of this requirement. The number of trees would exceed this minimum requirement, Lerum — 2832 Hamel Rd Page 2 of 5 August 10, 2021 Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission but solar equipment in excess of 1500 square feet allow the City to require additional landscaping as a condition of the CUP. See below for additional discussion. • The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes. Compliance with this condition will be confirmed upon permit. • The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. Staff recommends that this condition be included on the CUP. • Ground -mounted Solar Equipment with a footprint exceeding 1500 square feet shall only be permitted upon conditional use permit review and approval, subject to the conditions noted below: (1) Ground -mounted Solar Equipment shall not occupy a footprint exceeding the lesser of the following amounts: (A) One percent of the area of the property on which it is located; or (B) 4000 square feet; The proposed footprint is 0.3% of the total property and less than 4000 square feet. (2) The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that additional landscaping or other means of screening will be implemented to limit visual impacts of the Solar Equipment; and Staff encourages the Planning Commission to review existing vegetation during site visit to determine whether existing vegetation is sufficient or if additional plantings should be required. (3) The City may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, to protect the rural viewsheds and the natural environment, and to promote harmony with neighboring uses. Staff has recommended a number of conditions, and the Planning Commission and Council can add if they find it appropriate. Review Conditional Use Permit Criteria Section 825.39 of the City Code establishes general criteria which apply to all conditional uses. Staff has provided potential findings for each criterion in italics. • That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property inthe immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. Staff does not believe the installation solar equipment, subject to the conditions recommended below, will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor impair property values. Lerum — 2832 Hamel Rd Page 3 of 5 August 10, 2021 ConditionalUse Permit Planning Commission " That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. The installation of solar equipment is a permitted use in this district. Staff does not believe the installation of solar equipment will impede normal and orderly development. " That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and othernecessary facilities have been or are being provided. Staff does not believe the installation of solar equipment will affect utilities, roads, drainage or other facilities. " That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. Parking is not relevant for the installation of solar equipment. " That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. Staff does not believe the installation of solar equipment will create odor, fumes, dust, noise or vibration. Staff recommends a condition that the equipment be non -reflective. " The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The proposed use is permitted in the district subject to relevant requirements. " The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. Staff believes the proposed use is consistent with the purposes in the zoning code. The proposed use will support residential uses. " The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City. The proposed use is consistent with policies of the City. The proposed use falls with the requirements of a residential conditional use permit for ground mounted solar arrays. " The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. The solar equipment will not affect traffic. " Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. The existing nearby businesses are a golf course and farms, and staff does not believe that the proposed use will adversely affect their business. " The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project. The applicant has indicated it would intend to install the solar equipment this fall. " The developer shallprovideproofof ownership of the property to the Zoning Officer. The applicant is listed as the owner in Hennepin County records. Lerum  2832 Hamel Rd Page 4 of 5 August 10, 2021 Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Public Comment Received The City has received one public comment opposing the approval of the CUP, available in the attachments Staff Recommendation The City has a relatively low amount of discretion in the review of conditional use permits. If the proposal meets the general criteria noted above and the specific standards previously discussed, it should be approved. The City may impose, in addition to those standards and requirements expressly specified in this Ordinance, additional conditions which the City Council considers necessary to protect the best interests of the community. Staff recommends approval of the CUP, subject to the following conditions: 1) The solar equipment shall not exceed 15 feet in height. 2) The owner of the property shall be responsible to maintain the existing vegetation as long as the Solar Equipment is installed on the Property. 3) The solar equipment shall be non -reflective in nature. 4) The equipment or device must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co -generation of energy. 5) The applicant shall provide an emergency response plan to the Police and Fire Department for review. 6) The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for installation of the solar equipment and shall meet all relevant requirements. 7) The applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City forthe cost of reviewing the zoning amendment, conditional use permit, and other relevant documents. Potential Motion If the Planning Commission finds that the specific and general CUP criteria have been addressed, the following motions would be in order: Move to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit based upon the findings and subject to the conditions described in the staff report Attachments 1) Site Plan 2) Landscaping 3) Public Comment Lerum — 2832 Hamel Rd Page 5 of 5 August 10, 2021 Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission ALL ENF=FOGY COMPANY INFORMA TION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1264 ENERGY LANE ST PAUL, MN 55108 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ ALLENERGYSOLAR.CO M CLIENT INFORMATION STEVE LERUM 2832 HAMEL RD HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 42852 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: 1 (112) LONG! 445W M ODULES = 49 .84kW 2. M OUNTING TYPE: GROUND MOUNT 3. (112) ENPHASE IQ7A INVERTER(S) 4. ARRAY 1: 35 ° TILT, 180 ° AZIMUTH 5. ARRAY 2: 35° TILT, 180 ° AZIMUTH AZIMUTH REVISIONS LAST: 06/10/21 BX PR OJECT -PAGE TITLE COVER PAGE PAGE NUMBER AO J. ALL . ENERGY COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1264 ENERGY LANE ST PAUL, MN 55108 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENER GYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION STEVE LERUM 2832 HAMEL RD HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 42852 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: 1. (112) ENPHASE IQ7A INVERTER(S) = 39 .088kW AC 2. ARRAY 1: 180° AZIMUTH, 35° TILT (56) LONGI 445W = 24 .92kW 3. ARRAY 2: 180° AZIMUTH, 35 ° TILT (56) L ONGI 445W = 24 .92kW ACCOUNT: 150-1687-7524 PREMISE: METER: 24359068 AZIMUTH N REVISIONS LAST: 06/10/21 BX PROJECT -PAGE TITLE PROPERTY MAP PAGE NUMBER Al NORTH ELEVATION PER AR RAY 961-9" WEST ELEVATION 251-0" is /ALL, ENERC'{ COMPANY INFORMA TION ALL ENERGY SOLAR, INC 1264 ENERGY LANE ST PAUL, MN 55108 (800) 620-3370 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION STEVE LERUM 2832 HAMEL RD HAMEL, MN 55340 PO 42852 SYSTEM DETAILS NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS MAY VARY DEPENDING ON GROUND ELEVATION BUT ARE DRAWN TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY 2. TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2,328 SQ FT REVISIONS LAST: 06/3121 BX PROJECT -PAGE TITLE ELEVATION DRAWINGS PAGE NUMBER A2 From: Website Inquiries To: Website Inquiries Subject: FW: Public Hearing Notice for All Energy Solar Conditional Use Permit. PID 0911823340002 Date: Monday, August 2, 2021 2:28:39 PM From: Rebecca Backes <rebeccabackes@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 2:24 PM To: Website Inquiries <city@medinamn.gov>; Website Inquiries <city@medinamn.gov> Subject: Public Hearing Notice for All Energy Solar Conditional Use Permit. PID 0911823340002 TO: Dusty, Planning Commission, City Council FROM: William Larson/Rebecca Backes, 3400 Leawood Drive, Medina, MN I am unable to attend the Medina Planning Commission public hearing on Tuesday, August, 10th at 7:00pm. Please put into record that we are OPPOSED to the installation of these solar panels. While we support solar energy, we feel there is a better location for the installation of these panels. This is a country setting with large lots, wildlife, ponds, rolling acres of trees, creeks, rivers. This is not a site for a 112 panel solar array. This installation will alter the landscape in many ways. Aesthetically it does not fit within what Medina represents which is a beautiful rural setting. We have no idea how this many reflective panels will affect our local habitat and wildlife. Once built, this land cannot be used for anything other than a solar field. This is from a solar review blog: There are a lot of electromagnetic waves around a farm produced by power storage equipment. Such strong waves are very unhealthy to the body. ... People living with electromagnetic sensitivity should not live near solar tech farms. The potential environmental impacts associated with solar power —land use and habitat loss, water use, and the use of hazardous materials in manufacturing —can vary greatly depending on the technology, which includes two broad categories: photovoltaic (PV) solar cells or concentrating solar thermal plants (CSP). These panels will become obsolete in 25- 30 years and what happens then. How do you recycle and restore the land. We DO NOT know the long lasting effects of living near a solar energy panel site. This area is beloved by horse owners and nature enthusiasts that reside here for the rural landscape. WE ARE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS SITE. Thank you for considering our comments. Regards, WILLIAM LARSON/REBECCA BACKES 1 CITY OF MEDINA 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes 4 Tuesday July 13, 2021 5 6 1. Call to Order: Chairperson Nielsen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 Present: Planning Commissioners Peter Galzki, Ron Grajczyk, Beth Nielsen, Cindy Piper, 9 Justin Popp, Braden Rhem and Timothy Sedabres. 10 11 Absent: None. 12 13 Also Present: City Planning Director Dusty Finke. 14 15 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda 16 17 No comments made. 18 19 3. Update from City Council Proceedings 20 21 Reid reported that the Council met the previous week and provided a summary of recent 22 Council actions. 23 24 4. Planning Department Report 25 26 Finke provided an update. 27 28 5. Public Hearing — Rolling Green Business Park Association — Planned Unit 29 Development Amendment — 801-899 Meander Court 30 31 Finke presented a request to amend the Planned Unit Development for Rolling Green 32 Business Park to allow for service and retail uses within the development. The original PUD 33 was limited to office park uses. The other part of the request would be to reserve one of the 34 lots for additional parking, should that be a need in the future. He stated that other aspects of 35 the PUD would remain unchanged for the original approval in 2003. He stated that there are 36 15 buildings planned for the site, noting that half have been constructed since 2003 with the 37 remaining half of the property unbuilt. He stated that the association of builders acquired the 38 building pads through tax forfeiture about six or seven years ago and is looking to sell those 39 lots. He reviewed the adjacent property uses and zoning. He stated that the architectural 40 standards would remain unchanged. He displayed a list of uses that would be allowable 41 under the PUD, noting that the association desired to keep out some of the uses that would 42 not perhaps fit well with the property. He stated that the City has relatively little land zoned 43 for commercial uses, and this would bring opportunity for more retail and service businesses 44 to serve the community. He stated that the buildings are relatively small, therefore the 45 remaining square footage would not go a single use and would be split between multiple lots. 46 He stated that depending on the uses that come into the site, more trips could be generated 47 from service or retail businesses, but the peak traffic times would differ from office type uses. 48 He noted that there would most likely be more evening/weekend traffic than an office use. 49 He stated that parking minimums are comparable for all the uses. He noted that the PUD 50 approved a much lower parking than what would be required by the parking standards. He 51 stated that historically office parking needs have been higher than retail/service uses but 1 52 noted that may change post -pandemic. He stated that staff recommends approval with the 53 limited conditions noted within the staff report. 54 55 Piper stated referenced Lot 14, Block 1, which is called out for the parking agreement. She 56 asked if nothing would be built on that site until such time when the parking needs could be 57 assessed. She asked how many additional spaces that lot would provide for the site. 58 59 Finke stated that staff has estimated that pad could accommodate 18 parking spaces, along 60 with the 12 stalls on the northeast that are already set aside for proof of parking. 61 62 Grajczyk asked if this site would meet the MS4 requirements. 63 64 Finke stated that staff did not review that aspect as this change would not result in additional 65 hardcover. 66 67 Sedabres asked if there would be restrictions outside of the three or four exclusions for 68 retail/service that could generate a large amount of traffic. 69 70 Finke stated that other than those exclusions, the use would ultimately be limited by the size 71 of the space. He stated that the association would have the ability to privately control the 72 uses that could go into the site. 73 74 Nielsen opened the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. 75 76 George Betts, Betts and Hayes 6050 Pagenkopf Road in Independence, asked what type of 77 things would be included in medical offices. He specifically asked if physical therapy would 78 be included within medical office. 79 80 Finke commented that he believes that a medical office could be permitted under the existing 81 PUD. He stated that this amendment would provide additional clarity. 82 83 Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. 84 85 Grajczyk commented that Finke and staff did a great job working with the applicant to put 86 this amendment together. He believed the changes would add value to the site. 87 88 Popp commented that he visited the site and likes the design. He was unsure if there would 89 be a direct value to adding retail and service to the existing office uses, but also did not see 90 that as a negative. He commented that half of this lot is underutilized, and this seems to be a 91 good solution in order to mitigate the incomplete project. He asked if this would compete or 92 redirect retail/service uses that could otherwise go in Uptown Hamel. He commented that he 93 believes that this is a well thought out plan and is fairly comfortable moving forward. 94 95 Piper asked if entry and exit onto 116 would be an issue for the PUD. 96 97 Finke stated that the direct access is provided to Meander Road. He stated by and large the 98 highest issue with that maneuver would be during peak rush hour times. He stated that 99 adding these uses would most likely not impact the morning rush hour time. He stated that 100 there could be more people wanting to turn left into the site to frequent the retail service 101 businesses in the evening. He stated that there is commercial property to the west that will be 102 developed in the future and would most likely have a larger impact to Meander. 103 2 104 Piper asked if there would ever be thought to some kind of traffic control at Meander and 116 105 in the future as development continues in this area. 106 107 Finke confirmed that the City would continue to monitor that issue and agreed that type of 108 traffic control would most likely come in the future, not specifically from this site, but most 109 likely as a result of continued development in neighboring communities. 110 111 Galzki commented that this would assist in completing a project that is currently incomplete. 112 He stated that he would like to see new businesses come into Medina and use space that is 113 already available. He believed that this would be a great idea to open up this PUD to 114 additional uses and bring more businesses to the residents. 115 116 Sedabres commented that anything the City can do to help complete this development would 117 be helpful. He recognized while there is control to what could come in as an initial user, he 118 would have question as to what kind of control would remain for future users. He 119 commented that he does support the request. 120 121 Rhem agreed that it would make sense to allow more options to complete the project. 122 123 Nielsen stated that she also drove through the site and could not anticipate a use that would fit 124 within those spaces that she would oppose and therefore would not want to put additional 125 restrictions on the site. 126 127 Popp asked if the City has received any interest from prospective businesses that would like 128 to move into the space. 129 130 Marianne Houlihan, Rolling Green Business Association, provided details on interest the 131 association has received from businesses. She noted that a nail salon had expressed interest 132 and may proceed in one space, with an office use in another space within the building. She 133 also noted that a developer had considered a couple of buildings and they were waiting to see 134 if the City would approve. 135 136 Motion by Grajczyk, seconded by Piper, to recommend approval of the Planned Unit 137 Development Amendment subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Motion carries 138 unanimously. 139 140 Finke noted that this will move forward to the City Council at its August 4, 2021 meeting. 141 142 6. Approval of the May 11, 2021 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 143 144 Motion by Piper, seconded by Rhem, to approve the May 11, 2021, Planning Commission 145 minutes with the noted changes. Motion carries unanimously. 146 147 7. Council Meeting Schedule 148 149 Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Grajczyk 150 volunteered to attend in representation of the Commission. 151 152 8. Adjourn 153 154 Motion by Rhem, seconded by Piper, to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Motion carried 155 unanimously. 3