HomeMy Public PortalAbout07.16.2019 City Council Complete Meeting Packet Posted 7/11/2019 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
7:00 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the July 2, 2019 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Temporary Liquor License to Holy Name of Jesus Church at 155 County Road 24 on
September 14, 2019
B. Approve Temporary Liquor License to Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of Minnesota at 3000
Hamel Road on August 10, 2019
C. Approve Brockton Lane Engineering Design Cost Amendment
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Major Roadway Setback Discussion
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XI. ADJOURN
Meeting Rules of Conduct:
Fill out and turn in white
comment card
Give name and address
Indicate if representing a group
Limit remarks to 3-5 minutes
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: July 11, 2019
DATE OF MEETING: July 16, 2019
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Temporary Liquor License to Holy Name of Jesus Church at 155 County Road
24 on September 14, 2019 – All paperwork and fees are in order. Staff recommends
approval.
No attachments for this item.
B. Approve Temporary Liquor License to Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of Minnesota at
3000 Hamel Road on August 10, 2019 – All paperwork and fees are in order. Staff
recommends approval.
No attachments for this item.
C. Approve Brockton Lane Engineering Design Cost Amendment – Attached is an
explanation of the proposed cost amendment for the design portion of the Brockton Lane
project. The costs were broken down between Medina and Plymouth’s responsibility
according to the terms of the project agreement. Medina’s total is $12,640.14 and
Plymouth’s is $17,359.86. The reason this is not a change order is because the engineering
contract is with Plymouth, not Medina. Our agreement with Plymouth states they must
receive approval from Medina prior to any changes made. Staff recommends approval.
See attached memo.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Major Roadway Setback Discussion – The Planning Commission unanimously
recommended denial of the code amendment as requested by Matthew and Nikki
Cole, 3375 Butternut Drive, at their July 9th meeting. The Planning Commission
unanimously recommended that the City review the setbacks more broadly. Staff is
requesting direction from the Council on whether staff should initiate this broader
review. Staff believes it is appropriate based on some of the information discussed
during review of the applicant’s request. Review of the Coles’ specific request is
currently scheduled for August 7.
See attached report.
Possible Motion: Move to direct staff to review and present potential amendments to the
residential zoning districts pertaining to the relationship between setbacks and lot depth.
2
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 005142E-005162E for $101,651.52
and order check numbers 049026-049084 for $269,615.00 and payroll EFT 0509554-0509588
for $55,624.97 and payroll check 0020441 for $3,372.30.
INFORMATION PACKET:
Planning Department Update
Police Department Update
Public Works Department Update
Claims List
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
July 2, 2019
DRAFT 1
2
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 2, 2019 3
4
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on July 2, 2019 at 7:00 5
p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided. 6
7
I. ROLL CALL 8
9
Members present: Albers, Anderson, DesLauriers, Martin, and Pederson. 10
11
Members absent: None. 12
13
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi 14
Gallup, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Engineer Jim Stremel, City Planning Director Dusty 15
Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief of Police Ed Belland. 16
17
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 18
19
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 20
The agenda was approved as presented. 21
22
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.) 23
24
A. Approval of the June 18, 2019 Special City Council Meeting Minutes 25
Martin noted that proposed revisions were submit by Albers, DesLauriers and herself to 26
be incorporated. 27
28
Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve the June 18, 2019 special City 29
Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 30
31
B. Approval of the June 18, 2019 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 32
Martin noted that revisions were also submitted for this set of minutes. 33
34
Moved by Martin, seconded by Pederson, to approve the June 18, 2019 regular City 35
Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 36
37
V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 38
39
A. Approve 2020 Contract for Assessing Services with Southwest Assessing 40
B. Approve 2019 Trail Master Plan 41
C. Appoint Terry Sharp as Alternate to the Elm Creek Watershed Commission 42
D. Approve Second Amendment to T-Mobile Site Agreement 43
E. Approve Agreement for Engineering Services with WSB for Chippewa Road 44
Moved by Pederson, seconded by Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 45
passed unanimously. 46
47
VI. COMMENTS (7:03 p.m.) 48
49
A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 50
There were none. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
July 2, 2019
1
B. Park Commission 2
Park Commissioner Weir reported that the Minnesota Cricket Association provided a 3
thorough presentation, noting that the City does not have a park large enough to 4
accommodate a regulation cricket field. She stated that it could be a possibility when 5
building a new park but noted that one match is six hours which would be a long time to 6
reserve a park space. She stated that the Park Commission is proposing to pave the 7
south shoulder of Medina Road and is working with Hennepin County to possibly have 8
the shoulder of Hamel Road paved. 9
10
Scherer reported that he discussed the possibility with the County this spring and the 11
County felt there was not enough room on the shoulders for pedestrian traffic. 12
13
Park Commissioner Weir reported that the parking area at Morningside Park needs to be 14
updated and is in the proposed Capital Improvement Plan. She stated that she and 15
Steve Lee have been very active in garnering attention from the residents for the 16
improvement of parks and trails, reporting that through the last three events they have 17
collected 172 signatures in support of raising taxes to support this effort. She stated that 18
the City has spent a lot of money on the parks and trails, which add to the quality of life, 19
and believes that there should be a generous fund to keep those amenities in good 20
shape. She stated that they will continue to collect signatures at upcoming events. 21
22
C. Planning Commission 23
Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to conduct 24
two public hearings: consideration of an ordinance amendment related to setbacks for a 25
minor collector roadway in the R-2 district and consideration of an ordinance amendment 26
related to illumination of signs in the business and industrial park zoning districts. 27
28
VII. PRESENTATIONS 29
30
A. Resolution No. 2019-41 Recognizing Ivan Dingmann’s Years of Service to 31
the City of Medina (7:10 p.m.) 32
Martin read aloud the proposed resolution recognizing Ivan Dingmann for his years of 33
service to the City of Medina, as he is retiring July 8th. 34
35
Moved by Martin, seconded by Pederson, to Adopt Resolution No. 2019-41 Recognizing 36
Ivan Dingmann’s Years of Service to the City of Medina. Motion passed unanimously. 37
38
Martin presented the resolution to Ivan Dingmann and thanked him for his years of 39
service. 40
41
Ivan Dingmann stated that he is a lifelong resident of Medina and it has been a pleasure 42
to work for the City. 43
44
Scherer stated that he will miss Ivan, his leadership and witty attitude in the department. 45
He stated that he has worked with Ivan since the 1970’s when they both plowed snow 46
for the City. 47
48
B. Senator Osmek – Legislative Update (7:14 p.m.) 49
Martin stated that she appreciates the value and hard work that Senator Osmek brings 50
to the community. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
July 2, 2019
1
Senator Osmek stated that the legislative session was finished, with a little overtime 2
involved. He stated that he was one of the few votes against the opioid bill, noting that 3
his problem is not with the program itself but with the funding. He explained that funding 4
is just as important as a program itself. He stated that he worked with another 5
representative on an alternate local government aid formula but noted that the House did 6
not pass the bill. He noted that he will continue to work on that opportunity for the next 7
legislative session. He stated that he has received concern from residents of Medina 8
and Greenfield that lack cable and internet services and noted that he continues to work 9
on that issue. He stated that Johnson expressed interest in the civil forfeiture bill and 10
noted that although he is not familiar with that issue he will follow up. 11
12
Martin stated that she appreciates the follow up on the internet service availability, as 13
that continues to be an issue for some Medina residents. 14
15
Senator Osmek encouraged residents lacking internet service to reach out to his office 16
so that he can better understand the problem. 17
18
Pederson echoed the comments that the number one issue he hears from residents and 19
the business community in Medina is related to lack of internet. 20
21
DesLauriers referenced the universal service fund, which is funded by a tax on cellular 22
phone users and believed that is supposed to be used for underserved communities. 23
24
Senator Osmek stated that he can check into that but believed that fund is used for deaf 25
and hard of hearing access issues. He explained that there is a slight difference 26
between unserviced and underserviced, noting that Medina would fall into the category 27
of underserviced. He noted that he will continue to express urgency for communities like 28
Medina. 29
30
C. Municipal Park Fund Report (7:24 p.m.) 31
Weir stated that the parks and trails are aging and have been a large investment in the 32
community. She stated that the parks and trails need improvement and equipment 33
replacement and urged the community to continue to be a role model in good 34
government. 35
36
VIII. NEW BUSINESS 37
38
A. Munsell Wetland Buffer Vacation – Public Hearing (7:25 p.m.) 39
Finke stated that this lot is in the eastern portion of the Enclave development. He noted 40
that in 2015 the City previously reduced the upland buffer by 142 feet. He stated that 41
originally the buffer was 35 feet in width. He explained that the ordinance allows for an 42
average of the buffer, which means that the buffer could be shortened in some areas 43
and increased in other areas. He stated that the developer did not take advantage of 44
that and created a buffer of 35 feet around the wetland. He noted that the majority of the 45
buffer falls on City owned land. He stated that the applicant would like a further 46
reduction. He noted that the lawn is currently 15 to 20 feet in width prior to reaching the 47
upland buffer. He stated that the request would further reduce that buffer by 471 feet, 48
which combined with the previous reduction would be a total reduction of 40 percent for 49
this lot. He stated that the remaining buffer would be 25 to 30 feet in width. He stated 50
that staff reviewed the wetland to determine an average buffer, noting again that most of 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
July 2, 2019
the buffer lies within the City property. He stated that there would be no benefit to 1
enlarging the buffer on the City property as that property is largely undeveloped and 2
would remain so. He noted that the ordinance would have allowed the averaging when 3
created but the developer did not choose to do so. 4
5
Martin stated that the proposed buffer would be 25 feet in width all the way around the 6
wetland. 7
8
Finke confirmed and noted that is the minimum allowed under Code, even with 9
averaging. He noted that upon the original subdivision the averaging would have been 10
allowed. He noted that there are other circumstances where there has been averaging 11
on open space property or City owned property. He explained that this request would 12
not require a variance and provided additional information on activities that could require 13
a variance. 14
15
Martin opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. 16
17
Tim Sedabres, 3169 Cyprus Circle South, asked if this request would have any impact 18
on the adjacent trail. 19
20
Finke stated that the wetland buffer has not been fully implemented and therefore there 21
would not be any practical difference if the buffer were narrowed by five to ten feet. 22
23
Martin asked the current status of the buffer area. 24
25
Finke explained that much of that area remains sod. He noted that the City is still 26
holding escrow for the planting of the wetland buffer. 27
28
Martin closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. 29
30
1. Resolution No. 2019-42 Vacating Upland Buffer Easement on 3157 Wild 31
Flower Trail 32
Moved by Pederson, seconded by Albers, to Adopt Resolution No. 2019-42 Vacating 33
Upland Buffer Easement on 3157 Wildflower Trail. 34
35
Further discussion: Martin noted that she is struggling with the issue of public interest. 36
37
The applicant stated that when he purchased the home in 2014, the property was 38
improperly marked. He explained that they went through the proper channels through 39
the HOA to do the approved landscaping. He noted that they discovered during the 40
process of building their deck that the buffer posts had been removed. He explained 41
that they have since then discovered that some of their landscaping would need to be 42
removed because of the buffer locations. He stated that reducing the buffer would 43
prevent he and his wife from having to rip up that area once again. 44
45
Martin noted that it could be considered in the public interest to correct an error that was 46
not made by the homeowner. 47
48
Finke confirmed that additional plantings will be needed for the buffer area. He 49
explained that the ordinance was created to provide flexibility for the public interest, 50
regardless of whether this is done before or after the fact. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
July 2, 2019
1
Martin noted that it could also be in the public interest to provide adequate play space for 2
the applicant’s children. 3
4
Pederson stated that he agrees and believes that this was not the error of the 5
homeowner but instead of the developer or builder. 6
7
Motion passed unanimously. 8
9
B. Uptown Hamel Ordinance Amendment and Rezoning (7:42 p.m.) 10
Johnson noted that this item and the next are related. He advised that staff has 11
identified items that need to be updated. 12
13
Finke stated that there are two items that require separate action tonight. He stated that 14
the first would be amendments to the text related to the Uptown Hamel zoning districts, 15
which will become one district if adopted. He noted that the second action would rezone 16
all Uptown Hamel properties into the one district. He stated that the second action 17
would also incorporate two properties, 500 and 492 Hamel Road, into the Uptown Hamel 18
district. He provided information on the proposed residential density that would be 19
allowed in the proposed Uptown Hamel zoning district, which would match the full range 20
specified in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the broader discussion of 21
Uptown Hamel will continue but these changes are to ensure that the City is consistent 22
with the Comprehensive Plan prior to the deadline for doing so. He provided details on 23
the outdoor dining element, noting that the Planning Commission supported providing 24
flexibility to allow outdoor seating for smaller restaurants/businesses. He reported that 25
the Planning Commission held public hearings on both ordinances in June and 26
recommended approval of both ordinances. 27
28
Anderson referenced the outdoor seating language, noting that it appears that a rooftop 29
seating area could not be adequately allowed with this language. 30
31
Martin agreed. 32
33
Albers stated that he would be fine with the ordinance as written. He referenced the 34
language related to seating on the sidewalk or right-of-way and asked if that should be 35
included in this ordinance rather than addressed at a later time. 36
37
Martin stated that in her experience use of public right-of-way for public seating is done 38
using a permit, rather than specifically allowing the activity. 39
40
Finke stated that perhaps the place for that activity would be within the right-of-way 41
ordinance rather than within this ordinance. 42
43
Batty agreed that he would not include that language in this ordinance and would instead 44
include that ability outside of land use ordinance. 45
46
Martin stated that perhaps staff should be directed to find an appropriate place in the 47
ordinance for use of sidewalks for public seating. 48
49
Finke stated that would be a broader change. He noted that the intent of this ordinance 50
change would be to meet the requirements to be consistent with the Comprehensive 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6
July 2, 2019
Plan prior to the deadline. He confirmed that the City has not received the request for 1
public seating within the sidewalks but acknowledged that some businesses have used 2
the sidewalks. 3
4
Batty agreed that this is a broader issue that expands past restaurants and can include 5
retail merchandise. 6
7
Johnson agreed that there would be additional work to do on this topic and confirmed it 8
could come back to the Council in the future. 9
10
Martin referenced the rooftop seating issue and agreed that she would not want to 11
restrict that activity. 12
13
Anderson noted that it would seem to be an easy fix to the language to allow rooftop 14
dining. 15
16
Finke stated that rooftop would be differentiated from patio seating, exempting rooftop 17
and placing the restriction on patio seating. He confirmed that the use would remain as 18
a conditional use. 19
20
Martin confirmed the consensus of the Council to remove the restrictions on rooftop 21
seating, as long as that remains a conditional use. She asked for additional clarification 22
on the setback language. 23
24
Finke explained that there would either have to be a zero lot line or eight feet or more. 25
26
Martin provided a grammatical suggestion for the language. 27
28
1. Ordinance No. 648 Amending the Requirements of the Uptown 29
Hamel Zoning District; Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code 30
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to Adopt Ordinance No. 648 Amending the 31
Requirements of the Uptown Hamel Zoning District per the comments and discussion of 32
the City Council tonight. Motion passed unanimously. 33
34
a) Resolution No. 2019-43 Authorizing Publication of Ordinance 35
No. 648 by Title and Summary 36
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to Adopt Resolution No. 2019-43 37
Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary. Motion passed 38
unanimously. 39
40
2. Ordinance No. 649 Amending the Official Zoning Map to Rezone 41
Various Properties to the Uptown Hamel (UH) Zoning District 42
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to Adopt Ordinance No. 649 Amending the 43
Official Zoning Map to Rezone Various Properties to the Uptown Hamel (UH) Zoning 44
District. Motion passed unanimously. 45
46
a) Resolution No. 2019-44 Authorizing Publication of Ordinance 47
No. 649 by Title and Summary 48
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to Adopt Resolution No. 2019-44 49
Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary. Motion passed 50
unanimously. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7
July 2, 2019
1
C. Presbyterian Homes Conduit Bond Request (8:02 p.m.) 2
Johnson stated that staff was contacted by the business, which has two cities in place to 3
issue bonds at 50 basis points. He asked if Medina would be willing to accept the 4
request at 50 basis points, as the business would like to keep the rate consistent 5
between the cities. He noted that the business only requires three cities, not four, 6
because of the reduced scope of their project. 7
8
DesLauriers stated that if Medina does not accept the 50 basis points, the business 9
would have other options. 10
11
Pederson asked the total amount the City would receive. It was noted that the City 12
would receive $50,000. 13
14
Batty confirmed that there would be no cost or obligation to the City. He stated that the 15
other action would be that if the request is found acceptable by the City, the Council 16
should direct staff to call for a public hearing at the August 7th meeting. 17
18
Martin noted that in the past the Council has discussed where the funds should be 19
applied and asked if the Council would like to discuss this topic. 20
21
Johnson noted that additional discussion could occur at the next worksession. 22
23
The Council agreed additional discussion should occur, as it appears the Council would 24
prefer to see those funds applied to the Municipal Park Fund. 25
26
Johnson confirmed that staff would bring forward options for discussion at the 27
worksession. 28
29
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to direct staff to call for a public hearing on 30
the possible issuance of conduit bond financing for Presbyterian Homes at the August 7, 31
2019 meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 32
33
IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (8:08 p.m.) 34
Johnson stated that in the past seating arrangements for the Council have been 35
switched throughout the year and asked for direction from the Council. It was confirmed 36
that the Council is supportive of the idea. He noted that a request from Hamel Fire to 37
discuss a Transition Study Group will appear on the next Council agenda. He reported 38
that City Hall will be closed on July 4th and 5th. 39
40
X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (8:09 p.m.) 41
Martin reported that the West Metro Mayors Meeting will occur the following Wednesday, 42
July 10th. She noted that she is unable to attend and asked that an interested 43
Councilmember reach out to Johnson if they would like to attend. 44
45
XI. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (8:09 p.m.) 46
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the bills, EFT 005130E-47
005141E for $53,592.49 and order check numbers 048958-049025 for $223,946.72 and 48
payroll EFT 0509524-0509553 for $54,379.83. Motion passed unanimously. 49
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8
July 2, 2019
XII. CLOSED SESSION: CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT., 1
SECTION 13D.50, SUBD. 3(b) TO DISCUSS THREATENED LITIGATION 2
INVOLVING ZONING VIOLATIONS AT THE PROPERTY AT 2402 HIGHWAY 3
55 4
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to adjourn the meeting to closed session at 5
8:10 p.m. to discuss threatened litigation involving zoning violations at the property at 6
2402 Highway 55. Motion passed unanimously. 7
8
The meeting returned to open session at 8:52 p.m. 9
10
XIII. ADJOURN 11
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to adjourn the meeting at 8:53 p.m. Motion 12
passed unanimously. 13
14
15
__________________________________ 16
Kathleen Martin, Mayor 17
Attest: 18
19
____________________________________ 20
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk 21
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: July 11, 2019
MEETING: July 16, 2019
SUBJECT: Brockton Lane Engineering Design Amendment
Background
Attached you will find an explanation of the proposed cost amendment for the design portion of
the Brockton Lane project. The original proposal was $36,892 but Bolton & Menk reduced the
cost overrun to an even $30,000 which brings the total engineering to 15.6% of construction
costs, certainly within normal engineering costs. These costs were broken down between Medina
and Plymouth’s responsibility according to the terms agreed upon earlier. The breakdown of the
split is on the second attachment. Medina’s total is $12,640.14 and Plymouth’s is $17,359.86
The reason this is not a change order is because the engineering contract is with Plymouth, not
Medina. Our agreement with Plymouth states they must receive approval from Medina prior to
any changes made.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval of this amendment.
Agenda Item # 5C
May 13, 2019
Mr. Michael Thompson, P.E., Public Works Director
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Fee Amendment for Brockton Lane Improvements Project
Dear Mr. Thompson:
We have completed various tasks, as part of the design phase of the above referenced project,
that have contributed to an overrun of our design task budget. Below is a summary of the tasks
that contributed to our budge overrun. We respectfully request a scope amendment to our budget
for work necessary to complete these tasks.
Tasks outside of original scope:
• Stormwater treatment, beyond rule requirements, added to the plan.
• Pervious trail design. Additional design and specification effort needed to implement that
element.
• Increased effort with Medina related to 429 and State Aid process.
• RRFB design and State Aid justification letter submittal.
• Extra coordination and meetings with Xcel Energy to facilitate relocation of all poles
along the corridor.
• Private utility relocation / coordination plan was developed due to the extent of relocation
needs along the corridor.
• Last minute watermain design change by Medina.
Project Budget Overview :
Our current budget is $310,726. Our engineer’s estimates show soft costs at 20%. Based on the
low bid submitted by New Look Contracting, 20% = $437,573.
Project cost estimates for each city are as follows:
• Plymouth:
o $1,541,982 (Prebid Budget Estimate)
o $1,474,260 (Post Bid)
• Medina:
o $1,335,023 (Prebid Budget Estimate)
o $1,151,183 (Post Bid)
*Post bid includes $437,573 engineering costs
Based on the items listed above we are requesting an amendment of $30,000 for additional
services.
If an amendment of $30,000 is granted, the engineering budget for the project would equal
$340,726 or 15.6% of construction which is well within the normal range for delivery of a
project from preliminary design through construction, including 429 and State Aid process.
Thank you for your consideration of this amendment to cover additional tasks which were
necessary to complete the project as intended. Please feel free to call with any questions you may
have regarding this amendment.
Respectfully Submitted,
BOLTON & MENK, INC.
Mark D. Kasma, P.E.
Senior Principal Engineer
Cc: Daniel Lonnes, Principal Engineer
Fee Amendment Detail
Client: Cities of Plymouth and Medina, MN Bolton & Menk, Inc.Project: Brockton Lane Reconstruction
Task
No.Work Task Description Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
De
s
i
g
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Wa
t
e
r
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
Totals Total Labor
Costs
2.0 Engineering Design Services - Additional Services
2.1 Stormwater Treatment - Design & Plan Preparation 2 10 16 8 36 $4,928
2.2 Pervious Trail - Design, Plan Prep & Watershed Coordination 2 20 18 10 10 60 $8,172
2.3 429 & State Aid Process - Additional Work 10 15 25 $4,000
2.4 RRFB Design & State Aid Justification Letter 2 22 16 16 56 $7,728
2.5 Xcel Energy Coordination 2 24 26 $3,824
2.6 Private Utility Relocation Plan 2 8 10 16 36 $4,944
2.7 Utility Design Change 2 4 10 8 24 $3,296
Total Hours - Task 2 22 103 54 26 58 263
Total Labor Cost $36,892
Total Labor Task %
Task share of
$30,000 request Plymouth % Medina %Plymouth Amount Medina Amount
2.1 4,928 13.4% 4,007 100% 0% 4,007.37 0.00
2.2 8,172 22.2% 6,645 100% 0% 6,645.34 0.00
2.3 4,000 10.8% 3,253 0% 100% 0.00 3,252.74
2.4 7,728 20.9% 6,284 50% 50% 3,142.14 3,142.14
2.5 3,824 10.4% 3,110 50% 50% 1,554.81 1,554.81
2.6 4,944 13.4% 4,020 50% 50% 2,010.19 2,010.19
2.7 3,296 8.9% 2,680 0% 100% 0.00 2,680.26
36,892 100.0% 30,000 $17,359.86 $12,640.14
Brockton Lane Improvement Project
Engineering Cost Amendment Request Split
May 13, 2019 Request
Potential Ordinance Amendment Page 1 of 4 July 16, 2019
Major Roadway Setback Discussion City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: July 11, 2019
MEETING: July 16, 2019 City Council
SUBJ: Major Roadway Setback Amendment
Background
Matthew and Nikki Cole, 3375 Butternut Drive, have requested that the City consider reducing
the required setback from Minor Collector Roadways in the R2 (Single- and Two-Family)
Zoning District.
The R2 zoning district, like most other districts, currently requires a larger setback of 35 feet
from minor collector roadways. The applicants’ property backs up onto Hunter Drive, which is a
minor collector roadway. The applicants’ home was constructed approximately 43 feet from the
Hunter Drive right-of-way, leaving 8 feet for a deck. The applicants originally were going to
request a variance to reduce the setback to allow construction of a larger deck. In consultation
with staff, however, it was difficult to come up with any practical difficulty which was unique to
the property. The circumstances appear quite common for other properties.
The applicants have researched the requirements in a number of other communities, and it
appears that it is true that an increased setback adjacent to collector roadways is not common in
other cities. The applicants have prepared a presentation summarizing the information, which is
attached for reference. It should be noted that most communities require a “front” setback along
all streets, so the relevant setback for comparison is the “front” setback instead of the “rear”
setback.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the requested amendment at the July 9
meeting. An excerpt from their draft minutes is attached for reference. Most Commissioners
wanted to find a way to address the property owner’s issue, but did not support the complete
reduction as presented. Discussion included:
• Limiting a reduced setback to uncovered decks, perhaps in connection with an increased
setback for the main part of the home
• Increasing the minimum lot depth
• Considering other similar districts
• Other options which staff may suggest for discussion
Following the hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of the code
amendment as presented. However, the Commission also unanimously recommended that the
City review the setbacks more broadly.
Agenda Item # 7A
Potential Ordinance Amendment Page 2 of 4 July 16, 2019
Major Roadway Setback Discussion City Council Meeting
Staff is requesting direction from the Council on whether staff should initiate this broader
review. Staff believes it is appropriate based on some of the information discussed during
review of the applicant’s request.
Review of the Coles’ specific request is scheduled for August 7. If the Council directs staff to
review more broadly, staff would recommend that review be delayed. In fact, the applicant may
decide to withdraw their request.
The rest of this report includes information related to the Coles’ request for context. Again, staff
is not recommending action on the Cole’s request until the August 7 meeting at the earliest,
because the City is required to post a notification prior to action. The information is presented
because it provides some background on the broader discussion held by the Commission.
Potential Action
If the City Council concurs that review of the setbacks is warranted, the following action could
be taken:
Move to direct staff to review and present potential amendments to the residential zoning
districts pertaining to the relationship between setbacks and lot depth.
Additional Information on Applicant’s Specific Request
The applicant requests a reduction of the setback from minor collector roadways in only the R2
zoning district.
The main areas to which the R2 zoning district currently applies are:
1) Northern portion of the Enclave at Medina
(adjacent to Hunter Drive)
2) Throughout the Fields of Medina
(adjacent to Meander Road)
It is likely that additional sites will be zoned R2 in the
future upon development. The reduced setback from a
collector roadway would then also apply to those sites if
adopted.
Most R2 properties along a minor collector roadway are
currently set back further than the required 35 feet.
Most of the homes in Fields of Medina West are setback
around 45-50 feet. Most homes in the Fields of
Medina East and the Enclave are setback around 70 feet.
The exception is the north end of The Enclave. A good
example of the difference between
35 feet and 30 feet may be 3385 Butternut Drive, the
grey house on the north end of the Enclave along Hunter
Drive. The back of the home is setback approximately
Potential Ordinance Amendment Page 3 of 4 July 16, 2019
Major Roadway Setback Discussion City Council Meeting
36 feet from the Hunter Drive right-of-way and the balcony extends to within approximately 32
feet. The applicants’ home at 3375 Butternut Drive is the red home to the south and is setback
43 feet from the Hunter Drive right-of-way. The applicant would like a 12-foot wide deck.
Minor collectors include mostly 40 MPH local roadways such as Hunter Drive, Brockton Lane,
Meander Road, Arrowhead Drive and Medina Road.
Analysis
When considering changes to specific zoning regulations, it is helpful to consider what the intent
of the requirement may be and how it serves the broader goals and objectives of the community
as described in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has provided information from the
Comprehensive Plan, including the Community Vision and Goals, Land Use Principles, and the
objectives of the urban residential land uses.
Staff believes the increased setback adjacent to Collector Roadways is intended to provide
additional open space and more of a rural vista along a particular neighborhood, even when the
neighborhood may have more of a suburban layout. For this reason, it may not be particularly
surprising that other, more suburban, communities would not have increased setbacks along
collector roadways.
Another potential intent of the increased setback would be for the residents of that property to
have more distance from a heavier traveled roadway. If this were the primary objective, we
would more than likely see similar requirements in other communities.
If the Planning Commission and Council believe it is appropriate to reduce the setback from
minor collector roadways within the R2 zoning district, staff would suggest that it may also be
worth considering a similar reduction in other similar districts. At the very least, this would
include the Urban Residential (UR) and Mixed Residential (MXR) zoning districts, which are
otherwise very similar to the R2 district. If there is some rationale to keep the larger setback in
some of the districts, the City could certainly do so, but staff did not see a rationale to do so.
Reducing the setback in these districts would affect additional neighborhoods, including:
• Medina Morningside adjacent to Willow Drive
• Homes adjacent to Hunter Drive, north of the Enclave
• Future Mixed Residential Development at Brockton/Medina and Hamel/Tamarack
Staff believes the larger setback adjacent to minor collector roadways supports the goals and
objectives of the Comp Plan by protecting additional open/green space along thru-streets. Even
in a suburban neighborhood, there is a more “rural feel” if the homes are back further from the
exterior streets. set back further from the exterior streets. This also provides more opportunity
for buffering, including berming and landscaping. If the setback is reduced, it becomes difficult
to accommodate any buffer while still providing a lawn which would be desired by the
homeowner.
Potential Ordinance Amendment Page 4 of 4 July 16, 2019
Major Roadway Setback Discussion City Council Meeting
Other Considerations
While reviewing the proposed amendment, staff discovered a potential issue related to the
increased setback from collector and arterial roadways.
The R2 zoning district requires a minimum lot depth of 90 feet. If a lot were platted at the
minimum lot depth and backing up to a minor collector roadway, it would require a 30 foot
setback from the front street and a 35 foot setback from the collector. This would leave a
buildable pad of 35 feet.
In the same scenario backing up to an arterial roadway, the front setback would be 30 feet+50
feet from the arterial at the back, leaving only a buildable pad of 10 feet. While it would be
reasonable to expect that the subdivider would recognize this issue and make the lots deeper,
staff believes it would be worth considering an amendment to increase the depth adjacent to
collector and arterial roadways.
This discussion is not necessarily related to the applicants’ request, but came to mind during
review.
Attachments
1. Draft Ordinance requested by Applicant (for informational purpose only)
2. Excerpt from draft 7/9/2019 Planning Commission
3. Comp Plan Information
4. Applicant Presentation/Narrative
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. ###
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
SINGLE- AND TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R2) DISTRICT;
AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I. Section 840.2.05 of the code of ordinances of the City of Medina is amended by
deleting the struck through language and adding the underlined language as follows:
Section 840.2.05. (R2) Lot Standards. The following standards shall be observed, subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in the city code:
Subd. 1. Density of Development: Development or redevelopment shall be consistent with
the density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 2. Minimum Lot Size (Single Family Detached): 8,000 square feet
Subd. 3. Minimum Lot Size (Two Family Dwelling): 5,000 square feet per unit
Subd. 4. Minimum Lot Width (Single Family Detached): 60 feet. The minimum lot width
shall be increased to 90 feet for lots with a side yard adjacent to a collector or arterial
roadway.
Subd. 5. Minimum Lot Width (Two Family Dwelling): 50 feet per unit. The minimum lot
width shall be increased to 70 feet for a unit with a side yard adjacent to a collector or
arterial roadway.
Subd. 6. Minimum Lot Depth: 90 feet
Subd. 7. Minimum Front Yard Setback: 25 feet, except as follows:
(a) Additional setback for garage doors facing streets: Garage doors which face a street
shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet.
(b) Reduced setback for side-load garage: The front yard setback may be reduced to 20
feet if garage doors do not face the street and if garage walls facing the street include
a window or architectural elements to give the appearance of living space.
Subd. 8. Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 25 feet. The rear yard setback may be reduced to 15
feet if abutting a preserved open space or common area, but may not be reduced if abutting
public park property.
Subd. 9. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (Single Family Detached):
(a) The combined total of both side yards shall be a minimum of 15 feet
Commented [DF1]: Discussion: Increase to 100 feet
adjacent to Minor Collector and 120 feet adjacent to arterial?
(b) Neither side yard shall be less than 5 feet
(c) One of the side yards shall be 10 feet or greater
Subd. 10. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback (Two Family Dwelling): 10 feet, except the
side yard setback shall be reduced to zero for the common wall between two dwelling units.
Subd. 11. Street Setbacks: A required yard setback adjacent to a public or private street shall
be increased based on the classification of the street in the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
(a) Local Roadway or Private Street: 25 feet, except as follows:
(i) Additional setback for garage doors facing streets: Garage doors which face a
street shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet.
(ii) Reduced setback for side-load garage: The front yard setback may be reduced
to 20 feet if garage doors do not face the street and if garage walls facing
the street include a window or architectural elements to give the appearance
of living space.
(b) Minor Collector Roadway: 35 30 feet
(c) Major Collector or Arterial Roadway: 50 feet
Subd. 12. Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area.
Impervious surface coverage may exceed this amount if stormwater management practices
are implemented on the lot which, according to the City Engineer, reduce runoff below that
which would occur if abiding by the maximum impervious surface regulation. However,
in no case shall impervious surface coverage exceed 60 percent of the lot area remaining
after wetlands and stormwater ponds have been excluded.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina city council this _____ day of _________, 2019.
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News on the ____ day of _________, 2019.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/9/2019 Meeting Minutes
1
Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 8 of the City Code Related to Setbacks From
Streets Within the Single and Two Family Residential (R-2) Districts
Finke presented a request from property owners in the Enclave neighborhood to reduce the setback
from minor collector roadways from 35 feet to 30 feet. He stated that currently the R-2 zoning
district mainly applies to the north end of the Enclave neighborhood and in the Fields of Medina
neighborhood along Meander Road. He noted that staff reviewed the existing properties and the
setbacks currently exceed the setback by a fair amount, with the exception of two properties in the
northern end of the Enclave which were constructed wotj setbacks of 36-feet and 43-feet. He stated
that the applicant provided research related to setbacks from other communities which was included
in the staff report. He noted that none of the other communities required a larger setback along minor
collector roadways, but most communities require a front setback when the backyard is adjacent to a
roadway. He stated that the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan were included in the report,
highlighting the rural character, desire for open space and preservation of rural vistas. He stated that
the request would reduce the rear setback to be equal to the front setback when adjacent a minor
collector road. He stated that staff did not see a good reason to limit the discussion to the R-2 zoning
district as many districts are similar. He stated that if it would make sense to reduce the setback in
this case it would make sense to discuss a similar reduction in other similar residential districts. He
stated that if the larger setback stays in place staff identified some potential issues related to lot depth
and lot size.
Reid asked whether this change would impact all existing R-2 properties and future development in
the R-2 district. Finke confirmed that it would.
Amic noted that this would only apply to properties that abut a minor collector roadway within that
district.
Nester referenced the information provided from other communities, noting that Corcoran requires
100 feet for a rear setback for a arterial roadways.
Galzki stated that the report mentioned that a variance had been considered but staff did not believe a
unique situation existed. He did not see the purpose in rewriting the ordinance for one or two
requests and believed that a variance would be a better route.
Finke stated that because the lot depth exceeds the minimum but such an amount, he was unsure the
context that could be used to provide practical difficulty other than the chosen depth of the house
when constructed, which is did not seem like a unique circumstance.
Galzki asked if the lot depth is the choice of the homeowner or the builder.
Finke stated that the builder/developer is the owner of the property when making the decision on lot
depth. He stated that if the lot was created at the minimum standards and did not leave a sufficient
building pad, that may be a difficulty, but that is not the case here.
Williams asked if there is any other way to have this approved without a change to the ordinance.
Finke stated that the applicant could apply for a variance, but a unique situation/practical difficulty
would need to be identified that would support the request.
Galzki stated that he would see a variance as more appropriate than a zoning change.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/9/2019 Meeting Minutes
2
Nester noted that the homeowner still knowingly purchased the home knowing the size of the lot and
placement of the home.
Matthew Cole, applicant, stated that he moved into his home five years ago noting that the home was
previously built. He stated that he was made aware of the setback issue when purchasing the home
but noted that they had been told that their neighbors were able to obtain a variance to construct their
deck. He noted that he later learned that information was incorrect. He stated that he came to Finke a
few months ago to discuss the ability to obtain a variance for a deck. He stated that he did obtain
signatures from those in his neighborhood supporting his request for a deck. He noted that after
discussions with staff it was determined that his variance may be difficult to justify and a change in
code would be another option to pursue. He stated that the request would impact very few properties
in the communities, those within R-2 that abut minor collector roadways. He stated that the reduced
setback would allow him to construct a deck large enough to support a table for his family. He noted
that if this is not approved, they would not be able to construct a deck with sufficient space and their
alternate option would be hardscape. He noted that he could not find anyone else that this would
impact and that is why no one is here tonight.
Reid opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
No comments made.
Reid closed the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
Williams stated that this seems excessive to change the ordinance for this purpose. She
acknowledged that the developers are not always sharing the right information. She stated that while
she would like the property owner to be allowed to enjoy dinner on their deck, she also understands
the desire to keep the rural character of Medina.
Galzki stated that either way he would like the property owner to be able to construct a deck on their
property but would like to do that in the best way that makes sense for the City. He stated that he has
worked with residential developers in the past and their largest concern is getting the largest number
of lots out of a development while meeting the minimum lot standards. He noted that there are
always a few lots in a development that will be challenged by setbacks or wetland location. He stated
that he would have a hard time reducing the setback and changing the ordinance to accommodate this
request. He believed that a variance would be the better choice.
Nielsen stated that she also struggles with the issue. She applauded the property owner for all his
research and hard work on the topic. She noted that the owner can do an 8-foot wide deck across
much of the home, which some people may find sufficient.
Nester stated that she does not believe amending the ordinance would be the best choice.
Amic asked for details on the requirement for a variance.
Finke stated that staff spent a fair amount of time reviewing this request and the different methods
that could be used. He stated that the problem with blaming the person that owned before you would
not be unique and could be applied to everyone in the community. He noted the three point test for a
variance: 1) consistent with purpose and intent of the ordinance; 2) consistent with Comp Plan; 3)
practical difficulties. In determining if there are practical difficulties: 1) use of property must be
reasonable (including minimizing the variance as much as possible); 2) circumstance unique to
property, not caused by owner; 3) will not impact character of the locality.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/9/2019 Meeting Minutes
3
Amic stated that it appears that in terms of a variance it would depend how liberally the Commission
would want to interpret the criteria. He stated that he also believes that it does matter if there are less
stringent setbacks in other rural communities. He stated that this issue would only impact a small
number of properties and he does not see a large difference between 35 and 30 feet.
Piper stated that it seems there is agreement that the Commission would like to be able to allow the
resident to construct a deck but is struggling between whether a variance or zoning change would be
appropriate. She asked if there is an option in between.
Finke stated that you would either follow the rules or change the rules. He noted that Plymouth
allowed an exception for decks to encroach into the setback. He stated that the problem is that
builders want to maximize the buildable space on the lot which does not leave a lot of room for other
structures, such as decks. He stated that the builder is going to fill the building envelope, whatever
that envelope is, and will still leave the issue of decks.
Reid stated that she would have a problem changing an ordinance that would impact the entire City
and future development but would like to find a way to allow this deck to be constructed. She did not
believe it appropriate to make an ordinance change to accommodate one homeowner. She stated that
the City has always been tight in its review of variances and if staff could not find something that
would qualify for the criteria, she was unsure that would be approved.
Piper stated that there has to be a way to do this using a variance.
Cole stated that he and his wife believed that they could meet the variance criteria. He noted that
there are a number of things Lennar promised the neighborhood that did not come to fruition.
Reid stated that the hardship for this request could be the kitchen bump-up that the home has, as that
is unique to the home and makes the smaller deck less practical.
Finke stated that the unique situation would be that the home is located on a cul-de-sac and the home
is oddly situated on the lot. He noted that if the home were orientated in a different manner there
would have been space for a deck.
Nielsen asked if an exception to the setback could be made for the deck.
Finke noted that could be an option. He noted that Plymouth has done a similar exception because
they too were having a lot of similar issues.
Reid agreed that perhaps the better option would be to allow decks to encroach into the setback a
certain number of feet, using a suggestion of five feet.
Finke stated that he would believe it appropriate to then apply the encroachment to other similar
districts, but adding additional regulations using the example of only those lots abutting minor
collector roadways.
Reid agreed that this could be allowed making a minor change to the ordinance but noted that this
would not be the right ordinance amendment.
Finke noted that builders will take advantage of the encroachment option and make the home larger.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 7/9/2019 Meeting Minutes
4
Galzki stated that he believes that the entire ordinance should be reviewed, noting that perhaps a
larger setback be required and then allowing a deck encroachment.
Williams stated that the landscape of Medina is changing, the developments being constructed are
changing and therefore agreed that the ordinance as a whole should be reviewed in attempt to
eliminate this issue in the future.
Nester agreed that perhaps the setback should reviewed, but noted that she probably wouldn’t support
a reduction to 30 feet for decks.
Finke asked if the Commission would be in agreement with having decks extending five feet into the
rear setback for homes along minor collector roads. He stated that if that is the direction, he can
review the ordinance in more detail to review setbacks and lot depth.
Galzki asked if the ordinance could state a time period, using the example of every home constructed
prior to July 1, 2019 could encroach and then setting new standards for homes constructed after that
time to protect the building envelope.
Finke replied that could be done but that would add another level of complexity. Existing homes
which did not meet the new standard would receive nonconformity protections.
Motion by Galzki, seconded by Williams, to recommend denial of the ordinance amendment related
to setbacks from streets within the single- and two-family residential districts. Motion carries
unanimously.
Amic stated that this issue has brought up some larger issues to review in the ordinance and believed
that this would be a good time for the City to review the ordinance.
Motion by Piper, seconded by Nielsen, to recommend that the City review setbacks and lot depth in
relation to major roadways.
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 ensurate 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 General Land Use Policy Direction
As described in the Vision Statement, the City of Medina strives to promote and protect its open
spaces and natural environment. The City has historically been, and intends to continue to be,
primarily a rural community.
The City has planned for a limited amount of future development consistent with
regional forecast and consistent with Community Goals.
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 and protects natural resources.
Urban Service Designations
The Urban Service Area includes the residential and commercial areas of the City that
are currently or will be served by municipal water and sewer services.
Residential Uses
Objectives:
• Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other
significant natural characteristics of the property.
• 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.
• Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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.
• Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan.
• Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to
the provision of urban services that will hinder future division.
• 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.
• Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads,
with adequate facilities and open space.
• Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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.
• Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of
aesthetic enhancement and safety.
• Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use
to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required.
• 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.
• 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.
• Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the
development characteristics and natural resources of each existing
neighborhood.
• Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods
and to maintain public health and safety.
7/5/2019
1
Matt & Nikki Cole
3375 Butternut Drive
Medina, MN 55340
(612) 387‐3212
Exact Text Amendment Request (RED)
Section 840.2.05. (R2) Lot Standards. The following standards shall be observed, subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in the city code:
Subd. 11. Street Setbacks: A required yard setback adjacent to a public or private street shall be
increased based on the classification of the street in the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
(a) Local Roadway or Private Street: 25 feet, except as follows:
(i) Additional setback for garage doors facing streets: Garage doors which face a street shall be set
back a minimum of 30 feet.
(ii) Reduced setback for side‐load garage: The front yard setback may be reduced to 20 feet if
garage doors do not face the street and if garage walls facing the street include a window or
architectural elements to give the appearance of living space.
(b) Minor Collector Roadway: 35 30 feet
(c) Major Collector or Arterial Roadway: 50 feet
1
2
7/5/2019
2
Two R2
Communities
Potentially
impacted,
although I’m
not clear how
many of those
properties
back up to a
Minor
Collector
Roadway.
The following pages have been
included to demonstrate
setback distances in surrounding
communities.
3
4
7/5/2019
3
I was in search of comparable
zones in looking for setback
regulations.
Our home
3375 Butternut Drive
Medina, MN 55340
5
6
7/5/2019
4
Orono, MN
7
8
7/5/2019
5
9
10
7/5/2019
6
Corcoran, MN
11
12
7/5/2019
7
13
14
7/5/2019
8
15
16
7/5/2019
9
Wayzata, MN
17
18
7/5/2019
10
Loretto, MN
19
20
7/5/2019
11
Minnetonka Beach, MN
I’ve included this page so
that you can see what this
table has been designed to
convey.
It’s more than 35 ft, but I felt installing a pool (see
next page) is more aggressive/intrusive than 4‐6
posts in the ground for a deck that violates the
variance by approx. 4 ft.
21
22
7/5/2019
12
Does our ask
fall here?
And finally, a below ground pool that
violates the variance has to be more
intrusive than an above ground deck with
four/five/six posts in the ground.
23
24
7/5/2019
13
Plymouth, MN
25
26
7/5/2019
14
Rockford, MN
27
28
7/5/2019
15
Greenfield, MN
29
30
7/5/2019
16
31
32
7/5/2019
17
Mound, MN
33
34
7/5/2019
18
St. Michael, MN
35
36
7/5/2019
19
Long Lake, MN
37
38
7/5/2019
20
39
40
7/5/2019
21
Minnetrista, MN
41
42
7/5/2019
22
43
44
7/5/2019
23
Delano, MN
45
46
7/5/2019
24
47
48
7/5/2019
25
Edina, MN
49
50
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 July 16, 2019
City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: July 16, 2019
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – July 2, 2019 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) R2 Collector Road Setback Amendment – Matt and Nikki Cole have requested that the City
amend the required setback from a collector roadway within the R2 zoning district from 35
feet to 30 feet. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the July 9 meeting and
recommended denial of the request. However, the Commission recommended that the City
review the setbacks more broadly.
B) Raskob Elm Creek Addition – 500 Hamel Road – The John W Raskob Trust has requested to
subdivide the 8 acres (approximately 4 net acres) of property into two separate parcels so
that the family could market the two separately. The City Council granted preliminary
approval at the May 21 meeting. The applicant has now requested final plat application,
which will be presented to the Council when complete, potentially at the August 7 meeting.
C) 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. Staff is conducting a preliminary
review and will schedule when complete for review, potentially at the September 10 meeting.
D) Cavanaughs Meadowwoods Park Third Addition/OSI Expansion – Arrowhead Drive, north of
Highway 55 – Arrowhead Holdings (real estate company for OSI) has requested approval of a site
plan review, preliminary plat and rezoning to construct a 2nd building north of their existing facility.
The applicant proposes to construct the building on a separate lot and to rezone the property to
Business, in line with the updated Comprehensive Plan. The Council adopted approval documents
on November 7. The applicant has now requested final plat approval. The applicant has also
proposed some slight adjustments to the site plan, which were presented at the Planning Commission
on March 12. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amended site plan. Staff
will present to the City Council when the final plat is prepared.
E) Richardson Lot Combination – PIDs 18-118-23-24-0116 and 18-118-23-24-0117 – Big Island
Land LLC (Dale Richardson) has requested a lot combination of two vacant parcels along
Ardmore Avenue, just west of County Road 19. The parcels do not meet relevant lot
standards and the applicant desires to combine them to construct a single home. The
application is currently incomplete, and staff has requested additional information. Staff will
schedule when complete for review.
F) Munsell Wetland Buffer Vacation – 3157 Wild Flower Trail – Daniel Munsell has
requested that the City vacate a portion of the wetland buffer easement in the back of their
property in The Enclave. The applicant argues that the developer could have “averaged” the
width of the buffer into adjacent open space owned by the City and proposes to narrow it
upon their property. The City Council approved the vacation on July 2. Staff will work
with the applicant to get the new easement recorded.
G) Marshall-Schleeter Lot Rearrangement/Vacation, School Lake 2nd Final Plat, School Lake 2nd
Easement Vacation, Johnson ADU CUP, Maxxon, 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.
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 July 16, 2019
City Council Meeting
H) Woods of Medina, Hamel Haven subdivisions – These subdivisions have received final approval.
Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded.
Other Projects
A) Quad City Agreement – staff met with the cities of Loretto, Independence, and Greenfield related to
updating the Tri-City Agreement to allow Loretto to connect to the sanitary sewer system along
County Road 19. The intent is to have an agreement for approval of the 4 city councils by early
August. Staff has provided comments and proposed revisions to the other communities.
B) Zoning Enforcement – two correction notices are pending for zoning violations.
C) Chippewa/Arrowhead Visioning – Staff held a kick-off meeting with WSB to begin work on the
visioning/concept development.
TO: City Council
FROM: Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety,
Through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: July 11, 2019
RE: Police Department Updates
Hamel Rodeo in Town
The Hamel Rodeo will be in town July 11th through July 14th. We will have extra patrols working
all the events. We will have all our Reserves working the parade on Sunday July 14th. If you are
looking for something to do, come join the festivities.
Sgt Nelson Out on Medical
Three weeks ago Sgt. Nelson had gallbladder surgery. He had complications with the surgery and
continues to have complications. His return to work is unknown currently.
4th of July
The 4th of July weekend went off with no major problems. The fireworks at Medina were very
good with no issues. We had two people arrested for DWI and added extra patrols for speed
enforcement.
Ivan Dingmann Retirement
Most of the police department members attended Ivan’s retirement party. Ivan was a great partner
to the police department, and he will be missed. Good luck to him as he moves to his next step in
life.
Patrol Updates
For the dates of June 25 to July 9, 2019, our officers issued 10 citations and 126 warnings for
various traffic infractions. There was a total of 11 traffic accidents, 11 medicals, 13 alarms and 4
DWI.
MEMORANDUM
Investigation Updates
Investigating a shoplifting complaint from Target. Suspect made three separate thefts from the
business in one day. The suspect has been identified and will be charged with theft.
Investigating a theft of tools from truck that was parked at a business. At this time, I have no leads
or suspects.
Took a report of a party who did not pay for their gasoline at Holiday. The person who pumped the
gasoline is the registered owner of the vehicle. I sent a letter to the registered owner’s home address
requesting that he contact me to discuss the incident.
Assisting Patrol with calls for service since Sergeant Nelson is out of the office.
There are currently (9) cases assigned to investigations.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: July 11, 2019
MEETING: July 16, 2019
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
STREETS
• WSB and Public Works held a pre-con meeting for Hickory Drive on July 9th. City Staff
and the general contractor for the project attended the meeting. We received a schedule
and the contractor will be moving forward starting in late July. Letters will be sent to the
businesses.
• The Brockton project is about a week behind but will allow the Hamel Rodeo Parade to
go on as it has in the past. Currently they are working on black dirt, seeding, and
finishing the trail on the south end of the project. The start of Phase two and the Hamel
road closure is scheduled for July 29th, which is when the utility work will begin.
• Dust control was applied to Willow Dr. (north), Deer Hill Rd, and Hackamore as they are
the most traveled gravel roads.
• A few changes have been made to the CIP in the equipment section as suggested by
council and the broom was removed.
• After some repairs to the tractor, ditch mowing has resumed. Public Works plans to
complete this work in the next few days.
WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER
• Public Works repaired a sewer service in the Cherry Hill area. The pipe had settled, and
sewage was backing up at the residence. It is the cities responsibility from the service
connection to the sewer main. Fixing the pipe was only half the repair as the street was
also excavated with the pipe being ten feet deep.
• Well #6 has been repaired. There was excessive wear on the pump that was caused by the
bearings in the motor going out. The well has been in service for around 12 years. That is
about the life expectancy of the motor from my experience.
• Public Works has repaired two catch basins this week. We are getting caught up on the
stormwater repairs.
• The quad city agreement is out for comments and staff plans to bring it forward the first
meeting in August.
PARKS/TRAILS
• The parks are in good shape and the tennis courts at Hunter Lions Park are being
repaired. The contractor is repairing cracks and preparing for the resurfacing.
MISCELLANEOUS
• The Celebration Day Committee has met two times, and everything is coming together
well. We are coordinating the event with the Minnesotans’ Military Appreciation Fund as
Page 2 of 2
they are hosting an event at the Hamel VFW the same day. Katrina is assisting on the
coordination of the event with other staff.
ORDER CHECKS JULY 2, 2019 – JULY 16, 2019
049026 AHLUWALIA, ANUP OR ROHINI ............................................... $250.00
049027 ARGENTA, PETER OR OUFREEZ ............................................ $250.00
049028 CHELMO, LORI/RICHARD ........................................................ $470.04
049029 ENCLAVE MASTER ASSN ........................................................ $250.00
049030 FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL ....................................... $500.00
049031 JAVED, SAIMA .......................................................................... $250.00
049032 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ................................................. $27,061.65
049033 MIKE CARTER CLASSICS ........................................................ $800.00
049034 REDDY, JAYASYAM ................................................................. $700.00
049035 RICH, CHRISTOPHER/HOLLI RICH.......................................... $222.30
049036 SETHUMADHAVAN, GEETHA .................................................. $250.00
049037 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY ................................................. $125.00
049038 ABBAS, ARIF ............................................................................. $250.00
049039 BURNET TITLE ........................................................................... $17.94
049040 CASH........................................................................................... $72.50
049041 CHAUHAN, ANU OR RAJ .......................................................... $500.00
049042 KARIMI, FERSHTEH ................................................................. $250.00
049043 MARCO (LEASE) ....................................................................... $283.34
049044 MASHADI, WAJIH ..................................................................... $250.00
049045 MN DVS ....................................................................................... $22.00
049046 ABRA AUTO BODY & GLASS ................................................... $328.04
049047 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE .................................................. $4,319.82
049048 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN ................................... $33,431.30
049049 CENTERPOINT ENERGY ......................................................... $198.86
049050 CORE & MAIN LP ................................................................... $1,252.33
049051 DOBOS ...................................................................................... $503.25
049052 DPC INDUSTRIES INC ........................................................... $2,319.56
049053 ENGEL WATER TESTING INC.................................................. $450.00
049054 ESS BROS. & SONS, INC. ........................................................ $441.00
049055 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. ............................................... $374.94
049056 FASTENAL COMPANY ............................................................... $30.87
049057 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL .................................................... $595.35
049058 GRAINGER................................................................................ $192.50
049059 HACH COMPANY ...................................................................... $250.39
049060 HAMEL LUMBER INC ................................................................ $274.32
049061 HAMEL LIONS CLUB ................................................................ $575.00
049062 HAMEL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT ....................................... $82,625.00
049063 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH ..................................................... $169.27
049064 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC ............................................................ $915.00
049065 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC ........................................... $345.59
049066 LANO EQUIPMENT INC ............................................................ $140.03
049067 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN ......................................................... $2,226.41
049068 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ................................................. $32,076.54
049069 MID AMERICA METER INC ....................................................... $300.00
049070 NAPA OF CORCORAN INC ........................................................ $73.15
049071 OIL AIR PRODUCTS LLC ............................................................ $60.15
049072 CITY OF ORONO ................................................................... $3,332.50
049073 PERRY'S TRUCK REPAIR ..................................................... $7,645.00
049074 PIRTEK PLYMOUTH ................................................................... $20.31
049075 RUSSELL SECURITY RESOURCE INC .................................... $200.00
049076 SAMS LAWN & LANDSCAPE INC ............................................. $654.00
049077 JAMIE R WIOME .................................................................... $6,804.00
049078 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO.......................................................... $413.98
049079 TEGRETE CORP ....................................................................... $360.00
049080 TIMESAVER OFFSITE .............................................................. $147.25
049081 TRANQUIL WINDS THERAPY LLC ........................................... $375.00
049082 VESSCO, INC. ........................................................................... $436.52
049083 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE .................................................. $25.00
049084 WSB & ASSOCIATES ........................................................... $51,958.00
Total Checks $269,615.00
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS JULY 2, 2019 – JULY 16, 2019
005142E PR PERA .............................................................................. $16,175.01
005143E PR FED/FICA ....................................................................... $17,697.70
005144E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................... $1,940.00
005145E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA .................................................. $4,033.45
005146E CITY OF MEDINA ........................................................................ $21.00
005147E FURTHER ............................................................................ $29,902.52
005148E CENTURYLINK.......................................................................... $233.26
005149E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC. .............................................. $7,764.60
005150E HOSTINGMINNESOTA.COM ...................................................... $55.24
005151E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC ........................................................... $431.80
005152E DELTA DENTAL ..................................................................... $2,491.85
005153E FURTHER .............................................................................. $6,340.14
005154E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC ....................................... $810.82
005155E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL ....................................... $150.00
005156E PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE BY PHONE ............................... $1,000.00
005157E VALVOLINE FLEET SERVICES ................................................ $111.15
005158E XCEL ENERGY .................................................................... $10,613.34
005159E PR FED/FICA ......................................................................... $1,452.46
005160E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA ..................................................... $335.55
005161E FRONTIER .................................................................................. $57.33
005162E PR FED/FICA .............................................................................. $34.30
Total Electronic Checks $101,651.52
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT JULY 10, 2019
0509554 DINGMANN, TYLER ............................................................... $1,037.12
0509555 JOHNSON, PATRICK M. ........................................................... $519.01
0509556 ALBERS, TODD M. .................................................................... $230.87
0509557 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L. ................................................... $1,430.55
0509558 ANDERSON, JOHN G. .............................................................. $230.87
0509559 BARNHART, ERIN A. ............................................................. $2,456.43
0509560 BELLAND, EDGAR J. ............................................................. $2,791.02
0509561 BOECKER, KEVIN D. ............................................................. $2,412.69
0509562 CONVERSE, KEITH A. ........................................................... $1,937.51
0509563 DESLAURIES, DEAN ................................................................ $230.87
0509564 DINGMANN, IVAN W. ............................................................. $1,934.20
0509565 ENDE, JOSEPH...................................................................... $1,893.68
0509566 FINKE, DUSTIN D. ................................................................. $2,672.75
0509567 GALLUP, JODI M. ................................................................... $1,799.74
0509568 GLEASON, JOHN M. .............................................................. $2,289.96
0509569 GREGORY, THOMAS ............................................................ $2,224.73
0509570 HALL, DAVID M. ..................................................................... $2,109.63
0509571 JACOBSON, NICOLE ................................................................ $864.30
0509572 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S. .......................................................... $2,230.71
0509573 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. ............................................................ $2,206.31
0509574 JONES, KATRINA M............................................................... $1,403.85
0509575 KLAERS, ANNE M. ................................................................. $1,394.12
0509576 LEUER, GREGORY J. ............................................................ $2,028.52
0509577 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M ............................................................ $327.07
0509578 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. .................................................. $1,699.51
0509579 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D .......................................................... $1,973.73
0509580 NELSON, JASON ................................................................... $2,269.10
0509581 PEDERSON, JEFF .................................................................... $227.97
0509582 PETERSON, DEBRA A. .......................................................... $2,020.16
0509583 REINKING, DEREK M ............................................................ $1,712.89
0509584 ROBBINS, MELISSA ................................................................. $772.54
0509585 ROERICK, AUSTIN ................................................................ $1,388.50
0509586 SCHARF, ANDREW ............................................................... $1,749.51
0509587 SCHERER, STEVEN T. .......................................................... $2,292.82
0509588 SCHNEIDER, BENJAMIN .......................................................... $861.73
Total Payroll Direct Deposit $55,624.97
PAYROLL CHECK JULY 10, 2019
0020441 DINGMANN, IVAN .................................................................. $3,372.30
Total Payroll Check $3,372.30