HomeMy Public PortalAbout12.03.2019 Complete City Council Meeting Packet Posted 5/29/2009 Page 1 of 1
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, December 3, 2019
6:15 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
I. Call to Order
II. Lego League Presentation
III. Adjourn
Posted 11.26.19
Posted 11/26/2019 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, December 3, 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 November 19, 2019 Council Work Session
B. Minutes of the November 19, 2019 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Rashmi Williams from the Planning Commission
B. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Public Works Maintenance Technician Austin Roerick
C. Appoint Ivan Dingmann as Part-time Seasonal Employee
D. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 2010A
E. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s Taxable General
Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2011B
F. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. 2020 Budget
1. Budget and Tax Levy Presentation – Public Comment
2. Resolution Approving 2020 Final Tax Levy
3. Resolution Approving 2020 Final Budget
B. Ordinance Adopting an Amended Fee Schedule – Public Hearing
1. Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary
C. Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street – Variance to Exceed Impervious Surface
Maximum in Shoreland Overlay District – Public Hearing
D. Jan Har, LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) – Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review, Conditional
Use Permit – PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001 – north of Hwy 55, west of
Willow Dr.
E. Ken and Marquita Thurber – Lot Combination – 2885 Ardmore Avenue
1. Resolution Approving Lot Combination of Lots 3 and 4, Block 29, Independence Beach
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. Willow Drive/Highway 55 Regional Lift Station Project
1. Accept Feasibility Report and Authorize Plans and Specs
IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XII. 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: November 26, 2019
DATE OF MEETING: December 3, 2019
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Rashmi Williams from the Planning Commission –
On November 14th, Rashmi Williams submitted a letter of resignation from her seat on the
Planning Commission. Staff recommends accepting her resignation and advertising to fill
her vacant seat.
See attached resolution.
B. Resolution Accepting Resignation of Public Works Maintenance Technician Austin
Roerick – On November 22nd, Austin Roerick submitted his resignation from his position
as Public Works Maintenance Technician. Mr. Roerick was hired in June 2019 to fill the
vacant position in the Public Works Department with Ivan Dingmann’s retirement and
Derek Reinking’s promotion. Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting
Austin Roerick’s resignation.
See attached resolution.
C. Appoint Ivan Dingmann as Part-time Seasonal Employee– With the unexpected resignation
of Public Works employee Austin Roerick, recently retired employee Ivan Dingmann has
stated that he would be willing to assist the Public Works Department with snow plowing
on an as-needed basis until a full-time position can be filled. Staff recommends approval
in appointing Ivan Dingmann as a part-time seasonal employee while we figure out next
steps for replacing the vacant full-time position.
No attachments for this item.
D. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 2010A – The City previously issued its General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 2010A, dated July 7, 2010, in the original aggregate principal
amount of $315,000. The Bonds are currently outstanding in the principal amount of
$60,000 and are subject to redemption on any date at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Staff recommends approval of the prepayment and redemption of the bonds to save interest
cost.
See attached resolution.
2
E. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s Taxable General
Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2011B – The City previously issued its Taxable
General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2011B, dated July 12, 2011, in the original
aggregate principal amount of $870,000. The Bonds are currently outstanding in the
principal amount of $295,000 and are subject to redemption on or after February 1, 2017
at a price of par plus accrued interest. Staff recommends approval of the prepayment and
redemption of the bonds to save interest cost.
See attached resolution.
F. Resolution Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B – The City previously issued its General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B, dated November 7, 2012, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $2,845,000. The Bonds are currently outstanding in the principal
amount of $555,000 and are subject to redemption on or after February 1, 2020 at a price
of par plus accrued interest. Staff recommends approval of the prepayment and redemption
of the bonds to save interest cost.
See attached resolution.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. 2020 Budget - Staff recommends a City General Fund Budget of $4,807,123 and a proposed
total levy of $4,392,771 for 2020. This is consistent with the preliminary budget adopted on
September 3rd by the City Council. The 2019 General Fund Budget was $4,572,338. Staff
recommends approval of the 2020 Budget.
See attached budget booklet and resolutions.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt Resolution Approving the 2020 Final Tax Levy
Recommended Motion #2: Adopt Resolution Approving the 2020 Final Budget
B. Ordinance Adopting an Amended Fee Schedule – Public Hearing – Staff has updated the
attached fee schedule to reflect changes for 2020. This item has been noticed and a public
hearing will be held at this meeting prior to Council approval of the ordinance.
See attached ordinance and resolution.
Recommended Motion # 1: Adopt ordinance adopting an amended fee schedule
Recommended Motion # 2: Adopt resolution authorizing publication of ordinance by title
and summary.
C. Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street – Variance to Exceed Impervious Surface
Maximum in Shoreland Overlay District – Public Hearing - the applicants have requested
approval of a variance to exceed the 25 percent impervious surface maximum in the
3
Shoreland Overlay District to construct a single- family home at 4585 Balsam Street. The
subject lot is currently vacant. The applicants have provided a narrative explaining their
practical difficulty. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their November 12th
meeting and after hearing public comments and reviewing the request, the Planning
Commission found that the Variance criteria were met as described in the report and
recommended approval of the variance with the conditions noted in the staff report.
See attached report.
Potential Motion: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the variance,
subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
D. Jan Har, LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) – Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review,
Conditional Use Permit – PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001 – north of Hwy
55, west of Willow Dr. – The applicant has requested approval of various land use
applications to allow for a business development on property located north of Highway 55
and approximately 1300 feet west of Willow Drive. The applicant proposes construction of
a 43,000 square-foot, three-story office building with a bar restaurant and a 13,100 square
foot accessory building for shop space, warehouse, and vehicle storage.
See attached report.
Potential Motion: Move to direct staff to prepare documents approving the rezoning,
preliminary plat, site plan review, and conditional use permit subject to the conditions noted
in the staff report.
E. Ken and Marquita Thurber – Lot Combination – 2885 Ardmore Avenue – The applicants
have requested approval from the City to combine two parcels into a single lot. The existing
parcels do not meet minimum lot size standards, and while the combination would not bring
the parcels into full compliance, it does improve the situation.
See attached report.
Recommended Motion: Adopt resolution approving lot combination of lots 3 and 4, block
29, Independence Beach
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. Willow Drive/Highway 55 Regional Lift Station Project – On September 17, 2019 the City
Council directed staff to authorize the preparation of an engineering feasibility report for the
proposed Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project. The Willow Drive/TH 55
Regional Lift Station Project has been included with the City of Medina’s capital
improvement plan based on the anticipated development noted in the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. The plan identified the need for a lift station to serve properties in and around Willow
Drive north of Chippewa Road that are not serviceable with gravity sewer, including the
proposed Adams Pest Control development. This lift station will serve as a regional lift
4
station and receive wastewater from the ultimate development within the EC-1 sewershed of
the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Wastewater Plan and potentially beyond.
See attached memo, feasibility study, and WSB proposal.
Recommended Motion: Accept feasibility report and direct staff to proceed with plans and
specs based on appropriate timing of proposed development.
XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 005316E-005329E for $52,614.41
and order check numbers 049566-049616 for $49,019.20 and payroll EFT 0509862-0509889 for
$54,763.10.
INFORMATION PACKET:
Planning Department Update
Police Department Update
Public Works Department Update
Claims List
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1
October 22, 2019
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF
NOVEMBER 19, 2019
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on November 19, 2019 at
6:00 p.m. at the Medina City Hall, 2052 County Road 24, Medina, MN.
I. Call to Order
Members present: Martin, Albers, Anderson, DesLauriers, Pederson
Members absent:
Also present: Finance Director Erin Barnhart, City Administrator Scott Johnson,
Public Safety Director Ed Belland, Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup, and
Planning Director Dusty Finke
II. Fiscal Disparities Discussion
Finance Director Erin Barnhart provided information regarding the fiscal disparities
program. Barnhart walked through the contribution equation with the City Council.
Planning Director Dusty Finke provided examples of tax statements for commercial
facilities in Medina. In all of the scenarios presented, Medina would yield more from
commercial development compared to other types of development. Medina should be
very careful with offering incentives because the City does not fiscally receive a lot in
return because property taxes for commercial facilities are split up by different
government entities (state general taxes, fiscal disparities, county, school district, and
other taxing jurisdictions).
Staff was directed to try and come up with a fiscal analysis tool to show fiscal impacts
from requested comprehensive plan amendments. Specifically, resource costs for
municipal services and an estimate of the tax base that could be created by the proposed
development. Barnhart also informed the City Council that she would e-mail out the 10 –
year history of fiscal disparities for Medina.
III. Hamel Fire Transition Study Discussion
Staff provided a presentation on recent fire discussions and a draft request for proposals
(RFP) to bring in an expert to look at future fire service options for Medina. Also, staff is
recommending Council move forward with a grant application for a Service Planning
Grant from the State Fire Marshal to help pay for the study in 2020. If the City does not
receive the grant in 2020, then the City could budget the amount in 2021 and go after the
grant again in 2021. The study would allow Medina to do its due diligence and look into
options per the RFP scope.
Council discussed possible changes to the RFP scope. Staff will include the agreed upon
revisions to the document. Staff received Council consensus to move forward with the
RFP process and grant application.
III. Adjournment
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2
October 22, 2019
Martin closed the meeting at 7:08 p.m.
_________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
November 19, 2019
DRAFT 1
2
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 2019 3
4
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on November 19, 2019 at 5
7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided. 6
7
I. ROLL CALL 8
9
Members present: Albers, Anderson, DesLauriers, and Martin. 10
11
Members absent: Pederson. 12
13
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi 14
Gallup, City Attorney David Anderson, City Engineer Jim Stremel, City Planning Director 15
Dusty Finke, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and 16
Chief of Police Ed Belland. 17
18
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 19
20
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 21
The agenda was approved as presented. 22
23
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.) 24
25
A. Approval of the November 5, 2019 Special City Council Meeting Minutes 26
Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the November 5, 2019 special City 27
Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 28
29
B. Approval of the November 6, 2019 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 30
Martin noted that revisions from herself and Anderson have been distributed for 31
incorporation. 32
33
Moved by Anderson, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the November 6, 2019 34
regular City Council meeting minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 35
36
V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 37
38
A. Approve Public Safety Director Appointment 39
B. Approve Stormwater Design Manual 40
C. Approve TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Contract Renewal for 2020 41
D. Approve Hennepin County Natural Resources Grant for the Ardmore 42
Subwatershed Projects 43
E. Accept Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study 44
F. Resolution No. 2019-71 Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at 45
Brockton 4th Addition 46
G. Resolution No. 2019-72 Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at 47
Brockton 5th Addition 48
H. Resolution No. 2019-73 Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at 49
Brockton 6th Addition 50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
November 19, 2019
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 1
passed unanimously. 2
3
VI. COMMENTS (7:03 p.m.) 4
5
A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 6
There were none. 7
8
B. Park Commission 9
Scherer reported that the Park Commission will meet the following night to discuss the 10
Adam’s Pest Control project and will also discuss the Diamond Lake regional trail. He 11
noted that staff will meet with the Hamel Athletic Club to discuss upcoming projects and 12
visioning for the next year. 13
14
C. Planning Commission 15
Planning Commissioner Nester reported that the Planning Commission met the previous 16
week to consider requests from Adam’s Pest Control. She noted that some concerns 17
were raised regarding noise, the eagle’s nest and water and advised that the 18
Commission recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. She 19
noted that the Commission also considered a request from Dave Raskob, 4585 Balsam 20
Street, to exceed the 25 percent hardcover maximum and advised that the Commission 21
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. She personally 22
suggested that staff research an ordinance pertaining to electrical vehicle charging 23
infrastructure related to new development. 24
25
VII. NEW BUSINESS 26
27
A. Willow Drive/Highway 55 Regional Lift Station Project (7:08 p.m.) 28
Stremel reviewed the Feasibility Report prepared for the study. He explained that the lift 29
station has been included in the capital improvement plans and identified in the 2040 30
Comprehensive Plan. He noted that the submitted request from Adam’s Pest Control 31
lies within this area identified for the lift station. He explained that the list station would 32
not only serve properties in the MUSA but also properties beyond that. He stated that 33
the yellow outline identifies the proposed area to ultimately be served by the lift station. 34
35
DesLauriers asked if the construction of a lift station would be required if the Adam’s site 36
could be connected to the existing sewer system. 37
38
Stremel explained that there are other site constraints that would make it difficult to 39
Adam’s to connect to the sewer. He stated that this lift station will also set the City up for 40
future development in that area. He explained how a lift station is sized, based on the 41
developable area and proposed land use as well as the elevations. He stated that when 42
the lift station is initially built, the full capacity will not be needed to serve the existing 43
properties. He stated that the question would be whether the full build out would be 44
desired in phase one and noted that it could be separated into two phases. He identified 45
the elements that would make sense to implement in phase one because of the limited 46
differences. He stated that the main decision would be the amount of pumping desired 47
in phase one. He noted a potential undersized area downstream that should be 48
considered with future capital costs. He provided cost estimates including the different 49
options for phase one and phase two. He recommended installing the larger pumps now 50
because of the smaller incremental cost compared to retrofitting in the future. He stated 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
November 19, 2019
that funding would be provided through the City’s sewer capital fund. He reviewed the 1
proposed schedule details. 2
3
DesLauriers asked the cost to complete the final design and whether the sewer capital 4
fund would cover that cost. 5
6
Stremel estimated about $60,000 for final design. He confirmed that figure is included in 7
the total project cost estimated. He also confirmed that the documents could be finalized 8
with the exception of the bidding documents, if desired, and that information would have 9
a longer shelf life, should the Council decide not to move forward on the project at this 10
time. 11
12
Martin asked how long the City would have to decide whether to move forward with the 13
project once bids are opened. 14
15
Stremel stated that typically the bid language states 90 days. 16
17
Finke provided additional details on the timing for bidding the project and the Adam’s 18
Pest Control project. He noted that final approval for the project would not occur until 19
sometime in the next year. 20
21
Stremel stated that perhaps there would be a buffer of a few weeks to hit the prime 22
bidding time. 23
24
Anderson asked for additional details on the user area charge mentioned. 25
26
Barnhart explained that staff made projections on the number of connections in the area 27
to determine an appropriate area charge for direct recipients to offset the current 28
connection charges. 29
30
Martin asked if it would make sense to proceed with final design and then review in 31
January to determine if the Council would like to authorize bidding. She noted that the 32
decision could be delayed up to 30 days with the ability to still hit the prime bidding 33
season. She asked for timing on when sewer infrastructure improvements should occur 34
related to a development project. 35
36
Scherer explained that there are many components that would need to come together 37
for this project and would not mind delaying the decision for two weeks. 38
39
Finke noted that it would still be fine to authorize final design at the December 3rd 40
meeting and meet the proposed schedule. 41
42
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to table the consideration of the final design 43
for the lift station project to the December 3rd meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 44
45
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:28 p.m.) 46
Johnson reported that the Quad City Agreement is complete, thanking Finke and 47
Scherer for their great work. 48
49
Finke reported that a neighborhood meeting is tentatively being scheduled on December 50
4, 2019 related to the Mark of Excellence concept. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
November 19, 2019
1
Johnson asked the City Council to call for a special meeting to allow a quorum to attend 2
the neighborhood meeting. 3
4
Martin noted a conflict of interest. 5
6
Anderson noted a possible conflict of interest. 7
8
Albers stated that he would attempt to attend. 9
10
Finke noted that he would be attending the meeting. 11
12
Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to call for a special City Council meeting on 13
December 4, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. at the public works meeting for the purpose of attending 14
a neighborhood meeting for the Mark of Excellence concept. Motion passed 15
unanimously. 16
17
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:31 p.m.) 18
Anderson stated that he had the ability to sit in on the interview process for police officer 19
candidates and believed that there is a good pool of candidates. 20
21
Johnson noted that if both the candidates proceed through the background process, it 22
would be proposed to start both candidates in February and advised that there would not 23
be a budget impact. 24
25
Martin reported that the next meeting of the Northwest Mayors Meeting will include a 26
report from the State Auditor and will take place on December 11th. 27
28
Albers noted that he attended the veterans’ event in Orono and advised that it was a 29
nice program. 30
31
X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:33 p.m.) 32
Moved by Anderson, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the bills, EFT 005297E-33
005315E for $58,638.30 and order check numbers 049512-049565 for $166,471.49 and 34
payroll EFT 0509829-0509861 for $54,333.89. Motion passed unanimously. 35
36
XI. ADJOURN 37
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adjourn the meeting at 7:34 p.m. Motion 38
passed unanimously. 39
40
41
__________________________________ 42
Kathleen Martin, Mayor 43
Attest: 44
45
____________________________________ 46
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk 47
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF RASHMI
WILLIAMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Rashmi Williams’ term on the Planning Commission of the city of Medina does
not expire until December 2020; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2019, Rashmi Williams submitted a letter of resignation from
her position on the Planning Commission addressed to the City; and
WHEREAS, Rashmi Williams’ resignation from her position as Planning Commissioner
shall become effective immediately.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
Rashmi Williams’ letter of resignation from the Planning Commission is hereby accepted.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Agenda Item # 5A
1
Dusty Finke
From:Rashmi Seneviratne <rsenevir@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, November 14, 2019 2:11 PM
To:Dusty Finke; Dusty Finke
Subject:Planning Commission Resignation
Dusty & Members of the Medina City Council:
It is with regret that I have to resign from the Planning Commission due to
family obligations. Thank you for the opportunity to serve my community. I
truly enjoyed my time on the Commission and can't speak highly enough
about the Planning Commission members I served with.
Sincerely,
Rashmi Seneviratne Williams
‐‐
Rashmi Seneviratne Williams
________________
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you
made them feel. - Maya Angelou
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF
PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN
AUSTIN ROERICK
WHEREAS, Austin Roerick was recently employed as the Public Works Maintenance
Technician by the city of Medina; and
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2019, Austin Roerick submitted a letter of resignation from
his position addressed to the Public Works Director; and
WHEREAS, Austin Roerick’s resignation from his position became effective on November
22, 2019.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
Austin Roerick’s letter of resignation is hereby accepted.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _____ and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Agenda Item # 5B
Austin Joseph Roerick
3255 Highland Rd
Minnetrista, MN 55364
(952) 484-8478
airoerick34@gmail.com
November 22, 2019
City of Medina
Dear Mr. Scherer
I am writing this letter to you as a formal notice of my resignation from the City of Medina. My last day
of employment will be Friday December 6th, 2019.
I appreciate the opportunity to work for the City of Medina. With my time at the city you have taught
me the importance of hard work and attention to detail. I will take what I have learned with me as I
move forward in my career. I am accepting a position that I feel will help further my career within public
works after I complete my degree in construction management.
Thank you again for the work experience you have given me, and I wish you the best in the future.
Sincerely,
ao_k
Austin J. Roerick
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption.
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. ________
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION OF THE
CITY’S GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2010A
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows:
1. The City previously issued its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2010A (the
“Bonds”), dated July 7, 2010, in the original aggregate principal amount of $315,000. The Bonds are
currently outstanding in the principal amount of $60,000 and are subject to redemption on any date at a
price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in part, at the option of
the City and in such order as the City will determine and within a maturity selected by the Finance Director
of the City, acting as the registrar for the Bonds (the “Registrar”). Prepayments will be at a price of par
plus accrued interest.
2. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial management of the City
that the Bonds maturing on February 1, 2021 be prepaid and redeemed on February 1, 2020 (or the first
date for which the Registrar of the Bonds can provide proper notice to the holders of the Bonds) and the
Bonds are hereby called for redemption in the aggregate principal amount of $30,000.
3. The Registrar is authorized and directed to mail notice of call for redemption of the Bonds
in substantially the format attached hereto as EXHIBIT A to the registered owner of the Bonds to be
redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Agenda Item # 5D
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
Bank of Maple Plain
4980 Highway 12
Maple Plain, MN 55359
Re: Notice of Call for Redemption for City of Medina, Minnesota, General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 2010A
Dear ___________,
The City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota (the “City”), has determined to redeem and prepay the
following maturity of the above-referenced bonds (the “Bonds”) on February 1, 2020:
Maturity Amount to Be Redeemed
February 1, 2021 $30,000
The Bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2020, on which
date all interest on said Bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the Bonds hereby called for redemption are
requested to present their Bonds for payment at the office of the Finance Director of the City, 2052
County Road 24, Medina, Minnesota 55340, on or before February 1, 2020.
Important Notice: In compliance with the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003,
federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the
time of the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number
or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a
W-9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution.
Dated: ______________, 2019.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
By /s/ Scott Johnson
City Administrator
City of Medina, Minnesota
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption.
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. ________
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION OF THE
CITY’S TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2011B
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows:
1. The City previously issued its Taxable General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 2011B (the “Bonds”), dated July 12, 2011, in the original aggregate principal amount of $870,000.
The Bonds are currently outstanding in the principal amount of $295,000 and are subject to redemption on
or after February 1, 2017 at a price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in whole or in part,
and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City will determine and within a maturity
selected by Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, acting as the registrar for the Bonds
(the “Registrar”). Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
2. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial management of the City
that the Bonds maturing on February 1, 2021 and February 1, 2022 be prepaid and redeemed on
February 1, 2020 (or the first date for which the Registrar of the Bonds can provide proper notice to the
holders of the Bonds), and the Bonds are hereby called for redemption in the aggregate principal amount
of $200,000.
3. The Registrar is authorized and directed to mail notice of call for redemption of the Bonds
in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT A to the registered owners of the Bonds to be redeemed at the
address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Agenda Item # 5E
A-1
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$870,000
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS
SERIES 2011B
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota
(the “City”), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on
February 1, 2020
all outstanding bonds (the “Bonds”) of the City designated as the Taxable General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 2011B, dated July 12, 2011, having a stated maturity date of February 1 in the years 2021
and 2022, both inclusive, totaling $200,000 in principal amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity Amount to Be Redeemed CUSIP
2021 $100,000 584768 MR3
2022 $100,000 584768 MS1
The Bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2020, on which
date all interest on said Bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the Bonds hereby called for redemption are
requested to present their Bonds for payment at the main office of Bond Trust Services Corporation, 3060
Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, on or before February 1, 2020.
Important Notice: In compliance with the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003,
federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time
of the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal
employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form,
which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution.
Dated: ______________, 2019.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
By /s/ Scott Johnson
City Administrator
City of Medina, Minnesota
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption.
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION OF THE
CITY’S GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2012B
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows:
1. The City previously issued its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B (the
“Bonds”), dated November 7, 2012, in the original aggregate principal amount of $2,845,000. The Bonds
are currently outstanding in the principal amount of $555,000 and are subject to redemption on or after
February 1, 2020 at a price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in
part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City will determine and within a maturity selected by
Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, acting as the registrar for the Bonds (the
“Registrar”). Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
2. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial management of the City
that the Bond maturing on February 1, 2021 be prepaid and redeemed on February 1, 2020 (or the first date
for which the Registrar of the Bonds can provide proper notice to the holders of the Bonds), and the Bonds
are hereby called for redemption in the aggregate principal amount of $90,000.
3. The Registrar is authorized and directed to mail notice of call for redemption of the Bonds
in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT A to the registered owners of the Bonds to be redeemed at the
address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Agenda Item # 5F
A-1
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$2,845,000
CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS
SERIES 2012B
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of Medina, Minnesota
(the “City”), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on
February 1, 2020
all outstanding bonds (the “Bonds”) of the City designated as the General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2012B, dated November 7, 2012, having a stated maturity date of February 1, 2021, totaling $90,000
in principal amount, and with the following CUSIP number:
Year of Maturity Amount to Be Redeemed CUSIP
2021 $90,000 584768 NW1
The Bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2020, on which
date all interest on said Bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the Bonds hereby called for redemption are
requested to present their Bonds for payment at the main office of Bond Trust Services Corporation, 3060
Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, on or before February 1, 2020.
Important Notice: In compliance with the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003,
federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time
of the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal
employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form,
which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution.
Dated: ______________, 2019.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA
By /s/ Scott Johnson
City Administrator
City of Medina, Minnesota
Mayor and City Council Members December 3, 2019
The City of Medina Staff is pleased to submit the 2020 proposed Comprehensive Annual Budget and
property tax levy for your consideration of final approval on December 3, 2019. This 2020 budget
reflects the Council’s property tax levy and budget discussions throughout 2019. When approved, this
budget will be the basis for the final 2020 property tax levy to be certified to Hennepin County in
December 2019. The County will then use the certified property tax levy for final 2020 property tax
calculations.
Medina’s population as of the 2010 census was 4,892 residents living in a total of 1,702 housing
units. 2020 population is estimated to be 6,873, based on mathematical estimations of Medina’s fire
districts. Total taxable market value increased 4.8% from $1.717 billion in 2019 to $1.778 billion
in 2020. Adjusted net tax capacity increased 5.2% from $18.6 million in 2019 to $19.5 million in
2020.
The budget proposes a General Fund property tax levy increase of $108,555 for 2020, which is an
increase of 3.3%. The increase is partially due to decreasing revenue sources. Pre-existing debt
service levies have increased by $5,322. Capital levies for the Municipal Park Fund and Equipment
Fund have a total increase of $276,000. The overall total levy increase for 2020 amounts to $389,877.
Property Tax Levy: 2019 2020 Change
General Fund $3,325,897 $3,434,452 $108,555
Capital Equipment 134,500 312,500 178,000
Municipal Park Fund 14,000 112,000 98,000
Road Improvement Debt Service 151,106 152,753 1,647
Building Debt Service 377,391 381,066 3,675
Total Levy $4,002,894 $4,392,771 $389,877
The General Fund Budget reflects the revenues and expenditures developed from the City’s service
needs, trend analysis, the annual goal setting session, joint work sessions with the City Council and
Staff, and City Council discussions. The expenditure levels are focused on maintaining the City’s
current level of services and to address capital, maintenance, or special project needs.
1
Agenda Item # 7A
GENERAL FUND REVENUES:
The total budgeted revenue for 2020 is $4,807,123 compared to the 2019 budget of $4,572,338. As has
been true in the past, these revenue estimates are based on conservative assumptions.
With the proposed general operating levy increase of 3.3%, property tax collections in the General Fund
are projected to increase from $3,325,897 in 2019 to $3,434,452 in 2020. As in prior years, the City
continues to receive the largest portion of the General Fund revenue from the property tax. In 2020, the
tax levy will provide approximately 71.0% of the City’s total General Fund revenues.
Licenses and Permits are estimated to remain steady. The budget is conservative regarding building
permit activity to account for slowing growth in the future. A large portion of building permit surplus
can be offset by building inspection liability that isn’t booked until year-end.
The Intergovernmental revenue budget is projected to increase to $288,773 in 2020, due to increase in
fire state aid. There are no scheduled increases related to the Safe and Sober program.
Budgeted transfers to the General Fund from the Water, Sewer, and Storm Water funds have increased
from $213,573 in 2019 to $220,783 based on a 1.5% water increase, 2% sewer increase and a 3% storm
water increase.
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES:
General Fund expenditures are budgeted to increase from $4,572,338 in 2019 to $4,807,123 in 2020.
General government expenditures are budgeted to increase $47,195 or 4.0%, largely due to staff wages
and building contracts services (utilities and maintenance). Public safety expenditures are budgeted to
increase $75,675 or 3.1%, due to fire services, staff wages and building inspections. Parks and recreation
expenditures are budgeted to increase $24,590 or 11.7%, the increase is due to expanding contractual
services (mowing and chem lawn). Public works expenditures are budgeted to increase by $30,444 or
4.1%. Capital replacement acquisitions will continue to be transacted through other funding sources or
reserves on an as needed or emergency basis only.
Personnel costs represent 58% of the General Fund Budget. A 2.5% cost of living adjustment (COLA)
and defined pay grade step (step) increases are included in the 2020 budget for qualifying employees.
OTHER FUND BUDGETS
In addition to the City’s General Fund Budget and proposed property tax levy, the City also has several
other Special Revenue, Capital Projects, Debt Service, and Enterprise fund budgets. While a profile and
proposed budget of each fund is included in this budget document, a brief summary of each fund’s key
changes should be noted to understand the impact on meeting future City service needs.
Community Event Fund: The City has depended on donations to fund the fireworks display at the annual
Medina Celebration Day event. Conduit bond revenue in the amount of $15,500 was received in 2019
to be spread over five years. Additional donations will again be needed in 2020 to fund a fireworks
contract for the event. To assist in the event funding, a $4,000 transfer in from the General Fund is
budgeted for 2020.
2
Municipal Park Fund: Park equipment has an asset/depreciation life between 10 and 40 years. Past
practice for park equipment replacement needs have been funded from the General Fund or Park
Dedication Fund if classified as a capital improvement. The past need for park replacement has not
been great because the parks were new or newer. As the parks and park equipment within the City
of Medina approach asset life, there will be an increased need for replacement. The funds within the
Park Dedication Fund will not be enough to maintain a practice of funding replacements or
improvements. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows between $13.8 and $27.4 million in new parks
and trails development over the next 20 years. The Park Dedication Fund’s revenue source is 100%
dependent on development and developers and needs to set aside for future use. There have been
past years and will be again when no revenue comes in for Park Dedication. Thus, the reason there
is importance in establishing a constant revenue source for the Municipal Park Fund to handle
replacements, which will be ongoing while there are parks in use. The Municipal Park levy is
budgeted to increase $98,000 beginning in 2020.
Water Utility: The City’s 2018 Water Rate Analysis demonstrated the need for a 1.5% rate increase in
user rates and no current increase in the trunk connection fees.
Sewer Utility: The City’s 2018 Sewer Rate Analysis includes a 2% rate increase in user rates and a
decrease in trunk connection fees because of the addition of an area charge for the Willow TH 55 lift
station .
Storm Water Utility: A 3% increase in the Storm Water Utility rate has been included in the 2020 budget.
The storm water utility revenue supports administrative costs for annual reporting, pond maintenance,
etc. and will be used as matching funds for capital project completion. The CIP for storm water projects
is large and completion of the projects is highly contingent on receiving grant or cooperative funding
from other agencies and partners.
The remaining portions of this document provide greater detail on individual fund sources and uses
budgets. Supplemental information can be obtained from the Finance Department.
FINAL COMMENTS
I herewith submit the Preliminary 2020 Comprehensive Annual Budget to the City Council. It has been
a pleasure to work with the City Council and staff to prepare this document. This budget has been
prepared based on the direction given by the City Council to date and the best estimates of staff of the
available revenues and the expenditures required to reasonably maintain core levels of services without
significantly compromising quality of life for Medina taxpayers.
Respectfully Submitted,
Erin Barnhart
Finance Director
3
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption.
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2020 FINAL TAX LEVY
Be it resolved, by the city council of the City of Medina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the
following sums of money be levied for the current year, collectible in 2020, upon the taxable
property in the City of Medina, for the following purposes: To raise $3,434,452 as adequate
revenue for the general fund operating budget, $533,819 as adequate revenue for debt service, and
$312,500 for capital equipment and $112,000 for municipal parks.
General Fund: $3,434,452
Debt Service:
2010A G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 29,500
2011B Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds $ 60,000
2012A G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds $ 243,705
2013A G.O. Refunding Bond $ 137,361
2015A G.O. Improvement Bond $ 63,253
Municipal Parks $ 112,000
Capital Equipment $ 312,500
Total Levy: $4,392,771
The City Clerk, Jodi M. Gallup, is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to
the county auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
_______________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member ______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption.
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2020 FINAL BUDGET
Be it resolved by the city council of the City of Medina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the
following sums of money be approved for the 2020 budget:
Expenditures/
Revenues & Expenses &
Other Sources Other Uses
General Fund $ 4,807,123 $ 4,807,123
Special Revenue Funds $ 223,364 $ 257,950
Capital Project Funds $ 1,274,524 $ 1,818,805
Debt Service Funds $ 1,024,779 $ 1,130,581
Water Fund $ 1,307,022 $ 1,569,764
Sanitary Sewer Fund $ 649,788 $ 817,575
Storm Water Fund $ 227,106 $ 281,305
Be it also resolved by the city council of the City of Medina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that
the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) be approved for 2020:
2020 CIP $ 1,479,790
Dated: December 3, 2019.
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
_______________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF MEDINA
GENERAL FUND
PRELIMINARY 2020 BUDGET
2020 Amount Percentage
2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Prelim Increase Increase
Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
1 Property Tax Levy 3,134,977 3,132,281 3,229,026 3,154,881 3,325,897 1,689,572 3,434,452 108,555 3.3%
2 Other Taxes 30,000 73,488 30,000 51,358 33,000 44,342 75,000 42,000 127.3%
3 Licenses and Permits 372,800 595,499 374,300 592,277 377,400 535,105 390,669 13,269 3.5%
4 Intergovernmental 207,618 256,433 232,118 271,965 263,910 283,928 288,773 24,863 9.4%
5 Charges for Services 112,831 143,411 124,564 130,169 123,146 138,979 138,087 14,941 12.1%
6 Fines and Forfeitures 105,000 96,050 105,000 88,044 110,000 74,322 95,000 (15,000)-13.6%
7 Special Assessments 1,000 12,545 0 1,761 1,715 444 0 (1,715) -100.0%
8 Miscellaneous 128,167 182,453 108,225 215,518 123,698 100,538 164,359 40,661 32.9%
9 Sale of Assets 30003000000 0N/A
10 Transfers In 217,048 217,049 223,110 208,110 213,572 213,573 220,783 7,211 3.4%
11 Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 4,309,741 4,709,209 4,426,643 4,714,083 4,572,338 3,080,803 4,807,123 234,785 5.1%
EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES:
General Government:
12 Mayor & Council 26,294 25,323 25,144 25,273 25,644 23,946 25,543 (101)-0.4%
13 Administration 591,789 568,959 602,321 599,335 630,578 650,466 662,230 31,652 5.0%
14 Elections 10,900 1,501 10,900 15,235 11,400 1,069 15,400 4,000 35.1%
15 Assessing 88,872 90,515 90,493 91,229 93,840 86,865 98,066 4,226 4.5%
16 Planning & Zoning 190,150 191,825 193,840 169,889 189,411 161,467 191,032 1,621 0.9%
17 Comprehensive Plan 8,000 125 8,000 0 8,000 0 8,000 0 0.0%
18 Data Processing 72,850 73,271 82,083 79,586 82,083 75,730 88,704 6,621 8.1%
19 Police/Public Works Facility 69,415 69,521 69,415 79,670 76,415 56,370 77,500 1,085 1.4%
20 Municipal Building 48,410 39,740 39,100 40,994 60,810 40,170 61,000 190 0.3%
21 Unallocated 2,300 0 2,100 0 2,100 0 0 (2,100) -100.0%
22 Total General Government 1,108,980 1,060,780 1,123,396 1,101,209 1,180,281 1,096,083 1,227,476 47,195 4.0%
Public Safety:
23 Police 1,564,597 1,525,729 1,617,770 1,647,492 1,651,875 1,441,094 1,737,111 85,236 5.2%
24 Police Records Management 8,850 8,561 8,850 8,693 8,850 8,905 13,500 4,650 52.5%
25 Fire 394,172 426,262 424,716 413,375 446,242 414,024 419,111 (27,131)-6.1%
26 Building Inspections 300,006 240,836 312,013 409,365 318,343 224,980 330,664 12,321 3.9%
27 Emergency Management 5,200 4,246 5,200 3,990 5,200 4,722 5,800 600 11.5%
28 Total Public Safety 2,272,825 2,205,634 2,368,549 2,482,916 2,430,510 2,093,725 2,506,185 75,675 3.1%
Public Works:
29 Public Works 708,212 618,315 706,455 641,221 726,877 693,172 751,401 24,524 3.4%
30 Sanitation & Recycling 15,112 13,302 18,146 12,567 20,080 12,743 26,000 5,920 29.5%
31 Total Public Works 723,324 631,617 724,601 653,789 746,957 705,915 777,402 30,444 4.1%
Parks & Recreation:
32 Community Building 33,950 32,540 37,127 50,694 41,146 27,410 41,808 662 1.6%
33 Parks 168,662 165,077 170,970 242,850 169,444 222,884 193,372 23,928 14.1%
34 Total Parks & Recreation 202,612 197,617 208,097 293,544 210,590 250,293 235,180 24,590 11.7%
Economic Development Housing 0 0 0 0 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
35 Transfers Out 2,000 2,000 2,000 53,362 4,000 404,000 4,000 0 0.0%
36 Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 4,309,741 4,097,648 4,426,643 4,584,820 4,572,338 4,550,015 4,807,123 234,784 5.1%
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES AND
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
37 EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 0 611,561 0 129,263 0 (1,469,212)0 0 N/A
4
City of Medina
2020 Property Tax Levy Scenario Summary
Actual Proposed
Pay Pay
2019 2020
Property Tax Information:
Estimated Market Value Change (Taxable)N/A 4.8%
Estimated Tax Capacity Change (Taxable)N/A 5.1%
General Fund Levy $3,325,897 $3,434,452
% Change N/A 3.3%
Debt Service & Capital Levies $676,997 $958,319
% Change N/A 41.6%
Total Levy $4,002,894 $4,392,771
% Change N/A 9.7%
City Local Tax Capacity Rate 21.528% 22.484%
% Change N/A 4.4%
Estimated Property Taxes:
$700,000 Home With No Market Value Change $1,749 $1,827
% Change N/A 4.4%
$700,000 Home With 5.0% Market Value Increase $1,749 $1,928
% Change N/A 10.2%
$5,000,000 C/I Property With No Market Value Change $21,200 $22,147
% Change N/A 4.5%
$5,000,000 C/I Property With 5.0% Market Value Increase $21,200 $22,822
% Change N/A 7.6%
5
City of Medina
Property Tax Levies
2020 Proposed
Proposed Amount Percentage
Pay Pay Increase Increase
2019 2020 (Decrease) (Decrease)
1 General Fund Levy 3,325,897 3,434,452 108,555 3.3%
2
3 Debt Service & Capital Levies:
4
5 Public Works and Police Department Facility:
6
7 2012A G.O. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Bonds - $6.1 million 241,710 243,705 1,995 0.8%
8 2013A G.O. Refunding Bonds (2007A recharacterized CIP portion)135,681 137,361 1,680 1.2%
9
10 Total Public Works and Police Department Facility 377,391 381,066 3,675 1.0%
11
12 Other Debt Service:
13
14 2010A G.O. Improvement Bonds - Holy Name Drive and Pioneer Trail 29,500 29,500 0 0.0%
15 2011A G.O. Bonds - Hunter Drive South 0 0 0 N/A
16 2011B Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds - Hunter Drive North 59,000 60,000 1,000 1.7%
17 2015A G.O. Improvement Bonds - Tower Drive 62,606 63,253 647 1.0%
Total Other Debt Service 151,106 152,753 1,647 1.1%
Capital Levies:
18 Municipal Park Fund Levy 14,000 112,000 98,000 700.0%
19 Capital Equipment Fund Levy 134,500 312,500 178,000 132.3%
20
21 Total Capital Levies 148,500 424,500 276,000 185.9%
22
23 Total Debt Service & Capital Levies 676,997 958,319 281,322 41.6%
24
25 Total Levies 4,002,894 4,392,771 389,877 9.7%
6
City of Medina
2020 Proposed Property Tax Scenario
Residential Homesteads
SCENARIO - GENERAL FUND LEVY PLUS 3.3%
2019 2020 2019-2020
Budget Proposed Change
1 City Tax Rate:21.528%22.484%4.4%
2
3 General Fund Levy:$3,325,897 $3,434,452 $108,555
4
5 Debt Service & Capital Levies:$676,997 $958,319 $281,322
6
7 Total Levy:$4,002,894 $4,392,771 $389,877
8
9 Change in Total Levy:9.7%
10
11 2019 CITY PROPERTY TAXES
12
13 Homestead City Local City
14 Market Market Value Tax Tax Capacity Property
15 Value Exclusion Capacity Rate Taxes
16 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019
17
18 $100,000 ($28,200)$718 21.528%$155
19 $200,000 ($19,200)$1,808 21.528%$389
20 $300,000 ($10,200)$2,898 21.528%$624
21 $450,000 $0 $4,500 21.528%$969
22 $500,000 $0 $5,000 21.528%$1,076
23 $600,000 $0 $6,250 21.528%$1,345
24 $750,000 $0 $8,125 21.528%$1,749
25 $800,000 $0 $8,750 21.528%$1,884
26 $900,000 $0 $10,000 21.528%$2,153
27 $1,000,000 $0 $11,250 21.528%$2,422
28
29 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH NO MARKET VALUE CHANGE)
30
31 Market Homestead City Local City Property Percentage
32 Value Market Value Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
33 2020 Exclusion Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
34 NO CHANGE 2020 2020 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
35
36 $100,000 ($28,200)$718 22.484%$161 $7 4.4%
37 $200,000 ($19,200)$1,808 22.484%$407 $17 4.4%
38 $300,000 ($10,200)$2,898 22.484%$652 $28 4.4%
39 $450,000 $0 $4,500 22.484%$1,012 $43 4.4%
40 $500,000 $0 $5,000 22.484%$1,124 $48 4.4%
41 $600,000 $0 $6,250 22.484%$1,405 $60 4.4%
42 $750,000 $0 $8,125 22.484%$1,827 $78 4.4%
43 $800,000 $0 $8,750 22.484%$1,967 $84 4.4%
44 $900,000 $0 $10,000 22.484%$2,248 $96 4.4%
45 $1,000,000 $0 $11,250 22.484%$2,529 $108 4.4%
46
47 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH MARKET VALUE INCREASE)
48
49 Market
50 Value Homestead City Local City Property Percentage
51 2020 Market Value Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
52 INCREASE OF Exclusion Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
53 3.0%2020 2020 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
54
55 $103,000 ($28,000)$750 22.484%$169 $14 9.1%
56 $206,000 ($18,700)$1,873 22.484%$421 $32 8.2%
57 $309,000 ($9,400)$2,996 22.484%$674 $50 8.0%
58 $463,500 $0 $4,635 22.484%$1,042 $73 7.6%
59 $515,000 $0 $5,188 22.484%$1,166 $90 8.4%
60 $618,000 $0 $6,475 22.484%$1,456 $110 8.2%
61 $772,500 $0 $8,406 22.484%$1,890 $141 8.1%
62 $824,000 $0 $9,050 22.484%$2,035 $151 8.0%
63 $927,000 $0 $10,338 22.484%$2,324 $172 8.0%
64 $1,030,000 $0 $11,625 22.484%$2,614 $192 7.9%
65
66 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH MARKET VALUE INCREASE)
67
68 Market
69 Value Homestead City Local City Property Percentage
70 2020 Market Value Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
71 INCREASE OF Exclusion Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
72 4.8%2020 2020 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
73
74 $104,800 ($27,800)$770 22.484%$173 $19 12.0%
75 $209,600 ($18,400)$1,912 22.484%$430 $41 10.5%
76 $314,400 ($8,900)$3,055 22.484%$687 $63 10.1%
77 $471,600 $0 $4,716 22.484%$1,060 $92 9.5%
78 $524,000 $0 $5,300 22.484%$1,192 $115 10.7%
79 $628,800 $0 $6,610 22.484%$1,486 $141 10.5%
80 $786,000 $0 $8,575 22.484%$1,928 $179 10.2%
81 $838,400 $0 $9,230 22.484%$2,075 $192 10.2%
82 $943,200 $0 $10,540 22.484%$2,370 $217 10.1%
83 $1,048,000 $0 $11,850 22.484%$2,664 $243 10.0%
7
City of Medina
2020 Proposed Property Tax Scenario
Commercial/Industrial Properties
SCENARIO - GENERAL FUND LEVY PLUS 3.3%
2019 2020 2019-2020
Budget Budget Change
1 City Tax Rate:21.523%22.484%4.5%
2
3 General Fund Levy:$3,325,897 $3,434,452 $108,555
4
5 Debt Service & Capital Levies:$676,997 $958,319 $281,322
6
7 Total Levy:$4,002,894 $4,392,771 $389,877
8
9 Change in Total Levy:9.7%
10
11 2018 CITY PROPERTY TAXES
12
13 City Local City
14 Market Tax Tax Capacity Property
15 Value Capacity Rate Taxes
16 2019 2019 Pay 2019 2019
17
18 $1,000,000 $18,500 21.523%$3,982
19 $2,000,000 $38,500 21.523%$8,286
20 $3,000,000 $58,500 21.523%$12,591
21 $4,000,000 $78,500 21.523%$16,896
22 $5,000,000 $98,500 21.523%$21,200
23 $6,000,000 $118,500 21.523%$25,505
24 $7,000,000 $138,500 21.523%$29,809
25 $8,000,000 $158,500 21.523%$34,114
26 $9,000,000 $178,500 21.523%$38,419
27 $10,000,000 $198,500 21.523%$42,723
28
29 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH NO MARKET VALUE CHANGE)
30
31 Market City Local City Property Percentage
32 Value Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
33 2020 Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
34 NO CHANGE 2020 Pay 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
35
36 $1,000,000 $18,500 22.484%$4,160 $178 4.5%
37 $2,000,000 $38,500 22.484%$8,656 $370 4.5%
38 $3,000,000 $58,500 22.484%$13,153 $562 4.5%
39 $4,000,000 $78,500 22.484%$17,650 $755 4.5%
40 $5,000,000 $98,500 22.484%$22,147 $947 4.5%
41 $6,000,000 $118,500 22.484%$26,644 $1,139 4.5%
42 $7,000,000 $138,500 22.484%$31,141 $1,331 4.5%
43 $8,000,000 $158,500 22.484%$35,638 $1,524 4.5%
44 $9,000,000 $178,500 22.484%$40,134 $1,716 4.5%
45 $10,000,000 $198,500 22.484%$44,631 $1,908 4.5%
46
47 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH MARKET VALUE INCREASE)
48
49 Market
50 Value City Local City Property Percentage
51 2020 Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
52 INCREASE OF Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
53 3.0%2020 Pay 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
54
55 $1,030,000 $19,100 22.484%$4,294 $313 7.9%
56 $2,060,000 $39,700 22.484%$8,926 $640 7.7%
57 $3,090,000 $60,300 22.484%$13,558 $967 7.7%
58 $4,120,000 $80,900 22.484%$18,190 $1,294 7.7%
59 $5,150,000 $101,500 22.484%$22,822 $1,621 7.6%
60 $6,180,000 $122,100 22.484%$27,453 $1,949 7.6%
61 $7,210,000 $142,700 22.484%$32,085 $2,276 7.6%
62 $8,240,000 $163,300 22.484%$36,717 $2,603 7.6%
63 $9,270,000 $183,900 22.484%$41,349 $2,930 7.6%
64 $10,300,000 $204,500 22.484%$45,980 $3,257 7.6%
65
66 2020 CITY PROPERTY TAXES (WITH MARKET VALUE INCREASE)
67
68 Market
69 Value City Local City Property Percentage
70 2020 Tax Tax Capacity Property Taxes Tax
71 INCREASE OF Capacity Rate Taxes Increase Increase
72 4.8%2020 Pay 2020 2020 (Decrease)(Decrease)
73
74 $1,048,000 $19,460 22.484%$4,375 $394 9.9%
75 $2,096,000 $40,420 22.484%$9,088 $802 9.7%
76 $3,144,000 $61,380 22.484%$13,801 $1,210 9.6%
77 $4,192,000 $82,340 22.484%$18,514 $1,618 9.6%
78 $5,240,000 $103,300 22.484%$23,226 $2,026 9.6%
79 $6,288,000 $124,260 22.484%$27,939 $2,434 9.5%
80 $7,336,000 $145,220 22.484%$32,652 $2,842 9.5%
81 $8,384,000 $166,180 22.484%$37,364 $3,250 9.5%
82 $9,432,000 $187,140 22.484%$42,077 $3,658 9.5%
83 $10,480,000 $208,100 22.484%$46,790 $4,067 9.5%
8
CITY OF MEDINA
PROPERTY TAX SHARE BY TAXING AUTHORITY
PAY 2020
Share 2020
in Cents Proposed Tax Rate
County $0.43 41.016%
Schools $0.28 26.654% *
City $0.23 22.484%
Other $0.06 6.030% **
$1.00 96.184%
* School District #284 Wayzata
** Other includes various metro taxing districts, and other special taxing districts (excluding watershed)
County
$0.43 Schools
$0.28
City
$0.23
Other $0.06
9
CITY OF MEDINA
PROPERTY TAX SHARE BY TAXING AUTHORITY
PAY 2020
Share 2020
in Cents Proposed Tax Rate
County $0.39 41.016%
Schools $0.35 36.632% *
City $0.21 22.484%
Other $0.06 6.030% **
$1.00 106.162%
* School District #879 Delano
** Other includes various metro taxing districts, and other special taxing districts (excluding watershed)
County
$0.39 Schools
$0.35
City
$0.21
Other $0.06
10
CITY OF MEDINA
PROPERTY TAX SHARE BY TAXING AUTHORITY
PAY 2020
Share 2020
in Cents Proposed Tax Rate
County $0.44 41.016%
Schools $0.25 23.083% *
City $0.24 22.484%
Other $0.07 6.030% **
$1.00 92.613%
* School District #278 Orono
** Other includes various metro taxing districts, and other special taxing districts (excluding watershed)
County
$0.44 Schools
$0.25
City
$0.24
Other $0.07
11
CITY OF MEDINA
PROPERTY TAX SHARE BY TAXING AUTHORITY
PAY 2020
Share 2020
in Cents Proposed Tax Rate
County $0.38 41.016%
Schools $0.36 38.651% *
City $0.21 22.484%
Other $0.06 6.030% **
$1.00 108.181%
* School District #883 Rockford
** Other includes various metro taxing districts, and other special taxing districts (excluding watershed)
County
$0.38 Schools
$0.36
City
$0.21
Other $0.06
12
2020 CIP: DEPARTMENT
Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Potential Revenue Source
Roads
1
Tamarack North of Medina to Blackfoot
Overlay 54,000$ 43,200$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
2 Tamarack - Medina to 24 - Overlay 49,985$ 39,988$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
3 Tamarack City Limits to CSAH 24 Overlay 77,675$ 62,140$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
4 Tamarack Drive/Highway 55 Interesection 40,000$ 40,000$ 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$
Road Fund / Assessments /
Bonds / Developer
5 Clydesdale trail overlay 600/101 150,000$ 75,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
6 Oakview Road - Overlay 43,000$ 21,500$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
7 Deer Hill Road East - Overlay 27,000$ 23,500$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
8 Dusty Trail - Overlay 4,000$ 2,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
9 Tower Dr West Overlay/curb 42,000$ 21,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
10 Chestnut Road - Overlay 50,000$ 25,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
11 Town Line Rd South 100,000$ 100,000$ Assessment Escrow Fund
12 Foxberry Farms Overlay/10% curb 283,000$ 142,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
13 Hackamore Medina/ Portion 100,000$ 100,000$ 550,000$ 400,000$ 550,000$ 400,000$ Road Fund/Bonds/Developer
14 Willow Drive North to 24 - reclaim 370,000$ 300,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
15 Shire Dr Overlay 32,000$ 16,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
16 Iroquois Drive Overlay 30,000$ 15,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
17 Maplewood Drive Overlay 29,328$ 14,664$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
18 Bobolink Road Overlay 90,000$ 45,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
19 Morningside Road Overlay 110,000$ 55,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
20 Elsinore Circle N of Morningside Rd Overlay 20,000$ 10,000$ Road/Bonds/Assessments
21 Arrowhead & CR 118 Whistleless Crossing 450,000$ 60,000$ Reserves/State Bonding/Grant
22 Roads Sub-total 695,000$ 262,500$ 1,013,000$ 632,000$ 644,660$ 491,828$ 770,000$ 510,000$ 4,129,328$ 4,114,664$
23
24 Public Works
25 Tandem 230,000$ 230,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
26 Water Truck / Tanker Replacement 20,000$ 20,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
27 Air Compressor 25,000$ 25,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
28 Ditch Mower Replacement/Loretto 130,000$ 130,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
29 Backhoe Replacement 130,000$ 130,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
30 Skid Steer Upgrade w/ Bucket/Harly Rake 4,000$ 4,000$ 12,000$ 12,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
31 Single Axle Truck 220,000$ 220,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
32 Public Works Sub-total 289,000$ 289,000$ 12,000$ 12,000$ 244,000$ 244,000$ 234,000$ 234,000$ -$ -$
33
34 Police
35 PD Squad Cars 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ 126,000$ 126,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
36 Traffic Squad 35,000$ 35,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
37 PD Squad Camera / Body Cams 100,000$ 100,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
38 Portable Radios 6,000$ 6,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ DWI Forfeiture Fund/Cap Equip
39 Squad Radios 40,000$ 40,000$ DWI Forfeiture Fund/Cap Equip
40 Records Management 70,000$ 70,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
41 Miscellaneous 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ DWI Forfeiture Fund/Cap Equip
42 Police Sub-total 129,000$ 129,000$ 179,000$ 179,000$ 192,000$ 192,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ 134,000$ 134,000$
43
44 Fire
45 HAMEL
46 Ongoing PPE Replacement 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 12,000$ 12,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
47 Command Vehicle Replacement 4,320$ 4,320$ 4,320$ 4,320$ 4,320$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
48 Engine 11 Refurbishment 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
49 Pumper/Tanker 38,917$ 38,917$ 38,917$ 38,917$ 38,917$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
50 Annual Contract 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 77,000$ 77,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
51 Hamel Fire Sub-total 73,237$ 75,000$ 73,237$ 75,000$ 73,237$ 75,000$ 75,237$ 77,000$ 75,237$ 77,000$
52
53 Loretto & Long Lake
54 Fire (Loretto)28,290$ 28,290$ 28,290$ 28,290$ 28,290$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
55 Fire (Long Lake)6,000$ 6,000$ 6,000$ 6,000$ 6,000$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
56 Fire Sub-total -$ 34,290$ -$ 34,290$ -$ 34,290$ -$ 34,290$ -$ 34,290$
57
58 Emergency Management
59 Siren Maintenance 5,000$ 5,000$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
60 Civil Defense Sirens 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Revolving Cap. Impr. Fund
61 Civil Defense Sub-total 35,000$ 35,000$ 37,500$ 37,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$ 7,500$
62
63
64 Administration/Data Processing
65 Vehicle Equipment Bonds/Cap Equip Fund
66 Administration Sub-total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
67
68 City Buildings
69 City Hall Repairs/Renovation 15,000$ 15,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ Revolving Cap. Impr. Fund
70 Community Building Repairs 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ Revolving Cap. Impr. Fund
71 PW/Police Repairs/Renovations 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ Revolving Cap. Impr. Fund
72 City Buildings - Parking Lot 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ Revolving Cap. Impr. Fund
73 City Building Sub-total 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$
74
75
76
77 Water (high growth expectation)
78 Water Treatment Plant Expansion 1,400,000$ 1,400,000$ Future - Water Capital
79
Chippewa Watermain Extension - Arrowhead
to Mohawk 400,000$ 400,000$ Water Capital Improvement
80 Chippewa West of Mohawk 435,000$ 435,000$ Water Capital Improvement
81 Water Tower (and land acquisition)2,600,000$ 2,600,000$ Future Water Cap (2020-2023)
82 Water Sub-total -$ -$ 835,000$ 835,000$ 1,400,000$ 1,400,000$ 2,600,000$ 2,600,000$ -$ -$
2020
2020 - 2024 Capital Improvement Plan
2021 2022 2023 2024
1
2020 CIP: DEPARTMENT
Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Project Cost
City Proposed
Portion Potential Revenue Source
2020
2020 - 2024 Capital Improvement Plan
2021 2022 2023 2024
83
84 Sewer
85 Willow Dr Lift Station 700,000$ 700,000$ Sewer Capital Fund
86 I / I Maintenance 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Sewer Capital Fund
87 Hunter/Hamel Rd Upsize 750,000$ 750,000$ Sewer Capital Fund
88 Sewer Sub-total -$ -$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ 750,000$ 750,000$
89
90 Storm Water
91 Long Lake Creek Sub Watershed 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ Storm Water Fund/Grants
92 Storm Water Sub-total -$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$
93
94 Municipal Park Replacements
95 Trails
96 Annual Trail Replacement 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Municipal Park Fund
97 Hamel Legion Park
98 Holy Name Park
99 Hunter Lions Park
100 Full Park Reconstruction/Tennis Court 20,000$ 20,000$ 500,000$ 450,000$ Municipal Park Fund/Grants
101 Lakeshore Park
102 Redesign/Large Playground Equipment 20,000$ 20,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ Municipal Park Fund
103 Rainwater Nature Area
104 Maple Park
105 Walnut Park
106 Basketball Hoop/Striping 5,000$ 5,000$ Municipal Park Fund
107 Medina Morningside Park
108 Playground curb/rubber under swings 50,000$ 50,000$ Municipal Park Fund
109 Replace baseball backstop 5,000$ 5,000$ Municipal Park Fund
110 Parking Area 10,000$ 10,000$ Municipal Park Fund
111 Medina Lake Preserve
112 Park Clean-up 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ Municipal Park Fund
113 Tomann Preserve - Park Development
114 The Park at Fields of Medina
115 135,000$ 135,000$ 175,000$ 175,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 555,000$ 505,000$ 55,000$ 55,000$
116
117 New Park Development
118 Trails
119 Arrowhead Dr RR Crossing 130,000$ 130,000$ Park Dedication Fund
120 Arrowhead Trail Connection RR-Loram 75,000$ 75,000$ Park Dedication Fund
121 Hackamore Trail 174,000$ 87,000$ 174,000$ 87,000$ Park Ded/Cost Share w/ Corcoran
122 Medina Road Trail 200,000$ 200,000$ Park Dedication Fund
123 Medina Lake Preserve
124 Trail Head 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ Park Dedication Fund
125 Park Land by Medina Golf & CC 500,000$ 500,000$ Park Dedication Fund
126 Sioux Dr./HWY 55 Ped Crossing Future Study
127
Land Acquisitions / New Trails (rolling-used
as development occurs)250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ Park Dedication Fund
128 Parks Sub-total 455,000$ 455,000$ 624,000$ 537,000$ 750,000$ 750,000$ 449,000$ 362,000$ 275,000$ 275,000$
129
130 TOTAL:1,866,237$ 1,479,790$ 3,803,737$ 3,381,790$ 3,491,397$ 3,384,618$ 4,825,737$ 4,474,790$ 5,481,065$ 5,512,454$
2
2020 COMPREHENSIVE
ANNUAL BUDGET
DECEMBER 3, 2020
KATHLEEN MARTIN
MAYOR
JOHN ANDERSON
COUNCIL MEMBER
JEFF PEDERSON
COUNCIL MEMBER
TODD ALBERS
COUNCIL MEMBER
DINO DESLAURIERS
COUNCIL MEMBER
SCOTT JOHNSON
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
ED BELLAND
PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR
ERIN BARNHART
FINANCE DIRECTOR
DUSTY FINKE
PLANNING DIRECTOR
STEVE SCHERER
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
CITY OF MEDINA
2020 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL BUDGET
Table of Contents
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S BUDGET SUMMARY Page
Transmittal Letter .............................................................................................................1
GENERAL FUND BUDGET SUMMARY ................................................................ 5
Revenue Summary/Graph ................................................................................................6
Expenditure Summary .....................................................................................................7
Expenditure Summary by Department/Graph .................................................................8
Expenditure by Type/Graph .............................................................................................9
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Revenue Detail ...............................................................................................................10
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
General Government
Overview ............................................................................................................11
Mayor and Council ............................................................................................12
Administration ...................................................................................................13
Elections .............................................................................................................15
Assessing............................................................................................................17
Planning and Zoning ..........................................................................................18
Comprehensive Plan ..........................................................................................20
Data Processing ..................................................................................................21
Police/Public Works Facility .............................................................................22
Municipal Building ............................................................................................23
Unallocated Insurance ........................................................................................24
Public Safety
Overview ............................................................................................................25
Police..................................................................................................................26
Police Records Management..............................................................................28
Fire .....................................................................................................................29
Building Inspections ..........................................................................................30
Emergency Management ...................................................................................32
Public Works ..................................................................................................................33
Sanitation and Recycling ...............................................................................................35
Parks and Recreation
Community Building .........................................................................................36
Parks ...................................................................................................................37
Economic Development Housing ..................................................................................39
CITY OF MEDINA
2020 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL BUDGET
Table of Contents Continued
General Fund Budget .................................................................................................... 40
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS BUDGETS .............................................................. 41
Environmental Fund.......................................................................................................42
Municipal Park Fund......................................................................................................43
Field House Operations Fund ........................................................................................44
Police Forfeiture Fund ...................................................................................................45
Police Reserve Equipment Fund ....................................................................................46
German Liberal Cemetery Fund ....................................................................................47
Community Event Fund .................................................................................................48
Cable Franchise Fund ....................................................................................................49
Combined Special Revenue Funds Budgets ..................................................................50
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS BUDGETS .............................................................. 53
Park Dedication Fund ....................................................................................................54
General Capital Improvement Fund ...............................................................................55
Water Capital Improvement Fund .................................................................................56
Sewer Capital Improvement Fund .................................................................................57
Tax Increment 1-9 Fund .................................................................................................58
Equipment Replacement Fund .......................................................................................59
Road Improvement Fund ...............................................................................................60
Combined Capital Project Funds Budgets .....................................................................62
CITY OF MEDINA
2020 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL BUDGET
Table of Contents Continued
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS BUDGETS ...................................................................... 65
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2010A Fund .........................................................................66
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2011A Fund .........................................................................67
G.O. Taxable Improvement Bonds 2011B Fund ...........................................................68
G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds 2012A Fund (PW/PD Facility) .......................69
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2012B (TIF) .............................................................................70
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2013A (PW/PD Facility) ..........................................................71
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2015A (Tower Drive) ..........................................................72
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2016A (TIF) .............................................................................73
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2017A (Deer Hill) ...............................................................74
Combined Debt Service Funds Budgets ........................................................................76
PUBLIC UTILITY FUNDS BUDGETS ................................................................... 79
Water Utility Fund .........................................................................................................80
Sewer Utility Fund .........................................................................................................82
Storm Water Utility Fund ..............................................................................................84
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ...............................................................87
FEE SCHEDULE .........................................................................................................89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 1 of 89
Mayor and City Council Members December 3, 2019
The City of Medina Staff is pleased to submit the 2020 proposed Comprehensive Annual Budget
and property tax levy for your consideration of final approval on December 3, 2019. This 2020
budget reflects the Council’s property tax levy and budget discussions throughout 2019. When
approved, this budget will be the basis for the final 2020 property tax levy to be certified to Hennepin
County in December 2019. The County will then use the certified property tax levy for final 2020
property tax calculations.
Medina’s population as of the 2010 census was 4,892 residents living in a total of 1,702 housing
units. 2020 population is estimated to be 6,873, based on mathematical estimations of Medina’s fire
districts. Total taxable market value increased 4.8% from $1.717 billion in 2019 to $1.778 billion
in 2020. Adjusted net tax capacity increased 5.2% from $18.6 million in 2019 to $19.5 million
in 2020.
The budget proposes a General Fund property tax levy increase of $108,555 for 2020, which is an
increase of 3.3%. The increase is partially due to decreasing revenue sources. Pre-existing debt
service levies have increased by $5,322. Capital levies for the Municipal Park Fund and Equipment
Fund have a total increase of $276,000. The overall total levy increase for 2020 amounts to
$389,877.
Property Tax Levy: 2019 2020 Change
General Fund $3,325,897 $3,434,452 $108,555
Capital Equipment 134,500 312,500 178,000
Municipal Park Fund 14,000 112,000 98,000
Road Improvement Debt Service 151,106 152,753 1,647
Building Debt Service 377,391 381,066 3,675
Total Levy $4,002,894 $4,392,771 $389,877
The General Fund Budget reflects the revenues and expenditures developed from the City’s service
needs, trend analysis, the annual goal setting session, joint work sessions with the City Council and
Staff, and City Council discussions. The expenditure levels are focused on maintaining the City’s
current level of services and to address capital, maintenance, or special project needs.
Page 2 of 89
GENERAL FUND REVENUES:
The total budgeted revenue for 2020 is $4,807,123 compared to the 2019 budget of $4,572,338. As
has been true in the past, these revenue estimates are based on conservative assumptions.
With the proposed general operating levy increase of 3.3%, property tax collections in the General
Fund are projected to increase from $3,325,897 in 2019 to $3,434,452 in 2020. As in prior years,
the City continues to receive the largest portion of the General Fund revenue from the property tax.
In 2020, the tax levy will provide approximately 71.0% of the City’s total General Fund revenues.
Licenses and Permits are estimated to remain steady. The budget is conservative regarding building
permit activity to account for slowing growth in the future. A large portion of building permit
surplus can be offset by building inspection liability that isn’t booked until year-end.
The Intergovernmental revenue budget is projected to increase to $288,773 in 2020, due to increase
in fire state aid. There are no scheduled increases related to the Safe and Sober program.
Budgeted transfers to the General Fund from the Water, Sewer, and Storm Water funds have
increased from $213,573 in 2019 to $220,783 based on a 1.5% water increase, 2% sewer increase
and a 3% storm water increase.
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES:
General Fund expenditures are budgeted to increase from $4,572,338 in 2019 to $4,807,123 in 2020.
General government expenditures are budgeted to increase $47,195 or 4.0%, largely due to staff
wages and building contracts services (utilities and maintenance). Public safety expenditures are
budgeted to increase $75,675 or 3.1%, due to fire services, staff wages and building inspections.
Parks and recreation expenditures are budgeted to increase $24,590 or 11.7%, the increase is due to
expanding contractual services (mowing and chem lawn). Public works expenditures are budgeted
to increase by $30,444 or 4.1%. Capital replacement acquisitions will continue to be transacted
through other funding sources or reserves on an as needed or emergency basis only.
Personnel costs represent 58% of the General Fund Budget. A 2.5% cost of living adjustment
(COLA) and defined pay grade step (step) increases are included in the 2020 budget for qualifying
employees.
OTHER FUND BUDGETS
In addition to the City’s General Fund Budget and proposed property tax levy, the City also has
several other Special Revenue, Capital Projects, Debt Service, and Enterprise fund budgets. While
a profile and proposed budget of each fund is included in this budget document, a brief summary of
each fund’s key changes should be noted to understand the impact on meeting future City service
needs.
Community Event Fund: The City has depended on donations to fund the fireworks display at the
annual Medina Celebration Day event. Conduit bond revenue in the amount of $15,500 was received
in 2019 to be spread over five years. Additional donations will again be needed in 2020 to fund a
Page 3 of 89
fireworks contract for the event. To assist in the event funding, a $4,000 transfer in from the General
Fund is budgeted for 2020.
Municipal Park Fund: Park equipment has an asset/depreciation life between 10 and 40 years.
Past practice for park equipment replacement needs have been funded from the General Fund or
Park Dedication Fund if classified as a capital improvement. The past need for park replacement
has not been great because the parks were new or newer. As the parks and park equipment
within the City of Medina approach asset life, there will be an increased need for replacement.
The funds within the Park Dedication Fund will not be enough to maintain a practice of funding
replacements or improvements. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows between $13.8 and $27.4
million in new parks and trails development over the next 20 years. The Park Dedication Fund’s
revenue source is 100% dependent on development and developers and needs to set aside for
future use. There have been past years and will be again when no revenue comes in for Park
Dedication. Thus, the reason there is importance in establishing a constant revenue source for
the Municipal Park Fund to handle replacements, which will be ongoing while there are parks in
use. The Municipal Park levy is budgeted to increase $98,000 beginning in 2020.
Water Utility: The City’s 2018 Water Rate Analysis demonstrated the need for a 1.5% rate increase
in user rates and no current increase in the trunk connection fees.
Sewer Utility: The City’s 2018 Sewer Rate Analysis includes a 2% rate increase in user rates and a
decrease in trunk connection fees because of the addition of an area charge for the Willow TH 55
lift station .
Storm Water Utility: A 3% increase in the Storm Water Utility rate has been included in the 2020
budget. The storm water utility revenue supports administrative costs for annual reporting, pond
maintenance, etc. and will be used as matching funds for capital project completion. The CIP for
storm water projects is large and completion of the projects is highly contingent on receiving grant
or cooperative funding from other agencies and partners.
The remaining portions of this document provide greater detail on individual fund sources and uses
budgets. Supplemental information can be obtained from the Finance Department.
FINAL COMMENTS
I herewith submit the Preliminary 2020 Comprehensive Annual Budget to the City Council. It has
been a pleasure to work with the City Council and staff to prepare this document. This budget has
been prepared based on the direction given by the City Council to date and the best estimates of staff
of the available revenues and the expenditures required to reasonably maintain core levels of services
without significantly compromising quality of life for Medina taxpayers.
Respectfully Submitted,
Erin Barnhart
Finance Director
Page 4 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 5 of 89
General Fund
The General Fund is the primary operating fund for the governmental operations of the City.
Activities enabled by General Fund planning include police protection and community support, fire
prevention and suppression, planning and zoning, street maintenance and repair, parks and
recreation, sanitation and waste removal, as well as engineering, legal and general administrative
functions.
Page 6 of 89
General Fund Revenues and Other Financing Sources
By Type 2020
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Prelim Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 3,229,026 3,325,897 3,434,452 108,555 3.3%
Other Taxes 30,000 33,000 75,000 42,000 127.3%
Licenses and Permits 374,300 377,400 390,669 13,269 3.5%
Intergovernmental 232,118 263,910 288,773 24,863 9.4%
Charges for Services 124,564 123,146 138,087 14,941 12.1%
Fines and Forfeitures 105,000 110,000 95,000 (15,000) -13.6%
Special Assessments 0 1,715 0 (1,715) -100.0%
Miscellaneous 108,225 123,698 164,359 40,661 32.9%
Sale of Assets 300 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 223,110 213,572 220,783 7,211 3.4%
Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 4,426,643 4,572,338 4,807,123 234,785 5.1%
Property Tax Levy
$3,434,452 71%
Other Taxes
$75,000
2%
Licenses and
Permits,
$390,669
8%
Intergovernmental
$288,773 6%
Charges for Services
$138,087 3%
Fines and Forfeitures
$95,000 2%
Special Assessments
$0 0%
Miscellaneous $164,359
3%
Sale of Assets $300
0%
Transfers In $220,783
5%
Total $4,807,123
Page 7 of 89
General Fund Expenditures and Other Financing Uses
By Department 2020
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
General Government:
Mayor & Council 25,144 25,644 25,543 (101) -0.4%
Administration 602,321 630,578 662,230 31,652 5.0%
Elections 10,900 11,400 15,400 4,000 35.1%
Assessing 90,493 93,840 98,066 4,226 4.5%
Planning & Zoning 193,840 189,411 191,032 1,621 0.9%
Comprehensive Plan 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0%
Data Processing 82,083 82,083 88,704 6,621 8.1%
Police/Public Works Facility 69,415 76,415 77,500 1,085 1.4%
Municipal Building 39,100 60,810 61,000 190 0.3%
Unallocated 2,100 2,100 0 (2,100) -100.0%
Total General Government 1,123,396 1,180,281 1,227,476 47,195 4.0%
Public Safety:
Police 1,617,770 1,649,375 1,737,111 86,138 5.2%
Police Records Management 8,850 8,850 13,500 4,650 52.5%
Fire 424,716 446,242 419,111 (27,131) -6.1%
Building Inspections 312,012 318,343 330,664 12,321 3.9%
Emergency Management 5,200 5,200 5,800 600 11.5%
Total Public Safety 2,368,548 2,428,010 2,506,185 76,577 3.2%
Public Works:
Public Works 705,455 726,877 751,401 24,524 3.4%
Sanitation & Recycling & Organics 18,146 20,080 26,000 5,920 29.5%
Total Public Works 723,601 746,957 777,401 30,444 4.1%
Parks & Recreation:
Community Building 37,127 41,146 41,808 662 1.6%
Parks 169,470 169,444 193,372 23,928 14.1%
Total Parks & Recreation 206,597 210,590 235,180 24,590 11.7%
Economic Development Housing
Housing 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
Total Economic Development Housing 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
Transfers Out 2,000 4,000 4,000 0 0.0%
Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 4,424,142 4,569,838 4,807,123 235,686 5.2%
Page 8 of 89
General Fund Expenditures and Other Financing Uses
By Department 2020
General
Government,
$1,227,476 , 26%
Public Safety, $2,506,185 ,
52%
Public Works,
$777,401 , 16%
Parks and
Recreation, $235,180 ,
5%
Economic Development Housing,
$56,880 , 1%
Transfers Out,
$4,000 , 0%
Total $4,807,123
Page 9 of 89
General Fund Expenditures and Other Financing Use
By Type 2020
Personnel Services,
$2,787,098, 58%
Supplies, $427,917, 9%
Other Services and
Charges, $1,588,107 ,
33%
Capital Outlay, $0 , 0%Transfers Out, $4,000 ,
0%
Total $4,807,123
Page 10 of 89
General Fund Revenues
PROFILE
Revenues for all General Fund operations, regardless of the department responsible for charging and
collecting them, are all listed jointly in the revenues section of the budget document. This includes
all revenues from property taxes to recreation charges for activities. The primary breakdowns for
revenues in the General Fund are:
Taxes
Special Assessments
Licenses and Permits
Intergovernmental Revenues
Charges for Services
Fines and Forfeitures
Miscellaneous Revenues
REVENUE DETAILS
Property Taxes
$ 3,434,452
These are the General Fund property taxes charged to all taxable properties in the City of Medina
based on the tax capacity of each property. The 2020 budget is 5.1% greater than the 2019 budget.
Property Taxes make up about 71% of the total revenues and other sources collected to provide
General Fund services.
Licenses and Permits
$ 390,669
These are charges for items that state statutes have granted authority to issue and the fee amounts
are generally authorized on an annual basis within the City’s fee schedule. The City estimates these
amounts conservatively as these amounts can vary considerably from year to year. Types of fees
included are liquor and cigarette licenses, and building, plumbing, and hunting permits.
Charges for Services
$ 138,087
Cities may receive revenues for services provided. The main sources of revenue are from public
safety services and community room rentals. Other charges include election filing fees, sales of
maps and copies, and assessment searches.
These three revenue sources, property taxes, licenses and permits, and charges for services, together
make up approximately 82% of the City’s general operating revenues and other sources. The balance
comes from fines and forfeitures, intergovernmental activity, antenna rent, and operating transfers.
Page 11 of 89
General Fund Expenditures
GENERAL GOVERNMENT OVERVIEW
PROFILE
The General Fund General Government consists of City Council, Administration, Elections,
Assessing, Planning & Zoning, Comprehensive Plan, Data Processing, and Municipal Buildings.
2020 General Government Expenditures
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
General Government:
Mayor & Council 25,144 25,644 25,543 (101) -0.4%
Administration 602,321 630,578 662,230 31,652 5.0%
Elections 10,900 11,400 15,400 4,000 35.1%
Assessing 90,493 93,840 98,066 4,226 4.5%
Planning & Zoning 193,840 189,411 191,032 1,621 0.9%
Comprehensive Plan 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0%
Data Processing 82,083 82,083 88,704 6,621 8.1%
Police/Public Works Facility 69,415 76,415 77,500 1,085 1.4%
Municipal Building 39,100 60,810 61,000 190 0.3%
Unallocated 2,100 2,100 0 (2,100) -100.0%
Total General Government 1,123,396 1,180,281 1,227,476 47,195 4.0%
Page 12 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – MAYOR AND COUNCIL
PROFILE
The City Council is comprised of the Mayor and four Council Members. All are elected at large.
Under the City’s Council-Administrator form of government, the City Council exercises the
legislative authority of the City. The City Council is responsible for formulating City policy,
enacting legislation, adopting the annual budget, levying local property taxes, and appointing
members to advisory boards and commissions. Members of the City Council also constitute the
Board of Appeal and Equalization, and the Canvassing Board for municipal elections.
The City Council budget includes expenditures related to compensation, memberships, subscriptions
and training of its members. Printing expenditures are also included for the flier Council has chosen
to insert with the County’s proposed tax statements over the past few years.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVELS
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
Mayor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Council Members 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
Medina is a Statutory A form of government.
All Council members are at large.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Mayor and Council
Total Personnel Services 17,594 17,594 17,493 (101) -0.6%
Total Other Services and Charges 7,550 8,050 8,050 0 0.0%
Total Mayor and Council 25,144 25,644 25,543 (101) -0.4%
Page 13 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – ADMINISTRATION
PROFILE
The City Administrator is the Chief Administrative Officer of the City. It is the Administrator’s duty to
properly administer all affairs relating to the City. The Administrator provides management of the City to
ensure that all City Council policies and directives are carried out. Activities include coordinating
recommendations to the City Council on financial, legislative, and management issues and to serve as a
liaison between the Council, advisory boards and commissions, consultants, other levels of government, the
media, and the public.
The Administration budget includes expenditures related to general administration, human resources
management, information technology, legal, contract management, statutorily required clerk services and
financial management including: budgeting, debt management, investments, vendor check processing,
special assessments, public improvement financing, and risk management.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
City Administrator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Assistant City
Administrator/City Clerk 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Assistant to City
Administrator/Deputy
Clerk 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Administrative Assistant 0.50 0.50
Administration Intern 0.42 0.38
Finance Director 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Asst. Finance Director 1.00 1.00
Accountant II 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Accounting Technician 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Accounting Part-Time 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Total FTE's 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.80 4.80 5.22 5.18 5.13
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
In 2006, a Finance Director position was added to bring financial functions in house from the consultants
and previously assigned to the City Administrator. The position created investment strategies to provide
cash flow and conserving capital, while maximizing investment income revenue.
In 2007, an Accountant was added to handle utility billing and the processing of development
reimbursable items, as well as to improve segregation of accounting and finance duties, assist in
enhancing the accuracy of financial reporting, and to meet the demands of City growth. This position
also provided support for the additional 250 utility accounts added through new development.
Page 14 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – ADMINISTRATION (continued)
In 2008, the position of Assistant to the City Administrator was reassigned from an Administrative
Assistant position to assume all statutory clerk functions (as Deputy Clerk), duties in human resource
management, elections, public relations, information technology, contract management and liaison to
parks and the community building previously held by the City Administrator.
In 2008, an Accounting Technician position was created to replace the retiring Deputy Clerk. The
position also provided resources for the newly created Storm Water Utility which added an additional
2,500 accounts, as well as monthly utility billing in 2009.
In 2012, an Assistant Finance Director position was created to replace the Accountant position as well as
to cover added responsibilities acquired due to a vacant Finance Director position in interim status with
a contracted consultant.
In 2015, the Finance Director position was filled eliminating the Assistant Finance Director position and
reducing consultant hours. Additionally, a half-time Accountant position was filled.
In 2016, the budget includes the reassignment of the position Assistant to the Administrator to Assistant
Administrator/City Clerk.
In 2018, the budget includes the reassignment of the Accounting Technician position to Accountant II.
In 2019, a part-time administrative assistant position was created to be shared between admin and finance;
replacing the vacant PT Finance Clerk position. Assistant City Administrator position was approved pay
grade increase from 5-6 to 7-8.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Administration
Total Personnel Services 493,765 522,623 547,890 25,267 4.8%
Total Supplies 4,100 5,100 5,100 0 0.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 104,456 102,855 109,240 6,385 6.2%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Administration 602,321 630,578 662,230 31,652 5.0%
Page 15 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT - ELECTIONS
PROFILE
The City Clerk’s Office is responsible for administration of elections, including supervision of
elections and voter registration. The Clerk’s Office ensures elections are handled in accordance with
State, Federal, and County regulations. The Clerk’s Office oversees all activities related to City
elections including notices, materials, and certification of process. Additionally, the Clerk’s Office
arranges polling places and sets up voting equipment. The Clerk’s Office also supervises the
recruiting and training of election coordinators and judges and oversees the maintenance of voter
registration files.
Section 200 of the Medina City Code provides for regular municipal elections to be held in even-
numbered years only.
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
Although internal staff provides a service to this department every year and significantly during
an election year, no time is allocated due to the fluctuation in activity during off election years.
The General Administration budget contains the staffing resources to conduct the City’s
elections.
In 2006, City Staff restructured the flow of the election coordination by increasing internal staff
administration and decreasing part-time hiring by 30%.
In 2008, the City established a second precinct, which led to additional hiring of part-time
election staffing.
In 2010, City Staff enacted additional efficiencies in election coordination and shifts to reduce
part-time hiring.
In 2012 additional shift hours were added for an additional absentee precinct at the primary and
general election. This was also a presidential election and required more staffing.
In 2014 two part-time election judges were hired to administer absentee voting.
2015 was a non-election year. Shift staffing was not necessary.
2016 one full-time election judge was hired to administer absentee voting along with staff.
Presidential election and no excuse absentee voting implemented. Additional election judges
for office help will be needed for future presidential elections.
2017 was a non-election year.
In 2018, two full-time election judges were hired to assist in absentee voting.
In 2020, two primary elections and one general election will be held. All elections will have
absentee voting and require election judges at City Hall.
Page 16 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – ELECTIONS (continued)
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Elections
Total Personnel Services 6,000 6,000 8,550 2,550 42.5%
Total Supplies 800 800 1,000 200 25.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 4,100 4,600 5,850 1,250 27.2%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Elections 10,900 11,400 15,400 4,000 35.1%
Page 17 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT - ASSESSING
PROFILE
The primary function of the City’s Assessing services is to provide the accurate classification and
valuation of all real, personal and exempt property, including the value of all improvements and
structures thereon, located within Medina at maximum intervals of five years. In addition, the
Assessor maintains a data base and affiliated files, including property characteristics and
photographs on all parcels, provides computerized reports and responds to requests of the Minnesota
Department of Revenue, Hennepin County, City departments and members of the general public.
The City Assessor also attends and coordinates the City’s Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
hearing, commonly held in April each year and provides valuation information to the City to
determine park dedication fees when properties subdivide.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL AND STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
The City continues to utilize contracted assessing services. On a regular basis, the City receives
competitive quotes for this service. The contract services the City engages in are more economically
feasible than hiring full-time staff. The City currently contracts with Rolf Erickson Enterprises Inc.
South West Assessing for assessing services. No staffing is allocated to this department.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Assessing
Total Supplies 250 250 0 (250) -100.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 90,243 93,590 98,066 4,476 4.8%
Total Assessing 90,493 93,840 98,066 4,226 4.5%
Page 18 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – PLANNING AND ZONING
PROFILE
The Planning and Zoning department is primarily responsible for the drafting and enforcement of the City’s
zoning and subdivision ordinances (Chapter 8) and for coordinating the Comprehensive Plan. The department
has considerable contact with various members of the public on matters related to property in the City including
residents, business owners, contractors and builders, potential buyers, developers, realtors, appraisers, flood
insurance agents, and other similar persons.
The department manages the review process of all land use and development applications including:
subdivisions, site plan reviews, planned unit developments, conditional use permits, rezoning, variances, and
other appeals. This process includes meeting with potential applicants prior to an application, reviewing requests
for consistency with City regulations, preparing memoranda to assist the City officials, and drafting resolutions
and ordinances. The department also coordinates the development process after a project is approved, which
entails drafting documents such as easements and development agreements and verifying that all terms and
conditions applied to a project are followed.
Assistance is provided to the Planning Commission, including supplying monthly information packets,
maintenance of Commission meeting agendas and minutes, and distribution of public hearing notices.
Geographical Information System (GIS) and mapping services for all City departments are provided by this
department. This includes obtaining and maintaining relevant data and creating maps and providing spatial
analysis when requested.
The department inspects for compliance with zoning and nuisance regulations and carries through with
enforcement activities when necessary. This includes unlicensed/inoperable vehicles and property maintenance,
and property manure management practices.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
Planning Director 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
City Planner 0.70 0.75 0.75 0.80 0.80
Associate Planner 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.38 0.40
Planning Assistant 0.30 0.35 0.35 0.45 0.45
Administrative Assistant 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
Part Time Help
Total FTE's 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.22 1.22 1.75 1.77
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
In 2004, the City created the position of full-time City Planner, as opposed to utilizing only outside
consultants to meet the demands of the City’s growth and land use applications.
In 2008, the department was restructured to provide or enhance professional planning and zoning services
in the areas of land-use review, building permit review, ordinance revisions, use of GIS, as well as code
and septic enforcement.
In 2016, the City Planner was reassigned as Planning Director and the Planning Assistant was budgeted
and reassigned at Associate Planner.
Page 19 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – PLANNING AND ZONING (continued)
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Planning and Zoning
Total Personnel Services 138,099 137,111 140,682 3,571 2.6%
Total Supplies 300 800 750 (50) -6.3%
Total Other Services and Charges 55,441 51,500 49,600 (1,900) -3.7%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Planning and Zoning 193,840 189,411 191,032 1,621 0.9%
Page 20 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
PROFILE
The City’s Comprehensive Plan is updated every ten years and establishes the vision and sets the
course for the City looking out two decades to guide future residential growth, economic
development, and investments in City services such as natural resources, parks, recreation,
transportation, and water resources. The 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan was completed in
September 2018. $8,000 is assigned each year within General Fund reserves to account for total
project cost every ten years.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
N/A
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Comprehensive Plan
Total Other Services and Charges 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0%
Total Comprehensive Plan 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0%
Page 21 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – DATA PROCESSING
PROFILE
The main function for Data Processing is information technology (IT). This covers annual licensing
fees and web-based programs, as well as copier/printer leases. Also included are maintenance costs
for workstations and servers necessary to maintain the City’s electronic records and management.
In 2014 video recording and editing of City Council meetings was implemented. In 2017 transition
to the cloud was implemented reducing the need for servers.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL AND STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
This service is provided on a contractual basis. No staffing is allocated directly to this department
and staff coordination is budgeted from the General Administration budget.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Data Processing
Total Supplies 59,000 59,000 68,954 9,954 16.9%
Total Other Services and Charges 23,083 23,083 19,750 (3,333) -14.4%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Data Processing 82,083 82,083 88,704 6,621 8.1%
Page 22 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – POLICE/PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY
PROFILE
The former Clam Corp building at 600 Clydesdale Trail was obtained in 2012 and improved in 2013
for use as the Medina police/public works facility. The Police/Public Works Facility department
provides for the ongoing cleaning, maintenance and repair of the building. Public Works and Police
departments contract or perform all maintenance on building and/or equipment.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
The personnel from the Public Works and Police departments provide these services within the scope
of their existing duties.
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
The Public Works and Police departments are responsible for these activities.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the General Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Police/Public Works Facility
Total Supplies 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Other Services and Charges 69,415 76,415 77,500 1,085 1.4%
Total Police/Public Works Facility 69,415 76,415 77,500 1,085 1.4%
Page 23 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – MUNICIPAL BUILDING
PROFILE
The Municipal Building function provides for the ongoing cleaning, maintenance and repair of
government buildings including City Hall. Other facilities, such as Hamel Community Building,
Field House, and Hamel Water Treatment Plant have expenditures charged directly to their
respective departments. Public Works contracts or performs all maintenance on building and/or
equipment, as well as mowing, work on garden beds, heating/cooling, plumbing, painting, parking
lot, electrical, and water softener upkeep.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
The personnel from the Public Works department provide these services within the scope of their
existing duties.
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
The Public Works Department is responsible for these activities with minor contracting and
maintenance contracts used for specific items. The Administration Department provides contract
management for the various service contracts to these areas.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the General Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Municipal Building
Total Supplies 4,500 4,800 2,800 (2,000) -41.7%
Total Other Services and Charges 34,600 56,010 58,200 2,190 3.9%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Municipal Building 39,100 60,810 61,000 190 0.3%
Page 24 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT – UNALLOCATED INSURANCE
PROFILE
Insurance coverage costs include insurance policy premiums, agent services and provisions for
deductible amounts. Under Minnesota Statutes, the City is obligated to contract with an insurance
agent to procure any policies deemed appropriate. It is anticipated that the agent selected will
provide advice and recommendations regarding exposures, policies and options for the City. The
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) has added a risk management component to
its operations that provides a review of identified exposures and advice as to how the City can
minimize potential for claims.
NOTE: In years prior to 2015, the City did not allocate insurance policy premiums to existing City
departments. For the 2015 budget and forward, the City intends to allocate insurance costs by
department.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
N/A
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Unallocated
Total Other Services and charges 2,100 2,100 0 (2,100) -100.0%
Total Unallocated 2,100 2,100 0 (2,100) -100.0%
Page 25 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY OVERVIEW
PROFILE
The General Fund Public Safety departments include Police Services, Police Records Management,
Fire Services, Building Inspections, and Emergency Management activities. These categories relate
directly to making the City of Medina a safe place to live and work. These services are necessary to
address mandated requirements by State and Federal laws. It is the responsibility of the local unit
of government to protect their citizens and property.
2020 Public Safety Expenditures
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Police 1,617,770 1,649,375 1,737,111 87,736 5.3%
Police Records Management 8,850 8,850 13,500 4,650 52.5%
Fire 424,716 446,242 419,111 (27,131) -6.1%
Building Inspections 312,012 318,343 330,664 12,321 3.9%
Emergency Management 5,200 5,200 5,800 600 11.5%
Total Public Safety 2,368,548 2,428,010 2,506,185 78,175 3.2%
Page 26 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – POLICE
PROFILE
The Police Department provides for police administration, public safety services, investigation, and patrol.
The Public Safety Director provides leadership and management oversight by coordinating and
administrating all divisions within the department. The Public Safety Director is responsible for
overseeing multiple strategies by ensuring accountability and allocating resources. Sworn, uniformed
officers respond to calls-for-service of both emergency and non-emergency nature. In addition, police
services conduct proactive patrol in residential and commercial areas to deter crime and increase traffic
safety. Officers seek to make a positive difference in the lives of the residents of Medina and the
community. Community Service Officers are utilized to perform police-related duties that do not require
a sworn police officer. The investigative process includes, but is not limited to, carrying out interviews
and interrogations, recording and witnessing formal statements, conducting line-ups, performing
surveillance, gathering and processing evidence, reviewing and analyzing the data gathered, writing and
serving search warrants, and disseminating information to fellow officers within the department and
agencies outside the police department.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
Public Safety Director 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Chief 1.00 1.00
Sergeant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Investigator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Officers 8.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
CSOs 1.50 1.50 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.45
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Transcriptionist 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Overtime 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57
Total FTE's 14.07 13.57 12.82 12.82 12.82 12.82 12.82 12.82 12.82 12.52
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
Medina began providing contractual police services to Loretto from the date of inception.
In 1998, scheduling was structured to provide response to all emergencies, 24 hours a day, seven
days a week, 365 days a year.
In 2003, the drug task force was formed, and a position was designated to address drug related issues.
In 2005, that position was backfilled for general patrol duties.
In 2004, the Sergeant position was created to increase the supervision and accountability of the patrol
division and to work on investigations.
In 2007, an Investigator was added to do all in house investigations.
In 2007, a part-time Transcriptionist was added to increase efficiencies within the department.
In 2013 the Police Chief position was elevated to the Public Safety Director position.
Page 27 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY (continued)
In 2019, Police Sergeant was promoted to Public Safety Directed; effective March 2020. Addition
of full-time officer was approved; effective 2020. Part-time transcriptionist position was removed
from the budget; effective 2020.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the Equipment Replacement Fund, Police Forfeiture Fund, and Police Reserve Equipment
Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Police
Total Personnel Services 1,396,520 1,428,125 1,511,293 83,168 5.8%
Total Supplies 60,000 60,000 61,068 1,068 1.8%
Total Other Services and Charges 161,250 161,250 164,750 3,500 2.2%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Police 1,617,770 1,649,375 1,737,111 87,736 5.3%
Page 28 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – POLICE RECORDS MANAGEMENT
PROFILE
This function was established to capture the ongoing expenditures created by the City’s records
management system.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
The personnel from the Police department provide these services within the scope of their existing
duties.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Police Records Management
Total Supplies 150 150 0 (150) -100.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 8,700 8,700 13,500 4,800 55.2%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Police Records Management 8,850 8,850 13,500 4,650 52.5%
Page 29 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – FIRE
PROFILE
The purpose of fire protection is to respond to fire, medical emergencies, water rescues and chemical
spills/hazards within the City in a timely and efficient manner to minimize the loss sustained by
citizens and/or businesses in the City. The fire services budget also provides public education in fire
prevention, fire safety awareness, and fire extinguisher training.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
This service is provided on a contractual basis. No staffing is allocated to this department. The
Administration Department provides contract management for the service contracts and the
coordination is provided by the Police Department.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the Equipment Replacement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Fire
Total Other Services and Charges 424,716 446,242 419,111 (27,131) -6.1%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Fire 424,716 446,242 419,111 (27,131) -6.1%
Page 30 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – BUILDING INSPECTIONS
PROFILE
The Building Inspection division provides services for all building permit related activities in the
City. This includes permits for new construction, additions, alterations and remodels, mechanical,
plumbing, and septic systems. This also includes reviewing plans for consistency with relevant
codes prior to construction beginning, and on-site inspections during and after construction. The
function also maintains address files with past permit information and completes various state-
required reports.
The division is also responsible for the review and inspection of other types of permits including
permanent and temporary sign permits, driveway/curb cut permits and sewer/water hookup permits.
The division provides bi-annual fire inspections of all commercial properties in the City. Such
inspections include proper material storage, fire suppression devices, emergency exiting and fire
lane circulation.
This division coordinates the City’s septic system monitoring program. This program requires
property owners on individual sewage treatment systems to have their systems pumped and
inspected by a private licensed contractor a minimum of once every three years.
This division also provides inspections for construction site erosion and sediment control measures
in order to protect water quality and is responsible for regulation and enforcement related to wetlands
within the City.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
Planning Director 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
City Planner 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20
Associate Planner 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.13 0.13 0.13
Planning Assistant 0.70 0.65 0.65 0.55 0.55
PW Inspector 0.06 0.06 0.06
Administrative Assistant 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23
Intern 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.35
Total FTE's 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.58 1.61 1.11 1.11
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
The City utilizes contract services for most plan review inspection activities.
In 2009, staff was allocated to provide zoning plan reviews for structure setbacks, hardcover,
and landscaping. In-house staff also provides administrative support and coordinates financial
and statistical reporting.
Page 31 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – BUILDING INSPECTIONS (Continued)
In 2010, more accurate allocation of the Administrative Assistant, who provides phone and
counter services relating to building inspections, was implemented.
In 2016, the City Planner was reassigned as Planning Director and the Planning Assistant was
budgeted and reassigned at Associate Planner.
In 2018, the budget for Public Works Inspector was moved from Public Works to Building
Inspections.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Building Inspections
Total Personnel Services 173,262 171,193 170,259 (934) -0.5%
Total Supplies 0 0 750 750 N/A
Total Other Services and Charges 138,750 147,150 159,655 12,505 8.5%
Total Building Inspections 312,012 318,343 330,664 12,321 3.9%
Page 32 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC SAFETY – EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
PROFILE
The purpose of the Emergency Management function is to ensure the effective coordinated use of
resources to: 1) maximize the protection of life and property, 2) ensure the continuity of government,
3) sustain survivors and 4) repair essential facilities and utilities in the event of a disaster, whether
natural or manmade. Emergency Management is headed by the Public Safety Director. The City’s
emergency plan is reviewed annually, and continual training is conducted in accordance with City
Ordinance 206.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
The personnel from the Police department provide these services within the scope of their existing
duties.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the General Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Emergency Management
Total Supplies 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Other Services and Charges 5,200 5,200 5,800 600 11.5%
Total Emergency Management 5,200 5,200 5,800 600 11.5%
Page 33 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC WORKS
PROFILE
Public Works provides maintenance of all City streets, sidewalks and trails, which includes patching, seal
coating, crack sealing, sweeping, striping, mowing ditches, shouldering, grading, drainage issues, paving
and minor sidewalk and curb repair. Also included are snow and ice control on roads, trails and parking
lots, which are provided in a safe and cost-effective manner while balancing personnel resources and
environmental concerns, as well as servicing all trucks and equipment used. Public Works also provides
traffic control, maintenance, replacement and inventory of signage, pavement markings, and street and
signal lights. The department also maintains a compost and brush pile that can be utilized by the residents
year-round.
Public Works is on call 24/7 for all emergencies that may arise. Compliance with safety regulations is
provided by the department, including training seminars and testing to maintain the various licensing
requirements, and yearly safety training to meet OSHA requirements.
The Public Works Department provides budgeting, pavement management, road material bids,
contracting with low bidders, and overseeing all road projects each year, as well as other smaller projects.
Public Works is also involved in the set up, and tear down, and post clean-up of Clean-up Day and Medina
Celebration Day.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
PW Director 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
PW Foreman 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.20
Administrative Assistant 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
Street Maintenance/Inspector 0.43 0.49 0.43 0.49 0.43 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49
PW Maintenance 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.40
PW Maintenance 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
PW Maintenance 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.45 0.50
PW On-call 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Winter Temp 0.05 0.05 0.05
Part Time Help 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.30
Total FTE's 2.61 2.61 2.61 2.42 2.67 2.72 2.52 2.27 2.28 2.17
Page 34 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PUBLIC WORKS (continued)
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
In 2006, the Public Works Superintendent duties were redefined following retirement of the Public
Works Director, which allowed for a higher level of administration and supervision.
In 2007, a Foreman position was created to manage the day-to-day oversight of the employees working
in the field. An On-Call policy was also adopted to compensate staff available for dispatch after hours.
In 2009 & 2010, the department delayed the replacement of the retiring Equipment Operator. Part-
time staffing was utilized for seasonal projects such as snow plowing and street maintenance.
In 2011, the Street Maintenance position was written to include inspections.
In 2012, the Public Works Superintendent title was changed to Public Works Director and the
Administrative Assistant title was changed to Office Assistant.
In 2014, a winter temporary position was added, which will become a full-time Public Works
Maintenance position in 2015, allocated 50% to public works and 50% to parks.
In 2018, the inspections position was budgeted to Building Inspections and removed from Public
Works Budget.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the Equipment Replacement Fund and Road Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Public Works
Total Personnel Services 290,325 307,747 298,971 (8,776) -2.9%
Total Supplies 209,080 213,080 244,580 31,500 14.8%
Total Other Services and Charges 206,050 206,050 207,850 1,800 0.9%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Public Works 705,455 726,877 751,401 24,524 3.4%
Page 35 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
SANITATION AND RECYCLING
PROFILE
Sanitation and recycling is responsible for the administration of the City’s recycling and organic
activities as well as refuse hauling.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
Assistant City
Administrator/City Clerk 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Deputy Clerk 0.10 0.10 0.10
Total FTE's 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
In 2009, the City took on duties previously provided by a contracted Recycling Coordinator.
In 2016, the budget includes the reassignment of the position Assistant to the Administrator to
Assistant Administrator/City Clerk.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Sanitation and Recycling
Total Personnel Services 10,696 11,130 12,155 1,025 9.2%
Total Supplies 500 500 500 0 0.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 4,450 4,450 4,450 0 0.0%
Total Sanitation and Recycling 15,646 16,080 17,105 1,025 6.4%
Organics
Total Supplies 2,500 4,000 7,895 3,895 97.4%
Total Other Services and Charges 0 0 1,000 1,000 N/A
Total Organics 2,500 4,000 8,895 4,895 122.4%
Total Sanitation and Recycling & Organics 18,146 20,080 26,000 5,920 29.5%
Page 36 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
COMMUNITY BUILDING
PROFILE
The Hamel Community Building is available to be rented for various private functions. The
Community Building department provides for the ongoing cleaning, maintenance and repair of the
Hamel Community Building.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
Services are provided on a contractual basis.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the General Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Community Building
Total Personnel Services 5,347 5,566 6,078 512 9.2%
Total Supplies 5,000 5,500 5,500 0 0.0%
Total Other Services and Charges 26,780 30,080 30,230 150 0.5%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Community Building 37,127 41,146 41,808 662 1.6%
Page 37 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PARKS
PROFILE
This department represents the consolidation of all park maintenance operating functions. Activities
within this department include maintenance and repair of playground equipment, installation and
upkeep of park signage, repairs and snow removal on parking lots, dock installation and repairs, park
shelter buildings, picnic shelters, irrigation systems, bleachers, benches, restroom and dumpster
enclosures to ensure safe, clean and accessible park buildings and equipment. In addition, this
department provides basic park turf maintenance including mowing, fertilizing, weed control, and
seeding and aerating. It also provides miscellaneous grounds maintenance such as streetscape and
flower maintenance, rain garden maintenance, as well as garbage collection and picking up litter.
Other responsibilities include maintenance activities for athletic fields, tennis courts, basketball
courts, and ice-skating rinks.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
PW Director 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
PW Foreman 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.15
Assistant City
Administrator/City Clerk 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Assistant to City
Administrator/Deputy
Clerk 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Street Maintenance/Inspector 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
PW Maintenance 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20
PW Maintenance 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
PW Maintenance 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.50
Part Time Help 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Total FTE's 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.85 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.65
STAFFING HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY
The staffing structure of the department has been modified since 2006 to reflect the time spent
by Public Works staff and Administrative support for park functions.
In 2017, a part-time parks position was added.
Page 38 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
PARKS AND RECREATION (continued)
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
See the Park Dedication Fund & Municipal Park Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Parks
Total Personnel Services 77,775 77,749 73,727 (4,022) -5.2%
Total Supplies 23,920 23,920 29,020 5,100 21.3%
Total Other Services and Charges 67,775 67,775 90,625 22,850 33.7%
Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 N/A
Total Parks 169,470 169,444 193,372 23,928 14.1%
Page 39 of 89
General Fund Expenditures (Continued)
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HOUSING
PROFILE
This department created in 2020 was derived to budget funds for the City to continue to participate
in the Livable Communities Act (LCA), a program administered by the Metropolitan Council
offering grants to participating cities to support development of affordable and life-cycle
housing. The City elected to take part in the LCA in 1996 and to continue in 2010. The 2040
Comprehensive Plan also notes that the City participates in LCA Communities which participate in
the LCA are required to expend a certain amount annually to help create, sustain, preserve, or
advance affordable and/or life-cycle housing opportunities (ALHOA). The City is required to
report annually whether at least 85% of the annual amount (determined by Metropolitan Council)
is expended each year. If the City does not expend 85% of the ALHOA, the City does not qualify
for any grants within the LCA. In 2020, the amount is $56,880 and will be funded from antenna
revenue.
OPERATING BUDGET
CAPITAL OUTLAY
None requested.
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
Economic Development Housing
Total Other Services and Charges 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
Total Economic Development Housing 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
Page 40 of 89
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
2020 Amount Percentage
2018 2019 Prelim Increase Increase
Budget Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 3,229,026 3,325,897 3,434,452 108,555 3.3%
Other Taxes 30,000 33,000 75,000 42,000 127.3%
Licenses and Permits 374,300 377,400 390,669 13,269 3.5%
Intergovernmental 232,118 263,910 288,773 24,863 9.4%
Charges for Services 124,564 123,146 138,087 14,941 12.1%
Fines and Forfeitures 105,000 110,000 95,000 (15,000) -13.6%
Special Assessments 0 1,715 0 (1,715) -100.0%
Miscellaneous 108,225 123,698 164,359 40,661 32.9%
Sale of Assets 300 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 223,110 213,572 220,783 7,211 3.4%
Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 4,426,643 4,572,338 4,807,123 234,785 5.1%
EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES:
General Government:
Mayor & Council 25,144 25,644 25,543 (101) -0.4%
Administration 602,321 630,578 662,230 31,652 5.0%
Elections 10,900 11,400 15,400 4,000 35.1%
Assessing 90,493 93,840 98,066 4,226 4.5%
Planning & Zoning 193,840 189,411 191,032 1,621 0.9%
Comprehensive Plan 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0.0%
Data Processing 82,083 82,083 88,704 6,621 8.1%
Police/Public Works Facility 69,415 76,415 77,500 1,085 1.4%
Municipal Building 39,100 60,810 61,000 190 0.3%
Unallocated 2,100 2,100 0 (2,100) -100.0%
Total General Government 1,123,396 1,180,281 1,227,476 47,195 4.0%
Public Safety:
Police 1,617,770 1,651,875 1,737,111 85,236 5.2%
Police Records Management 8,850 8,850 13,500 4,650 52.5%
Fire 424,716 446,242 419,111 (27,131) -6.1%
Building Inspections 312,013 318,343 330,664 12,321 3.9%
Emergency Management 5,200 5,200 5,800 600 11.5%
Total Public Safety 2,368,549 2,430,510 2,506,185 75,675 3.1%
Public Works:
Public Works 706,455 726,877 751,401 24,524 3.4%
Sanitation & Recycling 18,146 20,080 26,000 5,920 29.5%
Total Public Works 724,601 746,957 777,402 30,444 4.1%
Parks & Recreation:
Community Building 37,127 41,146 41,808 662 1.6%
Parks 170,970 169,444 193,372 23,928 14.1%
Total Parks & Recreation 208,097 210,590 235,180 24,590 11.7%
Economic Development Housing 0 0 56,880 56,880 N/A
Transfers Out 2,000 4,000 4,000 0 0.0%
Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 4,426,643 4,572,338 4,807,123 234,784 5.1%
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES AND
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES 0 0 0 0 N/A
Page 41 of 89
Special Revenue Funds
Special Revenue Funds are categorized by the specific nature of the source of revenues. Grant and
donation funds given for a specific purpose are accounted for as Special Revenue Funds. The Special
Revenue Funds for the City of Medina are:
Environmental Fund
Municipal Park Fund
Field House Operations Fund
Police Forfeiture Fund
Police Reserve Equipment Fund
German Liberal Cemetery Fund
Community Event Fund
Cable Franchise Fund
Page 42 of 89
Special Revenue Funds
ENVIRONMENTAL FUND
PROFILE
The Medina Environmental Fund’s primary function is to provide for securing land for conservation
of natural resources, for parks and open space, and for trails, including partnerships with other
agencies on grant applications; secondary uses include: 1) Incentivizing residents to improve storm
water run-off management through voluntary installation of rain gardens and other measures in order
to benefit the health of lakes and streams; 2) Establishing a program for the installation of curb cuts
for interested residents who wish to install rain gardens; 3) Partnering with Storm Water Utility
Funds or grant resources to accomplish water improvement projects; 4) Lending funds to landowners
to complete wetland mitigation projects that will be repaid to the City when the landowner receives
compensation for the mitigation; 5) Implementing Low Impact Development or other sustainable
initiatives in City projects; 6) Removing sick and diseased boulevard trees on city land and replacing
them; and, 7) Subsidizing the cost of tree stock made available to residents on City Clean Up Day.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Miscellaneous 165,476 0 (165,476) -100.0%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Other Services and Charges 37,560 32,000 (5,560) -14.8%
Capital Outlay 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers Out 0 0 0 N/A
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 37,560 32,000 (5,560) -14.8%
Net Change in Fund Balance 127,916 (32,000) (159,916) -125.0%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 323,394 451,311
Fund Balance, End of Year 451,311 419,311
Page 43 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
MUNICIPAL PARK FUND
PROFILE
The Municipal Park Fund is to be used by the City Council as they see the need for park projects
and maintenance outside of expenditures within the General Fund and Park Dedication Fund.
Municipal Park Fund projects are primarily the replacement of existing park equipment and
structures that do not qualify for the Park Dedication Fund. Projects and replacements are presented
through the Capital Improvement Plan. Revenues are generated by taxes, antenna revenue, grants
and donations from individuals, businesses and organizations.
In 2019, discussions and planning took place amongst staff, City Council, Park Commission and
community outreach to establish a 30-year replacement plan. A levy increase was proposed
beginning 2020 and onward to fund ongoing replacements.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Taxes 7,216 112,000 104,784 1452.1%
Miscellaneous 167,982 300 (167,682) -99.8%
Transfers In 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Uses 175,198 112,300 (62,898) 14
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 16,355 135,000 118,645 725.4%
Net Change in Fund Balance 158,843 (22,700) (181,543) -114.3%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 63,520 222,363
Fund Balance, End of Year 222,363 199,663
Page 44 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
FIELD HOUSE OPERATIONS FUND
PROFILE
The Field House Operations Fund was established at the end of 2009 with a donation to assist in
operating costs related to the opening of the field house at Hamel Legion Park. The donation was
part of the contributions for the construction of the field house.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Miscellaneous 1,668 1,800 132 7.9%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Personal Services 0 0 0 N/A
Supplies 853 900 47 5.5%
Other Services and Charges 2,913 4,100 1,187 40.8%
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 3,766 5,000 1,234 32.8%
Net Change in Fund Balance (2,098) (3,200) (1,102) 52.5%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 15,445 13,347
Fund Balance, End of Year 13,347 10,147
Page 45 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
POLICE FORFEITURE FUND
PROFILE
The Police Forfeiture Fund was established to account for receipts and disbursements related to
forfeited vehicles, equipment and cash from drug, DWI, and other crime related cases. Expenditures
are restricted by law to be used for drug and DWI enforcement. In 2018, due
to law changes, forfeiture revenues and federal drug revenues have ceased or decreased
significantly.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Fines and Forfeitures 124,058 15,000 (109,058) -87.9%
Miscellaneous 587 0 (587) -100.0%
Sale of Assets 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 124,645 15,000 (109,645) -88.0%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Personal Services 396 0 (396) -100.0%
Supplies 1,399 0 (1,399) -100.0%
Other Services and Charges 6,234 0 (6,234) -100.0%
Capital Outlay 41,102 54,000 12,898 31.4%
Transfers Out 0 0 0 N/A
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 49,131 54,000 4,869 9.9%
Net Change in Fund Balance 75,514 (39,000) (114,514) -151.6%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 171,625 247,138
Fund Balance, End of Year 247,138 208,138
Page 46 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
POLICE RESERVE EQUIPMENT FUND
PROFILE
The Medina Police Reserve Equipment Fund is utilized to track donations to the City of Medina in
appreciation of the Reserves as well as Charges for Services they provide. These donations are
accepted by City Council for various purposes. Various expenditures are approved through the
Capital Improvement Program for a period of five years when enough funds are available.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Charges for Services 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 350 0 (350) -100.0%
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 350 0 (350) -100.0%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Supplies 57 1,200 1,143 2007.1%
Other Services and Charges 863 1,200 337 39.0%
Capital Outlay 0 0 0 N/A
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 920 2,400 1,480 160.9%
Net Change in Fund Balance (570) (2,400) (1,830) 321.1%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 18,945 18,375
Fund Balance, End of Year 18,375 15,975
Page 47 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
GERMAN LIBERAL CEMETERY FUND
PROFILE
The German Liberal Cemetery Fund was created in 2010 when the cemetery was transferred to City
ownership. This fund is used to account for lot sales that are legally restricted to the maintenance
of the cemetery and principal amounts received and related interest income for the care of the
German Liberal Cemetery.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Charges for Services 3,835 5,000 1,165 30.4%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 3,835 5,000 1,165 30.4%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Personal Services 0 0 0 N/A
Other Services and Charges 4,149 4,650 501 12.1%
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 4,149 4,650 501 12.1%
Net Change in Fund Balance (314) 350 664 -211.4%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 129,950 129,636
Fund Balance, End of Year 129,636 129,986
Page 48 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
COMMUNITY EVENT FUND
PROFILE
The Community Event Fund was established to account for donations and event costs as they relate
to the City’s Celebration Day.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Miscellaneous 24,800 18,264 (6,536) -26.4%
Transfers In 4,000 4,000 0 0.0%
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 28,800 22,264 (6,536) -22.7%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Supplies 973 0 (973) -100.0%
Other Services and Charges 11,999 8,100 (3,899) -32.5%
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 12,972 8,100 (4,872) -37.6%
Net Change in Fund Balance 15,828 14,164 (1,664) -10.5%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 6,013 21,841
Fund Balance, End of Year 21,841 36,005
Page 49 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
CABLE FRANCHISE FUND
PROFILE
The Cable Franchise Fund was established to account for cable related costs. Cable franchise fee
revenues are committed to this fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Other Taxes 61,647 67,000 5,353 8.7%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 61,647 67,000 5,353 8.7%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Other Services and Charges 12,342 15,000 2,658 21.5%
Net Change in Fund Balance 49,305 52,000 2,695 5.5%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (51,437) (2,132)
Fund Balance, End of Year (2,132) 49,868
Page 50 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
204 226 227 235
Environmental Municipal Field Police
Fund Park House Forfeiture
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Revenues
Property Taxes 112,000
Other Taxes
Intergovernmental
Charges for Services
Fines and Forfeitures 15,000
Miscellaneous 0 300 1,800 0
Total Revenues 0 112,300 1,800 15,000
Other Financing Sources
Sale of Assets 0
Transfers In
Total Other Financing Sources 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 0 112,300 1,800 15,000
EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES:
Current
General Government
Public Safety 0
Public Works
Parks & Recreation 32,000 0 5,000
Total Current 32,000 0 5,000 0
Capital Outlay
General Government
Public Safety 54,000
Public Works
Parks & Recreation 0 135,000
Total Capital Outlay 0 135,000 0 54,000
Other Financing Uses
Transfers Out 0
Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 32,000 135,000 5,000 54,000
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES AND
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES (32,000) (22,700) (3,200) (39,000)
Page 51 of 89
Special Revenue Funds (Continued)
236 238 240 250 Total
Police Reserve German Liberal Community Cable Special
Equipment Cemetery Event Franchise Revenue
112,000
67,000 67,000
0
0 5,000 5,000
15,000
0 0 18,264 0 20,364
0 5,000 18,264 67,000 219,364
0
4,000 4,000
0 0 4,000 0 4,000
0 5,000 22,264 67,000 223,364
4,650 4,650
2,400 2,400
0
8,100 15,000 60,100
2,400 4,650 8,100 15,000 67,150
0
0 54,000
0
135,000
0 0 0 0 189,000
0
2,400 4,650 8,100 15,000 256,150
(2,400) 350 14,164 52,000 (32,786)
Page 52 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 53 of 89
Capital Project Funds
The Capital Projects set of funds is used to record and keep track of costs for major projects. Often
these projects will cross fiscal years and must be kept separate for assessment accounting or funding
purposes. The City’s Capital Improvement Program includes a five-year projection of capital
improvement needs that will partially be funded from the Capital Project Funds. Some of the funds
act as repositories for capital replacement funds for major assets, such as water and sewer
infrastructure. The Capital Projects Funds include:
Park Dedication Fund
General Capital Improvement Fund
Water Capital Improvement Fund
Sewer Capital Improvement Fund
Tax Increment 1-9 Fund
Equipment Replacement Fund
Road Improvement Fund
Page 54 of 89
Capital Project Funds
PARK DEDICATION FUND
PROFILE
The Park Dedication Fund is to be used by the City Council as they see the need for new park
projects, outside of expenditures within the General Fund. Park Dedication funds are needed for
new park development, which is the intended use of Park Dedication funds, as mandated by state
statute. Park Dedication Fund projects are presented through the Capital Improvement Plan.
Revenues are generated from Park Dedication Fees charged on new developments.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Intergovernmental 0 0 0 N/A
Charges for Services 8,854 50,000 41,146 464.7%
Miscellaneous 0 6,000 6,000 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 8,854 56,000 47,146 532.5%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 27,016 455,000 427,984 1584.2%
Net Change in Fund Balance (18,162) (399,000) (380,838) 2096.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,531,033 1,512,871
Fund Balance, End of Year 1,512,871 1,113,871
Page 55 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
PROFILE
The General Capital Improvement Fund provides for the accounting of sources (revenues) and uses
(expenditures) of monies available from several sources such as the General Fund or grant activity.
The City’s Capital Improvement Program includes a five-year projection of capital improvement
needs that will partially be funded from the Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Intergovernmental 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 4,200 2,000 (2,200) -52.4%
Transfers In 200,000 0 (200,000) -100.0%
Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 204,200 2,000 (202,200) -99.0%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 4,391 85,000 80,609 1835.8%
Net Change in Fund Balance 199,809 (83,000) (282,809) -141.5%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 130,420 330,230
Fund Balance, End of Year 330,230 247,230
Page 56 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
PROFILE
The Water Capital Improvement Fund accounts for the construction of water infrastructure. The
financing of these improvements is through a combination of special assessments, water connection
fees through development, and bonding. The fund supports debt service payments of the Water
enterprise fund as follows:
40% for the Water Treatment Plant, Series 2005A bonds (since refunded by the 2012B bonds)
100% for the Water Tower, Well, and Raw Water Supply Line, Series 2007A bonds (since
refunded by the 2013A bonds)
The City’s Capital Improvement Program includes a five-year projection of capital improvement
needs that will partially be funded from the Water Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Charges for Services 563,673 400,000 (163,673) -29.0%
Special Assessments 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 0 5,000 5,000 N/A
Transfers In 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 563,673 405,000 (158,673) -28.1%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 23 0 (23) -100.0%
Transfers Out 360,093 356,028 (4,065) -1.1%
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 360,116 356,028 (4,088) -1.1%
Net Change in Fund Balance 203,557 48,972 (154,585) -75.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,109,138 1,312,695
Fund Balance, End of Year 1,312,695 1,361,667
Page 57 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
SEWER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
PROFILE
The Sewer Capital Improvement Fund accounts for the financing of improvements and the
construction of sewer infrastructure. The financing of these improvements is through a combination
of special assessments, sewer connection fees through development, and bonding. The City’s
Capital Improvement Program includes a five-year projection of capital improvement needs that will
partially be funded from the Sewer Capital Improvement Fund.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Charges for Services 84,065 60,000 (24,065) -28.6%
Special Assessments 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 0 20,000 20,000 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 84,065 80,000 (4,065) -4.8%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 8,498 0 (8,498) -100.0%
Transfers Out 0 0 0
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 8,498 0 (8,498) -100.0%
Net Change in Fund Balance 75,567 80,000 4,433 5.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 2,884,914 2,960,481
Fund Balance, End of Year 2,960,481 3,040,481
Page 58 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
TAX INCREMENT 1-9 FUND
PROFILE
The Tax Increment 1-9 fund accounts for all tax increment financing (TIF) revenues and
expenditures from TIF District 1-9. This TIF District has been the primary financing tool for the
redevelopment around the Uptown Hamel area and north Hwy 55 and 101 area. Revenues are
derived from tax increments on properties within the TIF District. The TIF District fund makes
annual transfers to the 2008A G.O. Bond Fund - Uptown Hamel and 2005C G.O. Tax Increment
Bond Fund – Uptown Hamel (since refinanced by the 2012B G.O. Refunding Bonds) as necessary
based on annual TIF fund analysis. Payments of principal and interest are also made on two Pay-
As-You-Go Tax Increment Notes based on the amount of increment received on various parcels.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Tax Increments 248,992 387,024 138,032 55.4%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 248,992 387,024 138,032 55.4%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 188,844 0 (188,844) -100.0%
Transfers Out 246,000 256,400 10,400 4.2%
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 434,844 256,400 (178,444) -41.0%
Net Change in Fund Balance (185,852) 130,624 316,476 -170.3%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (172,841) (358,693)
Fund Balance, End of Year (358,693) (228,069)
Page 59 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND
PROFILE
This fund is a capital improvement fund for replacement of equipment such as Public Works trucks
and machinery, police vehicles, fire equipment, and major office equipment. Proceeds from the
issuance of Equipment Certificates and transfers from the General Fund have been the primary
funding sources. Beginning with the 2015 budget, the City intends to certify a property tax levy
specifically for the funding of equipment replacement. In 2019, a levy increase was proposed for
2020 and onward.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 69,325 312,500 243,175 350.8%
Miscellaneous 88,957 2,000 (86,957) -97.8%
Sale of Assets 35,880 20,000 (15,880) -44.3%
Transfers In 200,000 0 (200,000) -100.0%
Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 394,162 334,500 (59,662) -15.1%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 584,545 463,877 (120,668) -20.6%
Transfers Out 0 0 0 N/A
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 584,545 463,877 (120,668) -20.6%
Net Change in Fund Balance (190,383) (129,377) 61,006 -32.0%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 260,750 70,366
Fund Balance, End of Year 70,366 (59,011)
Page 60 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
ROAD IMPROVEMENT FUND
PROFILE
This fund is a capital project fund utilized to construct and maintain the City’s road system.
Numerous projects are scheduled in the five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The City also
incorporates the Pavement Management Plan into the CIP for long range planning.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Intergovernmental 0 0 0 N/A
Special Assessments 57,604 0 (57,604) -100.0%
Miscellaneous 299,066 10,000 (289,066) -96.7%
Transfers In 0 0 N/A
Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 356,671 10,000 (346,671) -97.2%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay 424,006 202,500 (221,506) -52.2%
Net Change in Fund Balance (67,335) (192,500) (125,165) 185.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,069,935 1,002,600
Fund Balance, End of Year 1,002,600 810,100
Page 61 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 62 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
401 402
225 General Water
Park Capital Capital
Dedication Improvement Improvement
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Revenues
Property Tax Levy
Tax Increments
Intergovernmental 0 0
Charges for Services 50,000 400,000
Special Assessments 0
Miscellaneous 6,000 2,000 5,000
Total Revenues 56,000 2,000 405,000
Other Financing Sources
Sale of Assets
Transfers In 00
Bond Proceeds 0
Total Other Financing Sources 0 0 0
Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 56,000 2,000 405,000
EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES:
Capital Outlay
General Government 65,000
Public Safety 0
Public Works
Parks & Recreation 455,000 20,000
Economic Development
Water 0
Sewer
Total Capital Outlay 455,000 85,000 0
Other Financing Uses
Transfers Out 356,028
Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 455,000 85,000 356,028
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES AND
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES (399,000) (83,000) 48,972
Page 63 of 89
Capital Project Funds (Continued)
403
Sewer 406 411 420 Total
Capital Tax Increment Equipment Road Capital
Improvement #1-9 Replacement Improvement Projects
312,500 312,500
387,024 387,024
00
60,000 510,000
000
20,000 0 2,000 10,000 45,000
80,000 387,024 314,500 10,000 1,254,524
20,000 20,000
00 0
00 0
0 0 20,000 0 20,000
80,000 387,024 334,500 10,000 1,274,524
0 65,000
199,877 199,877
264,000 202,500 466,500
475,000
0 0
0
0 0
0 0 463,877 202,500 1,206,377
256,400 0 612,428
0 256,400 463,877 202,500 1,818,805
80,000 130,624 (129,377) (192,500) (544,281)
Page 64 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 65 of 89
Service Funds
Debt Service Funds track the monies collected and paid for the retirement of bonded debt obligations
of the City. Funds are collected in several ways. Some dollars are collected through property tax
levies established solely for payment of these obligations. Some dollars are collected through special
assessments against specific properties in the City which receive the benefits of debt-financed
projects. Tax increments are also dedicated to payment of debt obligations in some cases. If a
general pledge of the tax base of the City is made against a bond obligation it is accounted for in the
Debt Service Funds. The City’s Debt Service Funds include:
G.O. Bonds 2008 Uptown Hamel Fund
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2010A Fund
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2011A Fund
G.O. Taxable Improvement Bonds 2011B Fund
G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds 2012A Fund (PW/PD Facility)
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2012B Fund (TIF)
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2013A Fund (PW/PD Facility)
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2015A (Tower Drive)
G.O. Refunding Bonds 2016A (2008A)
G.O. Improvement Bonds 2017A Fund
Page 66 of 89
Debt Service Funds
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2010A FUND
PROFILE
These bonds were to fund the 2010 road improvement projects based on the financing philosophy
of Council from 2008. The Council proceeded with a bonding and assessment policy. Revenues for
payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy and special assessments. Expenditures
in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and agent fees for bond servicing. This debt
will be fully retired on February 1, 2021.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 15,304 29,500 14,196 92.8%
Special Assessments 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 15,304 29,500 14,196 92.8%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 27,724 31,718 3,994 14.4%
Net Change in Fund Balance (12,420) (2,218) 10,202 -82.1%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 37,035 24,615
Fund Balance, End of Year 24,615 22,397
Page 67 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2011A FUND
PROFILE
These bonds were to fund the 2011 Hunter Drive South road improvement project based on the
financing philosophy of Council from 2008. The Council proceeded with a bonding and assessment
policy. Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy and special
assessments. Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying agent
fees for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2020.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 52 0 (52) -100.0%
Special Assessments 0 0 0 N/A
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 52 0 (52) -100.0%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 23,270 0 (23,270) -100.0%
Net Change in Fund Balance (23,218) 0 23,218 -100.0%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 21,387 (1,831)
Fund Balance, End of Year (1,831) (1,831)
Page 68 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. TAXABLE IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2011B FUND
PROFILE
These bonds were to fund the 2011 Hunter Drive North road improvement project based on the
financing philosophy of Council from 2008. The Council proceeded with a bonding and assessment
policy. Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy and special
assessments. Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying agent
fees for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2022.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 30,600 60,000 29,400 96.1%
Intergovernmental 0 0 0 N/A
Special Assessments 701 0 (701) -100.0%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 31,301 60,000 28,699 91.7%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 103,409 105,341 1,932 1.9%
Net Change in Fund Balance (72,108) (45,341) 26,767 -37.1%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 230,127 158,019
Fund Balance, End of Year 158,019 112,678
Page 69 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS 2012A FUND
PROFILE
These bonds were issued in the amount of $6.1 million to fund the 2012 purchase and improvement
of the building at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use as the Medina public works/police facility. Revenues
for payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy, Water Fund (9%), and Sewer Fund
(11%). Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying agent fees
for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2034.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 125,524 243,705 118,181 94.2%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 60,427 60,926 499 0.8%
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 185,951 304,631 118,680 63.8%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 289,990 287,366 (2,624) -0.9%
Net Change in Fund Balance (104,039) 17,265 121,304 -116.6%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 421,662 317,623
Fund Balance, End of Year 317,623 334,888
Page 70 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. REFUNDING BONDS 2012B FUND (TIF)
PROFILE
In 2012, the City issued the 2012B G.O. Refunding Bonds to refinance $655,000 of the 2005C G.O.
Tax Increment Bonds (Uptown Hamel), with the defeasance occurring on February 1, 2013.
Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from tax increments generated by TIF District 1-9
and special assessments. Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and
agent fees for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2021.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Special Assessments 5,007 9,425 4,418 88.2%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 75,000 75,000 0 0.0%
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 80,007 84,425 4,418 5.5%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 83,915 87,688 3,773 4.5%
Net Change in Fund Balance (3,908) (3,263) 645 -16.5%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 14,438 10,529
Fund Balance, End of Year 10,529 7,266
Page 71 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. REFUNDING BONDS 2013A FUND
PROFILE
In 2013, the City issued the 2013A G.O. Refunding Bonds to refinance $1,160,000 of the 2007A
G.O. Water Revenue Bonds, with the defeasance occurring on February 1, 2015. A total of $1.4
million of the remaining outstanding 2007A G.O. Water Revenue Bonds were originally
recharacterized as G.O. CIP bonds in 2012 to assist in the financing of improvements of the building
at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use as the Medina public works/police facility.
Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy, Water Fund (9%), and
Sewer Fund (11%). Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying
agent fees for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2023.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 70,507 137,361 66,854 94.8%
Miscellaneous 0 871 871 N/A
Transfers In 33,920 34,340 420 1.2%
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 104,427 172,572 68,145 65.3%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 158,665 160,715 2,050 1.3%
Net Change in Fund Balance (54,238) 11,857 66,095 -121.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 205,977 151,739
Fund Balance, End of Year 151,739 163,596
Page 72 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2015A FUND
PROFILE
In 2015, the City issued $1,765,000 of 2015A G.O. Improvement Bonds to finance improvements
to Tower Drive. Other sources for the project included MSA, park dedication, grant, and utility
funds. The project is accounted for in the Tower Drive capital projects fund.
Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from the property tax levy and special assessments.
Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying agent fees for bond
servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2031.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Property Tax Levy 31,810 63,253 31,443 98.8%
Special Assessments 49,664 83,298 33,634 67.7%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 81,475 146,551 65,076 79.9%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 158,278 155,878 (2,400) -1.5%
Net Change in Fund Balance (76,803) (9,327) 67,476 -87.9%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 305,118 228,315
Fund Balance, End of Year 228,315 218,988
Page 73 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. REFUNDING BONDS 2016A FUND
PROFILE
In 2016, the City issued the 2016A G.O. Refunding Bonds to refinance $2,280,000 of the 2008A
G.O. Improvement Bonds, with the defeasance occurring on February 1, 2017. Revenues for
payment of this bond issue come from tax increments generated by TIF District 1-9 and special
assessments. Expenditures in this fund are for principal and interest on the bonds and agent fees
for bond servicing. This debt will be fully retired on February 1, 2024.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Special Assessments 5,366 10,700 5,334 99.4%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 171,000 181,400 10,400 6.1%
Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 176,366 192,100 15,734 8.9%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 187,628 187,028 (600) -0.3%
Net Change in Fund Balance (11,262) 5,072 16,334 -145.0%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 40,911 29,649
Fund Balance, End of Year 29,649 34,721
Page 74 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2017A FUND
PROFILE
In 2017, the City issued $1,210,000 of 2017A G.O. Improvement Bonds to finance the Deer Hill
Improvement Project. The project will be 100% assessed; payable at the sale of each lot, issuance
of building permit or at the end of a twelve-year deferment in 2028. The project is accounted for in
the Deer Hill Improvement capital projects fund.
Revenues for payment of this bond issue come from special assessments. Expenditures in this fund
are for principal and interest on the bonds and paying agent fees for bond servicing. This debt can
be prepaid at any time; otherwise fully retired on February 1, 2031.
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
YTD Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Special Assessments 143,622 35,000 (108,622) -75.6%
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers In 0 0 0 N/A
Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 N/A
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 143,622 35,000 (108,622) -75.6%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES:
Debt Service 25,465 114,847 89,382 351.0%
Net Change in Fund Balance 118,156 (79,847) (198,003) -167.6%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 180,490 298,646
Fund Balance, End of Year 298,646 218,799
Page 75 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 76 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
312 313 316 319
G.O. G.O. G.O. Taxable G.O.
Improvement Improvement Improvement CIP
Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds
2010A 2011A 2011B 2012A
REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Revenues
Property Tax Levy 29,500 0 60,000 243,705
Intergovernmental 0
Special Assessments 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues 29,500 0 60,000 243,705
Other Financing Sources
Transfers In 60,926
Bond Proceeds
Total Other Financing Sources 0 0 0 60,926
Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 29,500 0 60,000 304,631
EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES:
Expenditures
Debt Service 31,718 0 105,341 287,366
Other Financing Uses
Transfers Out
Bonds Paid by Escrow
Total Other Financing Uses 0 0 0 0
Total Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 31,718 0 105,341 287,366
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES AND
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES (2,218) 0 (45,341) 17,265
Page 77 of 89
Debt Service Funds (Continued)
320 321 322 323 324
G.O. G.O. G.O. G.O. G.O.
Refunding Refunding Improvement Refunding Improvement Total
Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds Debt
2012B 2013A 2015A 2016A 2017A Service
137,361 63,253 0 0 533,819
0
9,425 83,298 10,700 35,000 138,423
0871000871
9,425 138,232 146,551 10,700 35,000 673,113
75,000 34,340 181,400 0 351,666
00 0
75,000 34,340 0 181,400 0 351,666
84,425 172,572 146,551 192,100 35,000 1,024,779
87,688 160,715 155,878 187,028 114,847 1,130,581
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
87,688 160,715 155,878 187,028 114,847 1,130,581
(3,263) 11,857 (9,327) 5,072 (79,847) (105,802)
Page 78 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 79 of 89
Public Utility Funds
The Public Utility Funds track the revenues and expenses for fee based public utility services
provided by the City. These funds operate on their own ability to generate revenues and receive no
property tax support. Each year the City Council reviews the operations of these funds and sets rates
for each service based on the needs for general operations, capital spending and debt service
payments. The public utilities in 2020 include:
Water Utility Fund
Sewer Utility Fund
Storm Water Utility Fund
Page 80 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
WATER UTILITY FUND
PROFILE
The Water Utility Fund provides for the distribution of potable water to customers. This fund includes the
operations, administration and utility billing for the utility. The City has three separate water systems
which it maintains: Hamel, Independence Beach and Medina Morningside. Water is supplied by ten
municipal wells, and the Hamel system utilizes a water treatment facility. Also included in the Water
Fund along with providing the water is the maintenance of meters, locating water mains and services,
testing of the municipal water supply throughout the systems as required, preventative maintenance, and
emergency repairs to the City’s distribution system. The utility billing operation prepares and sends out
utility bills, receives meter readings and administers the collections and assessment for nonpayment.
Agreements with the cities of Maple Plain and Orono are also in place to provide water to separate
developments within the City of Medina.
OVERVIEW
Operating revenues are budgeted to increase $23,086. A 1.5% charge for services rate increase supported
by the 2018 Water Rate Analysis. Operating expenses (excluding transfers) are budgeted to decrease
$19,940 (includes CIP). Transfers out to the General Fund for operating costs were reviewed in 2012 and
show a budgeted increase of approximately 3%.
In 2012, the City issued $6.1 million of 2012A G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds to fund the 2012
purchase and improvement of the building at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use as the Medina public
works/police facility. The Water Fund will be transferring amounts equal to 9% of the debt service
payments on the CIP bonds through February 1, 2034. Additionally, in 2012, the City recharacterized
$1.4 million of the remaining outstanding 2007A G.O. Water Revenue bonds. The debt was removed from
the Water Fund as revenue bonds and was correspondingly reestablished as CIP bonds to assist in the
financing of improvements of the building at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use as the Medina public
works/police facility. The Water Fund will be transferring amounts equal to 9% of the debt service
payments on the recharacterized bonds (since refinanced by the 2013A G.O. Refunding Bonds) through
February 1, 2023.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
PW Director 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
PW Foreman 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
Office Assistant 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Street Maintenance/Inspector 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
PW Maintenance 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16
PW Water/Sewer Operator 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.45
PW Maintenance 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
PW On-call 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Part Time Help
Total FTE's 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.80 1.50 1.50 1.52 1.54
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Accounted for in the Water Capital Improvement Fund.
Page 81 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
WATER UTILITY FUND (continued)
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Preliminary Increase Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges for Services
Charges for Services 875,268 892,854 17,586 2.0%
Special Assessments 2,500 8,000 5,500 220.0%
Meter Sales 28,140 28,140 0 0.0%
Total Charges for Services 905,908 928,994 23,086 2.5%
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 905,908 928,994 23,086 2.5%
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personnel Services 188,859 180,498 (8,361) -4.4%
Supplies 87,020 102,020 15,000 17.2%
Depreciation 345,000 345,000 0 0.0%
Other Services and Charges 255,929 229,350 (26,579) -10.4%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 876,808 856,868 (19,940) -2.3%
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)29,100 72,125 43,025 147.9%
NONOPERATING REVENUES
Miscellaneous Revenues 0 0 0 N/A
Interest Earnings 5,000 5,000 0 0.0%
Water Connect/Reconnect Fee 17,000 17,000 0 0.0%
Total Nonoperating Revenues 22,000 22,000 0 0.0%
NONOPERATING EXPENSES
Bond Interest (25,200) (15,738) 0 -37.5%
Fiscal Agent s Fees (781) (1,400) (619) 79.3%
Total Nonoperating Expenses (25,981) (17,138) (619) -34.0%
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL
CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS 25,119 76,987 42,406 206.5%
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS
Transfers from Other Funds 360,093 356,028 (4,065) -1.1%
Transfers to Other Funds (122,149) (125,758) (3,609) 3.0%
Capital Contributions 0 0 0 N/A
Total Capital Contributions and Transfers 237,944 230,270 (7,674) -3.2%
CHANGE IN NET POSITION 263,063 307,257 34,732 16.8%
NET POSITION, JANUARY 1 9,394,556 9,657,619 263,063 2.8%
NET POSITION, DECEMBER 31 9,657,619 9,964,876 307,257 3.2%
Page 82 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
SEWER UTILITY FUND
PROFILE
The Sewer Utility Fund provides for the collection and conveyance of wastewater through a system
of mains and lift stations. Sewage is treated by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services,
whose fees account for a significant portion of this fund’s expenses. Included in this fund is the
routine and preventative maintenance of the City’s collection system and its appurtenances,
monitoring of inflow and infiltration, television inspection of the interiors of mains, and customer
service such as providing sewer locations. This activity involves the operation and maintenance of
the City’s ten lift stations, which includes buildings, equipment, and property. The utility billing
operation prepares and sends out utility bills and administers the collections and assessment for
nonpayment. An agreement with the City of Plymouth is also in place to provide sewer service to
an area within the City of Medina.
OVERVIEW
Operating revenues are budgeted to increase by $17,795. Rates are scheduled to increase by 2% as
supported by the 2018 sewer rate analysis. Operating expenses are projected to increase by $10,000
(includes CIP). Transfers out to the General Fund for operating costs were reviewed in 2012 and
show a budgeted increase of approximately 3%.
In 2012, the City issued $6.1 million of 2012A G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds to fund the
2012 purchase and improvement of the building at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use as the Medina public
works/police facility. The Sewer Fund will be transferring amounts equal to 11% of the debt service
payments on the CIP bonds through February 1, 2034. Additionally, in 2012, the City
recharacterized $1.4 million of the remaining outstanding 2007A G.O. Water Revenue bonds. The
debt was removed from the Water Fund as revenue bonds and was correspondingly reestablished as
CIP bonds to assist in the financing of improvements of the building at 600 Clydesdale Trail for use
as the Medina public works/police facility. The Sewer Fund will be transferring amounts equal to
11% of the debt service payments on the recharacterized bonds (since refinanced by the 2013A G.O.
Refunding Bonds) through February 1, 2023.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
PW Director 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
PW Foreman 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Office Assistant 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Street Maintenance/Inspector 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
PW Maintenance 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.16
PW Water/Sewer Operator 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.25
PW Maintenance 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18
PW On-call 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Total FTE’s 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.51 1.21 1.21 1.23 1.14
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Accounted for in the Sewer Capital Improvement Fund.
Page 83 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
SEWER UTILITY FUND (continued)
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Prelim Increase Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges for Services
Charges for Services 624,617 642,287 17,795 2.8%
Special Assessments 2,500 2,500 0 0.0%
Total Charges for Services 627,117 644,787 17,795 2.8%
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 627,117 644,787 17,795 2.8%
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personal Services 155,838 155,838 (0) 0.0%
Supplies 5,880 5,880 0 0.0%
Depreciation 100,000 110,000 10,000 10.0%
Other Services and Charges 415,500 415,500 0 0.0%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 677,218 687,218 10,000 1.5%
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)(50,101) (42,430) 7,796 -15.3%
NONOPERATING REVENUES
Miscellaneous Revenues 0 0 0 N/A
Interest Earnings 5,000 5,000 0 0.0%
Total Nonoperating Revenues 5,000 5,000 0 0.0%
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL
CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS (45,101) (37,430) 7,796 -17.0%
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS
Transfers to Other Funds (127,582) (130,357) (2,775) 2.2%
Capital Contributions 0 0 0 N/A
Total Capital Contributions and Transfers (127,582) (130,357) (2,775) 2.2%
CHANGE IN NET POSITION (172,683) (167,787) 5,020 -2.8%
NET POSITION, JANUARY 1 4,049,142 3,876,459 (172,683) -4.3%
NET POSITION, DECEMBER 31 3,876,459 3,708,672 (167,787) -4.3%
Page 84 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
STORM WATER UTILITY FUND
PROFILE
The Storm Water Utility Fund provides for the collection and management of storm water
throughout the City in compliance with State and Federal regulatory requirements. The Storm Water
Utility provides for regional planning, surface water quality monitoring, and compliance with the
Wetlands Conservation Act, approved Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL’s) to impaired bodies
of water and mandated Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
OVERVIEW
Operating revenues are budgeted at a 3% rate increase, or $6,484.
Operating expenses are budgeted to increase by $15,950 (includes CIP). Potential projects are
comprised of Best Management Practices (BMP’s) implemented in the City’s SWPPP, TMDL
Implementation Plan(s), Loretto Wetland Restoration/Creation, Water Quality improvements
relating to Hamel Road Tower Drive project, Stream, Ditch, and Wetland Restoration, other wetland
restoration in MCWD area, and other general projects recommended by the Public Works Director
and City Administrator. Grant funding is likely necessary for the completion of major projects.
BUDGETED PERSONNEL LEVEL
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
PW Director 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
PW Foreman 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Office Assistant 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Street Maintenance Inspector 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
PW Maintenance 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
PW Maintenance 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Total FTE's 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Various Improvements.
Page 85 of 89
Public Utility Funds (Continued)
STORM WATER UTILITY FUND (continued)
2020 Amount Percentage
2019 Prelim Increase Increase
Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges for Services
Charges for Services 219,622 223,606 6,484 1.8%
Special Assessments 2,500 2,500 0 0.0%
Total Charges for Services 222,122 226,106 6,484 1.8%
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 222,122 226,106 6,484 1.8%
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personal Services 78,470 78,470 0 0.0%
Supplies 5,200 5,200 0 0.0%
Depreciation 33,000 70,000 37,000 112.1%
Other Services and Charges 88,750 67,700 (21,050) -23.7%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 205,420 221,370 15,950 7.8%
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)16,702 4,735 (9,467) -71.6%
NONOPERATING REVENUES
Miscellaneous Revenues 0 0 0 N/A
Interest Earnings 1,000 1,000 0 0.0%
Total Nonoperating Revenues 1,000 1,000 0 0.0%
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL
CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS 17,702 5,735 (9,467) -67.6%
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS
Transfers from Other Funds 0 0 0 N/A
Transfers to Other Funds (58,189) (59,935) (1,746) 3.0%
Capital Contributions 0 0 0 N/A
Total Capital Contributions and Transfers (58,189) (59,935) (1,746) 3.0%
CHANGE IN NET POSITION (40,487) (54,199) (11,212) 33.9%
NET POSITION, JANUARY 1 1,258,231 1,215,244 (42,987) -3.4%
NET POSITION, DECEMBER 31 1,217,744 1,161,044 (56,699) -4.7%
Page 86 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 87 of 89
Capital Improvement Program
The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a planning document that presents a five-year overview
of scheduled capital projects to address the City’s goals for maintaining public infrastructure. The
CIP includes a long-term financing plan that allows the City to allocate funds for these projects based
on assigned priorities. The five-years within the CIP provides the City with an opportunity to
evaluate project priorities annually and to adjust the timing, scope and cost of projects as new
information becomes available. The information contained in this plan represents an estimate of
improvement costs based on present knowledge and expected conditions.
A capital improvement is defined as a major non-recurring expenditure related to the City’s physical
facilities and grounds. The CIP also distinguishes between projects contained in the City’s operating
budgets and capital improvement projects financed through the City’s capital funds and public utility
funds.
The CIP is predicated on the goals and policies established by the City Council, including general
development, redevelopment, and maintenance policies that are part of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan. A primary objective of the CIP is to identify projects that further these goals and policies in a
manner consistent with funding opportunities and in coordination with other improvement projects.
(The CIP will be compiled and presented separately.)
Page 88 of 89
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 89 of 89
Fee Schedule
The City Council adopts an ordinance which revises the City’s fee schedule, including fees for land
use, liquor licensing, public safety, and other permits issued by the City. It also establishes rates for
sanitary sewer, water, storm water, and other services.
(The fee schedule will be compiled and presented separately.)
Ordinance No. 1
December 3, 2019
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN AMENDED FEE SCHEDULE
The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows:
Section 1. The schedule of fees and rates attached hereto as Exhibit A, Exhibit B
and Exhibit C is hereby adopted.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective on January 1, 2020 upon its adoption and
publication.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Medina this 3rd day of December, 2019.
_____________________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Published in the South Crow River News this ___ day of December, 2019.
Agenda Item # 7B
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 2
December 3, 2019
Administration
Service Charge
Address Labels $50.00
Address List $25.00
Administrative Appeal $250.00
Affidavit of Filing $15.00
Audit Book copy $50.00
City Code Book Cost + 10%
Copies – single or double
sided (B&W)
$0.25 per page ($5.00
minimum)
Copies or pictures – color 8
½ x 11
$.50 per page ($5.00
minimum)
Credit Card Payments Credit Card fees apply; +
$0.50 if less than $100.00
(excluding utility and online
HCB payments)
Delinquent Charges Assessed 10% administrative fee
DVD/Flash Drive/CD $30.00 per DVD/Flash Drive
$20 per CD
Mailing costs of
copies/reports
At cost
New resident listing $20.00
Peddler, Solicitor, Transient
Merchant Permit Application
Fee
$50.00 up to $100.00 if
extensive background check
is needed
Photographs $20.00 + cost of photo
Non-Sufficient Funds $30.00
Notary No Charge
Special Assessment search $25.00
Special Council Meeting
request
$250.00
Special Event Permit Fee $25.00
Tax Increment Financing
application (minimum)
$1,500 (deposit) + c.a.c
Tobacco License (annual) $150.00
German Liberal Cemetery
Service Charge
Gravesite Purchase $1,500.00
Gravesite Transfer $15.00
Interment (Open/Close) for Casket
(Includes locate & marker)
$900.00 $1,010
Interment (Open/Close) for
Cremation or infant Cherub
$250.00 $410
Disinterment (Open/Close) for
Casket
$900.00
Disinterment (Open/Close) for
Cremation or infant Cherub
$250.00 $300
Marker Removal Locating for
Placement
$45.00 $100
Gravesite Locating for Interment $65.00
Funeral Service Attendant/Traffic
Control
$150.00
Park and Recreation
Service Charge
Independence Beach Parking
Permit (residents only)
No Charge
Ball Field and Court Use See Exhibit C
Hamel Community Building See Exhibit B
Liquor
Service Charge
3.2 Malt Liquor-off sale $50.00
3.2 Malt Liquor-on sale $100.00
Consumption & Display
License
$200.00
Liquor License Investigation
(in-state maximum)
$500.00
Liquor License Investigation
(out-of-state maximum)
$10,000.00
Off-sale $150.00
On-sale Class A: >20,000 sq.
ft.
$7,500.00
On-sale Class B: 12,000 –
20,000 sq. ft.
$6,500.00
On-sale Class C: 6,000 –
12,000 sq. ft.
$5,500.00
On-sale Class D: < 6,000 sq.
ft.
$4,500.00
On-sale Sunday $200.00
Public Dance $100.00
3.2 Malt Liquor one day set
up
$25.00
Temporary on-sale
application fee
$25.00
Wine License $2,000.00
On-sale Brewer Taproom
License
$500.00
Off-sale Small Brewer
License
$150.00
Microdistillery Cocktail
Room License
$500.00
Fire
Service Charge
Fire False Alarm (first) No Charge
Fire False Alarm (second) $150.00
Fire False Alarm (third) $200.00
Fire False Alarm (fourth and
thereafter)
$250.00
Post Fire Inspection $40.00 + c.a.c.
Number of
alarms within
one calendar
year
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 3
December 3, 2019
Police
Service Charge
Accident/Police Report $.25/page ($5.00
minimum)
Burning Permit (non-resident) $20.00
Burning Permit (resident) No Charge
Dog Impounds $25.00 at Police office or
$50.00 at Strehler Farm +
$10.00 each additional
calendar day
Reserve Officer at event/per
hour
$25.00
Event Security (per officer/per
hour)
$80.00 and $90.00 on
Holidays (2-hour
minimum)
Fingerprinting Resident & Employees
$20.00 up to 3 cards, $5.00
each additional card. Non-
residents $30.00 up to 3
cards, $5.00 each
additional card.
Criminal Suspense Files Non-
Medina Case
$20.00
Fireworks Permit $50.00
Gambling Investigation Fee
(annual)
$50.00
Gambling Application for
Exempt Permit
$10.00
Gun Club license (annual) $50.00
Hunting Permit (non-resident) $25.00
Hunting Permit (resident) $15.00
Kennel License (City Council
Review)
$300 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Kennel License
(Administrative Review)
$100.00
Kennel License (Waiver) $300 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Letter of Conduct $15.00
Police False Alarm (first) No Charge
Police False Alarm (second) $25.00
Police False Alarm (third) $50.00
Police False Alarm (fourth) $75.00
Police False Alarm (fifth and
thereafter)
$150.00
Vehicle Impound/Storage $10.00/day + towing fees
No Parking Sign Deposit $5.00 per sign. Deposit
returned when signs are
returned.
Public Works
Service Charge
Curb stop repair $250.00 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Driveway Curb Cut Review $100.00 (no fee if in
connection with building
permit fee >$1000)
Driveway Waiver $500.00
Frozen/damaged meter repair $100.00
Annual ROW Registration Fee $100.00 per year
Noxious Weed / Mowing $150/hr.
ROW Permit $100.00
Small Wireless Facility Rent
$150 Annual + $25
Maintenance
Small Wireless Electrical $73 per node (less than
or equal to 100 watts),
$182 per node (>100
watts), or actual cost
Sanitary Sewer Prohibited
Connection Fee - Residential
$100 per month
Surcharge – noncompliance w/
stormwater prohibition from
sanitary sewer
$100.00 per month
Sanitary Sewer Prohibited
Connection Fee – Comm/Industrial
$100 + $20 per 1,000
gallons per month
Water disconnect/reconnect trip fee $65.00
Radio Transmitter $125.00 $135.00
Water meter iPearl (1”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$535.00
Water meter iPearl (3/4”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$420.00
Water meter SRII (1”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$556.00
All other meters (at cost)
Trunk Connection Rates per living unit for residential; and, equivalent for
commercial as determined by the Metropolitan Council SAC, except as may
be amended by City policy. City may adjust number of units determined by
Metropolitan Council if it deems it appropriate based on information
provided.
Service Charge
Hamel Urban Service Area-Sewer
Willow Lift Station Area
$860 $1,075.00
$1,555
Hamel Urban Service Area-Water $7,575.00
Independence Beach Area-Sewer $860 $1,075.00
Independence Beach Area-Water $4,410.00
Medina Morningside Area-Sewer $860 $1,075.00
Medina Morningside Area-Water $4,410.00
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
Fee
As set by Metropolitan
Council
Maple Plain Service Area-Water Per Maple Plain Fee
Schedule
Number of
alarms within
one calendar
year
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 4
December 3, 2019
Sewer and Water Rates - All rates monthly.
(MM=Medina Morningside, IB=Independence Beach).
Service Charge
Sewer (residential)
minimum
$22.06 $22.50 per month
Sewer (residential) per
1,000 gallons of water usage
$5.51 $5.62
Sewer (commercial)
minimum
$22.06 $22.50 per month
Sewer (commercial) per
1,000 gallons of water usage
$5.51 $5.62
Sewer only (residential)
(based on 6,000 gallons per
month)
$33.10 $33.77 per month
MM & IB Water
(residential) (base charge)
$12.67 $12.86 per month
MM & IB Water
(residential) 0-4,000 gallons
$2.81 $2.85 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(residential) 5,000-6,000
gallons
$3.17 $3.22 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(residential) 7,000-10,000
gallons
$4.22 $4.29 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(residential) 11,000-23,000
gallons
$4.57 $4.64 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(residential) 24,000 and up
gallons
$5.64 $5.73 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water (irrigation)
0-13,000 gallons
$4.57 $4.64 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water (irrigation)
14,000 and up gallons
$5.64 $5.73 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(commercial) (base charge)
$12.67 $12.86 per month
MM & IB Water
(commercial) water usage
under 10,000 gallons per
month
$4.22 $4.29 per 1,000
gallons
MM & IB Water
(commercial) water usage
over 10,000 gallons per
month
$5.64 $5.73 per 1,000
gallons
Storm Water Utility Fees
Service Charge
Storm Water Utility Annual
Fee
$31.22 $34.39 per Residential
Equivalency Factor (REF) +
Annual Watershed Due
established by specific
Watershed
Storm Water Appeal $250.00
Sewer and Water Rates - All rates monthly.
Service Charge
Hamel Water (residential)
(base charge)
$17.62 $17.88 per month
Hamel Water (residential) 0-
4,000 gallons
$3.17 $3.22 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
5,000-6,000 gallons
$3.88 $3.93 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
7,000-10,000 gallons
$5.28 $5.36 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
11,000-23,000 gallons
$6.22 $6.32 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
24,000 and up gallons
$7.04 $7.14 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (irrigation) 0-
13,000 gallons
$6.35 $6.45 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (irrigation)
14,000 and up gallons
$7.04 $7.14 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (commercial)
(base charge)
$17.62 $17.88 per month
Hamel Water (commercial)
water usage 0 – 9,000
gallons per month
$5.28 $5.36 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (commercial)
water usage 10,000 + gallons
per month
$7.04 $7.14 per 1,000 gallons
Penalty for unpaid utility
bills
10% per month on unpaid
balance (penalty not interest)
City of Maple Plain Water
Service
Rate established by City of
Maple Plain + 10% Medina
administrative fee
City of Orono Water Service Rate established by City of
Orono + 10% Medina
administrative fee
City of Plymouth Sewer
Service
Rate established by City of
Plymouth + 10% Medina
administrative fee
The Enclave at Medina Raw
Water Usage for the first
2,000,000 gallons per month
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
The Enclave at Medina Raw
Water Usage above
2,000,000 gallons per month
$3.81 per 1,000 gallons
Dominium (per unit)
0-13,000 gallons
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
Dominium (per unit)
14,000 and up gallons
$3.81 per 1,000 gallons
Tanker Fill $75.00 + Hamel commercial
water rates
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 5
December 3, 2019
Building Inspection Related
Service Charge
Building Permits Based on valuation – 1994
Building Fee Schedule
Building Plan Review 65% of building permits
Site Plan Review
“Administrative”
$1,000.00 deposit + c.a.c.
Investigation fee (for work
began without permit)
Double charge
Demolition (minimum) $100.00 per structure
(residential) + surcharge
$200.00 per structure (non-
residential) + state
surcharge
Fence < 5 feet (no Permit);
>= 5 and < 7 feet = $50
>=7 based on valuation –
1994 building fee schedule
(location verification)
Building – fireplace $50.00 per fireplace + state
surcharge
Re-side – residential $100.00 per structure + state
surcharge
Re-roof – residential $100.00 ($165 for wood
shingles/shakes) per
structure + state surcharge
Occupancy Financial
Guarantee (ex: occupy home
prior to approval of final
grade; other similar)
$10,000 escrow or $20,000
escrow if septic system is
not completed
Window, patio door, and front
door replacement (existing
openings)
$50.00 (1 window); $100.00
(2+ windows) + state
surcharge
Windows and doors (changing
opening)
Based on valuation – 1994
Building Fee Schedule
Electrical $2.00
Grading, Plan Review
(engineer review of submitted
plans and building permits)
$250.00 (grading plan
review fee is reduced in
cases where combined
building plan review and
grading plan review
otherwise would exceed
$650)
Grading Permit (grading
permit fee for disturbance less
than 1000 cubic yards is
reduced in cases where
combined building permit and
grading permit would
otherwise exceed $1000)
< 50 cubic yards = $50.00
51-100 cubic yards = $75.00
101-1000 cubic yards =
$200.00
1,001+ cubic yards =
$200+$25 per each
additional 100 yds. (max.
$750.00) + financial
guarantee of 150% of cost;
Violations = c.a.c.
Hardcover Surface Small
Improvement Review (ex.
sport courts, address
monuments, pillars, sheds<
200 square feet, etc.)
$50.00
Mechanical (residential) $50.00 per piece + state
surcharge
Moving Structure on public
street
$100.00 + c.a.c.
Plumbing (residential) $50.00 (1-5 fixtures);
$10.00 each additional +
state surcharge
Septic (new – Types 1-3)
Septic (new – Type 4)
$250.00 + $100 site visit
$935
Septic Repair (drainage fields) $125.00
Holding tank (ex: floor drains) $100.00
Septic Violation Inspection $250.00 + c.a.c.
Sewer Hook-up $100.00
Signs (temporary/portable) $50.00
Sign face replacement-wall or
pylon
$50.00
New monument/pylon sign State fee schedule
New wall sign/lighting change $100.00
Storm water Pollution
Prevention Program Review
$200.00
Underground Tank Removal $100.00
Tree Preservation Plan
Review
$25.00 (no fee if part of
grading or building permit)
Water Hook-up $100.00
Water Heater – residential $50.00 + state surcharge
Temporary Structures – res
Temporary Structures - comm
$100.00 + state surcharge
$200.00 + state surcharge
Planning and Zoning
Service Charge
Agriculture Preserve Application $50.00 + c.a.c.
Agriculture Preserve Expiration $50.00 + c.a.c.
Appeal Administrative Decision $500 (deposit); c.a.c.
not to exceed $500
Appeal of Wetland Conservation
Act Staff Decision of Functional
Assessment and Value
Classification
$500 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Appeal of Wetland Corrections
Notice
$500.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Appeal of Open Space Composite
Map and/or reference data
$500.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Cartway Easement $20,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Comprehensive Plan Copy $100.00
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 6
December 3, 2019
Concept Plan Review $1,000.00
Conditional Use Permit
application (commercial,
minimum)
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit
application (Telecommunications
Tower, minimum)
$2,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit
application (residential,
minimum)
$1,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit Annual
Review
$100.00 residential;
$200.00 commercial
Conservation Design
collaborative goal setting process
$1,000.00
Development Improvement
Financial Guarantee (i.e. Letter of
Credit or Cash)
150% amount of
estimated
improvements
Environmental Review (e.g.
EAW, EIS)
$10,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Interim Use Permit $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Lot Combination or
Rearrangement
Lot Combination of Substandard
Lots
$1,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
$200 + cost of title
documentation
Maps 11x17 = $1; others =
c.a.c.
Mixed Use Stage I Plan $2,000.00 + c.a.c.
Mixed Use Stage II Plan $2,000.00 + c.a.c.
Mixed Use Stage III Plan
Mixed Residential Master Plan
$2,000.00 + c.a.c.
$5,000.00 + c.a.c.
Park Dedication Fee (see city
code)
Residential = 8% of
land value but no <
$3,500/unit or
>$8,000/unit;
Commercial = 8% of
land value
Planned Unit Development
Concept
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Planned Unit Development
General Plan
$10,000.00 (deposit)
+ c.a.c.
Planned Unit Development Final
Plan
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Rezoning Application (minimum) $1,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Site Plan Review $5,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Subdivision Application
(minimum) (2-5 lots)
Subdivision Application (>5 lots)
$5,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
$10,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Temporary Outdoor Sales Event $50.00
Upland Buffer Vegetation
Review/Inspection/Guarantee
150% financial
guarantee
Upland buffer sign $35.00 (w/ design)
$10.00 (text only)
Vacation $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Variance Application (minimum) $1000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c. for residential;
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c. for commercial
(Land Use Application Sign)
install
$75.00
Wetland Delineation Review $600.00
Wetland Field Estimate (flagging) $250.00
Wetland Exemption Decision/No
Loss
$300.00
Wetland Replacement Plan $750.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Zoning Letter $50.00
Staff Consultant Fees – Staff and consultant time spent on
planning applications (or defined as other c.a.c.) will be
charged to applicant.
Service Charge
City Attorney Up to $270 $275 per hour,
per rate schedule
City Engineer Up to $182 $185 per hour,
per rate schedule
Survey Crew Up to $198 $205 per hour,
per rate schedule
Prosecuting Attorney Up to $140.25 $143.75 per
hour, per rate schedule
Planning Consultants Up to $160 per hour, per
rate schedule
Tree Inspector Up to $75.00 $90 per hour
City Staff - Professional $80 $90per hour
City Staff – Public Works $65 $70per hour + time &
half for over time
City Staff – Field Inspector $80 $90 per hour + time &
half for over time
City Staff – Administrative
Support
$60 $70 per hour + time &
half for over time
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 7
December 3, 2019
*c.a.c. = city accrued costs
*Deposits for land use and other applications must include the fee established by this fee schedule ordinance and any unpaid fees from
the previous application involving essentially the same property by the same or similar applicant.
*Deposits for land use applications that require more than two requests or large in scale shall be determined by the City Administrator.
*Deposits will be returned for land use projects paid in full after final approval, deposits for wetland and grading permits will be
returned upon acceptance of work if bills are paid in full.
*Escrow for building certificate will be returned upon acceptance of project.
*Land use applications are processed by planning, building, finance, engineering and legal departments and all costs associated with
the review shall be billed to the applicant.
Exhibit B
Hamel Community Building Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 8
December 3, 2019
Group Time Period Rental Rate
Medina Public Service Groups Anytime N/A
City Approved Medina Civic or Non-profit Groups ■ Anytime N/A ■
Monday to Thursday All Day $190
Monday to Thursday < 4 Hours $100
Monday to Thursday < 1.5 Hours $50
Friday All Day $250
Sat. and Sun. Afternoons (7 am to 2 pm) < 4 Hours $200 ^
Sat. and Sun. Evenings (3 pm to Midnight) 3 pm - Midnight $400
Saturday or Sunday All Day $450
Overnight Events* (10 pm to 8 am) All Night $150
Alcohol Usage* All Day $100
Facility walk-through required: First one is free, if you miss
appointment or need another one, each additional walk-through: Scheduled $25
Appointment with vendor to view facility prior to event Scheduled $25
Sales Tax Included in all fees. Kitchen Service Area and Outdoor Shelter use included in all fees.
■ City Approved Civic or Non-profit Groups or public events can receive one free use per month and any
additional will be charged rental rates
^ $55 per hour for additional hours over the 4-hour time slot (only allowed up to 3 pm to keep evening rental
available).
* in addition to base fee
Community Building Security Deposit ○ Time Period Security Deposit Rate
Medina Public Service Groups - Any Day Anytime N/A
City Approved Medina Civic Groups - Any Day Anytime $100
Any Day Anytime $250
Any Day w/ Alcohol or Dance Anytime $500
○ This fee is to cover any damage to the facility, extra clean-up, or
cancellation of event without 3 weeks’ notice.
Exhibit C
Field and Court Reservation Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 9
December 3, 2019
Field Usage Fee Table
Field fees are based on a 2.5-hour time slot. If additional time is needed, the fee will increase $25 per additional hour.
Facility Practice Fee Game Fee Tournament Fee
Ball Field* $25 $50 Calculated on a case by case basis
Open Field $50.00 $100 Calculated on a case by case basis
Light Fee: $15 / field / hour – this fee will be required if lights are requested
*Renter is expected to drag the field on day of reservation, chalk for their own games, and prepare field for playing condition in the
event of rain. These fees cover the city’s cost to reserve the field and help pay for annual maintenance and capital expenses
to keep these facilities in playing condition.
Field Usage Security Deposit
$500.00 Security Deposit for field reservations pertaining to games and/or practices per every Field Reservation Application
submitted.
$800.00 Security Deposit for field reservations pertaining to tournaments per every Field Reservation Application submitted.
Tennis Court Fee Rental & Deposits
The tennis courts are available free of charge to residents on a first come, first serve basis. Organized recreational groups may reserve
the tennis courts with advanced approval, based on availability, for the following fee:
Court Rental - $20 per court per hour*
Court Deposit - $150 Security Deposit
*This fee may be negotiated through a separate group rental agreement, which must be approved by the Medina City Council.
Key Deposit
A $25 key deposit is required for issued keys to any building reservation on the facilities.
Keys must be returned by 4:30 p.m. of next business day after rental.
Rental Fees for Amenities
Field House Bathroom Fee
$70 per day to reserve both men’s and women’s bathrooms
Portable Toilets
The City of Medina will determine if Additional Toilets or Special Cleaning needs to be scheduled on the day or days that the fields
are reserved.
Portable Toilet Fees:
$60 Additional Units (per unit); $200 ADA Toilet; $35 Special Cleaning (per unit)
Exhibit C
Field and Court Reservation Fee Schedule
Effective January 1, 2020
Ordinance No. 10
December 3, 2019
RESERVATION FEE AND DEPOSIT POLICY
Recreation Field Reservation fees
Recreation field reservation fees are the fees required for the direct usage of the fields. This fee includes the field usage fee as well as
any fees associated with the requested/required rental of amenities. All fees will be required by the City upon submission of the
reservation application.
Refunds of Reservation Fees
Refunds for all recreation field reservation fees are processed on an individual basis with regards to the conditions of the cancellation.
All cancellation notices and requests for rescheduling must be submitted in writing. Any cancellations that occur upon the day of the
event, the City must receive the cancellation notice by the next business day.
•• REFUND FOR CANCELLATIONS DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS. All cancellations that are due to weather
conditions must be verified by the City staff prior to refund. A percent of the recreation field reservation fees may be
remitted to the City according to the percent of field used if event is interrupted due to weather conditions and is not
rescheduled.
•• NO FEE REFUNDS. Recreation field reservation fee refunds will not be given for cancelled game/practice reservations
that are not related to weather conditions less than fourteen (14) days before the event.
•• NO FEE REFUNDS. Recreation field reservation fee refund will not be given for cancelled tournament reservations that
are not related to weather conditions less than thirty (30) days before the event.
Recreation Field Reservation Security Deposit
Recreation Field Reservation Security Deposit is required to secure the performance of the field usage and any administration fees
connected to cancellations or rescheduling. A security deposit will be required by the City upon submission of the reservation
application.
Refunds of Security Deposit
The applicant; having fulfilled the obligations under the field reservation application, City Code Chapter 515, and an after post-event
inspection by the Public Works Department, will have their Security Deposit refunded.
•• A full security deposit will be remitted to the applicant upon having left no financial obligation to the City and having
caused no damage beyond ordinary wear and tear.
•• A percent of the security deposit will be remitted to the City pending:
1) any financial obligation to the City,
2) the percent of damages to the facilities beyond the ordinary wear and tear.
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO. ___ BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ___ an
ordinance amending the city’s fee schedule; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is 10 pages in length and consists almost entirely of a chart and
exhibits; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the
public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. ___ to be published in the
official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ___. The ordinance revises
the city’s fee schedule, including fees for administration, sewer and water, storm water, watershed,
planning and zoning, building, staff consultants, community building rental, and other services. The
ordinance will not be codified. The full text of Ordinance No. __ is available for inspection at Medina
city hall during regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the City
Clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in the clerk’s office at city hall for public inspection and that the
City Clerk post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city.
Dated: December 3, 2019.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Resolution No. 2019-
December 3, 2019
2
ATTEST:
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Debra Dion, Associate Planner, through Director Dusty Finke
DATE: November 25, 2019
MEETING: December 3, 2019 City Council
SUBJ: Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street – Variance to exceed
impervious surface maximum in Shoreland Overlay District
Public Hearing
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: October 7, 2019
120-day Review Deadline: February 3, 2020
Summary of Request
Dave and Angie Raskob, the applicants have requested approval of a variance to exceed the 25
percent impervious surface maximum in the Shoreland Overlay District to construct a single-
family home at 4585 Balsam Street. The subject lot is currently vacant. The applicants have
provided a narrative explaining their practical difficulty. An aerial of the subject property is
below:
The subject lot is zoned UR, Urban Residential. It is within the Shoreland Overlay District,
1,000 feet from Lake Ardmore (located to the east of subject property) and Lake Independence
(to the west). The lot was platted in 2005 and is described as L2, B1, Maple Walk. The
Planning Commission recommends approval of the variance to exceed 25% impervious surface
maximum in the Shoreland Overlay District with conditions at the end of this report.
The subject lot is 9,477 square feet in size, which meets the required UR zoning district lot size
requirements of 9,000 square feet, in the absence of the Shoreland Overlay district. The
Shoreland Overlay district requires 15,000 square feet of lot area with a maximum of 25 percent
Agenda Item # 7C
Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street Page 2 of 6 December 3, 2019
Impervious Surface Variance City Council Meeting
impervious surface. The applicants are requesting to exceed the impervious surface maximum in
the Shoreland Overlay district by 5.78 percent.
The following table summarizes setbacks and impervious requirements.
Setbacks/Impervious Surface Requirements
Proposed
Min. Front Yard Setback (north) 30 feet 30 feet
Min. Rear Yard Setback (south) 30 feet 30 feet
Min. Side Setback (east/west) 10 feet 24+ feet
Maximum Hardcover 25% 30.78 %
Future Deck
The applicants have shown a 10’ x 15’ deck location on the survey. It is not the applicant’s
intention to construct the deck with the construction of the house, but rather to receive approval
for it during the variance process. The deck is shown on the east side of the house and would be
on the walk-out side of the lot. This would mean that the deck would be raised approximately
10+- feet off of the ground. Given this distance, it would leave room for a patio door or some
sort of door under the deck which would mean egress would be warranted from under the deck to
the yard. This side of the house would provide a lot of natural light given that it is on the
walkout side of the lot.
Standard decks are considered impervious surfaces/hardcover because the boards are
substantially larger than the gaps between the boards. The applicants have not requested
additional hardcover for a deck. Instead, they suggested a product which has a larger proportion
of gaps for water to run through. The material the applicants have provided is shown below and
is from PlasTEAK Products - Plastic Grates for Docks, Decks & Walkways:
Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street Page 3 of 6 December 3, 2019
Impervious Surface Variance City Council Meeting
The PlasTeak brand would not be the only material allowed, but rather anything similar meeting
building code standards and as permeable as the PlasTeak product in the pictures above. The
City Engineer and staff believe it is reasonable that these types of products be not counted as
hardcover, provided the ground underneath remains permeable.
The Commission considered the material PlasTeak brand permeable and staff has conditioned
the application requiring the material be used or something similar be used for the upper deck
and that the lower patio if one ever installed be permeable.
Engineering – Storm Sewer – Run-off
The City Engineer has reviewed the Variance request and has the following review comments:
(1) A direct connection should be made to the existing structure at Ardmore Avenue as
opposed to daylighting with a flare end and rip-rap.
(2) The applicants have increased the size of the pipe opening per the request of the City
from 8 inches to 12 inches to improve maintenance capabilities and conveyance of
stormwater.
(3) In addition to the installation for the filtration trench (French drain), the applicants have
proposed to collect additional run-off from the site and convey it from the site and
convey it through a new storm sewer pipe and connection at Ardmore Avenue. The
storm sewer at Ardmore Avenue is connected to the adjacent treatment pond.
Building Code Review
The decking material will be required to be state certified and meet state building code
requirements.
Public Comment
Two residents spoke at the meeting with questions relating to home style, setbacks, drainage,
grades, existing trees, and stormwater. Dave and Angie Raskob responded to both residents
questions and both appeared to be satisfied. The proposed home will be a rambler, will have
setbacks of 30’ at the front yard and 20’ to the west. The west side of the house will not have
windows which should reduce any impact to the neighboring property.
No significant tree removal is planned. Improvement of drainage and how wet the area is was
discussed.
Pursuant to Chapter 8, Section 825.45 of Medina City Code, the City shall grant Variances
if the following Criteria are met:
(a) A variance shall only be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of the
ordinance.
In exchange for the increased impervious surface, the applicants are proposing to go
above and beyond by installing a filtration trench (French drain) that will collect
additional run-off from off-site properties and convey all water through a new storm
sewer pipe that will connect it at Ardmore Avenue and then it would go to the
adjacent treatment pond. Currently the subject lot takes on a lot of water from
neighboring properties.
Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street Page 4 of 6 December 3, 2019
Impervious Surface Variance City Council Meeting
The intent of the 25% hardcover limitation is to reduce the rate and amount of
stormwater runoff to nearby lakes. The applicants proposed to achieve the intent by
installing stormwater improvements on the property which would exceed those
required if a home was built with 25% hardcover.
(b) A variance shall only be granted when it is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The subject lot is guided Low Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan and the
construction of one home that has a footprint of 2,344 square feet does not appear to
be 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
difficulty to be established, all 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 applicants are proposing to use the property for the construction of a single-
family home. The home would be of reasonable size, consisting of a 2,344 square
foot footprint, which includes the attached garage. The proposed footprint is
consistent in size with single family homes in the neighborhood. Staff does not
feel that reducing the house footprint or driveway would be a good consideration.
(2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the landowner;
The subject lot was created through a plat combing a larger number of lots in
2003. That plat allowed the creation of this lot below the minimum lot size
requirement in the Shoreland Overlay District, which appears to be unique. In
addition, the existing topography of the lot and the substantial amounts of off-site
drainage are unique and not created by the landowner.
and;
(3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The construction of the single-family home in this neighborhood will be in
conformity with all the other homes in the block and area. The proposed home
will not stand out from the essential character of the neighborhood, but rather
provide a home on a vacant lot.
Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street Page 5 of 6 December 3, 2019
Impervious Surface Variance City Council Meeting
Planning Considerations and Findings
The lot is showing a footprint for a home designed with the existing grades in mind and to
minimally alter the lot. As a result, a portion of the home will be below grade. The driveway
will be at a minimal width which will help to keep hardcover at a minimum.
Staff feels the applicant has put much consideration into the planning of the home layout and
grading of the lot. Given how the lot is uniquely sloped and how improvements the applicants
are proposing will improve the runoff for the neighboring properties, staff feels this may be a
better result than reducing the hardcover.
Staff does recommend the French drain system and conveying neighboring run-off to run into the
proposed storm sewer pipe to help alleviate run-off not only for their lot but for the surrounding
area properties as a benefit to the area. This in exchange for not having to install a permeable
driveway seems much more beneficial to the surrounding area and much less maintenance to the
future homeowners.
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their November 12th meeting and after hearing
public comments and reviewing, the Planning Commission found that the Variance criteria were
met as described in the report and recommended approval of the variance with the conditions
noted below:
1. A direct connection should be made to the existing structure at Ardmore Avenue as
opposed to daylighting with a flare end and rip-rap.
2. The Applicant shall construct the new home in substantial conformance with the survey
received by the City on November 7, 2019, except as amended herein.
3. No additional hardcover shall be added, which includes patios, sidewalks, building
additions, driveway expansions, or anything else not otherwise mentioned.
4. A building permit shall be required for deck prior to construction. Any future deck is
required to be constructed with PlasTeak grated material or another similar material
which is substantially permeable rather than standard deck boards. Materials shall meet
building code requirements. The surface under the deck shall also remain permeable.
5. The Applicant shall commence construction within one year of the approval of this
variance for the construction of the home, or else approval of the variance shall be
considered null and void.
6. The Applicant shall not have a timeline to commence construction of permeable deck.
7. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the request.
Potential Action
The Council, as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, should hold a public hearing on the
request. If, following the hearing, the Council agrees that the variance criteria are met, the
following action could be taken: Move to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the
variance, subject to the conditions noted in the staff report.
Dave and Angie Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street Page 6 of 6 December 3, 2019
Impervious Surface Variance City Council Meeting
Attachments
1. Excerpt from draft 11/12 Planning Commission minutes
2. Applicant’s Narrative
3. Survey received by City on 11-7-2019
4. League of Mn “Practical Difficulties” (2)
5. Document List
CITY OF MEDINA
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT Meeting Minutes
Tuesday November 12, 2019
1. Call to Order: Chairperson Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Planning Commissioners Aaron Amic, Peter Galzki, Beth Nielsen, Kerby Nester, Cindy
Piper, and Robin Reid.
Absent: Planning Commissioner Rashmi Williams.
Also Present: City Planning Director Dusty Finke and City Planner Deb Dion.
2. David B. Raskob – 4585 Balsam Street – Variance to Exceed 25% Hardcover Limitation within
Shoreland Overlay District
Reid recused herself from the discussion.
Dion reported that the applicants are requesting a variance to exceed the 25 percent impervious
surface maximum in the shoreland overlay district to construct a home. She noted that the property is
currently vacant and is zoned Urban Residential. She stated that all properties in this area are
similarly zoned. She reviewed the proximity of Lake Independence and Lake Ardmore and the
restrictions for properties within 1,000 feet of lakeshore. She reviewed the size of the property, which
is smaller than the required lot size in the shoreland overlay district. She reviewed the total amount of
hardcover proposed on the site of 2,917 square feet of impervious which would be 30.78 percent. She
provided details regarding a deck, noting that staff would like input from the Commission. She
reviewed the variance criteria that must be considered.
Nester asked if the proposed home would fall under the 25 percent requirement if the lot were
correctly sized.
Dion confirmed that to be true.
Nester asked if the home would meet setbacks.
Dion confirmed that all setback requirements would be met.
Galzki commented that it would seem the deck would be a small area and asked how much of the
deck would be the pervious material.
Dion confirmed that material would be proposed for the entire deck. She noted that there would still
be an issue under the deck and there would still need to be a step out.
The applicant provided additional details, noting that there would be gutters under the deck to collect
the rainwater and direct that to a downspout.
Nester noted that could be made a condition.
Finke stated that the variance as requested would not allow for a deck unless it is pervious.
Nester stated that this seems to be a unique situation because of the small lot size.
Dion provided additional details on the French drain and culvert proposed by the applicant that would
capture drainage from this property as well as the water that comes onto the site from other
properties.
Galzki asked if the existing stormwater structure that would connect to the French drain would be
adequately designed to handle that water.
Dion stated that originally an eight-inch pipe was proposed but the City Engineer recommended a 12-
inch pipe, which will flow underground to the pond near Ardmore.
Finke stated that for a variance the City Council will hold a public hearing, but the Commission can
accept public input.
Dave Raskob, 2864 Ardmore Avenue, stated that he and his wife run a small construction business
and build homes. He stated that they have owned this lot since 2005 and they are trying to do
something with the lot. He noted that they have had several different plans and ideas for what could
be done, and they feel that this would be the best fit. He noted that the home will partially be built
into a hill as they will be using insulated concrete form which will have less impact on the neighbor to
the west. He asked the Commission to recommend approval so that they can develop something on
the lot. He noted that Reid is the neighbor to the east and they are trying to develop something that
will not negatively impact the neighbors.
Matt Larson, neighbor to the west, asked for information on the height and it was confirmed that the
home would be a rambler style. He asked if there would be an opportunity to increase the setback
near the garage.
Mr. Raskob stated that Mr. Larson’s home also has a ten-foot setback and they would like to have
sufficient space on the other side as well.
Mrs. Raskob provided additional details on the space requirements for the French drain system.
Mr. Raskob noted that there would not be windows on that side of the garage.
Robin Reid, 2945 Ardmore, stated that all the water from this lot, the Larson lot and her lot ends up in
her yard. She commented on the wet conditions in her yard all summer. She hoped that this plan
would help alleviate the problem she experiences. She stated that she and her husband are not
opposed to this development as it seems this would be a win/win for everyone. She asked and
received confirmation that certain large trees would remain on the lot. She asked for input on who
assisted with the drainage plan and it was confirmed that the City Engineer provided input along with
the project engineer. She asked if the water would run down Balsam or whether there would be a
trench.
Mr. Raskob explained that the water would be piped underground to the storm pond.
Motion by Galzki, seconded by Nielsen, to recommend approve the variance request for the
construction of a home at 4585 Balsam Street subject to the conditions noted by staff. Motion carries
unanimously. (Absent: Williams)
Letter of Intent
In Support of Request for Variance
4585 Balsam St Medina, MN
This Letter of Intent is meant to support our request for a variance to the hardcover requirement on a
non-conforming lot. We are requesting release from the existing ordinance where strict enforcement
would cause undue hardship. The Maple Walk development in Independence Beach was approved in
January of 2005, and we purchased this lot shortly after. As builders and long-time residents of the
neighborhood, we seek to make a beneficial improvement. The variance, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood.
We have carefully considered how we could build a home on this lot while limiting the impact of run-off
on neighboring properties. Our intention is to build a 40x60 single-family Insulated Concrete Form (ICF)
home with a 2-car garage, which we would set into the existing topography. We propose to install a
berm, French drain and HPDE below-grade drainage as indicated on the survey. Our sump pump outlet
would likewise be tied into that below-grade system. Lastly, although we don’t intend to put one on
immediately, we are also asking that a future permeable deck or underdeck gutter system be
considered within this variance. We believe these considerations would reduce the amount of surface
water in the yard, and its impact on the neighborhood.
The intention of a hardcover restriction is to limit the amount of run-off into the lakes and reduce the
impact of run off onto adjoining properties. Currently, the run-off from the highest point on Balsam
Street flows across our lot, through the neighbor’s yard, and down to Ardmore Avenue. Our proposed
berm would stop that run-off along our lot’s easterly edge, directing it underground and into the storm
sewer at the corner of Balsam Street & Ardmore Avenue. This improves an existing problem, where as a
permeable driveway & sidewalk would not.
What is perhaps most relevant here, and what we would ask the board to consider, is: (1) We are
proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner by asking for a minimal hardcover overage to
alleviate the practical difficulty. We are not requesting special privileges that are denied to others in the
same neighborhood. (2) The hardship is due to circumstances unique to this property and not created
by us. The lot was approved as-is and purchased in 2005, and hasn’t changed since then. (3) The
proposed drainage plan improves existing run-off, and thus creates no undue burden on any
neighboring residence. The style and structure of the home will be in step with the existing
neighborhood, and we believe the improvement would result in an overall increase in property value
and tax base.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
David & Angie Raskob
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
RELEV ANT LINKS:
Ill. Legal standards
When considering a variance application, a city exercises so-called "quasi-
judicial" authority. This means that the city's role is limited to applying the
legal standard of practical difficulties to the facts presented by the
application. The city acts like a judge in evaluating the facts against the legal
standard. If the applicant meets the standard, then the variance may be
granted. In contrast, when the city writes the rules in zoning ordinance, the
city is exercising "legislative" authority and has much broader discretion.
A. Practical difficulties
"Practical difficulties" is a legal standard set forth in law that cities must
apply when considering applications for variances. It is a three-factor test
and applies to all requests for variances. To constitute practical difficulties,
all three factors of the test must be satisfied.
1.
The first factor is that the propeity owner proposes to use the properly in a
reasonable manner. This factor means that the landowner would like to use
the property in a particular reasonable way but cannot do so under the rules
of the ordinance. It does not mean that the land cannot be put to any
reasonable use whatsoever without the variance. For example, if the variance
application is for a building too close to a lot line or does not meet the
required setback, the focus of the first factor is whether the request to place a
building there is reasonable.
2.
The second factor is that the landowner's problem is due to circumstances
unique to the propeity not caused by the landowner. The uniqueness
generally relates to the physical characteristics of the particular piece of
property, that is, to the land and not personal characteristics or preferences
of the landowner. When considering the variance for a building to encroach
or intrude into a setback, the focus of this factor is whether there is anything
physically unique about the particular piece of property, such as sloping
topography or other natural features like wetlands or trees.
League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo:
Land Use Variances
1/1 1/2019
RELEV ANT LINKS:
Tshe tracte' if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality. Under this factor, consider whether the resulting
structure will be out of scale, out of place, or otherwise inconsistent with the
surrounding area. For example, when thinking about the variance for an
encroachment into a setback, the focus is how the particular building will
look closer to a lot line and if that fits in with the character of the area.
201I Miim Laws, cli 19,
amendingMum Stat §
462 35 7, subd 6.
B. Undue hardship
"Undue hardship" was the name of the three-factor test prior to a May 2011
change of law. After a long and contentious session working to restore city
variance authority, the final version of HF 52 supported by the League and
allies was passed unanimously by the Legislature. On May 5, Gov. Dayton
signed the new law. It was effective on May 6, the day following the
governor's approval. Presumably it applies to pending applications, as the
general rule is that cities are to apply the law at the time of the decision,
rather than at the time of application.
Krunnnewcher v. Crtr of
iSrjumetorika. 783 N W 2d 721
(Minn. June 24, 2010)
Miim Stat !: 462 351 subd
6
Minn Stat !§ 394 27, subd 7
See Section [, kVhat rs (7
!lmlanCe
The 2011 law restores municipal variance authority in response to a
Minnesota Supreme Court case, Krummenacher v. City ofMinnetonka. It
also provides consistent statutory language between city land use plaruiing
statutes and county variance authority, and clarifies that conditions may be
imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to,
and bear a rough proportionality to, the impact created by the variance.
In Krummenacher, the Minnesota Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the
statutory definition of "undue hardship" and held that the "reasonable use"
prong of the "undue hardship" test is not whether the proposed use is
reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence of the
variance. The new law changes that factor back to the "reasonable manner"
understanding that had been used by some lower courts prior to the
Krummenacher ruling.
See Section IV-A, Hmmony
+pit/i other land yrse conti'ols.
The 2011 law renamed the municipal variance standard from "undue
hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise retained the familiar
three-factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential
character. Also included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was
already in the county statutes.
League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo:
Land Use Variances
liil{20j Cl
Project: LR-19-262 – Raskob 4585 Balsam Street Hardcover Variance
The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are
only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall.
Documents Submitted by Applicant
Document Received
Date
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic Paper
Copy?
Notes
Application 10/7/19 10/4/19 5 yes yes
Fee 1000.00 10/7/19 1
Mailing Labels n/a
Narrative 10/7/19 9/30/19 1 yes yes
Survey 10/7/19 4/26/18 1 yes yes
survey 11/1/19 11/1/19 1 yes yes
survey 11/7/19 11/7/19 1 yes yes
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic Notes
Police comments 10/8/19 1 yes
WSB email comments 10/17/19 1
WSB email comments 10/23/19 2 yes
PC Staff Report 11/12/19 11 yes
Draft PC minutes 11/12/19
Public Comments
Document Date Electronic Notes
Robin Reid – Planning Commission meeting 11/12/19 yes
Mat Larson 11/12/19 yes
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 1 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: November 26, 2019
MEETING: December 3, 2019 City Council
SUBJ: Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) - Rezoning, Preliminary Plat,
Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit - PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 &
04-118-23-24-0001 (north of Highway 55, 1300 feet west of Willow Drive)
Background
Jan Har, LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) has requested approval of various land use applications to
allow for a business development on property located north of Highway 55, approximately 1300
feet west of Willow Drive. The applicant proposes construction of a 43,000 square-foot, three-
story office building with a bar restaurant and a 13,100 square foot accessory building for shop,
warehouse, and vehicle storage.
The subject site is approximately 43 acres, but the western half is part of a large wetland basin
(Pioneer Creek). The northern five acres of the site is wooded, and the remainder is farmed. The
site slopes from east to west. A bald eagle eyrie is located within a large tree near Highway 55
on the edge of the wetland. Site and building construction would be subject to US Fish and
Wildlife Services regulations and recommendations.
Property to the east of the site is also guided for business, but much is currently farmland.
Graphic Packaging is located to the southeast. Rural homes in the City of Corcoran are located
to the north. The large wetland to the west is between 850-1350 feet in width, with rural
residential uses to the west. An aerial of the site and surrounding properties can be found at the
top of the following page.
The request includes the following land use applications, and staff recommends that they be
considered in this order:
1) Rezoning from Rural Business Holding (RBH) to Business (B) - The subject site, and
property to the east and south, is guided for business development in the Comprehensive
Plan. The subject site is currently zoned Rural Business Holding (RBH). The applicant
proposes to rezone both proposed lots to the Business (B) zoning district.
2) Preliminary Plat to plat property into two lots - The applicant proposes to plat the property
into two lots. The southern lot is proposed to be approximately 26.5 acres in size and to
be developed in this application. The northern lot is proposed to be approximately 19.5
acres in size for future development. No improvements are proposed on the northern lot
at this time.
3) Site Plan review for construction of new buildings
4) Conditional Use Permit for Indoor Recreation, Outdoor Dining/Drinking area, and vehicle
repair
Agenda Item # 7D
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 2 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Rezoning Request
As previously noted, the subject site has been designated as “Business” in the City’s 2020-2040
Comprehensive Plan. The subject site is zoned Rural Business Holding (RBH). The RBH
zoning district is intended to apply to property planned for business development prior to
development with City sewer and water. Rezoning is expected at the time sewer and water are
extended to the property.
The City has established the Business (B) and Business Park (BP) zoning districts to implement
the objectives of the Business land use in the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has requested
that the entire site be zoned to Business.
The B and BP districts allow similar uses, but as described in their purpose statements, generally
the B district is intended to be applied to property more proximate to arterial roadways: “The
purpose of the Business (B) district is to provide for a zoning district for a mix of office, high
quality light industrial, and larger-scale retail and service uses with proximity to arterial
roadways. Development shall include high quality and attractive building materials and
architectural design as well as extensive landscaping in order to limit impacts on surrounding
land uses, and shall be integrated and coordinated in a way to most efficiently utilize site
improvements and to protect the natural environment.”
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 3 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
The BP zoning district is intended to be applied to property more proximate to residential lands:
“The purpose of the Business Park (BP) district is to provide an attractive, high quality business
park primarily for office, high quality manufacturing and assembly, and non-retail uses in
developments which provide a harmonious transition to residential development and
neighborhoods by: 1) conducting all business activities and essentially all storage inside
buildings, 2) consisting of low profile, high quality and attractive buildings which blend in with
the environment, 3) providing open space, quality landscaping and berming which achieve a
park-like setting; 4) including berming and buffering of parking, loading docks and other similar
functions; and 5) protecting and enhancing the natural environment.”
The most significant difference between the BP and B zoning districts is that the B district allows
a height of 45 feet, and the BP district allows 35 feet. The setback requirements are slightly
more for BP and very limited outside storage is permitted in B while no outside storage is
permitted in BP.
The subject site is adjacent to Highway 55, which would generally align with the purpose
statement of the B zoning district. Residential property is located north of the site in the City of
Corcoran, which may suggest that the BP district could be applied to the proposed northern lot.
However, the proposed northern lot is approximately 865 feet north of Highway 55, which is still
proximate to the highway.
The definition and objectives of the Business land use should provide guidance when
determining appropriate zoning regulations for property within the use. This information is
attached for reference.
According to Section 825.35 of the City Code: “amendments [to the zoning map] shall
not be issued indiscriminately but shall only be used as a means to reflect changes in the goals
and policies of the community as reflected in the Plan or changes in conditions in the City.”
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of the entire subject site to the B zoning district.
Staff believes the proposed zoning of the southern lot to the B zoning district is consistent with
the purposes of the district. While the northern lot is adjacent to residential property in Corcoran
to the north, it is still proximate to Highway 55. As such, staff believes the B district is
appropriate.
Preliminary Plat
The applicant proposes to plat the subject property into two lots. The subject site has two
property identification numbers, but staff did not find record of previous subdivision. The B and
BP district have different minimum lot standards, but it appears that both proposed lots far
exceed the minimum standards of either district. The following table compares the proposed
lots to the standards of the B and BP districts.
B Requirement BP
Requirement
Lot 1
(south lot)
Lot 2
(north lot)
Minimum Lot Area 3 acres 3 acres 26.58 acre 19.59 acre
Minimum Lot Width 175 feet 200 feet 1440 feet 935 feet
Minimum Lot Depth 175 feet 200 feet 660 feet 1440 feet
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 4 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Transportation, Streets and Right-of-way
The applicant proposes to construct a road to connect to Willow Drive as a primary access. The
applicant proposes a temporary access into the site from Highway 55 for three years following
completion of the building. The plans show a right-in/right-out onto Highway 55, but the
applicant is updating plans to show access via the road to Willow.
There is property owned by another party between the subject site and Willow Drive. City staff
is working with the owners to secure public right-of-way which would allow the applicant to
construct the street. The City would then accept this street as a public roadway. Without the
street connection to Willow Drive, it is likely that staff would be requiring a traffic analysis and
potentially major improvements on Highway 55 if the applicant were proposing as primary
access. Staff recommends a condition that the plat and site plan review are contingent upon
construction of the street to connect to Willow Drive.
Staff recommends a condition that the owner provide documentation acceptable to the City
Attorney to ensure closure of the access onto Highway 55 within three years after completion of
the building. Staff also recommends a condition that the plat be updated to dedicate right-of-way
for the proposed cul-de-sac from Willow Drive.
Provided the access to Willow Drive is constructed, the City Engineer did not raise concerns
related to the City’s transportation system. The City Engineer did not oppose the temporary right
from Highway 55. However, the City Engineer did raise concern with access directly onto
Highway 55 if the access to Willow Drive is not provided.
Sewer/Water/Easements
The applicant proposes to loop a watermain from the west side of Graphic Packaging to the site
and then back to Willow Drive along the proposed roadway. Staff recommends that all
watermain and hydrants improvements within the subject site be private.
The applicant proposes to expand sanitary sewer along the street to a future City sewer lift
station which is proposed along Willow Drive. Private sewer lines would extend from the cul-
de-sac to serve the buildings.
Staff recommends a condition that easements be provided around the perimeter of the lot, over
all wetland areas, over all stormwater facilities, and over public and private watermains and
hydrants. Because staff recommends that the watermain within the site be private, staff
recommends that a wider drainage and utility easement be provided along the eastern property
line between the watermains to allow for a potential connection between them at some point in
the future.
Park Dedication – Ordinance Requirements
City’s subdivision regulations require up to one of the following amounts to be dedicated for
parks, trails, and open space purposes:
• 2.4 acres of land to be dedicated – 10% of the buildable property
• $65,200 (estimated) in-lieu of land dedication – 8% of the pre-developed market value
• Combination of land and cash
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 5 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan
No park or trail improvements are identified in the City’s Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan, a
map of which is attached for reference.
The City’s natural resource inventory and Open Space Plan identify the wooded area in the
northern portion of the site as a “good” quality maple-basswood forest. This quality of woodland
is uncommon in the metropolitan area and has been identified as a priority for conservation. At
this point, no development is proposed on the northern lot so no disturbance of the woodland is
proposed. However, Park Dedication during review of the plat provides opportunity for
preservation.
Proposed Parks, Trails and Open Space
The applicant proposes preservation of the approximately 20 acre wetland area and installation
of three bike repair stations in City parks as park dedication. Wetland areas have certain
protections through the wetland conservation act and City ordinances. It appears that the bike
repair stations retail for approximately $750-$1500+installation costs.
The applicant has also discussed the possibility of trails to access the natural amenities of the
site, specifically the eagles’ eyrie and the woods to the north. The Park Commission can discuss
whether such trails, although internal to the site, could provide a broader public use, perhaps in
connection with a trailhead.
Park, Trail, Open Space Discussion
Staff recommends discussion related to preservation of the wooded area in the northern portion
of the site. The City’s natural resource inventory identifies this as a comparatively high-quality
natural resource in the City and a priority for protection.
Existing City regulations and practical realities of the site provide some protections. The City’s
tree preservation ordinance would require replacement if more than 10% of the trees were
proposed to be removed. The wetland to the west and north provide buffer requirements, and
when combined with property line setbacks from the residential property to the north, encompass
a fair amount of the area. These factors, combined with the topography of this portion of the
property, would suggest construction in their area may be challenging.
With all of that being said, there would be no prohibition against disturbance within most of the
wooded area. In past examples, the City and property owner have agreed on partial credit for
preservation when the City hasn’t required the actual full dedication of land into City ownership.
Based upon the challenges with construction in this case, it appears that this may be an
opportunity.
Park Commission Recommendation
The Park Commission reviewed at their November 20 meeting. The Commission discussed the
wooded area of the lot and generally supported preservation to the extent possible. The
Commission did not believe it was necessary for the land to be taken publicly, but supported
some amount of credit for private conservation. The Council should discuss whether to require
dedication of some portion of the area as park dedication, or if it would prefer that staff discuss
with the applicant some credit for private preservation.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 6 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Plat Review Criteria/Staff Recommendation
The following criteria are described in the subdivision ordinance: “In the case of all subdivisions,
the City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the
following findings are made:
(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 Section 820.28.
(b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography,
vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are
such that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does
not meet minimum lot size standards.
(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.
The City’s has a relatively low amount of discretion while reviewing a plat request. If the plat
meets relevant ordinance standards and does not meet the criteria above, it should be approved.
Subject to the following conditions, staff does not believe these findings are met. Therefore, the
Planning Commission recommends approval 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. Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon construction of a roadway to provide
access to the site from Willow Drive.
3. The Applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans dated _______, except as
may be modified herein. The design of all improvements shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer prior to commencing construction.
4. The Applicant shall pay cash-in-lieu of land dedication in the amount of ___________. A
covenant shall be recorded related to the preservation of the ____ acre wooded area. If the
Owner or a future Owner extinguishes the covenant in the future, the remaining park
dedication fee of ________ shall become payable.
5. The plat shall dedicate right-of-way for the proposed cul-de-sac.
6. The plat shall dedicate a wider drainage and utility easement along the eastern property line
for potential water main connection.
7. The plat shall dedicate drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the lots, over all
water mains and hydrants, over stormwater improvements, and over all wetland areas.
8. The watermain and hydrants within the lots shall be privately maintained.
9. The Applicant shall submit a letter of credit in an amount of 150% of the cost of site
improvements in order to ensure completion.
10. The final plat applicant shall be filed within 180 days of the date of the resolution granting
preliminary approval or the approval shall be considered void, unless a written request for
time extension is submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Council.
11. 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.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 7 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Proposed Site Plan
The proposed uses of the principal building include office and bar/restaurant, which are
permitted in B zoning district. The applicant also proposes entertainment in the bar/restaurant
and outdoor seating. Indoor recreational uses and outdoor dining/drinking areas are allowed with
conditional use permit. The proposed uses of the accessory structure include warehouse and
vehicle storage, which are allowed uses and vehicle repair, which is a conditional use.
Following is a summary comparing the proposed construction to the dimensional standards of
the B district. This review is contingent upon rezoning to the B zoning district and would need
to be reevaluated if the City does not approve of the requested rezoning.
B District
Requirement
Principal
Building
Accessory
Building
Minimum Front Yard Setback 40 feet 330 feet (cul-de-
sac)
510 feet (cul-de-
sac)
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 25 feet 820 feet (west) 1300 feet (west)
Minimum Interior Yard
Setback
25 feet
(15 feet if integrated)
300 feet (north)
330 feet (east)
550 feet (north)
40 feet (east)
Setback from Highway 55 50 feet 127 feet 62 feet
Setback from Residential 100 feet
(75 feet w/ screening)
800 feet
(southwest)
N/A
Setback for Structures >35’ + foot per foot +7 feet N/A
Minimum Parking Setbacks
Front Yard 25 feet 30 feet (south)
19 feet (south)
Rear and Side Yard 15 feet 120 feet (north)
900 feet (west)
50 feet (east)
Residential (east) 100 feet
(60 feet w/ screening)
800 feet
(southwest)
1300 feet
(southwest)
Maximum Hardcover 70% 17.3% (total) 17.3% (total)
Building Height 45 feet 37.6’ (42’ to top
of arch. element)
22’ (27’ to top of
arch. Element)
It appears that that access drive and circulation for the accessory building does not meet
minimum setback requirements from Highway 55. It appears that this area is wider than it would
need to be, so staff recommends a condition that the plans be adjusted to abide by setback
requirements. With the exception of this portion of the access lane, it appears the proposed site
plan meets dimensional standards of the district.
Building Materials and Design
The B zoning district requires the following architectural standards. The Planning Commission
and Council can discuss whether the proposed building is consistent with the standards or
recommend conditions if necessary.
The applicant may not construct the restaurant portion of the building with the initial
construction, but has requested the ability to construct within a reasonable timeframe. Staff
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 8 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
supports allowing four years for construction to begin. Staff requested architectural plans
showing the building with and without the restaurant to confirm that the building could meet
architectural requirements in either case. Both elevations are included in the attached plans.
Materials
The B district requires: “All exterior building materials shall be durable and meet the following
standards:
(a) A minimum of 20 percent of the building exterior shall be brick, natural stone, stucco
(not Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product), copper, or glass.
(b) A maximum of 80 percent may be decorative concrete, split face (rock face) decorative
block, and/or decorative pre-cast concrete panels. Decorative concrete shall be color
impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and shall be patterned to create a
high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance.
(c) A maximum of 20 percent may be wood, metal (excluding copper), fiber cement lap
siding or Exterior Insulation and Finish System or similar product, if used as accent
materials which are integrated into the overall building design.”
The principal building is proposed to include
the exterior materials to the right:
The accessory structure is proposed to include the
exterior materials to the right:
Staff recommends a condition that the concrete
panels are “color impregnated in earth tones (rather
than painted) and shall be patterned to create a high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine
appearance.”
Modulation
The business districts require: “Buildings shall be designed to avoid long, monotonous
building walls. Modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or
building materials/design. Generally, a particular building elevation shall include a
minimum of one element of modulation per 100 feet of horizontal length, or portion
thereof. Alternative architectural or site elements and designs may also be approved by
the city which achieve the purpose of reducing the visual impact of long building walls.”
The southern portion of the proposed principal building elevations contain many aspects of
modulation, including horizontal (varying building setback), vertical (varying building heights),
different materials, and elements such as awnings. The northern portion of the building does not
include as much modulation, but does provide vertical stone elements more than once per 100
feet.
The accessory building is a large rectangle with the same building height. The structure is
proposed to include vertical stone architectural elements in excess of once per 100 feet which
complement the principal structure.
Materials Proposed Required
Glass, stone, brick, stucco 48% Minimum 20%
Precast concrete 31% Maximum 80%
Metal 20% Maximum 20%
Materials Proposed Required
Glass, stone 23% Minimum 20%
Precast concrete 66% Maximum 80%
Metal 10% Maximum 20%
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 9 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Fenestration and Transparency
The business districts require: “Building elevations which face a public street shall include
generous window coverage. Alternative architectural elements may be approved by the City
when windows are not practical.”
The southern façade of the principal structure includes approximately 18% window coverage and
various other architectural elements. The southern façade of the accessory structure includes
approximately 4% window coverage and a stone architectural feature. Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission and Council discuss whether the fenestration and architectural design of
the accessory building is consistent with this requirement.
Multi-sided Architecture
The business districts require: “Any rear or side building elevation which faces a
public street or a residential zoning district shall include design and architectural
elements of a quality generally associated with a front façade. The elevation(s) shall be
compatible with the front building elevation.”
Staff believes the principal structure generally provides multi-sided architecture.
Stormwater
The applicant proposes a series of filtration basins for stormwater management. The City
Engineer has reviewed and provided comments to address. Most significantly, additional
volume control will be required. Staff recommends as a condition of approval.
The project will also be subject to Pioneer-Sarah Creek Watershed review and approval.
Wetlands and Floodplains
The western half of the property is within a large wetland basin which is connected with the
headwaters of Pioneer Creek. A smaller basin is located in the woods to the north and a
drainageway in the east-central area of the property near the proposed lot line. No wetland
impacts are proposed. The applicant has proposed to subdivide the property such that Lot 2
could receive access without wetland impacts, but some impacts may be requested to cross the
drainageway when Lot 2 is developed.
The wetland protection ordinance requires upland
buffers with average width as described to the right:
The plan identifies the required buffers and the
applicant proposes very little disturbance within the buffers, only to accommodate the discharge
from a filtration basin to the northwest.
FEMA floodplain maps identify a large “Zone A” floodplain within the large wetland basin to
the west. Neither FEMA nor the Pioneer-Sarah Creek Watershed have identified a base flood
elevation for this basin, but the structures are proposed more than 10 feet above the elevation of
the floodplain location. No impacts are proposed within the mapped floodplain.
Wetland Required
buffer
Large basin to west 35 feet
Northern wetland (wooded) 35 feet
Eastern wetland 25 feet
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 10 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Transportation/Access/Loading
Transportation and access are discussed above within the review of the preliminary plat. Staff
recommends that sidewalk connections be provided from the cul-de-sac to the principal structure
and that pedestrian circulation be reviewed within the parking lot. This would allow connection
with pedestrian improvements within neighboring developments to the east.
The business zoning districts include the following requirements related to loading docks:
• Limitation on loading dock area located outside of courtyards - Loading docks,
excepting those located within a courtyard as defined by this Section, shall not occupy
greater than 10 percent of the building perimeter. If it deems it practically necessary, the
city may allow additional loading dock area outside of courtyards, but not in an amount
to exceed 20 percent of the building perimeter.
The principal building is not proposed to include a loading dock. Garage doors and docks
occupy 12.3% of the perimeter of the accessory structure. The applicant has submitted a
narrative describing why the additional doors are necessary. About ½ of the garage doors allow
for inside vehicle storage, rather than loading. Staff believes it is reasonable to determine that
the doors in excess of 10% are practically necessary, especially since the principal structure has
no docks.
• Loading docks shall not be located in required yard setbacks and should be located in a
way which minimizes visibility from residential zoning districts and public streets.
The proposed docks meet setback requirements and no residential property is in the area. The
vehicle storage and shop doors are located on the western side of the accessory building. The
building is a few feet below grade, which would reduce visibility, but may be visible east-bound
on Highway 55. The applicant proposes landscaping on the bottom of the wall, near the
building, but staff recommends a condition to incorporate or shift some planting to the top of the
retaining wall to improve screening.
• The loading dock setback adjacent to or across a street from a residential zoning district
shall be increased to 100 feet.
The proposed docks are 1300 feet from residential property.
• Any loading dock within 300 feet of a residential zoning district shall be separated from
the residential district by a building or a wing wall. The city may approve of other
alternatives for noise abatement and screening.
The proposed docks are 1300 feet from residential property.
• Loading docks shall be screened from adjacent property and streets to the fullest extent
possible using the following techniques, or others as approved by the city.
o Building design/configuration
o Wing walls
o Below grade docks. This technique shall be supplemented with landscaping.
o Landscaping
o Berming
o Decorative Fencing.
The applicant proposes landscaping on the bottom of the wall, near the building, but staff
recommends a condition to incorporate or shift some planting to the top of the retaining wall to
improve screening.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 11 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Parking
The applicant proposes 298 parking spaces. According to the City’s parking ordinance, the
office, restaurant, and warehouse/shop would require a minimum of 260 parking stalls.
The applicant anticipates live music within the bar/restaurant. It is likely that this would increase
the parking demand of the bar/restaurant because some of the space would likely be opened up
for standing room. However, the applicant anticipates that the entertainment use would occur in
the off-peak office hours, which would provide the opportunity to share the parking. The
parking ordinance allows for Joint Use Parking when “parking demands occur at different times,
if approved by the City.” The ordinance also allows the City to reduce the required number of
parking spaces based on “factors having an impact on parking demand and capacity.” Staff
believes the proposed joint parking between the office and entertainment use is appropriate.
Lighting
The City’s lighting ordinance requires light trespass to be no more than 0.2 FC at property lines.
The applicant has submitted a lighting and photometric plan and there are some areas that appear
to be 0.3 FC at the property line. The plans will need to provide updated fixtures or shielding to
meet the maximum allowance.
Staff recommends a condition requiring updated photometrics showing compliance with the 0.2
FC limitation and stating that all lighting fixtures must be fully shielded and downcast.
Tree Preservation
578 significant trees were identified on the site, mostly within the wooded are to the north, along
the boundaries of the site and adjacent to the wetlands. Additional trees were not located on the
island west of the large wetland. The applicant proposes to remove two trees for the street
construction (0.3%) and eight trees (<10% of trees on Lot 1) for construction of the building.
The tree preservation ordinance would permit 10% of the trees on the site to be removed in
connection with “initial site development” (streets, utilities) and an additional 10% of the trees
from each lot to be removed for other construction.
Landscaping
The business district includes the following landscape requirements:
• Building Setting - At least 12 feet of landscaped area shall be provided adjacent to all
buildings except for walks, plaza space and approved loading docks.
Landscaping greater than 12 feet in width is proposed adjacent to the buildings.
Office 1 stall per 250 s.f. 36,000 square feet 144 stalls
Warehouse/Shop 1 stall per employee
or 1 stall per 2000 s.f.
15,827 square feet
6 max shift
8 stalls
Restaurant 1 stall per 3 seats 250 indoor seats
75 outdoor seats
83 stalls
25 stalls
Total 260 stalls
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 12 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
• Minimum Planting
Requirement Required Proposed
Overstory trees 1 per 50’ site perimeter 103 trees 107 trees
Ornamental trees 1 per 100’ site perimeter 52 trees 54 trees
Shrubs 1 per 30’ site perimeter 183 shrubs >1000 shrubs
It appears that the landscaping plan exceed the minimum planting requirements of the district.
As noted above, staff is recommending additional screening for the garage doors on the
accessory structure. The City can require additional plantings for screening where necessary.
• Parking lot landscaping – minimum of 8% of parking lot area
The interior of the parking lot and loading dock area includes almost 20% landscaping area,
primarily because of the filtration basin and berm between the two buildings.
• Landscaping islands every 20 spaces, wider separations for cells of 120 spaces
Plans provide landscaping islands. However, a larger separation at least 12 feet in width is
required in the portion of the parking lot east of the principal structure. Staff recommends a
condition requiring this change.
Utilities, Mechanical Equipment, and Trash and Recycling Facilities
The business districts require: All utilities shall be placed underground. To the extent possible,
all utility equipment, meters and transformers shall be placed either inside of the building or
within an outside mechanical court formed by walls. If not located within the building,
these items shall be fully screened from view from adjacent property and streets through
the use of opaque landscaping or walls constructed of materials which are compatible
with the building.
The landscaping plan shows landscape screening around transformers and generators.
The plans do not identify HVAC location. Staff recommends a condition that HVAC locations
be identified and screening measures provided.
All trash and material to be recycled are required to be stored within the principal building,
within an accessory structure, or within an enclosed outdoor area adjacent to the principal
structure. The applicant has identified locations adjacent to each building.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 13 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Conditional Use Permit
Indoor recreational uses, outdoor dining/drinking areas, and vehicle repair are all conditional
uses within the B zoning district. Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) are subject to specific
requirements for each use which are above the general zoning requirements, and also subject to a
general set of criteria for all CUPs.
Following are the specific standards for each use with a summary of how staff believes each are
met:
Indoor Recreational Uses
(a) Entrances for public access, as well as other outdoor areas where patrons may congregate,
shall be no less than 200 feet from residential districts.
The building and all outside areas are located more than 770 feet from residential property.
(b) Provisions for noise reduction shall be identified based on the type of use proposed.
Staff recommends a condition requiring provisions for noise reduction for the live music.
Outdoor dining/drinking
(a) The outdoor space shall be at least 200 feet from any residential zoning district.
The outdoor seating area is located more than 770 feet from residential property.
(b) The area shall be directly adjacent to the principal structure, and be clearly delineated by
fencing or decorative landscaping.
The plans appear to identify fencing, but staff recommends this as an ongoing condition for the
CUP.
(c) The area shall not interfere with fire safety access to the building.
No concerns were raised by the Fire Marshal.
(d) Outdoor speakers and lighting shall be designed to limit impacts on adjacent property or
right-of-way.
Lighting is required to be downcast and no outdoor speakers are proposed.
(e) Pervious surfacing is encouraged, and if utilized, these areas shall not be considered
as an impervious surface.
The applicant does not propose pervious surfacing.
Automobile Repair
(a) The structure containing the use shall be no less than 200 feet from residential districts.
The building is over 1300 feet from residential property.
(b) Vehicles parked outside awaiting service or pick-up shall be located in an area which is fully
screened from neighboring properties and from the right-of-way.
The building provides indoor vehicle storage, but staff recommends this as an ongoing condition
for the CUP.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 14 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
(c) No inoperative vehicles shall be stored on the premises, unless in the process of being
repaired and are stored within a building.
Staff recommends this as an ongoing condition for the CUP.
(d) All repair functions shall occur within an enclosed building.
Staff recommends this as an ongoing condition for the CUP.
(e) No sales, storage, or display of automobiles shall be permitted unless a conditional use
permit is granted for such a use.
Staff recommends this as an ongoing condition for the CUP. The applicant has noted that they
occasional sell their own trucks when the retire them from service. Staff has recommended that
these be exempted from the prohibition.
(f) Equipment specifications shall be submitted. Vibration and noise reduction measures may be
required by the city.
The equipment is anticipated to be standard repair equipment. Staff does not recommend
additional noise reduction.
(g) Additional screening may be required to limit sight and noise impacts of service bays.
Staff has recommended additional screening for the service bay door.
(h) Adequate provision shall be made for proper inside storage of all new and used
petroleum, chemical, liquid, and other products.
Staff recommends this as a condition prior to building permit.
(i) Towing operations shall be permitted as an accessory use, but only if allowed as part of the
conditional use permit and if clearly subordinate to the principal use. The city may apply
necessary conditions and limitation on this use.
No towing is proposed.
General CUP Standards
Pursuant to Section 825.39 of the zoning document, when considering CUPs, the City shall
consider:
Subd. 1. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property
in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the immediate vicinity.
Subject to the conditions recommended, staff does not believe these will be a concern.
Subd. 2. 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.
Staff does not believe the CUP will impede development.
Subd. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities
have been or are being provided.
These matters are discussed above, and subject to the conditions recommended, staff believes they
will be addressed.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 15 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
Subd. 4. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street
parking and loading space to serve the proposed use.
These matters are discussed above, and staff believes have been provided.
Subd. 5. 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.
Subject to the conditions recommended, staff does not believe these will be a concern.
Subd. 6. 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 uses are all permitted in the zoning district.
Subd. 7. 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.
The uses are all permitted in the zoning district.
Subd. 8. The use is not in conflict with the policies plan of the City.
Staff does not believe the proposed CUP would conflict with the policies of the City.
Subd. 9. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion.
Subject to construction of the access to Willow Drive, staff does not believe this will be a concern.
Subd. 10. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected by intrusion of noise, glare
or general unsightliness.
Subject to the conditions recommended, staff does not believe these will be a concern.
Subd. 11. The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project.
The applicant anticipates construction during 2020. As noted above, the restaurant may not be
constructed with the initial project.
Subd. 12. The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Zoning
Officer.
The applicant is listed as the owner of the property.
Planning Commission Recommendation
As discussed above, staff recommends that the rezoning request be discussed first. The
improvements on Lot 1 are designed according to the B zoning district. The criteria for
reviewing a rezoning were described above. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of Lot 1
to the B district. The Planning Commission and Council should also determine whether the B or
BP zoning district is most appropriate for Lot 2. Staff believes it is reasonable for both sites to
be zoned B.
Staff also recommends approval of the preliminary plat. The criteria for the plat and
recommended conditions were described earlier in the report.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 16 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
The City has a relatively low level of discretion when reviewing the Conditional Use Permits and
Site Plan Review. It a proposed conditional use permit meets the specific and general standards
described earlier in the report, it should be approved. The City Council may impose additional
conditions “it considers necessary to protect the best interests of the surrounding area or the
community as a whole.” The Planning Commission has recommended some of those conditions
below.
The purpose of a Site Plan Review is to review compliance with relevant land use regulations. If
the proposed construction meets the requirements, it should be approved. The City can apply
conditions as necessary to ensure compliance with City requirements.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application at their November 12
meeting. An excerpt from the draft meeting minutes is attached for reference. Three people
spoke at the hearing and were not opposed to the project, but requested that the City consider
concerns related to stormwater management, light, noise, and potential costs for other taxpayers
for infrastructure improvements.
Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed. The Commission supported
the Business zoning district for both lots and were supportive of the project. Following review,
the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use
Permit subject to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall abide by the requirements of US Fish and Wildlife Services with
regard to construction near the bald eagle nest.
2. Approval of this Site Plan Review shall be contingent upon approval of a rezoning of the
subject property to the Business zoning district.
3. The Applicant shall install all improvements shown on the plans dated _____________,
except as may be modified herein. The design of all improvements shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing construction.
4. The Applicant shall abide by the requirements of the wetland protection ordinance,
including installation of vegetative buffers, recordation of easements, and installation of
signage.
5. The Applicant shall update landscaping plans to provide landscaping to south and west of
the vehicle service bay and vehicle storage doors.
6. The Applicant shall update the parking lot plan to divide the parking into cells with
landscaping at least 12 feet in width.
7. The Applicant shall update plans so that the access/circulation for the accessory building
meets setback requirements from Highway 55.
8. The Applicant shall submit specifications confirming that proposed concrete panels are
color impregnated in earth tones (rather than painted) and shall be patterned to create a
high quality terrazzo, brick, stucco, or travertine appearance.
9. The Applicant shall update lighting plants to comply with the City’s lighting ordinance,
limiting light trespass to 0.2 FC at the property line.
10. The Applicant shall identify HVAC locations and provide screening measures for re view
and approval.
11. All comments from the Pioneer-Sarah Creek Watershed District shall be addressed.
12. All comments from the City Engineer shall be addressed.
13. The outdoor dining and drinking area shall be delineated with fencing.
Jan Har LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) Page 17 of 17 December 3, 2019
Rezoning, Pre Plat, Site Plan Review, CUP City Council Meeting
14. Adequate provision shall be made for proper inside storage of all new and used
petroleum, chemical, liquid, and other product related to the vehicle repair.
15. All vehicle repair shall occur within the structure.
16. Vehicles parked outside awaiting service or pick-up shall be located in an area which is
fully screened from neighboring properties and from the right-of-way. No inoperable
vehicle may be parked outside.
17. No automobile storage, display or sales shall occur upon the site unless a separate
conditional use permit is obtained for such use, except that retired vehicles used in
connection with the approved use(s) on the site may be sold.
18. The site plan review approval shall be effective for one year and thereafter shall be
considered null and void. The restaurant portion of the project may be constructed as a
separate project, provided the permit is obtained within four years of approval.
19. 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, site plan review, and related documents.
Potential Action
If the Council finds that the criteria described in the report have been satisfied, the following
action would be appropriate:
Move to direct staff to prepare documents approving the rezoning, preliminary plat,
site plan review, and conditional use permit subject to the conditions noted in the staff
report.
Attachments
1. List of Documents
2. Excerpt from 11/12/2019 Planning Commission
3. Excerpt from 11/20/2019 Park Commission
4. Comp Plan Information – Business Land Use
5. Engineering comments dated 11/5/2019
6. Public Comments received (Reader, Kozlak)
7. Applicant narrative
8. Applicant description for additional garage doors
9. Preliminary Plat and Plans (Civil dated 10/28/2019; Arch dated 9/11/2019)
11/26/2019
Project: LR‐19‐255 – Adam’s Pest Control Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit
The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are
only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall.
Documents Submitted by Applicant
Document Received Document
Date
Pages Electronic Paper
Copy?
Notes
Application 7/23/2019 7/23/2019 3 Yes Yes
Deposit 7/23/2019 7/15/2019 1 Yes Yes $11,000
Rezoning Extension 11/4/2019 11/4/2019 1 Yes Yes
Narrative 7/23/2019 N/A 3 Yes Yes
Road proposal 8/23/2019 N/A 2 Yes
Plans 7/23/2019 7/22/2019 18 Yes Yes
Plans‐Updated 9/11/2019 9/11/2019 24 Yes Yes
Plans‐Civil‐Updated 10/28/2019 10/28/2019 14 Yes Yes Civil only
Plans‐Civil‐Updated 11/7/2018 11/7/2019 4 Yes C3, C4, C5, C5.1 only
Turning Exhibit 9/11/2019 9/11/2019 2 Yes Yes
Narrative re: garage doors 9/11/2019 8/19/2019 1 Yes Yes
Stormwater Management 9/11/2019 9/6/2019 71 Yes Yes
Stormwater – Updated 10/28/2019 10/28/2019 81 Yes
Stormwater – Updated 11/7/2019 11/7/2019 46 Yes Yes
<OVER>
11/26/2019
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic Notes
City Engineer comments 8/7/2019 1 Y
City Engineer comments 8/23/2019 4 Y
City Engineer comments 9/27/2019 5 Y
City Engineer comments 11/5/2019 5 Y
Pioneer‐Sarah Watershed Review 9/26/2019 6 Y
Pioneer‐Sarah Review 11/14/2019 6
Pioneer‐Sarah Review 11/21/2019 8 Y Conditional Approval
MnDOT comments 8/9/2019 7 Y
Notice 11/1/2019 12 Y 15 pages w/ affidavit and labels
Preliminary Comments 8/9/2019 3 Y
Review Extension 10/23/2019 2 Y
Fire and Plat Comments 11/21/2019 2 Y
Park Dedication Market Value 11/21/2019 1 Y
Natural Resource Comments 11/20/2019 1 Y
Planning Commission Report 11/7/2019 16 Y 45 pages w/ attachments
City Council Report 11/26/2019 17 Y 60 pages w/ attachments
Public Comments
Document Date Electronic Notes
Jim Reader Email 11/12/2019 Y
Dave Kozlak Email 11/12/2019 Y
Planning Commission Minutes 11/12/2019 Y
Park Commission Minutes 11/20/2019 Y
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/12/2019 Meeting Minutes
1
Public Hearing – Jan Har, LLC (Adam’s Pest Control) – Rezoning, Preliminary Plat,
Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit – PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-
0001 – North of Hwy 55, West of Willow Drive
Finke presented a request from Jan Har, LLC (Adam’s Pest Control) to develop a piece of vacant property
north of Highway 55 and west of Willow Drive to build a 43,000 square foot building. He noted that part
of the building would contain a bar/restaurant while the accessory building would house a 1,300
shop/warehouse/vehicle building for Adam’s Pest Control use. He suggested that the Commission review
the requests in the following order: rezoning request, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Conditional Use
Permit. He displayed the subject site which is 43 acres in size and noted that the northern area would
remain for potential future development. He referenced the eagle’s nest on the site, noting that would not
be disturbed by this project. He reviewed the surrounding land use and zoning. He displayed the
elevation for the office building and accessory building. He explained that a rezoning of this site would
be expected upon development and noted that the site is within the current staging period. He explained
the differences between the Business and Business Park zoning districts. He stated that staff believes that
business would be appropriate for both the southern and northern portions of the property. He provided
details on the proposed access which would construct a road connecting to Willow Drive for full access
with a temporary right-in from Highway 55 for three years to allow the business to become established.
He stated that staff also recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the conditions noted in
the staff report. He provided details on the proposed building and some adjustments that would be needed
to the driveway and stormwater management plan. He stated that there would be a shared parking
proposal between the office and restaurant use. He provided details on the proposed building elevations
and architectural modulation. He stated that the applicant would move forward with the office building
first and would like a longer time period to begin construction of the restaurant and noted that staff would
recommend allowing four years for that to occur.
Piper asked if the property is currently owned by the applicant or whether the sale of the property would
be conditional upon approval by the City.
Finke replied that the applicant owns the property.
Reid asked where the division of the property would occur.
Finke identified the proposed division of the property.
Andrea Doop, of Adam’s Pest Control, introduced her architect to provide additional information to the
Commission.
Steve Kleineman, architect representing the applicant, stated that if the site were divided vertically in half
the left side of the property is virtually all wetland. He stated that when the design of the project began it
started as one building, but the grade is quite high on the eastern side of the property and slopes to the
west. He stated that because the office function is not as connected to the warehouse function, it made
sense to push the warehouse building to the east to be more out of site. He stated that on the west side the
office and restaurant were oriented to take advantage of the wetland views. He provided details on the
proposed building elevations, materials, and building layout. He stated that their goal is to create an
attractive and interesting building as it would be visible from Highway 55.
Amic asked the distance of the three-story building from Highway 55. It was estimated at least 200 feet.
Reid asked why the applicant would want the northern half of the property to be zoned as business rather
than business park, noting the adjacent residential property.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/12/2019 Meeting Minutes
2
Kleineman replied that they are unsure what would be developed on that northern portion and therefore
the business use would allow the most flexibility at this time.
Amic asked the location of the eagle in the finished project.
Kleineman replied that it would be found in the grouping of trees to the west of the restaurant.
Piper asked for details on the access proposed.
Kleineman replied that the right-in from Highway 55 would be proposed temporarily in order to make the
restaurant viable. He explained that it would be difficult for customers to find the access from Willow
Drive when seeing the restaurant from Highway 55. He stated that once on the site people would exit
onto Willow Drive and therefore after that length of time people would become familiar with the Willow
access.
Reid opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
Donald Jeszewski, 6215 Willow Drive, referenced the access on Mohawk which does not allow a left-turn
and advised that many vehicles still turn left. He asked how the property to the north would have access
once divided.
Finke explained that both the northern and southern portions would have the same access using the street
to Willow.
Jeszewski referenced language in the staff report related to an easement and received clarification that
would not include property that he owns. He asked about paving. He asked why a four-story apartment
building would be allowed on the northern portion of the property adjacent to existing residential.
Finke stated that while it was mentioned that may be of interest, it has not been proposed at this time.
Jeszewski stated that he enjoys the privacy and seclusion of his home and would be opposed to a large
four-story apartment building. He stated that his driveway has been under water for the past few years
and did not believe the stormwater ponds are large enough in that area. He did not believe the culvert
under Highway 55 is large enough.
Finke explained that the request would be subject to stormwater management requirements.
Tim Broadhead, operating officer at Rockler, stated that his business has concern with traffic. He asked if
the applicant is asking the City to pay for some of the infrastructure or whether those improvements
would be funded by the applicant. He stated that they would be happy to have additional businesses
along Highway 55.
Finke explained that all of the improvements for the development, outside of the public right-of-way,
would be funded by the applicant. He stated that one unique element for the subject site and properties to
the east is that a sanitary lift station has been identified as a need for the properties in this area and would
be funded through the City’s capital funds along with partial fees from the properties that would receive
benefit. He stated that there may be improvements to a portion of Willow Drive.
Broadhead asked if the sanitary lift station would impact Rockler.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/12/2019 Meeting Minutes
3
Finke did not believe that the business would be impacted.
Broadhead stated that they would welcome development on the site and simply wanted clarification of the
financial elements.
Finke advised of two written comments from Jim Reader and David Kozlak that were received and
distributed to the Commission and provided a summary of those comments related to safety, access on
Highway 55, lighting, and potential impacts on hunting. He noted that the resident does support the
development with those concerns identified.
Additional details were provided on the proposed outdoor seating.
Reid closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
Reid suggested that the Commission begin with the proposed rezoning as the other elements would be
dependent upon that change.
Nester stated that she is not opposed to rezoning both parcels as business as that would be less restrictive.
Finke stated that the request is to rezone the subject site as a whole.
Reid suggested that a separate motion be made for the zoning change.
Motion by Galzki, seconded by Nielsen, to recommend approval of the rezoning. Motion carries
unanimously. (Absent: Williams)
Reid stated that it seems there are a lot of questions about the traffic flow.
Nester noted that contingencies are already written in.
Finke provided additional clarity, noting that staff would desire additional details to be worked out before
this moves to the City Council.
Piper asked the definition of frontage road.
Finke identified the area proposed for the road and provided additional details.
Reid asked where the right-in from Highway 55 would be.
Finke noted that it would essentially be where the field road exists today and would connect to the
parking lot.
Galzki stated that the sharper right-in seems to make sense to prevent people from turning left. He stated
that it would seem feasible to have that temporary right-in option as long as the frontage road to Willow
Drive is provided. He noted that the conditions seem appropriate to address any concerns.
Piper stated that she can see the desire for the right-in access but believes that it would be a problem for
drivers. She felt strongly that the right-in should only be allowed temporarily.
Nester stated that if the right-in is allowed for three years and the restaurant is not constructed for four
years, that would seem to miss the point of having that access.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/12/2019 Meeting Minutes
4
Piper asked if the applicant would move forward with the project if the right-in is not allowed.
Kleineman stated that Adam’s Pest Control would not need the access onto Highway 55, but the owner
felt was important to help the restaurant become established.
Piper asked if this Highway 55 access would require MnDOT approval.
Finke confirmed that the applicant and City have been working with MnDOT and the property owner to
the east and at this point MnDOT has indicated that they would support the temporary three year right-in
access.
Nester asked if the three years would begin after approval of after the restaurant is opened.
Finke stated that the three years would begin once the initial building is constructed. He clarified that if
the restaurant is not built during that time period that would simply be a missed opportunity for the
restaurant to utilize the right-in.
Galzki commented that if there is adequate way finding signage that would alleviate any issues with
people finding the right access.
Piper asked what would happen with the signage rules.
Reid stated that the applicant would need to follow the sign regulations. She believed that there would
need to be large signage needed.
Finke stated that once the right-in is closed it would be apparent that Willow would be the way to access
the business.
Galzki stated that people will find the way into the restaurant and did not see any issues with that.
Finke stated that the condition would specify the frontage road and the right-in only. He noted that the
Commission could clarify that it wants the applicant to update the plans to show that. He stated that a
portion of the shoulder would be converted to a turn lane for the temporary right-in.
Nielsen stated that she does not oppose the right-in and would not have a problem with that remaining
open indefinitely.
Amic agreed that he also did not have a problem with the right-in. He noted that GPS will bring people to
the restaurant. He stated that he would also support an indefinite right-in.
Piper stated that perhaps a condition could be made that would review the right-in every year or few
years.
Finke stated that as proposed the right-in would close after three years. He noted that ultimately that
would be a MnDOT decision.
Dave Kozlak, 4545 Wichita Trail, commented that he would like to see that right-in reviewed yearly
noting the number of accidents on that stretch of Highway 55 and near Wichita.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/12/2019 Meeting Minutes
5
Galzki commented that this is a great development and matches the desires of the City for this area
through the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are adequate conditions in the staff report that
address the necessary coordination that is needed with other regulatory agencies. He believed that this
request should continue to move forward subject to the conditions in the staff report.
Reid asked if there are additional comments or questions related to the Preliminary Plat, Site Plan or
CUP.
Nester referenced the eagle nest on the property and asked if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife have been
notified or if that would occur when the permit is obtained.
Kleineman provided additional details on that process.
Amic noted that the eagle does not seem to have problems with noise as the nest is along Highway 55.
Motion by Galzki, seconded by Amic, to recommend approval of preliminary plat, site plan review and
CUP. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Williams)
Finke noted that it would be proposed to bring this forward to the City Council at its December 3rd
meeting.
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/20/2019 Meeting Minutes
1
Jan Har, LLP (Adam’s Pest Control) – Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review – 04-
118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001 – North of Hwy 55, West of Willow Drive – Park
Dedication Review
Gallup provided an overview presentation of the applicant’s request to rezone from rural
business holding to business, preliminary plat for two lots, site plan review, and conditional use
permit to build a 43,000 square foot office building with a bar/restaurant and a 13,000 square
foot shop/warehouse/vehicle storage on a site north of Highway 55 and west of Willow Drive.
The plan also includes a lot to the north for future development. It was noted that Graphic
Packaging is directly to the east of this site and Medina Mini Storage is to the west of this site.
Gallup stated that the applicant proposes to construct a road connection to this site from Willow
Drive. She noted that staff and the applicant have been working on obtaining the right-of-way
from the property owner to the east. The applicant proposes a temporary right-in to the site off
Highway 55 for the first three years. Gallup stated that review of this application is contingent
upon access to Willow Drive. If the road to Willow is not constructed, further analysis will need
to be done regarding access and improvements from Highway 55.
Gallup stated that the park dedication ordinance allows 10% of buildable land, which would total
2.4 acres, or 8% of pre-developed market value as cash-in-lieu, which would be approximately
$60,000, or a combination of land and cash. She noted that the park and trail plan does not
identify any parks or trails in this area.
Gallup stated that she walked the site with Scherer and Finke earlier that day and observed good
quality basswood forest on the north site. The north site is not being developed at this time, but it
is proposed to be future development. Gallup noted that the future landowner would not be back
before the Park Commission when this site develops, so now would be the opportunity if the
Park Commission wanted to preserve the woods.
Gallup stated that the applicant proposes to preserve the wetland area, which would generally be
protected by existing regulations. The applicant also proposes to purchase three bike repair
stations to be placed at active parks/trails in the Medina. These bike repair stations are valued at
approximately $750 to $1,500 each.
Gallup requested the Park Commission have a discussion regarding preserving the wooded area.
She noted that there will likely be challenges for construction in this area due to the tree
preservation ordinance, setbacks, and slope. She noted that the city has provided credit for
covenants to preservation areas in the past. She also noted a potential to use the city’s tree
replacement fund to protect the wooded area instead of the park dedication fund.
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/20/2019 Meeting Minutes
2
Gallup stated that staff’s recommendation would be for the Park Commission to recommend that
staff discuss an appropriate credit for the preservation of the wooded area with the property
owner, with the remainder of park dedication being provided as cash-in-lieu of land dedication.
The Park Commission discussed how to calculate giving the applicant a tree credit.
Thies noted the city should not give a full credit to preserve the trees if the woods are not
publicly owned.
Weir stated that it would not be good to clear cut the woods on the slope.
Todd Leyse, the applicant, described the property and his love for the wetlands on this site. He
noted that there is an eagle’s nest on the property near Highway 55. He proposes to leave the
eagle’s nest alone and potentially build a trail head or parking stalls near it, so people can
pullover off Highway 55 to view the eagle’s nest. He also stated that he would encourage the
future builder on the north lot to build a trail to the woods. He believed most of the woods would
be preserved, but he did not want to tie a future developer’s hands by requiring that all the woods
be preserved.
Scherer stated that the woods on the north lot were high quality with Oak, Basswood, Maple, and
not much buckthorn because of the dense tree canopy.
Leyse described the proposed bike repair stations that he plans on putting in Medina parks and
the benefit it would provide to the community.
The Park Commission reviewed the Park and Trail map and noted that the closest need for a
future park is to the east, but it is not in the vicinity of this development.
Weir warned that a trail head or parking stalls too close to the eagle’s nest could scare the eagles
off. She stated that vehicle traffic and noise on Highway 55 might not scare them off, but actual
people near the nest could disturb them.
Weir suggested looking at a preservation credit for the woods in the northeast corner.
Jacob suggested preserving a couple acres of trees and taking the remainder as cash-in-lieu.
Rumsey suggested taking all the funds as cash-in-lieu.
Sharp believed a combination of preservation and cash-in-lieu made sense.
Medina Park Commission Excerpt from DRAFT 11/20/2019 Meeting Minutes
3
Morrison said she was in favor of preserving as much woods as possible without spending
money. She suggested capitalizing on as much land as possible (more than the 2.4 acres)
assuming the city did not have to give full credit for park dedication if the land was being
preserved, but not publicly owned.
Leyse stated that he may be open to allowing the city to “purchase” additional woods to secure
the woods preservation above the park dedication amount.
Scherer suggested to the applicant that a private trail be constructed for the benefit of the
employees that will be working at the site.
A motion was made by Weir and seconded by Jacob to move to recommend that staff discuss
appropriate credit for the preservation of the wooded area with the property owner, with the
remainder of park dedication to be provided as cash-in-lieu of land dedication. Motion passed
unanimously.
EExxcceerrppttss ffrroomm 22002200--22004400 CCoommpprreehheennssiivvee PPllaann
FFuuttuurree LLaanndd UUssee PPllaann PPrriinncciipplleess
TThhee FFuuttuurree LLaanndd UUssee PPllaann gguuiiddeess tthhee ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff MMeeddiinnaa tthhrroouugghh 22004400,, aanndd wwiillll bbee uusseedd ttoo
iimmpplleemmeenntt tthhee CCiittyy’’ss ggooaallss,, ssttrraatteeggiieess aanndd ppoolliicciieess.. TThhee PPllaann iiss gguuiiddeedd bbyy tthhee VViissiioonn aanndd
CCoommmmuunniittyy GGooaallss aass ffuurrtthheerreedd bbyy tthhee ffoolllloowwiinngg pprriinncciipplleess::
DDeevveellooppmmeenntt PPaatttteerrnnss aanndd NNeeiigghhbboorrhhoooodd FFoorrmm
EEnnccoouurraaggee ooppeenn ssppaacceess,, ppaarrkkss aanndd ttrraaiillss iinn aallll nneeiigghhbboorrhhoooodd ddeevveellooppmmeennttss.. SSuurrvveeyyss
iinnddiiccaattee tthhaatt aa hhiigghh qquuaalliittyy ooff lliiffee iiss ffoouunndd wwhheenn rreessiiddeennttss hhaavvee vviissuuaall aacccceessss ttoo ggrreeeenn
ssppaacceess..
CCrreeaattee nneeiigghhbboorrhhooooddss wwiitthh aa vvaarriieettyy ooff hhoouussiinngg ttyyppeess tthhaatt aarree wweellll ccoonnnneecctteedd wwiitthh rrooaaddss,,
ttrraaiillss oorr ssiiddeewwaallkkss..
MMaaiinnttaaiinn tthhee iinntteeggrriittyy ooff rruurraall nneeiigghhbboorrhhooooddss aanndd pprroommoottee ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ppaatttteerrnnss
ccoonnssiisstteenntt wwiitthh eexxiissttiinngg rruurraall rreessiiddeennttiiaall ddeevveellooppmmeenntt..
RReeccooggnniizzee nneeiigghhbboorrhhoooodd cchhaarraacctteerriissttiiccss aanndd pprroommoottee nneeww ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ccoommppaattiibbllee iinn
ssccaallee,, aarrcchhiitteeccttuurraall qquuaalliittyy aanndd ssttyyllee wwiitthh eexxiissttiinngg nneeiigghhbboorrhhooooddss..
SSttaaggee rreessiiddeennttiiaall ggrroowwtthh ttoo mmiinniimmiizzee tthhee aammoouunntt ooff aaddjjaacceenntt ddeevveellooppmmeennttss wwhhiicchh ooccccuurr
wwiitthhiinn tthhee ssaammee ttiimmee ppeerriioodd..
GGuuiiddee ddeennssiittyy ttoo aarreeaass wwiitthh pprrooxxiimmiittyy ttoo eexxiissttiinngg iinnffrraassttrruuccttuurree aanndd ffuuttuurree iinnffrraassttrruuccttuurree
aavvaaiillaabbiilliittyy..
CCoonncceennttrraattee hhiigghheerr ddeennssiittyy ddeevveellooppmmeenntt nneeaarr sseerrvviiccee oorriieenntteedd bbuussiinneesssseess ttoo hheellpp
pprroommoottee wwaallkkaabbiilliittyy..
CCoonnssiiddeerr ppllaannnneedd ddeevveellooppmmeenntt iinn ssuurrrroouunnddiinngg ccoommmmuunniittiieess wwhheenn mmaakkiinngg llaanndd uussee
ddeecciissiioonnss iinn tthhee CCiittyy..
RRooaadd PPaatttteerrnnss
RReeccooggnniizzee rreeggiioonnaall hhiigghhwwaayy ccaappaacciittyy aanndd ppllaannnneedd iimmpprroovveemmeennttss,, aalloonngg wwiitthh uussee
ffoorreeccaassttss,, aass mmaajjoorr ffaaccttoorrss iinn ppllaannnniinngg ffoorr ggrroowwtthh aanndd llaanndd uussee cchhaannggeess..
EEssttaabblliisshh ccoolllleeccttoorr ssttrreeeettss wwiitthh ggoooodd ccoonnnneeccttiioonnss tthhrroouugghh tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy’’ss ggrroowwtthh aarreeaass..
PPrroommoottee ttrraaiillss aanndd ssiiddeewwaallkk aacccceessss nneeaarr rrooaaddss aanndd tthhoorroouugghhffaarreess ttoo eennccoouurraaggee mmuullttii--
mmooddaall ttrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn cchhooiicceess..
CCoonnssiiddeerr ooppppoorrttuunniittiieess ttoo iimmpprroovvee nnoorrtthh--ssoouutthh ttrraavveell wwiitthhiinn tthhee CCiittyy..
OOppeenn SSppaacceess aanndd NNaattuurraall RReessoouurrcceess
PPrreesseerrvvee nnaattuurraall rreessoouurrcceess tthhrroouugghhoouutt tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy aanndd pprroovviiddee eedduuccaattiioonnaall
ooppppoorrttuunniittiieess ttoo rreessiiddeennttss ttoo hheellpp tthheemm uunnddeerrssttaanndd tthhee vvaalluuee ooff nnaattuurraall aarreeaass..
PPrreesseerrvvee ooppeenn ssppaacceess aanndd nnaattuurraall rreessoouurrcceess..
PPrrootteecctt wwooooddeedd aarreeaass aanndd eennccoouurraaggee iimmpprroovveemmeenntt ooff eexxiissttiinngg rreessoouurrcceess aanndd
rreeffoorreessttaattiioonn.. EEvvaalluuaattee eexxiissttiinngg wwooooddllaanndd pprrootteeccttiioonnss aanndd ssuupppplleemmeenntt aass nneecceessssaarryy..
SSuuppppoorrtt tthhee gguuiiddeelliinneess iiddeennttiiffiieedd iinn tthhee OOppeenn SSppaaccee RReeppoorrtt ttoo pprreesseerrvvee tthhee CCiittyy’’ss nnaattuurraall
ssyysstteemmss..
BBuussiinneessss DDiissttrriiccttss aanndd CCoommmmeerrcciiaall AArreeaass
FFooccuuss sseerrvviiccee bbuussiinneesssseess aanndd ddeevveellooppmmeenntt nneeaarr uurrbbaann rreessiiddeennttiiaall ddeennssiittiieess aanndd aalloonngg
pprriimmaarryy ttrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn ccoorrrriiddoorrss..
PPrroovviiddee ccoonnnneeccttiioonnss bbeettwweeeenn rreessiiddeennttss aanndd ccoommmmeerrcciiaall aarreeaass aanndd pprroommoottee bbuussiinneesssseess
wwiitthhiinn mmiixxeedd--uussee aarreeaass..
WWoorrkk ttoo ccrreeaattee jjoobb ooppppoorrttuunniittiieess iinn tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy ffoorr MMeeddiinnaa rreessiiddeennttss ttoo rreedduuccee
ttrraaffffiicc aanndd ccoommmmuuttiinngg ddeemmaannddss..
EEmmpphhaassiizzee sseerrvviiccee aanndd rreettaaiill uusseess wwhhiicchh sseerrvvee tthhee nneeeeddss ooff tthhee llooccaall ccoommmmuunniittyy aanndd
pprroovviiddee ooppppoorrttuunniittiieess ffoorr tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy ttoo ggaatthheerr..
SSuuppppoorrtt bbuussiinneessss ddeevveellooppmmeenntt wwiitthh aa ccoorrppoorraattee ccaammppuuss ssttyyllee wwhhiicchh pprroovviiddeess ooppeenn
ssppaacceess aanndd pprrootteeccttss nnaattuurraall rreessoouurrcceess..
Future Land Use Designations
Business (B) provides opportunities for corporate campus uses including office, warehouse,
and light industrial. This designation identifies larger tracts of land that are suitable for office
and business park developments and are served or will be served by urban services.
Land Use Policies by Area
Business Uses
The following objectives refer to business land uses that are connected to or planned for urban
services. Businesses in this use generally include office complexes, business park development,
warehouse and light industrial opportunities.
Objectives:
1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural
characteristics of the property.
2. Encourage businesses that benefit the local community by providing employment
opportunities utilizing high quality design, and having limited impact on public services.
3. Consider permitting uses such as nursing homes and assisted living facilities where
suitable, subject to appropriate requirements related to density, ensuring compatibility
between uses, and preventing the use from being predominantly independent-living
residential in nature. These uses are expected to occupy a very small proportion of
Business land. Residential density is estimated to be between 5-20 units per net acre, but
flexibility will be considered based upon the mix of nursing home, assisted living,
memory care, independent living units, and other uses proposed within a development.
4. Regulate the impact of development along the border between business and residentially
guided areas to ensure that business uses have a minimal impact on residential areas.
5. Regulate construction to ensure high quality, energy and resource efficient buildings and
to promote such Green Building standards as LEED Certifications or the State of
Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines: Buildings, Benchmarks and Beyond (B-3)
standards.
6. Encourage construction that enhances the visual appeal of TH 55 corridor and the rural
vistas and open spaces of the City.
7. Create or update standards that promote a more rural appearance, or create campus style
developments that protect ecologically significant areas and natural features.
8. Require frontage roads that do not directly access arterial roadways and limit access
points to collector and arterial roadways.
9. Use the site plan review process to ensure that commercial and industrial uses are
compatible with neighboring future and existing uses, and with the adjoining public
streets and highways. PUD’s may be used to help accomplish this policy.
10. Emphasize pedestrian safety.
11. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic
enhancement and safety.
12. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to maintain public health and safety.
K:\014536-000\Admin\Docs\2019-10-29 Plan Submittal\_2019-11-05 Adams Pest Control Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx
7
0
1
X
E
N
I
A
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
|
S
U
I
T
E
3
0
0
|
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
|
5
5
4
1
6
|
7
6
3
.
5
4
1
.
4
8
0
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
November 5, 2019
Mr. Dusty Finke
Planner
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340-9790
Re: Adam’s Pest Control Preliminary Plat & Site Plan Submittal – Engineering Review
City Project No. LR-19-255
WSB Project No. 14536-000
Dear Mr. Finke:
We have reviewed The Adam’s Pest Control application and plans dated October 29, 2019. The
applicant proposes to construct a three-story office building with a bar/restaurant. In addition, a
separate warehouse/storage/maintenance building is also proposed for the site.
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.
Site & Paving Plans
1. Provide an exhibit showing the turning movements of trucks (fire and delivery) within the
site including the delivery entrances along with a detail of the truck dimensions. Include
an analysis of fire truck turning movements and access, the City’s Fire Marshall will need
to review this plan. Complete, exhibit provided. The City’s Fire Marshall will provide
comment separately from this memo.
2. With final construction plans please provide the following:
o In general, plans shall meet the requirements set forth in the City’s Utility and
Stormwater Design Manuals. Include the City’s standard details where
applicable.
o Show typical pavement sections (standard, heavy duty, etc.) based on
geotechnical analysis and recommendations.
o Add symbols and notations for proposed sign locations.
Traffic & Access
3. The proposed site plan and project narrative indicates that the site access to TH 55
would be a right-in/right-out, until such time as the future access to Willow Drive is
constructed, at which time the access would be closed within three years. This comment
was for information no plan revisions are required.
4. The current plan shows only the addition of a westbound right turn lane and does not
show how the access would be restricted to right-in/right-out. The plan should be revised
to include this additional information. The plan was revised to include a striped median at
Adam’s Pest Control Preliminary Plat & Site Plan Submittal – WSB Comments
November 5, 2019
Page 2
K:\014536-000\Admin\Docs\2019-10-29 Plan Submittal\_2019-11-05 Adams Pest Control Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx
the entrance. This design will not provide the necessary restrictions for left turning
vehicles into or out of the site. The site access should be redesigned to include
restrictions by using raised concrete medians, signing and additional pavement markings.
In leu of providing a more restrictive right-in/right-out access, the access could be closed
with the addition of the access to Willow Drive.
5. Based on the proposed site plan the anticipated traffic generation would be 2375 daily
trips, 108 AM peak hour trips and 223 PM peak hour trips, assuming a multi-family
building on the northerly lot. This comment was for information no plan revisions are
required.
6. With a significant increase in traffic, the primary concern is with the safety of the traffic
entering and exiting the right-in/right-out at TH 55 from the proposed site. Provide a
traffic analysis and calculations reviewing the traffic generation, potential for vehicles to
make an eastbound left into the site from TH 55, left turn out of the site to eastbound TH
55, and a review of the safety impacts and recommended improvements to the site
access at TH 55. Should the right-in / right-out access be maintained, and redesigned,
additional documentation should be provided for the right-out onto TH 55. This would not
be necessary should the access be closed.
Grading & Storm Sewer Plan
7. Provide a geotechnical analysis and show soil boring locations on grading plans. Not
Resolved.
8. With final construction plans please provide the following:
o Provide top and bottom elevations of all retaining walls and details/ typical
sections. Walls greater than 4’ in height will require plans signed by a structural
engineer. Consider safety railings for retaining walls 3’ or taller. Complete, notes
and typical section added. Applicant stated they will provide a retaining wall
construction plan and engineered drawings prior to construction.
o Provide a storm sewer table. Complete, Exhibit provided.
o Add more directional arrows with percent grades along curb lines, parking lot
areas, walkway profile/cross slope grades, etc. Add additional grade notes to
slopes such as “3:1” or “4:1” where appropriate.
Utility Plan
9. The City of Medina is currently working on a feasibility study and a preliminary design of
a sewer system along Willow Drive that includes a possible lift station. The lift station is
intended to provide service to the Adam’s site (among other surrounding areas). The
sanitary sewer information shown on the plan will need to be revised once the feasibility
is complete. As shown, there is excessive depth (up to 30’) for the sanitary sewer
between manholes #6-8 but these issues will likely be resolved with the City’s feasibility.
The applicant shall coordinate construction activities with the future road or proposed lift
station and associated sanitary sewer.
10. Show proposed utility stubs to any of the adjacent lots with the extension of watermain
and sanitary sewer to Willow Road. Not complete.
11. With final construction plans please provide the following:
Adam’s Pest Control Preliminary Plat & Site Plan Submittal – WSB Comments
November 5, 2019
Page 3
K:\014536-000\Admin\Docs\2019-10-29 Plan Submittal\_2019-11-05 Adams Pest Control Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx
o Show material type for the sanitary sewer noting SDR 35 pipe up to an 18’ depth;
SDR-26 for between 18-26’; and DR-18 for depths exceeding 26’. Note this
information for each pipe run.
o Define what utilities are public and private.
Easements may be required by the City to encompass all or a portion of
the sanitary sewer and watermain into the site.
Define future maintenance responsibilities of the utilities.
Access to some of the structures may be limited as they are in areas with
3:1 slopes or adjacent to the future roadway and do not have a defined
access. An acceptable access will be required to reach and maintain the
structures.
o Provide plan and profile views of sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and watermain
identifying potential conflicts. If pipes will be directionally drilled, note as such.
o Label all pipe sizes, material types, and grades for watermain pipnig. The City’s
preference is to use PVC C900 for watermain and PVC (SDR based on depth)
for sewer. See the City’s Utility Design Manual.
o Provide dimension labels showing separation between watermain and both
sanitary sewer and storm sewer piping.
o Watermain and services should have a minimum horizontal separation of 10’ and
vertical separation of 24” (or 18” with insulation) from both sanitary and storm
sewer piping and should be noted as such on the plans.
o Provide sizes and material types of all existing utilities that are being connected
to as part of the project. Call out the locations of existing hydrants.
o Show a separate fire and domestic water service stub into the building with the
appropriate shut off valves, PIV valves, curb stops, etc.
o Describe the types of connections to existing utilities and show proposed valve
locations.
o The water and sanitary sewer should be a lighter line-type on the grading plan.
12. The layout provided will require review by the City’s Fire Marshall to verify hydrant
spacing for fire protection coverage as well as approval of fire apparatus access/turn
around.
13. Apply and provide copies to the City of any required permits including DLI (final design),
watershed (final design), and NPDES (construction).
14. Show soil boring locations on utility plan. Not complete.
15. Casing pipe will be required where utilities cross the retaining walls. Note on the plan
and provide specific details for each crossing proposed. Not complete.
16. Provide a looping watermain connection along the easterly property line connecting the
proposed southerly and northerly watermain lines or provide an analysis showing that
adequate fire flow can be provided to the remaining lots in the loop (future multi-family on
the Adam’s site, three lots to the east) if the watermain within the Adam’s site were to be
shut-off. Not complete.
17. Added watermain easement will need to allow for hydrants and hydrant construction.
Adam’s Pest Control Preliminary Plat & Site Plan Submittal – WSB Comments
November 5, 2019
Page 4
K:\014536-000\Admin\Docs\2019-10-29 Plan Submittal\_2019-11-05 Adams Pest Control Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx
Stormwater Management
18. The development will need to meet the appropriate requirements for Pioneer-Sarah
Creek Watershed Management Commission. Please provide permitting documents to the
City when approved.
19. Provide soil borings for infiltration areas to determine if feasible due to soil type and
groundwater levels. Typically, infiltration is not recommended for C type soils which are
prevalent in the City of Medina. The bottom of infiltration basins must have 3 feet of
separation from current groundwater levels. In most cases, infiltration has not been found
to be feasible in the City, but rather filtration. Filtration basins have been added with
draintile on the bottom. 50% credit is allowed for filtration. Basins will need to be resized
to meet the volume control requirement.
20. Provide pretreatment for all infiltration areas. If infiltration is not found to be feasible,
pretreatment will still be required for filtration areas. Call out where pretreatment
structures are located on the plans.
21. No impervious area is currently directed to Basin #2. No credit for provided volume can
be used for this BMP. Additionally, provided volume can only be credited for the other 3
BMPs for the amount of impervious area contributing to the basin. 3. The City will not
allow credit for oversizing basins if there isn’t enough impervious routed to the basin.
22. The rate control summary table should provide comparison of existing and proposed
discharge rates for all three rainfall events.
23. Highway 55 ditch discharge location is not shown on the drainage figures. Both existing
and proposed drainage figures should match all labels for subcatchments and nodes in
the HydroCAD model.
24. EOF locations and elevations must be specifically labeled on the plans for all BMPs. Not
complete.
25. Label the size and type of existing and proposed storm sewer piping, label the invert
information on all catch basins/manholes. Not complete.
26. Calculations must be submitted indicating the culvert under the proposed entrance road
is sized adequately to convey the offsite tributary area. Not complete.
27. Curve numbers for existing agriculture land must use the peak growth formula listed in
the City’s Design Manual. Not complete.
28. Confirm minimum and maximum velocities for storm sewer are met for the 10-year
rainfall event. Minimum pipe velocity is 3 fps and maximum is 10 fps. Not complete.
29. Discharge velocities into stormwater BMPs must not exceed 6 fps. Not complete.
30. Provide HydroCAD model or stage-storage/discharge tables to confirm BMPs drain within
48 hours. Applicable for either infiltration or filtration. To be reviewed once basins are
sized appropriately to meet volume control requirement.
31. With final construction plans please provide the following:
Adam’s Pest Control Preliminary Plat & Site Plan Submittal – WSB Comments
November 5, 2019
Page 5
K:\014536-000\Admin\Docs\2019-10-29 Plan Submittal\_2019-11-05 Adams Pest Control Preliminary Plat - WSB Comments.docx
o Access routes (8’ wide minimum) will be required to reach the proposed control
structures. Show the locations on the plans.
o Separate SWPPP sheets showing erosion and sediment control BMP’s for the
site.
o Operation and maintenance plan for stormwater BMPs.
Erosion Control
32. Provide a copy of the NPDES General Construction Permit prior to any site disturbance.
33. Double silt fence must be implemented adjacent to the existing wetlands. Not complete.
34. Label construction entrance on the plans.
35. Provide a description of construction sequencing for the stormwater filtration areas to limit
impacts and ensure the basins are functioning post construction. Not complete.
36. Update any reference to infiltration basins in the SWPPP. Revise to be consistent with
proposed onsite BMPs.
Wetland Impacts
37. Confirm if any wetland impacts are anticipated. If so, a wetland permit application would
need to be submitted. Wetland buffers are adequate for the Complete.
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
1
Dusty Finke
From:Scott Johnson
Sent:Tuesday, November 12, 2019 7:51 AM
To:Dusty Finke; Ed Belland
Subject:FW: New submission from Contact Us
FYI
From: Jim Reader <jim_reader@comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 5:24 AM
To: Website Inquiries <city@medinamn.gov>
Subject: New submission from Contact Us
Name
Jim Reader
Email
jim_reader@comcast.net
Phone
(763) 350-3000
Comments
Re: mtg tonight building going up on 55.
I live close enough to receive the mtg notice. I can not come to the meeting. I'm in Corcoran, not Medina.
1) I do not want to hear any complaints from future Medina residents about hunting next to their property. Hunting is legal in
Corcoran. Most of the hunting on my 5 acres is "no noise", bow hunting. But shot gun hunting is legal.
2) There is large eagles nest , possibly on the interested parcel, .almost on 55. It's enjoyed by myself, neighbors, -- anyone who
drives 55. That's thousands per day! We look for the eagles starting in Jan and especially during the spring hatching season.
They are so neat!!
I'm going to suggest that the MN DNR install a video cam to film the nest and then transmit it on the net, Being next to 55 it will
be convenient to maintain.
Regards, JIm Reader resident of 50 + yrs.
Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members,
I am writing in response to the Jar Har LLP‐“Adams” proposal to develop land located north of
Highway 55 and west of Willow Drive.
I have read through the memorandum packet and feel I understand the proposal for rezoning and
planning requirements. There are many requests and it is not extremely clear which ones will be voted
upon at the November 12th meeting.
I have the following specific concerns and questions:
1. Driving safety (CUP standard Subd. 1 and 9)‐ Since the access to Highway 55 is now proposed to
be a right in/right out, does the ‘CUP’ for the access address these issues:
Eastbound vehicles must make a right hand turn and go west. Has an Adam’s Pest Control
driving plan has been established and reviewed? Where will they turn around to go east?
Will they use the first roads they see, like Wichita Trail, a dead end residential street, or
Rolling Hills Road to turn around and go east? This could cause morning rush hour safety
conflicts between a fleet of trucks and school children waiting for the bus on a quiet
residential street that is not designed for heavy vehicles. Will restaurant patrons be directed
through signage to a safe location to turn or will they also turn into the first driveway they
see to make a U turn to the east?
If restaurant or staff who disregard the barriers and make a left turn or if ‘X’ amount of
traffic accidents or DUI’s occur will the right in/right out be revoked ?
I propose that a yearly review of traffic safety and accidents take place up to the full
termination of the access to 55 once the new frontage road to Willow is established so
traffic can safely access 55 in both direction at the signal light.
2. Lighting (CUP standard Subd. 5)‐ ‐According to staff recommendations the lighting is to be
reduced to the acceptable range, I would like to request shielding be used on the Hwy 55 side to
block unnecessary light from rural residential and the lake. Have lighting hours been
established? Neighboring industrial lighting shuts off or is reduced after hours. Since a
restaurant is proposed what will be the hours of operation? Will the lights go off or be
diminished after close?
3. Noise (CUP standard Subd. 9) Has an outdoor decibel level been established for outdoor dining
and music? Or if windows or doors are opened (common restaurant design feature).
4. Hunting (CUP standard Subd. 1). Will the Adam’s building (or subsequent restaurants which
may take over the property) remove the ability for Peter Lake residents to hunt on the lake?
This would injure the enjoyment of other properties in the immediate vicinity and possibly even
diminish unique property amenities.
Opinion:
Overall I support the development of the land with Adam’s Pest Control and welcome a local
and well run business, with excellent ties to the community, to the area. I am somewhat apprehensive
about the restaurant, as it is an often a contested business with local municipalities regarding
ordinances, noise, crime, etc. But coming from a family that has been in the business for almost 100
years I also know when done right it too can be a value to the community.
As with any development I am primarily concerned with Safety, light, noise, and change in my
rights as a property owner. In our development on Wichita Trail, our children’s wellbeing is of utmost
focus. Late night noise and light along with increase in traffic of non‐residents has us worried.
Additionally the effects to the natural area and environment around Peter Lake warrants study.
All of the Residents on Wichita Trail have well water and any run off or spillage of stored chemicals,
which sole purpose is to kill animals, could be detrimental to people, pets or the ecosystem. There is a
high likelihood the eagles will leave the area, and the possibility of additional runoff at its most minimal
will change the ecosystem.
In regards to the initial request for residential rezoning, I am highly opposed. I reviewed all
versions of the 2040 plan submitted to Met Council and agreed with the current zoning identifications.
I believe that the solicitation for public input not cast correctly. I understand the requirements
to inform the surrounding residents, but due to geographical features and sightlines I believe more
individuals should have been informed. This is based on visual and auditory effects of the proposed
development, due to water and site lines over swamps and lakes. Additionally the Agenda was never
posted until a few hours prior to the planning commission meeting, thus no public could be informed
unless a specific call, letter or email was directly sent. I have sought out information since, pulling over
and reading the development sign located on site. Small font at 55 mph is not likely to be understood.
Residents such as should all be informed:
THOMAS C GUBBINS
3212 PIONEER TR
HAMEL MN 55340
CHASE K HANSON
4602 WICHITA TR
HAMEL MN 55340
DAVID F KOONMEN
3312 PIONEER TR
HAMEL MN 55340
JEAN S SHILINSKI
STANLEY J SHILINSKI
3400 PIONEER TR
HAMEL MN 55340
DAVID A ANDERSON
ELISSA A HENRICKS
4592 WICHITA TR
HAMEL MN 55340
BRYAN K NORMAN
NILA J NORMAN
4625 WICHITA TR
HAMEL MN 55340
JAYMES GROSSMAN
3082 STATE HWY NO 55
HAMEL MN 55340
JAMES R READER
6200 ROLLING HILLS RD
HAMEL MN 55340
DONALD J SPECKEL
6210 ROLLING HILLS RD
HAMEL MN 55340
J J KIRLEY & T A BOYTIM
P.O. BOX 187
HAMEL MN 55340
ANDREW J & DEBRA L MALECHA
6221 WILLOW DR
HAMEL MN 55340
DONALD & LESLIE JESZEWSKI
6215 WILLOW DR
HAMEL MN 55340
With that said, I would like to thank the planning director, Dusty Finke, for open and honest
communication during this process. And the council for hearing my concerns
Sincerely,
Dave Kozlak
4545 Wichita Trail
Medina, MN
Project Overview and Narrative
Adam’s Pest Control, Inc., Valued Member of the Community for 36 Years, Continues To Grow
Adam’s Pest Control, Inc has operated in Medina since 1983 when it purchased the Anchor Motel at 872 Hwy
55, next to Peg’s Countryside Cafe. This 8 unit hotel and landlord quarters over time was converted to office
space and upgraded multiple times over the years until Adam’s outgrew it.
The company that owned the property was actually Don-Har, LLP and when Don Hanson passed away in
1995, it became Jan-Har, LLP. This was the first property owned by the partnership. Today, Jan-Har owns 5
properties including locations in Nisswa, Milaca, and now 3 in Medina.
In 2000, Jan-Har purchased Village Auto Body at 922 Hwy and in 2007 tore down the two dumpy garages and
upgraded the neighborhood with a beautiful 13,200 square foot office building, warehouse and single vehicle
repair bay. The original building housed Complete Eye Care of Medina, a startup, and a Commercial Bank of
Minnesota, a small loan office for Heron Lake States Bank. Shortly after moving in, Jan-Har remodeled their
old office building at 872 which is now home to Pilates and State Farm.
Adam’s again is outgrowing its facility and so Jan-Har purchased the property we are discussing today in 2018.
While over 44 acres, the western 19.71 acres is wetland (Wetland 3 Type 1/2/3 PEM1C/B/A Floodplain
Forest/Seasonally Flooded Basin/Shallow Marsh). On the North end that borders Corcoran, specifically the
Eastern half, exists a forest that Dusty tells me it is considered Moderate Quality Basswood Maple forest. The
unique part of the property is the bald eagles nest right on the busy, noisy highway. Unfortunately, people
frequently stop on the shoulder of 55 to take pictures.
The 2020 Plan
Jan-Har is planning its next building for Adam’s. It will be a 3 story office building with some tenant space on all
3 floors, and likely with a bar/restaurant with a patio that overlooks the eagle’s nest and wetlands.
There will be a second building, tucked into the hill, that will hold the warehouse, requisition room (where
technicians get their products), indoor vehicle storage, and vehicle repair bay.
Access
For access, we are requesting highway 55 right in, right out only access, converting the existing shoulders to
turn lanes until we have been in the property for 3 years or the private road to Willow is built for 3 years,
whichever is later. This is so customers can find the restaurant easily and learn how to get in/out via WIllow.
Without this access, the restaurant concept is a non-starter. We would be fine with signing a closure
agreement in advance to this effect.
Utilities
We expect to get water and sewer through the rights of way easement of the private road, although the city’s
sewer only extends a little bit north on Willow. TwinCo is on septic. There is talk the city will have to extend the
sewer north on Willow and install a grind/lift/pump station because that area is lower than the sewer system
near Graphics Packaging (formerly Walter G Anderson). The lift station, if that is the design, will service our
property, Twin Co, and the future development of the two parcels adjacent to the private road and the Cates
Ranch, east of Willow.
It is unfortunate that the city does not have water and sewer further west on Hwy 55 in front of our property. It
becomes a significant extra expense for us to connect to them - approximately 1400’ to extend these utilities
from Willow to the edge of our property.
Private Road
St. Louis Park Investments (SLPI) owns the two outlots set aside for a future private road. The also own the
parcel north of the private road, parcel to the south of the private road, and the TwinCo property. The private
road right of way was created decades ago to give those parcels and our property access. The agreement,
written by the city, and agreed upon by the city and SLPI was poorly written, in many people’s opinions. Our
development does not appear to trigger anything. Therefore, SLPI’s stance, despite our best efforts to
negotiate with them, is to pay nothing towards the water, sewer and a private road.
We have met with Bob Atkinson who claims to have the SLPI properties and Cates property under contract. It
sounds like he has submitted something to the city about rezoning the Cates property. Supposedly, he wants
to put in large industrial parks on these properties, build the private road, and develop it before we do. We
hope this is the case, but we can’t confirm any of this. His realtor is Rose Lorsung. She indicates we are a little
ahead of them with city submittals, but I think they plan to break ground before us.
The agreement between SLPI and the city says the city won’t maintain the road. I would hope the city would
reconsider this position if the road, including a short extension up to the culdesac on our property, were built to
city specs, but this is up to the city and SLPI or Bob Atkinson if he buys it.
Park Dedication Fees
Because the property is two parcels and we plan to
subdivide them differently - near the grove of
trees/small wetland in the middle of the property, we
are submitting the subdivision request soon. We
understand this triggers a park dedication fee and
given no park is planned for the area, we would have
to pay the fee, or it could be reduced or stayed if a
nature area was preserved. We’d like to offer up the
19.71 acre wetland as a preserved area. In addition,
we’d like to provide the city with three bike repair
stations (with tools and a pump) that the city can
install in the central park, at the police station (where
an annual Bike Safety Rodeo starts), and at a park at
24 & 19, which is on two popular bike trails.
Subdivision
The current properties are two parcels, but we want the parcels to be configured differently. Therefore, we are
submitting a subdivision request. We’d like it named “Adams”. You can see them in the proposed packet.
We’re asking that the southern parcel, where these buildings will be built, be rezoned Business (B).
While we plan on selling the northern parcel, we’d like to direct it to be multi-family residential, an apartment
building some day. As defined, with underground parking, we think it could hold up to a 4 story, 116 unit,
building. This would tremendously help the bar/restaurant concept. The unique parcel could allow for a
structure surrounded on 3 sides by mature trees and a beautiful wetland to the west. The entry could be via a
private entrance between trees. Walking paths could enhance the residential experience along the wetlands
and in this nice 100 year old forest. To the north are Corcoran single family homes, so it seems like a great
transition between single family homes and business. We are looking for guidance as to how this northern
property should be zoned. Or, should we let the buyer make that determination?
Timing
For timing, we hope to break ground with earth work around July 1, 2020, with major construction of the
building shell and exterior occurring between September 1 and December 31 to avoid any issues with the
eagles. To do this, much of the office and warehouse buildings will be built with precast panels having a more
modern appearance. The restaurant portion will likely be more typical construction, but also have a modern
feel. You know our tastes - it will be an attractive building.
We expect to move in around April 1, 2021, but the general contractor has not laid out an exact construction
schedule yet.
The last time we built in Medina, it took 9 months to get approval. W orking backwards from July 1, 2020
groundbreaking, we need to submit to the city by October 1, 2019, so that is our plan. Hopefully the approval
process will go quicker this time. One hang up last time was MnDOT. I encourage a meeting be set up soon to
get their unofficial reaction to this concept plan, so they can respond in a timely manner and not hold up the
process.
SKD Architects, Inc.
11140 Highway 55, Suite A
Plymouth, MN 55441
763.591.6115 763.591.6119 fax
Date: August 19, 2019
To: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
From: SKD
Re: Jan-Har, LLP Project, PID’s 04-118-23-21-0001 & 04-118-23-24-0001
Dock and Overhead Door width at the Warehouse Requisition, Vehicle Repair and Vehicle
Storage Building
The requested narrative supports the need for dock and garage doors width as shown on the plan for
the Warehouse Requisition, Vehicle Repair and Vehicle Storage Building.
There are 6 dock or overhead doors totaling 66’-0” in width. The current building perimeter is 544’-0”.
The percentage of doors is 12.13%. The zoning ordinance limits that width to 10% unless shown the
need for additional width.
Below is a breakdown of the number of doors needed for each area of the building.
A. Warehouse
a) 10’-0” wide, single drive in door. Services smaller trucks and clients using the heat
chamber.
b) 8’-0” wide, single dock door. Set up required for semitruck deliveries.
B. Repair Bay
a) 12’-0” wide, single drive in door. This door is used to service a potential of 3 repair
bays. The single door allows servicing of all vehicle types.
C. Vehicle Storage
a) 3 @ 12’-0” wide, drive in doors. The 3 doors allow indoor storage of their current box trucks,
which by Medina Ordinance cannot be kept outside. The depth allows for tandem storage up
to 6 vehicles. A single door will restrict their ability to maneuver a large truck and store the
same number of vehicles efficiently.
Memorandum
1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e . N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1
P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 | a e -m n .c o m
A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C | P r o j #15236
15236
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SURVEY
C1.0
------
LOT
1
LOT
2
NEW LOT LINE
RETAINING WALL
3-FT. HIGH WALL (MAX.)
FUTURE ROADWAY
(NOT INCLUDED)
RETAINING WALL
1
1
1
1
RAISED ISLANDS (TYP.)
2
RETAINING WALL
3
3
3
3
3
RIPRAP SPILLWAYS
(TYP.)
GRASS-LINED SPILLWAY
GRASS-LINED
SPILLWAY
END CONC. CURB, PROVIDE BIT. CURB ALONG
EDGE OF BIT. PAVEMENT
PRO
P
O
S
E
D
BUI
L
D
I
N
G
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
ADAM'S
MONUMENT SIGN
4-FT. HIGH WALL (MAX.)
9-FT. HIGH WALL (MAX.)
ALONG CURB LINE
4
FUTURE ROADWAY
(NOT INCLUDED)
NEW CULVERT (SHALL MEET
MINIMUM DESIGN
STANDARDS OF MNDOT)
REMOVE EXITING ENTRANCE
& CULVERT
MULCH-COVERD PATH & LEVEL PAD FOR
FUTURE BEE - KEEPING LOCATION (BY OTHERS)
END CONC.
CURBS
FUTURE ROADWAY BY
OTHERS
(NOT INCLUDED)
(19.59
AC.)
(26.58
AC.)
5
5
(20
,
6
1
2
S.F
.
FOO
T
P
R
I
N
T
)
(1
4
,
3
9
4
S.
F
.
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
)
PETER LAKE -
1000' SHORELAND
OVERLAY LINE
35' WETLAND BUFFER
15' BLDG. SETBACK
DELINEATED WETLAND
DELINEATED WETLAND
50' BLDG.
SETBACK
15' PARKING SETBACK
40' BLDG. SETBACK
25' PARKING SETBACK
FUTURE ADAM'S SIGN
5
10' D&U ESMT.
10' D&U ESMT.
10' D&U ESMT.
10' D&U ESMT.
10' D&U ESMT.
15' D&U ESMT.
15' D&U ESMT.
MN
D
O
T
R
.
O
.
W
.
1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e . N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1
P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 | a e -m n .c o m
A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C | P r o j #15236
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
15236
LEGEND
PROPERTY LIMITS
PROPOSED D & U EASEMENT
EXISTING WATERMAIN
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
WETLAND
PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
EXISTING D & U EASEMENT
EXISTING CURB
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY CORNERS
PRELIMINARY PLAT
C2.0
RS RSJN
SCALE:1 PRELIMINARY PLAT
1" = 60'
N
0 80'160'
NEW CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
EXPANSION OF HIGHWAY 55 PAVEMENT WIDTH TO
ACCOMMODATE RIGHT TURN LANE AND ACCELERATION LANE.
PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT, PER PROJECT
SPECIFICATIONS & DETAIL.
PROPOSED BITUMINOUS CURB AT END OF PAVEMENT.
DIRECTIONAL SIGN.
KEY NOTES:
1
2
1)LOT 1 AREA = 26.58 ACRES
LOT 2 AREA = 19.59 ACRES
TOTAL AREA = 46.17 ACRES
2)CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT: RURAL BUSINESS (RBH)
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT: BUSINESS (B)
3)SITE UTILITIES SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO
SHEET C4.0 FOR DETAILED SITE UTILITY INFO.
4)REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL
SITE PLAN DIMENSIONS.
GENERAL NOTES:
3
4
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL
10
BEING 15 FEET IN WIDTH ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES
AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH ADJOINING INTERIOR AND
EXTERIOR LOT LINES.
10
15
SCALE:2
PROPOSED DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENTS DETAIL
N.T.S.
PARKING STALL COUNT
5
DELINEATED WETLAND LINE
28
LIGHTING POLE LOCATION
PROPOSED CONCRETE WALK
DIRECTIONAL SIGN/STOP SIGN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT 1/ LOT 2, BLOCK 1, ADAM'S SUBDIVISION
BUILDING SETBACKS:
HIGHWAY 55 = 50 FEET
FRONT = 40 FEET
SITE = 25 FEET (CAN BE REDUCED TO 15 FEET IN COORDINATED
DEVELOPMENT)
REAR = 25 FEET (CAN BE REDUCED TO 15 FEET IN COORDINATED
DEVELOPMENT)
RESIDENTIAL = 100 FEET (75 FEET WITH OPAQUE LANDSCAPE BUFFER)
BUILDING OVER 35 FEET IN HEIGHT HAVE INCREASED SETBACK BY ONE
FOOT FOR EACH FOOT OVER 35 FEET.
PARKING SETBACKS:
FRONT = 25 FEET
REAR/SITE = 15 FEET (CAN BE REDUCED TO 0 FEET TO SHARING PARKING)
RESIDENTIAL = 100 FEET (60 FEET WITH OPAQUE LANDSCAPE BUFFER)
WETLAND BUFFER:
LARGE WETLAND TO WEST = 35 FEET
OTHER WETLANDS IN FIELD = 25 FEET
THRERE IS 1 15 FEET SETBACK FOR BUILDINGS FROM THE BUFFER.
IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS:
BLDG. 1 AREA = 20,612 SF
BLDG. 2 AREA = 14,394 SF
PARKING/DRIVES AREA = 165,369 SF
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA = 200,365 SF
% OF LOT 1(TOTAL AREA COVERAGE) = 17.30%
PARKING PROVIDED = 298 (INCLUDES 9 H.C. STALLS)
MN
D
O
T
R
.
O
.
W
.
WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
9
8
8
.
0
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
9
9
4
.
0
10
0
0
99
5
9
8
0
98
5
98
9
98
5
98
0
98
0
98
0
97
5
97
5
975
9
7
5
98
5
97
0
98
0
985
980
97
5
100
2
1000
9
9
0
98
0
98
0
97
5
98
0
9
8
5
10
0
5
10
0
5
99
0
98
5
985
985
98
5
100
5
1
0
0
5
98
9
99
0
990
99
0
976
97
3
986
987
98
7
988
990
9
8
7
9
8
8
98
5
98
5
98
3
.
5
9
8
7
9
9
3
983
9
8
3
9
8
7
9
8
6
9
8
7
988
97
5
99
0
995
988
985
990
995
997983
99
0
99
5
99
6
99
0
99
1
989
991
99
2
9
9
2
992
993
992
991
993
99
3
992
99
3
987
98
7
987
98
9
98
8
RD
R
D
RD
R
D
1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e . N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1
P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 | a e -m n .c o m
A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C | P r o j #15236
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
15236
LEGEND
PROPERTY LIMITS
EXISTING WATERMAIN
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
PROPOSED WATER SERVICE (SEE SHEET C4.0)
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER (SEE SHEET C4.0)
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURES
PROPOSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT AND WALK
RIPRAP
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL
EXISTING CURB
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY CORNERS
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATON
PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION (GUTTER GRADE IF SHOWN ON CURB LINE)
4-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
BASIN #2
EL. = 988.0
FILTRATION
BASIN #3
EL. = 976.0
FILTRATIOIN
BASIN #4
EL. = 973.0
FILTRATION
BASIN #1
EL. = 983.5
3.5:1 SLOPE
(MAX.)
3:1 SLOPE
(MAX.)
T/BERM
EL. = 991.5
RIPRAP SPILLWAY
(TYP.)
STM FES
INV. = 973.80
STM FES
EL. = 972.56
STM CONTROL
STRUCTURE
RIM = 979.3
6-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
(MAX.)
SITE GRADING,
DRAINAGE & EROSION
CONTROL PLAN
C3.0
RS RSJN
SCALE:1 SITE GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN
1" = 60'
N
0 60'120'
5-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
(MAX.)
RIPRAP SPILLWAY
EL. = 979.50
STM CONTROL
STRUCTURE
RIM = 976.3
STM FES
EL. = 970.0
STM CONTROL
STRUCTURE
RIM = 986.8
STM FES
INV = 976.80
CB'S
SILT FENCE
PROPOSED CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
SPILLWAY
EL. = 975.3T/BERM
EL. = 976.0
ROCK CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE LOCATION
REMOVE EXISTING
ENTRANCE & CULVERT
3:1 SLOPE
(MAX.)
988
MONUMENT SIGN
PAVEMENT, BIT. CURB
AND END CURB
FUTURE ROADWAY
(NOT INCLUDED)
4-FT. HIGH WALL (MAX.)
CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT FUTURE ROAD SUBGRADE ONLY, IN AREA IDENTIFIED,
FOR A FUTURE ROADWAY. SUBGRADE ELEVATIONS SHALL BE 12" LOWER THAN FINISHED
GRADES SHOWN. PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL SEEDING/MULCHING/TOPSOIL ON THE
SHAPED SUBGRADE FOR TEMPORARY TURF ESTABLISHMENT
PROVIDE RIPRAP AT STORM SEWER OUTLETS, PER DETAIL.
SUMPED BOTTOM STORM MANHOLE, TO COLLECT AND HOLD SEDIMENT FOR TREATMENT
PURPOSES. MAINTAIN/CLEAN REGULARLY. REFER TO UTILITY PLAN FOR DETAIL.
PROVIDE SEEDED EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON AREAS GRADED STEEPER THAN 4:1.
PROVIDE ENKAMAT, OR APPROVAL SIMILAR EROSION CONTROL MAT WITHIN AREAS OF
CONCENTRATED FLOW.
PROVIDE STAKED BIOROLL DITCH CHECKS IN GRADED SWALES, PER DETAIL.
KEY NOTES:
1
CONSTRUCT SUBGRADE ONLY, FOR FUTURE ROADWAY
1
1
NEW CULVERT
STM FES
EL. = 973.80
STM FES
EL. = 976.80
STM FES
INV. = 984.30
DRAINAGE ARROW
2
3
MULCH-COVERD PATH & LEVEL PAD FOR FUTURE BEE -
KEEPING FACILITY (BY OTHERS)
2 3
3
2
2
3
100-YR HIGH WATER LEVELHWL
ROOF DRAIN PIPERD
BERM
BE
R
M
HWL = 979.52
HWL = 975.52
HWL=990.27
HWL=985.81
2
LIGHTING POLE LOCATION
GRASS-LINED
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
EL. = 987.5
9-FT HIGH WALL (MAX.)
ALONG CURB LINE
GRASS-LINED
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
EL. = 990.5
4
6
6
6
6
4
5
5
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW ROUTE (E.O.F.)
4
5
6
1.NO WETLAND IMPACTS ARE ANTICIPATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
2.PROJECT IS ADJACENT TO A FEMA ZONE A FLOOD PLAN, LOCATED WITHIN THE
WESTERN PORTION OF LOT 1.
3.PRE-TREATMENT OF IMPERVIOUS RUNOFF AREAS, IS ACHIEVED BY UPSTREAM
SUMPED MANHOLE STRUCTURES, PER DETAIL AND KEY NOTE #3.
4.RETAINING WALLS WHICH ARE GREATER THAN 4-FT. HEIGHT, ARE TO BE DESIGNED BY
A CERTIFIED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, AND MAY REQUIRE HANDRAILS OR SAFETY
FENCING.
GENERAL NOTES:
STM FES
INV = 985.0
4
4:1
3.5:1 SLOPE
(MAX.)
4
4
4:1 SLOPE
(MAX.)
3
3
3
WI
L
L
O
W
D
R
I
V
E
1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e . N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1
P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 | a e -m n .c o m
A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C | P r o j #15236
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
15236
LEGEND
PROPERTY LIMITS
EXISTING WATERMAIN
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
PROPOSED WATER SERVICE
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURES
PROPOSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT AND WALK
RIPRAP (SEE SHEET C6.0)
PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL
EXISTING CURB
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY CORNERS
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATON
PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
(SEE SHEET C5.0)
(SEE SHEET C5.0)
SAN. MH 1
SAN. MH 2
SAN. MH 3
SAN. MH 4
(LIFT STATION
BY OTHERS)
SAN. MH 5SAN. MH 6
SAN. MH 7
INFILTRATION BASIN #4
SURFACE EL. = 973.00
INFILTRATION BASIN #3
SURFACE EL. = 976.00
INFILTRATION BASIN #1
SURFACE EL. = 983.50
SAN.
MH 10
SAN. MH 11
ST
M
ST
M
S
A
N
.
"
K
"
SAN. MH 8
CBMH 5
CONNECT WITH
EXISTING SAN. MH
@ INV = 982.00
STMH 9A
8" WATER MAIN
8" WATER MAIN
CONNECT WITH
EXISTING WATER MAIN
4-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
6-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
STM CONTROL
STRUCTURE 19
RIM = 976.30
STM FES 19A
INV = 971.26
STM FES 18A
INV = 972.50
CONTROL
STRUCTURE 18
RIM = 979.30
RIPRAP SPILLWAY EL. = 979.5
STM FES 10A
INV = 973.80
SITE UTILITY PLAN
C4.0
RS RSJN
SCALE:1 SITE UTILITY PLAN
1" = 100'
N
0 100'200'
SAN.
MH 9
SAN. "E"SAN. "F"SAN. "G"
SAN
.
"
H
"
SAN
.
"
I
"
RIPRAP SPILLWAY
SA
N
.
"
J
"
CBMH 8
CBMH 9
CBMH 7
CBMH 12
STM FES 16A
INV = 976.80
SA
N
.
"
D
"
(
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
)
SA
N
.
"
A
"
(
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
)
SA
N
.
"
B
"
(
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
)
SA
N
.
"
C
"
(
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
)
STM
ST
M
ST
M
8"
W
A
T
E
R
M
A
I
N
8"
W
A
T
E
R
M
A
I
N
CBMH 3
CB 1
ST
M
S
T
M
STM
ST
M
GRASS-LINED
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
EL. = 990.50
5-FT HIGH
RETAINING WALL
STM
ST
M
STM
A
PIPE DESIGNATION
SANITARY SEWER TABLE
DESCRIPTION
340' -XX" @ XX%
COMMENT
GRAVITY BY OTHERS
1
MANHOLE NO.
SANITARY SEWER STRUCTURES
1002.00
COMMENT
BY OTHERS
RIM ELEV.
983.40 (+)
INV. ELEV.
2 983.00 XXX.XX
3
BY OTHERS
BY OTHERS
4 LIFT STATION, BY OTHERS
5
6
FUTURE ROAD, TBD
7
8
9 ------------
10
11
XX = INFORMATION IS YET TO BE DETERMINED (BY OTHERS).
"TEMP" RIM EL. MAY BE ADJUSTED ACCORDING TO FUTURE ROAD DESIGN.
XX = INFORMATION IS YET TO BE DETERMINED (BY OTHERS).
FUTURE ROAD, TBD
FUTURE ROAD, TBD
FUTURE ROAD, TBD
983.20
977.0 (TEMP)
966.30
967.70
969.10
970.30
976.50986.10
977.50986.35
981.00991.40
978.5 (TEMP)
987.5 (TEMP)
999.0 (TEMP)
994.0 (TEMP)
965.00 (w)
XXX.XX
B 340' -XX" F.M.FORCEMAIN BY OTHERS
C 330' -XX" F.M.FORCEMAIN BY OTHERS
D 330' -XX" F.M.FORCEMAIN BY OTHERS
E ------------
------------
------------
------------
------------
------------
------------
------------
F
318' - 8" @ 0.4%
G
344' - 8" @ 0.4%
H
345' - 8" @ 0.4%
I
300' - 8" @ 0.4%
J
390' - 8" @ 1.6%
K
250' - 8" @ 0.4%
------------310' - 6" @ 1.1%
GRASS-LINED EMERGENCY
SPILLWAY, EL. = 987.5
STM CONTROL
STRUCTURE 4
RIM = 986.50
STM FES 3A
INV = 984.30
CB 15A
CBMH 16
CBMH 14
CB 15
CB 11
CB 6
PROPOSED WATER HYDRANT
9-FT HIGH WALL (MAX.)
ALONG CURB LINE
4-FT. HIGH WALL
(MAX.)
NEW CULVERT
CB 1
STRUCTURE NO.
STORM SEWER TABLE
DOWN STREAM PIPE DESCRIPTIONRIM ELEV.INV. ELEV.
CBMH 2 (2' SUMP)
CBMH 3 (W/SAFL)
OCS 4
CBMH 5
CB 6
CBMH 7
CBMH 8 (2' SUMP)
STMH 9 (W/SAFL)
STMH 10
CB 11
CBMH 12 (2' SUMP)
CB 13A
CBMH 14
CB 15
CBMH 15A
CBMH 16 (W/SAFL)
OCS 17
STMH 17A
OCS 18
OCS 19
CB 13
CBMH 2
CB 13A
STMH 9A
CB 13
88' - 12" HDPE @ 0.50%990.00 986.50
102' - 12" HDPE @ 0.50%991.75 986.06
40' - 15" HDPE @ 0.50%991.70 985.24 (N)
145' - 15" HDPE @ 1.00%986.50 982.00
113' - 18" HDPE @ 0.40%985.50 980.55
42' - 12" HDPE @ 1.00%986.85 983.40
95' - 15" HDPE @ 2.00%986.50 983.00
114' - 21" HDPE @ 1.00%986.20 980.10
125' - 18" HDPE @ 3.17%985.00 978.96
118' - 21" HDPE @ 1.29%979.50 975.00
60' - 24" HDPE @ 0.80%977.50 973.48
42' - 15" HDPE @ 1.00%986.85 983.40
207' - 15" HDPE @ 1.80%986.50 983.00
8' - 12" HDPE @ 1.25%987.90 983.90
113' - 12" HDPE @ 1.50%987.80 983.80
70' - 15" HDPE @ 1.10%986.20 982.10
60' - 15" HDPE @ 0.83%982.50 979.50
94' - 18" HDPE @ 0.80%983.75 979.00
87' - 15" HDPE @ 3.00%991.30 985.00±
88' - 18" HDPE @ 0.50%979.30 975.50±
30' - 15" HDPE @ 0.80%976.30 971.50
ASSUME COMMON INVERTS UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.
984.54 (W)
45' - 30" HDPE @ 0.40%985.20
979.27 (SW)
978.25 (NW)
30' - 15" HDPE @ 1.00%982.00 979.00 (E)
976.30 (W)
STM FES 19B
INV = 973.80
18' - 12" RCP
STM FES 4A
INV = 984.30
27' - 12" RCP
STM FES 18A
INV = 976.80
19"-12" RCP
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
9
8
8
.
0
0
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
9
9
4
.
0
0
STMH 10
977.00 (NE)
981.05 (SE)
RD
R
D
RD
ROOF DRAIN PIPERD
R
D
LIGHTING POLE LOCATION
RIP RAP SPILLWAY, EL. = 975.3
PETER LAKE -
1000'S SHORELAND
OVERLAY LINE
GENERAL NOTES:
1.SANITARY SEWER MATERIAL SHALL BE PVC-SDR
35, UNLESS DETERMINED OTHERWISE BY CITY
CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.
2.WATERMAIN PIPE MATERIAL SHALL BE PVC-C900,
UNLESS OTHERWISE DETERMINED BY CITY
CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.
SERVICE STUBS
FOR LOT 2
HYD. #3
HYD. #2
HYD. #1
SLOPE 8" PERFORATED
DRAINTILE @ 0.2%
SLOPE 8" PERFORATED
DRAINTILE @ 0.2%
SLOPE 8" PERFORATED
DRAINTILE @ 0.2%
12" FES
10
0
0
99
0
99
5
98
0
98
5
985
98
0
98
0
98
0
97
5
97
4
97
5
97
5
975
9
7
5
98
5
97
0
980
985
980
97
5
100
2
1000
9
9
0
98
0
98
0
97
5 98
0
9
8
5
10
0
5
10
0
5
98
5
985
985
985
100
5
10
0
5
995
98
9
99
0
990
99
0
976
97
3
986
987
98
7
988
990
9
8
7
98
5
98
5
98
3
.
5
9
8
7
9
9
3
983
9
8
3
9
8
7
9
8
6
9
8
7
988
99
0
10
0
3
10
0
4
98
8
99
0
9
8
8
99
0
98
9
99
1
997
99
5
10
0
0
99
6
99
2
992
9
9
2
991
99
3
983
9
8
4
9
9
2
9
8
9
99
2
987
988
988
98
8
98
7
9
8
7
987
986
984
988
993
993
992
99
2
993
997
988
975
976
9
9
1
99
1
99
5
989
99
3
99
5
991
992
991
981
98
2
98
3
984
98
5
98
6
987
98
8
989
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
972
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
1
0
0
2
.
7
5
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
L
D
G
.
FF
E
=
9
8
9
.
2
5
6Prairie Cascade Willow
2" CAL. B&B
3 Prairie Cascade Willow
2" CAL. B&B
10 Black Hills Spruce
6` HT. B&B
3Balsam Fir
6` HT. B&B
9Amur Chokecherry
2" CAL. B&B
3 Balsam Fir
6` HT. B&B
1 Common Hackberry
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
2 Green Mountain Sugar Maple
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
2 Red Oak
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
2 Green Mountain Sugar Maple
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
1 Red Oak
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
4 Green Mountain Sugar Maple
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
7Common Hackberry
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
12Midnight Schubert Chokecherry
2" CAL. B&B
1Midnight Schubert Chokecherry
2" CAL. B&B
2Green Mountain Sugar Maple
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
3`Autumn Brilliance` Serviceberry
2" CAL. B&B
10Red Rocket Maple
2" CAL. B&B
4`Autumn Brilliance` Serviceberry
2" CAL. B&B
7Red Rocket Maple
2" CAL. B&B
4Candicans White Fir
6` HT. B&B
4`Autumn Brilliance` Serviceberry
2" CAL. B&B
2Accolade Elm
3" CAL. B&B
8Accolade Elm
3" CAL. B&B
1 Black Hills Spruce
6` HT. B&B
1Amur Chokecherry
2" CAL. B&B
11 Heritage River Birch - multi-trunk form
2" CAL. B&B
2 Heritage River Birch - multi-trunk form
2" CAL. B&B
5 Green Mountain Sugar Maple
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
3 Common Hackberry
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
3 Red Oak
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
1 Accolade Elm
3" CAL. B&B
2 Red Oak
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
1 Common Hackberry
2 - 1/2" CAL. B&B
1Black Hills Spruce
6` HT. B&B
5Black Hills Spruce
6` HT. B&B
6Balsam Fir
6` HT. B&B
1 Accolade Elm
3" CAL. B&B
1Red Rocket Maple
2" CAL. B&B
5Balsam Fir
6` HT. B&B
2Apple
5` HT. CONT.
2Apple
5` HT. CONT.
TREES QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT.SIZE
15 GREEN MOUNTAIN SUGAR MAPLE B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
ACER SACCHARUM `GREEN MOUNTAIN` TM
13 HERITAGE RIVER BIRCH - MULTI-TRUNK FORM B&B 2" CAL.
BETULA NIGRA `HERITAGE`
12 COMMON HACKBERRY B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS
8 RED OAK B&B 2 - 1/2" CAL.
QUERCUS RUBRA
9 PRAIRIE CASCADE WILLOW B&B 2" CAL.
SALIX X `PRAIRIE CASCADE`
12 ACCOLADE ELM B&B 3" CAL.
ULMUS X `ACCOLADE`
CONIFEROUS TREES QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT.SIZE
17 BALSAM FIR B&B 6` HT.
ABIES BALSAMEA
4 CANDICANS WHITE FIR B&B 6` HT.
ABIES CONCOLOR `CANDICANS`
17 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE B&B 6` HT.
PICEA GLAUCA DENSATA
ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT.SIZE
18 RED ROCKET MAPLE B&B 2" CAL.
ACER RUBRUM `RED ROCKET`
11 `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` SERVICEBERRY B&B 2" CAL.
AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE`
4 APPLE CONT.5` HT.
MALUS DOMESTICA `HONEYCRISP`
10 AMUR CHOKECHERRY B&B 2" CAL.
PRUNUS MAACKII
11 MIDNIGHT SCHUBERT CHOKECHERRY B&B 2" CAL.
PRUNUS VIRGINIANA `MIDNIGHT`
CITY OF MEDINA, MN, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
BUSINESS PARK (BP) AND BUSINESS (B) DISTRICTS
OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS SHADE & CONIFEROUS TREES
A minimum of one (1) tree per fifty (50) feet, or fraction thereof, of lot perimeter
shall be required.
Lot Perimeter:5,134 ft
Trees Required:103
Trees Provided:107
ORNAMENTAL TREES
A minimum of one (1) tree per one-hundred (100) feet, or fraction thereof, of lot
perimeter shall be required.
Lot Perimeter:5,134 ft
Trees Required:52
Trees Provided:54
UNDERSTORY SHRUBS
A minimum of one (1) shrub per thirty (30) feet, or fraction thereof, of lot
perimeter shall be required.
Lot Perimeter:5,134 ft
Shrubs Required:172
Total Shrubs Provided:1,166 Total 5 Gal Size:283
NOTE:
Shrub & perennial locations are not labeled at this time. Schedule is provided
to demonstrate meeting city requirements
SHRUBS QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE
64 ANNABELLE SMOOTH HYDRANGEA CONT.5 GAL.
HYDRANGEA ARBORESCENS `ANNABELLE`
178 CREEPING JUNIPER CONT.5 GAL.
JUNIPERUS HORIZONTALIS `YOUNGSTOWN`
41 BLUE WONDER DWARF ALBERTA SPRUCE CONT.5 GAL.
PICEA GLAUCA `BLUE WONDER`
424 GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC CONT.2 GAL.
RHUS AROMATICA `GRO-LOW`
PERENNIALS QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE
223 SUMMER BEAUTY GLOBE LILY POT 8" POT
ALLIUM TANGUTICUM `SUMMER BEAUTY`
64 FEATHER REED GRASS CONT.1 GAL.
CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA `KARL FOERSTER`
75 PURPLE CONEFLOWER POT 8" POT
ECHINACEA PURPUREA
305 MAY NIGHT SALVIA CONT.1 GAL.
SALVIA X SYLVESTRIS `MAY NIGHT`
115 AUTUMN JOY SEDUM CONT.1 GAL.
SEDUM X `AUTUMN JOY`
SHRUBS - NATIVE AREAS QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE
15 AMERICAN HAZELNUT CONT.2 GAL.
CORYLUS AMERICANA
15 NINEBARK CONT.1 GAL.
PHYSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS
12 AMERICAN PLUM CONT.2 GAL.
PRUNUS AMERICANA
65 SAND CHERRY CONT.1 GAL.
PRUNUS PUMILA
68 LABRADOR TEA CONT.1 GAL.
RHODODENDRON GROENLANDICUM
27 SMOOTH SUMAC CONT.2 GAL.
RHUS GLABRA
15 PRAIRIE WILLOW CONT.2 GAL.
SALIX HUMILIS
88 ARCTIC BLUE LEAF WILLOW CONT.1 GAL.
SALIX PURPUREA `CANYON BLUE`
26 FLAME WILLOW CONT.2 GAL.
SALIX X `FLAME`
64 MEADOWSWEET CONT.1 GAL.
SPIRAEA ALBA
64 LOWBUSH BLUEBERRY POT 8" POT
VACCINIUM ANGUSTIFOLIUM
SCALE:1 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN
1" = 40'
1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e . N . #1 0 0 P l y m o u t h , M N 5 5 4 4 1
P 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 0 0 | F 7 6 3 .4 1 2 .4 0 9 0 | a e -m n .c o m
A n d e r s o n E n g i n e e r i n g o f M i n n e s o t a , L L C | P r o j #15236
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
15236
N
0 40'80'
LANDSCAPE PLANTING
PLAN
L1.0
DS DSDS
LEGEND
PROPERTY LIMITS
NOTES
1.ALL SHRUB & PERENNIAL PLANTINGS IN LANDSCAPE BEDS SHALL
RECEIVE IRRIGATION (SEE L2.0 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES)
2.ALL SHRUB PLANTINGS IN NATIVE SEED AREAS SHALL RECEIVE
TEMPORARY IRRIGATION FOR ESTABLISHMENT PURPOSES ONLY
(SEE L2.0 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES)
3.REFER TO PLAN SHEET L2.0 FOR SODDING, SEEDING, FERTILIZER
AND TOPSOIL NOTES
NEW SOD W/ IRRIGATION
PRAIRIE RESTORATION "MIXED
HEIGHT/MESIC" SEED MIX, OR
APPROVED EQUAL
1 3" DEEP, SHREDDED HARDWOOD
MULCH W/ FABRIC
SPADE EDGE LANDSCAPE BORDER2
CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
PRAIRIE RESTORATION "SHORELINE"
SEED MIX, OR APPROVED EQUAL
PLANT SCHEDULE
CODE REQUIREMENTS
MONUMENT SIGN
SEE SITE PLAN
BIO-FILTRATION
BASIN: SEE CIVIL
BIO-FILTRATION
BASIN: SEE CIVIL
BIO-FILTRATION
BASIN: SEE CIVIL
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Thurber Page 1 of 4 December 3, 2019
Lot Combination City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: November 26, 2019
MEETING: December 3, 2019 City Council
SUBJ: Ken and Marquita Thurber – Lot Combination – 2885 Ardmore Avenue
Summary of Request
Ken and Marquita Thurber have requested approval from the City to combine two parcels into a
single lot. The existing parcels do not meet minimum lot size standards, and while the
combination would not bring the parcels into full compliance, it does improve the situation.
The subject property is located south of Ardmore Avenue, west of County Road 19. The subject
property is vacant, wooded, and the rear of the lots slope steeply to the creek connecting Lake
Ardmore to Lake Independence. The subject site is outlined in red below, and the property line
between the two parcels which is proposed to be removed is in blue.
Agenda Item # 7E
Thurber Page 2 of 4 December 3, 2019
Lot Combination City Council Meeting
Analysis
The subject property and surrounding land is zoned Urban Residential and located within the
Shoreland Overlay District of Lake Independence and Lake Ardmore.
As noted, the combined parcel would still fall short of minimum lot size standard of 15,000
square feet for lots within the Shoreland Overlay District.
State law provides special provisions related to determining buildability for lots within the
Shoreland Overlay District. This language is attached for reference. If adjacent substandard lots
are under common ownership, the intent is to require the combination of substandard lots to
bring them as close to compliance as possible. The applicant owns these two parcels, and also
property to the southwest. The property to the southwest meets minimum lot size requirements
and is therefore allowed to be developed separately.
The statutory provisions state that in a group of lots under common ownership “…an individual
lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or development if….:
(1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the…lot size for shoreland classification…”
(2) the lot must be connected to public sewer…
(3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25%; and
(4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan.”
Statute states that a group of lots which do not meet the 66% of the minimum lot size “must be
combined with one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much
as possible.”
In this case, 66% of the minimum lot size is 9,900 square feet. The two lots do not meet this
standard, but combining them results in a lot of 12,000 square feet, which exceeds 66% of the
minimum.
The combined lot would be subject to a maximum hardcover coverage of 25%. Construction
would also be subject to the city’s tree preservation and wetland protection ordinance.
Min.
Requirement
Lot 3 -
west PID
Lot 4 -
East PID
Combined Parcel
Min. Lot Area
(Shoreland Overlay)
9,000 s.f.
15,000 s.f.
6,000 s.f. 6,000 s.f. 12,000 s.f.
(Exceeds 66% of minimum)
Min. Lot Width 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet 120 feet
Min. Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet
Front Setback 30 feet Vacant Vacant Vacant
Side Setbacks 10 feet Vacant Vacant Vacant
Rear Setback 30 feet Vacant Vacant Vacant
Max Hardcover 25% Vacant Vacant Vacant
Thurber Page 3 of 4 December 3, 2019
Lot Combination City Council Meeting
Easements/Wetlands
There do not appear to be drainage and utility easements along the property line to be removed.
The City usually recommends that such easements be vacated if they are on the property.
The City has requested a drainage and utility easement along the creek through the southern
portion of the property and a drainage and utility easement along Ardmore Avenue.
Review Criteria/Staff Recommendation
The Planning Commission generally does not review lot combinations or lot line rearrangements.
The Commission has passed a motion supporting waiving such review to allow expedited review
of such requests, unless the City Council or staff refer the application for their review.
The subdivision ordinance establishes the following criteria for plats and subdivisions. Staff has
included potential findings for each in italics:
“…The City shall deny approval of a preliminary or final plat if one or a combination of the
following finding 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 Section 820.28.
Although the lots as combined do not meet minimum lot size requirements, the lot combination
reduces the level of nonconformance and improves the situation. Improving conformity is
consistent with the plans of the City.
(b) That the physical characteristics of this site, including but not limited to topography,
vegetation, soils, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, drainage and retention, are such
that the site is not suitable for the type of development or use contemplated.
The combination of the lots should improve these characteristics.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development or does not
meet minimum lot size standards.
Although the lots as combined still falls short of minimum lot size requirements, the lot
combination reduces the level of nonconformance and improves the situation.
(d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause
substantial environmental damage.
The combination of the lots is not likely to cause environmental concern.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious
public health problems.
The combination of the lots is not likely to cause health concern.
(f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with public or
private streets, easements or right-of-way.”
Staff does not believe the combination would not conflict with streets, rights-of-way or
easements.
Thurber Page 4 of 4 December 3, 2019
Lot Combination City Council Meeting
Staff generally supports the combination of lots that do not conform with minimum lot size
requirements. Even though the proposed lot does not meet minimum lot size requirements, it
creates a lot which is closer to compliance. As such, staff recommends approval.
If the Council concurs, the following action would be appropriate:
Motion to adopt the resolution approving a lot combination of Lots 3 and 4, Block 29,
Independence Beach into a single parcel
Attachments
1) Resolution
2) Document List
3) Statutory language related to substandard shoreland lots
4) Survey
Resolution No. 2019-##
December 3, 2019
Member ________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-##
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT COMBINATION OF
LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 29, INDEPENDENCE BEACH
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Kenneth J. Thurber and Marquita A. Thurber (the “Owners”) own two
parcels of property located south of Ardmore Avenue, west of County Road 19 (collectively, the
“Property”), which are legally described as:
Lot 3, Block 29, Independence Beach, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
Lot 4, Block 29, Independence Beach, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the Owners have requested approval of a lot combination to combine the
Property into a single parcel of land; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the requested lot combination at the December
3, 2019 meeting and reviewed information and recommendation provided by City staff and
accepted testimony of interested parties; and
WHEREAS, following such review the City Council made the following findings:
1) The proposed combination is not in conflict with the general and specific plans of the
City and is not premature.
2) Although the lot resulting from the combination does not meet minimum lot standards, it
reduces the extent of nonconformance and brings the Property closer to compliance.
3) The lot resulting from the combination is more suitable for the type of use contemplated
because it results in a lot which is greater than 66 percent of the minimum lot size
requirement of the Shoreland Overlay District.
4) The combination is otherwise not in conflict with the findings noted in Subd. 10 of
Section 820.21 of the City Code.
5) The combination meets the requirements contained in Section 820.03 of the City Code
for exception from re-platting.
6) The proposed combination will not conflict with public streets and right-of-way or
easements.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
hereby approves the lot combination of the Property such that the combined parcel shall be
hereafter legally described as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto.
Resolution No. 2019-## 2
December 3, 2019624339v1ME230-1PZ
Dated: December 3, 2019.
By: ______________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
By: ___________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
________ upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2019-## 3
December 3, 2019624339v1ME230-1PZ
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property After Lot Combination
Lots 3 and 4, Block 29, Independence Beach, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Project: LR‐19‐263 – Thurber Lot Combo
The following documents are all part of the official record of the above referenced request, even if some documents are not attached, or are
only attached in part, to Planning Commission and City Council reports. All documents are available for review upon request at City Hall.
Documents Submitted by Applicant
Document Received
Date
Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic Paper
Copy?
Notes
Application 11/4/2019 11/4/2019 3 Yes Yes
Fee 11/4/2019 11/4/2019 2 Yes Yes $200 for combo; $75 for title
Survey 11/4/2019 9/26/2019 1 Yes Yes
Title Report 11/12/2019 11/12/2019 8 Yes Yes
Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies
Document Document
Date
# of
pages
Electronic Notes
City Engineer comments No Comments
City Attorney comments 11/18/2019 1 Yes
City Council Report 11/26/2019 4 10 pages w/ attachments
Public Comments
Document Date Electronic Notes
462.357 OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE.
Subd. 1e.Nonconformities.
(d) Paragraphs (d) to (j) apply to shoreland lots of record in the office of the county recorder
on the date of adoption of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements for lot size
or lot width. A municipality shall regulate the use of nonconforming lots of record and the repair,
replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in
shoreland areas according to paragraphs (d) to (j).
(e) A nonconforming single lot of record located within a shoreland area may be allowed as
a building site without variances from lot size requirements, provided that:
(1) all structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met;
(2) a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can
be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and
(3) the impervious surface coverage does not exceed 25 percent of the lot.
(f) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an
individual lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or
development, if it meets the following requirements:
(1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size
for the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120;
(2) the lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the
installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080,
and local government controls;
(3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot; and
(4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan.
(g) A lot subject to paragraph (f) not meeting the requirements of paragraph (f) must be
combined with the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as
much as possible.
(h) Notwithstanding paragraph (f), contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland
areas under a common ownership must be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot
contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under common ownership
and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent with the
requirements of section 115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or connected to a public
sewer.
(i) In evaluating all variances, zoning and building permit applications, or conditional use
requests, the zoning authority shall require the property owner to address, when appropriate,
storm water runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces, increasing setback, restoration of
wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage treatment and water supply capabilities, and other
conservation-designed actions.
(j) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the
remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of the
zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an adjacent parcel.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Jim Stremel, City Engineer
DATE: November 14, 2019
MEETING: December 3, 2019
SUBJECT: Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project
Background:
On September 17, 2019 the City Council directed staff to authorize the preparation of an
engineering feasibility report for the proposed Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
Project.
The Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project has been included with the City of
Medina’s capital improvement plan based on the anticipated development noted in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. The plan identified the need for a lift station to serve properties in and
around Willow Drive north of Chippewa Road that are not serviceable with gravity sewer,
including the proposed Adams Pest Control development. This lift station will serve as a
regional lift station and receive wastewater from the ultimate development within the EC-1
sewershed of the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Wastewater Plan and potentially beyond.
Design & Feasibility:
The design of the lift station will need to consider both the initial flow conditions and the
ultimate maximum flow conditions of the regional sewershed; these options were evaluated
during the feasibility study phase. Graphical representations of the sewer study area can be
found in the appendix of the enclosed feasibility report.
The total estimated project cost for the initial flow conditions with the more immediate
development need using smaller pumps is $786,514. The cost to construct the lift station with
larger pumps that could serve a fully developed condition is $807,689. If the City were to install
the smaller pumps initially, then come back at a later date to retrofit the lift station with the
larger pumps, the estimated cost to do so would be $80,548. All of these estimated project costs
include a 10% contingency factor and 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administrative,
and financing.
The project is proposed to be funded through the City Sewer Capital Fund. The City is also
planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs.
Agenda Item # 8A
2
Next Steps:
The next step is for the City Council to consider authorizing final design. WSB anticipates final
design to take approximately 8-10 weeks and could be structured in a way to provide the City
with construction plans and technical specifications that could be utilized regardless of when the
City decides to bid the project. Progress of adjacent development planning and approvals will
likely determine the timing of when the lift station project is bid. At the point in which a bidding
schedule is determined, the remaining contract documents can be prepared along with the
incorporation of the final construction plans and technical specifications prepared earlier.
The proposed project schedule intends to hold bidding during the optimal industry environment
for the best pricing, which typically occurs around mid-winter of each year. In order to meet the
schedule noted in the feasibility report, authorization of final design would need to be initiated
by the December 3, 2019 Council meeting.
City Council Action Requested:
Consider authorizing final design for the lift station project to prepare for possible bidding as
early as February of 2020.
FEASIBILITY REPORT
WILLOW DRIVE / TH 55
REGIONAL LIFT STATION
HENNEPIN COUNTY | MEDINA | MINNESOTA
November 19, 2019
Prepared for:
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
WSB PROJECT NO. R-014877-000
FEASIBILITY REPORT
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
WILLOW DRIVE/TH 55 REGIONAL LIFT STATION
FOR THE
CITY OF MEDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
November 19, 2019
Prepared By:
1
7
8
E
9
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
|
S
U
I
T
E
2
0
0
|
S
A
I
N
T
P
A
U
L
,
M
N
|
5
5
1
0
1
|
6
5
1
.
2
8
6
.
8
4
5
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
November 19, 2019
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Medina
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Re: Feasibility Study Report
Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
The following is a feasibility study report addressing the Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
for the City of Medina. The report evaluates sanitary sewer service in the vicinity of the proposed
regional lift station, within the Service Study Area. The City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified
the need for a lift station to serve properties to the west of Willow Drive, including the Adam’s
Pest Control Site. These sites would not be serviceable with sanitary sewer via gravity, so a lift
station is required. This lift station will also serve as a regional lift station and receive wastewater
from the ultimate development of the EC-1 sewershed of the City’s Comprehensive Sanitary
Sewer Plan. Therefore, the lift station needs to be designed for the initial flow conditions and the
ultimate maximum flow conditions of the sewershed. The proposed improvements include one
new regional sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain, the pumping capacity of which can be
phased with development.
WSB is available at your convenience to discuss this report. Please do not hesitate to contact me
at 651.286.8466 if you have any questions regarding this report.
Sincerely,
WSB
Greg Johnson, PE
Director of Water/Wastewater
Enclosure
kkp
CERTIFICATION
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me
or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed professional
engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Greg Johnson, PE
Date: November 19, 2019 Lic. No. 26430
Prepared By:
Jon Christensen, EIT
Date: November 19, 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
TITLE SHEET
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
CERTIFICATION SHEET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................1
2. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................2
2.1 Authorization..........................................................................................................2
2.2 Scope.....................................................................................................................2
2.3 Data Available........................................................................................................2
2.4 Project Background................................................................................................2
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................3
3.1 Surface...................................................................................................................3
3.2 Right-of-Way..........................................................................................................3
3.3 Sanitary Sewer.......................................................................................................3
3.4 Watermain..............................................................................................................3
3.5 Storm Sewer ..........................................................................................................3
3.6 Private Utilities .......................................................................................................3
4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ........................................................................................4
4.1 Surface...................................................................................................................4
4.2 Right-of-Way/Easements.......................................................................................4
4.3 Sanitary Sewer.......................................................................................................4
4.4 Watermain..............................................................................................................6
4.5 Storm Sewer ..........................................................................................................6
4.6 Permits...................................................................................................................6
5. FINANCING.......................................................................................................................7
5.1 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost..................................................................7
5.2 Funding..................................................................................................................8
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE.....................................................................................................9
7. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION......................................................................10
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 – Service Study Area
Figure 2 – Existing Sanitary Sewer System
Figure 3 – Proposed Sanitary Sewer System
APPENDIX B
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report investigates the feasibility, service area, and sizing of the proposed Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional
Lift Station. The recommended improvements include one sanitary sewer lift station with a wet well, a
valve vault, approximately 1,500 feet of 6-inch diameter forcemain, connection to the existing gravity
sewer at the intersection of Willow Dr and Chippewa Rd, connection to new gravity sewer installed with
development to the west of the lift station, and a stub for future connection of gravity sewer to the east
and southeast of the lift station location.
The total estimated project cost for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station as recommended herein is
$807,689, which includes a 10% contingency and 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering,
administrative, and financing. Funding for the project will be through the City Sewer Capital Fund.
The proposed project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint. It is our
recommendation that the improvements be implemented as outlined in this report.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 2
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Authorization
On September 17, 2019, the Medina City Council authorized the preparation of an engineering feasibility
report for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station.
2.2 Scope
This report evaluates sanitary sewer service within the Service Study Area identified in Figure 1 in
Appendix A. This project is identified in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan.
2.3 Data Available
Information and materials used in the preparation of this report include the following:
City of Medina 2040 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan
City of Medina Record Drawings
Medina (Lunski) Senior Living Community Construction Drawings
Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff
2.4 Project Background
The study and design of the Willow Dr Lift Station is driven by the proposed development plans for the
property to the west of the proposed lift station location. This lift station is identified in the City’s 2040
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan in order to provide sanitary sewer service to a broader regional
area. Therefore, the lift station will provide service to the developing property in the near term and to
additional land to the east and southeast in the long term.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 3
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Surface
Roadways in the Service Study Area include Willow Drive, Chippewa Road, and Cates Ranch Drive.
Willow Drive is a paved rural roadway from Chippewa Road to 300 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive,
where it transitions to an unpaved dirt road.
3.2 Right-of-Way
The right-of-way along Willow Drive is 66 feet wide. The City has a utility easement extending west from
Willow Drive through the property owned by “St. Louis Park Investment Co.” that will encompass the
proposed lift station location.
3.3 Sanitary Sewer
The existing sanitary sewer system includes trunk sewer in TH 55, 8-inch gravity sewer in Willow Drive
that extends as far north as the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road, 8-inch gravity sewer
that extends north through the Medina Senior Living Community Development to Chippewa Road, and 8-
inch gravity sewer on the north side of TH 55 at North Metro Companies, LLC. The existing sanitary
sewer system is shown in Figure 2 in Appendix A.
The existing sanitary sewer system can be extended to serve portions of the Service Study Area by
gravity, as shown in Figures 2 and 3 in Appendix A. Some areas can be served by multiple existing
gravity sewers. Where this is the case, the recommended flow path is indicated.
3.4 Watermain
There are existing 8-inch and 12-inch DIP watermains in the western boulevard of Willow Drive that
extend approximately 450 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive.
3.5 Storm Sewer
Within the project area, there is one existing 24-inch RCP storm sewer that crosses Willow Drive
approximately 350 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive.
3.6 Private Utilities
Wright Hennepin is the electrical provider in the project area. There is an electrical transformer located at
the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road and overhead three-phase electric in the western
boulevard of Willow Drive. Utility poles that must be moved or held to construct the utilities and roadways
as proposed will be coordinated with utility companies ahead of the project.
The private utilities that may be present within the proposed project area include:
CenturyLink (Communication)
CenterPoint Energy (Gas)
Mediacom (Communication)
Wright Hennepin (Electricity)
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 4
4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
4.1 Surface
Due to the presence of existing watermain in the western boulevard of Willow Drive and the minimum
required horizontal separation from sanitary sewer of ten feet by the Minnesota Department of Health, it is
proposed to locate future gravity main and forcemain along Willow Drive in the eastern boulevard. In this
case, it will be necessary for the forcemain to cross Willow Drive at the proposed lift station location and
at the discharge point to the existing sanitary manhole at the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa
Road. The receiving manhole is located in the boulevard, so pavement impacts are limited to the crossing
and the area surrounding the existing manhole to the south.
4.2 Right-of-Way/Easements
It is recommended the City obtain a 30-ft by 50-ft area of land for the construction of the Willow Dr/TH 55
Regional Lift Station, ideally within a 70-ft by 70-ft construction area. It is anticipated that most gravity
main and forcemain installation will take place within existing City right-of-way or drainage and utility
easements. Temporary easements may be required from adjacent property owners at the proposed lift
station location, forcemain directional drilling pit locations, and forcemain discharge connection location.
4.3 Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended by gravity from the existing gravity sewers in Willow Drive and
Chippewa Road at the Lunski property. Due to the limits of gravity serviceability, an appropriate location
for a regional lift station was identified along Willow Drive to serve development to the west and east as
shown in Figure 3 in Appendix A. The proposed lift station location was selected based on local
topography (at a low point) and proximity to a future roadway that will provide driveway access for
personnel to perform operation, service, and maintenance.
4.3.1 Projected Wastewater Flows
The flow to the proposed lift station was projected based on the net developable acres of
Business and Future Development Area land uses (excluding wetlands and platted roadway)
within the sewershed, as summarized in the table below. Based on the projections below, it is
recommended that the full build design capacity of the Willow Dr Lift Station be at least 341 gpm.
Table 4.1 – Projected Flow to Willow Dr Lift Station
Land Use Net Area
(acres)
Flow
Assumption
(gpd/acre)
Avg Flow
(gpd)
Peak
Factor
Peak
Flow
(gpd)
Peak
Flow
(gpm)
Business 46 800 37,247*4.0 148,988 103
Future Development Area 107 800 85,600 4.0 336,000 238
Total 122,847 4.0 491,388 341
*Including 447 gpd from one existing business that may connect in the future.
4.3.2 Forcemain
The Willow Dr lift station and forcemain may be designed for service in phases. A full build
capacity of 341 gpm will require a 6-inch diameter forcemain for reasonable velocity and head
loss. In order to maintain a velocity of 2.0 feet per second in the 6-inch diameter forcemain until
the full build capacity is reached in the future, initial phase pumps may be installed with a
minimum flow rate of 180 gpm. As development continues, new pumps will be needed once the
flow rate exceeds the selected initial rate (180 gpm minimum); the new pumps will have the
capacity to convey the full build flow rate. Although the full build flow rate is projected in this
report, it should be reevaluated at the time of the pump upgrade based on the actual
development and wastewater flows at that time.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 5
4.3.3 Lift Station Dimensions
The ground elevations and wetlands in the proposed service area were reviewed to determine the
required invert elevation at the proposed lift station location. At the boundaries of wetlands, it was
assumed that the basement of any building near the wetland must be two feet higher than the
wetland boundary elevation, and that the sanitary service to the building will be installed at a
slope of two percent. In open areas away from wetlands, it was assumed that the public sewer
will have a minimum cover of eight feet and that sanitary services will be installed at a slope of
two percent. In order to serve (1) ground elevations of 972 ft near the wetland in the northwest
corner of the service study area, (2) ground elevations of 974 ft near the wetland on the north
central boundary of the service study area, and (3) ground elevations of 972 ft on the east side of
Willow Drive, the wet well will require the elevations listed in the table below. If buildings are
constructed at low elevations near the boundaries of the service area, private individual lift
stations may be required in some cases.
As discussed previously, the forcemain was sized in order to achieve reasonable velocity and
head loss under full build conditions, while still allowing for an earlier phase pumping rate that
maintains a velocity of 2.0 feet per second.
Table 4.3 – Preliminary Willow Drive Lift Station Dimensions
Description Phase I Phase II
(Full Build)
Firm Pumping Capacity 180 gpm (min.)341 gpm
Approximate Pump Power 4 HP 10 HP
Wet Well Ground Elevation 980 ft 980 ft
Wet Well Invert Elevation 955 ft 955 ft
Wet Well Base Elevation 950 ft 950 ft
Wet Well Depth 30 ft 30 ft
Wet Well Diameter*8 ft 8 ft
Forcemain Length 1,500 ft 1,500 ft
Forcemain Diameter 6-inch 6-inch
Forcemain Velocity 2.0 ft/s 3.8 ft/s
*It is recommended that the lift station include a valve vault independent
of the wet well. A typical valve vault houses the check valves, gate valves,
and a bypass gate valve and connection coupling. The valve vault allows
easy access to these valves in a dry structure free from exposure to
sewage and hazardous gases. It also allows the wet well to be taken
offline for maintenance by pumping the wastewater from an upstream
manhole to the valve vault bypass connection.
4.3.4 Lift Station Electrical and SCADA
The electrical components of the lift station will include a new control panel, submersible level
transducer, and high/low level float switches. The electrical controls will operate the two
submersible pumps in a lead/lag configuration based on the level in the wet well, with both pumps
operating simultaneously if needed during peak demand.
Electrical service to the site will be determined during design. It is anticipated that three-phase
power will be made available to the site, so the pumps can be operated with full voltage motor
starters. If only single-phase power is available, the pumps can be operated with oversized
variable frequency drives (VFDs) that convert single phase power to three-phase power for the
pumps.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 6
The lift station will include a freestanding control panel with interlocked main and standby circuit
breakers and a receptacle for connection to a portable generator in the event of a power outage.
An alternate design will include a stationary generator and an automatic transfer switch. The
control panel will include branch circuit breakers and motor starters or VFDs for operation of the
pumps, a programmable logic controller (PLC), an operator interface terminal (OIT), and other
components as required. The control panel will be monitored remotely via a radio or cellular
system that is compatible with the City’s existing SCADA system. The design will include a spare
conduit stubbed out from the panel to allow for connection to a future fiber optic cable for remote
monitoring.
4.3.5 Gravity Main Capacity
The existing 8-inch diameter PVC sewer in Willow Drive has a slope of 0.34%. With a Manning’s
n coefficient of 0.011, the full-bore capacity of this pipe is 374 gpm. The existing and future
wastewater flow to this sewer is summarized in the table below.
Table 4.2 – Willow Drive Gravity Main Capacity
Description Flow
(gpm)
Willow Dr 8-inch Gravity Main Capacity 374
Existing Business Peak Hourly Flow 9
Future Gravity Extension Peak Hourly Flow*31
Willow Dr Lift Station Projected Flow 341
Willow Dr 8-inch Residual Capacity -7
*Future gravity extension peak hourly flow is based on net
developable acres of Business land use with an average
flow of 800 gallons per acre per day and a peak hourly flow
factor of 4.0. Due to the wide variability in business,
commercial, and industrial water use, actual flows may vary
by 125% or more.
Based on the residual capacity listed in the table above, the capacity of the existing 8-inch gravity
main in Willow Drive will likely be exceeded by the time of full build out of its service area.
However, the pumps at the Willow Dr Lift Station may be installed in phases as mentioned above.
The 8-inch gravity will not need to be upsized until the full build pumps are installed. At full build,
699 LF of 8-inch PVC sewer from the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road to the
south side of TH 55 will need to be upsized to 10-inch diameter. This includes a 100 LF casing
beneath TH 55. The cost of this upsizing is not included in the cost estimate at this time.
4.4 Watermain
The proposed sanitary sewer improvements do not affect or include watermain improvements.
4.5 Storm Sewer
The proposed sanitary sewer improvements do not affect or include storm sewer improvements.
4.6 Permits
The following permits will be required for the recommended construction:
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Regional Review
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Temporary Project Dewatering Permit
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 7
5. FINANCING
5.1 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
The estimated construction cost for the recommended scope is summarized in the tables below. A
detailed breakdown of the costs can be found in Appendix B of this report. The opinion of cost
incorporates estimated 2019 construction costs and includes a 10% contingency factor. Indirect costs are
projected at 25% of the estimated construction cost and include legal, engineering, administrative, and
financing.
The estimated costs are separated by phase for comparison of: 1) the installation of 4 HP pumps for the
180 gpm capacity, 2) the upsizing of 4 HP to 10 HP pumps to increase the capacity from 180 gpm to 340
gpm, and 3) the installation of 10 HP pumps for the 340 gpm capacity today. For most of the electrical
equipment, including the stationary generator alternate, the difference in cost between equipment sized
for 4 HP versus 10 HP pumps is minimal. Therefore, it is recommended that the equipment be sized for
10 HP pumps where feasible, even if 4 HP pumps are initially installed. Accordingly, the stationary
generator cost is the same between scenarios since it is sized for 10 HP pumps, and the electrical
replacement costs to upsize from Phase I to Phase II are minimal. The bulk of the upsizing cost is the
new 10 HP pumps.
As described previously, it is recommended that the lift station include a valve vault independent of the
wet well. The cost of the valve vault is included in the estimate below. If the check valves were to be
located in the wet well rather than the valve vault, then the wet well would need to be 10-foot diameter
instead of 8-foot diameter. This size structure at the proposed depth costs more than a separate valve
vault due to the higher precast concrete and installation costs.
Table 5.1 – Phase I
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $58,000
Roadway/Streets $14,593
Site/Grading/Restoration $15,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (4 HP Pumps)$449,420
Stationary Generator Alternate $35,000
Construction Sub-Total $572,010
Construction Contingency (10%)$57,201
Construction Total $629,211
Indirect Costs (25%)$157,303
Total Cost $786,514
Table 5.2 – Upsize Phase I to Phase II in Future
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $5,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (10 HP Pumps)$53,575
Construction Sub-Total $58,580
Construction Contingency (10%)$5,858
Construction Total $64,438
Indirect Costs (25%)$16,110
Total Cost $80,548
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 8
Table 5.3 – Construct Phase II Now
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $58,000
Roadway/Streets $14,593
Site/Grading/Restoration $15,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (10 HP Pumps)$464,820
Stationary Generator Alternate $35,000
Construction Sub-Total $587,410
Construction Contingency (10%)$58,741
Construction Total $646,151
Indirect Costs (25%)$161,538
Total Cost $807,689
5.2 Funding
Funding for the proposed lift station, forcemain, and appurtenances will come from the City Sewer Capital
Fund. The City is planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 9
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The proposed project schedule for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station is as follows:
Order Feasibility Report..............................................................................September 17, 2019
Project Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff.............................................................October 2, 2019
CC Receives Feasibility Report...................................................................November 19, 2019
Final Design.....................................................................................November-December 2019
CC Approve Plans / Authorize Ad for Bid........................................................January 21, 2020
Bid Opening ...................................................................................................February 20, 2020
CC Receives Bids / Awards Project .....................................................................March 3, 2020
Begin Construction...............................................................................................Spring of 2020
Substantial Completion.............................................................................................Fall of 2020
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 10
7. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION
The Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station will serve the area roughly north of TH 55, south of the
municipal boundary, and about one-half mile west and east of Willow Drive that is not serviceable by
gravity sewer. The recommended improvements include one sanitary sewer lift station with wet well and
valve vault, approximately 1,500 feet of 6-inch diameter forcemain, connection to the existing gravity
sewer at the intersection of Willow Dr and Chippewa Rd, connection to new gravity sewer installed with
development to the west of the lift station, and a stub for future connection of gravity sewer to the east
and southeast of the lift station location.
The opinion of probable project cost was provided for multiple phases. If the Phase II (full build) 10 HP
pumps are installed with initial construction, the lift station pumping capacity will far exceed the initial
influent wastewater flow. This will cause the active volume in the wet well to fill slowly and empty quickly,
resulting in a risk of septicity and short pump runs, respectively. The larger pumps would also have higher
electric demand charges and operation and maintenance costs.
Consideration must also be given to the capacity of the receiving gravity main in Willow Drive. As detailed
in Section 4.3.5, the 8-inch gravity main will likely need to be upsized for the full build pumping rate. The
minimum turndown of the 10 HP pumps is approximately 180 gpm at 44 Hz. This lower operating point is
within the capacity of the downstream sewer. However, an incorrect setting of the pump speed could
cause a surcharge in the receiving sewer, so the maximum initial pump speed would need to be verified
downstream in the field during startup.
With that being said, it is recommended that the City construct the lift station for the 10 HP pumps at this
time, since they can be turned down to operate within the capacity of the receiving sewer, and it is more
cost effective than replacing the pumps in the future. The estimated cost to construct the lift station with
the Phase II (full build) 10 HP pumps is $807,689.
Funding for the proposed lift station, forcemain, and appurtenances will come from the City Sewer Capital
Fund. The City is planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs. The proposed
project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint. It is our
recommendation that the improvements be implemented as outlined in this report.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 – Service Study Area
Figure 2 – Existing Sanitary Sewer System
Figure 3 – Proposed Sanitary Sewer System
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
Highway 55
W
illo
w
D
r
iv
e
Chippewa Road
Shire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig1_ServiceStudyArea.mxd Date Saved: 11/12/2019 11:30:25 AM
Legend
Service Study Area
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 1Service Study AreaWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
MH-273RIM = 999.53INV = 981.51
MH-274RIM = 993.66INV = 979.83
8" STUBGRD = 996INV = 984.2
MHRIM = 993INV = 978.0
8" STUBRIM = 999INV = 980.5
2805 Shire RdAvg Flow = 466 gpd
4365 Willow DrAvg Flow = 1,410 gpd
4635 Willow DrAvg Flow = 447 gpd
4385 Willow DrAvg Flow = 2,943 gpd
4352 Willow DrAvg Flow = 155 gpd
4300 Willow DrAvg Flow = 22 gpd
2402 Hwy 55Avg Flow = 117 gpd
MH-268RIM = 993.21INV = 976.63
Highway 55
Wil
lo
w Drive
Chippewa RoadShire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
Lost Horse Road
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig2_ExistingSanitarySewerSystem.mxd Date Saved: 10/23/2019 2:34:07 PM
Legend
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
Service Study Area
Serviceable by Gravity
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 2Existing Sanitary Sewer SystemWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"""
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
Xä
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
MH-273RIM = 999.53INV = 981.51
8" STUBRIM = 999INV = 980.5
Proposed Willow Dr Lift Station341 gpm peak hourly flow (full build)180 gpm initial flow (2 fps in 6" FM)
MH-268RIM = 993.21INV = 976.63
Future Development Area107 net developable acres238 gpm peak hourly flow
Business46 net developable acres + 1 existing business103 gpm peak hourly flow
Upsize 700 LF of 8" to 10" (full build)
Highway 55
Willow Drive
Chippewa Road
Shire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
Lost Horse Road
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig3_ProposedSanitarySewerSystem.mxd Date Saved: 11/12/2019 11:24:53 AM
Legend
Xä Proposed Lift Station
Proposed Forcem ain
Proposed Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
Service Study Area
Serviceable by Gravity
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 3Proposed Sanitary Sewer SystemWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
APPENDIX B
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Phase I
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $18,000.00 $18,000.00
2 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
3 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
4 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
5 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON EACH 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
6 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 30 $55.00 $1,650.00
7 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ FT 450 $6.00 $2,700.00
8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ FT 1,200 $1.00 $1,200.00
9 ASPHALT PAVEMENT TON 25 $150.00 $3,806.25
10 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE TON 55 $24.00 $1,320.00
11 STABILIZATION FABRIC SQ YD 167 $4.00 $666.67
12 AGGREGATE SHOULDER CU YD 17 $45.00 $750.00
13 SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION (4 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $336,270.00 $336,270.00
14 6" DR 11 HDPE FORCEMAIN (DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED)LIN FT 1,500 $65.00 $97,500.00
15 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
16 8" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT 150 $60.00 $9,000.00
17 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 150 $3.00 $450.00
18 CONST 48" DIA SAN MH EACH 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
19 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY)EACH 1 $700.00 $700.00
20 STATIONARY GENERATOR LUMP SUM 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
21 GRADING & RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $572,010.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$57,201.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $629,211.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$157,303.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $786,514.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Upsize Phase I to Phase II
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
2 REPLACE LIFT STATION PUMPS (10 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $49,575.00 $49,575.00
3 REPLACE LIFT STATION ELECTRICAL LUMP SUM 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $58,580.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$5,858.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $64,438.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$16,110.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $80,548.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Phase II (2019 Costs)
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $18,000.00 $18,000.00
2 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
3 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
4 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
5 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON EACH 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
6 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 30 $55.00 $1,650.00
7 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ FT 450 $6.00 $2,700.00
8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ FT 1,200 $1.00 $1,200.00
9 ASPHALT PAVEMENT TON 25 $150.00 $3,806.25
10 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE TON 55 $24.00 $1,320.00
11 STABILIZATION FABRIC SQ YD 167 $4.00 $666.67
12 AGGREGATE SHOULDER CU YD 17 $45.00 $750.00
13 SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION (10 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $351,670.00 $351,670.00
14 6" DR 11 HDPE FORCEMAIN (DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED)LIN FT 1,500 $65.00 $97,500.00
15 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
16 8" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT 150 $60.00 $9,000.00
17 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 150 $3.00 $450.00
18 CONST 48" DIA SAN MH EACH 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
19 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY)EACH 1 $700.00 $700.00
20 STATIONARY GENERATOR LUMP SUM 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
21 GRADING & RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $587,410.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$58,741.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $646,151.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$161,538.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $807,689.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
1
7
8
E
9
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
|
S
U
I
T
E
2
0
0
|
S
A
I
N
T
P
A
U
L
,
M
N
|
5
5
1
0
1
|
6
5
1
.
2
8
6
.
8
4
5
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
September 12, 2019
Mr. Scott Johnson
City Administrator
City of Medina
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Re: Proposal for Professional Engineering for Design and Bidding Services
Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project
Dear Mr. Johnson,
We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal to provide a feasibility study, professional
engineering design, and bidding services for the proposed Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift
Station Project. Members of our team have completed numerous sanitary sewer lift station
projects in the metro area. These projects have included new lift stations, replacements, and
upgrades. The majority of these projects have also included new SCADA equipment.
The proposed scope of services presented herein is based on a review of the site and information
received from the City. The City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified the need for a lift station
to serve properties to the west of Willow Drive that are not serviceable with gravity sewer,
including the proposed Adam’s Pest Control development. This lift station will also serve as a
regional lift station and receive wastewater from the ultimate development of the EC-1 sewershed
of the City’s Comprehensive Wastewater Plan and beyond. Therefore, the lift station needs to be
designed for both the initial flow conditions and the ultimate maximum flow conditions of the
regional sewer-shed.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Proposed Lift Station: The proposed lift station will consist of a concrete wetwell with duplex or
triplex pumps, a concrete valve vault with check valves, air release valves, all interconnecting
piping, hatches, and appurtenances. Our design fees assume that a precast concrete wet-well
and valve vault will be designed and constructed.
Electrical/SCADA System:
Available electrical service to the site is unknown at this time but could be either single phase or
three phase. If three phase power is available, the pumps can be operated with full voltage motor
starters. If only single phase power is available, the pumps can be operated with variable
frequency drives (VFDs). Final choice of voltage and phase will also depend on the City’s
preferences, so that the lift station is consistent with other locations and compatible with the City’s
existing portable generator.
The base design will include a freestanding control panel with interlocked main and standby
circuit breakers and a receptacle for connection to a portable generator in the event of a power
outage. An alternate design (bid alternate) will include a stationary generator and an automatic
transfer switch. In addition, the panel will include branch circuit breakers and motor starters or
VFDs for operation of the pumps, a programmable logic controller (PLC) and operator interface
terminal (OIT), and other components as required. The PLC will call for operation of the pumps
based on start and stop setpoints entered at the OIT and compared to level in the wetwell as
Mr. Scott Johnson
September 12, 2019
Page 2
measured by a submersible level transducer. High and low level float switches in the wetwell will
be connected to hard wired circuitry in the control panel to provide backup pump control, in the
event of a PLC or level transducer failure. The control panel will be monitored remotely via a
cellular system that is compatible with the City’s existing monitoring system.
The base bid design for the control panel will include spare space inside to allow for installation of
a future automatic transfer switch, and spare conduits will be stubbed out from the panel to allow
for connection to a future permanently installed on-site generator. The base bid and bid alternate
designs will both include a spare conduit stubbed out from the panel to allow for connection to a
future fiber optic cable for remote monitoring. Evaluation of the control design, components, and
other City preferences will be conducted during both feasibility and final design.
Forcemain: The size and route for the proposed forcemain will be determined during the
feasibility study. The forcemain will be installed with either a directional drilling method or an
open trench method.
Geotechnical Analysis: Soil borings and a geotechnical analysis are required to determine the
characteristics of the existing soils and the groundwater conditions. We will provide up to five (5)
soil borings and a geotechnical report. Additional soil borings, if needed, can be provided for an
additional fee.
Surveying: Surveying is required to provide a CAD drawing that shows all existing conditions,
elevations, and private utilities for the proposed lift station improvements.
Subconsultants: WSB has a long-standing relationship with Barr Engineering to provide
electrical services for lift stations and similar projects. We will subcontract the electrical
engineering design and bidding services with Barr. Barr’s proposed fees are included with this
proposal.
Permitting and Approvals: We will work with the City to obtain the necessary permits for project
construction if needed. Permitting agencies are assumed to be limited to the Metropolitan
Council Environmental Services (MCES) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The project scope and proposed work plan is based on our understanding of the project,
discussions with City Staff, and experience on similar projects. We are proposing in coordination
with Barr Engineering for the electrical design of the project. The key components are discussed
for clarification in the following paragraphs.
Task 1.0 – Feasibility Study
We will identify the ultimate service area for the sewershed with the assistance of the City
Planning Director and Public Works Director and at that point decide how we would phase the
operations of this lift station. It is possible that we would start out with a smaller pump system
and then upgrade when the additional development occurs or start out with a large system and
not upgrade as much at a later date, etc. The feasibility study will also include an opinion of
probable construction costs and benefit analysis for both options.
Task 2.0 - Design Services
We understand that the extent of final design and bidding may be contingent upon whether area
development proceeds beyond concept phase. If circumstances change with adjacent
Mr. Scott Johnson
September 12, 2019
Page 3
development proposals, WSB would produce plans up to an 60%-70% level of completion and
provide the City with an updated cost estimate based on the direction of City Staff. The complete
plans, specifications, and contract documents would then not be completed until such time as the
City is prepared to bid the project.
Plans
Using topographic and survey information obtained by WSB, prepare base plans showing:
Locations and elevations of all physical features.
Existing right of way/easements and property lines.
Prepare preliminary and final design plans including the following:
Removal plan
Existing utilities (electric, gas, telephone, cable TV)
Existing City systems (forcemain, sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer)
Civil engineering plan/profile(s)
Process plan
Electrical plan
Instrumentation and control plan
Specifications and Contract Documents
Prepare contract documents and specifications.
Prepare engineer’s estimate of construction costs.
Task 3.0 - Bidding Services
Bidding Administration
Prepare advertisement for bids and submit to required publications.
Answer bidder’s questions related to the lift station and issue addenda, if required.
Attend bid opening and tabulate results.
Prepare letter of recommendation to the City.
Prepare notice of award and contract agreement and forward to contractor.
ANTICIPATED PROJECT SCHEDULE
Below is the anticipated project schedule.
Phase 1 – Feasibility
CC Order Feasibility Study................................................................................ September 17, 2019
Project Kickoff Meeting with City Staff ............................................ Week of September 23rd, 2019
Preliminary Design, Field Work, Feasibility Report ..................................................... October, 2019
CC Receive Feasibility Report ........................................................................... November 19, 2018
Phase 2 – Final Design
Final Design .......................................................................................... November-December, 2019
CC Approve Plans / Authorize Ad for Bid .............................................................. January 21, 2020
Bid Opening ......................................................................................................... February 20, 2020
CC Receives Bids / Award Project ............................................................................. March 3, 2020
Mr. Scott Johnson
September 12, 2019
Page 4
PROPOSED FEES
WSB’s proposed fees for the work summarized within this proposal have been detailed in the
table below. The fees will be billed based on an hourly, not-to-exceed basis.
Task Estimated
Fees
1.0 Feasibility Study $7,212
2.0 Design Services $58,042
3.0 Bidding Services $4,662
Total $69,916
A copy of the project task hour budget is attached for your reference. Based on the proposed
task hour budget, WSB will complete the scope of work previously discussed on hourly basis for a
not-to-exceed amount of $69,916. This represents our complete understanding and scope of the
project. We are available to begin work immediately upon authorization.
WSB appreciates the opportunity to provide the City of Medina with this proposal. As always, we
are looking forward to working with you and your staff toward the completion of the project.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you have.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jim Stremel, P.E. Greg Johnson, P.E.
Senior Project Manager Director of Water/Wastewater
City of Medina:
_________________________________
Authorized signature
_________________________________
Title
_________________________________
Date
Ta
s
k
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
1
1.
1
Me
e
t
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
(
K
i
c
k
-
O
f
f
)
3
2
3
8
$1
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
1.
2
Fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
S
t
u
d
y
P
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
4
4
40
3
51
$6
,
0
1
2
.
0
0
Ta
s
k
1
T
o
t
a
l
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
F
e
e
7
6
43
3
59
$7
,
2
1
2
.
0
0
2
2.
1
Dr
a
w
i
n
g
s
50
50
$7
,
3
0
0
.
0
0
2.
2
De
s
i
g
n
24
18
54
24
40
24
18
4
$2
4
,
3
2
4
.
0
0
2.
3
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
4
6
12
4
16
42
$4
,
9
1
0
.
0
0
2.
4
Qu
a
n
t
i
t
y
T
a
b
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
1
2
4
2
2
11
$1
,
3
4
1
.
0
0
2.
5
QA
/
Q
C
8
4
12
$2
,
1
1
6
.
0
0
2.
6
Me
e
t
i
n
g
s
8
12
8
1
29
$4
,
3
5
2
.
0
0
2.
7
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
1
2
2
5
$6
2
1
.
0
0
2.
8
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
4
1
5
$5
2
8
.
0
0
2.
9
Ge
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
(
s
o
i
l
b
o
r
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
)
$4
,
9
5
0
.
0
0
2.
1
0
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
(
B
a
r
r
)
$7
,
6
0
0
.
0
0
Ta
s
k
2
T
o
t
a
l
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
F
e
e
46
42
84
50
32
40
24
20
33
8
$5
8
,
0
4
2
.
0
0
3
3.
1
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
a
d
v
e
r
t
i
s
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
b
i
d
s
a
n
d
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
o
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
p
u
bl
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
1
1
1
3
$3
8
6
.
0
0
3.
2
An
s
w
e
r
b
i
d
d
e
r
’
s
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
l
i
f
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
i
ss
u
e
a
d
d
e
n
d
a
,
i
f
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
2
2
4
4
3
15
$1
,
9
8
4
.
0
0
3.
3
At
t
e
n
d
b
i
d
o
p
e
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
t
a
b
u
l
a
t
e
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
.
2
3
1
6
$7
3
7
.
0
0
3.
4
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
l
e
t
t
e
r
o
f
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
.
1
1
1
3
$4
3
6
.
0
0
3.
5
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
n
o
t
i
c
e
o
f
a
w
a
r
d
a
n
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
f
o
r
w
a
r
d
t
o
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
.
1
2
3
$3
6
9
.
0
0
3.
6
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
(
B
a
r
r
)
$7
5
0
.
0
0
Ta
s
k
3
T
o
t
a
l
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
F
e
e
5
5
8
4
8
30
$4
,
6
6
2
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
58
53
13
5
54
32
40
24
31
36
8
Av
e
r
a
g
e
H
o
u
r
l
y
B
i
l
l
i
n
g
R
a
t
e
18
5
.
0
0
15
9
.
0
0
10
9
.
0
0
14
6
.
0
0
10
9
.
0
0
99
.
0
0
19
0
.
0
0
92
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
F
e
e
b
y
L
a
b
o
r
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
$1
0
,
7
3
0
.
0
0
$8
,
4
2
7
.
0
0
$1
4
,
7
1
5
.
0
0
$7
,
8
8
4
.
0
0
$3
,
4
8
8
.
0
0
$3
,
9
6
0
.
0
0
$4
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
$2
,
8
5
2
.
0
0
$5
6
,
6
1
6
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
F
e
e
f
o
r
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
$4
,
9
5
0
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
F
e
e
f
o
r
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
(
B
ar
r
)
$8
,
3
5
0
.
0
0
TO
T
A
L
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
C
O
S
T
$
6
9
,
9
1
6
.
0
0
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
Fo
r
c
e
m
a
i
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Fo
r
c
e
m
a
i
n
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
L
y
d
i
a
E
n
e
r
M
i
k
e
M
i
l
l
e
r
Tw
o
P
e
r
s
o
n
Su
r
v
e
y
C
r
e
w
Co
s
t
To
t
a
l
H
o
u
r
s
De
s
i
g
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
o
f
C
o
s
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
e
d
i
n
a
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
Pr
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
B
i
d
d
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Wi
l
l
o
w
D
r
i
v
e
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
L
i
f
t
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
Ad
m
i
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
J
o
n
C
h
r
i
s
t
e
n
s
e
n
G
r
e
g
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
Bi
d
d
i
n
g
G
r
e
g
G
l
u
n
z
K
a
r
l
a
P
e
d
e
r
s
o
n
Fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
S
t
u
d
y
Ci
t
y
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
J
i
m
S
t
r
e
m
e
l
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 December 3, 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: November 26, 2019
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – December 3, 2019 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) Mark of Excellence Comp Plan Amendment, PUD Concept Plan – east of Mohawk Drive,
north of Highway 55 – Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) has requested a Comp Plan
Amendment and PUD Concept Plan for development of 76 twinhomes, 41 single-family,
and 32 townhomes on the Roy and Cavanaugh properties. The Planning Commission held a
public hearing at the October 8 meeting. A number of residents provided written comment
and one spoke in opposition of the amendment. Following the hearing, the Planning
Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
Council reviewed and tabled the request at the November 6 meeting to allow for a
neighborhood meeting.
B) Adam’s Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning – Jan-Har, LLP (dba Adam’s
Pest Control) has requested various approvals for development of a 35,000 s.f. office
building, restaurant, and 13,000 s.f. warehouse/repair shop north of Highway 55, west of
Willow Drive (PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001). The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the November 12 meeting and recommended approval.
The application is scheduled for review by the City Council on December 3.
C) 4585 Balsam Hardcover Variance – Dave Raskob has requested a variance from the 25%
hardcover limitation for a lot within the shoreland overlay district, to 32%. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the November 12 meeting and recommended approval.
The application is scheduled for review by the City Council on December 3.
D) Thurber Lot Combination – 2885 Ardmore Avenue – Ken and Marquita Thurber have
requested to combine two substandard vacant lots into a single lot. The property is located
south of Ardmore Avenue, west of County Road 19. The application is scheduled to be
reviewed by the City Council on December 3.
E) OSI Expansion – Arrowhead Drive, north of Highway 55 – Arrowhead Holdings (real estate
company for OSI) has requested approval of a site plan review and preliminary plat to construct an
expansion to the existing building and parking lot at 4101 Arrowhead Drive. The plat proposes to
increase the size of the main lot and decrease the size of the outlot to the north. Staff is conducting a
preliminary review of the material and will schedule for a public hearing when complete, potentially
at the December 10 meeting.
F) Roehl Preliminary Plat – 1735 Medina Road – The Estate of Robert Roehl has requested a
preliminary plat to subdivide 28 acres into two lots. The application is currently incomplete
and will be scheduled for a hearing when necessary information is submitted.
G) 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.
H) 3672 Pinto Rezoning – Woodbury REI, LLC has requested a rezoning of its property at the
northeast corner of Tower Drive and Pinto Drive from Commercial-Highway to
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 December 3, 2019
City Council Meeting
Commercial-General. The owner is interested in constructing self-storage on the property.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 8 and voted 5-1 to recommend
approval of the rezoning. The City Council reviewed on November 6 and determined that
the CH district was more appropriate and directed staff to prepare documentation denying
the request. The applicant has withdrawn the requested and it will now be closed.
I) 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.
J) 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 – All four cities have now executed the agreement and it is now complete.
Loretto is working towards finalizing plans so that they can connect to the system next year.
B) Zoning Enforcement – two correction notices are pending for zoning violations.
TO: City Council
FROM: Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety,
Through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: November 26, 2019
RE: Police Department Updates
Happy Thanksgiving!
Have a safe and happy thanksgiving! It looks like we may have some snow to contend with
Wednesday.
Hiring Processes, Officer Position
We have selected our top two candidates to move on to the background process. Over the next
month we will complete the backgrounds and hopefully bring them back to the council for a
conditional job offer in January.
Fire Study
We have completed the request for proposal for a fire service study for the city of Medina. The RFP
was sent out on November 22nd, with a due date of December 5th. I have started the grant application
to see if we could receive a State grant for the study.
Department Shoot
On November 19th we held our department annual qualifying shoot. Due to the council meeting and
other engagements, several of us will be qualifying next week
Patrol Updates:
Training – On 11-19-19, Officer McGill conducted the department’s annual cold weather/low light
firearms qualification.
On 11-19-19, I attended the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office annual awards and recognition
ceremony where Officer Jessen was given an award for his efforts in narcotics enforcement
throughout the Metro.
On 11-21-19, I attended annual first responder refresher training in New Hope.
From 11-3 to 11-6, Officer Hall attended leadership training at the BCA in St. Paul.
Patrol Activities - For the dates of November 14 to November 26, 2019, our officers issued 57
citations and 121 warnings for various traffic infractions. There was a total of 4 traffic accidents, 15
medicals, 8 alarms and 1 DWI.
MEMORANDUM
On 11-16-19, Officer Scharf stopped a vehicle after seeing the driver he was familiar with and aware
that he did not have a valid driver license. The driver was also found to have a warrant for his arrest
in Dakota County for driving without a license. The driver was arrested, and his vehicle was
impounded.
On 11-16-19, Officer Scharf stopped a vehicle after seeing the driver he was familiar with and aware
that he did not have a valid driver license. The driver was subsequently arrested, booked and
released from our police department.
On 11-16-19, Officer Hall took a residential burglary report. The homeowner had come home and
discovered that the residence was unlocked and that unknown persons had gone through her and her
daughters’ personal belongings. Items that were stolen included computers and jewelry, along with
high school graduation cash. There was a total of over $15k missing. Case forwarded to
investigations.
On 11-21-19, Officer Scharf stopped a vehicle for reckless driving and speeding 97/55 on State
Highway 55. The driver was found to be under the influence of narcotics and was subsequently
arrested. A search warrant was drafted and approved by a judge and a blood draw was taken. The
party was released pending the outcome of the blood results.
On 11-22-19, Officer Scharf stopped a vehicle for a headlight out. The driver was found to give a
false name to the officers and was positively identified by her fingerprints as being the sister to
whom she was using the false name. The driver was arrested and booked into Hennepin County Jail
on charges of false information to police, driving without a driver license and no insurance.
On 11-24-19, Officer Boecker was dispatched to a domestic. It was reported to be physical but upon
arrival it was learned to be more verbal between roommates. Both parties were separated, and the
renter agreed to leave for the day.
On 11-25-19, Officer Converse took a theft of a snowmobile trailer from a business in the Hamel
area. The case was forwarded to investigations.
Investigator Updates:
Assisted on the interview panel for the new police officer position.
Investigating the theft of an iPhone from Target. Suspects are juvenile males who are responsible for
similar thefts at Targets in the metro area.
Conducted compliance checks for both Alcohol and Tobacco in Loretto and Medina. Two businesses
in the city of Medina failed the Tobacco compliance check. Letters will be sent to the businesses that
passed the checks. Citations will be issued to the employees that sold to a person under 18 years of
age.
Investigating a residential burglary. Jewelry, cash and electronics were taken from the residence. The
homeowner is in the process of gathering serial numbers of the items. No suspects at this time.
Investigation is ongoing.
Assisted with Use of Force training for the reserve officers.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: November 26, 2019
MEETING: December 3, 2019
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
STREETS
• The streets are all in good shape and ready for the winter season. We have marked the
curbs and sod with fiberglass markers to try to avoid any damage to plows or property.
• The trucks and other equipment are all ready to go for the upcoming snow.
WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER
• The fire hydrant hit at Primrose Lane and 101 during the first snow event has been
repaired by Public Works.
• WSB and I have been working to locate and repair inflow and infiltration in the sewer
system. Public Works and LaTour Construction repaired some major leaks that were in
the low area in the Toll Brothers development. These repairs will be paid for by the
developer.
PARKS/TRAILS
• Public Works will be prepping the skating rinks and making snow for the sledding hill.
• The bid packages have been sent out for the grounds and lawn mowing contract that
expired this fall. Proposals are due December 4th and the lowest bid will be on the
December 17th agenda for approval.
• Katrina will be sending out bid proposal documents for the fertilization and weed control
contract in the next week or so.
MISCELLANEOUS
• The ditch mowing tractor that Medina and Loretto jointly own has had several
mechanical issues over the past few years. Repairs are continuing to add up and we
believe it is best to replace it. I have researched pricing and added it to the CIP for 2020.
We do not have the details of the trade in or if Loretto is still on board for cost sharing.
The tractor is currently in for repair to have the hydraulic pump replaced again.
PERSONNEL
• Austin Roerick turned in his resignation on November 21st and his last day was
November 22nd. Ivan Dingmann has agreed to help with snow plowing on a part time/on
call basis which will allow Public Works time to evaluate options for backfilling the
position.
ORDER CHECKS NOVEMBER 20, 2019 – DECEMBER 3, 2019
049566 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC .................................................... $89.84
049567 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION .................................... $599.00
049568 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN ......................................... $334.00
049569 ASPEN MILLS INC ................................................................. $2,378.70
049570 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC ....................................................... $22.92
049571 CASH - PD PETTY CASH............................................................ $72.48
049572 CORE & MAIN LP ................................................................... $2,242.50
049573 CROW RIVER FARM EQUIPMENT CO .................................... $344.00
049574 CROW RIVER NEWS .................................................................. $45.00
049575 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT ............................................. $255.00
049576 DESIGNING NATURE, INC. ................................................... $1,085.76
049577 EASTMAN, EMILY L .................................................................. $150.00
049578 ESS BROS. & SONS, INC. ........................................................ $350.00
049579 FORTERRA BUILDING PRODUCTS ...................................... $1,635.91
049580 GRAINGER................................................................................ $106.41
049581 HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES I ............................. $1,628.00
049582 KRIS ENGINEERING INC.......................................................... $408.75
049583 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES ............................... $408.00
049584 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS.TRUST ..................................... $1,000.00
049585 NAPA OF CORCORAN INC ........................................................ $29.99
049586 OFFICE DEPOT ........................................................................ $233.74
049587 QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP INC.......................................... $108.85
049588 SAMS LAWN & LANDSCAPE .................................................... $300.00
049589 SHAGGIES LAWN CARE ....................................................... $1,350.00
049590 STREICHERS INC ..................................................................... $520.89
049591 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL ............................................................ $1,309.21
049592 SYMBOLARTS, LLC .................................................................. $230.00
049593 TEGRETE (CARLSON BLDG) ................................................ $1,355.00
049594 TIME SAVER OFFSITE SEC SVCS IN ...................................... $265.50
049595 ULINE ........................................................................................ $133.10
049596 US SOLAR BUSINESS ........................................................... $2,361.66
049597 CHETTIAR, MOHAN .................................................................. $100.00
049598 DHULIPALA, SRI KRISHNA SUDHEER .................................... $200.00
049599 DINGMANN, IVAN ..................................................................... $235.00
049600 HENDERSON, CARL/BRENDA ................................................. $666.66
049601 HENDERSON, PAUL/CYNTHIA ................................................ $666.63
049602 HOUSE, BRITTNEY .................................................................. $500.00
049603 JONES, AARON ........................................................................ $600.00
049604 KHAN, SAJJAD ......................................................................... $350.00
049605 KUBITZ EDUCATIONAL SERVICES ........................................... $19.56
049606 MET COUNCIL (SAC) ............................................................. $2,460.15
049607 MINNESOTA TITLE ESCROW ACCOUNT .................................... $9.51
049608 MONTGOMERY, QUINN ...................................................... $10,000.00
049609 ORONO, CITY OF ..................................................................... $934.73
049610 PRODAHL, SUSAN M ............................................................... $666.71
049611 RESERVE OF MEDINA HOA .................................................... $250.00
049612 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC .................................. $8,087.47
049613 SHAH, BHAVIN ......................................................................... $500.00
049614 STEWART TITLE COMPANY ...................................................... $22.14
049615 TEGRETE (CARLSON BLDG) ................................................ $1,355.00
049616 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY LLC ............................................ $41.43
Total Checks $49,019.20
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS NOVEMBER 20, 2019 – DECEMBER 3, 2019
5316E PR PERA .............................................................................. $17,073.87
5317E PR FED/FICA ....................................................................... $17,180.63
5318E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................... $1,650.00
5319E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA .................................................. $3,834.19
5320E CITY OF MEDINA ........................................................................ $22.00
5321E FURTHER .............................................................................. $1,342.52
5322E FURTHER .............................................................................. $2,446.97
5323E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE .................................................. $2,437.00
5324E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL ........................................... $4.00
5325E MINNESOTA, STATE OF ....................................................... $1,341.00
5326E MARCO (LEASE) ....................................................................... $540.80
5327E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN ...................................... $1,983.93
5328E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC ........................................................... $294.90
5329E DELTA DENTAL ..................................................................... $2,462.60
Total Electronic Checks $52,614.41
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS NOVEMBER 27, 2019
0509862 BOEDDEKER, KAYLEN ........................................................... $645.66
0509863 JOHNSON, PATRICK M. .......................................................... $552.42
0509864 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L. .................................................. $1,436.78
0509865 BARNHART, ERIN A. ............................................................ $2,466.20
0509866 BELLAND, EDGAR J. ............................................................ $2,816.98
0509867 BOECKER, KEVIN D. ............................................................ $2,643.32
0509868 CONVERSE, KEITH A. .......................................................... $2,354.92
0509869 DION, DEBRA A. ................................................................... $2,060.67
0509870 ENDE, JOSEPH..................................................................... $2,045.35
0509871 FINKE, DUSTIN D. ................................................................ $2,649.59
0509872 GALLUP, JODI M. .................................................................. $1,925.40
0509873 GLEASON, JOHN M. ............................................................. $1,880.30
0509874 GREGORY, THOMAS ........................................................... $2,309.41
0509875 HALL, DAVID M. .................................................................... $2,187.76
0509876 JACOBSON, NICOLE ............................................................... $918.31
0509877 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S. ......................................................... $2,501.75
0509878 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. ........................................................... $2,218.77
0509879 JONES, KATRINA M.............................................................. $1,409.82
0509880 KLAERS, ANNE M. ................................................................ $1,376.88
0509881 LEUER, GREGORY J. ........................................................... $1,849.23
0509882 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. ................................................. $1,974.81
0509883 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D ......................................................... $1,981.43
0509884 NELSON, JASON .................................................................. $3,972.69
0509885 REINKING, DEREK M ........................................................... $2,091.07
0509886 ROERICK, AUSTIN ............................................................... $1,382.24
0509887 SCHARF, ANDREW .............................................................. $2,206.34
0509888 SCHERER, STEVEN T. ......................................................... $2,303.11
0509889 SCHNEIDER, BENJAMIN ......................................................... $601.89
Total Payroll Direct Deposit $54,763.10