The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About04.20.2021 Complete City Council Meeting Packet Posted 4/16/2021 Page 1 of 1 AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:00 P.M. Meeting to be held telephonically/virtually pursuant Minn. Stat. Sec. 13D.021 I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of the April 6, 2021 Regular Council Meeting B. Minutes of the April 7, 2021 Special Council Meeting V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Mill and Paving Services Agreement with Omann Brothers, Inc. B. Approve Seal Coating Services Agreement with Pearson Brothers, Inc. C. Approve Curb and Concrete Installation Services Agreement with Schmidt Curb Co. Inc. D. Approve Restaurant and Bar Liquor License Fee Waiver E. Appoint Emily Jans and Katya Cavanaugh to Youth Park Commission Seats F. Resolution Accepting Donation from 21st Century Bank G. Resolution Accepting Donation from Empire Cycle H. Resolution Accepting Donation from Harbor Freight Tools I. Resolution Accepting Donation from Rockford Fire Department VI. COMMENTS A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda B. Park Commission C. Planning Commission VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 CR29 – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) – Annual Public Hearing B. Gambling License at Medina Entertainment Center, 500 Highway 55 1. Hamel Lions Gambling Report 2. Resolution Approving Premises Permit to District # 284 Wayzata Youth Hockey to Conduct Lawful Gambling at 500 Highway 55 C. Ditterswind Final Plat 1. Resolution Adopting the Ditterswind Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Resolution Granting Final Approval for the Ditterswind Plat 3. Ordinance Establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District – Public Hearing 4. Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance by Title and Summary 5. Development Agreement by and Between the City of Medina and Ditter Properties for Ditterswind D. Stetler Enterprises LLC – 500 Hamel Road – Concept Plan Review IX. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT X. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS XII. ADJOURN Telephonic/Virtual Meeting Call-in Instructions Join via Microsoft Teams to view presentations at this link: https://medinamn.us/council/ For audio only: Dial 1-612-517-3122 Enter Conference ID: 569 181 290# MEMORANDUM TO: Medina Mayor and City Council FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator DATE OF REPORT: April 15, 2021 DATE OF MEETING: April 20, 2021 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report Telephonic/Virtual Meeting Call-in Instructions Join via Microsoft Teams to view presentations at this link: https://medinamn.us/council/ For audio only: Dial 1-612-517-3122; Enter Conference ID: 569 181 290# V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Mill and Paving Services Agreement with Omann Brothers, Inc. – Staff recommends approval to contract with the road materials low bid, Omann Brothers Inc., for the mill and paving services. See attached agreement. B. Approve Seal Coating Services Agreement with Pearson Brothers, Inc. – Staff recommends approval to contract with the road materials low bid, Pearson Brothers, Inc., for the seal coating services. See attached agreement. C. Approve Curb and Concrete Installation Services Agreement with Schmidt Curb Co Inc. – Staff recommends approval to contract with the road materials low bid, Schmidt Curb Co, Inc., for the curb and concrete installation services. See attached agreement. D. Approve Restaurant and Bar Liquor License Fee Waiver – To provide economic relief to bars and restaurants impacted by the COVID-19 restrictions and executive orders over the last year, staff is recommending waiving the liquor license fees for Medina’s restaurants and bars for the 2021-2022 renewals. The total fee waiver would amount to $24,750 in critical savings for our local establishments, which Medina will recoup in the next round of federal assistance. See attached memo. E. Appoint Emily Jans and Katya Cavanaugh to Youth Park Commission seats – Medina’s Park Commission Ordinance allows for the appointment of up to two youth members. The youth member seats serve one-year terms with the ability to renew for one additional year. The youth members are encouraged to actively participate in meetings and on 2 subcommittees, but they are non-voting members to not interfere with meeting quorums. Since these positions are non-voting members there is no conflict of interest for Katya Cavanaugh to serve as a youth member. Park Commission Chair John Jacob and Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup interviewed the youth members and are recommending their appointments. Staff recommends approval. No attachments for this item. F. Resolution Accepting Donation from 21st Century Bank – Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting a donation from 21st Century Bank for the Annual Bike Safety Rodeo. See attached memo and resolution. G. Resolution Accepting Donation from Empire Cycle – Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting a donation from Empire Cycle for the Annual Bike Safety Rodeo. See attached memo and resolution. H. Resolution Accepting Donation from Harbor Freight Tools – Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting a donation from Harbor Freight Tools to purchase two 4-in-1 jump starters. See attached memo and resolution. I. Resolution Accepting Donation from Rockford Fire Department – Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting a donation from Rockford Fire Department for the Annual Bike Safety Rodeo. See attached memo and resolution. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 CR29 – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan – At the February 16, 2021 meeting, the City Council reviewed a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 24-unit townhome development at 1432 County Road 29. The Council reviewed an updated concept plan with 24-units at the March 16 meeting. The applicant has updated their concept and narrative and reduced to 23-units to provide additional greenspace and has provided supplemental information related to recreational opportunities in the area. The property owner also wishes to address the Council related to their attempts to accommodate the City’s density requirement with other types of projects. See attached report. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) – Annual Public Hearing – Public  Works Director Steve Scherer will be providing a presentation of 2020 accomplishments and future best management practices (BMP’s) for the City’s SWPPP. The City is  3 required to conduct an annual public hearing on the SWPPP. No action is needed on this item. See attached presentation. B. Gambling License at Medina Entertainment Center – The Medina Entertainment Center is ending its lease with the Hamel Lions to conduct lawful gambling at their establishment. The Medina Entertainment Center has entered into a new lease agreement, beginning May 1st, with the Wayzata Youth Hockey organization to conduct the charitable gambling, which will include paper pull tabs, electronic pull tabs, bar bingo, and electronic linked bingo. All paperwork has been submitted and the fee has been paid for the new license. The Wayzata Youth Hockey organization meets the criteria for a license at this location, with no reason to deny it. Gambling licenses are typically on the consent agenda, but the Hamel Lions have requested to address the City Council regarding this license change prior to action being taken. See attached letter from Hamel Lions Club and resolution. Recommended Motion: Motion to adopt resolution approving premises permit to District # 284 Wayzata Youth Hockey to Conduct Lawful Gambling at 500 Highway 55 C. Ditterswind Final Plat – On September 15, 2020, the City granted preliminary plat approval to Ditters Properties for Ditterswind. The plat proposed to replat and subdivide four existing lots into five lots. The City also granted various other approvals the same night related to the subdivision which are included in the staff report. The applicant has now requested final plat approval. See attached report. Recommended Motion #1: Motion to adopt the resolution adopting the Ditterswind Comprehensive Plan Amendment Recommended Motion #2: Motion to adopt the resolution granting final approval for the Ditterswind Plat Recommended Motion #3: Motion to adopt the ordinance establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District Recommended Motion #4: Motion to adopt the resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by title and summary Recommended Motion #5: Motion to approve the development agreement by and between the City of Medina and Ditter Properties for Ditterswind 4 D. Stetler Enterprises LLC – 500 Hamel Road – Concept Plan Review – Stetler Enterprises, LLC has requested review of a concept plan review for development of a 17-unit villa project at 500 Hamel Road. The subject property is located north of Hamel Road, across from Elm Creek Drive. The property is approximately 6.7 acres in size (4.9 net acres), is currently vacant and guided and zoned Uptown Hamel. The northern portion of the site slopes down to a wetland, and the western portion of the site includes a stormwater pond which was constructed by the City to treat stormwater from the site and property to the west. Rainwater Nature Preserve is located east of the site, with the rest of Uptown Hamel to the east. Single family homes are located to the south, with fourplexes to the southwest. The property to the west includes warehouse uses. Staff is requesting City Council review and discussion of the concept plan. See attached report. XI. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 005890E-005903E for $50,138.53 and order check numbers 051431-051480 for $370,159.76, and payroll EFT 0510949-0510981 for $54,571.01. INFORMATION PACKET: • Planning Department Update • Police Department Update • Public Works Department Update • Claims List Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 April 6, 2021 DRAFT 1 2 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 6, 2021 3 4 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on April 6, 2021 at 7:00 5 p.m. virtually. Mayor Martin presided. 6 7 Martin read a statement explaining that the meeting is being held virtually due to the 8 ongoing pandemic. She provided instructions on how members of the public can 9 participate. 10 11 I. ROLL CALL 12 13 Members present: Albers, Cavanaugh, DesLauriers, Martin, and Reid. 14 15 Members absent: None. 16 17 Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi 18 Gallup, City Attorney Ron Batty, Finance Director Erin Barnhart, City Engineer Jim 19 Stremel, City Planning Director Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and 20 Chief of Police Jason Nelson. 21 22 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:02 p.m.) 23 24 III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:04 p.m.) 25 The agenda was approved as presented. 26 27 IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:04 p.m.) 28 29 A. Approval of the March 16, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 30 Martin noted that comments that she provided for incorporation were circulated prior to 31 the meeting tonight. 32 33 Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Reid, to approve the March 16, 2021 regular City 34 Council meeting minutes as amended. 35 36 A roll call vote was performed: 37 38 DesLauriers aye 39 Albers aye 40 Cavanaugh aye 41 Reid aye 42 Martin aye 43 44 Motion passed unanimously. 45 46 V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:05 p.m.) 47 48 A. Approve 2021 Road Material and Equipment Bids 49 B. Approve Garden Maintenance Services Agreement with Designing Nature, 50 Inc. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 April 6, 2021 C. Approve Hennepin County Youth Sports Program Grant Agreement 1 D. Approve Consultant Fee for Paul Fortin Baseball Field Lighting Project 2 E. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for the Weston Woods Development 3 Project 4 F. Appoint John Vinck to the Position of Police Officer 5 G. Resolution No. 2021-19 Accepting Donation from Hamel Women’s Auxiliary 6 H. Resolution No. 2021-20 of Support for the Cooperative Effort for Broadband 7 in Underserved Communities Outside the Metro 8 I. Approve Updated Contract – MetroWest Inspection Services, Inc. 9 Cavanaugh referenced Item E and asked if a trail is being considered through the 10 wetland, would it be appropriate to request that now. 11 12 Finke commented that impacts could not be quantified at this time and therefore this 13 would not be a missed opportunity. 14 15 Cavanaugh asked if it would make sense to request those easements, or whether there 16 would be time as this moves forward. 17 18 Martin commented that the development issues have been previously vetted with the 19 Council and developer, which is why this item was placed on the Consent Agenda. She 20 stated that the trail discussions are still ongoing and therefore would not want to impose 21 an easement for an unknown corridor at this time. 22 23 Finke agreed with the comments of Martin, especially because the item tonight is related 24 to the wetland replacement plan, which is a separate action. He commented that there 25 will be more opportunities in the future to discuss the trail. 26 27 Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Albers, to approve the consent agenda. 28 29 A roll call vote was performed: 30 31 Reid aye 32 Cavanaugh aye 33 Albers aye 34 DesLauriers aye 35 Martin aye 36 37 Motion passed unanimously. 38 39 VI. COMMENTS (7:10 p.m.) 40 41 A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 42 There were none. 43 44 B. Park Commission 45 Scherer reported that the Park Commission met on March 17th and discussed the Hamel 46 Athletic Club grant and ballfield lights, noting that item was just approved on the Consent 47 Agenda. He stated that the group also discussed the Diamond Lake Regional Trail and 48 Hamel Road corridor. He stated that the consensus was to stick to the north side at 49 least until the golf course is reached and once the park property is reached the trail 50 should go through the park property. 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 April 6, 2021 1 C. Planning Commission 2 Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to hold a 3 public hearing for a Concept Plan review for a 17-unit villa development at 500 Hamel 4 Road. 5 6 VII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (7:14 p.m.) 7 Johnson advised of the Board of Appeal and Equalization hearing scheduled for the 8 following night at 6:30 p.m. He noted that three more requests were received today and 9 are being reviewed. 10 11 VIII. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (7:14 p.m.) 12 Cavanaugh referenced Highway 55 activity within the report from Nelson. He stated that 13 it sounds like there have been a few incidents with vehicles traveling at very high speeds 14 recently. He asked the Council to keep in mind the importance of residents having a 15 safe crossing of Highway 55 as the Diamond Lake Regional Trail discussions continue. 16 17 IX. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (7:16 p.m.) 18 Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Martin, to approve the bills, EFT 005866E-19 005889E for $106,647.27, order check numbers 051380-051430 for $176,398.75, and 20 payroll EFT 0510893-0510948 for $107,381.67. 21 22 A roll call vote was performed: 23 24 Cavanaugh aye 25 Albers aye 26 Reid aye 27 DesLauriers aye 28 Martin aye 29 30 Motion passed unanimously. 31 32 X. ADJOURN 33 Moved by Albers, seconded by Cavanaugh, to adjourn the meeting at 7:19 p.m. 34 35 A roll call vote was performed: 36 37 Albers aye 38 Reid aye 39 Cavanaugh aye 40 DesLauriers aye 41 Martin aye 42 43 Motion passed unanimously. 44 45 __________________________________ 46 Kathleen Martin, Mayor 47 Attest: 48 49 ____________________________________ 50 Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk 51 Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1 April 7, 2021 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES OF APRIL 7, 2021 The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in session as the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting on April 7, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. virtually pursuant Minn. Stat. Sec. 13D.021. Mayor Martin presided. Members present: Albers, Cavanaugh, DesLauriers, Martin, and Reid Members absent: Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson; Assistant City Administrator Jodi Gallup; City Assessor Rolf Erickson, Southwest Assessing; and Representative of the Hennepin County Assessor's Office Wes Hanson. Mayor Martin provided an overview of the appeals process, instructions to attend the meeting, and meeting procedures. Property owners can appeal to Hennepin County if they disagree with the recommendation of the local board. City Assessor Rolf Erickson provided an overview of the purpose of the Board of Appeal and the meeting process. He explained that this evening’s session is based on past year assessments and transactions between October 1, 2019 and September 30, 2020. He stated that tonight’s session is to discuss classifications or market values. Specifically, 2021 values for 2022 taxes. Colin & Wendy Lundgren/Marcus & Samantha Specks, 1832 Hunter Drive Council reviewed the information provided by City Assessor Erickson. Mr. Erickson recommended $1,874,000 as the value for the property. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed with the valuation of $1,874,000. Stone Gate Farm, Inc., Susan Seeland, PIDS 21-118-23-34-0018 & 28-118-23-24- 0004 Council reviewed the information provided by City Assessor Erickson. The parcel was increased in error because it was coded incorrectly. City Assessor Rolf Erickson recommended reducing the value from $7,000 to $1,000 for both parcels. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed to change the valuation from $7,000 to $1,000. Michelle Schmidt, 813 Meander Ct. #4, PIDS 02-118-23-44-0074 & 02-118-23-44- 0071 City Assessor Erickson provided information on the property and recent sales information on properties in the same property owners association. Michelle Schmidt provided information on her property and history on the poor quality/problems of the development. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed to leave the value of PID 02-118-23-44-0074 at $202,000 and reduce 02-118-23-44-0071, the lower level of the unit, to 60% of value which is $121,000. James Lane, 2605 Hamel Road Rolf Erickson provided an update to the City Council and explained that the property is under the “10 acres in production” minimum requirement for the classification. Mr. Lane’s property does not meet this requirement. The City Council reviewed the Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2 April 7, 2021 information and agreed that they could not change the classification from Residential to Agricultural for the property. PRC, LLC, Larry Palm, 1400 County Road 19 Council reviewed the information provided by City Assessor Erickson. The property was increased in error. Mr. Erickson recommended reducing the value from $730,000 to $599,000. The City Council reviewed the information and agreed to change the valuation from $730,000 to $599,000. Mark Johnson, 817 Meander Court, PIDS 02-118-23-44-0075 & 02-118-23-44-0072 City Assessor Erickson provided information on the property and recent sales information on properties in the same property owners association. The City Council reviewed the information. Council discussed reducing the valuation consistent with Michelle Schmidt’s property which is in the same association. Council also discussed reducing the valuation of the upper level because it is less accessible. The upper level is 960 SF and Council agreed to reduce the valuation to 70% and have the assessor investigate future adjustments. Council reviewed the request and agreed to reduce the value of PID 02-118-23-44-0075 to $291,000 for the upper floors and reduce PID 02- 118-23-44-0072, the lower level of the unit, to 60% of value which is $121,000. Hunter Acquisitions, Inc., Scott Muehler, 821 Meander Ct., PIDS 02-118-23-44-0076 & 02-118-23-44-0073 City Assessor Erickson provided information on the property and recent sales information on properties in the same property owners association. The City Council reviewed the information and keep this property consistent with the other two properties reviewed earlier in the association. Council agreed to leave the value of PID 02-118-23- 44-0076 at $202,000 and reduce 02-118-23-44-0073, the lower level of the unit, to 60% of value which is $121,000. Mayor Martin summarized all the decisions made by the Board. Cavanaugh moved to accept all the changes discussed at the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting, Albers seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. A roll call vote was performed: Cavanaugh aye Reid aye DesLauriers aye Albers aye Martin aye Motion carried. Adjournment Cavanaugh moved, Reid seconded, to adjourn at 7:59 p.m. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. A roll call vote was performed: Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3 April 7, 2021 Cavanaugh aye Reid aye DesLauriers aye Albers aye Martin aye Motion carried. _________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor Attest: ____________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4 April 7, 2021 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 1 MILL AND PAVING SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this 21st day of April, 2021, by and between Omann Brothers Inc., 6551 LaBeaux Avenue NE, Albertville, MN 55301, a Minnesota corporation (the “Contractor”) and the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”). Recitals 1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for mill and paving services; and 2. The City has approved the contract for mill and paving services with the Contractor; and 3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows: Terms 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform mill and paving services for the City. “Mill and Paving Services” will consist of milling bituminous surface at depth per square yard (including milling removal) and paving of roads, and will also include bituminous placement, at the discretion of the Public Works Director. 2.0. TERM. The term and prices of this contract shall remain in effect from April 2021 until the end of November 2022 or until such later date as may be mutually agreed upon. 3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor for Mill and Overlay Services according to the above 1.0 Scope of Services at the following 2021 Road Materials Bid rates: Mill Bituminous surface at depth per square yard (including removal): • $1.95 per square yard for 0” to 2” of bituminous milling • $2.80 per square yard for 2” to 4” of bituminous milling • $4.50 per square yard for 4” to 6” of bituminous milling Bituminous mixture used for 2021 paving projects: • $74.20 for MN-D.O.T. SPNWB230(B) Mix, placed on streets • $74.20 for MN-D.O.T. SPNWB330(B) Mix, placed on streets • $74.20 for MN-D.O.T. SPWEB240(B) Mix, placed on streets • $80.20 for MN-D.O.T. SPWEB340(C) Mix, placed on streets • $95.20 for MN-D.O.T. SPWEA240(B) Mix, placed on trails Reclaim Roadway at depth per square yard: • $3.60 per square yard for 0” to 2” of reclaim roadway • $3.60 per square yard for 2” to 4” of reclaim roadway • $3.60 per square yard for 4” to 6” of reclaim roadway Agenda Item #5A 2 The Contractor will receive additional compensation for: • Bituminous Curb Installation at a cost of $5.00/LF • Miscellaneous milling as a rate of $495/hr. and a mobilization fee of $500 • Reclaim Roadway at a rate of $380/hr. and a mobilization fee of $500 • Miscellaneous Equipment per the 2021 Road Materials Bid may also be contracted at the discretion of the Public Works Director. 3.01 The Contractor shall pay for all licenses and permits. These costs shall be included in the bid cost. The City is exempt from sales tax. 4.0 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. 4.01 Both the Contractor and the City acknowledge and agree that the Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Any employee or subcontractor who may perform services for the Contractor in connection with this Agreement is also not an employee of the City. The Contractor understands that the City will not provide any benefits of any type in connection with this Agreement, including but not limited to health or medical insurance, worker’s compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, nor will the City withhold any state or federal taxes, including income or payroll taxes, which may be payable by the Contractor. 4.02 The Contractor will supply and use its own equipment and tools, as well as traffic control, to complete the services under this Agreement. 4.03 The Contractor acknowledges that any general instruction it receives from the City has no effect on its status as an independent contractor. 5.0 INSURANCE. The Contractor will maintain adequate insurance to protect itself and the City from claims and liability for injury or damage to persons or property for all work performed by the Contractor and its respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Contractor shall name the City as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy in limits acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective. 6.0 WORKER’S COMPENSATION. 6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker’s compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this Agreement. 6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker’s compensation insurance and will provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this Agreement. 7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney’s fees) for claims as a result of 3 bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor’s performance under this Agreement. 8.0 PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND. The Contractor shall provide a Payment and Performance Bond to the City at no additional cost to the City. 9.0 PRIVATIZATION CLAUSE. Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (the “Act”) and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by the Contractor in performing its obligations is subject to the requirements of the Act, and the Contractor must comply with the requirements of the Act as if the Contractor was a government entity. 10.0 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota. 11.0 ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement or procure the services of another individual or company to provide services under this Agreement without first obtaining the express written consent of the City. 12.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and no other agreement prior to or contemporaneous with this Agreement shall be effective, except as expressly set forth or incorporated herein. Any purported amendment to this Agreement is not effective unless it is in writing and executed by both parties. 13.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law. 14.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason. If the contract is terminated early, the City will pay a prorated fee for the services performed to date in that calendar year. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year written above. CITY OF MEDINA By _____________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By ______________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk OMANN BROTHERS, INC. (CONTRACTOR) By ______________________________ 1 SEAL COATING SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this 21st day of April 2021, by and between Pearson Brothers, Inc., 11079 Lamont Avenue N.E., Hanover, MN 55341 a Minnesota corporation (the “Contractor”) and the City of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”). Recitals 1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for seal coating services; and 2. The City has approved the contract for seal coating services with the Contractor; and 3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows: Terms 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform seal coating services for the City. “Seal Coating Services” will consist of installation of seal coating, according to the specifications listed on the attached Exhibit A and materials listed in 3.0 below. Public Works Director will provide a detailed map to contractor at time of installation. 2.0. TERM. The term and prices of this contract shall remain in effect from April 2021 until November 2022, or until such later date as may be mutually agreed upon. 3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor according to the square yard pricing listed below: ITEM NO. 11A – Seal Coating, Installed, Including Pre-Sweeping, CRS-2 Liquid Asphalt at .27 Gallons/Sq Yd, 1/8” Trap Rock at 25 lbs/Sq Yd, Area Rolled with Two Eleven Wheeled Pneumatic Tire Rollers and Excess Rock Pick Up and Disposal (May require two sweepings) • 0-25,000 Sq. yds. $___1.18_ • 25-50,000 Sq. yds. $___1.07_ • 50-75,000 Sq. yds. $___1.06_ • 75-100.000 Sq. yds. $___1.06_ ITEM NO. 11B – Seal Coating, Installed, Including Pre-Sweeping, CRS-2 Liquid Asphalt at .30 Gallons/Sq Yd, 1/8” FA2 Granite at 28 lbs/Sq Yd, Area Rolled with Two Eleven Wheeled Pneumatic Tire Rollers and Excess Rock Pick Up and Disposal (May require two sweepings) • 0-25,000 Sq. yds. $___1.20_ • 25-50,000 Sq. yds. $___1.19_ • 50-75,000 Sq. yds. $___1.18_ • 75-100.000 Sq. yds. $___1.17_ Agenda Item #5B 2 3.01 Length and width of paved area will vary. Payment and Performance Bond shall be required and shall be included in the bid price. 3.02 The Contractor shall pay for all licenses and permits. These costs shall be included in the bid cost. The City is exempt from sales tax. 4.0 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. 4.01 Both the Contractor and the City acknowledge and agree that the Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Any employee or subcontractor who may perform services for the Contractor in connection with this Agreement is also not an employee of the City. The Contractor understands that the City will not provide any benefits of any type in connection with this Agreement, including but not limited to health or medical insurance, worker’s compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, nor will the City withhold any state or federal taxes, including income or payroll taxes, which may be payable by the Contractor. 4.02 The Contractor will supply and use its own equipment and tools, as well as traffic control, to complete the services under this Agreement. 4.03 The Contractor acknowledges that any general instruction it receives from the City has no effect on its status as an independent contractor. 4.04 The Contractor acknowledges that all OSHA Safety requirements will be in place at all times. 5.0 INSURANCE. The Contractor will maintain adequate insurance to protect itself and the City from claims and liability for injury or damage to persons or property for all work performed by the Contractor and its respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Contractor shall name the City as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy in limits acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective. 6.0 WORKER’S COMPENSATION. 6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker’s compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this Agreement. 6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker’s compensation insurance and will provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this Agreement. 7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney’s fees) for claims as a result of bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor’s performance under this Agreement. 3 8.0 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota. 9.0 PRIVATIZATION CLAUSE. Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (the “Act”) and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by the Contractor in performing its obligations is subject to the requirements of the Act, and the Contractor must comply with the requirements of the Act as if the Contractor was a government entity. 10.0 ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement or procure the services of another individual or company to provide services under this Agreement without first obtaining the express written consent of the City. 11.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and no other agreement prior to or contemporaneous with this Agreement shall be effective, except as expressly set forth or incorporated herein. Any purported amendment to this Agreement is not effective unless it is in writing and executed by both parties. 12.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law. 13.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason. If the contract is terminated early, the City will pay a prorated fee for the services performed to date in that calendar year. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year written above. CITY OF MEDINA By _____________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By ______________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk PEARSON BROTHERS INC. (CONTRACTOR) By ______________________________ EXHIBIT A BITUMINOUS SEALCOAT MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX 2021 STREET MAINTENANCE MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS 1.00 Bituminous Sealcoat 1.01 Scope of Work S-1 1.02 Inspection and Supervision S-1 1.03 Specifications Which Apply S-1 1.04 Starting Date S-1 1.05 Completion Schedule S-1 1.06 Coordination of Work S-1 1.07 Preconstruction Conferences S-2 1.08 Commencing Work S-2 1.09 Traffic Control S-2 1.10 Protecting Utilities and Property S-3 1.11 Bituminous Sealcoat Material S-3 1.12 Equipment S-3 1.13 Calibration S-4 1.14 Personnel S-4 1.15 Road Surface Preparations S-5 1.16 Rolling Operations S-5 1.17 Sealcoat Application S-5 1.18 Protection of Surface S-5 1.19 Uniform Surface Appearance S-6 1.20 Sweeping and Disposal of Excess Aggregate S-6 1.21 Application of Blotting Material S-6 1.22 Method of Measurement and Payment S-6 1.23 Quantity Adjustments S-6 1.24 Liquidated Damages S-7 1.25 Emergency Response S-7 1.26 Sampling and Testing S-7 1.27 Conflict between Unit Prices and Extended Amounts S-7 1.28 Guarantee S-7 1.00 BITUMINOUS SEALCOAT: 1.01 SCOPE OF WORK: The work to be done under this contract includes the furnishing of all labor, materials, transportation, tools, supplies, plant equipment, etc., necessary for the complete and satisfactory construction and installation of sealcoating shown on the maps attached to these specifications. 1.02 INSPECTION AND SUPERVISION: The City Public Works Director, or their authorized representative, will provide the necessary inspection for all work under this contract taking place within the City of Medina. The Public Works Director may also designate a consulting engineer who may provide necessary inspection for all work under this contract. The Contractor shall give the City a 48-hour notice prior to beginning work or resuming work on this project. 1.03 SPECIFICATIONS WHICH APPLY: The specifications of the Minnesota Department of Transportation “Standard Specifications for Construction,” 2018 Edition (with all addenda and supplements as of the date of these specifications). Section 2356 “Bituminous Sealcoat” shall apply using English measurements, except as further modified in these Special Conditions as follows: 1.04 STARTING DATE: The target start date for this project shall be mutually decided by the Contractor and the City Public Works Director, or his designee. 1.05 COMPLETION SCHEDULE: All work under this contract shall be completed on or before September 6, 2021, except street sweeping. Liquidated damages ($300/day) will be assessed if the work is not completed on time. 1.06 COORDINATION OF WORK: Throughout the project the Contractor shall coordinate his work with operations being carried out by City forces, utility companies and/or other contractors. Access shall be maintained as much as possible. The Contractor shall notify those affected of the periods of time that accesses must be closed. The Contractor shall be required to secure a staging area, approved by the Public Works Director, prior to starting work. The Contractor shall perform the work in a manner that will ensure completion within the time set in the contract. In case of failure to perform the work in such a manner, the City shall have the right to require the Contractor to place in operation such additional forces and equipment as deemed necessary. 1.07 PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCES: Prior to the start of any work, following execution of the contract, there will be a preconstruction conference arranged by the Medina Public Works Department. 1.08 COMMENCING WORK: The Contractor shall notify Public Works Director, Steve Scherer, of their intentions to commence work at least two days (excluding holidays and Saturdays and Sundays) prior to moving onto the work site. No work shall be started until the contract has been executed and the Contractor has fulfilled all preliminary requirements. Also, prior to the start of any work, the Contractor shall submit to the Public Works Director for approval, a written time schedule, sequence of moves, and other pertinent information as required by the City of Medina Public Works Department. 1.09 TRAFFIC CONTROL: All required maintenance of contract construction items shall be in accordance with the provisions of MnDOT 1404, 1514, and 1515 with the added stipulations. The Contractor is responsible for maintenance, control, and safeguard of traffic within and immediately abutting the project in accordance with MnDOT Field Manual on Temporary Traffic Control Zone layouts. The Contractor is responsible for providing and maintaining all traffic control devices. The Contractor shall furnish, erect and maintain warning lights, temporary fence, and barricades as required to adequately warn and protect the public from hazardous protrusions, materials, excavations, etc., resulting directly or indirectly from the construction. The Contractor shall provide all flaggers (minimum of two), barricades, signs, and other traffic control devices as required during the construction operations at no additional cost to the City. All traffic control devices shall conform to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Signs shall be posted to limit speeds to maximum 20 mph. Signs, like MnDOT W21- 2 in size (30" x 30") and color designating “Loose Rock” shall be posted at all access points to neighborhoods or streets where sealcoating is taking place. All signs are to be installed by the Contractor prior to sealcoating and removed by the Contractor within 48 hours after the streets are swept after sealcoating. Payment for installation of these provided signs shall be incidental to the work and no additional compensation will be paid. Traffic control includes signing streets with temporary “No Parking for Street Maintenance” signs a minimum of 24 hours and a maximum of 36 hours before work is to begin. The maximum distance between signs shall be 500 feet with at least two signs per block. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to provide and install and remove temporary no parking signs. Efforts should be made to coordinate with residents and businesses the day before and early morning to keep the street clear of vehicles. Special care shall be taken to move vehicles that may be hit by bituminous material over-spray. The Contractor is responsible for any vehicle cleaning or repainting. 1.10 PROTECTING UTILITIES AND PROPERTY: The Contractor shall furnish a person and materials to carefully cover manhole covers, catch basin grates and watermain valve box covers with suitable paper covers and sand immediately prior to applying bituminous material to those same structures. Directly after sealcoating, all material on the structures will be hand shoveled/swept to ensure that no material is placed on the seal coated street and that all material is removed from the structure. If structures are not covered and are seal coated over and cannot be opened easily, the Contractor shall be charged $100.00/hour for time spent by City forces to open and clean these items. The Contractor shall be responsible for protecting all property from damage due to drifting bituminous material and aggregate. 1.11 BITUMINOUS SEALCOAT MATERIAL: CLASS “A” AGGREGATE SEALCOAT (STREETS, TRAILS AND PARKING LOTS) This work shall meet the requirements of MnDOT Specification 2356 for Bituminous Seal Coat with the following modifications: Bituminous material will be emulsified asphalt, cationic, CRS-2 or polymer modified cationic CRS-2P and shall conform with MnDOT Specification 3151. Aggregate material shall conform in composition to MnDOT Specification 3137 for Class “A” aggregate and to 3127 for gradation and quality for FA-2 and FA-2 (modified 1/8”) requirements. The base bid shall be all dresser trap rock. An alternate bid shall also be provided for all granite material. Polymer material shall conform to MnDOT Specifications 3161 for coating and anti- stripping additives. All materials shall comply with the most recent version of the MNDOT Specification. Materials found to fail testing and quality requirements as outlined in these specifications shall be paid at reduced prices for all materials represented by that sample as outlined in the MnDOT Specifications. The sealcoat application range is: 1) Where FA-2 Class “A” is used, it shall be applied at a rate of 20-25 pounds per square yard with 0.26-0.28 gallons per square yard of CRS-2 or CRS-2P. 2) Where FA-2 (Modified 1/8”) Class “A” is used, application rates shall be the same as FA-2 Class “A”. 3) On older, more textured pavements, the inspector may adjust the application rate higher than the specified range for emulsion to provide proper aggregate chip embedment. Bituminous seal material shall be applied at a rate as directed by the Engineer. Application rates will be determined based on the condition of each area to be sealed. 1.12 EQUIPMENT: Sweepers shall be “pick-up” type only, capable of non-streak sweeping and spray bar water applications for dust control. Minimum of one machine required on project throughout sealcoat application, and minimum of two machines required for excess aggregate pick up. Also, one tandem axle dump truck per sweeper required for hauling excess sweepings from project. Asphalt distributor shall be two thousand (2000) gallon minimum capacity, capable of applying a 16-foot width of bituminous material at a computer calibrated rate of application. Minimum of two machines required. Aggregate spreader shall be a self-propelled type, capable of applying a 16-foot width of aggregate material at a calibrated rate of application. Rollers shall be eleven-wheel, self-propelled, pneumatic tire type. Minimum of two rollers required. Each pneumatic-tired roller will have a total compacting width of not less than 60 inches and will have a minimum ground contract pressure of 80 psi. 1.13 CALIBRATION: The Contractor shall be required to demonstrate proof that the equipment being used is distributing aggregate and emulsion at the rates specified herein. Aggregate distribution rates shall be verified at each equipment setup location. 1.14 PERSONNEL: All assigned personnel shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director or his designee, the ability to operate the piece of equipment to which they are assigned. 1.15 ROAD SURFACE PREPARATIONS: Patching and crack sealing of the streets designated for sealcoating, and adjustment of valve boxes and manhole castings will be performed by the City at no cost to the Contractor. Pre-sweeping of streets shall be completed by the Contractor as part of this project with no additional payment made by the City. The sweeping operation shall provide a clean street prior to starting the sealcoat operation. 1.16 ROLLING OPERATIONS: Complete the initial rolling within 2 minutes after applying the aggregate. Proceed at a recommended speed less than or equal to 8 km per hour (5 miles per hour) to prevent turning over aggregate. Make a minimum of three complete passes over the aggregate before continuing the operation. Roll the aggregate so the entire width of the treatment area is covered in one pass of all the rollers. The total compacting width of each pneumatic-tired roller shall exceed 1.5 m (5 ft). 1.17 SEALCOAT APPLICATION: Furnishing, application, aggregate covering and curing shall be accomplished in accordance with MnDOT Specification 2356. Starting times each morning during sealcoat application varies based upon weather conditions that day; i.e. humidity, temperature, etc. In general, sealcoat operations shall be conducted only during the daylight hours when the air temperature is between 60°F and 95°F, when the relative humidity is less than 75%, and the road surface is dry. The City’s field representative shall determine each day’s starting time based upon those conditions. Bituminous materials shall be placed at a temperature of 125°F to 185°F and at rates designated by the City’s designee. Cover aggregate shall be applied within 1 minute of the emulsified asphalt at a rate designated by the City’s designee. The speed of the spreader will be such that the stones are not rolling over. The aggregate shall be spread in one operation in such a manner that an 8-inch strip of emulsified asphalt is left exposed along the longitudinal center to form a lap for succeeding applications of emulsion. If necessary, thin or bare spots in the spread of aggregates will be corrected by hand spreading or other methods subject to approval of the Public Works Director. A clear straight line at the edge of the pavement next to the concrete gutter shall be maintained. All streets shall be seal coated to incorporate all adjacent radii as directed by the City’s field representative. Application ends shall result in a straight continuous line. 1.18 PROTECTION OF SURFACE: Concrete surfaces such as concrete curb & gutter sections, triangular sections, and cross gutters shall be kept clean from bituminous material so that aggregate does not build up and block drainage. The Contractor shall clean any concrete surface as required by the Public Works Department. Sections of the streets shall be closed to traffic before the bituminous material is applied on the surface and no traffic shall be permitted on the sealed road surface until after all rolling has been completed and the bituminous material set to a degree satisfactory to the Public Works Department personnel and the material will not pick up on vehicle tires. All required flagmen, barricades, warning signs, traffic cones, and other traffic control devices will be the responsibility of the Contractor for the proper execution of the work. These traffic control devices shall be placed so as to effectively restrict traffic flow on the streets being surfaced. At the preconstruction conference, the Contractor shall provide the Public Works Department with a plan indicating the devices and procedures to be utilized to protect the surface during bituminous cure. The Public Works Department may recommend changes to the plan and these changes shall be incorporated into the plan at no additional cost to the City. 1.19 UNIFORM SURFACE APPEARANCE: All areas to be seal coated shall have a uniform aggregate cover base on the specified application rate. This includes street intersection radius areas and any other special areas which may require special application procedures. When complete, there should be no flushing and/or bleeding at the surface and the finished sealcoat should have a uniform surface appearance. 1.20 SWEEPING AND DISPOSAL OF EXCESS AGGREGATE: Sweeping and re-sweeping will be done as directed by the Public Works Director and discussed at the pre-con meeting. 1.21 APPLICATION OF BLOTTING MATERIAL: The Contractor shall apply sand blotting material where bleeding is detected as directed by Public Works Director. There shall be no additional compensation for time or materials for blotting streets that bleed through. 1.22 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT: The unit price, on the basis of gallons for bituminous material and square yards for aggregate material, shall include the cost of all materials, equipment used, and other necessary work related to this project. The unit price, on the basis of gallons or square yards, shall include installation of bituminous material and aggregate material applied at the specified application rates. Measurement of square yard area of each street shall be done centerline to centerline. Radiuses at intersections are incidental. All other work shall be considered incidental to the project. The volume of bituminous material (gallons) will be established by bills of lading of delivery tankers and by measurement of distribution trucks when necessary. Payments (two) for this project shall be as follows (supersedes GC 24). At Certified Substantial Completion - 95% At Certified Final Completion - Remaining 5% Payments will be processed in the next available accounts payable cycle after certification. Final payment requires Contractor submissions - see Page 4. Contractor will submit a separate itemized invoice to the City of Medina for the work performed. The City shall pay invoiced amounts directly to the Contractor. 1.23 QUANTITY ADJUSTMENTS: The City reserves the right to add or delete streets; adjusting quantities respectively, to equal a dollar amount budgeted for this type of street maintenance. Twenty-five percent (25%) shall be the maximum adjustment without possible adjustment to bid unit price. 1.24 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: The Contractor guarantees that he/she can and will complete the work within the time limit stated in Contract Documents, or within the time as extended provided elsewhere in the Contract Documents. Inasmuch as the damage and loss to the City which will result from the failure of the Contractor to complete the work within the stipulated time will be most difficult or impossible of accurate assessment, the damage to the Owners for such delay shall be liquidated at a daily rate of $300.00 for each calendar day, Sundays and holidays included, beyond the completion date as originally determined or as extended. The liquidated damages shall not be considered a penalty. The City has the right to deduct and retain out of any money due, or to become due to the Contractor, the amount of liquidated damages accrued, and in case those amounts are less than the amount of liquidated damages, the Contractor shall pay the difference upon demand. The City shall not be deemed to have forfeited or waived its right to liquidated damages by permitting the Contractor to continue work on the project beyond the completion date, nor by assuming control of the Contractor’s obligations and completing the project as provided for in this contract, nor by terminating this contract as provided herein. 1.25 EMERGENCY RESPONSE: During the contract period it may be necessary to have contracted work done on an emergency basis. The City shall have the right to require the Contractor, upon 24-hour notice (verbal or written), to respond to such request. In case of failure to perform the work, the City shall have the right to have other non-contractual forces complete requested work. All costs in excess of unit price bid shall be deducted from the Contractor’s final payment. 1.26 SAMPLING AND TESTING: All bidders shall furnish certification that materials furnished meet specification for both asphalt and aggregates. Said certifications shall be by an approved testing laboratory. The City reserves the right to make any further tests deemed necessary to ensure work meets the required specification. Said tests are to be made at the Contractor’s expense. 1.27 CONFLICT BETWEEN UNIT PRICES AND EXTENDED AMOUNT: In the event of a conflict between the unit price written in a proposal and the product of that unit and the proposal quantity, the unit price will govern. Similarly, in the case of a conflict between a written incorrect total bid amount, the correct total will govern. 1.28 GUARANTEE: As noted in the General Conditions, the Contractor shall guarantee the work for a period of one year from the date of final acceptance. Unless otherwise approved by the City Public Works Director, warranty repair work for the sealcoat portion of the project shall be completed in full lane widths. Work shall be completed such that segments less than 100’ in length shall be continuously covered until all areas requiring warranty work have been covered. 1 CURB AND CONCRETE INSTALLATION SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this 21st day of April 2021, by and between Schmidt Curb Co. Inc., 13195 95th Street NE, Elk River, MN 55330, a Minnesota corporation (the “Contractor”) and the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”). Recitals 1. The City has been authorized to enter into a contract for curb and concrete installation services; and 2. The City has approved the contract for curb and concrete installation services with the Contractor; and 3. The parties wish to define the scope of services and terms of their agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Contractor agree as follows: Terms 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES. The Contractor will perform curb installation services for the City. “Curb and Concrete Installation Services” will consist of installing curb and concrete using MN- D.O.T. D424 and/or MN-D.O.T. B618, as per the 2021 Road Material Bids. Any curb work performed will be at the discretion of the Public Works Director, according to the compensation schedule below. 2.0. TERM. The term and prices of this contract shall remain in effect from April 2021 until November 2022, or until such later date as may be mutually agreed upon. 3.0 COMPENSATION. The City shall compensate the Contractor as follows: Curb Installation – MN-D.O.T. D424: • $35.00 per lineal foot - New Installation Curb Installation – MN-D.O.T. B618: • $35.00 per lineal foot - New Installation Non Reinforced Concrete Flat Work: • 4” Thick at $9.00 per sq. foot • 6” Thick at $12.00 per sq. foot • 8” Thick at $15.00 per sq. foot 3.01 The Contractor shall pay for all licenses and permits. These costs shall be included in the bid cost. The City is exempt from sales tax. 4.0 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Agenda Item #5C 2 4.01 Both the Contractor and the City acknowledge and agree that the Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Any employee or subcontractor who may perform services for the Contractor in connection with this Agreement is also not an employee of the City. The Contractor understands that the City will not provide any benefits of any type in connection with this Agreement, including but not limited to health or medical insurance, worker’s compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, nor will the City withhold any state or federal taxes, including income or payroll taxes, which may be payable by the Contractor. 4.02 The Contractor will supply and use its own equipment and tools to complete the services under this Agreement. 4.03 The Contractor acknowledges that any general instruction it receives from the City has no effect on its status as an independent contractor. 5.0 INSURANCE. The Contractor will maintain adequate insurance to protect itself and the City from claims and liability for injury or damage to persons or property for all work performed by the Contractor and its respective employees or agents under this Agreement. The Contractor shall name the City as an additional insured under its commercial general liability policy in limits acceptable to the City. Prior to performing any services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide evidence to the City that acceptable insurance coverage is effective. 6.0 WORKER’S COMPENSATION. 6.01 The Contractor will comply with the provisions of the Minnesota worker’s compensation statute as an independent contractor before commencing work under this Agreement. 6.02 The Contractor will provide its own worker’s compensation insurance and will provide evidence to the City of such coverage before commencing work under this Agreement. 7.0 INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor will hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses (including defense, settlement, and reasonable attorney’s fees) for claims as a result of bodily injury, loss of life, property damages and any other damages arising out of the Contractor’s performance under this Agreement. 8.0 PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND. The Contractor may be required to provide a Payment and Performance Bond to the City at no additional cost to the City. 9.0 PRIVATIZATION CLAUSE. Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (the “Act”) and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by the Contractor in performing its obligations is subject to the requirements of the 3 Act, and the Contractor must comply with the requirements of the Act as if the Contractor was a government entity. 10.0 APPLICABLE LAW. The execution, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement will, in all respects, be controlled and governed by the laws of Minnesota. 11.0 ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement or procure the services of another individual or company to provide services under this Agreement without first obtaining the express written consent of the City. 12.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and no other agreement prior to or contemporaneous with this Agreement shall be effective, except as expressly set forth or incorporated herein. Any purported amendment to this Agreement is not effective unless it is in writing and executed by both parties. 13.0 NO WAIVER BY CITY. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not waive its entitlement to any immunity under statute or common law. 14.0 TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time, for any reason. If the contract is terminated early, the City will pay a prorated fee for the services performed to date in that calendar year. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year written above. CITY OF MEDINA By _____________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By ______________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY, INC. (CONTRACTOR) By ______________________________ 1 TO: Medina City Council FROM: Jodi Gallup, Assistant City Administrator DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: Restaurant and Bar Liquor License Fee Waiver To provide economic relief to bars and restaurants impacted by the COVID-19 restrictions and executive orders over the last year, staff is recommending waiving the liquor license fees for Medina’s restaurants and bars for the 2021-2022 renewals. The total fee waiver would amount to $24,750 in critical savings for our local establishments, which Medina will recoup in the next round of federal assistance. This fee waiver will provide relief to the following Medina establishments: • Medina Entertainment Center (Medina Recreations Inc.) • Medina Golf & Country Club (Medina CC LLC) • Oak Eatery (Start Fresh Corporation) • Inn Kahoots (R.M.T. Inc.) • American Legion 394 • Three Rivers Park District Baker National Golf Course Recommendation Approve restaurant and bar liquor license fee waiver for the 2021-2022 liquor license renewals. MEMORANDUM Agenda Item #5D TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director Jason Nelson DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: 21st Century Bank Donation On March 30, 2021, the police department received a check from 21st Century Bank for $300.00 to use towards prizes for the Bike Rodeo. I would ask the Medina City Council to accept the donation for the Bike Rodeo and direct staff to respond with a thank you letter to 21st Century Bank. MEMORANDUM Agenda Item #5F Resolution No. 2021- April 20, 2021 Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM 21ST CENTURY BANK WHEREAS, 21st Century Bank has generously offered to donate a check in the amount of $300 (the “Donation”) to the city of Medina (the “City”); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to the City’s Annual Bike Safety Rodeo; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to 21st Century Bank for their generosity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks 21st Century Bank. Dated: April 20, 2021. ____________________________________ 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. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director Jason Nelson DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: Empire Cycle Donation On March 30, 2021, the police department received a check from Empire Cycle for $500.00 to use towards prizes for the Bike Rodeo. I would ask the Medina City Council to accept the donation for the Bike Rodeo and direct staff to respond with a thank you letter to Empire Cycle. MEMORANDUM Agenda Item #5G Resolution No. 2021- April 20, 2021 Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM EMPIRE CYCLE WHEREAS, Empire Cycle has generously offered to donate a check in the amount of $500 (the “Donation”) to the city of Medina (the “City”); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to the City’s Annual Bike Safety Rodeo; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to Empire Cycle for their generosity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks Empire Cycle. Dated: April 20, 2021. ____________________________________ 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. 2021- April 20, 2021 Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS WHEREAS, Harbor Freight Tools has generously offered to donate a check in the amount of $150 (the “Donation”) to the city of Medina (the “City”); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be used to purchase two 4-in-1 jump starters; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to Harbor Freight Tools for their generosity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks Harbor Freight Tools. Dated: April 20, 2021. ____________________________________ 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 #5H TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director Jason Nelson DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: Harbor Freight Tools Donation On April 2, 2021, the police department received a grant in the form of a gift card from Harbor Freight Tools for $150.00 to be purchase two 4-in-1 Jump Starters. I would ask the Medina City Council to accept the donation for the two jump starters and direct staff to respond with a thank you letter to Harbor Freight Tools. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director Jason Nelson DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: Rockford Fire Department Donation On April 7, 2021, the police department received a check from Rockford Fire Department for $100.00 to use towards prizes for the Bike Rodeo. I would ask the Medina City Council to accept the donation for the Bike Rodeo and direct staff to respond with a thank you letter to Rockford Fire Department. MEMORANDUM Agenda Item #5I Resolution No. 2021- April 20, 2021 Member _______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM ROCKFORD FIRE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, Rockford Fire Department has generously offered to donate a check in the amount of $100 (the “Donation”) to the city of Medina (the “City”); and WHEREAS, the Donation will be dedicated to the City’s Annual Bike Safety Rodeo; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to accept the Donation and express its gratitude to Rockford Fire Department for their generosity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina, Minnesota, that the City accepts the Donation and thanks Rockford Fire Department. Dated: April 20, 2021. ____________________________________ 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. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 1 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Johnson DATE: April 14, 2021 MEETING: April 20, 2021 City Council SUBJ: Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 County Road 29 – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan Background At the February 16, 2021 meeting, the City Council reviewed a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 24-unit townhome development at 1432 County Road 29. The Council reviewed an updated concept plan with 24-units at the March 16 meeting. An excerpt from those minutes is attached for reference. The applicant has updated their concept and narrative and reduced to 23-units to provide additional greenspace and has provided supplemental information related to recreational opportunities in the area. The property owner also wishes to address the Council related to their attempts to accommodate the City’s density requirement with other types of projects. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below. Agenda Item #7A Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 2 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting The aerial shows existing land uses and describes planned land uses as follows: • The City of Maple Plain is west of County Road 29. The Haven Homes senior project is under construction to the northwest • Baker Park Reserve is located to the east and northeast • Property to the southeast is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) development. • The lot north of the subject site includes an existing single-family home and is guided for potential HDR redevelopment • Commercial property is located to the south The site is approximately two acres in size and currently includes an existing home and garage. The site slopes down to the east and includes moderate tree cover. This report updates the information related to the number of units and parking location. Otherwise, the information provided is the same in previous meetings. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning The subject site is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) development and zoned R4 (Residential Multiple Family). The HDR land use and R4 zoning district allow townhome and multi-family development with a density between 12-15 units/acre. Staff has attached the Vision and Community Goals, the general land use principles and objectives of residential land use from the Comprehensive Plan. The criteria for reviewing a PUD include determining whether the PUD meets these objectives better than a development following the general ordinance standards. PUD Concept Plan The purpose of a PUD Concept Plan is to provide feedback to the applicant prior to a formal application. Generally, the Planning Commission and City Council do not take any formal action and the feedback is purely advisory. Purpose of a Planned Unit Development According to Section 827.25, PUD provisions are established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards designed to allow greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas by incorporating design modifications and allowing for a mixture of uses. The PUD process, by allowing deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards is intended to encourage: 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for all styles of economic expansion may be met by greater variety in type, design, and placement of structures and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2. Higher standards of site and building design. 3. The preservation, enhancement, or restoration of desirable site characteristics such as high quality natural resources, wooded areas, wetlands, natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 4. Innovative approaches to stormwater management and low-impact development practices which result in volume control and improvement to water quality beyond the standard requirements of the City. 5. Maintenance of open space in portions of the development site, preferably linked to surrounding open space areas, and also enhanced buffering from adjacent roadways and lower intensity uses. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 3 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting 6. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern and more convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. 7. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lower development costs and public investments. 8. A development pattern that effectuates the objectives of the Medina Comprehensive Plan. (PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles.) 9. A more desirable and creative environment than might be possible through the strict application on zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. Proposed Site Layout The concept plan proposes 23 townhome units divided amongst four structures. This density would be at the low end required within the HDR land use and R4 district. The applicant has indicated that they would intend to offer the townhomes for rent. The R4 zoning district is intended to implement development in the HDR land use. As noted above, a PUD allows “deviation from the strict provisions of this Code related to setbacks, lot area, width and depth, yards, and other development standards” to serve the purposes described in the PUD ordinance. To analyze whether to approve a rezoning to PUD, the City compares the request to the expectations of the underlying zoning designation. The applicant has requested the PUD primarily for flexibility from the setback requirement to the new public street along the south of the property. The applicant has stated that this flexibility is necessary to obtain the minimum density of 12 units/acre with townhome units. The applicant states that townhomes could not be developed at this density without some flexibility through a PUD. The alternative would likely be for a 3-story multi-family structure, which may not be economically viable at this scale. The following compares the concept to the R4 district requirements. R4 Requirement Proposed Townhomes Minimum Net Area per Unit 3400 s.f. 3850 s.f. Maximum Net Area per Unit 3650 s.f. 3850 s.f. Minimum Setback from Perimeter 20 feet 20 feet Arterial Road setback 50 feet 50 feet Local Road Setback (new road on south) 40 feet 20 feet Private Road Setback (internal driveway) 25 feet 22 feet from drive to garage Minimum Distance Between Buildings 30 feet 50 feet Max. Hardcover – total Excluding wetlands and ponds 60% 70% Not indicated The applicant proposes a density of approximately 10.85 units/acre, just under 12 units/acre, which is the lower end of the density range required in the HDR land use. The Comprehensive Plan allows the city to consider flexibility to the density standards as follows: “exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use.” This would allow the number of units to be reduced to 23 if the conditions are met. The City Council Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 4 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting can discuss whether this flexibility seems appropriate based upon the slopes of the site, to provide more opportunity for stormwater management, or if the project exceeds minimum standards. The applicant has indicated that they would be willing to rent 1 of the 23 units at 80% of the area median income (AMI) to help provide options at a lower rent point. The remaining units would be market rate rents, but provides rental options which are generally lacking within Medina. Architectural Design Renderings of the proposed townhomes are attached. The minimum standards of the R4 district include: • Accent materials – minimum of 20% of any façade facing a street shall be accent material • Garage door elements – if garage doors occupy more than 50% of horizontal façade facing a street, additional elements are required • Building modulation – buildings are required to be modulated at least once per 50 feet. This may include varying building height, building setback, building orientation, roof pitch, roof design, or significant differences in building materials/design. The applicant has submitted updated building elevations for review. It appears that the applicant proposes accent materials beyond the amount required by the R4 district. The applicant has also provided railings to the entries of the units to give more of an “entry” appearance. Staff believes these could continue to be improved if the application proceeds. Because the applicant is proposing to pull the units closer to the new street to the south, staff recommends architectural elements on the southern facades of the southern buildings to make these buildings have more of a front entry/porch appearance along the sidewalk. This could include porches, steps, etc. Tree Preservation, Buffer Yard and Landscaping Although the site is not wooded, it is a residential lot with moderate tree cover throughout. It is likely that most of the trees will need to be removed from the site for any project to be developed at HDR density. Development would be subject to the City’s tree preservation regulations, but a waiver may need to be considered because the required density of the Comprehensive Plan and the fact the trees are scattered around the site. Staff recommends that consideration be given to preserve trees along the perimeter of the site. The concept plan does not include landscaping details. The minimum landscaping requirements of the R4 district are based on the perimeter of the development site and requires a minimum of 22 overstory trees, 11 ornamental trees, and 33 shrubs. A bufferyard with an opacity of 0.1 is required along the adjacent street, which may further supplement planting requirements. The City could consider requiring architectural, landscaping, berming, fencing, and other elements beyond the minimum standards as part of a PUD. Staff would recommend that a privacy fence be considered along the northern property line with the adjacent single-family home. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 5 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting Wetlands and Floodplain The site contains no wetlands or floodplains. Transportation/Parking The City’s transportation plan anticipates a new public street along the south of the property, which is intended to provide access to the future development property to the east, and to loop south to connect with the driveway from Holiday and the multi-tenant retail building to the south. In the future, this loop will provide full access to the commercial properties when Hennepin County constructs a median in County Road 29 at the Highway 12 intersection. The applicant proposes to construct the roadway to the point where it turns south off the property. The remaining portion of the loop is anticipated to be constructed by the development to the east. The applicant proposes a right-turn lane from the new road onto County Road 29. Staff recommends that the roadway width be increased east of the turn lane to accommodate the turn radius around the curve to the south. As noted above, the property to the north is guided for HDR redevelopment. Ideally, an opportunity for access to that site through this subject property would be provided to reduce the need for access onto County Road 29. Staff does not recommend requiring an access easement at this time, but would recommend that considerations be made such that the site design could accommodate it in the future. City code requires a minimum of 0.25 guest parking spaces per townhome unit. Staff recommends that a minimum of 6 parking spaces be provided because it will be difficult to maneuver around vehicles parked in front of the garage. The applicant has updated the plans to provide 6 parking spaces near the entrance. Staff also recommends that the applicant meet the recommendations of Public Safety and the Maple Plain Fire Department with regard to emergency vehicle circulation. Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water service from County Road 29 to serve the townhome units and to stub the services to the east. Staff recommends that future plans address the comments of the City Engineer. Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review The Concept Plan includes conceptual grading and stormwater plans. A filtration basin is proposed in the southeast corner of the site and the applicant is considering an underground filtration tank under the driveway. Staff believes there are several considerations for the underground filtration device, including construction and maintenance costs and construction/structural considerations in relation to adjacent buildings and retaining walls. It may be advisable to consider alternatives. The City prohibits lawn/landscaping irrigation from using City water. Staff would recommend that stormwater re-use be utilized for a portion of the stormwater requirements. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 6 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting Park/Trails/Multi-Modal The applicant proposes a small “tot-lot” playground within the project and a sidewalk along the new road. The nearest park is located approximately ½ mile to the northwest at the Orono School Early Learning Center in Maple Plain. Staff recommends additional recreational amenities as part of the amenities of the PUD. This may include something like a basketball hoop or similar amenity. In addition, staff recommends construction of a sidewalk or trail along County Road 29. This will provide pedestrian access to the property to the north if it redevelops. Public Hearing/Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the concept plan at the February 9 meeting. The draft minutes from the discussion are attached. The neighbor immediately to the north of the subject site spoke at the hearing and requested consideration for a privacy fence, lighting limitations for patios which will be close to his property, and careful review of drainage so there are no impacts to his property. Comments from Planning Commissioners generally supported a townhome use on the subject property, if it could be shown that the site could accommodate the circulation, parking, and other improvements necessary. Commissioners noted that the concept did appear to be tight, especially after guest parking was added. Commissioners did not raise concerns with the reduced setback to the new street to the south, but reiterated that design improvements for the southern façade would be necessary. Some Commissioners spoke favorably of the provision of rental housing, especially for units reserved at lower rents reserved for residents at lower incomes. Review Criteria/Staff Comments The purpose of the PUD Concept Plan is to provide purely advisory comments to the applicant for their consideration whether and how to continue with a formal application. The City has a great deal of discretion when reviewing a PUD because it is a rezoning, which is a legislative action. A PUD should only be approved if it achieves the purposes of the PUD district (described on pages 2-3), the Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. The PUD process allows flexibility to the general zoning standards to result in a more desirable development than would be expected through strict adherence to the requirements, which in this case are the R4 requirements. The process provides flexibility which is ultimately at the discretion of the City. Such flexibility often cuts in both directions, certain aspects of the development may not meet the general standards while others exceed minimum standards. The flexibility provides the opportunity for collaboration in site design because the City can request adjustments which may be seen as preferred, but would not be required under general standards. When considering the PUD, it is important to compare against the development likely to occur under the standard R4 zoning district. The PUD is not being compared to lower density development or no development at all. The high level of discretion applies to use of the PUD process, whereas the City would have a lower level of discretion if a development was proposed at a similar density range which met the standard zoning requirements. Medina Townhome Development LLC Page 7 of 7 April 20, 2021 PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting In this case, it appears that the primary flexibility being sought through the PUD is to reduce the front setback to the new street to the south. The applicant describes how they believe the proposed concept meets the objective in their narrative, which is attached for reference. The applicant argues that the PUD allows for development of the site with rental townhomes while still meeting the City’s density requirements for the site. They indicate that this type of development is viable for the site and market and more desirable than development of the site under the R4 standards, which would likely need to be a taller multi-family building. Staff has provided comments throughout the report to be incorporated into any future formal application. These comments are summarized below: 1) Architectural design shall be improved for the south of the southern units to provide more of a “front entry” design. Architectural design shall otherwise meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the R4 district. 2) The site design shall meet the recommendations of Public Safety and Maple Plain Fire with regard to emergency vehicle access and circulation. 3) Consideration shall be made to preserve as many existing trees as practical. Landscaping shall meet the requirements of the R4 zoning district and provide required buffer yards along streets. 4) A privacy fence shall be provided along the northern property line adjacent to the existing single-family lot. 5) The width of the public roadway shall be increased as recommended by the City Engineer. 6) The site design shall be reviewed to provide opportunity for the property to the north to potentially access through the subject site. 7) The applicant shall agree that one of the units is reserved for rental at or below 80% AMI. 8) Guest parking shall be provided. 9) The applicant shall provide additional recreational amenities and a trail along County Road 29. 10) The applicant shall address the comments of the City Engineer and shall be subject to review and approval by Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed and other relevant agencies. Attachments 1. Document List 2. Excerpt from draft 2/9/2021 Planning Commission minutes 3. Excerpt from 2/16/2021 City Council minutes 4. Excerpt from 3/16/2021 City Council minutes 5. Excerpt from Comprehensive Plan 6. Engineering Comments 7. Applicant Narrative updated for 4/20 meeting 8. Concept Plan – updated for 4/20 meeting 4/15/2021 Project: LR-21-287– CR29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan 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 1/5/2021 1/5/2021 3 Yes Yes Deposit 1/5/2021 1/5/2021 1 Yes Yes $2000 Plans 1/5/2021 6/19/2019 14 Yes Yes Concept Plan – updated 3/8/2021 3/8/2021 8 Yes N Concept Plan – updated 4/12/2021 4/12/2021 6 Yes Purchase Agreement 1/5/2021 9/15/2020 14 Yes Yes Narrative 1/5/2021 NA 4 Yes Yes Narrative-Updated 1/29/2021 NA 4 Yes Yes Narrative-updated 3/8/2021 NA 1 Yes N Narrative-updated 4/15/2021 NA 2 Yes Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Legal Comments 1/15/2021 1 Y Engineering Comments 1/15/2021 4 Y Building Comments 1/14/2021 1 Y Minnehaha Creek 1/14/2021 1 Y Hennepin County 1/13/2021 2 Y Notice 1/29/2021 8 Y 11 pages w/ affidavit, labels, map Planning Commission Packet 2/4/2021 7 Y City Council Report 2/11/2021 7 Y 36 pages w/ attachments City Council Report 3/11/2021 8 Y City Council Report 4/15/2021 7 Y OVER 4/15/2021 Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 02/09/2021 Minutes 1 Public Hearing – Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 County Road 29 – Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Finke stated that the proposed concept includes 24 townhomes on approximately two acres, bordering Maple Plain. He stated that the subject site is guided for high density residential development and zoned R4, which allows for 12 to 15 units per acre. He stated that the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process intends to provide flexibility in return for achieving other City objectives and/or public benefit. He identified the adjacent property uses and zoning. He displayed the proposed site plan, noting that the applicant proposed four six-unit buildings. He compared the site layout to the R4 zoning regulations, noting that the primary flexibility requested would be a reduction to the setback to the new road to the south from 40 feet to 20 feet. He stated that the proposed density is just under 12 units per acre which would be reasonable for a site of this size compared to the density range of the underlying zoning district. He stated that the applicant would be open to reserving two units out of the 24 as affordable units, for those making 80 percent of the area median income or less. He displayed the proposed elevations, both front and back. He stated that staff would recommend that at least the minimum architectural standards be met with additional elements added to the units closest to the public roadway. He noted that staff would also suggest a privacy fence to the north to buffer from the existing single-family homes. He provided details on the proposed roadway that would be built to provide access into the site. He noted that staff suggests that the roadway to the south be widened in order to allow better circulation. He stated that staff would also suggest additional guest parking because of the small size of the driveways. He stated that perhaps the ability to provide access to the property to the north be shown as well in the case of future development. Piper asked if the public road continues and circles around the back of the shopping area to the gas station, would it eventually end up being part of the future high density residential to the east of those structures. Finke replied that the road would be partially constructed on the future high-density parcel to the east and therefore would be required as improvements for that development. Sedabres asked if the requirement for the six parking spaces could be accommodated while maintaining the proposed density. Finke replied that it is possible that the parking could be located along the entry drive, otherwise the units may need to be resized in order to accommodate the parking and maintain the density. Sedabres referenced the property to the north and asked how many additional units could fit on that property under that standard zoning. Finke replied that size is approximately .5 acres in size and therefore would equate to six units but noted that there may be dimensional constraints and therefore less units could be approved. Nielsen asked if the setback proposed to be reduced to 20 feet from 40 feet would be further impacted by the desire for the road to the south to be wider. Finke replied that the setback is measured to the right-of-way line and therefore the road could be widened within the existing right-of-way without impacting the setback further. Shane LaFave, representing the applicant, introduced the members of his team that are present tonight. He stated that they see a need for rental housing for families in this area as there is not a large supply but there is a demand in this part of the community. He stated that the townhome Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 02/09/2021 Minutes 2 concept would align with the density recommendation for the site. He described the challenges of attempting to fit all the required elements into the site but believed that this concept maximizes the land to its full potential. He stated that the townhomes would be three to four bedrooms and therefore they anticipate families and have included a tot lot amenity. He stated that the PUD is requested for the setback requirement as they do not feel they could provide this number of units without that flexibility. He believed that this development would be attractive to families that want to live in the community but could perhaps not afford to purchase or would prefer to rent. Nielsen asked for input on the mention of two affordable housing units. LaFave replied that they are comfortable designating two units at the 80 percent median income level. He stated that would lower the rent amounts from those identified in the proforma but would not be a large difference. He recognized that there is a need for that in the metro area and understands the need and desire for that. Popp asked if the applicant has insight on how the rental demand for that area has changed in the past five years. LaFave replied that they completed a market demand assessment but noted that does not go into the history of the demand and instead estimates the current demand. Popp asked and received confirmation that the property is within the Orono School District. Piper referenced the six additional guest parking stalls recommended by staff and stated that it would seem those would need to be included and asked if the developer is committed to finding space for them. LaFave replied that staff did share that concern prior to the meeting, and they do recognize the need for that parking. He stated that the other potential would be to cap the drive lanes and provide parking in those areas. Josh Mckinney, representing the applicant, stated that there are a few options available that would be viable for guest parking and provided additional details on those potential locations. He stated that they would further explore those options as they go further into the design. Nielsen referenced the comment related to the south facing side of the buildings and asked for input from the developer. LaFave replied that the comment is well received. He noted that in the first iteration they did not have the sidewalk connecting but they recognized the comment of staff to make that more pedestrian friendly. He stated that they will continue to enhance those entrances to the townhomes to look more like front entries, which could include improving the materials, as they proceed with design. He stated that they are motivated to make it look nice and therefore they are not concerned with accommodating those comments from staff. Nielsen asked if there are any suggestions from staff that the applicant would be concerned with incorporating. LaFave replied that it would be tough to provide the connection to the property to the north. He stated that if they attempted to guess where a drive lane would go to the north, it would most likely eliminate the tot lot and impact the privacy fence. HE stated that it would be difficult to anticipate Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 02/09/2021 Minutes 3 what could/would be developed on that site and would not want to see an amenity removed from this site in the interest of guessing on what could happen on the property to the north. Popp referenced the preservation of trees mentioned in the staff report, noting the two areas suggested that could be practical to preserve and asked for input from the applicant. LaFave stated that they like the visual and noise barrier that trees provide and therefore are motivated to keep all the trees they can on the west. He stated that the area to the east would be dependent upon grading and concrete pouring. He stated that if that can be done without damaging tree roots, they would like to preserve those trees. Mckinney agreed that they would like to maintain the number of trees that they can as that provides additional separation from Baker Park Road. He asked the Commission to consider the context in which this is placed. He stated that there may be a need to remove trees within the boundary, but Baker Park will maintain its trees. Nielsen opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Robert Braun, 1472 Baker Park Road, commented that he would support the concept for a privacy fence as well as preserving trees when possible near the property line. He commented that the buildings and patios would be near the property line and would want to ensure that there is not an impact to his property from hardcover runoff. He also asked about patio lighting and potential impacts to his property from that lighting. Finke replied that stormwater runoff would be a consideration that would be addressed through the formal plan process and would be looked at carefully to ensure the runoff does not impact adjacent properties. He stated that lighting from individual units would not be regulated but stated that could perhaps be addressed through the PUD if that is a concern. Mr. Braun asked the rental value for the properties. LaFave replied that they would anticipate rents around $2,000 per month. Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. Grajczyk commented that he likes the townhome concept for this property, recognizing that it is becoming a more popular area for growth and development. He stated that architecturally wise he agrees with the need for a change on the south side of the building along the road, as well as widening that road. He commented that the driving and parking space between the buildings is tight and could see that as an issue for future residents having enough space to back out and get through and would prefer to see something with a little more space that is driver friendly. Piper echoed the comments of the previous Commissioner in that this site is awfully tight for traffic coming in and out. She also prefers the guest parking be provided. She stated that as long as the applicant can meet the City requirements, she supports this moving forward. Popp agreed with the direction of the staff comments to be incorporated into the plans moving forward. He stated that he supports the preservation of trees on the east and west. He stated that he also supports the additional architectural elements on the units facing the road to the south. He stated that the additional parking spots would increase the tightness of the site. He referenced the potential access to the north and stated that it would seem difficult to do that without removing another Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 02/09/2021 Minutes 4 valuable element such as the tot lot. He stated that he would prefer the additional separation and tot lot. He stated that this appears to be a valuable development that would align with the City’s goals. He referenced the comment related to lighting, which is a valid concern from that resident. Rhem echoed the comments of the previous Commissioners. He stated that staff did an excellent job with their comments and appreciated the applicant for agreeing to incorporate those elements. He stated that this is a great potential development that aligns with what the City is attempting to achieve in its Comprehensive Plan and therefore is very supportive of the request. Sedabres stated that overall, he supports this design as it fits within the R4 standards and appreciates the openness of the developer to provide affordable housing units as that is something the community definitely needs. He echoed the comments related to architectural design on the south and potentially the west sides. He stated that he considered what the local area looks like, noting that the stone fits within the R4 district and adjacent developments. He stated that perhaps additional materials are used to break up the lap siding from east to west. Nielsen agreed with the comments expressed by the Commission thus far. She stated that this appears to be a great design for this property. She noted that she would like to see the two units for affordable housing, if possible, and some sort of downcast lighting on the north side to ensure that does not impact the neighbors to the north. LaFave appreciated the feedback from the Commission tonight. He stated that they will find space for the guest parking and will be cognizant of the vehicle spacing overall. He stated that it appears that perhaps the connection to the north is not needed if they can preserve greenspace and provide the tot lot as an amenity. He stated that they will also think carefully about architecture and the materials they propose, especially on the south side. Finke stated that the intent is to forward this concept to the City Council at its meeting next week. Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Minutes 1 Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 County Road 29 – Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan Review (7:15 p.m.) Finke presented a Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for the subject site and displayed an aerial photograph of the site, identifying the adjacent property uses. He explained that the property is zoned as R-4 and noted that the PUD would allow for flexibility of the underlying zoning in return for providing additional benefits that meet other goals of the City and provide a more desirable development. He displayed the proposed site plan of six buildings each with four units for a total of 24 units. He stated that there would be construction of a public street to the south, as identified in the City’s transportation plan. He stated that the proposed density of the site is just under the 12 units per acre specified by the R-4 district. He noted that the City would have to make the decision as to whether that density would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that staff believes that the development would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as it is near that density range and only a two-acre site. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan also speaks to some flexibility from the density based on elements in the Code, which could reduce that density to 22 units for the two-acre site. He stated that the applicant believes that some flexibility would be needed from the R-4 district in order to provide townhomes on the site, such as the flexibility on the front setback. He noted that the alternative would allow for construction of an apartment or condominium building that would have additional height in order to put the same number of units on a smaller footprint. He stated that the applicant also notes that they would be willing to reserve two of the 24 units for rent at 80 percent of the median income level in order to achieve a portion of the City’s goals for workforce and affordable housing. He provided a rendering of the proposed structures and reviewed the details of the proposed elevations as well as the comments of staff and the Planning Commission. He noted that at the Planning Commission meeting a neighboring property owner requested a privacy fence to provide a buffer between the patios and his property. Martin asked for input on the site layout and architectural design. Reid stated that she sees a missed opportunity, noting that if the garages were flipped to face the outside and front entrances facing the center that would create a center commons area that would help to create a sense of community. She believed that more innovative architecture is needed for the project as the garage side looks ordinary and the patio and front door side would be unacceptable. She did not believe that this would meet the requirements of a PUD as she did not see any planning or architecture that would justify a PUD. Finke commented that staff would need to see what that design would look like, noting that the question would be how the other bank of townhomes would be accessed. Martin commented that Reid presented an interesting concept and asked if the developer could provide input on that suggestion. She stated that she would like to see greater accent materials and a better design with more curb appeal. She stated that she also agrees with the staff and Planning Commission recommendations. Cavanaugh asked where the six guest parking stalls would be located. Finke replied that the guest parking was a staff recommendation and has therefore not yet been shown on the plan. He noted that the applicant suggested a few potential locations for the guest parking and confirmed there would be sufficient space to add parking in those locations. Cavanaugh asked where the snow would be stored. Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Minutes 2 Finke replied that the applicant can address that question. Cavanaugh stated that the units have short driveways and if snow is stored at the end of the road it would make it difficult for end units to turn their vehicles around. He stated that he would be keener to reach the density of 24 units or changing the product offered. He stated that the second layout includes an option of six units per building. Martin asked the square footage of the interior of the units. Finke stated that he can attempt to pull that information out of the plans. Martin stated that perhaps the square footage of the units could be reduced to achieve the density. Cavanaugh agreed that the units seem large and perhaps the unit size could be reduced to meet some of the standards. Finke estimated about 2,200 square feet per unit. Albers stated that in reviewing the layout he is concerned with the setback of only 20 feet from the local road. He stated that he also echoes the comments of Reid that there is something lacking in terms of architectural design. DesLauriers stated that he is very concerned with the 20-foot setback and would like to find a way to better meet the required 40 foot setback. He asked for clarification on driveway length. Finke replied that the distance would depend upon how the townhome units would be platted. He stated that in other townhome developments in the community the distance is more likely to be 27 feet from garage to the drive aisle, whereas this would propose 22 feet. He stated that this development would propose a wider drive aisle between the units than would be required, which would balance that out. DesLauriers stated that he would like to see the maximum hardcover percentage for the site too as it appears to be out of compliance. He asked what 80 percent of the median income would equate to for the affordable housing units. He stated that he is also concerned with snow storage and parking for guests as there is not much room in the driveways. Martin asked if the public street would provide opportunities for guest parking as well. Finke replied that the public street would most likely not provide options for parking because of the curved alignment of the street. Martin commented that if the units each have three or four units, the available garage space and parking on the site seems tight. Reid noted that the neighboring retail area is lightly used and typically has excess parking. Martin commented that there would not be a legal right for the townhome residents to park in that area but perhaps a cross parking easement could be secured by the applicant. Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Minutes 3 Finke commented that the current Metropolitan Council figures show a three-bedroom unit at 80 percent of the median income for the area to be approximately $2,100 per month. DesLauriers asked if the affordable housing units could then be charged rents of up to $2,100. Finke confirmed that to be true noting that the other units could have a higher rate if the market demanded. DesLauriers stated that during the Planning Commission meeting the comment was made by the applicant that they would anticipate rents around $2,000 per month and asked if the affordable units could then have higher rates than the other units. Martin stated that there are concerns with how the units work on the site in light of parking needs and snow storage as well as concern with the architectural presentation of the units. She stated that the Council also agrees with the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission but would like to see additional elements added in order to enhance the curbside appearance. Reid stated that this is an opportunity for have a lovely townhouse development and does not want to miss that opportunity but does not believe this would qualify for a PUD. Finke provided a summary on the infrastructure proposed including the roadway. He stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its meeting the previous week and Commissioners generally supported the townhome use and some flexibility in the setback in order to support that use. He noted that Commissioners also expressed similar concern in the tightness of the site as additional guest parking will need to be incorporated as well. He stated that the City does have a great deal of discretion when reviewing PUD’s and noted that it is important to compare a PUD proposal to the underlying standards rather than to alternative land use or no development. He stated that part of that consideration is how many items are being requested for flexibility. He noted that in this case the main flexibility is the front setback, as the other elements generally meet the zoning requirements. He noted that the intent is for the Council to provide comments tonight and no formal action is requested tonight. Martin noted that there is a tot lot proposed, but sometimes the people that need some space are adolescents and was unsure if a sports court or other similar type of amenity could be provided, recognizing the tightness of the site. DesLauriers stated that it was noted that there may be sidewalks connecting in the future and asked for details. Finke replied that the comment was to provide the sidewalk/trail connections along the western portion and through the site along the public roadway in order to provide a connected network. Shane LaFave, representing the applicant, expressed appreciation for this opportunity to gather input from both the Planning Commission the previous week and the Council tonight. He stated that they see the most demand in this area for families to have a rental option in Medina and within the Orono School District. He stated that there is a huge demand but lack of supply for rental housing. He noted that three- and four-bedroom units would provide that opportunity for families and advised that they would be happy to show that market demand with the Council. He stated that they are attempting to target those families that have a need for rental units with three or four bedrooms. He commented that the affordable units would be a maximum of Medina City Council Excerpt from 02/16/2021 Minutes 4 $2,100, or whatever the market demands, and the affordable units would never be more expensive than the other units. He stated that they are proposing 24 units on the site in order to meet the Comprehensive Plan requirement for density. He stated that if the setback were not reduced, they would only be able to fit 18 units on the site. He stated that they would need flexibility either from the setback requirement or the density requirement in order to make this type of project feasible. He stated that the guest parking arose during the input from the Planning Commission and they have not yet had a chance to update the plan but agree there needs to be guest parking and room for snow storage. He noted that the updated plans would also include more dimensions in order to provide additional information. He confirmed that they would also work to improve the design, noting that these plans are only at about five percent completion and confirmed that they would improve the architectural design as they continue to work on the plans. Martin expressed appreciation for the presentation from the developer along with the staff analysis and review by the Planning Commission. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Minutes 1 Medina Townhome Development LLC – 1432 County Road 29 – Planned Unit Development PUD) Concept Plan Review (7:56 p.m.) Johnson stated that the applicant adjusted their plan based on the input received by the City Council at a February Council meeting. Finke stated that updated architectural renderings were provided along with guest parking and a privacy fence shown on the plans. He recognized that this is still a concept plan review but stated that the applicant is requesting input from the Council on the changes made and whether the Council would support a PUD before moving forward with formal application. He displayed the updated site plan identified the guest parking stalls that were added. He stated that staff raised concern with the western stalls but noted that there are other location opportunities. He stated that the privacy fence was also added to the north. He reviewed some of the architectural elements that have been added to the elevations following the previous review. He stated that the Planning Commission felt that a PUD would be an appropriate tool to provide a townhome development that meets the density identified within the Comprehensive Plan. Cavanaugh recognized the guest parking that was added. He noted that the driveways look very short in length and it could be difficult to back out of a garage and make the turn with the guest parking when there is snow. He asked if the drive and parking layout makes sense to staff, specifically whether there would be enough room to make the backing motions. Finke replied that the distance between the townhomes in the center area is equivalent to the minimum in the parking lot design, specially 60 feet between the two buildings. He recognized that it would be tight, but vehicles would be able to circulate. He stated that the proposed density is at the low range identified in the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that under the Comprehensive Plan there is language that could allow ten percent less density in return for additional benefit or open space, noting that increased vehicle circulation could fall under that category. Cavanaugh commented that if a family has three vehicles, two could be parked in a garage and one would need to be in the driveway, which would make it tight for the end units. He stated that he would tend to prefer a high-density apartment building on this type of site. DesLauriers asked if the applicant would be short one space for guest parking. Finke confirmed that to be true but noted there would be additional opportunities to add guest parking. DesLauriers commented that the two end stalls appear to be about five feet from the sidewalk of the townhomes which is tight, as is the overall development. He referenced the townhome closest to the road and asked if the right turn lane would be a mandatory requirement. Finke commented that the left turn was thought to be the primary maneuver and as the traffic on CR 29 continues to increase there may be some backups and the thought was to let the right hand turns to get by. Stremel confirmed that staff reviewed this from a traffic standpoint and determined that those two turn lane configurations would be most beneficial in this location. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Minutes 2 DesLauriers commented that there would be 20 feet from the townhome to the road which concerns him in terms of safety. He commented that this is a very tight development on this site and agreed that perhaps this site would be more appropriate for a high-density apartment. Albers stated that he agrees with the concerns raised thus far by the previous speakers. He asked if the affordable housing units would equate to a building or the units within a building. Finke replied that it would be two of the 24 residential units. Reid commented that if these are three- and four-bedroom units that would assume they would be occupied by families with children. She asked where those older children would recreate. She also questioned whether this would qualify for a PUD but believed the City boxed itself in zoning this parcel for high-density. She stated that she would personally prefer townhomes but understands that an apartment would perhaps better fit the site. Martin agreed that this development is too boxy and tight without amenities for the residents. She was also concerned with vehicular movement on the site. Shane LaFave commented that the feedback seems to be consistent in that the Council is not in love with this presentation. He stated that the target audience for this development would be for families with children. He noted that there is a density requirement within the Comprehensive Plan that limits the development on one side and other zoning requirements that limit them on the other end. He asked what the Council would support on this site. He stated that if the Council is looking for multifamily housing in terms of apartments it would be difficult to find a developer for that type of product on this site and therefore the site would remain vacant. He noted that this plan would provide rental housing for families, which is a need in this community. Reid commented that three and four bedrooms seem large as many single-family homes do not have that many bedrooms. She stated that perhaps these be two- and three-bedroom homes instead which would ease up some space on the site. LaFave commented that half of the units would be four bedrooms and the remainder would be three bedrooms. He stated that there is a limited number of rentals for four-bedroom homes, but that is a need for some families. He recognized that it takes up space but commented that there is an incredible need for that product. Cavanaugh commented that he has a few four-bedroom rentals within Medina and has not been overwhelmed with interest. He stated that rowhomes may be a better fit for this site. DesLauriers agreed that perhaps two-to-three-bedroom units would be a better fit for the site. He noted that an apartment building could utilize underground parking. LaFave commented that underground parking is very expensive and only makes sense on large scale apartment developments. He noted that this site is limited in size. Martin commented that the Council appreciates the developer bringing this forward and would like to see additional rental housing in Medina. She believed that it would make sense to reduce the number of bedrooms to free up some space. She did not believe there would be support for the development as proposed under a PUD. Medina City Council Excerpt from 3/16/2021 Minutes 3 Cavanaugh thanked the applicant for this proposal and hoped that the developer could make adjustments based on the feedback and bring something else back. Reid commented that she does not believe that this would meet the criteria for a PUD. Albers agreed with the comments of Martin. He noted that this is the second proposal for this parcel and stated that perhaps the City should review the zoning to determine if there would be more appropriate zoning that would support development. Finke agreed that it has been identified that even at the minimum density it would be difficult to develop this site. He stated that this parcel was identified for the City’s minimum requirements for high density housing within the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that perhaps because of the circumstances of the site, the City could state that perhaps eight units an acre would be a better fit. He believed that the City could still technically comply with the high-density requirements but was unsure how the Metropolitan Council would respond. Martin agreed that this piece should be reviewed in context to the neighboring retail and park properties. Reid commented that she did not think the math would ever work on a property of this size and noted that she would not want to see anything over two stories on this site. She stated that she would support reexamining the zoning of this site. Excerpts from Comprehensive Plan Community Vision The following statement provides a vision of the community for the future and the resultant goals and strategies. Medina is a community united by a common goal: to sustain and enhance the quality of life of its residents. Medina will protect its significant natural resources and open space throughout the City, while honoring its rural heritage and fostering safe and well-designed neighborhoods, places of recreation and destinations for citizens to gather. Development within the City will be commensurate with available transportation systems, municipal services and school capacity. Community Goals The following Community Goals are derived from the Vision Statement and inform objectives and strategies throughout the various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. • Preserve rural vistas, open spaces, and wetlands in all parts of the community to promote the rural character of Medina. • Protect and enhance the environment and natural resources throughout the community. • Encourage and incent innovative and environmentally friendly approaches to planning, engineering and development. • Expand urban services only as necessary to accommodate regionally forecasted residential growth, desired business opportunities and achievement of other Community Goals. Such development and growth shall be at a sustainable pace proportionate with capacity of schools and transportation, water supply and wastewater infrastructure available to the City. • Spread development so that it is not geographically concentrated during particular timeframes. • Promote public and private gathering places and civic events that serve the entire community. • Preserve and expand trails and parks to provide community recreational facilities, connect neighborhoods, and encourage healthy lifestyles of its residents. • Provide opportunities for a diversity of housing at a range of costs to support residents at all stages of their lives. • Encourage an attractive, vibrant business community that complements the residential areas of the City. • Maintain its commitment to public safety through support of the City’s police department and coordinate with its contracted volunteer fire departments. • Manage the City through prudent budgeting processes, retaining a skilled and efficient staff and long-range planning and financial management. Future Land Use Plan Principles The Future Land Use Plan guides the development of Medina through 2040, and will be used to implement the City’s goals, strategies and policies. The Plan is guided by the Vision and Community Goals as furthered by the following principles: Development Patterns and Neighborhood Form • Encourage open spaces, parks and trails in all neighborhood developments. Surveys indicate that a high quality of life is found when residents have visual access to green spaces. • Create neighborhoods with a variety of housing types that are well connected with roads, trails or sidewalks. • Maintain the integrity of rural neighborhoods and promote development patterns consistent with existing rural residential development. • Recognize neighborhood characteristics and promote new development compatible in scale, architectural quality and style with existing neighborhoods. • Stage residential growth to minimize the amount of adjacent developments which occur within the same time period. • Guide density to areas with proximity to existing infrastructure and future infrastructure availability. • Concentrate higher density development near service oriented businesses to help promote walkability. • Consider planned development in surrounding communities when making land use decisions in the City. Road Patterns • Recognize regional highway capacity and planned improvements, along with use forecasts, as major factors in planning for growth and land use changes. • Establish collector streets with good connections through the community’s growth areas. • Promote trails and sidewalk access near roads and thoroughfares to encourage multi- modal transportation choices. • Consider opportunities to improve north-south travel within the City. Open Spaces and Natural Resources • Preserve natural resources throughout the community and provide educational opportunities to residents to help them understand the value of natural areas. • Preserve open spaces and natural resources. • Protect wooded areas and encourage improvement of existing resources and reforestation. Evaluate existing woodland protections and supplement as necessary. • Support the guidelines identified in the Open Space Report to preserve the City’s natural systems. Business Districts and Commercial Areas • Focus service businesses and development near urban residential densities and along primary transportation corridors. • Provide connections between residents and commercial areas and promote businesses within mixed-use areas. • Work to create job opportunities in the community for Medina residents to reduce traffic and commuting demands. • Emphasize service and retail uses which serve the needs of the local community and provide opportunities for the community to gather. • Support business development with a corporate campus style which provides open spaces and protects natural resources. High Density Residential (HDR) identifies residential land uses developed between 12.0 and 15.0 units per acre that are served, or are intended to be served, by urban services. The primary uses will include town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums which should incorporate some open space or an active park. Residential Uses Objectives: 1. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands, and other significant natural characteristics of the property. 2. Consider exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Such modification shall generally not exceed -10% of the minimum density or +20% of the maximum density requirement of the relevant land use. 3. Restrict urban development to properties within the sewer service boundary. 4. Regulate land within the Mixed Residential land use to provide opportunities for residential development with a density in excess of 8 units/acre. Flexibility is purposefully provided within the land use to support opportunities for a single project to provide both low- and high- density housing or for multiple developers to partner on independent projects within a Mixed Residential area. 5. Encourage green building practices such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles in neighborhood planning and residential building and low impact development design standards. 6. Regulate the rate and location of development in keeping with availability of public facilities and the City's stated goals, including the undesignated MUSA and growth strategies. 7. Restrict commercial and business development to areas designated in this Plan. 8. Protect property within the City's MUSA boundary from development prior to the provision of urban services that will hinder future division. 9. Create flexible zoning standards that would allow for innovative arrangements of homes, conservation easements, or other creative land use concepts that preserve the City's open space and natural features. 10. Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. 11. Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. 12. Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. 13. Establish design criteria for platting and developing site plans which will be compatible with surrounding physical features, existing land uses and the preservation of ecologically significant natural resources. 14. Establish standards for higher density residential development so that such development is compatible with surrounding uses. Such standards may include enclosed parking, green space, landscape buffering and height limitations. 15. Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible for reasons of aesthetic enhancement and safety. 16. Plan interconnections between separate developments to encourage shared road use to reduce costs and minimize the amount of road surface required. 17. Require planning of trails and walkway systems in the early design stages of all new development so that residential areas are provided safe access to parks and open space. 18. In urban residential zones with sanitary sewer service permit higher density in PUD’s in exchange for (1) reduced land coverage by buildings, (2) provision of more multi-family units; and, (3) sensitive treatment of natural resources. 19. Implement standards for lot sizes and setbacks which recognize the development characteristics and natural resources of each existing neighborhood. 20. Regulate noise, illumination, and odors as needed to protect residential neighborhoods and to maintain public health and safety. K:\017473-000\Admin\Docs\2021-01-08 Submittal\_2021-01-15 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - 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 January 15, 2021 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan – Engineering Review City Project No. LR-21-287 WSB Project No. 017473-000 Dear Mr. Finke: WSB staff have reviewed County Road 29 Townhomes Concept PUD plan submittal dated January 5, 2021. The plans propose to construct 24 multi-family units (townhomes) on a 2 acre parcel. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. Site Plan & Streets 1. With future submittals, identify the proposed street ROW/easements and note the widths on the site plan. Based on the information provided, it appears the intent is for the shared access to bey a public street with the remaining portion of the roadways within the site will be private as no easements have been proposed. 2. The applicant will need to coordinate with the property owner directly to the south for the planning and construction of the proposed public/shared access to CR 29. Lengthen the taper for the proposed right turn lane to a minimum of 7.5:1 or a minimum of 100ft at the public/shared access location. Modify the width of the proposed lanes with a 12’ left/through lane and 13.5’ outer lane widths to face of curb. 3. Any work within Hennepin County right of way will require a permit. The applicant shall also meet the requirements of the County’s plat review committee. 4. With future plan submittals provide a signing and striping plan with callouts for specific striping and signage types. 5. Add typical street section(s) details to the plans meeting the City’s standard, at minimum. The current site plan shows all of the bituminous pavement being “heavy-duty”, confirm intended pavement design. The final street section shall be designed by a registered geotechnical engineer for the specific soil conditions found on the site. 6. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and required turn around space as required by the City Fire Marshall. 7. City design standards require horizontal and vertical curve lengths to meet a 30 MPH design speed, at minimum. Provide a profile drawing for the proposed public/shared access. City of Medina – CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan – Engineering Review January 15, 2021 Page 2 K:\017473-000\Admin\Docs\2021-01-08 Submittal\_2021-01-15 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx 8. The plan does not include trails, sidewalks, or other pedestrian amenities that connect all of the units. See the City Planners comments on pedestrian access and mobility requirements. 9. Provide topographic survey that extends 50 feet beyond the limits of the proposed development. Include additional topography south of the proposed public/shared access improvements. 10. With future submittals include the City standard details for the pertinent improvements proposed. Water/Sewer Utilities 11. With future submittals show the existing sewer and watermain system including the nearest existing hydrants, valves, and manhole locations. 12. The City of Medina’s sanitary sewer system serves the existing site from the west along CR 29. 13. The City of Maple Plain’s water system serves the site. The final design shall meet the City of Maple Plain watermain design standards. Confirm whether or not a permit from the City of Maple Plain will be required. A review of valve locations will be provided with future plan submittals. 14. Watermain looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. Consideration of further watermain looping needs and stubs for future phases or other adjacent developments will be required and reviewed with future submittals. With this in mind, at minimum the City will require that the internal site watermain is extended to the northerly property line with a stub and temporary hydrant. 15. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the City Fire Marshal. 16. The City will require that each unit have a separate water/sewer service. Each water service shall have a separate curb stop (shut-off). With future submittals show proposed sanitary sewer/water service lines and stub invert elevations on plans; the City requires a minimum depth of 4’ from low floor elevations. 17. Gravity sewer is being proposed to serve all units within the development. The City’s typical standard is to place sewer a minimum of 10’ below the surface (18” vertical separation below the watermain). Where this depth is not feasible, the City will allow an 8’ depth; depths less than 8’ will require review on a case-by-case basis and require insulation and/or insulated pipe at minimum. 18. Any public sanitary sewer and watermain shall be encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert of the utility with a minimum of 20’ centered on the utility. 19. With final construction plans, if basements are proposed with the townhomes, the City will require draintile or other connections for sump pump discharges. A separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharge system should be considered. 20. Where any sewer pipe (storm or sanitary) crosses the watermain, include a note saying “Maintain 18-Inch Separation, 4” Rigid Insulation”. Provide dimension notes in various locations between the watermain and storm/sanitary sewer. City of Medina – CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan – Engineering Review January 15, 2021 Page 3 K:\017473-000\Admin\Docs\2021-01-08 Submittal\_2021-01-15 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx Traffic & Access 21. Based on the proposed site plan the anticipated traffic generation would be 176 daily trips, 11 AM peak hour trips and 13 PM peak hour trips, assuming 24 townhomes on the site. 22. Any access to CR 29 will be controlled by Hennepin County; full access to the proposed development and the existing retail site to the south shall be combined into one location between the existing retail and the proposed site. The proposed plan shows a shared/public access to CR 29 with two lanes exiting (one left and one right lane) and one lane entering. 23. We understand the existing shared access to the retail site and Holiday will remain open with the proposed development. However, the access will need to be converted to a right-in/right-out in the future when development to the east is proposed, in accordance with Hennepin County requirements. These improvements will need to be coordinated with the property owner to the north and west. 24. A traffic analysis/study should be submitted with assumptions of the existing, proposed, and future development(s) to determine whether when turn lanes will be required at the shared access on CR 29. The analysis should also include what level of future development will trigger the need for construction of the turn lanes. Additional comments may follow from the City (either Maple Plan or Medina) and/or Hennepin County based on the final concept plan submitted. Stormwater 25. The developer will need to submit a Stormwater Management Plan and modeling consistent with Medina’s Stormwater Design Manual. 26. The development will need to meet the City’s volume control requirement to capture and retain onsite 1.1” of runoff from the net new impervious surface. By satisfying the volume requirement the water quality requirement is considered met. Follow the City’s Stormwater Design Manual for alternative credits towards the volume requirement if infiltration is not feasible. 27. The applicant may want to consider using the stormwater ponds for irrigation. Credits for volume control can be given for stormwater reuse. City ordinance does not allow for municipal water system to be used for irrigation. 28. The development will need to meet the City’s rate control requirement, which states that post development discharge rates must be less than or equal to existing conditions discharge rates. 29. The City requires two feet of freeboard from structure low openings to 100-year high water levels and EOF’s. Provide maintenance access to all ponding facilities. 30. The development will need to meet the appropriate watershed standards (Minnehaha Creek Watershed District) and the applicant shall submit for the required permits. Grading and Erosion Control 31. Provide EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway. 32. Provide topographic survey that extends 50 feet beyond the limits of the proposed development. 33. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the lots. City of Medina – CR 29 Townhomes PUD Concept Plan – Engineering Review January 15, 2021 Page 4 K:\017473-000\Admin\Docs\2021-01-08 Submittal\_2021-01-15 CR29 Townhome Concept PUD - WSB Comments.docx 34. Maintain all surface grades within the minimum of 2% and maximum 33% slopes. Vegetated swale grades shall be a minimum of 2.0%. Show directional arrows and percent grades on future submittals. 35. Include a typical section/design on the plans for the proposed retaining walls. Submit retaining wall engineered designs for walls 4-feet or greater. 36. A full review of erosion/sediment control will be conducted with the final plat submittal. 37. An NPDES permit must be submitted to the City prior to start of construction. 38. A review of the erosion/sediment control plan will be completed with preliminary/plat submittals. Wetlands 39. A wetland delineation was approved for the site in 2017 and concluded there are no wetlands present (NOD No. WF-17-089). The City, or agents of the City, are not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City’s standards. We would be happy to discuss this review in more detail. Please contact me at 763-287-8532 if you have any questions or if you would like to set up a time to meet. Sincerely, WSB Jim Stremel, P.E. City Engineer PUD Concept Plan Submission – 1432 Co Rd No 29, Medina, MN 55359 (c) A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is intended to serve and the market demand. The statement is also to demonstrate the proposed PUD's relationship to Medina's Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of the City. Currently this 2 acre property is used as a vacant single family home, garage, and land. The proposal is to remove the single family home and garage and construct 23 new townhomes (4 buildings), some private outdoor space and recreational area, as well as a new public road. Site design will also take into account the grading changes on the property as well as the need for stormwater management. The townhomes will consist of both three-bedroom and four-bedroom homes that will be rented to families in need of rental housing (including 2 units limiting rents at the 80% AMI level). The driving factor behind this use type is the lack of rental housing options for families in the area. A 3rd party rental housing demand assessment was conducted by Viewpoint Consulting and it estimated the unmet rental demand for the primary market area surrounding this site is 168 units. Construction of new rental townhomes will help meet that unmet demand. While we understand that sometimes PUD’s are applied for as a means by which to deal with wetland requirements or tree conservation, our intention is to use the PUD designation as a vehicle by which we can meet the Comprehensive Plan recommendations while at the same providing a rental opportunity for larger families. While the number of bedrooms in each unit could be reduced, and therefore the footprint of the buildings, it would result in the exclusion of larger families as potential renters. We believe having units with larger bedroom counts allows families with kids to have the living space they need while also benefiting from the local schools, parks and amenities Medina has to offer. Once construction is completed the site will have density just under 12 units/acre. The proposed use of rental townhomes and density of almost 12 units/acre fits within the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. To further address Section 827.25 of the City Zoning Code, rental townhomes are not something that currently exists in abundance in Medina. In order to make this project a reality and make it comply with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan a PUD is needed. Provision of these townhomes will allow for those who for various reasons cannot purchase a home in Medina to still live in this community, thereby helping to meet the demands for all styles of economic expansion (Subd. 1). Without a PUD the density recommendation on this 2 acre site is not physically or economically feasible, so the classification of a PUD allows for a higher and better maximization of the site (Subd. 2), which in the long term is a better use for the City (per the Comprehensive Plan) with the expected growth. The completion of this project also includes constructing an access road to the 14 acre parcel located immediately to the SE of the subject property, which will make development of that parcel more feasible and convenient (Subd. 6). Without a PUD, the setback requirements in the underlying zoning code would require this project to be less than 23 units, which means it would not meet the density recommendation, which in theory would mean it cannot move forward. A 23 unit project meets the density recommendation, maximizes the use of the site area, and allows for more diversity of housing options to be offered in the City (Subd. 8 and 9). We have done all that we can to minimize the exceptions asked for, and although we are asking for the PUD the only exception we are really requesting is a lesser setback length from the SW building to the entry drive. 5 Townhomes 6 Townhomes 6 Townhomes 6 Townhomes 50'-0" 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " Privacy Fence Retaining Wall Retaining Wall Retaining Wall 24 ' - 0 " 24'-0" kaas wilson architects Medina Townhome DevelopmentSITE PLAN 2.0 03/12/20 1" = 40'-0"1 SD Site Plan 6 Townhomes 6 Townhomes Tot Lot 6 Townhomes 6 Townhomes 50'-0" 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 24 ' - 0 " 24 ' - 0 " 24'-0" Privacy Fence Retaining Wall Retaining Wall Retaining Wall kaas wilson architects Medina Townhome DevelopmentSITE PLAN 2.0 03/12/20 1" = 40'-0"1 SD Site Plan PREVIOUS VERSION; FOR COMPARISON ONLY 6.1 1 6.1 2 6.1 3 6.14 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 kaas wilson architects Medina Townhome DevelopmentLEVEL 1 - TYP. TOWNHOUSE 3.0 03/12/20 3/32" = 1'-0"1 Level 1 6.1 1 6.1 2 6.1 3 6.14 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 UNIT 4-0 UNIT 5-0 kaas wilson architects Medina Townhome DevelopmentLEVEL 2 - TYP. TOWNHOUSE 3.1 12/29/20 3/32" = 1'-0"1 Level 2 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" TH Truss Brg. 120'-3" 7.37.27.1 4.1 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.1 4.1 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" TH Truss Brg. 120'-3" 7.1 4.1 7.1 4.1 7.2 7.3 7.1 4.1 7.1 7.2 4.1 7.3 7.1 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" TH Truss Brg. 120'-3" 7.1 7.2 7.1 4.1 4.1 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 111'-1 7/8" TH Truss Brg. 120'-3" 7.3 7.1 7.1 4.1 4.1 kaas wilson architects Medina Townhome DevelopmentEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 6.1 03/12/20 1/16" = 1'-0"1 Front Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"2 Back Elevation 1/16" = 1'-0"3 Elevation 3 - a 1/16" = 1'-0"4 Elevation 4 - a Nearby Activities Recreational 1. Baker Park Trailhead 0.3 miles 2. Northside Park 0.7 miles 3. North Shore Gymnastics 1.3 miles 4. Baker Campground 1.4 miles 5. Rainbow Park 1.8 miles 6. Baker Swimming Beach 1.9 miles 7. Orono Activities Center 3.2 miles ANNUAL STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN PUBLIC HEARING April 20, 2021 Agenda Item #8A 2020 STORM WATER PROJECTS ■Completed the Ardmore Creek carp gate project ■Completed the Lakeshore Park shoreline stabilization project ■Completed several culvert projects including Deer Hill Road East (Long Lake Creek), Blackfoot, Holy Name and Hunter Drive ■Identified workable solutions to correct phosphorus issues in Long Lake Creek subwatershed PROJECTS –2021 & BEYOND ■Partner with Minnehaha Creek Watershed to complete the Wolsfeld Woods Ravine Stabilization grant project ■Evaluate opportunities for stormwater improvements within the Tower Drive Street project ■Complete the Stormwater Maintenance Policy and Procedures ■Incorporate new mandated MS4 permit requirements into our SWPPP and update ordinances as necessary MINIMUM CONTROL MEASURES ■Public Education & Outreach –Several Newsletter Articles –Stormwater Utility Bill Insert ■Public Participation –Annual Public Hearing –Medina Celebration Day –Medina Clean-up Day ■Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination –Two staff members are certified to identify, investigate, eliminate and enforce discharges within the city stormwater system –City Code Section 345 requires residents to clean-up after their dog. MINIMUM CONTROL MEASURES ■Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control –Continued to perform all routine site erosion inspections (in-house) –In 2020, Public Works inspected 24 construction sites for erosion control, which included 6 violation reports ■Post-Construction Storm Water Management –Continuing to implement the policies of the City’s Surface Water Management Plan ■Pollution Prevention and Housekeeping –Snow and ice management control –Pond maintenance –Inspections: road material stockpiles, brush and compost site, equipment storage facility, parks, public parking lots, and salt storage –Various annual employee training courses focused on the prevention of discharging pollutants PARTNERS IN WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS ■Three Rivers Park District ■Board of Water & Soil Resources (BWSR) ■Lake Independence Citizens Association (LICA) & Long Lake Creek Association ■Hennepin County Environmental Services ■Watersheds –Minnehaha Creek, Pioneer-Sarah Creek, & Elm Creek ■Homeowner Associations 1 Hamel Lions Club P.O. Box 301, Hamel MN 55340 Medina City Council Medina City Hall 2052 County Rd. 24 Medina, MN 55340 April 15, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Council Members, The Hamel Loins Club was recently notified that its gambling lease at the Medina Entertainment Center is being terminated. The club has worked with MEC for over twenty years accruing funds used to meet community needs as well as international research and implementation in the areas of health and environmental improvements. This sudden, and significant, loss of revenue will immediately impact the club’s ability to fund these causes. Because the club regularly contributes to the city’s safety services, park and community center improvements/upkeep and city celebrations, we feel the need to inform you that, although we will continue to review all requests, we may not be able to meet them. This applies to all organizational and personal hardship queries we receive. For Council review, here is a list of what the Hamel Lions have contributed to the city, school district and community in recent years: •Hamel Community Building. ($1,000,000) •Hamel Community Building Maintenance and Managing. •10 Wayzata High School scholarships each year for a $1000 each, to students in 55340. •Medina City celebration fireworks. •Medina Police Bike Rodeo. •Radar Speed Signs. •Hamel Fire Department. •Food Shelf Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners (IOCP). •Special Olympics. •Kids Halloween Party. •Lighting at Hamel Ball Fields. •Score Boards at Hamel Ball Field. •Hamel Athletic Association Little League. Agenda Item #8B • Hamel Rodeo Parade. • MN Lions Diabetes Foundation. • Can Do Canine's - Hearing & Service Dogs of MN. • Leader Dogs for The Blind. • MN Lions Vision Foundation. • MN Lions Hearing Foundation. • MN Lions Project New Hope. For Veterans. • MN Lions - Kids Sight Project (ages 6 mo to 6 yrs). • Lions Club International Foundation (LCIF). • Burn Aid. • Firefighters for Healing. • MS Walk. • Camp Courage. • Camp Needlepoint and Camp Daypoint. (Diabetes Assoc.) • Youth Firearms Safety Training. In closing, we support the City of Medina and are determined to help where we can, but this new development will influence our ability to contribute. Thank you for your time, The Hamel Lions. Resolution No. 2021- April 20, 2021 Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021- RESOLUTION APPROVING PREMISES PERMIT TO THE DISTRICT # 284 YOUTH HOCKEY TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, District #284 Youth Hockey (“Applicant”) has made application to the City of Medina for a “Premises Permit” to conduct charitable gambling activities under authority and regulation of Minnesota Statute 349.16; and WHEREAS, said premises permit will be for charitable gambling activities to be conducted at Medina Entertainment Center, 500 Highway 55, Medina, MN 55340, within the city; and WHEREAS, Applicant understands that this license prohibits conducting charitable gambling activities at any other location not stated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Medina, Minnesota that the Applicant’s request for the Premises Permit be granted for a perpetual term bound by Section 315 of the Code of Ordinances as amended. Dated: April 20, 2021. _____________________________ 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 #8B Ditter Properties - Ditterswind Page 1 of 4 April 20, 2021 Final Plat City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: April 14, 2021 MEETING: April 20, 2021 City Council SUBJ: Ditter Properties – Ditterswind Final Plat and Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District – 2032-2052 Holy Name Drive – Public Hearing Background On September 15, 2020, the City granted preliminary plat approval to Ditters Properties for Ditterswind. The plat proposed to replat and subdivide four existing lots into five lots. The City granted various other approvals the same night related to the subdivision: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment to designate the two proposed sewered lots as Low Density Residential, and to realign the MUSA line to match the proposed sewer lots • Rezoning to change the zoning of Lots 1 and 4 to the Suburban Residential zoning district • Interim Use Permit to allow the continuation of two existing homes on Lot 1 and two accessory buildings on the property line between lots 2 and 4 until expiration of a life estate for the occupant on one of the homes The applicant has now requested final plat approval. Comprehensive Plan Amendment On September 15, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-51, which granted conditional approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment which makes the following changes: 1) Change of Future Land Use 2.6 acres from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential 2) Reduction of existing Metropolitan Urban Service Area by five acres These changes account for the fact that two of the existing parcels are already served by municipal sewer, and the applicant proposes to reduce the size of the lots (1 and 4). The Metropolitan Council has reviewed and authorized the City to place the amendment into effect. The City’s conditional approval was contingent upon approval of the plat, because the land use and MUSA lines would match the new lots. Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and placing it into effect in connection with approval of the plat. Agenda Item #8C Ditter Properties - Ditterswind Page 2 of 4 April 20, 2021 Final Plat City Council Meeting Final Plat Analysis Consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, zoning and subdivision regulations, and other relevant policies was reviewed during review of the Preliminary Plat. The purpose of a final plat review is to ensure that the final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and to ensure that all the conditions of approval have been met. Consistency with Preliminary Plat It appears that the proposed plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and the lot configuration of the proposed plat is the same. Preliminary Plat Conditions Following is a list of conditions which were required upon preliminary approval. Staff has summarized how each has or will be addressed in italics. 1) Approval of the plat shall be contingent upon the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning of proposed Lots 1 and 4 to the Suburban Residential zoning district. The City Council granted conditional approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning along with the preliminary plat on September 15, 2020. The Metropolitan Council has authorized the City to put it into effect. Staff has prepared a resolution to place the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which is attached for consideration. 2) The plat shall be contingent upon either demolition of or approval of an Interim Use Permit related to the two homes on proposed Lot 1 and of the three outbuildings located upon property lines or which do not meet setback requirements. The Owners shall enter into an agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City Attorney to ensure compliance with these requirements. The City Council granted approval if the interim use permit along with the preliminary plat on September 15, 2020. The Development Agreement addresses the conditions for removal of the structures. 3) The Owners shall construct the private road and stormwater improvements as shown on the plans dated August 3, 2020, except as modified by the conditions herein. The requirement for these improvements are described within the attached development agreement and staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 4) The Owners 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. A draft development agreement is attached for review and approval by the City Council. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 5) The Owners shall submit a letter of credit for 150% of the estimated cost of improvements and demolition of the home and outbuildings to ensure completion of the work. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. Ditter Properties - Ditterswind Page 3 of 4 April 20, 2021 Final Plat City Council Meeting 6) The Owners shall provide the private road easement/agreement and shared driveway easement/agreement for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat. A draft private road agreement is attached to the development agreement. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 7) The Owners shall execute a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement to describe the responsibility of the property owners to maintain the stormwater improvements. A draft of this agreement is attached to the development agreement. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 8) The Owners shall meet the requirements of the wetland protection ordinance, including provision of easements, planting of vegetation and installation of signage. A draft of upland buffer easement is attached to the development agreement. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 9) The Owners shall pay a park dedication fee of $8,000 at the time the plat is executed by the City. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution and the fee will be collected at the time the plat is signed by the City. 10) The Owners shall address the comments of the City Engineer. Final construction plans shall be submitted along with final plat application and be subject to review and approval. Construction plans have been submitted and the City Engineer has requested some changes. Staff recommends that this condition be included in the final plat resolution. 11) The Owners shall provide title documentation at the time of final plat application and abide by the recommendation of the City Attorney, with regard to title matters and recording instructions. The Applicant submitted title documentation and the City Attorney has prepared a plat opinion. Staff recommends a condition on the final plat resolution requiring that the applicant abide by the requirements of the City Attorney in the plat opinion. 12) No replacement shall be required for trees removed which were planted by the Ditter family. It is acknowledged that the trees on proposed Lots 3, 4, and 5 were planted by the Ditter family, with the exception of those along the southern and eastern boundary of Lot 5. This is an informational condition, and staff recommends that it be included in the final plat resolution. 13) The Owners shall obtain required approvals from Minnehaha Creek Watershed and any other relevant agencies. The applicant has submitted to Minnehaha Creek Watershed for approval. Staff recommends that a condition be included in the final plat resolution. 14) 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. Final plat was requested within this deadline. No action necessary Ditter Properties - Ditterswind Page 4 of 4 April 20, 2021 Final Plat City Council Meeting 15) The Owners 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. The applicant has been paying invoices during the review process. Staff recommends that a similar condition be included in the final plat resolution or these expenses. Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District The City’s practice is to require that homeowners’ associations maintain stormwater improvements within developments. This is formalized through an agreement that is recorded against each property. This agreement is included as a requirement in the development agreement and is attached to it as an exhibit. Additionally, the City’s practice is to establish Storm Sewer Improvement Taxing District over development sites as a “back-up plan” if the homeowner’s association does not maintain stormwater improvements. The City has taken this step in all recent residential subdivisions. Prior to considering the establishment of such as district, the City Council is required to hold a Public Hearing. Notice of this public hearing was published for the April 20 meeting. Potential Action If the City Council finds that the final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and that the conditions of preliminary plat have been addressed, the Council can take the following actions: 1. Move to adopt the resolution adopting the Ditterswind Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Move to adopt the resolution granting final plat approval for Ditterswind 3. Move to adopt the ordinance establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District 4. Move to adopt the resolution authorizing publication by title and summary 5. Move to approve the Development Agreement by and between the City of Medina and Ditter Properties. Attachments 1. Resolution adopting the Ditterswind Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Resolution granting final plat approval 3. Ordinance establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District 4. Resolution authorizing publication by title and summary 5. Development Agreement 6. Plat 7. Plans Resolution No. 2021-## DATE Member _________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021-## RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE DITTERSWIND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, James and Pamela Ditter, Thomas and Mimi Ditter, and Ditter Properties (collectively the “Owners”) own four parcels of land located from 2032-2052 Holy Name Drive (the “Property”) which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Owners requested that the City amend its Comprehensive Plan with regard to the Property as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto (the “Amendment”), which generally makes the following changes: 1) Change of Future Land Use of 2.6 acres from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential 2) Reduction of existing Metropolitan Urban Service Area by five acres; and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-51 granting conditional approval of the Amendment and authorizing submission to the Metropolitan Council for review; and WHEREAS, the conditional approval was contingent upon review by the Metropolitan Council and approval of the Ditterswind plat by the City; and WHEREAS, on October 30, 2020, the Metropolitan Council authorized the City to place the Amendment into effect; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2021, the City Council adopted final approval of the Ditterswind plat. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Medina, Minnesota that the Ditterswind Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto, is hereby adopted, effective upon the recording of the Ditterswind plat. Resolution No. 2021-## 2 DATE Dated: . __________________________________ 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. 2021-## 3 DATE EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property Resolution No. 2021-## 4 DATE EXHIBIT B Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Table 5-2 – Future Land Use to be amended as follows: Table 5-5 – Staging Plan – Net Acres to be amended as follows: Resolution No. 2021-## 5 DATE Map 5-3 to be amended as follows: Resolution No. 2021-## 6 DATE Map 5-5 to be amended as follows: Resolution No. 2021-## DATE Member _____ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION 2021-## RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL FOR THE DITTERSWIND PLAT WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, James and Pamela Ditter, Thomas and Mimi Ditter, and Ditter Properties (collectively the “Owners”) own four parcels of land located from 2032-2052 Holy Name Drive (the “Property”) which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-53, granting preliminary plat approval for Ditterswind, a subdivision of the Property into five lots, subject to a series of terms and conditions; and WHEREAS, the Owners have requested final plat approval for Ditterswind; and WHEREAS, the Owners have also requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning of Lots 1 and 4, Block 1 to the Suburban Residential zoning district; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the request at the April 20, 2021 meeting, reviewed the information provided by the Owners and City staff, and heard testimony from interested parties; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, subject to the terms and conditions contained herein, the final plat is substantially consistent with the approved preliminary plat and the requirements of the City’s subdivision regulations. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota hereby grants final approval of the Ditterswind plat, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1) The Owners shall construct the private road and stormwater improvements as shown on the plans dated April 3, 2021, except as modified by the conditions herein. 2) The Owners 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. 3) The Owners shall submit a letter of credit for 150% of the estimated cost of improvements and demolition of the home and outbuildings to ensure completion of the work. 4) The Owners shall execute and record a private road easement/agreement and shared driveway easement/agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City Attorney related to access to and maintenance of the private road and shared driveway. Resolution No. 2021-## DATE 5) The Owners shall execute and record a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City Attorney to describe the responsibility of the property owners to maintain the stormwater improvements. 6) The Owners shall meet the requirements of the wetland protection ordinance, including provision of easements, planting of vegetation and installation of signage. 7) The Owners shall enter into an agreement in a form and of substance acceptable to the City Attorney to ensure demolition of one of the homes on proposed Lot 1 and of demolition or moving of the three outbuildings located upon property lines or which do not meet setback requirements. 8) The Owners shall pay a park dedication fee of $8,000 at the time the plat is executed by the City. 9) The Owners acknowledge that lots within the subdivision are subject to the regulations of the Shoreland Overlay district, including 25% hardcover limitations. 10) The plat shall be updated to provide drainage easements over the drainageway through Lot 5 and the easement locations shall be corrected as recommended by the City Engineer. 11) Final construction plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City and shall address the comments of the City Engineer. 12) The Owners shall meet the requirements of the plat opinion prepared by the City Attorney. 13) No replacement shall be required for trees removed which were planted by the Ditter family. It is acknowledged that the trees on proposed Lots 3, 4, and 5 were planted by the Ditter family, except for those along the southern and eastern boundary of Lot 5. 14) The Owners shall obtain required approvals from Minnehaha Creek Watershed and any other relevant agencies. 15) The plat shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles within 180 days of the date of this resolution 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. 16) The Owners shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing the plat, construction plans, and other relevant documents. Dated: 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 ______ 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. 2021-## DATE EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property CITY OF MEDINA ORDINANCE NO. ___ AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE DITTERSWIND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT TAX DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MEDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section I. Background: Findings. 1.01. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 444.16 – 444.21 (the “Act”) to establish a storm sewer improvement tax district within the Ditterswind development (the “District”) to acquire, construct, reconstruct, extend, maintain and otherwise improve storm sewer systems and related facilities within the District and to acquire, construct, maintain and improve stormwater holding areas and ponds outside of the District which are for the benefit of the District in accordance with the Act and to levy a tax on all taxable property within the District to finance such activities. 1.02. It is found and determined that it is in the best interests of Medina and its storm water management program that the District be established. The District shall be comprised of the land legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section II. Establishment: Authorizations. 2.01. The Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District is hereby established. The City shall have all powers and authority conferred by the Act in the operation and financing of the activities of the District. 2.02. The boundaries of the District include all property described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and are depicted in the map on Exhibit B, attached hereto. 2.03. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance with the Auditor and Recorder of Hennepin County. Section III. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication and the recording of the plat of Ditterswind in Hennepin County. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Medina this ____day of ____________, 2021 Kathleen Martin, Mayor Attest: _____________________________________ Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk Published in the Crow River News on this ____ day of _________, 2021. EXHIBIT A Legal Description of property contained within boundaries of Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District Lots 1 through 5, Block 1 and Outlot B, Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota Ordinance No. XXX DATE 4 EXHIBIT B Map of Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District Location of Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District Resolution No. 2021-## DATE Member _________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF MEDINA RESOLUTION NO. 2021-## 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 establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statues § 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publications by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is four pages in length and contains a map; 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 ordinance in its entirety: Public Notice The city council of the City of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. ###, an ordinance establishing the Ditterswind Storm Sewer Improvement Tax District. The tax district applies to the property within the Ditterswind residential development and would allow the City to acquire, construct, reconstruct, extend, maintain and otherwise improve storm sewer systems and related facilities related to the District and to levy a tax on all taxable property within the District to finance such activities. The full text of the ordinance is available from the city clerk 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 her office at city hall for public inspection and that she post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place within the city. Resolution No. 2021-## 2 DATE Dated: ______________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ 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. ME230-747-712026.v3 DRAFT 4/14/2021 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MEDINA AND DITTER PROPERTIES FOR DITTERSWIND This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ME230-747-712026.v3 i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. Right to Proceed ................................................................................................................1 2. Plans; Improvements .........................................................................................................2 3. Erosion Control .................................................................................................................2 4. Site Grading ......................................................................................................................3 5. Construction of Subdivision Improvements .....................................................................3 6. Private Road ......................................................................................................................4 7. Septic Systems and Wells .................................................................................................5 8. Stormwater Improvements ................................................................................................5 9. Upland Buffer Easement Agreement ................................................................................6 10. Street Signs .......................................................................................................................6 11. Letter of Credit ..................................................................................................................6 12. Shared Driveway Easements.............................................................................................7 13. Existing Structures ............................................................................................................7 14. Homeowners’ Association ................................................................................................8 15. Park Dedication Requirements .........................................................................................8 16. Responsibility for Costs; Escrow for Construction Inspection .........................................8 17. Developer’s Default ..........................................................................................................9 18. Insurance ...........................................................................................................................9 19. Floodplain Regulations .....................................................................................................9 20. No Building Permits Approved; Certificates of Occupancy.............................................9 21. Clean up and Dust Control ..............................................................................................10 22. Compliance with Laws ...................................................................................................10 23. Agreement Runs with the Land ......................................................................................10 24. Indemnification ...............................................................................................................10 25. Assignment .....................................................................................................................10 26. Notices ............................................................................................................................10 27. Severability .....................................................................................................................11 28. Non-waiver .....................................................................................................................11 29. Estoppel Certificate; Partial Release ...............................................................................11 30. Counterparts ....................................................................................................................12 SIGNATURES ........................................................................................................................... 13-14 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY EXHIBIT B LIST OF PLAN DOCUMENTS EXHIBIT C FORM OF PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT D FORM OF STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT EXHIBIT E FORM OF UPLAND BUFFER EASEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT F SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE ME230-747-712026.v3 1 This Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made and entered into this ___ day of _____________, 2021 by and between the city of Medina, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (the “City”), and Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer is fee owner of the real property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”) and desires to develop the land as a five-lot, single-family residential development; and WHEREAS, to accommodate the proposed development, the City has approved a comprehensive plan amendment via Resolution 2020-51, a rezoning via Ordinance 660, an interim use permit via Resolution 2020-54, and the final plat of Ditterswind (the “Subdivision”) via Resolution 2021-____ (said resolutions and ordinance shall be referred to herein collectively as the “City Approvals”); and WHEREAS, the City Approvals are each contingent upon the Developer entering into a development agreement satisfactory to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the mutual covenants and obligations contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Right to Proceed. The Property is approximately 25 acres in size and the Subdivision consists of five lots intended for single family residential purposes. Pursuant to the City Approvals, Lots 1 and 4 of the Subdivision have been re-guided and rezoned to Low Density Residential and SR, Suburban Residential, respectively. The remaining three lots remain both guided and zoned as Rural Residential. The Developer may not construct public or private improvements or any buildings within the Subdivision or otherwise contemplated herein until all the following conditions precedent have been satisfied: a) the final plat of Ditterswind has been filed with Hennepin County; b) this Agreement has been executed by the Developer and the City; c) the required Letter of Credit (as hereinafter defined) has been received by the City from or on behalf of the Developer; d) final engineering and construction plans in digital form have been submitted by the Developer and approved by the city engineer; e) the Developer has reimbursed the City for all legal, engineering and administrative expenses incurred to date by the City regarding the Subdivision and has given the City the additional escrow required by this Agreement; f) the Developer has executed the Private Road Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C; g) the Developer has executed the Stormwater Maintenance Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D; ME230-747-712026.v3 2 h) the Developer has executed the Upland Buffer Easement Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit E; i) the four structures required to be demolished under section 13 of this Agreement have been demolished (this condition is only a prerequisite to the issuance of building permits for Lot 4); j) a storm sewer improvement tax district has been established for the Property and the Developer has submitted the storm sewer improvement tax district disclosure statement required by section 8 of this Agreement; k) the Developer has submitted and the City has approved the certified grading plan; l) all erosion control measures are in place; m) the Developer has received all required permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and any other entity having jurisdiction; n) the Developer or the Developer’s engineer has initiated and attended a preconstruction meeting with the city engineer and staff; and o) the City has issued a notice that all conditions precedent have been satisfied and that the Developer may proceed. 2. Plans; Improvements. a) The Developer agrees to develop the Subdivision in accordance with this Agreement, the final plat of Ditterswind, the City’s engineering standards and the terms and conditions of the City Approvals, which are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement and made a part hereof. The Developer also agrees to construct all required improvements related to the Subdivision in accordance with the approved engineering and construction plans (collectively, the “Plans”). The documents which constitute the Plans are those on file with and approved by the City and are listed on Exhibit B attached hereto. The Plans may not be modified by the Developer without the prior written approval of the City. b) In developing the Subdivision in accordance with the Plans, the Developer shall make or install at its sole expense the following public and private improvements (collectively, the “Subdivision Improvements”): 1. site grading and erosion controls; 2. private road; 3. stormwater facilities; 4. vegetative plantings and buffer signage; 5. street signs; and 6. the demolition of existing structures pursuant to section 13 of this Agreement. c) All work performed by or on behalf of the Developer on or related to the Subdivision, including construction of the Subdivision Improvements and construction of houses on the lots, shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. through 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. 3. Erosion Control. a) All construction regarding the Subdivision Improvements shall be conducted in a manner designed to control erosion and in compliance with all City ordinances ME230-747-712026.v3 3 and other requirements, including the City’s permit with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding municipal separate storm sewer system program. Before any portion of the Property is rough graded, an erosion control plan shall be implemented by the Developer as approved by the City. The City may impose reasonable, additional erosion control requirements after the City’s initial approval if the City deems such necessary due to a change in conditions. All areas disturbed by the excavation shall be reseeded promptly after the completion of the work in that area unless construction of streets or utilities, buildings or other improvements is anticipated immediately thereafter. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. b) If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems reasonably appropriate to control erosion based on the urgency of the situation. The City agrees to provide reasonable notice to the Developer in advance of any proposed action, including notice by telephone or email in the case of emergencies, but limited notice by the City when conditions so dictate will not affect the Developer’s obligations or the City’s rights hereunder. c) The Developer agrees to reimburse the City for all expenses it incurs in connection with any action it takes to control erosion. No grading or construction of the Subdivision Improvements will be allowed and no building permits will be issued within the Subdivision unless the Developer is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. The erosion control measures specified in the Plans or otherwise required within the Property or adjacent areas shall be binding on the Developer and its successors and assigns. 4. Site Grading. In order to construct the Subdivision Improvements and otherwise prepare the Property for development, it will be necessary for the Developer to grade the Property based on the approved Plans and specifications for the Subdivision. All site and other grading must be done in compliance with the Plans. The City may withhold issuance of a building permit for any structure within the Subdivision until the approved certified grading plan is on file with the City and all erosion control measures are in place as determined by the City. Within 30 days after completion of the grading, or such other period acceptable to the City’s engineer, the Developer shall provide the City with an “as constructed” grading plan and a certification by a registered land surveyor or engineer. 5. Construction of Subdivision Improvements. a) All Subdivision Improvements shall be installed in accordance with the Plans, the City Approvals, the City’s subdivision regulations, the City’s engineering standards for utility construction (as hereinafter defined) and the requirements of the report from the City engineer dated ___________, 2021. The Developer shall submit plans and specifications for the Subdivision Improvements prepared by a registered professional engineer. The Developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Hennepin County, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Metropolitan Council, and any other agency having jurisdiction over the Subdivision before proceeding with construction. The City shall inspect all work at the Developer’s expense. The Developer, its contractors and subcontractors, shall follow ME230-747-712026.v3 4 all instructions received from the City’s inspectors. Prior to beginning construction, the Developer or the Developer’s engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting with all parties concerned, including the City staff and engineers, to review the program for the construction work. b) Within 60 days after the completion of the Subdivision Improvements, the Developer shall supply the City with a complete set of reproducible “as constructed” plans and three complete sets of paper “as constructed” plans, each prepared in accordance with City standards and in AutoCAD format based on Hennepin County coordinates. Stormwater “as constructed” plans shall also be submitted to the City in GIS format compatible with ArcMap 10.3 in the coordinates and with the attributes directed by the City engineer. Iron monuments must be installed in the Subdivision in accordance with state law. The Developer’s surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. Subject to events of force majeure, all Subdivision Improvements required by this Agreement shall be completed by no later than ______________, ____, except as may be specifically noted otherwise in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the final wear course of bituminous on the Private Road, as defined herein, shall be completed by no later than ________________, ____ and in no event prior to the occurrence of at least one seasonal freeze-thaw cycle. c) No building permit shall be issued for structures within the Subdivision until adequate street access is available to the lot in question. If building permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of all Subdivision Improvements serving any lot, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of the Subdivision Improvements and damage to the Subdivision Improvements caused by the City, the Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties. No temporary or permanent certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any structure within the Subdivision until all street access, except for the final wear course of bituminous, and all proper utilities have been completed for the lot in question. 6. Private Road. The Developer agrees to construct a private road over Outlot B of the Subdivision to serve the lots in the Subdivision (the “Private Road”). The Private Road shall remain private and shall be maintained by the Developer or by the HOA, as hereinafter defined. Additionally, the Developer agrees to enter into a separate private road maintenance and easement agreement, the form of which is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit C, to ensure ongoing maintenance of the Private Road and to provide the City with necessary access to the Private Road. The Private Road shall be constructed and the private road maintenance and easement agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to the sale of any lots within the Subdivision or the issuance of any building permits related thereto. The Developer acknowledges that i) the Private Road will not be accepted by the City; ii) the City does not plan to maintain or pay for maintenance, repair or replacement of the Private Road and that the Developer initially and the HOA ultimately will have responsibility for such work; iii) the City has the right but not the obligation to perform necessary work upon the failure or refusal by the Developer or the HOA to do so; and iv) if the City performs any work on the Private Road, the City has the right to specially assess or otherwise recover the cost of such work against the lots within the Development that are served by the Private Road. The Developer agrees to inform purchasers of lots served by the Private Road that i) the City does not plan to maintain or pay for maintenance, repair or replacement of the Private Road and that the HOA will have primary responsibility for such work; ii) the City has the right but not ME230-747-712026.v3 5 the obligation to perform necessary work upon the failure or refusal by the HOA to do so; and iii) if the City performs any work on the Private Road, the City intends to recover the cost of such work from the owners of the lots served by the Private Road. 7. Septic Systems and Wells. a) The Developer or its successors or assigns agree to construct individual septic systems and wells to serve the lots within the Subdivision, except that Lots 1 and 4 shall continue to be served by public sanitary sewer service. All work in constructing the new private utilities must comply with all City and state requirements regarding such private utilities. The septic systems and wells will remain private and will not be owned or maintained by the City. b) All lots within the Subdivision, except for Lots 1 and 4, must have primary and alternate septic sites on the lot which meet setback requirements and which do not interfere with the intended purpose of any drainage and utility or other easement. In no circumstance shall the treatment (absorption) area of a septic system be allowed within any easement. All private wells for the lots shall be located on the served lot. 8. Stormwater Improvements. a) The Developer agrees to construct the stormwater facilities in accordance with the Plans and in compliance with all City requirements regarding such improvements. The stormwater facilities include but are not limited to a filtration basin, drainageways, and emergency overflows, together with all related facilities, as shown on the Plans. b) The stormwater facilities serving the Subdivision will remain private and will be maintained by the Developer at its sole expense until taken over by the HOA, as hereinafter defined. The City does not intend to accept the stormwater facilities as public and does not intend to maintain them. In order to meet the requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and City code, the Developer agrees to enter into a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement with the City in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D. The purpose of the Stormwater Maintenance Agreement is to ensure that the Developer maintains the stormwater facilities and to give the City the right but not the obligation to do so if the Developer fails in its obligations. The Stormwater Maintenance Agreement will be recorded against all land within the Subdivision and will run with the land. The Developer acknowledges that i) the stormwater facilities have not and will not be accepted by the City; ii) the City does not plan to maintain or pay for maintenance, repair or replacement of the stormwater facilities and that the Developer and ultimately the HOA will have primary responsibility for such work; iii) the City has the right but not the obligation to perform necessary work upon the failure or refusal by the Developer or HOA to do so; and iv) if the City performs any work on the stormwater facilities, the City intends to specially assess or otherwise recover the cost of such work against the lots within the Subdivision. c) The Developer will make the HOA responsible for the maintenance, repair or replacement of the stormwater facilities as needed and the HOA documents recorded with Hennepin County shall so require. The HOA shall thereafter be responsible for the maintenance, repair or replacement of all stormwater facilities serving the Subdivision. The Developer agrees to inform purchasers of lots within the Subdivision that i) the City does not plan to maintain or pay for maintenance, repair or replacement of the stormwater facilities and that the HOA will have primary responsibility for such work; ii) the City has the right but not the obligation to perform ME230-747-712026.v3 6 necessary work upon the failure or refusal by the HOA to do so; and iii) if the City performs any work on the stormwater facilities, the City intends to recover the cost of such work against the lots within the Subdivision. d) The Developer acknowledges that the City intends to establish a storm sewer improvement tax district which includes all land within the Subdivision. The district will be established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, sections 444.16 to 444.21 and will authorize the City to acquire, construct, reconstruct, extend, maintain, and otherwise improve storm sewer systems and related improvements within or serving the Subdivision if such work becomes necessary in the opinion of the City. In recognition of this possibility, the Developer agrees to provide prospective lot purchasers with a disclosure statement informing them of the existence of the storm sewer improvement tax district and that a tax could be imposed on the lots within the Subdivision if the City is required to repair or maintain the storm sewer systems and related improvements. The wording of the disclosure statement must be approved by the City for use in connection with the sale of lots in the Subdivision prior to its distribution or use by the Developer. 9. Upland Buffer Easement Agreement. The Developer agrees to execute the Upland Buffer Easement Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit E, the purpose of which is to ensure that the buffer areas surrounding the wetlands on the Property are planted with appropriate materials intended to enhance water quality and are maintained in that condition thereafter. The materials to be planted within such areas are specified in the Plans and vegetation therein shall be established consistent with the City’s ordinances. The Upland Buffer Easement Agreement will be recorded against the Property and will run with the land. 10. Street Signs. The Developer agrees to install street signs within the Subdivision. The Developer shall pay for the cost of the street signs, which shall be of a design approved by the City and shall be dedicated by the Developer to the City after installation and acceptance by the City. Any street signs requiring repair or replacement will be replaced by the City with the City’s standard form of street sign. 11. Letter of Credit. a) In order to ensure completion of the Subdivision Improvements required under this Agreement and satisfaction of all fees due to the City, the Developer agrees to deliver to the City prior to beginning any construction or work within the Subdivision a letter of credit (the “Letter of Credit”) in the amount of $154,472.48 which represents 150 percent of the estimated cost of the Subdivision Improvements as specified in the Plans. This amount represents the maximum risk exposure for the City, based on the anticipated sequence of construction and the estimate of cost of each element of the Subdivision Improvements, rather than the aggregate cost of all required Subdivision Improvements. The Letter of Credit shall be delivered to the City prior to beginning any work on the Subdivision Improvements and shall renew automatically thereafter until released by the City. The estimated cost of the work covered by the Letter of Credit is itemized on Exhibit F attached hereto. The Letter of Credit shall be issued by a bank determined by the City to be solvent and creditworthy and shall be in a form acceptable to the City. The Letter of Credit shall allow the City to draw upon the instrument, in whole or part, in order to complete construction of any or all of the Subdivision Improvements and other specified work within the Subdivision and to pay any fees or costs due to the City by the Developer. ME230-747-712026.v3 7 b) The City agrees to reduce the Letter of Credit to an amount roughly equal to 150 percent of the cost of the remaining work, subject to evaluation of the City’s maximum risk exposure and satisfaction of all of the Developer’s financial obligations to the City. The Letter of Credit shall be released in full and returned to the Developer following full completion of all Subdivision Improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of the final wear course of bituminous on Private Street and demolition of the existing structures pursuant to section 13 of this Agreement; after satisfaction of all financial obligations by the Developer to the City; and after completion of all other requirements of this section. Prior to releasing any portion of the Letter of Credit or accepting another letter of credit in replacement, the City shall first be satisfied regarding the quality and completeness of the work and that the Developer has taken such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no liens will attach to the Subdivision. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Letter of Credit shall not be reduced to less than $50,000, until such time as the City releases the entire Letter of Credit. c) It is the intention of the parties that the City at all times have available to it a Letter of Credit in an amount adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the Subdivision Improvements and other obligations of the Developer under this Agreement. To that end and notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, all requests by the Developer for a reduction or release of the Letter of Credit shall be evaluated by the City in light of that principle. d) If at any time the City reasonably determines that the bank issuing the Letter of Credit no longer satisfies the City’s requirements regarding solvency and creditworthiness, the City shall notify the Developer and the Developer shall provide to the City within 30 days a substitute Letter of Credit from another bank meeting the City’s requirements. If within 30 days of notice the Developer fails to provide the City with a substitute Letter of Credit from an issuing bank satisfactory to the City, the City may draw under the existing Letter of Credit. 12. Shared Driveway. Pursuant to the Plans, the Developer proposes to utilize a shared driveway for access off of the Private Road to Lots 2, 3, and 4. The Developer shall prepare and provide to the City one or more shared driveway easement and maintenance instrument which shall provide (a) perpetual access rights to the owner of Lot 2, which access shall run over and across a portion of Lot 3; (b) perpetual access rights to the owner of Lot 3, which access shall run over and across a portion of Lot 2; and (c) perpetual access rights to the owner of Lot 4, which access shall run over and across a portion of Lot 2, all in accordance with the Plans. Such instrument(s) shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and, upon review and approval by the City, the Developer shall be responsible for recording such instruments against the affected lots, and shall provide the City with evidence of such recording prior to conveying Lots 2, 3, or 4 to any third party. The City shall not issue a building permit for Lots 2, 3, and 4 until such instruments have been recorded to its satisfaction. 13. Existing Structures. Pursuant to that certain deed, dated March 30, 2000, and filed on March 30, 2000 as Document No. 7280250, a portion of the Property platted as Lot 1, Block 1 of the Subdivision (“Lot 1”) is subject to a life estate interest in the names of John H. Ditter and Anyce Ditter (the “Life Tenant”), the latter of whom is still alive. Creation of the Subdivision resulted in two single-family residential dwellings being located on Lot 1, one of which is occupied by the Life Tenant, and three outbuildings that do not meet the City’s setback requirements. As ME230-747-712026.v3 8 part of the City Approvals, the City approved an interim use permit (the “IUP”) that allows for Lot 1 to be occupied by two single-family dwellings and all three outbuildings to remain on the Property through the duration of the Life Tenant’s life, subject to certain conditions which are incorporated herein. Within one (1) year of the expiration of the IUP, the Developer shall complete demolition of one of the single-family dwellings on Lot 1 and all three outbuildings. The Developer shall secure all permits necessary for said demolition work, and the parties expressly agree and understand that no building permits shall be issued for Lot 4, Block 1 of the Subdivision until all four structures authorized to remain pursuant to the IUP are demolished in accordance with the IUP and this section 13. 14. Homeowners’ Association. a) The Developer agrees to establish a homeowners’ association (the “HOA”), which shall include all land within the Subdivision. The Developer agrees to record covenants against said land for this purpose, which covenants must be in form and substance acceptable to the City. The covenants shall be filed by the Developer with Hennepin County prior to any building permits being issued for the Subdivision. b) The HOA covenants must provide, among other things, for HOA maintenance of the Private Road, the stormwater facilities, and the upland buffers. The City must approve the HOA covenants and will require that certain provisions thereof may not be amended or deleted without prior written City approval. 15. Park Dedication Requirements. In order to satisfy the City’s park dedication requirements with respect to the Subdivision, the Developer shall pay to the City a cash-in-lieu amount of $8,000 prior to the City’s execution and release of the final plat. 16. Responsibility for Costs; Escrow for Construction Inspection. a) The Developer agrees to pay to the City an administrative fee in the amount necessary to reimburse the City for its reasonable costs and expenses in reviewing the Subdivision, including the drafting and negotiation of this Agreement and all associated documents. The Developer agrees to reimburse the City in full for such reasonable costs within 45 days after notice in writing by the City. The Developer agrees to reimburse the City for the reasonable cost incurred in the enforcement of any provision of this Agreement, including reasonable engineering and attorneys’ fees. b) The Developer shall also pay a fee for City construction observation and administration relating to construction of the Subdivision Improvements. Construction observation shall include inspection of all the Subdivision Improvements. In order to reimburse the City for the reasonable cost of inspection of the Subdivision Improvements, the Developer shall deposit an additional $14,500 into an escrow account with the City, which shall receive and hold such funds solely under the terms of this Agreement. The City shall reimburse itself for expenses from the escrow and will provide the Developer with a copy of any invoice from the city engineer or evidence of other cost or expense attributed to the escrow prior to deducting such funds from the escrow. If any funds held under this escrow exceed the amount necessary to reimburse the City for its costs under this section, such funds shall be returned to the Developer without interest. If it appears that the actual costs incurred will exceed the estimate, the Developer and the City shall review the costs required to complete the project and the Developer shall deposit additional sums with the City. ME230-747-712026.v3 9 17. Developer’s Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to construction or repair of any of the Subdivision Improvements or any other work or undertaking required by this Agreement, after providing 30 days’ notice to the Developer of the nature of the default pursuant to the notice requirements in this Agreement, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek an order from any court for permission to enter the Property for such purposes. If the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy special assessments against the land within the Subdivision to recover the costs thereof. For this purpose, the Developer, for itself and its successors and assigns, expressly waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments, including but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the land so assessed. The Developer, for itself and its successors and assigns, also waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 429.081. The City may also withhold the issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy if the Developer is in default of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement or afford itself to any other rights that it may have whether in law or in equity. 18. Insurance. The Developer agrees to take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and maintained until six months after the City has accepted the Subdivision Improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer’s work or the work of its contractors or subcontractors. Liability limits shall not be less than $500,000 when the claim is one for death by wrongful act or omission or for any other claim and $1,500,000 for any number of claims arising out of a single occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy. The certificate of insurance shall provide that the City must be given the same advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance as is afforded to the Developer. 19. Floodplain Regulations. No structures, including fences and accessory structures, may be constructed within the Subdivision below the regulatory flood protection elevation. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the City with regard to flood protection. Any utilities which are installed by the Developer on ground the surface of which is below the regulatory flood protection elevation must be flood proof in accordance with the state building code and City requirements. 20. No Building Permits Approved; Certificates of Occupancy. a) Approvals granted to date by the City regarding the Subdivision do not include approval of a building permit for any structure within the Subdivision. The Developer must submit and the City must approve building plans prior to an application for a building permit for a structure on any lot within the Subdivision. All building pads must be certified prior to initiation of construction of a home on a lot. The Developer or the party applying for a building permit shall be responsible for payment of the customary fees associated with the building permit and all other deferred fees, if any, as specified in this Agreement. b) No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any home constructed in the Subdivision unless prior thereto the lot has been graded and all buffer plantings installed in ME230-747-712026.v3 10 accordance with the Plans, the septic system or sanitary sewer, well and driveway have been installed, and an as built survey of the lot has been submitted and approved by the City. In cases in which seasonal weather conditions make compliance with these conditions impossible, the City may accept an escrow of sufficient amount to ensure completion of the work during the following construction season. 21. Clean up and Dust Control. The Developer shall clean on a daily basis dirt and debris from streets adjoining the Subdivision resulting from construction work by the Developer, its contractors, agents or assigns, including any party constructing houses within the Subdivision. Prior to any construction on the Property or adjacent areas, the Developer shall identify to the City in writing a responsible party for erosion control, street cleaning, and street sweeping. The Developer shall provide dust control to the satisfaction of the City’s engineer throughout construction within the Subdivision. 22. Compliance with Laws. The Developer agrees to comply with all laws, resolutions, ordinances, regulations and directives of the state of Minnesota and the City applicable to the Subdivision. This Agreement shall be construed according to the laws of Minnesota. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits for lots within the Subdivision. 23. Agreement Runs with the Land. This Agreement shall run with the Property and shall be recorded against the title thereto and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the City and the Developer and their successors and assigns. The Developer warrants that there are no unrecorded encumbrances or interests relating to the Property. The Developer agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless for any breach of the foregoing covenants. 24. Indemnification. The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents harmless from claims made by it and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from approval of the Subdivision or the other City Approvals. The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents harmless for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys’ fees, except matters involving acts of gross negligence by the City. 25. Assignment. The Developer may not assign this Agreement without the prior written permission of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or denied. It is the intention of the parties that any assignee be subject to this Agreement. 26. Notices. Any notice or correspondence to be given under this Agreement shall be deemed to be given if delivered personally or sent by United States certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested: ME230-747-712026.v3 11 a) as to Developer: Ditter Properties 2052 Holy Name Drive Medina, MN 55340 Attention: Jim Ditter b) as to City: City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Attention: City Administrator With a copy to: Ronald H. Batty Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 or at such other address as either party may from time to time notify the other in writing in accordance with this section. The Developer shall notify the City if there is any change in its name or address. 27. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall pertain only to such section and shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other section or provision of this Agreement. 28. Non-waiver. Each right, power or remedy conferred upon the City by this Agreement is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, or available to the City at law or in equity, or under any other agreement. Each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. If either party waives in writing any default or nonperformance by the other party, such waiver shall be deemed to apply only to such event and shall not waive any other prior or subsequent default. 29. Estoppel Certificate; Partial Release. a) The City agrees to execute a certification in writing and in such form as will enable it to be recorded in the proper office for the recordation of deeds and other instruments that (i) this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been modifications, the identify of such modifications and that the same are in full force and effect as modified; (ii) no party is in default under any provisions of this Agreement or, if there has been a default, the nature of such default; (iii) all Subdivision Improvements to be constructed under this Agreement have been constructed, or, if not, specifying the Subdivision Improvements yet to be constructed; and (iv) as to any other matter that the requesting party shall reasonably request. Any such statement on behalf of the City may be executed by the city administrator without city council approval. b) Following completion of the Subdivision Improvements and at the written request of the Developer, the City agrees to execute a certification in writing releasing the lot or lots from the ME230-747-712026.v3 12 Developer’s obligations under this Agreement. Such certification shall not release the lot or lots from any obligations to the HOA, the liability under the storm sewer improvement tax district or any other ongoing obligations regarding the Subdivision. 30. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and shall constitute one and the same Agreement. ************************* ME230-747-712026.v3 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF MEDINA By: __________________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By: __________________________________ Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of __________, 2021, by Kathleen Martin and Scott T. Johnson, the mayor and city administrator, respectively, of the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. ____________________________________ Notary Public ME230-747-712026.v3 14 DITTER PROPERTIES By: James Ditter STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April _____ 2021, by James Ditter, General Partner of Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 A-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT A TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Property The land to which this Development Agreement applies is legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, and Outlots A and B, all in Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ME230-747-712026.v3 B-1 EXHIBIT B TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT List of Plan Documents The following documents prepared by Gronberg & Associates, Inc., engineer issue date 06/22/20, collectively constitute the Plans: 1 Title Sheet 2 Drainage Plan 3 Road Plan 4 Grading, Tree Preservation and Erosion/Sediment Control Plan 5 SWPPP 6 Standard Details ME230-747-712026.v3 C-1 EXHIBIT C TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FORM OF PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), is made this ___ day of _______________, 2021, by and between the city of Medina, a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota (the “City”), and Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer is the fee owner of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Developer is developing the Property in accordance with a separate development agreement entered into by the City and the Developer (the “Development Agreement”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Development Agreement, the Developer has agreed to construct and maintain a privately-owned and operated road (the “Private Road”) that will provide access to the individual lots that make up the Property; and WHEREAS, the Private Road is legally described on Exhibit B attached hereto; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the Development Agreement, the City and the Developer must enter into a maintenance and easement agreement regarding the Private Road. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants of the parties set forth herein and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Construction and Maintenance of the Private Road. The Developer hereby agrees to construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair the Private Road at its own expense. The Private Road consists of the grade, base, surface, ditches, culverts, stormwater improvements including, but not limited to, drainage conveyance of roadway runoff, and all other elements and appurtenances which create a driving surface suitable for vehicular traffic. The Developer acknowledges that the City has no obligation to construct, reconstruct, maintain or repair the Private Road and that the City does not intend to accept, acquire, or open the Private Road as a public roadway. Such construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair shall meet minimum standards set forth in the approved engineering and construction plans for the Subdivision. All of the Developer’s obligations regarding the Private Road shall also be obligations of the Developer’s successors or assigns, and such obligations shall eventually be assigned to a homeowner’s association (the “HOA”). ME230-747-712026.v3 C-2 2. City’s Right to Maintain and Repair. a) The City may maintain and repair the Private Road if the City reasonably believes that the Developer or its successors or assigns has failed to adequately maintain the Private Road in accordance with section 1 of this Agreement and such failure continues for 30 days after the City gives the Developer, its successors or assigns written notice of such failure or, if such tasks cannot be completed within 30 days, after such time period as may be reasonably required to complete the required tasks provided that the Developer is making a good faith effort to complete said task. The City’s notice shall specifically state which maintenance tasks are to be performed. b) If the Developer does not complete the maintenance tasks within the required time period after such notice is given by the City, the City shall have the right to enter upon the Private Road, and those portions of the Property immediately surrounding the Private Road, as may reasonably be necessary to gain access to the Private Road to perform such maintenance tasks; provided, however, the City will use reasonable efforts to minimize the disturbance and destruction of landscaping and improvements within said areas immediately surrounding the Private Road. In such case, the City shall send an invoice detailing its reasonable maintenance costs to the Developer or its successors or assigns, which shall include all reasonable staff time (at the applicable rates charged by the City to similarly situated parties), engineering and legal and other reasonable third-party costs and expenses incurred by the City. If the Developer or its successors or assigns fails to reimburse the City for its costs and expenses in maintaining the Private Road within 30 days of receipt of an invoice for such costs, the City shall have the right to assess the full cost thereof against the lots that make up the Property and collect the same in single or multiple payments as in the case of special assessments for public improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. For the purposes of this section and the City’s right to impose special assessments, the Developer’s successors and assigns shall be deemed to be the HOA or the owners of individual lots. c) The assessments shall bear interest at the rate determined by the City but not more than 2 percent more than the average coupon rate if the City sells debt to pay for the cost of the work or 2 percent over the average rate of return earned by the City on its investment portfolio if the City finances the work without selling debt. The Developer, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, acknowledges that the maintenance work performed by the City regarding the Private Road benefits the lots that make up the Property in an amount which exceeds the assessment and hereby waives any right to hearing or notice and the right to appeal the assessments otherwise provided by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of an emergency, as determined by the city engineer, the 30-day notice requirement to the Developer for failure to perform maintenance tasks shall be and hereby is waived in its entirety by the Developer, and the Developer shall reimburse the City and be subject to assessment for any expense so incurred by the City in the same manner as if written notice as described above has been given. Any maintenance or repairs made by the City pursuant to this section 2 will not result in the establishment of a public roadway. d) The City has the right but not an obligation to perform maintenance or repair the Private Road. The City intends to exercise this authority only if the condition of the Private Road is so poor, in the reasonable exercise of the City’s discretion, as to pose a hazard to the health, safety and welfare to those using the Private Road. ME230-747-712026.v3 C-3 e) Notwithstanding any other language to the contrary, to the extent that the Private Road is damaged by the City, it’s employees, contractors or agents for any reason, including but not limited to, damage arising out of repairing or replacing any City utility, then at no cost to the Developer or it’s successors or assigns, the City shall repair or replace the Private Road as necessary, to the same standard as the condition of the Private Road existed prior to the City damaging the Private Road. Further, if the previously described damage to the Private Road by the City shall occur then the terms contained in paragraphs (2) and (5) herein shall also not apply. 3. Conveyance of Easement. The Developer hereby conveys a non-exclusive easement over the Private Road for ingress and egress to the City for any public service deemed necessary by the City, including but not limited to, response to police calls, fire calls, rescue and other emergency calls, inspections, animal control, provisions for adequate surface drainage, and other code enforcement issues. This does not convey a right to the general public to use the Private Road. 4. Reservation of Rights. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to, nor shall it, prevent the City from the exercise of its full range of land use authority regarding the Property granted to it by state statute, the City code or any other applicable regulation and the City shall be entitled to apply its official controls to the Property in the same manner and to the same extent as if it were served by public streets. 5. Hold Harmless. The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees against any and all claims, demands, losses, damages, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) directly arising out of or directly resulting from the Developer’s, or the Developer’s agents’ or employees’ grossly negligent or intentional misconduct, or any violation of any applicable safety law, regulation, or code enacted by the City or the State of Minnesota in the performance of this Agreement, without regard to any inspection or review made or not made by the City, its agents or employees or failure by the City, its agents or employees to take any other prudent precautions. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver by the City of any immunities, defenses or other limitations on liability to which the City is entitled to by law, including but not limited to, the maximum monetary limits on liability established by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. 6. Recording; Run with the Land; Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Property and the Private Road. All duties and obligations of Developer under this Agreement shall also be duties and obligations of Developer’s successors and assigns. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall run with the land. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon execution and recording by the HOA for the Property of an instrument in a form satisfactory to the City assuming and agreeing to perform the obligations and responsibilities of the Developer under this Agreement, the HOA shall be bound by all terms and conditions of this Agreement as if it were the original signatory hereto and the Developer, its successors and assigns, shall be released from all personal liability under this Agreement but the individual lots that make up the Property shall remain subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 7. Costs of Enforcement. The Developer agrees to reimburse the City for all costs prudently incurred by the City in the enforcement of this Agreement, or any portion thereof, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. ME230-747-712026.v3 C-4 8. Notice. All notices required under this Agreement shall either be personally delivered or be sent by United States certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: a) as to Developer: Ditter Properties 2052 Holy Name Drive Medina, MN 55340 Attention: Jim Ditter b) as to City: City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Attention: City Administrator with a copy to: Ronald H. Batty Kennedy & Graven 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 or at such other address as either party may from time to time notify the other in writing in accordance with this paragraph. 9. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be binding and effective as of the date first written above. ********************* ME230-747-712026.v3 C-5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF MEDINA By: __________________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By: __________________________________ Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of __________, 2021, by Kathleen Martin and Scott T. Johnson, the mayor and city administrator, respectively, of the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. ____________________________________ Notary Public ME230-747-712026.v3 C-6 DITTER PROPERTIES By: James Ditter STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April _____ 2021, by James Ditter, General Partner of Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. ____________________________________ Notary Public This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 C-A-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT A TO PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Property The Property is legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota, C-B-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT B TO PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Private Road The Private Road is legally described as follows: Outlot B, Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota. D-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT D TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FORM OF STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made and entered into as of the ____ day of _________, 2021, by and between the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”) and Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer is the fee owner of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the City has obtained drainage and utility easements over portions of the Property (the “Easement Areas”); and WHEREAS, by a separate development agreement (the “Development Agreement”), the Developer has agreed to construct and maintain certain stormwater facilities (the “Stormwater Improvements”) for the benefit of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Stormwater Improvements which are the subject of this Agreement include, but are not necessarily limited to, a filtration basin, drainageways, and emergency overflows and all related facilities. The location of the Stormwater Improvements are shown on Exhibit B attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires permanent provisions for handling of runoff, including terms and conditions for operation and maintenance of all Stormwater Improvements, and requires such provisions to be set forth in an agreement to be recorded against the Property; and WHEREAS, the City and the Developer intend to comply with certain conditions, including entering into a maintenance agreement regarding the Stormwater Improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants of the parties set forth herein and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Maintenance of the Stormwater Improvements. The Developer, for itself and its successor or assigns, agrees to maintain the Stormwater Improvements and observe all drainage laws governing the operation and maintenance of the Stormwater Improvements. The Developer shall make periodic inspection and perform maintenance of the Stormwater Improvements as described in Exhibit C attached hereto. The Developer shall make all such scheduled inspections D-2 ME230-747-712026.v3 and maintenance, keep record of all inspections and maintenance activities, and submit such records annually to the City. The cost of all inspections and maintenance, including but not limited to skimming and cleaning of the Stormwater Improvements, shall be the obligation of the Developer and its successors or assigns as the fee owner of the Property, which obligation shall be assigned to the HOA, as defined hereinafter, in accordance with section 7 of this Agreement. 2. City’s Maintenance Rights. The City may inspect the Stormwater Improvements at any time and shall have the right to enter upon the Easement Areas and such portions of the Property as may reasonably be necessary to gain access to the Easement Areas to perform such inspections. Additionally, the City may maintain the Stormwater Improvements, as provided in this paragraph, if the City reasonably believes that the Developer or its successors or assigns has failed to maintain the Stormwater Improvements in accordance with applicable drainage laws and other requirements and such failure continues for 30 days after the City gives the Developer written notice of such failure or, if such tasks cannot be completed within 30 days, after such time period as may be reasonably required to complete the required tasks provided that Developer is making a good faith effort to complete said task. The City’s notice shall specifically state which maintenance tasks are to be performed. If Developer does not complete the maintenance tasks within the required time period after such notice is given by the City, the City shall have the right to enter upon the Easement Areas and such portions of the Property as may reasonably be necessary to gain access to the Easement Areas to perform such maintenance tasks. In such case, the City shall send an invoice of its reasonable maintenance costs to the Developer or its successors or assigns, which shall include all reasonable staff time, engineering and legal and other reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City. If the Developer or its successors or assigns fails to reimburse the City for its costs and expenses in maintaining the Stormwater Improvements within 30 days of receipt of an invoice for such costs, the City shall have the right to assess the full cost thereof against the Property. The Developer, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, acknowledges that the maintenance work performed by the City regarding the Stormwater Improvements benefits the Property in an amount which exceeds the assessment and hereby waives any right to hearing or notice and the right to appeal the assessments otherwise provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of an emergency, as determined by the city engineer, the 30-day notice requirement to the Developer for failure to perform maintenance tasks shall be and hereby is waived in its entirety by the Developer, and the Developer shall reimburse the City and be subject to assessment for any expense so incurred by the City in the same manner as if written notice as described above has been given. 3. Hold Harmless. The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees against any and all claims, demands, losses, damages, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising out of or resulting from the Developer’s, or the Developer’s agents’ or employees’ negligent or intentional acts, or any violation of any safety law, regulation or code in the performance of this Agreement, without regard to any inspection or review made or not made by the City, its agents or employees or failure by the City, its agents or employees to take any other prudent precautions, except to the extent of intentional or grossly negligent acts of the City, its employees, agents and representatives. In the event the City, upon the failure of the Developer to comply with any conditions of this Agreement, performs said conditions pursuant to its authority in this Agreement, the Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its employees, agents and representatives for its own negligent acts in the D-3 ME230-747-712026.v3 performance of the Developer’s required work under this Agreement, but this indemnification shall not extend to intentional or grossly negligent acts of the City, its employees, agents and representatives. 4. Costs of Enforcement. The Developer agrees to reimburse the City for all reasonable costs prudently incurred by the City in the enforcement of this Agreement, or any portion thereof, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees after providing written notice to Developer and a reasonable opportunity to cure. 5. Rights Not Exclusive. No right of the City under this Agreement shall be deemed to be exclusive and the City shall retain all rights and powers it may have under Minnesota Statutes, sections 444.16 to 444.21 to acquire, construct, reconstruct, extend, maintain and otherwise improve the Stormwater Improvements. 6. Notice. All notices required under this Agreement shall either be personally delivered or be sent by United States certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: a) as to Developer: Ditter Properties 2052 Holy Name Drive Medina, MN 55340 Attention: Jim Ditter b) as to City: City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Attn: City Administrator With a copy to: Ronald H. Batty Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 or at such other address as either party may from time to time notify the other in writing in accordance with this paragraph. 7. Successors and Assigns. All duties and obligations of Developer under this Agreement shall also be duties and obligations of Developer’s successors and assigns. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall run with the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon creation of a homeowners’ association for the Property (the “HOA”) by an instrument in a form satisfactory to the City which assumes and agrees to perform the obligations and responsibilities of the Developer under this Agreement, the HOA shall be bound by all terms and conditions of this Agreement as if it were the original signatory hereto and the Developer, its successors and assigns, shall be released from all personal liability under this Agreement but the Property shall remain subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. D-4 ME230-747-712026.v3 8. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be binding and effective as of the date first written above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF MEDINA By: __________________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By: __________________________________ Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of __________, 2021, by Kathleen Martin and Scott T. Johnson, the mayor and city administrator, respectively, of the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. ____________________________________ Notary Public D-5 ME230-747-712026.v3 DITTER PROPERTIES By: James H. Ditter STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April _____ 2021, by James H. Ditter, General Partner of Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. ____________________________________ Notary Public This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 D-A-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT A TO STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Property The land to which this Stormwater Maintenance Agreement applies is legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, and Outlots A and B, all in Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota. D-B-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT B TO STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Depiction of Location of Stormwater Improvements [to be inserted] D-C-1 ME230-747-712026.v3 EXHIBIT C TO STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Inspection and Maintenance Schedule [to be inserted] ME230-747-712026.v3 E-1 EXHIBIT E TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FORM OF UPLAND BUFFER EASEMENT AGREEMENT This Upland Buffer Easement Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made this __ day of ____________, 2021 by and between the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”), and Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the “Grantor”). RECITALS A. Grantor is the fee owner of property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”); and B. Grantor and the City have entered into a separate development agreement (the “Development Agreement”) regarding the development of the Property. C. The City has granted approval of the plat of Ditterswind concerning the Property (the “City Approval”), under the terms of which the Grantor is required to establish upland buffers adjacent to wetlands on portions of the Property consistent with City regulations, the location of which is legally described in Exhibit B attached hereto and depicted on Exhibit C attached hereto (the “Easement Area”). D. In accordance with the Development Agreement, the City Approval and the City’s ordinances, the City has requested that Grantor grant to the City a conservation easement (the “Easement”) over the Easement Area. E. Grantor is willing to grant the Easement and to fulfill the other terms of this Agreement. PROVISIONS In consideration of the mutual promises of the parties contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to the City and its successors and assigns, an Easement in, under, on, over and across the Easement Area, and the City hereby accepts such grant. The duration of this easement is perpetual, subject to Minnesota law governing granting of easements to governmental bodies, and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties, their successors and assigns. 2. The following terms and conditions shall apply to the Easement Area: a. The Easement Area shall be planted with native grasses and other vegetation consistent with the Plans, as that term is defined in the Development Agreement, and thereafter be preserved predominantly in its natural condition, except to the extent set forth below. No use shall be made of the Easement Area except uses, if ME230-747-712026.v3 E-2 any, which would not change or alter the condition of the Easement Area or its drainage, water conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, or fish and wildlife habitat and characteristics. b. No structures, hardcover or other improvements shall be constructed, erected, or placed upon, above, or beneath the Easement Area, with the exception of a boardwalk or dock not to exceed four feet in width to allow reasonable access to and across the wetland. c. No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the Easement Area except as is necessary to remove storm damage, diseased or non- native vegetation or as authorized by the prior written consent of the City consistent with the city code. A path no more than four feet in width may be mowed to allow reasonable access to the wetland. d. No earth, peat, gravel or soil, sand or any other natural material or substance shall be moved or removed from the Easement Area and there shall be no dredging or excavation of any nature whatsoever or any change of the topography of the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the City. e. No soil, sand, gravel or other substance or material as landfill shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Easement Area, and no waste, trash, yard waste, manure or other materials shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the City. 3. Grantor represents that Grantor owns the Easement Area in fee simple, subject only to the encumbrances of record. 4. The Grantor conveys to the City and its successors and assigns, the following rights: a. The City may enter upon the Easement Area for the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Easement Area without any liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the covenants contained herein and the natural state of the Easement Area. If there is a violation of the covenants contained herein, the City shall provide notice and an order for corrective action consistent with City regulations. If the Grantor does not take the required corrective action, the City may enter the Property in order to perform the action. In such case, the City shall send an invoice of its reasonable maintenance costs to the Grantor, which shall include all reasonable staff time, engineering and legal and other reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City. If the Grantor fails to reimburse the City for its costs and expenses within 45 days of receipt of an invoice for such costs, the City shall have the right to assess the full cost thereof against the Property. The Grantor, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, acknowledges that any such corrective work performed by the City benefits the Property in an amount which exceeds the assessment and hereby waives any right to hearing or notice and the ME230-747-712026.v3 E-3 right to appeal the assessments otherwise provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. b. The City may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction against the Grantor to enforce the terms of this Agreement; to require restoration of the Easement Area to its planted or more natural condition; to enjoin such non- compliance by temporary or permanent injunction and to recover any damages arising from such non-compliance. If a court determines that the Grantor has failed to comply with this Agreement, Grantor or Grantor’s successors or assigns shall reimburse the City for any reasonable costs of enforcement, including costs of restoration, court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees, in addition to any other payments ordered by the court. 5. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to the City a perpetual flowage easement and right and privilege to trespass with water over and upon any or all of the Easement Area. 6. Grantor retains all responsibilities and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind related to ownership, operation and maintenance of the Property and the Easement Area. 7. Grantor agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, employees and agents, against any and all loss, costs, damage and expense, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above covenants and/or resulting from or due to Grantor’s intentional misrepresentation of any material fact contained therein. The Grantor and the City agree that each shall be responsible for their own acts and the results of such acts and shall not be responsible for the act of the other party and the results of such acts. 8. This Agreement may be amended only by mutual written agreement of the parties. 9. Nothing herein shall give the general public a right of access to the Property. 10. Grantor’s obligations under this Agreement run with the Property and shall be binding on the Developer’s successors and assigns. Grantor’s personal obligations under this Agreement terminate upon transfer or termination of its interest in the Property, provided that any liability for acts or omissions occurring prior to the transfer or termination shall survive that transfer or termination. Nothing in this Paragraph 10 is deemed to alter or amend the remaining terms of the Agreement in the event of a transfer of the Grantor’s interest. 11. Any notice required in this Agreement shall be delivered personally or sent by U.S. certified mail, return receipt requested: ME230-747-712026.v3 E-4 a) as to Developer: Ditter Properties 2052 Holy Name Drive Medina, MN 55340 Attention: Jim Ditter b) as to City: City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 Attn: City Administrator With a copy to: Ronald H. Batty Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 or at such other address as either party may from time to time notify the other in writing in accordance with this paragraph. ************************ ME230-747-712026.v3 E-5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Upland Buffer Easement Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. DITTER PROPERTIES By: James H. Ditter STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April _____ 2021, by James H. Ditter, General Partner of Ditter Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. ____________________________________ Notary Public ME230-747-712026.v3 E-6 CITY OF MEDINA By: __________________________________ Kathleen Martin, Mayor By: __________________________________ Scott T. Johnson, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of __________, 2021, by Kathleen Martin and Scott T. Johnson, the mayor and city administrator, respectively, of the city of Medina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. ____________________________________ Notary Public This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 700 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ME230-747-712026.v3 E-A-1 EXHIBIT A TO UPLAND BUFFER EASEMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Property The land to which this Agreement applies is legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, and Outlots A and B, all in Ditterswind, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ME230-747-712026.v3 E-B-1 EXHIBIT B TO UPLAND BUFFER EASEMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of the Wetland Buffers [to be inserted] ME230-747-712026.v3 E-C-1 EXHIBIT C TO UPLAND BUFFER EASEMENT AGREEMENT Depiction of the Wetland Buffers [to be inserted] ME230-747-712026.v3 F-1 EXHIBIT F TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Subdivision Improvement Cost Estimate Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 1 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson DATE: April 14, 2021 MEETING: April 20, 2021 City Council SUBJ: Stetler Enterprises LLC– 500 Hamel Road – Concept Plan Review Summary of Request Stetler Enterprises, LLC has requested review of a concept plan review for development of a 17- unit villa project at 500 Hamel Road. The subject property is located north of Hamel Road, across from Elm Creek Drive. The property is approximately 6.7 acres in size (4.9 net acres), is currently vacant and guided and zoned Uptown Hamel. The northern portion of the site slopes down to a wetland, and the western portion of the site includes a stormwater pond which was constructed by the City to treat stormwater from the site and property to the west. Rainwater Nature Preserve is located east of the site, with the rest of Uptown Hamel to the east. Single family homes are located to the south, with fourplexes to the southwest. The property to the west includes warehouse uses. An aerial of the site and surrounding property can be found below. Purpose of Concept Plan Review Agenda Item #8D Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 2 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting Concept plan reviews are encouraged for new development within Uptown Hamel. According to Section 825.63 of the City Code: “Concept plan review serves as the basis for informal conceptual discussion between the city and the applicant regarding a specific land use proposal. It is designed to assist the applicant in preparing a formal land use application for the city’s consideration. The purpose of the concept plan review is to identify significant issues, suggest design considerations and discuss requirements of the city’s official controls.” Comprehensive Plan/Zoning The subject property is guided Uptown Hamel in the Comprehensive Plan and zoned Uptown Hamel (UH). The purpose of the Uptown Hamel district is “to create a distinctive Uptown Hamel area that is an attractive, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use town center, by using building facades, porches, walkways, landscaped plazas, lighting, signage, landscaping and parking to blend retail, office, higher-density housing, specialty shops, and gathering spots into a unified and viable community.” Uptown Hamel allows commercial development, residential development with a net density between 4-20 units/acre or a combination of commercial and residential development. Proposed Site Layout The concept proposes 17 single-level villa units accessing a private road which would loop through the site. The villas along Hamel Road would have front entrances and porches toward Hamel Road with rear loaded garages. The villas north of the private road would likely have their front entrances toward the center of the site with patio/decks to the north. The site includes approximately 4.9 net acres and requires a residential density of 4-20 units/acre. This would equate to a minimum of 20 units on the subject property. The western 1.5 acres of site is a stormwater pond and filtration basin that treats stormwater from a broader area to the west in addition to the subject site. The subject site accounts for less than 20% of the total drainage area to the pond, so staff believes it is reasonable to subtract a significant portion of the pond area from the net acreage since it reduces the usable portion of the site to treat water from other properties. If the Council agrees, this would result in the net acreage of the site being reduced to 3.85 acres. To meet the minimum density of 4 units/acre, a minimum of 16 units would then be required. The Uptown Hamel district requires buildings to be set closer to the street with parking behind the building. In this case, there is a 30 foot wide Metropolitan Council sewer main easement north of Hamel Road. This easement prevents the buildings from being located closer than 30 feet to Hamel Road. Staff believes the existence of the sewer easement creates a practical difficulty in meeting the maximum 10-foot setback and would justify either a variance or otherwise providing a deviation from the requirement. Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 3 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting UH Requirement Proposed Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling 2904 s.f. 9865 s.f. Maximum Lot Area per Dwelling 10,890 s.f. 12,555 s.f. (or 9865 s.f. after subtracting 80% of pond area) Minimum Lot Size N/A 5650 s.f. Minimum Lot Width N/A 55 feet Minimum Lot Depth N/A 106 feet Min. Front Yard Setback 0 feet 25 foot (internal street) 40 feet (Hamel Rd) Max. Front Yard Setback 10 feet 40 feet (Hamel Rd) Rear Yard Setback As necessary 140 feet Side Yard Setback 8 feet (or 0) 8 feet Max Height 50 feet Approx. 20 feet Max. Hardcover 90% Not provided Architectural Design The applicant proposes to sell finished lots to a couple of builders and does not have specific building plans at this time. The applicant has provided conceptual building elevations for the units facing Hamel Road, which are included in their narrative. The Uptown Hamel district includes the following architectural requirements. Staff believes that the standards generally contemplate commercial and multifamily structures more than single- family detached villas. • Materials. Exterior materials shall consist of one or more of the following: natural brick, stucco, stone, wood, glass, or commercial grade fiber cement lap siding with a wood appearance which is installed per manufacturer’s specifications. Treated or anodized metal may be used for trim. • General. All new buildings, structures, expansions, remodeling, and development plans shall conform to these design standards and be compatible and complementary to the buildings proposed to be retained downtown. Elements of compatibility include, but are not limited to: building height, form, mass and bulk, fenestration, exterior material appearance, color, exterior material durability, detailing, setbacks, landscaping, exterior lighting and site improvements. • Building - Street. Building design shall make the street visually more interesting, functionally more enjoyable and useful and economically more viable. Buildings, porches, and plaza spaces shall be designed to bring the building and its activity more in contact with the street. • New Building and Major Expansions. New buildings… should be compatible with adjacent and nearby buildings. Buildings shall be designed and oriented consistent with this ordinance, proposed use of the property, uses on adjacent properties and nearby amenities. Buildings shall be designed and oriented so as not to detract from one another or vistas. Views from the residential areas should be protected. Where these views exist, partial loss of the view may be an unintended but justified result when development takes place consistent with other provisions of this ordinance. Entrances shall be placed for easy Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 4 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting access from the street. Utilities shall be placed underground and meters and transformers shall be hidden from view. • Integrate – Coordinate. New buildings, structures, remodeling and expansion shall be integrated and coordinated with development on abutting property. Elements for integration and coordination include, but are not limited to, sidewalk and pedestrian ways and their continuity; site lighting; site access; building orientation; building entrances… • Porches (Overhangs – Canopies – Arcades). Porches, which overhang into walks, are one of Uptown Hamel’s trademarks. These features should be preserved, enhanced, and improved. New commercial structures on Hamel Road and Sioux Drive are expected to be designed and constructed with these features. • Fenestration – Modulation. Windows and openings shall be generous, especially on the street side, and their placement and design shall express the pedestrian- friendly, livability of the town center. …Buildings shall be modulated a minimum of once per 40 feet in frontage to avoid long, monotonous building walls. This modulation may include varying building height, building setback, or building materials/design. At the street level, at least 30 percent of the façade should be glass in windows and doors. • Plazas. Plazas or small extensions of the sidewalk into or on private property are encouraged especially at key focal points and selected locations. Plazas will serve as a unifying link between businesses and sidewalks. The design and form of the plazas shall accommodate social and business interaction, provide a setting for buildings, sidewalks and other plazas, and should accommodate sitting, watching and in some instances outdoor food services. Plazas shall include special pavements (for example, concrete brick pavers or exposed aggregate), decorative lights and decorative trees, shrubs and flowers with emphasis on providing a variety of color, texture, and form throughout the year. … Decorative fences and walls will be used to delineate spaces and to accommodate grade changes. Plaza furniture is encouraged including benches, drinking fountains, bike racks, waste containers, kiosks, and decorative signs and plaques. Monuments and sculpture will be encouraged e.g. clock towers, gazebos, water fountains, etc. …” Based upon the limited information provided, the proposed architecture incorporates porches along Hamel Road and provides modulation and windows. The proposed siding materials are not indicated, but the Uptown Hamel district allows for wood or fiber cement (hardiboard). Transportation/Pedestrian/Trails/Park Dedication The applicant proposes to loop a private road through the site, with an access point across from Elm Creek Drive and another adjacent to the pond on the west of the site. The applicant proposes a 28-foot wide street through the villas, which is the standard width for City streets in neighborhoods. This width could accommodate parking on one side of the street. The City Code requires a setback of 2.5 feet for driveways in Uptown Hamel. Staff recommends that the private road meet this setback requirement along the eastern property line. Ideally, this access at Elm Creek Drive would be able to be shared when the property at 492 redevelops as well. Staff recommends that discussions occur with this property owner to determine if language could be added to the private road agreement which may allow the property to be added in the future. Upon formal application, the City Engineer recommends that a turning analysis be provided to verify emergency vehicles will be able to navigate the curves and a sightline analysis be provided at the driveways. Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 5 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting The City Engineer has indicated that an increased volume of traffic from the development should not impact the transportation system and would not necessitate turn lane construction. The City Engineer has suggested the possibility of widening Hamel Road, depending on how the developer proposes to accommodate the drainage along Hamel Road and from the site. The concept plan does not identify pedestrian improvements, which are emphasized within the UH district. A continuation of the trail along the north side of Hamel Road has been identified in the City’s trail plan. Staff would recommend construction of this trail as part of the park dedication requirements of the site. Staff recommends a sidewalk connection through the site to the trail. The City reviewed park dedication for the subject site when it was split from the land to the east back in 2019. At the time, the City determined that no land would be required for park dedication, but rather a cash-in-lieu fee of $3500 per unit, which would amount to $59,500 for 17 units. Soils/Buried Debris A significant amount of buried construction debris has been identified on the site. A Phase I and Phase II Environmental Assessment were completed in 2006-2007. The Assessments identified buried construction debris on the site. Soil borings and water sampling identified some locations which exceeded Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), arsenic and other chemicals which were measured. In addition, when the City excavated for the ponds in the western portion of the site, tiles which contained asbestos were encountered and had to be disposed of properly. It is recommended that a Response Action Plan (RAP) and Contingency Construction Plan (CCP) be implemented for construction activity on the site. These documents establish a plan on how construction will be conducted, how materials will be handled and sampled, which materials will need to be disposed of and in which manner, and other means to limit groundwater or other contamination. Because the applicant proposes to extend public sewer and water utilities into the site, it will be especially important that construction practices are conducted appropriately because future maintenance and replacement of the utilities will be the responsibility of the City. There are grants available to assist with the extra cost of developing contaminated sites, completing the necessary documentation and testing, and disposing of hazardous materials. If the developer applies for such funds, staff recommends that the City support the application. The applicant has indicated that they are aware of the potential challenges posed by the debris and soil conditions on the site and look to work with the city on how best to minimize disturbance of the debris. Stormwater/LID Review/Grading Review The concept plan does not include grading and drainage plans. Stormwater management was provided for the site through construction of the stormwater pond in the western portion of the site as part of acquisition of the easement area. Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 6 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting Grading and drainage plans will need to be designed to direct site runoff to the pond in the western portion of the site, or to provide additional treatment. The grading plan will also need to be designed so that it will not negatively impact the drainage from Hamel Road. The City Engineer has indicated that either a ditch or installation of curb along Hamel Road will be required. The developer of the subject site is required to provide a small area of floodplain mitigation adjacent to the wetland to off-set the installation of a driveway on the eastern portion of the site (east of 492 Hamel Road). This property was subdivided from the subject site in 2019 and installation of a driveway will necessitate some fill within the floodplain of Elm Creek. To off- set this fill, the property owner agreed that the developer of the subject site would mitigate the floodplain. Sewer/Water The applicant proposes to extend sewer and water through the site to serve the units. The City Engineer recommends a stub to the property to the east. As described above, it is important that installation of the utilities within the debris be completed appropriately, because the utilities will be public. Tree Preservation and Landscaping Tree cover is light on the site and there appear to be volunteer trees which have grown upon the site. The concept plan does not include landscaping details. The Uptown Hamel district does not include specific planting requirements, except to require a minimum of 5% of the site to be plaza or landscaped. City Code generally prohibits the use of domestic City water for use in lawn irrigation systems. Generally, a neighborhood utilizes stormwater reuse from ponds for irrigation purposes. City staff recommends that, if possible, an irrigation system be installed to reuse water from the City stormwater pond west of the site. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their April 13 meeting. An excerpt from the meeting minutes is attached. No one spoke at the public hearing and no comments have been received. Commissioners noted that the concept plan did not provide a lot of detail on which to comment. Commissioners expressed concern about the hazardous materials within the debris. One Commissioner noted that they envisioned more density, potentially a multi-level multi-family project on this site since opportunities are limited within Medina. Commissioners did not oppose deducting some of the area of the pond for the sake of density and noted that allowing the units further from Hamel Road was justified because of the easement. Stelter Enterprises – 500 Hamel Road Page 7 of 7 April 20, 2021 Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting Staff Comments The City Council will not take formal action, but should provide comments on the Concept Plan to inform a future application. Staff has provided comments throughout the report, which are summarized below: 1. Future land use requests shall be subject to relevant provisions of the City Code. 2. The private road should provide a minimum of 2.5 foot setback from the property line unless provisions are made with the property owner to the east. 3. A Response Action Plan (RAP) and Contingency Construction Plan (CCP) be implemented for construction activity on the site. 4. A variance would need to be requested for the increased setback from Hamel Road because of the existing sewer easement on the property. 5. A trail shall be constructed along the north side of Hamel Road and pedestrian circulation should be provided within the site. 6. Architectural plans for the villas shall meet the requirements of the Uptown Hamel district. Units along Hamel Road shall provide porches, windows, and other elements similar to those shown in connection with the concept plan. 7. The applicant shall provide a turning analysis and update street alignment as necessary to ensure adequate emergency vehicle circulation. 8. The applicant shall provide required floodplain storage as described in the development agreement for Raskobs Elm Creek Addition. 9. The applicant should consider including provisions to allow for the inclusion of adjacent property into the private road agreement. 10. If it is possible to do so and with the agreement of the City, the development shall utilize the stormwater pond to the west for reuse for lawn irrigation. 11. Future plans shall address the recommendations of the City Engineer. 12. Park dedication shall be provided as cash-in-lieu fee of $3500 per unit. Attachments 1. List of Documents 2. Excerpt from draft 4/13/2021 Planning Commission meeting 3. Engineering Comments dated 4/7/2021 4. Applicant Narrative 5. Concept Plan 4/15/2021 Project: LR-21-291– 500 Hamel Road Concept Plan Review 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 3/15/2021 3/15/2021 3 Yes Yes Fee 3/15/2021 3/15/2021 1 Yes Yes $1000 Concepts 3/15/2021 3/11/2021 2 Yes Yes 1 villa, 1 twinhome Updated Concept 4/2/2021 4/2/2021 3 Yes Yes Narrative 3/15/2021 3/15/2021 14 Yes Yes Narrative-Updated 4/1/2021 4/1/2021 9 Yes Yes Documents from Staff/Consultants/Agencies Document Document Date # of pages Electronic Notes Engineer Comments 3/31/2021 4 Y Engineer Comments 4/8/2021 4 Y Building Comments 3/22/2021 1 Y Legal Comments 03/26/2021 1 Y Notice 4/2/2021 10 Y Planning Commission Report 4/9/2021 7 Y City Council Report 4/14/2021 7 Y Public Comments Document Date Electronic Notes Planning Commission minutes 4/13/2021 Y Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 4/13/2021 Minutes 1 Public Hearing – Stetler Enterprises LLC – 500 Hamel Road – Concept Plan Review for 17-Unit Villa Development – PID 1211823310048 Finke presented a request for a concept plan review for a 17 unit detached villa development proposed at 500 Hamel Road. He stated that the subject size is just over six acres in size with 4.9 net developable acres. He provided details on the current zoning and allowed density for the site as well as details on the surrounding properties and uses. He presented the concept plan which includes a looped private road to go between the two rows of villas. He provided details on the general layout, density, setbacks, and existing easement. He stated that the developer would create sellable lots for a builder to buy and construction upon. He stated that examples of the intentions of the developed product have been provided within the packet. He reviewed the allowed building materials and design elements included with the Uptown Hamel district. He noted that the sketch provided by the applicant seems to be consistent with those requirements. He noted that staff provided comments related to infrastructure within the report. He noted that the low volume of traffic would not be anticipated to create issues for Hamel Road, compared to the density that could be supported on the site. He reviewed the recommendations related to the suggested trail connection. He stated that the stormwater pond on the site to the west was developed to support this development as well. He stated that both phase one and phase two environmental assessments were completed for the site and both note various levels of debris buried on the property, some of which includes hazardous material and therefore best practices should be in place during construction to allow monitoring, sampling, and proper disposal of hazardous materials. He stated that the utility installation would cause the deepest excavation because the homes are proposed to be slab on grade. He stated that any development on this site would need to address these issues and therefore it would be helpful to have someone on board on behalf of the applicant to lead those actions. He welcomed any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Stetler, applicant, welcomed any input the Commission may have on the site. He noted that he has been talking with staff and reviewing options for the site for the past four to five years. He stated that he has attempted to develop an approach that would minimize the soil correction issues on the site and the need to dig in the debris. He stated that he has done a number of projects ranging from five lots to 115 lots throughout the metro area and have experience with this type of project. He noted that while this has challenges, so have other projects that they have been able to successfully navigate. He stated that if they receive positive input and decide to move forward, he would hope to select a final builder and provide a clear example of what the elevations would look like as they would move forward with preliminary plat. Piper asked the price point that would be anticipated for the homes. Stetler replied that these would be single-family homes and would estimate a range in price point would begin in the upper $400,000’s and go up from there. Piper asked if there is a hill to the north that goes down to Highway 55. Stetler commented that the site seems fairly level other than the slope towards the wetland. He commented that he has not studied the topography to the north. Sedabres commented that there was a reference to an alternative 30 twinhome concept and asked if that is still under consideration. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 4/13/2021 Minutes 2 Finke stated that the applicant originally submitted a concept that included 30 twinhomes, with essentially the same layout with narrower lots. He stated that was withdrawn in preparation for the hearing and in response to the market demand for villas. Stetler commented that in discussion with people familiar with the area and real estate, the appetite for twinhomes was not nearly as great as single-family villas. He commented that the builders he spoke with had much more interest in the villa product and therefore they withdrew that plan and chose to move forward with the villa product. Sedabres referenced the 30-foot setback due to sewer and asked if that is specific to this property or something that exists throughout Uptown Hamel. Finke replied that issue exists for this property and the two to the east. Galzki asked if there is concern that once the homes are built and sold that notification should be provided related to the underlying debris field. Finke commented that he is not aware of notification that is required, noting that the phase one and phase two assessments would be public record. He stated that he could inquire further about potential notification requirements of those records, but he was not aware of any. Nielsen commented that she is also concerned with the debris on the site. She stated that staff laid out several recommendations and asked if the applicant agrees with those recommendations. Stetler commented that in general he does not have issues with the staff recommendations but would like to continue discussions with the City Engineer related to the placement of the watermain. He stated that there is a buried building on the site and six feet of clean fill on top of that, which exceeds the requirement for a top barrier by the PCA. He stated that the PCA views this as a brownfield and if there is a viable way to leave that in place, they favor that as opposed to digging it up and moving it somewhere else. He stated that if the material is dug up it needs to be properly disposed of and replaced with clean fill. He stated that the builders he has spoken with are familiar with this type of construction that would minimize disturbance to the debris field. He was hopeful that his engineer and the City Engineer could review the watermain placement if this moves forward. Nielsen asked if Stetler would be comfortable with his family living on this site. Stetler confirmed that he would be comfortable with that as the material is safely below six feet of clean fill and there are no concerns with leeching. Grajczyk commented that the debris issue has his attention and asked if there are any groundwater monitoring wells near this site. Finke replied that there are no monitoring wells at this point. He stated that the testing that has been done and City excavation for the pond on the west side had similar constraints. He stated that the City disposed of hazardous material that was excavated in a similar process that would be followed for this project. Nielsen opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. No comments. Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 4/13/2021 Minutes 3 Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:35 Galzki commented that he lives in the neighborhood south of this proposed development and therefore has his own personal concerns related to the development as a whole. He stated that he does have concern with the debris field and excavation for utilities. He commented that he would like to see an extension of the trail and potentially some curb and gutter in order to maintain consistency from west to east. He commented that this is an active, pedestrian friendly area and that trail connection would help to alleviate concerns. He stated that it will be nice to see drainage plans and stormwater reports if this moves forward. Grajczyk commented that he would agree that it would be nice to see additional details but recognized that this is a concept plan review. He stated that he would also support the trail as mentioned. He stated that he likes the architectural features in the examples and believed those would fit well with the surrounding homes. He stressed the importance of safety and noted that he is concerned with the buried debris and disturbance that would occur when burying utilities. He stated that he would feel more comfortable if there were a clay cap to help seal and contain the debris and provide better segregation for those that will live above it. Piper commented that she agrees with the statements made thus far and noted that she is also concerned with the buried debris. She asked if the City could require a clay cap/cover. Finke stated that he cannot provide an answer to that question. He stated that there are guidelines in place for development and was unsure if the City could go beyond those requirements. He stated that he could report further on that if the applicant chooses to move forward past this concept. Piper referenced the square footage of the lots and asked if there would be a restriction on the size of the home that would be built on the smaller lots. Finke stated that there would be 16 feet between the units and the units would be setback 25 feet from the internal road, or 30 feet where the sewer easement exists. He stated that Uptown Hamel allows for significant coverage and higher density compared to other areas of Medina. Piper stated that she agrees with this so far and is eager to see more detail. Popp commented that he agrees with many of the comments made thus far and echoed concerns with safety already mentioned. He referenced the design considerations and stated that it is important that as someone approached the Uptown Hamel district from the west, this would be the first impression of the area someone would get and therefore the view should be pleasing. He stated that he would like to see a sidewalk/trail on the north side of Hamel Road in order to support the vision of a walkable community. He stated that if the easement moves forward he would like to see additional enhancements that would make it aesthetically pleasing greenspace. He stated that he is eager to see how the applicant will address landscaping and greenspace. He stated that his primary focus rest on the safety concerns that have already been raised. Rhem commented that if this moves forward the largest element will be how the debris field will be mitigated and recognized that more details would be provided in the future. He stated that he would support the reduction in setback because of the sewer easement. He stated that to him, it would also make sense to exclude the pond in terms of density. Sedabres thanked the applicant for reviewing this recognizing the constraints and challenges of the site. He stated that the concept of what Uptown Hamel will become is interesting and this would be Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 4/13/2021 Minutes 4 the first development since the regulations were changed. He stated that he had in mind less of the detached single-family residential and more matching the urban downtown vision with brick façade and multiple stories or height differences. He stated that he would feel this site could even support more density. He stated that perhaps single-family residential would be okay on the west side, but the group should then consider where mixed use development would fit within the overall district. Nielsen stated that she shares the concern with the soils but trusts that would be mediated. She stated that if the applicant agrees with staff recommendations she would support this moving forward. She also stated that she would support removing the pond from the density calculation and confirmed the consensus of the Commission will that element as well as the reduced setback because of the sewer easement. Stetler thanked the Commission for the comments and input tonight. He noted that he started looking at this for an apartment building site but as he looked at the site more and more, with the single- family to the south and townhomes to the east, it appeared that a lower density residential project would fit better into those surroundings. He believed that this would be a nice addition to the area. He noted that because of the setbacks this parcel would never provide a true, close to the street urban feel. He hoped that the engineering staff can look creatively in order to attempt rooting around in the debris field to the extent possible related to the watermain design and placement. Nielsen thanked the applicant for bringing this forward and noted that this seems to be a nice plan for the lot. Finke commented that the intent would be to bring this forward to the Council for comments at its next meeting. K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-04-02 Submittal\_2021-04-08 Hamel Rd Villas Concept Plan - Engineering Review.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 April 8, 2021 Mr. Dusty Finke City Planning Director City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340-9790 Re: Hamel Rd Villas/Townhome Concept Plan – Engineering Review City Project No. LF-21-291 WSB Project No. 017878-000 Dear Mr. Finke: WSB staff have reviewed Hamel Road Villas Concept plan submittal dated March 19, 2021. The plans propose to construct either a 19 unit villa style single family homes (detached townhomes) or a 30-unit twin home project at 500 Hamel Road. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Medina’s general engineering standards and Stormwater Design Manual. We have the following comments with regards to engineering and stormwater management matters. Site Plan & Streets 1. With preliminary/final plat submittal(s) provide the following: o Existing site/removal plans that includes topographic survey/information that extends 50 feet beyond the limits of the proposed development. Include additional topography south of the proposed public/shared access improvements. o Grading, drainage, erosion control plans. o Utility plan/profile drawings for watermain, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer. o Signing and striping plan with callouts for specific striping and signage types. o Sheet that includes the pertinent City Standards details or other details needed to construction the propose improvements. o Typical section details for street, trail, sidewalk meeting the City’s standards, at minimum. The final street section shall be designed by a registered geotechnical engineer for the specific soil conditions found on the site. 2. Provide a vehicle turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures and provide any required turn around space(s) as required by the City Fire Marshall. 3. The plan does not include trails, sidewalks, or other pedestrian amenities that connect all of the units. In addition to providing this plan, the applicant will be required to install a bituminous trail along Hamel Road. See additional comments provided by the City Planner on pedestrian access and mobility requirements. 4. The applicant will be required to show how runoff from Hamel Road will be conveyed along the edge of the road. This may require grading of a swale or the installation of concrete curb adjacent to improve conveyance of runoff to the east. Hamel Rd Villas/Townhomes Concept Plan – Engineering Review April 8, 2021 Page 2 K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-04-02 Submittal\_2021-04-08 Hamel Rd Villas Concept Plan - Engineering Review.docx Water/Sewer Utilities 5. With future submittals show the existing sewer and watermain system in more detail including the nearest existing hydrants, valves, and manhole locations. Show proposed watermain, sanitary sewer mains, service locations, hydrants and valve locations. A hydrant will be required at the end of the watermain stub to the east. 6. The City will require that each unit have a separate water/sewer service. Each water service shall have a separate curb stop (shut-off). With future submittals show proposed sanitary sewer/water service lines and stub invert elevations on plans; the City requires a minimum depth of 4’ from low floor elevations. 7. Watermain looping connections will be needed to minimize long dead-end watermain sections. Consideration of further watermain looping needs and stubs for future phases or other adjacent developments will be required and reviewed with future submittals. With this in mind, at minimum the City will require that the internal site watermain is extended to the easterly property line with a stub and temporary hydrant. Complete. 8. Hydrant locations shall be approved of by the City Fire Marshall. Provide an exhibit of hydrant coverage with a maximum of 250’ radius. A review of valve locations will be provided with future plan submittals. 9. City’s typical standard is to place sewer a minimum of 10’ below the surface (18” vertical separation below the watermain). Where this depth is not feasible, the City will allow an 8’ depth; depths less than 8’ will require review on a case-by-case basis and require insulation and/or insulated pipe, at minimum. With that in mind, the applicant is proposing to place water and sewer utilities at depths of 4-6 feet below the surface to avoid underlying fill conditions (various forms of debris from the demolition of a building). There is inherent risk in placing utilities at depths of less than 8 feet due to winter/freezing conditions. The City will require that watermain is placed at a minimum of 8 feet deep but allow sewer to be placed no less than 6 feet deep with proper insulation methods. Spacing/clearance requirements of the MN Health Department for wateramain and sewers will need to be met. The City’s standards also require that sanitary sewer manholes are placed outside of the roadway pavement areas in the adjacent boulevard. 10. The underlying fill conditions (various forms of debris from the demolition of a building) will require that a geotechnical evaluation is provided that includes a specific bedding/support evaluation of utility piping systems (watermain, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer). Buried debris can continue to break down over time causing settlements and otherwise provide poor foundation conditions. The applicant proposes to directionally drill water services. This method of installation will not allow the proper bedding materials to be placed. In addition, the buried debris may contain brick, block, and concrete chunks that will now a drill head to pass. 11. Any public sanitary sewer and watermain shall be encompassed by drainage and utility easements where located outside of public road right of way. Drainage and utility easements will need to allow for a 1:1 trench from the invert of the utility with a minimum of 20’ centered on the utility. 12. With final construction plans, if basements are proposed with the villas or townhomes, the City will require common draintile/collection system for sump pump discharges. If Hamel Rd Villas/Townhomes Concept Plan – Engineering Review April 8, 2021 Page 3 K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-04-02 Submittal\_2021-04-08 Hamel Rd Villas Concept Plan - Engineering Review.docx foundation drains are proposed to be separate from the sump discharge, a separate foundation pipe system in addition to the sump discharge system should be considered. 13. Where any sewer pipe (storm or sanitary) crosses the watermain, include a note saying “Maintain 18-Inch Separation, 4” Rigid Insulation”. Provide dimension notes in various locations between the watermain and storm/sanitary sewer. 14. The watermain improvements will require approval from the MDH. The sanitary sewer improvements will require a permit from the MPCA. Provide completed and approved permit documents with final construction plans. Traffic & Access 15. Based on the proposed site plan the anticipated traffic generation would range from 139 daily trips, 9 AM peak hour trips and 11 PM peak hour trips with the 19 unit Villa proposal to 220 daily trips, 14 AM peak hour trips and 17 PM peak hour trips with the 30 unit Townhome proposal. 16. Hamel Road adjacent to the site is a local Municipal State Aid Street. The existing roadway has a 25ft two lane rural cross section with no shoulders. The roadway has a posted 30mph speed limit. 17. Two site access driveways are proposed. With the low site traffic generation, the 30mph posted speed limit and moderate traffic volume on Hamel Road there would not be a need for turn lanes in to or out of the site at the proposed driveways. However, consideration of widening Hamel Road to include a shoulder would provide improved safety. 18. A sight line analysis should be completed at both driveway intersections on Hamel Road and included considerations for landscaping and monument sign locations, if applicable. Stormwater 19. This development drains to a regional wet pond/filtration basin system constructed in 2015. The regional basins were designed to meet rate control and water quality requirements for this site. The ponds were designed to assume that 80% (2.7 acres) of the buildable portion of this parcel would be impervious surface. Provide detailed impervious surface information for the proposed development to ensure that the proposed impervious is less than 2.7 acres. Routing of the storm sewer will need to convey runoff directly to the wet pond (not the filtration basin). 20. The City requires two feet of freeboard from structure low openings to 100-year high water levels and EOF’s. The HWL of the adjacent basin is 983.26 and the EOF is 985. Therefore, the minimum low openings for adjunct structures is 987. 21. According to FEMA flood plain maps Zone AE 100-yr flood fringe encompasses much of this site. The floodplain elevation that applies to this parcel is 974.6. Please show floodplain elevation on future plan sets. The city requires compensatory storage at a 1:1 ratio for any filling the in the floodplain. 22. When this parcel split in 2018, there was floodplain fill on the eastern parcel that did not get mitigated. This fill amounts to 3,312 cf. Previous grading plans show this migration amount on the western parcel. This should be incorporated into the site development plans. Hamel Rd Villas/Townhomes Concept Plan – Engineering Review April 8, 2021 Page 4 K:\017878-000\Admin\Docs\2021-04-02 Submittal\_2021-04-08 Hamel Rd Villas Concept Plan - Engineering Review.docx 23. The development will need to meet the appropriate standards for Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. Please submit approved permit information to the city. Grading and Erosion Control 24. Provide EOFs for all low points inside and outside the roadway. 25. Provide spot elevations at the high points between the lots. 26. Maintain all surface grades within the minimum of 2% and maximum 33% slopes. Vegetated swale grades shall be a minimum of 2.0%. Show directional arrows and percent grades on future submittals. 27. Include a typical section/design on the plans for the proposed retaining walls, if applicable. Submit retaining wall engineered designs for walls 4-feet or greater. 28. A full review of erosion/sediment control will be conducted with the final plat submittal. 29. An NPDES permit must be submitted to the City prior to start of construction. 30. A review of the erosion/sediment control plan will be completed with preliminary/plat submittals. Wetlands 31. The wetland boundary must be extended through all project parcels. The boundary shown on the current site plan is what was delineated in 2018 (WF-18-113) but does not accurately extend around the entire wetland complex. 32. Upland buffers are required for the wetland within the property. The wetland is classified as a Manage 1 by the City of Medina and will require a 30-foot average (20-foot minimum) buffer. The location of the buffer, including buffer monuments and revegetation plan must be shown on the site plan around the full extent of the wetland within the project parcels. 33. If either permanent or temporary impacts to wetlands are proposed, an approval from the Wetland Conservation Act will be required. 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 500 Hamel Road Concept Plan STELTER ENTERPRISES LLC APRIL, 2021 500 Hamel Road Project Overview Stelter Enterprises LLC is submitting this request for approval of two different concept plans prior to spending significant resources with respect to the engineering necessary on the site as well as having flexibility in collaborating with area builders who may be interested in different residential products on the site before selecting a final builder and site design for plat approval. The site has approximately 3.74 buildable acres above the wetland elevation level of 975. The site contains a field of buried debris which was dumped and then buried under 6’ of clean fill. Additionally, studies have shown that there is unsuitable soil for foundations down from 10 – 20’ in the building area. Due to these challenges, the site has remained undeveloped for years. Both concepts presented with meet the minimum density of 4 units per acre. Stelter Enterprises is an experienced developer who has worked on several projects in Plymouth and others in the Twin Cities area. They have specialized in taking difficult sites and finding ways to overcome the challenges to successfully complete the projects. The challenges to this site are discussed in the following presentation as well as proposed solutions. Additionally, potential elevations for both concepts are presented for consideration. Current Survey of Site Significant Site Challenges Buried Building Debris in Center of Site: -Review of Existing Phase 2 Environmental Report, boring logs and test pit data -Debris is demolished building materials -Debris is covered with 6’ of clean fill -Discussion with MPCA -New Phase 1 required for legal protection -Minimum of 4’ clean fill in green space and 2’ under living space -Minimizing the disturbance of the debris field is preferred -Any disturbed soil with debris to needs be removed and disposed of appropriately Unsuitable Soils for Footings Ranging from 10’ to 20’ Deep: -Review of Existing Soil Engineering Report -Helical piers recommended for foundations for deeper unsuitable soils -No special considerations for street construction but some for utility lines Debris Field Map From Phase 2 Report Debris Depth Ranges from 0 to 8+ feet Soil Correction Depth Map Approach to Address Site Challenges Minimize disturbance of debris: -Utility design to stay above debris field as much as possible or to avoid all together -Possible shallower sewer depths over debris field with insulated pipe -Water main design along Hamel Road with service lines directionally bored below debris to building pads -Slab on grade construction -Helical pier foundation supports (which also addresses unsuitable soil issues) Site Design Villa Home Layout - See Engineer site plan Potential Elevations Facing Hamel Road W/ Rear Garage W E T WE T WET WET WET W E T WET WET WET WET W E T WET WE T WET WE T WET 100YR 10 0 Y R 100YR 100 Y R 10 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 10 0 Y R 100Y R 100YR 100YR 1 0 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100 Y R 100YR 100Y R 10 8,692 Sq. Ft. 13 8,389 Sq. Ft. 16 8,396 Sq. Ft. 17 8,850 Sq. Ft. 7 6,971 Sq. Ft. 6 7,253 Sq. Ft. 5 7,460 Sq. Ft. 4 6,430 Sq. Ft. 3 6,040 Sq. Ft. 2 6,178 Sq. Ft. 9 5,817 Sq. Ft. 1 5,977 Sq. Ft. 8 6,689 Sq. Ft. 15 8,294 Sq. Ft. 11 8,495 Sq. Ft. 12 8,442 Sq. Ft. 14 8,337 Sq. Ft. 24’ Rear Setback 25’ Front Setback 2 5 ’ t y p . Front Setback 2 5 ’ t y p . 8’ typ. 24’ 28’ NORTH 0 25’ 50’ 100’ Unit Count 17 Existing Zoning District Uptown Hamel District Provided Density 5.6 units / acre Private Drive 24’ & 28’ wide Minimum Lot Size Required / Provided 2,904 sf / 5,817 sf Maximum Lot Size Required / Provided 10,890 sf / 8,850 sf Minimum Lot Width Required / Provided none / 56’ min. Minimum Lot Depth Required / Provided none / 90’ Building Setbacks Front Minimum Required / Provided none / 25’ Front Maximum Required / Provided 10’ / 25’ Rear Required / Provided determined by city / 25’ Side Required / Provided 8’ / 8’ Gross Site Area 6.73 acres Net Developable Area (less wetlands, wetland buffer, floodplain, easements)3.05 acres Pond Easement 1076995 Wetland Buffer Delineated Wetland Edge Wetland Buffer (30’) D&U Easement (Existing) Floodplain Boundary D&U Easement (Existing) D&U Easement (Proposed) Delineated Wetland 30’ 8’ typ. 15’ 15’ 30’ 20’ Concept Data Site Data Hamel Rd El m C r e e k D r Legend Delineated Wetland Wetland Buffer Pond and D&U Easement Areas LEGENDLEGENDLEGEND Highway 55 Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Villa Development • Medina, MN 04.02.2021 Concept Plan W E T WE T WET WET WET W E T WET WET WET WET W E T WET WE T WET WE T WET 100YR 10 0 Y R 100YR 100 Y R 10 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 10 0 Y R 100Y R 100YR 100YR 1 0 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100 Y R 100YR 100Y R 10 8,692 Sq. Ft. 13 8,389 Sq. Ft. 16 8,396 Sq. Ft. 17 8,850 Sq. Ft. 7 6,971 Sq. Ft. 6 7,253 Sq. Ft. 5 7,460 Sq. Ft. 4 6,430 Sq. Ft. 3 6,040 Sq. Ft. 2 6,178 Sq. Ft. 9 5,817 Sq. Ft. 1 5,977 Sq. Ft. 8 6,689 Sq. Ft. 15 8,294 Sq. Ft. 11 8,495 Sq. Ft. 12 8,442 Sq. Ft. 14 8,337 Sq. Ft. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6" Stub I 6" Stub I 6" Stub 25’ typ. NORTH 0 25’ 50’ 100’ Pond Easement 1076995 Wetland Buffer Delineated Wetland Edge Wetland Buffer (30’) D&U Easement (Existing) Floodplain Boundary D&U Easement (Existing) D&U Easement (Proposed) 30’ 30’ 20’ Delineated Wetland El m C r e e k D r Legend Delineated Wetland Wetland Buffer Sanitary Line, proposed Proposed Utilities Site Features Existing Utilities Sanitary Line, existing Pond and D&U Easement Areas Water Line, proposed Force Main, existing Water Line, existingLEGENDLEGENDLEGEND LEGEND I I LEGEND I I LEGEND I LEGEND I I LEGEND I I Highway 55 Hamel Rd Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Villa Development • Medina, MN 04.02.2021 Concept Plan with Utilities W E T WE T WET WET WET W E T WET WET WET WET W E T WET WE T WET WE T WET 100YR 10 0 Y R 100YR 100 Y R 10 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 10 0 Y R 100Y R 100YR 100YR 1 0 0 Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100Y R 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100YR 100 Y R 100YR 100Y R I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6" Stub I 6" Stub I 6" Stub NORTH 0 25’ 50’ 100’ 30’ 30’ Delineated Wetland El m C r e e k D r Approximate Debris Field Map from Phase 2 Report Debris depth ranges from 0 to 8+ feet Highway 55 Hamel Rd Legend Delineated Wetland Wetland Buffer Sanitary Line, proposed Proposed Utilities Site Features Existing Utilities Sanitary Line, existing Pond and D&U Easement Areas Water Line, proposed Force Main, existing Water Line, existingLEGENDLEGENDLEGEND LEGEND I I LEGEND I I LEGEND I LEGEND I I LEGEND I I Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Villa Development • Medina, MN 04.02.2021 Concept Plan with Utilities and Debris Field Map Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 April 20, 2021 City Council Meeting MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director DATE: April 15, 2021 SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – April 20, 2021 City Council Meeting Land Use Application Review A) Townhome PUD Concept Plan – 1432 County Road 29 – Medina Townhome Development LLC has requested review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for development of 24 townhomes east of Baker Park Road, north of Highway 12. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the February 9 Planning Commission meeting and the Council reviewed on February 16 and March 16. The applicant has made some adjustments and is seeking additional Council comments on April 20. B) 500 Hamel Road Concept Plan – 500 Hamel Road – Stelter Enterprises LLC has requested review of two concepts for 19 villas or 30 twinhomes at 500 Hamel Road. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at the April 13 meeting and provided comments. The Concept Plan will be presented to the City Council at the April 20 meeting. C) Ditterswind Final Plat – 2032-2052 Holy Name Drive – Tom and Jim Ditter have requested final plat approval of a 5-lot subdivision. The City granted preliminary plat approval during the fall of 2020. Staff intends to present to the City Council at the April 20 meeting. D) Reserve of Medina 3rd Addn Final plat – south of Hackamore Road, east of CR116 – Pulte Homes has requested final plat approval for the final 31 lots in the Reserve of Medina. Review is underway, and the City Council will review when complete, potentially at the April 20 or May 4 meeting. E) Fortin Site Plan Review – 215 Hamel Road – Connie Fortin has requested a site plan review for construction of a detached garage at 215 Hamel Road. The Uptown Hamel district requires a site plan review for accessory structures greater than 20% of the floor area of the principal structure. The Planning Commission is scheduled to review at the May 11 meeting. F) Pioneer Trail Preserve – 2325 Pioneer Tr. – James and Melissa Korin have requested a 3- lot subdivision of a 40-acre parcel. The applicant has indicated that they intend to change the lot alignment originally submitted, so staff will await updated documents and schedule a public hearing when complete, potentially at the June 8 meeting. G) M/I Homes Comprehensive Plan Amendment – 1400 Hamel Road – M/I Home has requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use from Business to Medium Density Residential and submitted a concept plan review for a potential development of 78 townhomes. The applicant has not completed the application, and a public hearing will be scheduled when complete, potentially at the June 8 meeting. H) Holy Name Lake Estates Final Plat – north of County Road 24, northwest of Holy Name Lake - JD Dossier Holdings LLC has requested final plat approval for a six-lot rural subdivision on 90 acres. The City Council granted final plat approval at the March 16 meeting. The developer intends to start construction in July. I) Meadowview Commons 2nd Addition Final Plat – south of Meander Rd, west of Jubert Tr – US Home Corporation (Lennar) has requested final plat approval for development of the remaining 83 townhome lots in the project. The initial 42 townhome lots were approved in Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 April 20, 2021 City Council Meeting November 2020. The City Council granted final plat approval at the March 16 meeting. Staff will work with the applicant to finalize the conditions of approval. J) Weston Woods Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan – east of Mohawk Drive, north of Highway 55 – Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) has requested a Preliminary Plat and PUD General Plan for development of 76 twinhomes, 42 single-family, and 33 townhomes on the Roy and Cavanaugh properties. The City Council adopted documents of approval at the January 5 meeting. Staff is coordinating permitting for construction of Chippewa Road and will await final plat application. K) Cates Ranch Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning – 2575 and 2590 Cates Ranch Drive – Robert Atkinson has requested a change of the future land use from Future Development Area to Business, a staging plan amendment to 2020, and a rezoning to Business Park. The application is incomplete for review, and the City has requested additional materials. L) Adam’s Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning – These projects have been preliminarily approved and the City is awaiting final plat application. M) 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. N) Hamel Haven subdivision – These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plat is recorded. Other Projects A) Floodplain Data updates – The Elm Creek Watershed and Minnehaha Creek Watershed completed watershed-wide analyses to establish base flood elevations for basins over the past years. They have released draft data for review by staff. Staff reviewed and noted a number of instances where the draft flood elevation was substantially higher (upwards of 7 feet higher for Elm Creek along Hamel Road) than previous studies. These elevations may impact property owners related to flood insurance and use of property. Staff raised the concerns and similar concern was raised by the City of Corcoran. Staff will await a response, but intends to have WSB review the model and potentially provide better information depending how the watersheds and DNR respond. B) Diamond Lake Regional Trail – Staff attended the open house at the Park at the Fields of Medina and the virtual open houses related to the potential northern routes. C) Chippewa Road permitting – The Chippewa Road project has been submitted for review by relevant agencies. A Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) meeting is schedule for April 28, 2021. D) Wolsfeld Woods Ravine Stabilization – staff met with WSB related to a scope of services to prepare the design for the project. I also have continuing coordination with the Friends of Wolsfeld Woods. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jason Nelson, Director of Public Safety DATE: April 15, 2021 RE: Department Updates Once again, we have had an incident that has led to uncertainty within the Twin Cities metro area. A young man lost his life, and a family is without their loved one. This comes from a tragic incident in Brooklyn Center. This is something that comes as tensions were already very high as the Chauvin trial is coming to an end with the anticipation of the case going to the jury possibly on Monday, April 19. As a result of the trail, we have been planning for almost a year in preparation for potential civil unrest. Those preparations have prepared us, and we have responded and enacted our Hennepin County Mobile Field Force Teams to assist Brooklyn Center with civil unrest. We have added extra patrols in our city as I have pulled our investigators from their current job assignments to assist with road coverage and acting as a visual deterrent in the commercial areas of the city. Once again, all our police officers have stepped up when asked and did so without hesitation or complaints. All officers have put their personal lives on hold, cancelled vacations, and changed shift hours and details. Our police officers also grieve and struggle with the issues at hand but continue to step up when asked. We all have picked this profession and I want you to know that we will continue to be professional and work to keep our community safe along with supporting those who choose to peacefully demonstrate their first amendment rights. Update on body worn cameras: I had hopes of bringing this forward to the council on April 20th but due to the current issues I have had to dedicate most of my personnel to the civil unrest. We just have not had the time to tie up some loose ends with the vendor and our Informational Technology Specialists. I am hoping that this will be ready to present to you by the first council meeting in May. Patrol: Patrol updates 03/31/2021 through 04/14/2021 The following are updates of Patrol Officers between March 31, 2021 and April 14, 2021 - officers issued 27 citations for various traffic offenses, 70 warnings, responded to 2 property damage accidents, 1 personal injury accident, 9 medicals, 3 suspicious activity calls, 10 assists to other agencies, 2 welfare checks, and 6 residential alarms. MEMORANDUM On 04/03 Officer was dispatched to a reported missing peacock from a residence off Willow Drive. A short time later the officer received word that the peacock had returned home. On 04/03 Officer was dispatched to a traffic complaint eastbound on Highway 55 from County Road 19. It was reported a grey jeep was driving erratically, speeding, and throwing objects from the vehicle. The reporting party also stated at a red light the driver got out of the vehicle and approached her car. The officer was able to locate the reported vehicle and made contact with the driver who said the other vehicle (reporting party) had nearly struck his vehicle. He admitted to getting out of his car at a red light but denied speeding or throwing any objects out of his car. The driver was given a verbal warning for the driving conduct. On 04/04 Officers were dispatched to a reported domestic in the 700 block of Highway 55. Upon arrival officers learned an altercation took place between a father and the adult son where the son eventually pulled out a pocket knife and threatened his father with it. A struggle ensued for the knife and the father was able to remove the knife from his son but sustained a small cut to the hand. The son was arrested for Domestic Assault and transported to Hennepin County Jail. On 04/06 Officers attempted to assist West Hennepin Public Safety with stopping a vehicle that had fled from the Buffalo Police Department earlier in the morning. When squads activated their emergency lights the suspect again fled from officers. Officers did not pursue as the identity of the driver was believed to be known. Additional charges are pending. On 04/09 Officer took a theft report from Highway 55 Rental. A subject had rented a generator and air compressor and has failed to return the items and the business can no longer make contact with the renter. Officers were unable to contact the subject as well. The case was forwarded to investigations. On 04/09 at 2300 hours Officer assisted Corcoran Police with a suspicious vehicle running, unoccupied at a car dealership in their city along Highway 55. While investigating officers heard what sounded like vehicles off roading on private property nearby. Officers were aware that Corcoran PD had been dispatched to a report of unwanted vehicles on the property earlier in the evening. Officers checked the area and were able to locate a 4x4 truck leaving the property who said he had been called by a friend to come and assist him with getting his truck unstuck from the mud after mudding on the property. It was determined that no one had permission to be on the property. Corcoran PD was called to the scene and took over the incident. On 04/13 Officer was dispatched to a theft report at Aldi. It was reported that earlier two male suspects entered the store. One suspect filled a cart with approximately 30 gallons of laundry detergent and pushed the cart out to the parking lot without paying for anything. A second suspect inside the store saw someone watching him and abandoned his cart and left in a vehicle that was waiting in the parking lot. The reporting party was able to obtain a license plate of the vehicle. The case was forwarded to investigations. Starting 04/12 additional officer was pulled from their other assignment to assist with extra patrol in the city due to civil unrest in the metro area due to a police shooting in Brooklyn Center. Two officers were also activated in our Mobile Field Force platoon and have been assisting Hennepin County and the Minnesota State Patrol with civil unrest around Brooklyn Center. These officers have been pulled from normal patrol assignment to work as needed with the Mobile Field Force Platoon. Investigations: Investigating a theft from a business in Medina. A suspect stole hundreds of dollars of product. Suspect left the business in a red SUV. I am waiting on video surveillance from the business. Investigating a theft from another business in Medina. The suspect failed to return product that they rented. The business wished to pursue theft charges. I am attempting to contact the suspect. Investigation is ongoing. Did a few background checks for solicitor permits in city of Medina. This week I have been filling in for patrol shifts to assist with coverage for the city. 1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director DATE: April 15, 2021 MEETING: April 20, 2021 SUBJECT: Public Works Update STREETS • Seasonal weight postings have been removed on most of the Medina streets but remain on the more vulnerable ones. • Crack sealing has begun, we are in the process of crack sealing Pioneer Trail. We are about half complete with the project. Weather has slowed us down. • Derek Reinking and I have been evaluating all of Medina’s streets. The data will be recorded into a pavement management plan prior to the CIP planning. • The flat work and curb, paving and sealcoating contracts are in you packet for approval. The quantities and locations are left up to the Public Works Director’s discretion as always. • Because of the heavy truck traffic to the Ravinia Development, Hackamore Road is showing significant signs of deterioration this spring. We will be working with Corcoran Public Works to repair some areas to keep the street together until we move forward with a future project. • Pavement corings for Tower Drive West and Shire Drive are complete and show evidence of deficiencies in the pavement. We will begin feasibility planning for both commercial streets. They are currently in the CIP for an overlay this season. The scope of both streets will likely change as I work through the report. • Street Sweeping has been completed on the city streets and at city buildings. WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER • The city has a new chemical company on board for city water treatment. • Lisa and I have put together a power point presentation for the annual stormwater public hearing to be held at the April 20th meeting. • I will be meeting with the MN Land Trust, WSB, Anderson and Associates and the Wild Meadows HOA to discuss stormwater issues on Friday the 16th to review projects that have been completed by the HOA and any adverse effects they may have created. We will also be discussing criteria and procedures moving forward with future stormwater issues. MEMORANDUM 2 PARKS/TRAILS • Spring Cleanup in the parks will begin soon. The weather has delayed this process. • We are in receipt of a request to park a food truck at the Legion Park for the summer at Paul Fortin Field. We will present this request to council for feedback. • Lisa DeMars and I are working with The Enclave HOA and a local Boy Scout Troop to coordinate the reforestation project in Harriet’s Woods. The Scouts surveyed the area and are in the process of completing a proposal to plant the trees. Partnering with the Scouts will enable them to work towards a 50th Anniversary Environmental Protection Agency Award, they are very motivated and excited to be involved. MISCELLANEOUS • Cleanup day preparations are in progress. Public Works will be taking the lead on this event. This year will be a little different - due to social distancing. Staff will handle the event without volunteers. ORDER CHECKS APRIL 6, 2021 – APRIL 20, 2021 051431 MICHAEL/CAROLYN ANDERSON ......................................... $1,360.50 051432 CLARK, CAROLINE ................................................................ $1,360.50 051433 EDINA REALTY ........................................................................... $34.04 051434 PARADISE HOMES .............................................................. $10,000.00 051435 RASO, DAVID & TANYA .............................................................. $20.89 051436 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC .................................................. $122.36 051437 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE .................................................. $1,947.81 051438 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN ................................... $34,442.77 051439 BROCK WHITE..................................................................... $12,675.00 051440 BURSCHVILLE CONSTRUCTION INC ................................... $6,475.00 051441 CASH......................................................................................... $250.00 CLEAN-UP DAY CASH 051442 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS INC ................................................... $263.92 051443 COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA INC ................................... $4,768.79 051444 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES ................................................... $2,413.11 051445 EARL F ANDERSEN INC ....................................................... $1,244.45 051446 ECM PUBLISHERS INC ............................................................ $324.52 051447 EQUIFAX ....................................................................................... $8.04 051448 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL .................................................... $157.95 051449 GRAINGER................................................................................ $537.50 051450 HACH COMPANY ...................................................................... $890.14 051451 HAMEL LUMBER INC ................................................................ $165.39 051452 HAMEL LIONS CLUB ................................................................ $525.00 051453 HAMEL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT ....................................... $85,387.50 051454 HAWKINS INC. ....................................................................... $1,684.27 051455 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH .................................................. $2,289.83 051456 HENN COUNTY SHERIFF........................................................... $75.00 051457 HENN CTY RECORDER/REGISTRAR ........................................ $20.00 051458 MATTHEW E HUNZ .................................................................. $180.00 051459 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR .................................................. $508.00 051460 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS.TRUST ................................. $118,743.00 051461 LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MGMT INC .......................................... $42.50 051462 CITY OF LONG LAKE ............................................................. $5,930.75 051463 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN ......................................................... $1,017.59 051464 MARTIN-MCALLISTER CONSULTING ...................................... $550.00 051465 MEDTOX LABS ......................................................................... $100.66 051466 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ................................................. $33,322.64 051467 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH .................................. $409.00 051468 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH .......................................... $16,251.84 051469 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ................................................. $23.00 051470 NORTHLAND PETROLEUM SERVICES ................................... $164.00 051471 NORTHWEST ASSOC CONSULTANTS ................................ $1,287.00 051472 OFFICE DEPOT ........................................................................ $176.80 051473 CITY OF ORONO ................................................................... $1,360.28 051474 PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE INC ............................... $15,360.00 051475 RUSSELL SECURITY RESOURCE INC .................................... $105.00 051476 STREICHER'S ........................................................................... $216.90 051477 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI .......................................................... $4,233.28 051478 TEGRETE CORP ....................................................................... $156.10 051479 TIMESAVER OFFSITE .............................................................. $258.75 051480 ULINE ........................................................................................ $318.39 Total Checks $370,159.76 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS APRIL 6, 2021 – APRIL 20, 2021 005890E FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL ......................................... $75.36 005891E PR PERA .............................................................................. $16,900.90 005892E PR FED/FICA ....................................................................... $16,791.89 005893E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................... $1,890.00 005894E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA .................................................. $3,699.72 005895E CITY OF MEDINA ........................................................................ $22.00 005896E FURTHER .............................................................................. $1,715.20 005897E MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT ............................................. $725.00 005898E CENTURYLINK.......................................................................... $250.49 005899E CULLIGAN-METRO ..................................................................... $34.40 005900E FP MAILING SOL POSTAGE BY PHON ................................. $1,000.00 005901E FRONTIER .................................................................................. $57.74 005902E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC .................................... $1,077.97 005903E FURTHER .............................................................................. $5,897.86 Total Electronic Checks $50,138.53 PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT – APRIL 14, 2021 0510949 BILLMAN, JACKSON CARROLL .............................................. $672.88 0510950 JOHNSON, PATRICK M. .......................................................... $584.21 0510951 ALBERS, TODD M. ................................................................... $230.87 0510952 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L. .................................................. $1,671.94 0510953 BARNHART, ERIN A. ............................................................ $2,505.32 0510954 BOECKER, KEVIN D. ............................................................ $2,582.87 0510955 CAVANAUGH, JOSEPH ........................................................... $230.87 0510956 CONVERSE, KEITH A. .......................................................... $1,999.45 0510957 DEMARS, LISA ...................................................................... $1,421.33 0510958 DESLAURIES, DEAN ............................................................... $230.87 0510959 DION, DEBRA A. ................................................................... $1,990.75 0510960 ENDE, JOSEPH..................................................................... $2,175.31 0510961 FINKE, DUSTIN D. ................................................................ $2,623.23 0510962 GALLUP, JODI M. .................................................................. $2,206.96 0510963 GLEASON, JOHN M. ............................................................. $1,836.34 0510964 GREGORY, THOMAS ........................................................... $1,933.49 0510965 HALL, DAVID M. .................................................................... $2,160.48 0510966 HANSON, JUSTIN ................................................................. $2,573.45 0510967 JACOBSON, NICOLE ............................................................... $930.79 0510968 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S. ......................................................... $2,350.38 0510969 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. ........................................................... $2,316.39 0510970 KLAERS, ANNE M. ................................................................ $1,485.11 0510971 LEUER, GREGORY J. ........................................................... $2,171.58 0510972 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M ........................................................... $327.07 0510973 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. ................................................. $1,456.39 0510974 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D ......................................................... $2,144.23 0510975 NELSON, JASON .................................................................. $2,598.37 0510976 REID, ROBIN ............................................................................ $230.87 0510977 REINKING, DEREK M ........................................................... $1,955.24 0510978 SCHARF, ANDREW .............................................................. $1,682.54 0510979 SCHERER, STEVEN T. ......................................................... $2,367.69 0510980 VOGEL, NICHOLE .................................................................... $964.57 0510981 ZUMBUSCH, NICHOLAS P ................................................... $1,959.17 Total Payroll Direct Deposit $54,571.01