HomeMy Public PortalAbout04.05.2022 City Council Meeting MinutesMedina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
1
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 5, 2022
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on April 5, 2022 at 7:00
p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided.
Martin commented that the meeting is being held in a virtual format due to the ongoing
pandemic and provided instructions for public participation.
I. ROLL CALL
Members present: Albers, Cavanaugh, DesLauriers, Martin, and Reid.
Members absent: None.
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, City Attorney Dave Anderson, Finance
Director Erin Barnhart, City Engineer Chuck Rickart, City Planning Director Dusty Finke,
and Chief of Police Jason Nelson.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:03 p.m.)
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:04 p.m.)
The agenda was approved as presented.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:04 p.m.)
A. Approval of the March 15, 2022 Work Session City Council Meeting Minutes
Moved by Martin, seconded by Albers, to approve the March 15, 2022 work session City
Council meeting minutes as presented.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
B. Approval of the March 15, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
Moved by Martin, seconded by Reid, to approve the March 15, 2022 regular City Council
meeting minutes as presented.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
2
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:06 p.m.)
A. Approve Resolution 2022-23 of Support for the People of Ukraine
B. Approve Resolution 2022-24 Authorizing Closure and Transfer of Debt
Service Funds
C. Approve 2022 Road Materials and Equipment Bid
D. Approve Uptown Hamel Market Analysis and Redevelopment Feasibility
Study Request for Proposals
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the consent agenda.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
VI. COMMENTS (7:08 p.m.)
A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda
There were none.
B. Park Commission
Johnson commented that the Park Commission held a lengthy discussion related to the
Fortin Field scoreboard request which is before the Council tonight. He reported that the
Commission will next meet on April 20th.
C. Planning Commission
Finke reported that the Planning Commission will meet the following week to hold public
hearings related to requests for the Hamel townhome development at 342 Hamel Road,
a variance to tear down and rebuild an existing barn at 2055 Tamarack Drive, discussion
pertaining to electric vehicle regulations, and an ordinance amendment to the sign
ordinance related to signs internal to public park land.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Hamel Athletic Club – Fortin Field Scoreboard (7:13 p.m.)
Johnson stated that HAC and the Hamel Hawks have requested to install a new digital
scoreboard at Paul Fortin Field. He stated that funding is being provided by the Hamel
Lions and the Council could accept that through formal resolution at a future meeting.
He stated that HAC has requested that the City pay for electrical work at a cost up to
$5,000. He noted that there has been a lot of discussion on this topic by the Park
Commission and the Park Commission did not support the funding request of up to
$5,000 based on other park priorities.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
3
Finke stated that there is one action item before the Council tonight related to the
proposed scoreboard, by HAC, the Hamel Hawks and Hamel Lions. He stated that if the
Council approves the action, staff will bring back a resolution to accept the donation from
the Hamel Lions. He noted that the second question would be whether the City would
want to partner in the project for a cost of up to $5,000 for the electrical services. He
noted that the Park Commission did not recommend approval of the $5,000 cost and
suggested that if the existing scoreboard were sold, those proceeds could be used to
fund the electrical costs for the new sign. He stated that because of the scale of the
dynamic display, staff did look at the existing regulations. He noted that in the past
permits have not been required for scoreboards and related internal field advertising. He
stated that staff suggests formalizing that exemption within the sign ordinance, noting
that would proceed forward through the review process and would be approved before
the sign is installed.
Martin asked for the input of the Council related to the scoreboard request and related
funding.
Cavanaugh commented that he believes this is a fantastic idea, noting there are many
other uses of the scoreboard such as community movies. He stated that he did have the
benefit of virtually attending the Park Commission meeting and it sounded like the
applicants were okay covering the cost for the electrical. He stated that in regard to the
old scoreboard, his first preference would be to reuse that at another field in the city
rather than selling it. He did recognize that it may need to be sold to help the applicants
cover costs.
Martin asked who owns the existing scoreboard.
Cavanaugh noted that it is a City owned sign.
Albers commented that there would be a cost in moving the existing sign to another
location and therefore he would like the estimated cost for doing so before making that
decision. He was also curious if the sign is readily sellable and could be sold in a
reasonable amount of time. He stated that he does support the new scoreboard and
believes it would be a value and benefit to the field. He commented that he would be
okay supporting the $5,000 cost for electric, but if the applicants are fine covering that
cost, he would support that as well.
Martin asked if Cavanaugh would agree to have staff review the cost/benefit analysis in
determining whether it would be feasible to reuse the existing scoreboard.
Cavanaugh agreed.
Reid commented that the new sign looks great and would support the recommendation
of the Park Commission for the City not to provide the $5,000 cost. She stated that she
would also be curious about the cost of reusing the scoreboard in another location and if
it is feasible, she is fine reusing the sign elsewhere.
DesLauriers commented that the sign will add value to the City. He commented that
staff should make the decision as to what to do with the old scoreboard. He believed
that the City should pay the $5,000 if the applicants are willing to pay $120,000 for the
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
4
new scoreboard. He commented that he does have concern that Finke is going to
develop an ordinance amendment after the fact. He stated that one of the ways HAC
will pay the Hamel Lions back for their donation is through advertising on the sign. He
was concerned that an amendment could limit the ability of HAC to generate revenue in
that manner.
Martin agreed that the sign is great as proposed and would be of great value to the City
and its ballfields. She also agreed that the City could pay a maximum of four percent of
the total cost of the sign or up to $5,000, whichever is greater. She stated that she
would also agree to leave the decision of what to do with the existing sign up to staff.
She noted that both she and DesLauriers would support the City contributing up to a
maximum of $5,000, but no greater than four percent of the sign and asked the other
members if they would support that action.
Cavanaugh, Albers, and Reid all expressed support for that proposal.
Moved by Martin, seconded by DesLauriers, to accept the proposal to install a new
scoreboard at Paul Fortin Field in a design consistent with the proposed design in the
agenda packet and that the City fund the greater of $5,000 or four percent of the total
sign cost.
Further discussion: Andy Servi, HAC, thanked the Council for their comments and
support.
Martin commented that, because Medina is a small city, it relies on organizations such
as HAC to enhance athletic opportunities for the children in the community. She
thanked HAC and the partnering organizations for doing so much to provide baseball
and other sports activities in Medina.
A roll call vote was performed:
Cavanaugh aye
Albers aye
Reid aye
DesLauriers aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
Martin asked staff for more information on the proposed sign ordinance issue.
Finke commented that staff is preparing an amendment to the sign ordinance which
would add to the list of exemptions dynamic display scoreboards and signs that are
internal to public park land. He explained that those things would be exempt to the
regulations in the sign ordinance. He stated that the public hearing has been noticed for
the Planning Commission meeting the following week and then will come forward to the
City Council.
Martin commented that her concern would be whether the Council would continue to see
these types of requests, should that amendment be adopted.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
5
Finke commented that in this case the Council would still review the request as it will be
installed in a City park and ultimately be owned by the City. He stated that staff could
put some thought into that review process or a narrower exemption within the ordinance.
Albers commented that he is conflicted as he would believe an ordinance review would
proceed this discussion. He stated that he would want to have review rights for signs
posted on public property. He stated that again that he would have preferred to see the
proposed ordinance amendment before reviewing this request.
Martin noted that perhaps the exemption would apply to signs on public property
because the City would still have review of those requests.
Albers asked if tennis club signage would be reviewed, noting that it would be internally
facing rather than externally facing.
Martin commented that she would believe it would be subject to regulations. She noted
that a sign could be internally facing but at a height of 50 feet which impacts other
properties.
Reid commented that signs should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis as there are a
lot of variables. She noted that at least the Planning Commission should continue to
review the signs.
Cavanaugh commented that the carve out should only apply to City owned properties
and/or park land for exemptions. He stated that the City should still review signage for
Three Rivers properties or other properties. He stated that the Council would still review
signs for any City owned property and therefore did not see a problem with an
exemption of that nature.
Albers, Reid, and Cavanaugh confirmed that they would be comfortable with that as well.
B. Cates Industrial Park – Jeff and Chris Cates – Comprehensive Plan
Amendment (7:43 p.m.)
Johnson stated that the Cates have requested a Comprehensive Plan amendment and
concept plan review for development of approximately 665,000 square feet of
warehouse, light industrial, office buildings on 70 acres.
Finke identified the subject property location, which is currently agriculture, zoned rural
residential/urban reserve, and designated as future development area in the
Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the amendment would propose to reguide the
property as business development within the current phase of staging. He reviewed the
surrounding land uses. He noted that the goals, principles, and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan should be considered when reviewing an amendment request. He
reviewed the history of planning and previous guiding for the parcel going back to 2000.
He provided details on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was completed
and noted that it was determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would
not be needed.
Martin asked whether or not a business building in the current staging plan fits the vision
of the City for these 70 acres. She noted that once that is decided, they could then go
into more detail. She stated that if this property were reguided in the Comprehensive
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
6
Plan, the development would still be subject to all ordinances and necessary approvals,
and that reguiding could be subject to all of those approvals similar to what was done
with Weston Woods. She stated that unlike Weston Woods, the developer will most
likely not propose a Planned Unit Development (PUD), which would provide the Council
with a higher level of scrutiny and enhanced benefits such as greater architectural
standards with natural resources preservation. She asked if the Council is willing to say
that this fits within the Council’s vision for this 70 acres in the current staging plan.
Finke commented that there was a lot of technical information related to infrastructure
that was included in the staff report.
Reid stated that there was a previous agreement with the City that mandates that the
lower portion of the property could be rezoned to business if requested by the property
owners. She asked staff to verify whether that is correct.
Finke replied that the attorney for the applicant referenced that settlement agreement
which was included in the application. He stated that in 2000 the City agreed to
designate the property as urban commercial. He stated that applied not only to the 30
acres to the south, but the 40 acres to the north. He noted that the City Attorney has
provided his opinion on that agreement 20 years later.
Martin commented that, in her opinion, that agreement and its impact applied to the
southern portion of the site. She stated that this is an application to amend the
Comprehensive Plan, not only those 30 acres, but the 40 acres to the north and
therefore the impact of that agreement would only apply if the applicant came in with a
proposal for only the southern 30 acres that was the subject of that agreement. She
noted that if the proposal came forward in that manner, the Council would then discuss
whether that agreement applies. She stated that this proposal would amend the
Comprehensive Plan for 70 acres, and over half of that property was not the subject of
that agreement, therefore the agreement does not come into play until the application is
reduced to only the 30 acres that was included in the agreement.
City Attorney Anderson stated that the agreement itself and the City’s obligations to
reguide the property only applies to the southern parcel of the two parcels included in
this application. He stated that he has reviewed that very closely and provided his
opinion to the Council on the fact that, despite the language in the agreement, the
obligations to the City written in the agreement were adhered to in 2000 when the
property was reguided and made developable for a period of ten years. He stated that
from his standpoint, the obligations of the City were not something that would be an
obligation remaining in place forever. He stated that as land uses, visions, and goals
change over time, the City had the authority to reguide the property in the future;
therefore, he does not believe the City is contractually obligated to rezone the site. He
asked the Council to use its discretion to decide whether the vision for this area aligns
with the request presented tonight to determine whether it would support the reguiding of
the property. He noted that perhaps the goals and visions for this area may have
changed since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted a few years ago and the Council
will need to make its determination.
Finke called attention to infrastructure, noting that development should be proportional to
the infrastructure that could support it. He provided additional details on transportation
noting that when Highway 55 is converted to four lanes, it could support development
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
7
but there would be impacts to the local systems until that time and provided additional
details. He stated that the development would require improvements to local roads and
highlighted those items. He provided details on sewer and water.
Martin asked if this were to move forward, how the commitment of the developer would
be secured to make such improvements. She asked whether the applicant would
contribute to the expansion of Highway 55 and related signal improvements. She also
asked how the land would be secured for the lift station.
Finke commented that if the Council were supportive of the land use, conditioned upon
securing some of these improvements that would be necessitated by the development,
the Council would conditionally approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment which
would be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. He stated that
the ultimate enactment of the plan amendment would not be completed until some of
these more specific conditions had been settled within a development agreement. He
stated that the ultimate adoption of the plan amendment would be conditioned upon
achieving those things within the development agreement.
Anderson agreed with Finke. He stated that this would be similar to Weston Woods in
the sense that the Comprehensive Plan amendment would be conditioned upon all
requisite land use approvals and land use entitlements coming forward. He stated that
they would ensure the transportation needs were met in order to accommodate the site
and that all easements were received. He stated that when this area ultimately becomes
developed, it will need to be served by a lift station which has been planned for although
a specific location or site has not yet been identified. He stated that there is some
uncertainly and uniqueness to the area. He stated that if the Council believes this
guiding is appropriate for the area, this could provide some certainty in the location of a
lift station as easements could be required as part of the platting.
Martin asked for the opinion of Council related to the Comprehensive Plan amendment
as requested and whether that meets the vision for this 70 acres.
Anderson commented that it is also important to note that a Comprehensive Plan
amendment requires a four-fifths vote of the Council.
DesLauriers noted that he would like to hear from Albers as he was a part of the
Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee and would perhaps have input on why the
property was guided as future development area (FDA).
Albers stated that the property was guided as such, similarly to the other FDA property in
and around Loretto. He stated that at the time the thought was that the areas may not
have been ready for development in terms of infrastructure. He stated that the thought
was to have more residential development in this area rather than business or
commercial.
Martin agreed that those on the steering committee were trying to minimize the
construction of additional housing within the parameters of the Metropolitan Council and
therefore the land was put into a future phase for land use and staging.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
8
Finke commented that various properties were pushed out some level within the staging
periods as a result of the reduction of forecasted residential growth especially. He
stated that the general trend of the plan was to delay some properties for development.
Albers asked the net acres of business and commercial land available for development
at this time and already developed as business or commercial. He stated that one of the
arguments being made at this time is the business use is good for the tax base.
Martin stated that another consideration of the Comprehensive Plan was to have
business/commercial development along the Highway 55 corridor. She stated that the
steering committee believed that attracting that business development enhanced the
experience of the residents. She stated that the residents in that area had grown tired of
fighting traffic and the thought was that traffic to those businesses would be opposite the
traffic of residents, as it was assumed most residents would travel east in the morning to
work while business traffic would be moving west during that time.
Albers commented that as people return to work, post pandemic, traffic has again
increased on Highway 55. He stated that until the highway is expanded, which could
occur in the next ten years, it has to be considered as to whether the additional traffic
could be supported. He noted that traffic from other communities must also be
considered, noting a similar commercial development that is in the planning process in
Corcoran. He noted that infrastructure needs are a part of the reason this property was
guided for FDA.
Martin asked what the City has collectively for commercial and business uses, both
currently being used for those purposes and guided for the future.
Finke provided details on the available commercial and business property within Medina.
He noted that some things have changed since the Comprehensive Plan update which
occupied property available for business development without actually providing
traditional business type use and listed examples. He stated that if there is a desire to
expand business capacity within the city, this site could be considered.
Albers commented that the examples provided are businesses and commercial
developments that generate taxes. He was unsure whether it would make sense to
guide additional land for business at this time. He did not believe that this requested
change fits within the goals and objectives of the City and its Comprehensive Plan.
DesLauriers commented that there are both positives and negatives to consider about
this site and request. He referenced the related infrastructure requirements that would
be needed to support the site. He asked if the infrastructure changes would need to be
agreed upon with the developer prior to submission of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment to the Metropolitan Council and related zoning change.
Martin confirmed that is the process as she understands it.
Anderson commented that this would be the initial step that this development would
seek. He stated that the applicant has completed an extensive EAW and has requested
the Comprehensive Plan amendment and if that were approved, he would think the
applicant to come back to request rezoning, site plan and plat. He noted that in order for
those next steps to be considered, there would be conditions placed upon this approval
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
9
related to the infrastructure that would be necessary to support this development. He
stated that it is his understanding that the applicant has shown a willingness to
accommodate the transportation and utility infrastructure that would be needed.
DesLauriers stated that there is an overwhelming need for more business development
in this area as it generates taxes and creates jobs without placing additional burden on
other City services. He asked if the business development could be limited to the
southern portion of the property, leaving the northern parcel to remain more rural.
Reid stated that she is comfortable with the Comprehensive Plan amendment but is not
comfortable with the proposed site plan as she believes it to be too big. She did not
believe that this scale of business development fits within Medina.
Martin stated that if the Comprehensive Plan amendment were approved, there are still
elements of the ordinance that would impact the design but was unsure that would
reduce the total square footage and parking if all other ordinance requirements were
met.
Cavanaugh stated that he would prefer the development to come in as a PUD and asked
if the Comprehensive Plan amendment could be made contingent upon the applicant
submitting a PUD rather than a general land use application.
Anderson commented that he does agree with Martin in that when a property of this size
is reguided and includes this amount of developable land, the Council would be limited in
terms of the scale of physical improvements as long as the other zoning requirements
are met. He stated that a Council could not require a developer to submit a PUD. He
explained that a PUD would be something a developer would request if it were seeking
flexibility or deviations from City Code in return for other benefit.
Cavanaugh commented that he understands under normal circumstances a City cannot
require a developer to submit a PUD but asked if that could be done in this case as this
approval would be contingent upon other items such as infrastructure improvements.
Anderson replied that the proposal that has been brought forward related to this
Comprehensive Plan amendment request would need the infrastructure improvements in
order to support the proposed development which is why that could be made contingent
upon those items.
Cavanaugh stated that the main purpose for requesting a PUD would be for the Council
to guide more of the development design. He asked if the Site Plan review would
provide the same level of discretion as a PUD, as the Comprehensive Plan amendment
would still be contingent upon all other necessary approvals.
Anderson stated that the review of the Site Plan would not provide the Council the ability
to request things above what is required in the City Code and ordinance regulations. He
stated that if all Code requirements were met, the Council could not deny the request
simply because it does not like the way it looks.
Finke commented that there are some wetland impacts that would be proposed on the
western side of the northern parcel for the sole purpose of adding additional footprint to
the building. He stated that one of the recommended conditions was that the impacts to
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
10
wetlands would be reduced. He referenced the staging period requirements, noting that
if a parcel wants to move forward in the staging period, a PUD is required therefore it
would not be unheard of that a PUD would be required in order to move forward in
staging. He stated that if the property were staged for 2025, a developer could propose
a PUD to develop now rather than waiting for 2025.
Martin asked if the wetlands could be significantly impacted by filling and purchasing
wetland credits.
Finke stated that it could be fair to say that action would not make the request align with
the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Cavanaugh commented that he believes that this business use makes sense as there is
business to the south and across from the site, and great access from Highway 55. He
believed that this would be an ideal place for this type of business. He referenced the
transportation infrastructure and asked if Highway 55 would be an issue.
Rickart commented that Highway 55 will be a problem until it is four lanes. He stated
that the improvements proposed would limit the impact to Willow, especially at the
Chippewa intersection. He stated that the peak condition was analyzed with full
development. He stated that there would not be a huge impact from the development
right away. He stated that he is very comfortable with the recommended improvements.
He noted that the Highway 55 improvements will be a MnDOT decision on when that
should occur but noted that more development would help to push MnDOT in that
direction.
Cavanaugh referenced the developments that were listed that occupied land designated
as business noting that included residential development, internal business, a religious
use, and the AutoPlex units are owned by the people that purchase them therefore those
are not businesses in the traditional commercial sense that serve the broader
community. He stated that if he were to add additional business land, this would be a
great location. He stated that he would support the use of a PUD and would support
linking that to the staging if possible.
Martin commented that she thought in adding more business development would be to
add businesses that provide a service to the existing residents rather than an industrial
complex. She was unsure that this fits within that goal. She stated that it does not seem
that there is overwhelming support of the Council for the Comprehensive Plan
amendment as proposed.
DesLauriers commented that he does not believe it makes sense to amend the
Comprehensive Plan to reguide the entire parcel to business at this time.
Albers agreed that he does not believe the reasons provided support an amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan based on the goals and visions within that plan.
Reid stated that she is not in favor of a Comprehensive Plan amendment for this
property. She commented that uses north and south of Cates Road could be different.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
11
Cavanaugh commented that he could support a Comprehensive Plan amendment if
there was a requirement for a PUD related to staging. He stated that as proposed he
would not support the request.
Martin encouraged the applicant to rethink its proposal based on the comments and
concerns expressed. She invited the applicant to speak.
Peter Coyle, attorney representing the applicant, stated that the question related to a
PUD has never been suggested. He stated that from their vantage point, a PUD may be
appropriate and if asked, they would most likely agree to that. He stated that while he
respects the notion that this property should be preserved as rural, it is situated directly
adjacent to Highway 55 and other emerging commercial areas to the west. He stated
that the Cates family has owned the property for 40 years and has been very patient
about bringing forward development until they found something appropriate to what is
happening around them and this seems to be the appropriate time. He stated that this is
just a plan and has not yet been vetted in a technical way. He stated that they have
committed to all the infrastructure improvements that have been suggested. He stated
that they are committed to preserving as much wetland as possible while still having the
site usable for a business park use. He stated that the overall site plan has a much-
diminished site plan over what would be allowed under the Code in order to preserve
wetland. He commented that the expansion of this area for the business would provide
benefit to the community through job creation and increased tax base. He thanked City
staff for the time they have spent working with them to develop a plan that makes sense
for the landowner, developer, and the City. He stated that they want to work together to
create a plan that would meet the approval of the Council and if that were through a
PUD, they would do that. He asked the Council to keep an open mind and allow this to
move forward in order to see additional plans. He noted that if there is something the
Council does not like, they would work to address that. He referenced the previous
agreement that had been mentioned, noting that he has a disagreement with Anderson
on the meaning of the settlement agreement. He understood that they are proposing
something larger than the agreement.
Martin commented that she understands that proposals are very broad in nature at this
stage, as it would not make sense to invest too much into detail without knowing if the
amendment would be allowed.
Cavanaugh commented that he looks forward to the applicant coming back with
additional proposals.
Reid stated that she believes the northern and southern portions of the property are very
different. She stated that she would welcome another application but is not comfortable
with the proposal as submitted.
DesLauriers echoed the comments of Reid.
Martin echoed those comments as well.
Coyle asked for clarification on the modification that would be needed, specifically
whether that would be provided in subsequent applications or to the request tonight.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
12
Martin commented that there have been many concerns expressed tonight. She stated
that whatever comes before the Council has to be more in line with the goals and
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
Coyle asked how those modifications would be made, whether that would be
amendment to the current application or done through resubmittal.
Finke stated that there has been a lot of feedback provided by the Council tonight. He
stated that there is time available within the review period to have additional discussion.
He noted that there could be a motion to table tonight which would allow additional
discussion with the applicant and staff to perhaps amend this application.
Martin commented that she would prefer to deny this Comprehensive Plan amendment
to make that action clear. She stated that the applicant could then work on a new
application without the constraints of the review timeline.
Moved by Albers, seconded by Reid, to direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment based upon the findings described by the Council.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
Martin commented that the developer is invited to consider modifying its request for the
property that accommodates the comments provided by the Council tonight. She
confirmed the consensus of the Council.
Martin briefly recessed the meeting.
Martin reconvened the meeting.
C. Weston Woods – Mark and Kathleen Smith – Amended PUD and Plat (9:34
p.m.)
Johnson stated that the Smiths are requesting an amended PUD and plat for Weston
Woods and provided an overview of the changes proposed.
Finke stated that the plat and PUD were approved the previous year and summarized
within the staff report. He stated that those approvals would still stand regardless of the
decision on the proposed amendments. He displayed the updated plat as requested
and related lot standards. He highlighted the proposed changes from the approved
PUD. He stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its last meeting,
with no public testimony received, and unanimously recommended approval noting the
reduction in density was seen as a benefit.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
13
DesLauriers commented that he supports the changes and recommendation of the
Planning Commission.
Albers, Reid, Cavanaugh, and Martin were supportive of the changes as well.
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Reid, to direct staff to prepare documents
approving the amendment to the Weston Woods PUD and plat.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
D. Loram and Scannell Medina Industrial – Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) – Proposed Commercial/Industrial Development (9:42
p.m.)
Johnson stated that this is an EAW for a proposed commercial/industrial development of
approximately 450,000 square feet on 25 acres east of Arrowhead and south of Highway
55.
Finke stated that an EAW was prepared as required and the comment period expired on
March 17th. He noted that comments were provided from various agencies and included
in the Council packet. He noted that staff has prepared a draft response to comments,
findings of fact and record of decision. He stated that none of the agencies providing
comments suggested that an EIS should be required. He stated that staff recommends
a negative declaration on the need for an EIS and approval of the findings of fact and
record of decision as well as the related resolution.
Martin commended staff for the excellent draft of the findings of fact and record of
decision.
Albers stated that he will be curious to see the results of the archeology scan.
Finke stated that those are not generally seen in a land use application, but he would
attempt to provide them for informational purposes.
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Albers, to approve the Loram/Scannell Medina
Industrial EAW Findings of Fact and Record of Decision.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
14
Motion passed unanimously.
1. Resolution 2022-25 Approving the Response to Comments, Findings
of Fact, and Record of Decision for the Loram/Scannell Medina
Industrial EAW and Making a Negative Declaration Regarding the
Need for an EIS
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Albers, to adopt the Resolution 2022-25 Approving
the Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision for the
Loram/Scannell Medina Industrial EAW and Making a Negative Declaration Regarding
the Need for an EIS.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
E. Landform on Behalf of McDonald’s – 822 Hwy 55 – Conditional Use Permit
Amendment (9:48 p.m.)
Johnson stated Landform is requesting, on behalf of McDonald’s, a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) amendment to allow an additional drive-thru lane.
Finke stated that the subject property is Commercial Highway, on which a drive-thru is a
conditional use. He stated that the amended PUD would rescind and replace the CUP
approved in the 1990’s. He stated that the installation of the second drive-thru lane
would reduce the parking stalls onsite, but the site would still have more than the
required number of stalls. He stated that the second drive-thru lane would be added
between the building and existing drive-thru lane, therefore the expansion would not
reduce the existing setbacks in that location any further. He stated that the Planning
Commission held a public hearing and unanimously recommended approval.
Martin commented that this makes sense and actually enhances the site plan. She
confirmed that there were no questions of the Council.
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Martin, to direct staff to prepare a resolution
approving the amendment to the CUP subject to the conditions noted.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
15
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (9:53 p.m.)
Johnson thanked Reid for all her work on the Uptown Hamel banners, noting that she
has worked closely with business and property owners. He stated that the business
owners would like to order the banners and asked the City to fund half of that purchase
which would be a contribution of $2,600. He stated that the business owners would
install, own, and maintain the banners.
Moved by Martin, seconded by Reid, to authorize an expenditure of $2,600 towards the
purchase of the Uptown Hamel banners.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
Martin thanked Reid for her assistance in creating an identity for Uptown Hamel.
Johnson reminded the Council of the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting on April
6th which is scheduled to be held virtually on April 6th. He noted that the assessor has a
conflict with the second meeting date and therefore a rescheduled date should be
discussed at the meeting. He stated that he has been working with Martin and Uptown
Hamel business owners to schedule business tours for May 3rd.
Albers commented that he would have a conflict with Tuesday morning meetings.
Martin confirmed that Albers would be in agreement with sitting out for the May 3rd
meeting and in the future, they would attempt to avoid Tuesday morning meetings.
Albers noted that he also has a conflict with Thursday mornings.
Martin noted the need to reschedule the second Board of Appeal and Equalization
meeting and asked if that could occur at 5:30 p.m. on May 3rd.
Johnson commented that the second meeting must occur within 20 days of the first
meeting, therefore it would have to be held on or before April 26th. He stated that he will
work with the assessor to determine some options for the date.
The members of the Council provided details on their availability over the next two
weeks.
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (10:07 p.m.)
Albers stated that he will be attending the fire services meeting the following day in place
of DesLauriers.
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2022
16
Martin commented that there is a resident in Long Lake that may have been intricately
involved in creating a fire district in another jurisdiction that has offered to speak at the
fire services meeting. She commended Johnson for getting the City of Wayzata to the
table as well. She also commended DesLauriers for guiding this process for so long.
DesLauriers commented that some of the mayors will also be attending and seem to be
interested in the presentation the following day.
Martin stated that there has been rumor circulating that Medina may not support the
merger between Loretto and Hamel fire departments. She stated that she believes the
merger would be a great step forward and a benefit to residents.
Johnson thanked Martin and DesLauriers for their vision on fire services and pushing
this topic forward. He stated the cities participating in this process have also been
excellent to work with on fire services.
X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (10:17 p.m.)
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Albers, to approve the bills, EFT 006303E-006327E
for $107,695.10, order check numbers 052736-052791 for $323,272.57, and payroll EFT
0511716-0511776 for $118,016.69.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
XI. ADJOURN
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Martin, to adjourn the meeting at 10:19 p.m.
A roll call vote was performed:
DesLauriers aye
Albers aye
Cavanaugh aye
Reid aye
Martin aye
Motion passed unanimously.
__________________________________
Kathy Martin, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________________
Scott Johnson, City Administrator