HomeMy Public PortalAbout06.21.2022 City Council Meeting Packet Posted 06/17/2022 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, June 21, 2022
7:00 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the June 7, 2022 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Adopt Ordinance Amending the 2022 Fee Schedule
B. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance Amending the 2022 Fee Schedule by
Title and Summary
C. Adopt Ordinance Amending City Code Pertaining to Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
D. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance Amending City Code Pertaining to
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure by Title and Summary
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Iroquois Drive Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing
1. Resolution Approving Plans According to Feasibility Report and Ordering Iroquois Drive
Improvement Project
2. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Iroquois Drive Overlay Project
B. Oakview Road Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing
1. Resolution Approving Plans According to Feasibility Report and Ordering Oakview
Road Improvement Project
2. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Oakview Road Overlay Project
C. Tower Drive West Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing
1. Resolution Approving Plans According to Feasibility Report and Ordering Tower Drive
West Improvement Project
2. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll for Tower Drive West Overlay Project
D. Baker Park Townhomes Easement Vacation – Public Hearing
E. State Farm – 340 Clydesdale Trail – PUD Concept Plan Review
F. Blooming Meadows – PUD Concept Plan Review
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XI. ADJOURN
Meeting Rules of Conduct to Address
the City Council:
• Fill out & turn in comment card
• Give name and address
• Indicate if representing a group
• Limit remarks to 3-5 minutes
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina Mayor and City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: June 16, 2022
DATE OF MEETING: June 21, 2022
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Adopt Ordinance Amending the 2022 Fee Schedule – The changes to the Fee Schedule
are to respond to increases in prices from vendors and the overall economy. Staff
recommends approval.
See attached ordinance.
B. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance Amending the Fee Schedule by
Title and Summary – Attached is a resolution for summary publication of the amended
Fee Schedule Ordinance. Staff recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
C. Adopt Ordinance Amending City Code Pertaining to Electric Vehicle Charging
Infrastructure – City Council reviewed the ordinance at the April 19, 2022 Work Session
and June 7, 2022 City Council Meeting. Staff made the requested adjustments to the
ordinance. Staff recommends approval.
See attached ordinance.
D. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Publication of Ordinance Amending City Code Pertaining
to Electric Vehicle Infrastructure by Title and Summary – Attached is a resolution for
summary publication of the Electric Vehicle Charing Infrastructure Ordinance. Staff
recommends approval.
See attached resolution.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Iroquois Drive Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing – At the
May 17, 2022, meeting, the City Council received the feasibility report and called for the
public hearings for the Iroquois Drive Improvement Project and levying special
assessments. The hearings have been noticed for the June 21, 2022, City Council
meeting.
2
Recommended Motions:
1. Motion to adopt resolution approving plans according to feasibility report and
ordering Iroquois Drive Improvement Project
2. Motion to adopt resolution adopting assessment roll for Iroquois Drive
Improvement Project
B. Oakview Road Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing – At the
May 17, 2022, meeting, the City Council received the feasibility report and called for the
public hearings for the Oakview Road Improvement Project and levying special
assessments. The hearings have been noticed for the June 21, 2022, City Council
meeting.
Recommended Motions:
1. Motion to adopt resolution approving plans according to feasibility report and
ordering Oakview Road Improvement Project
2. Motion to adopt resolution adopting assessment roll for Oakview Road
Improvement Project
C. Tower Drive West Improvement Project – Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing – At
the May 17, 2022, meeting, the City Council received the feasibility report and called for
the public hearings for the Tower Drive West Improvement Project and levying special
assessments. The hearings have been noticed for the June 21, 2022, City Council
meeting.
Recommended Motions:
1. Motion to adopt resolution approving plans according to feasibility report and
ordering Tower Drive West Improvement Project
2. Motion to adopt resolution adopting assessment roll for Tower Drive West
Improvement Project
D. Baker Park Townhome Easement Vacation – Public Hearing – Medina Townhomes LLC
has requested that the City vacate drainage and utility easements which they granted in
connection with the Baker Park Townhome development approved last year. The
original easements were inadvertently granted in locations which crossed into the
approved building locations and the applicant has updated their proposed utility layout so
portions of the easement would no longer appear necessary. The applicant proposes to
grant new easements necessary for the new utility layout and which would not be located
within building footprints. The attached exhibit highlights the replacement easement
locations in green and the portions of the easement which would be vacated or not
replaced in red.
Recommended Motion:
1. Move to adopt the resolution vacating drainage and utility easement within 1432
County Road 29.
3
E. State Farm – 340 Clydesdale Trail – PUD Concept Plan Review – Kyle Vitense has
requested a PUD Concept Plan Review (PUD-CPR) for the construction of a 4,628-sf
stand-alone building for a State Farm Agency at 340 Clydesdale Trail. The vacant lot is
just west of Wells Fargo and Target, and north of the Goddard School. The subject lot
and all surrounding properties are zoned PUD. The purpose of the PUD Concept Plan is
to provide advisory comments to the applicant for their consideration on whether and
how to continue with a formal application. No formal action is requested.
F. Blooming Meadows PUD Concept Plan Review – Pillar Home Partners has requested
review of a PUD Concept Plan for a 5-lot rural subdivision located east of Holy Name
Drive, northeast of Lakeview Road. The subject site is over 73 acres in size, with
approximately 22 acres of wetlands. The subject site is zoned and guided Rural
Residential (RR). The applicant is proposing a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to
result in the same number of lots (five), but requests flexibility for lot size and
arrangement to set aside a significant portion of the site (approximately 7.5 acres) for
creation of additional wetland areas. The applicant intends to create a wetland bank with
the additional wetland areas and sell credits from the bank. The purpose of the PUD
Concept Plan is to provide advisory comments to the applicant for their consideration on
whether and how to continue with a formal application. No formal action is requested.
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 006403E-006420E for $62,868.18,
and order check numbers 053041-053094 for $208,819.61, and payroll EFT 0511915-0511951
for $60,572.37.
INFORMATION PACKET:
• Planning Department Update
• Police Department Update
• Public Works Department Update
• Claims List
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
1
DRAFT 1
2
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 7, 2022 3
4
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on June 7, 2022 at 7:00 5
p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided. 6
7
I. ROLL CALL 8
9
Members present: Albers, Cavanaugh, DesLauriers, Martin, and Reid. 10
11
Members absent: None. 12
13
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Attorney Dave Anderson, Finance 14
Director Erin Barnhart, City Engineer Jim Stremel, City Planning Director Dusty Finke, 15
Planning Intern Colette Baumgardner, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief of 16
Police Jason Nelson. 17
18
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:01 p.m.) 19
20
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 21
The agenda was approved as presented. 22
23
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:01 p.m.) 24
25
A. Approval of the May 17, 2022 Work Session City Council Meeting Minutes 26
Moved by Albers, seconded by Martin, to approve the May 17, 2022 work session City 27
Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 28
29
B. Approval of the May 17, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 30
Moved by Martin, seconded by Cavanaugh, to approve the May 17, 2022 regular City 31
Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 32
33
V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:02 p.m.) 34
35
A. Approve Resolution Accepting the Resignation of Community Service 36
Officer Justin Cook and Authorize Recruitment of Vacant Community 37
Service Officer Position 38
B. Approve 2022-2023 Liquor License Renewals 39
C. Approve Hackamore Road Agreement with WSB 40
D. Approve Resolution Accepting Donations for the 2022 Bike Safety Rodeo 41
E. Approve Agreement for Uptown Hamel Study 42
Martin commented that the City will miss Cook. She also thanked everyone that made 43
donations to the bike rodeo. 44
45
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Reid, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 46
passed unanimously. 47
48
VI. COMMENTS (7:04 p.m.) 49
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
2
A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 1
There were none. 2
3
B. Park Commission 4
Scherer reported that the annual park tour was held on May 18th with a regular meeting 5
following. He stated that the Three Rivers regional trail was discussed, and no 6
consensus was reached. 7
8
C. Planning Commission 9
Finke reported that the Planning Commission will hold three public hearings the following 10
week to consider a PUD Concept Plan for a rural subdivision, Cates Industrial Park 11
Comprehensive Amendment request, and a Concept Plan for an amendment to the 12
Medina Clydesdale Marketplace PUD. 13
14
VII. OLD BUSINESS 15
16
A. Hamel Townhomes (7:08 p.m.) 17
DesLauriers recused himself from this item. 18
19
Johnson stated that the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan have been updated based on the 20
input of the Council at the last meeting. 21
22
Martin commented that she believes staff captured all the comments of the Council from 23
the last review. 24
25
1. Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval 26
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Albers, to Adopt the Resolution Granting 27
Preliminary Plat of Hamel Townhomes subject to the recommended conditions. Motion 28
passed unanimously. 29
30
2. Resolution Approving Site and Building Plan Review 31
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Albers, to Adopt the Resolution Approving the Site 32
Plan of Hamel Townhomes subject to the recommended conditions. Motion passed 33
unanimously. 34
35
DesLauriers rejoined the Council. 36
37
B. Diamond Lake Regional Trail (7:10 p.m.) 38
Johnson stated that on June 15, 2021 the Council approved a conceptual route for the 39
Diamond Lake Regional Trail (DLRT). He stated that since that time Three Rivers Park 40
District has worked on a Master Plan, the comment period has now expired, and Three 41
Rivers Park District is now requesting each of the communities pass a resolution of 42
support for the DLRT. 43
44
Martin asked if there had been any significant deviations from what was previously 45
approved for the conceptual route through Medina. 46
47
Stephen Shurson replied that there were no deviations from the route previously 48
approved by the Medina City Council. He commented that the Master Plan is designed 49
to document those previous discussions, public engagement, and previous research. 50
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
3
Martin commented that she did focus on the Medina route and did not notice any 1
deviations. 2
3
DesLauriers referenced the cities that support the trail and noticed that Long Lake was 4
missing. He asked if there was a reason that community did not support the trail. 5
6
Shurson replied that they had proposed that the existing trail along Highway 112 would 7
be converted to a regional trail where Three Rivers would take over ownership and 8
maintenance and while the public and businesses supported the concept, the City 9
Council felt that introducing a higher level of traffic into the downtown area would cause 10
congestion and pedestrian traffic. He stated that the City declined the option to convert 11
that segment of trail. 12
13
DesLauriers stated that perhaps in the future Long Lake will change their mind. 14
15
Shurson commented that the good news is that there would still be connectivity. 16
17
Martin commented that during the public hearing process there was quite a bit of 18
discussion related to the power of imminent domain and that the Park District would not 19
exercise that route. She asked if that is simply the policy of the current commissioners 20
or whether that is set in policy. 21
22
Kelly Grissman, Three Rivers Park District, replied that it is not written into statute that 23
they cannot exercise imminent domain, but it is written into statute that in order for the 24
Park District to exercise that tool, the city would have to authorize that tool. She stated 25
that the city could choose to take that tool off the table through a cooperative agreement 26
that will come forth at a later time. 27
28
Martin agreed that she would feel more comfortable if that is included in the cooperative 29
agreement. She asked if the cooperative agreement would be between the Park District 30
and all cities, or between the Park District and each individual city. 31
32
Grissman replied that the Park District would have agreements with each individual city 33
in order to customize the details to the needs and desires of that community. 34
35
Shurson reviewed the next steps in the process, should this resolution be approved. 36
37
Martin recognized the lengthy review and discussions the Council previously had on this 38
topic and appreciated the cooperative efforts of the Park District throughout that process. 39
40
1. Resolution of Support for the Diamond Lake Regional Trail 41
Moved by DesLauriers, seconded by Martin, to Adopt the Resolution Supporting the 42
Diamond Lake Regional Trail Master Plan. Motion passed unanimously. 43
44
C. Electric Vehicle Charging Ordinance (7:20 p.m.) 45
Johnson stated that at the April 19th worksession, staff brought forward the proposed 46
ordinance and a few changes were required to be made which were then reviewed by 47
the Planning Commission at its May meeting. He stated that a few more changes were 48
suggested by that body and an updated version is provided for the Council to review. 49
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
4
Baumgardner provided background on the draft electric vehicle charging ordinance and 1
its intent, noting that she provided a higher level of background and information at the 2
previous worksession with the Council. She reviewed the sections of the proposed draft 3
ordinance, recommendations, and related incentives. 4
5
Martin asked if the landscaping reduction incentive would be on the interior of the site. 6
She was unsure that would be a big incentive as most developers of retail are building to 7
sell. 8
9
DesLauriers commented that 50 percent is a lot and suggested 25 percent as the 10
reduction. 11
12
Martin stated that perhaps up to 50 percent is allowed with specific minimums identified. 13
14
Albers asked if the current cost to be EV ready for commercial would be about $7,200. 15
16
Baumgardner provided a copy of an email showing the associated cost estimates. She 17
noted that the final step to go from EV ready to EV installed is missing as those costs 18
vary dramatically. 19
20
Finke stated that this incentive was in response to feedback from the Council pertaining 21
to offsetting the cost of installation of some level of EV readiness. He stated that 22
reduction of landscaping would allow for some additional square footage of space in the 23
building to offset the cost of installation. 24
25
Baumgardner continued to review the proposed incentives. 26
27
Cavanaugh asked if there would be a reason to keep parking lot islands, in terms of 28
safety or maneuverability. 29
30
Finke stated that if islands are necessary to provide turning radius, those would still be 31
required. 32
33
Baumgardner continued to review the proposed incentives. 34
35
Martin noted that she was a bit concerned with the density incentive until she read the 36
proposed language which includes caps. 37
38
Baumgardner reviewed the input received by the Planning Commission and its 39
recommendation at its May meeting. 40
41
Martin stated that perhaps there should be additional language added to the tree 42
incentive to ensure there are some trees on the site and how that incentive is applied. 43
44
Baumgardner commented that the incentive would only apply up to the recommendation 45
for the type of development. She stated that if two stations would be recommended, the 46
incentive could be applied up to that standard. 47
48
Albers stated that he is unsure if he is in agreement with the tree incentive. He 49
suggested not using the tree incentive. He noted that not all vehicles will be electric and 50
therefore trees will still provide value. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
5
1
Cavanaugh commented that whatever can fit on the site, should be placed on the site. 2
He stated that perhaps the City pays a percentage of going from one step to the other, 3
using the tree fund. He stated that if the incentive is linked to tree replacement payment, 4
some sites would have the incentive available, and others would not. He suggested 5
instead, using the tree fund to contribute a percentage of the cost for a site to become 6
EV ready. 7
8
Martin asked for clarification. 9
10
Cavanaugh provided examples of two parcels. He instead provided a suggestion where 11
the City would assist a developer in becoming EV ready by contributing a percentage of 12
the cost using the tree fund. 13
14
Finke stated that the City has identified a more active role of forestry management using 15
that fund. 16
17
Martin commented that diverting tree fund dollars to EV would seem contrary to the 18
purpose and intent of that fund. She stated that she would lean towards simply 19
removing that tree incentive. 20
21
Barnhart provided additional details on the environmental fund and explained the 22
different line items within the fund. 23
24
Albers stated that he would prefer to use that fund to offset the cost of trees for residents 25
to purchase and plant rather than offset the cost of an EV charging station. 26
27
Reid stated that she is unsure what the answer would be. 28
29
DesLauriers agreed to remove the tree incentive, noting that it could be added at a later 30
time. 31
32
Cavanaugh commented that the first three incentives take away from the aesthetics of 33
the property. He stated that his suggestion was to allow development to occur as it does 34
today and a portion of the funds that would be paid towards the tree fund could be used 35
to contribute a percentage towards EV charging readiness. 36
37
Albers stated that he would prefer to allow developers to respond to the market rather 38
than incentivizing that. He stated that developers can already obtain subsidies to install 39
the equipment and therefore would be in favor of the ordinance without the incentives. 40
41
Martin commented that she does agree with that statement in respect to single-family 42
and townhome developments. She could not recall a discussion with anyone that has 43
an electric vehicle in terms of the cost to add that type of connection to charge their 44
vehicle. She stated that she does like the recommendation or incentive for multi-family 45
housing. She asked the Council if some type of incentive program would make sense. 46
47
Cavanaugh agreed that some type of incentive would make sense, on the commercial 48
side, to ensure there is infrastructure in place in the future. 49
50
Albers stated that he would not support an incentive. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2022
6
1
Reid commented that she believes that this should be market driven and did not support 2
incentives. 3
4
DesLauriers stated that he would agree that the EV charging should be market driven. 5
He noted that Polaris has a few charging stations, and they are rarely used. He stated 6
that if the stations are needed, the market will bring them. 7
8
Martin confirmed the consensus of the Council to remove the incentives from the 9
proposed ordinance. She suggested that staff bring back an amended ordinance with 10
that direction. 11
12
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (8:10 p.m.) 13
Johnson had nothing further to report. 14
15
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (8:10 p.m.) 16
Martin commented that she did attend the bike rodeo which was enjoyed by the children 17
and also attended the Honor Guard memorial service. She stated that she and Albers 18
also attended the meeting to continue discussions on fire services. She stated that 19
Albers is heading a subcommittee that will create a vision for that potential district. She 20
commented that the Uptown Hamel banners look great and thanked Reid for her 21
contributions. 22
23
X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (8:12 p.m.) 24
Moved by Cavanaugh, seconded by Reid, to approve the bills, EFT 006381E-006402E 25
for $77,371.66, order check numbers 052977-053040 for $199,500.84, and payroll EFT 26
0511883-0511914 for $61,234.07. Motion passed unanimously. 27
28
XI. CLOSED SESSION: CONSIDERATION OF LAND ACQUISITION AT PID 11-29
118-23-21-0005 OR PID 11-118-23-32-0003 PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT. 30
SEC. 13D.05, SUBD. 3(C) 31
Moved by Martin, seconded by Albers, to adjourn the meeting to closed session at 8:14 32
p.m. in consideration of land acquisition at PID 11-118-23-21-0005 or PID 11-118-23-32-33
0003 pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 13D.05, Subd. 3(c). Motion passed unanimously. 34
35
The meeting returned to open session at 9:00 p.m. 36
37
XII. ADJOURN 38
Moved by Albers, seconded by Cavanaugh, to adjourn the meeting at 9:01 p.m. Motion 39
passed unanimously. 40
41
42
__________________________________ 43
Kathy Martin, Mayor 44
Attest: 45
46
____________________________________ 47
Scott Johnson, City Administrator 48
1
TO: Medina Mayor and City Council
FROM: Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk/Assistant to the City Administrator
DATE: June 14, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022
SUBJECT: Amended 2022 Fee Schedule
Summary
The proposed changes to the 2022 Fee Schedule include the areas of Administration,
Public Safety, Parks, and the Hamel Community Building. The changes are to respond to
increases in prices from vendors and the overall economy.
Recommended Actions
1. Adopt Ordinance Amending the 2022 Fee Schedule
2. Adopt Resolution to Publish Ordinance Amending the 2022 Fee Schedule by Title
and Summary
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item #5A
Ordinance No. 1
June 21, 2022
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN AMENDED FEE SCHEDULE
The city council of the city of Medina ordains as follows:
Section 1. The schedule of fees and rates attached hereto as Exhibit A, Exhibit B
and Exhibit C is hereby amended by deleting the struck through
language and adding the underlined language.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective on June 21, 2022 upon its adoption and
publication.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Medina this _____ day of ______, 2022.
_____________________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News this _____ day of ______, 2022.
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 2
June 21, 2022
Administration
Service Charge
Address Labels $50.00
Address List $25.00
Administrative Appeal $250.00
Affidavit of Filing $15.00
Audit Book copy $50.00
City Code Book Cost + 10%
Copies – single or double
sided (B&W)
$0.25 per page ($5.00
minimum)
Copies or pictures – color 8
½ x 11
$.50 per page ($5.00
minimum)
Credit Card Payments Credit Card fees apply; +
$0.50 if less than $100.00
(excluding utility and online
HCB payments)
Delinquent Charges Assessed 10% administrative fee
DVD/Flash Drive/CD $30.00 per DVD/Flash Drive
$20 per CD
Mailing costs of
copies/reports
At cost
New resident listing $20.00
Peddler, Solicitor, Transient
Merchant Permit Application
Fee
$150 up to $200 if extensive
background check is needed
Photographs $20.00 + cost of photo
Non-Sufficient Funds $30.00 $40.00
Notary No Charge
Special Assessment search $25.00
Special Council Meeting
request
$250.00
Special Event Permit Fee $25.00
Tax Increment Financing
application (minimum)
$1,500 (deposit) + c.a.c
Tobacco License (annual) $150.00
German Liberal Cemetery
Service Charge
Gravesite Purchase $1,500.00
Gravesite Transfer $15.00
Interment (Open/Close) for Casket
(Includes locate & marker)
$1,010
Interment (Open/Close) for
Cremation or infant Cherub
$410
Disinterment (Open/Close) for
Casket
$900.00
Disinterment (Open/Close) for
Cremation or infant Cherub
$300
Marker Removal $100
Funeral Service Attendant/Traffic
Control
$150.00
Park and Recreation
Service Charge
Independence Beach Parking
Permit (residents only)
No Charge
Ball Field and Court Use See Exhibit C
Hamel Community Building See Exhibit B
Liquor
Service Charge
3.2 Malt Liquor-off sale $50.00
3.2 Malt Liquor-on sale $100.00
Consumption & Display
License
$200.00
Liquor License Investigation
(in-state maximum)
$500.00
Liquor License Investigation
(out-of-state maximum)
$10,000.00
Off-sale $150.00
On-sale Class A: >20,000 sq.
ft.
$7,500.00
On-sale Class B: 12,000 –
20,000 sq. ft.
$6,500.00
On-sale Class C: 6,000 –
12,000 sq. ft.
$5,500.00
On-sale Class D: < 6,000 sq.
ft.
$4,500.00
On-sale Sunday $200.00
Public Dance $100.00
3.2 Malt Liquor one day set
up
$25.00
Temporary on-sale
application fee
$25.00
Wine License $2,000.00
On-sale Brewer Taproom
License
$500.00
Off-sale Small Brewer
License
$150.00
Microdistillery Cocktail
Room License
$500.00
Fire
Service Charge
Fire False Alarm (first) No Charge
Fire False Alarm (second) $150.00
Fire False Alarm (third) $200.00
Fire False Alarm (fourth and
thereafter)
$250.00
Post Fire Inspection $40.00 + c.a.c.
Number of
alarms within
one calendar
year
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 3
June 21, 2022
Police
Service Charge
Accident/Police Report $.25/page ($5.00
minimum)
Burning Permit (non-resident) $20.00
Burning Permit (resident) No Charge
Dog Impounds $25.00 at Police office or
$50.00 at Strehler Farm +
$10.00 each additional
calendar day
$22/day Oak Ridge
Kennels
Reserve Officer at event/per
hour
$25.00
Event Security (per officer/per
hour)
$100.00 and $125.00 on
Holidays (3-hour min.)
Fingerprinting Resident & Employees
$20.00 up to 3 cards, $5.00
each additional card. Non-
residents $30.00 up to 3
cards, $5.00 each
additional card.
Criminal Suspense Files Non-
Medina Case
$20.00
Fireworks Permit $50.00
Gambling Investigation Fee
(annual)
$50.00
Gambling Application for
Exempt Permit
$10.00
Gun Club license (annual) $50.00
Hunting Permit (non-resident) $25.00
Hunting Permit (resident) $15.00
Kennel License (City Council
Review)
$300 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Kennel License
(Administrative Review)
$100.00
Kennel License (Waiver) $300 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Letter of Conduct $15.00
Liquor License Renewal
Background Check Fee
$70
Police False Alarm (first) No Charge
Police False Alarm (second) $25.00
Police False Alarm (third) $50.00
Police False Alarm (fourth) $75.00
Police False Alarm (fifth and
thereafter)
$150.00
Vehicle Impound/Storage $10.00/day + towing fees
No Parking Sign Deposit $5.00 per sign. Deposit
returned when signs are
returned.
Public Works
Service Charge
Curb stop repair $250.00 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Driveway Curb Cut Review $100.00 (no fee if in
connection with building
permit fee >$1000)
Driveway Waiver $500.00
Frozen/damaged meter repair $100.00
Annual ROW Registration Fee $100.00 per year
Noxious Weed / Mowing $150 per hour
ROW Permit $100.00
Small Wireless Facility Rent
$150 Annual + $25
Maintenance
Small Wireless Electrical $73 per node (less than
or equal to 100 watts),
$182 per node (>100
watts), or actual cost
Sanitary Sewer Prohibited
Connection Fee - Residential
$100 per month
Surcharge – noncompliance w/
stormwater prohibition from
sanitary sewer
$100.00 per month
Sanitary Sewer Prohibited
Connection Fee – Comm/Industrial
$100 + $20 per 1,000
gallons per month
Water disconnect/reconnect trip fee $65.00
Unpermitted Hydrant Water Usage $500 (first)
$750 (second)
$1,000 (third)
Radio Transmitter $165.00
Water meter iPearl (1”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$617.00
Water meter iPearl (3/4”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$468.00
Water meter SRII (1”) + radio
transmitter & meter horn
$556.00
All other meters (at cost)
Trunk Connection Rates per living unit for residential; and, equivalent for
commercial as determined by the Metropolitan Council SAC, except as may
be amended by City policy. City may adjust number of units determined by
Metropolitan Council if it deems it appropriate based on information
provided.
Service Charge
Hamel Urban Service Area-Sewer
Willow Lift Station Area
$860
$1,555
Hamel Urban Service Area-Water $7,575.00
Independence Beach Area-Sewer $860
Independence Beach Area-Water $4,410.00
Medina Morningside Area-Sewer $860
Medina Morningside Area-Water $4,410.00
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
Fee
As set by Metropolitan
Council
Maple Plain Service Area-Water Per Maple Plain Fee
Schedule
Number of
alarms within
one calendar
year
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 4
June 21, 2022
Sewer and Water Rates - All rates monthly.
(MM=Medina Morningside, IB=Independence Beach).
Service Charge
Sewer (residential) minimum $22.73 per month
Sewer (residential) per 1,000
gallons of water usage
$5.68
Sewer (commercial) minimum $22.73 per month
Sewer (commercial) per 1,000
gallons of water usage
$5.68
Sewer only (residential)
(based on 6,000 gallons per
month)
$34.10 per month
MM & IB Water (residential)
(base charge)
$12.99 per month
MM & IB Water (residential)
0-4,000 gallons
$2.88 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (residential)
5,000-6,000 gallons
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (residential)
7,000-10,000 gallons
$4.33 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (residential)
11,000-23,000 gallons
$4.68 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (residential)
24,000 and up gallons
$5.78 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (irrigation)
0-13,000 gallons
$4.68 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (irrigation)
14,000 and up gallons
$5.78 per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (commercial)
(base charge)
$12.99 per month
MM & IB Water (commercial)
water usage under 10,000
gallons per month
$4.33per 1,000 gallons
MM & IB Water (commercial)
water usage over 10,000
gallons per month
$5.78 per 1,000 gallons
Storm Water Utility Fees
Service Charge
Storm Water Utility Annual
Fee
$36.48 per Residential
Equivalency Factor (REF) +
Annual Watershed Due
established by specific
Watershed
Storm Water Appeal $250.00
Sewer and Water Rates - All rates monthly.
Service Charge
Hamel Water (residential)
(base charge)
$18.06 per month
Hamel Water (residential) 0-
4,000 gallons
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
5,000-6,000 gallons
$3.97 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
7,000-10,000 gallons
$5.42 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
11,000-23,000 gallons
$6.38 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (residential)
24,000 and up gallons
$7.22 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (irrigation) 0-
13,000 gallons
$6.51 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (irrigation)
14,000 and up gallons
$7.22 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (commercial)
(base charge)
$18.06 per month
Hamel Water (commercial)
water usage 0 – 9,000
gallons per month
$5.42 per 1,000 gallons
Hamel Water (commercial)
water usage 10,000 + gallons
per month
$7.22 per 1,000 gallons
Penalty for unpaid utility
bills
10% per month on unpaid
balance (penalty not interest)
City of Maple Plain Water
Service
Rate established by City of
Maple Plain + 10% Medina
administrative fee
City of Orono Water Service Rate established by City of
Orono + 10% Medina
administrative fee
City of Plymouth Sewer
Service
Rate established by City of
Plymouth + 10% Medina
administrative fee
The Enclave at Medina Raw
Water Usage for the first
2,000,000 gallons per month
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
The Enclave at Medina Raw
Water Usage above
2,000,000 gallons per month
$3.81 per 1,000 gallons
Dominium (per unit)
0-13,000 gallons
$3.25 per 1,000 gallons
Dominium (per unit)
14,000 and up gallons
$3.81 per 1,000 gallons
Tanker Fill $75.00 + Hamel commercial
water rates
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 5
June 21, 2022
Building Inspection Related
Service Charge
Building Permits Based on valuation – 1994
Building Fee Schedule,
except $50 flat fee if
valuation <$1500
Building Plan Review 65% of building permits
Investigation fee (for work
began without permit)
100% of Building Permit
Fee
Demolition (minimum) $100.00 per structure
(residential) + surcharge
$200.00 per structure (non-
residential) + state
surcharge
Fence <7 feet (no Permit);
>=7feet+ = based on
valuation – 1994 building
fee schedule (location
verification)
Building – fireplace $75.00 per fireplace + state
surcharge
Re-side – residential $100.00 per structure + state
surcharge
Re-roof – residential $100.00 ($165 for wood
shingles/shakes) per
structure + state surcharge
Occupancy Financial
Guarantee (ex: occupy home
prior to approval of final
grade; other similar)
$10,000 escrow or $20,000
escrow if septic system is
not completed
Window, patio door, and front
door replacement (existing
openings)
$50.00 (1 window); $100.00
(2+ windows) + state
surcharge
Windows and doors (changing
opening)
Based on valuation – 1994
Building Fee Schedule
Grading, Plan Review
(engineer review of submitted
plans and building permits)
$250.00 (grading plan
review fee is reduced in
cases where combined
building plan review and
grading plan review
otherwise would exceed
$650)
Grading Permit (grading
permit fee for disturbance less
than 1000 cubic yards is
reduced in cases where
combined building permit and
grading permit would
otherwise exceed $1000)
< 50 cubic yards = $50.00
51-100 cubic yards = $75.00
101-1000 cubic yards =
$200.00
1,001+ cubic yards =
$200+$25 per each
additional 100 yds. (max.
$750.00) + financial
guarantee of 150% of cost;
Violations = c.a.c.
Hardcover Surface/shed<200
s.f. (optional permit)
$50.00
Mechanical (residential) $75.00 per piece + state
surcharge
Moving Structure on public
street
$100.00 + c.a.c.
Plumbing (residential) $50.00 (1-5 fixtures);
$10.00 each additional +
state surcharge
Septic (new – Types 1-3)
Septic (new – Type 4)
$250.00 + $100 site visit
$935
Septic Repair (drainage fields) $125.00
Septic or Holding tank only
(ex: floor drains): Connect to
existing system
$100.00
Septic system abandonment $100.00
Septic Violation Inspection $250.00 + c.a.c.
Sewer Hook-up $100.00
Signs (temporary/portable) $50.00
Sign face replacement-wall or
pylon
$50.00
New monument/pylon sign State fee schedule
New wall sign/lighting change $100.00
Storm water Pollution
Prevention Program Review
$200.00
Underground Tank Removal $100.00
Tree Preservation Plan
Review
$50.00 (no fee if part of
grading or building permit)
Water Hook-up $100.00
Water Heater – residential $50.00 + state surcharge
Temporary Structures – res
Temporary Structures - comm
$100.00 + state surcharge
$200.00 + state surcharge
Planning and Zoning
Service Charge
Agriculture Preserve Application $50.00 + c.a.c.
Agriculture Preserve Expiration $50.00 + c.a.c.
Appeal Administrative Decision $500 (deposit); c.a.c.
not to exceed $500
Alternative Upland Buffer
Request or Appeal of Wetland
Conservation Act Staff Decision,
Correction Notice or
Classification
$500 (deposit) + c.a.c.
Appeal of Wetland Corrections
Notice
$500.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Appeal of Open Space Composite
Map and/or reference data
$500.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 6
June 21, 2022
Cartway Easement $20,000.00 (deposit)
+ c.a.c.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Comprehensive Plan Copy $100.00
Concept Plan Review $1,000.00
Conditional Use Permit
application (commercial,
minimum)
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit
application (Telecommunications
Tower, minimum)
$2,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit
application (residential, minimum)
$1,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Conditional Use Permit Annual
Review
$100.00 residential;
$200.00 commercial
Conservation Design collaborative
goal setting process
$1,000.00
Development Improvement
Financial Guarantee (i.e. Letter of
Credit or Cash)
150% amount of
estimated
improvements
Environmental Review (e.g.
EAW, EIS)
$10,000.00 (deposit)
+ c.a.c.
Interim Use Permit $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Lot Combination or
Rearrangement
Lot Combination of Substandard
Lots
$1,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
$200 + cost of title
documentation
Maps 11x17 = $1; others =
c.a.c.
Park Dedication Fee (see city
code)
Residential = 8% of
land value but no <
$3,500/unit or
>$8,000/unit;
Commercial = 8% of
land value
Planned Unit Development
Concept
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Planned Unit Development
General Plan
$10,000.00 (deposit)
+ c.a.c.
Planned Unit Development Final
Plan
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Rezoning Application (minimum) $1,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Site Plan Review
“Administrative”
$1,000.00 deposit +
c.a.c.
Site Plan Review $5,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Subdivision Application
(minimum) (2-5 lots)
Subdivision Application (>5 lots)
$5,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
$10,000 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Temporary Outdoor Sales Event $50.00
Upland Buffer Vegetation
Review/Inspection/Guarantee
150% financial
guarantee
Upland buffer sign $6.00
Vacation $2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Variance Application (minimum) $1000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c. for residential;
$2,000.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c. for commercial
Wetland Delineation Review $600.00
Wetland Field Estimate (flagging) $300.00
Wetland Exemption Decision/No
Loss
$300.00
Wetland Replacement Plan $750.00 (deposit) +
c.a.c.
Zoning Letter $50.00
Staff Consultant Fees – Staff and consultant time spent on
planning applications (or defined as other c.a.c.) will be
charged to applicant.
Service Charge
City Attorney Up to $280 per hour, per
rate schedule
City Engineer Up to $197 per hour, per
rate schedule
Survey Crew Up to $214 per hour, per
rate schedule
Prosecuting Attorney Up to $143.75 per hour,
per rate schedule
Planning Consultants Up to $160 per hour, per
rate schedule
Tree Inspector Up to $90 per hour
City Staff - Professional $90 per hour
City Staff – Public Works $70 per hour + time & half
for over time
City Staff – Field Inspector $90 per hour + time & half
for over time
City Staff – Administrative
Support
$70 per hour + time & half
for over time
Exhibit A
City of Medina Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 7
June 21, 2022
*c.a.c. = city accrued costs
*Deposits for land use and other applications must include the fee established by this fee schedule ordinance and any unpaid fees from
the previous application involving essentially the same property by the same or similar applicant.
*Deposits for land use applications that require more than two requests or large in scale shall be determined by the City Administrator.
*Deposits will be returned for land use projects paid in full after final approval, deposits for wetland and grading permits will be
returned upon acceptance of work if bills are paid in full.
*Escrow for building certificate will be returned upon acceptance of project.
*Land use applications are processed by planning, building, finance, engineering and legal departments and all costs associated with
the review shall be billed to the applicant.
Exhibit B
Hamel Community Building Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 8
June 21, 2022
Group Time Period Rental Rate
Monday to Thursday All Day $190 $220
Monday to Thursday < 4 Hours $100 $110
Monday to Thursday < 1.5 Hours $50
Friday All Day $250 $300
Saturday or Sunday All Day $450 $500
Alcohol Usage* All Day $100
Facility walk-through required: First one is free, if you miss
appointment or need another one, each additional walk-through: Scheduled $25
Appointment with vendor to view facility prior to event Scheduled $25
Change of Event Date $25
Sales Tax Included in all fees. Kitchen Service Area and Outdoor Shelter use included in all fees.
* in addition to base fee
Community Building Security Deposit ○ Time Period Security Deposit Rate
City Approved Medina Civic Groups - Any Day Anytime $100
Day Monday to Friday Thursday Anytime $250
Friday, Saturday or Sunday Anytime $500
Any Day w/ Alcohol or Dance Anytime $500
○ This fee is to cover any damage to the facility, violations of the rental agreement, or extra clean-up. , or
cancellation of event without 3 weeks’ notice.
Community Building Cancelation Policy ○ Cancelation Fee
Anytime Prior to 3 Weeks of Event $25
Within Three Weeks of Event Rental Fee
○ If rental fee is unpaid, the amount of rental fee with be deducted from security deposit.
Exhibit C
Field and Court Reservation Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 9
June 21, 2022
Field Usage Fee Table
Field fees are based on a 2.5-hour time slot. If additional time is needed, the fee will increase $25 per additional hour.
Facility Practice Fee Game Fee Tournament Fee
Ball Field* $25 $50 Calculated on a case by case basis
Open Field $50.00 $100 Calculated on a case by case basis
Light Fee: $15 / field / hour – this fee will be required if lights are requested
*Renter is expected to drag the field on day of reservation, chalk for their own games, and prepare field for playing condition in the
event of rain. These fees cover the city’s cost to reserve the field and help pay for annual maintenance and capital expenses
to keep these facilities in playing condition.
Field Usage Security Deposit
$500.00 Security Deposit for field reservations pertaining to games and/or practices per every Field Reservation Application
submitted.
$800.00 Security Deposit for field reservations pertaining to tournaments per every Field Reservation Application submitted.
Tennis Court Fee Rental & Deposits
The tennis courts are available free of charge to residents on a first come, first serve basis. Organized recreational groups may reserve
the tennis courts with advanced approval, based on availability, for the following fee:
Court Rental - $20 per court per hour*
Court Deposit - $150 Security Deposit
*This fee may be negotiated through a separate group rental agreement, which must be approved by the Medina City Council.
Key Deposit
A $25 key deposit is required for issued keys to any building reservation on the facilities.
Keys must be returned by 4:30 p.m. of next business day after rental.
Rental Fees for Amenities
Field House Bathroom Fee
$70 per day to reserve both men’s and women’s bathrooms
$80 per day to reserve both men’s and women's bathrooms – Monday through Friday
$150 per day to reserve both men’s and women's bathrooms – Saturday and Sunday
Portable Toilets
The City of Medina will determine if Additional Toilets or Special Cleaning needs to be scheduled on the day or days that the fields
are reserved.
Portable Toilet Fees:
$60 Additional Units (per unit); $200 ADA Toilet; $35 Special Cleaning (per unit)
Exhibit C
Field and Court Reservation Fee Schedule
Effective June 21, 2022
Ordinance No. XXX 10
June 21, 2022
RESERVATION FEE AND DEPOSIT POLICY
Recreation Field Reservation fees
Recreation field reservation fees are the fees required for the direct usage of the fields. This fee includes the field usage fee as well as
any fees associated with the requested/required rental of amenities. All fees will be required by the City upon submission of the
reservation application.
Refunds of Reservation Fees
Refunds for all recreation field reservation fees are processed on an individual basis with regards to the conditions of the cancellation.
All cancellation notices and requests for rescheduling must be submitted in writing. Any cancellations that occur upon the day of the
event, the City must receive the cancellation notice by the next business day.
•• REFUND FOR CANCELLATIONS DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS. All cancellations that are due to weather
conditions must be verified by the City staff prior to refund. A percent of the recreation field reservation fees may be
remitted to the City according to the percent of field used if event is interrupted due to weather conditions and is not
rescheduled.
•• NO FEE REFUNDS. Recreation field reservation fee refunds will not be given for cancelled game/practice reservations
that are not related to weather conditions less than fourteen (14) days before the event.
•• NO FEE REFUNDS. Recreation field reservation fee refund will not be given for cancelled tournament reservations that
are not related to weather conditions less than thirty (30) days before the event.
Recreation Field Reservation Security Deposit
Recreation Field Reservation Security Deposit is required to secure the performance of the field usage and any administration fees
connected to cancellations or rescheduling. A security deposit will be required by the City upon submission of the reservation
application.
Refunds of Security Deposit
The applicant; having fulfilled the obligations under the field reservation application, City Code Chapter 515, and an after post-event
inspection by the Public Works Department, will have their Security Deposit refunded.
•• A full security deposit will be remitted to the applicant upon having left no financial obligation to the City and having
caused no damage beyond ordinary wear and tear.
•• A percent of the security deposit will be remitted to the City pending:
1) any financial obligation to the City,
2) the percent of damages to the facilities beyond the ordinary wear and tear.
Resolution No. 2022-XX
June 21, 2022
Member _ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO.XXX BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. XXX
regarding revisions of the city’s fee schedule; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, § 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary
in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the
public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that
the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. XXX to be published in the
official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The city council of the city of Medina has adopted Ordinance No. XXX. The ordinance revises
the city’s fee schedule including updated fees for administration, public safety, parks, and the Hamel
Community Building. The ordinance will not be codified. The full text of Ordinance No. XXX is
available for inspection at Medina city hall during regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina that the City Clerk
keep a copy of the ordinance in office at city hall for public inspection and that a full copy of the
ordinance be posted in a public place within the city.
Dated: June 21, 2022.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
Agenda Item #5B
Resolution No. 2022-XX
June 21, 2022
2
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.
EV Readiness Ordinance Page 1 of 2 June 21, 2022
City Council Meeting
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Colette Baumgardner, Planning Intern
DATE: June 15, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022 City Council
SUBJECT: Electric Vehicle Parking Proposed Ordinance
Background
One of the Planning Department’s 2022 Goals is to research an electric vehicle (EV) charging
ordinance to promote orderly and efficient development in the City. The Planning Commission
and the City Council discussed potential regulatory methods for enhancing EV charging
infrastructure during select meetings in April, May, and June of 2022.
On May 10th, the Planning Commission discussed an ordinance similar to the one presented in
Attachment 1, but the ordinance included incentives for EV charging. The Planning Commission
expressed support for incentives to encourage EV charging infrastructure, but they were
concerned that the incentives presented may propose a risk to the natural, rural feel of future
development. The Commission recommended approval of the ordinance with all incentives,
except for the one reducing the tree replacement requirement.
On June 17th, the City Council discussed a similar ordinance as the Planning Commission. The
City Council ultimately decided not to pursue an incentive-based ordinance and preferred relying
on market conditions to drive development of EV charging infrastructure. The proposed
ordinance in Attachment 1 is the same ordinance reviewed at the June 17th meeting but without
incentives.
Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance in Attachment 1 encourages development of Level 2 charging
throughout the City. The proposed ordinance has four main components.
First, the ordinance allows EV charging as a permitted use throughout the City. The only
exception is the use of DC-fast charging because it is limited to non-residential areas. DC-fast
charging is designed for commercial and industrial uses, and it requires a high-power level that
could be unsafe for individual homes.
Second, the ordinance requires an EV readiness plan be submitted as part of the site plan review
application for a new development. No level of readiness is required, but the applicant must
include in their application whether their development will have any EV readiness.
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item #5C
EV Readiness Ordinance Page 2 of 2 June 21, 2022
City Council Meeting
Third, the ordinance recommends a percentage of spaces be EV-capable, EV-ready, or EV-
installed. The recommendation is based on the land use types in Section 828.51 which defines
the number of off-street parking spaces required. This will allow for a simple comparison
between sections of the code.
Fourth, the ordinance outlines some general provisions for multifamily and non-residential land
use types. These provisions were adapted from the provisions in St. Louis Park’s EV charging
ordinance, and they guide the development of EV charging to be accessible, visible, and well-
maintained.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends adopting the proposed ordinance and tracking the effectiveness of the
ordinance over time. If little to no new developments include EV charging readiness in the site
plan process, it could be worth considering adding in incentives at a later date especially for
residential uses. Incorporating EV charging infrastructure in initial site development is an
additional upfront cost that may not provide an immediate benefit to the developer. However, it
can have large long-term public benefits through both reducing future retrofitting expenses and
reducing greenhouse gas emissions from private vehicles.
Potential Action
After the Council has finalized their review, the following actions could be taken:
1. Move to adopt the ordinance pertaining to electric vehicle charging infrastructure
development.
2. Move to adopt the resolution authorizing publication by title and summary.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. Resolution Authorizing Publication by Title and Summary
Ordinance No. ### 1
DATE
CITY OF MEDINA
ORDINANCE NO. ###
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
The City Council of the City of Medina ordains as follows:
SECTION I. A new Section 828.52 is hereby added to the code of ordinances of the City of
Medina as follows:
Section 828.52. Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to promote orderly and efficient
development in the City through encouraging and facilitating the establishment of convenient,
cost-effective electric vehicle infrastructure.
Subd. 2. Definitions. The following words and terms, wherever they appear within this
section, are defined as follows:
a) “Battery electric vehicle” means any vehicle that operates exclusively on electrical
energy from an off-board source that is stored in the vehicle's batteries and produces zero
tailpipe emissions or pollution when stationary or operating.
b) “Charging level” means the standardized indicators of electrical force, or voltage, at
which an electric vehicle’s battery is recharged. The terms level 1, level 2, and DC are
the most common charging levels and include the following specifications:
1. Level 1 is considered slow charging with 120V outlets.
2. Level 2 is considered medium charging with 240V outlets, charging head and cord
hard-wired to the circuit.
3. DC is considered fast or rapid charging. Voltage is greater than 240.
c) “Electric vehicle (EV)” means a vehicle that operates, either partially or exclusively, on
electrical energy from the electrical grid, or an off-grid source, that is stored on board for
motive purposes. “Electric vehicle” includes:
1. Battery electric vehicle.
2. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle.
d) “Electric vehicle capable space” or “EV-capable” means a designated parking space that
is provided with conduit sized for a 40-amp, 208/240-Volt dedicated branch circuit from
a building electrical panelboard to the parking space and with sufficient physical space in
the same building electrical panelboard to accommodate a 40-amp, dual-pole circuit
breaker.
Ordinance No. ### 2
DATE
e) “Electric vehicle charging installed space” or “EV-installed” means a parking space with
electric vehicle supply equipment capable of supplying a 40-amp dedicated branch circuit
rated at 208/240 Volt from a building electrical panelboard.
f) “Electric vehicle charging stations” or “EVCS” means a parking space that is served by
electric vehicle supply equipment that has as its primary purpose the transfer of electric
energy (by conductive or inductive means) to a battery or other energy storage device in
an electric vehicle.
g) “Electric vehicle load management system” means a system designed to allocate charging
capacity among multiple electric vehicle supply equipment at a minimum of eight amps
per charger.
h) “Electric vehicle ready space” or “EV-ready” means a parking space that is provided with
one 40-amp, 208/240-Volt dedicated branch circuit for electric vehicle supply equipment
that is terminated at a receptacle, junction box, or electric vehicle supply equipment
within or adjacent to the parking space.
i) “Electric vehicle supply equipment” or “EVSE” means any equipment or electrical
component used in charging electric vehicles at a specific location. EVSE does not
include equipment located on the electric vehicles themselves.
j) “Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle” means an electric vehicle that:
(i) Contains an internal combustion engine and also allows power to be delivered to
drive wheels by an electric motor;
(ii) Charges its battery primarily by connecting to the grid or other off-board
electrical source;
(iii)May additionally be able to sustain battery charge using an on-board internal-
combustion-driven generator; and
(iv) Has the ability to travel powered by electricity.
Subd. 3. Permitted Locations. Electric vehicle charging stations are permitted as follows:
a) Level 1 and level 2 EVCSs are permitted in every zoning district when accessory to the
primary permitted use. Such stations serving residential property shall be designated as
private restricted use only.
b) DC EVCSs are permitted in all non-residential districts when accessory to a primary
permitted use.
c) If the primary use of the parcel is the retail electric charging of vehicles, then the use
shall be considered an auto service station for zoning purposes. Installation shall be
located in zoning districts which permit auto service, automotive service, or motor fuel
stations.
Ordinance No. ### 3
DATE
Subd. 4. EV Readiness Plan. An EV readiness plan shall be submitted with all site plan
applications submitted pursuant to Section 825.55.
a) The readiness plan shall contain the following elements:
(i) The percentage of parking spaces meeting required specifications for EV-capable
spaces, EV-ready spaces, and EV-installed spaces.
(ii) A site plan identifying:
1) the location of EV-capable spaces, EV-ready spaces, and EV-installed
spaces, if any.
2) proposed location and specification of conduits, wiring, or other
improvements intended to serve EVCS locations.
b) The readiness plan is recommended to include the following elements:
(i) Proposed signage for EVCSs.
(ii) If installing multiple EVCSs, the type of electric vehicle load management system
expected to be used.
Subd. 5. EV Readiness Recommendation. In order to proactively plan for and accommodate
the anticipated future growth in market demand for electric vehicles, it is strongly encouraged,
but not required, that all new and expanded construction follow the recommended readiness
contained in the charts shown in subd. 5(a) and 5(b) below.
a) Residential Uses Recommendation. If a fraction of a parking space is calculated, it is
recommended to round to the nearest whole number, but always maintaining a minimum
of one space.
Ordinance No. ### 4
DATE
EV-Capable EV-Ready EV-Installed
(i) Single Family Detached At least one
space in garage
(ii) Two-Family Dwellings At least one
space in garage
(iii) Townhomes At least one
space in garage
(iv) Multiple Family Dwellings
with 1 – 10 spaces
20% of resident
spaces
One resident
space
(v) Multiple Family Dwellings
with 10 or more spaces
20% of resident
spaces
18% of guest
spaces
10% of resident
spaces
5% of resident
spaces
2% of guest
spaces
b) Non-Residential Uses Recommendation.
(i) For uses with 10 or fewer parking spaces required, there is no readiness
recommendation.
(ii) For uses with 11 or more parking spaces required, the following readiness is
recommended. If a fraction of a parking space is calculated, it is recommended to
round to the nearest whole number, but always maintaining a minimum of one
space.
EV-Capable EV-Ready EV-Installed
(1) Accessory Dwelling Units Varies by use and type
(2) Religious Institutions,
Theaters, Auditoriums, and
other places of assembly.
18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(3) Business and Professional
Offices
18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(4) Medical and Dental Clinics 18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(5) Hotel or Motel 20% of spaces 10% of spaces 5% of spaces
(6) Schools: Grade schools,
elementary schools, middle
school, junior high school
15% of spaces 10% of spaces 5% of spaces
(7) Schools: High School 15% of spaces 10% of spaces 5% of spaces
(8) Vocational or business
schools
15% of spaces 10% of spaces 5% of spaces
(9) Hospitals 18% of spaces 10% of spaces 2% of spaces
(10) Bowling Alleys 18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(11) Automobile Service
Stations
15% of spaces 10% of spaces 5% of spaces
(12) Retail Sales and Service 18% of spaces 2% of spaces
Ordinance No. ### 5
DATE
EV-Capable EV-Ready EV-Installed
(13) Restaurants, Drive-through
Food Establishments,
Cafes, Bars, Taverns, Night
Clubs
18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(14) Health Club (Includes, but
not limited to dance,
martial arts, and yoga
studios.)
18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(15) Funeral Homes Varies by use and type
(16) Industrial, Warehouse,
Storage, Handling of Bulk
Goods
18% of spaces 2% of spaces
(17) Uses not specifically noted Varies by use and type
Subd. 7. General Provisions for Multi-Family Residential and Non-Residential
Development
a) Parking.
(i) An electric vehicle charging station space will be included in the calculation for
minimum required parking spaces required in accordance with Section 828.51.
(ii) Public EVCS are reserved for parking and charging electric vehicles only.
b) Accessible Spaces. A charging station will be considered accessible if it is located
adjacent to, and can serve, an accessible parking space as defined and required by the
ADA. It is strongly encouraged that a minimum of one accessible electric vehicle
charging station be provided. Accessible electric vehicle charging stations should be
located in close proximity to the building or facility entrance and connected to a barrier
free accessible route of travel. It is not necessary to designate the accessible electric
vehicle charging station exclusively for the use of disabled persons.
c) Equipment Design Standards and Protection.
(i) Battery charging station outlets and connector devices shall be mounted to comply
with state code and must comply with all relevant Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) requirements. Equipment mounted on pedestals, lighting posts, bollards, or
other devices shall be designed and located as to not impede pedestrian travel or
create trip hazards on sidewalks.
(ii) Adequate battery charging station protection, such as concrete-filled steel bollards,
shall be used. Curbing may be used in lieu of bollards, if the battery charging station
is setback a minimum of 24 inches from the face of the curb.
d) Usage Fees. The property owner or third party permitted by the property owner, as the
case may be, may collect a service fee for the use of EVSE.
Ordinance No. ### 6
DATE
e) Signage.
(i) Information shall be posted identifying voltage and amperage levels and any time of
use, fees, or safety information related to the electric vehicle charging station.
(ii) Each electric vehicle charging station space shall be posted with signage indicating
the space is only for electric vehicle charging purposes. For purposes of this
subsection, "charging" means that an electric vehicle is parked at an electric vehicle
charging station and is connected to the battery charging station equipment.
f) Maintenance. Electric vehicle charging stations shall be maintained in all respects,
including the functioning of the equipment. A phone number or other contact information
shall be provided on the equipment for reporting problems with the equipment or access
to it.
Ordinance No. ### 7
DATE
SECTION II. Subd. 2 of Section 825.55 of the code of ordinances of the City of Medina is
amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the struck through language as follows:
Section 825.55. Site Plan Review – Application.
Subd. 2. The owner or developer shall submit an application for site plan review to the zoning
administrator. The application shall be accompanied by the following information and
documentation to the extent it is not otherwise required by another land use application made by
the owner or developer for the same site at the same time:
(a) legal description of the property;
(b) identification of developer and owner, if different;
(c) survey showing property boundaries; existing improvements, including utilities,
drainage tiles and wells; topography of the site and area within 100 feet of the
property boundaries with contours at 2-foot intervals; significant trees and existing
vegetation which would meet ordinance landscaping requirements; easements of
record, including the dimensions thereof; and wetlands;
(d) site plan of proposed improvements showing all buildings, including details of
loading docks; parking areas; driveways; access points; berms; easements; and adjacent
public or private streets;
(e) floor plans and building elevations, including list of building materials, showing a
sketch or computer-generated image of proposed buildings as viewed from surrounding
uses;
(f) site plan of existing uses on property in non-residential zones adjacent to the site and
on property in residential zones within 720 feet of the site, measured at the closest
point, showing buildings, including loading docks, entrances and other significant
features and illustrating sight lines to proposed uses;
(g) proposed grading plan with contours at 2-foot intervals;
(h) soils map;
(i) tree preservation plan;
(j) landscaping plan, including species and sizes;
(k) drainage and storm water plan;
(l) utility plan;
(m) sign plan;
(n) lighting plan;
(o) electric vehicle readiness plan;
(po) table of all proposed uses by type and square footage, including estimated water and
sanitary sewer usage;
(qp) schedule of staging or timing of development; and
(rq) application fee.
Ordinance No. ### 8
DATE
SECTION III. This ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the Medina city council this ________ day of _________, 2022.
_____________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________________
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
Published in the Crow River News on the _____ day of ____ 2022.
Resolution No. 2022-##
June 21, 2022
Member ______________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-##
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 pertaining to electric vehicle charging infrastructure; 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 8 pages in length; 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 pertaining to
electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The ordinance allows electric vehicle charging as a
permitted use in the City and provides guidance for future installation of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure. The ordinance also adds a requirement that site plan reviews required by code
provide information on how electric vehicle charging preparation was considered during plan
preparation.
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.
Agenda Item #5D
Resolution No. 2022-## 2
June 21, 2022
Dated:
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member ______
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ACCORDING TO FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
ORDERING IROQUOIS DRIVE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to previous actions by the city council, city staff has prepared plans
and specifications for the overlay of the Iroquois Drive Improvement Project and has presented such
plans and specifications to the council for approval.
WHEREAS, ten days’ mailed notice and two weeks’ published notice of the hearing was
given and the hearing was held on June 21 2022, at which hearing all persons desiring to be heard
were given an opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, are hereby adopted.
2. The above-described improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible as detailed
in the feasibility report.
3. The improvement is hereby ordered as proposed.
Dated: June 21, 2022
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker 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 #7A1
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-xx
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR
IROQUOIS DRIVE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the city clerk has, with the assistance of the public works director and the city
finance director, prepared a proposed roll regarding the assessment of benefited properties for a
portion of the cost of the Iroquois Drive Overlay project which consists of mill and overlay
improvements; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by law, the city council conducted a public
hearing on June 21, 2022, with regard to the proposed assessments and heard and passed upon all
objections to the proposed assessment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof,
is hereby accepted and shall constitute a special assessment against the lands named therein, and each
tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of
the assessment levied against it.
2. The special assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over
a period of 7 years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2022
and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.00% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment
resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of
this resolution until December 31, 2023. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to November 15, 2022,
pay the whole of the assessment on such property to the city finance director, with interest accrued to
the date of payment, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30
days of the adoption of the assessment. Thereafter, any owner may pay to the city finance director
the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest
will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The city clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this resolution to the
county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be
collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Agenda Item # 7A2
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 2
Dated: June 21, 2022.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker, 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. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 3
MapID PID TAXPAYER PROPERTY ADDRESS CITY ZIP Assessment Share
1 2211823420002 THOMAS & NANCY MALIK 1925 CO RD NO 24 LONG LAKE, MN 55356 $1,318.44
2 2211823420001 GRANT FRIEMEL & KRISTEN ENGEN 1855 CO RD NO 24 LONG LAKE, MN 55356 $1,318.44
3 2211823420007 SUSAN MACMILLAN MGR 1910 IROQUOIS DR LONG LAKE, MN 55356 $2,636.88
4 2211823420005 FREEMAN & JOYCE WONG 1902 IROQUOIS DR LONG LAKE, MN 55356 $2,636.87
5 2211823420004 JAY & JOANN NELSON 1875 CO RD NO 24 LONG LAKE, MN 55356 $2,636.87
Total
$10,547.50
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 4
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ACCORDING TO FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
ORDERING OAKVIEW ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to previous actions by the city council, city staff has prepared plans
and specifications for the overlay of the Oakview Road Improvement Project and has presented such
plans and specifications to the council for approval.
WHEREAS, ten days’ mailed notice and two weeks’ published notice of the hearing was
given and the hearing was held on June 21 2022, at which hearing all persons desiring to be heard
were given an opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, are hereby adopted.
2. The above-described improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible as detailed
in the feasibility report.
3. The improvement is hereby ordered as proposed.
Dated: June 21, 2022
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker 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 7B1
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-xx
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR
OAKVIEW ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the city clerk has, with the assistance of the public works director and the city
finance director, prepared a proposed roll regarding the assessment of benefited properties for a
portion of the cost of the Oakview Road Overlay project which consists of mill and overlay
improvements; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by law, the city council conducted a public
hearing on June 21, 2022, with regard to the proposed assessments and heard and passed upon all
objections to the proposed assessment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof,
is hereby accepted and shall constitute a special assessment against the lands named therein, and each
tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of
the assessment levied against it.
2. The special assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over
a period of 7 years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2022
and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.00% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment
resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of
this resolution until December 31, 2023. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to November 15, 2022,
pay the whole of the assessment on such property to the city finance director, with interest accrued to
the date of payment, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30
days of the adoption of the assessment. Thereafter, any owner may pay to the city finance director
the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest
will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The city clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this resolution to the
county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be
collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Agenda Item # 7B2
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 2
Dated: June 21, 2022.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker, 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. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 3
MapID PID TAXPAYER PROPERTY ADDRESS TAXPAYER ADDRESS CITY ZIP Assessment Share
1 1411823210012 D D LOPESIO & P M D LOPESIO 1305 OAKVIEW RD 520 CASEY KEY RD NOKOMIS FL 34275 $2,305.45
2 1411823210011 TERRY L GRAVE 1295 OAKVIEW RD 1295 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
3 1411823210013 RENEE B POPKIN 1285 OAKVIEW RD 1285 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
4 1411823240012 LAURENTINA T DEJONG-LEXMOND 1275 OAKVIEW RD 1275 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
5 1411823230003 JO ANN FERRIS 1265 OAKVIEW RD 1265 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
6 1411823230004 JO ANN FERRIS 1255 OAKVIEW RD 1265 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
7 1411823230005 DANIEL J SULLIVAN 1245 OAKVIEW RD 1245 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
8 1411823230006 HARRY & JOYCE BENSON 1235 OAKVIEW RD 1235 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
9 1411823230007 CARMEN B VOLKART 1225 OAKVIEW RD 1225 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
9 1411823320003 CARMEN B VOLKART 1225 OAKVIEW RD 1225 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
10 1411823240003 DIANA I CASEY 1215 OAKVIEW RD 505 S FLAGLER DR SUITE 900 WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401 $2,305.45
10 1411823310002 DIANA I CASEY 1215 OAKVIEW RD 505 S FLAGLER DRIVE STE 900 WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401 $2,305.45
11 1411823240004 ANTHONY PATTERSON 1205 OAKVIEW RD 1205 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
11 1411823310003 ANTHONY PATTERSON 1205 OAKVIEW RD 1205 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
12 1411823240010 TYLER KOLTES 1200 OAKVIEW RD 16730 12TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55356 $2,305.45
13 1411823240009 ANDERS J GODE 1220 OAKVIEW RD 1220 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
14 1411823240008 TERRENCE G KOPP 1240 OAKVIEW RD 1240 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
15 1411823240007 DARLENE D STEINMETZ 1270 OAKVIEW RD 1270 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
16 1411823240006 STEVEN THIELBAR 1290 OAKVIEW RD 1290 OAKVIEW RD MEDINA MN 55356 $2,305.45
17 1411823240005 WILFRED SIMMONS 1300 OAKVIEW RD 1300 OAKVIEW RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 $2,305.45
Total $46,109.00
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 4
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ACCORDING TO FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
ORDERING TOWER DRIVE WEST IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to previous actions by the city council, city staff has prepared plans
and specifications for the overlay of the Tower Drive West Road Improvement Project and has
presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval.
WHEREAS, ten days’ mailed notice and two weeks’ published notice of the hearing was
given and the hearing was held on June 21 2022, at which hearing all persons desiring to be heard
were given an opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, are hereby adopted.
2. The above-described improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible as detailed
in the feasibility report.
3. The improvement is hereby ordered as proposed.
Dated: June 21, 2022
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker 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 #7C1
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022
Member __ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-xx
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR
TOWER DRIVE WEST IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the city clerk has, with the assistance of the public works director and the city
finance director, prepared a proposed roll regarding the assessment of benefited properties for a
portion of the cost of the Tower Drive West Overlay project which consists of mill and overlay
improvements; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by law, the city council conducted a public
hearing on June 21, 2022, with regard to the proposed assessments and heard and passed upon all
objections to the proposed assessment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof,
is hereby accepted and shall constitute a special assessment against the lands named therein, and each
tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of
the assessment levied against it.
2. The special assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over
a period of 7 years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2022
and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.00% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment
resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of
this resolution until December 31, 2023. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to November 15, 2022,
pay the whole of the assessment on such property to the city finance director, with interest accrued to
the date of payment, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30
days of the adoption of the assessment. Thereafter, any owner may pay to the city finance director
the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest
will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The city clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this resolution to the
county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be
collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Agenda Item # 7C2
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 2
Dated: June 21, 2022.
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Caitlyn Walker, 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. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 3
MapID PID TAXPAYER TAXPAYER PROPERTY ADDRESS TAXPAYER ADDRESS CITY ZIP Assessment Share
1 1111823140011 JEFFREY C HALEY C/O C-AXIS 800 TOWER DR 800 TOWER DR MEDINA MN 55340 $2,679.21
2 1111823140012 CENTRAL HOUSING ASSOC LLLP C/O DIVERSIFIED EQUITIES COR 810 TOWER DR 333 WASHINGTON AVE N #419 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401 $2,679.21
3 1111823140013 WINKLER PROPERTIES LLC 820 TOWER DR 820 TOWER DR MEDINA MN 55340 $2,679.21
4 1111823140015 HYPER GROWTH PROPERTIES LLC ATTN JON ARNESON 830 TOWER DR 4712 LAKE SARAH DR S MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 $2,679.21
5 1111823140016 UNIPUNCH PRODUCTS INC C/O PREMAX LP 825 TOWER DR 825 TOWER DR MEDINA MN 55340 $2,679.21
6 1111823140017 815 TOWER DRIVE LLC 815 TOWER DR 815 TOWER DR MEDINA MN 55340 $2,679.21
7 1111823140019 805 TOWER BUILDING LLC 805 TOWER DR 805 TOWER DR MEDINA MN 55340 $2,679.21
Total $18,754.50
Resolution No. 2022-xx
June 21, 2022 4
Baker Park Townhomes Page 1 of 2 June 21, 2022
Easement Vacation City Council Meeting
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: June 16, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022 City Council
SUBJECT: Medina Townhomes LLC – Easement Vacation – 1432 County Road 29 –
Baker Park Townhomes – Public Hearing
Summary of Request
Medina Townhomes LLC has requested that the City vacate drainage and utility easements
which they granted in connection with the Baker Park Townhome development approved last
year. The original easements were inadvertently granted in locations which crossed into the
approved building locations and the applicant has updated their proposed utility layout so
portions of the easement would no longer appear necessary.
The applicant proposes to grant new easements necessary for the new utility layout and which
would not be located within building footprints. The attached exhibit highlights the replacement
easement locations in green and the portions of the easement which would be vacated or not
replaced in red.
Analysis
According to Minnesota Statute 462.358 subd. 7: “The governing body of a municipality may
vacate any publicly owned utility easement…which are not being used for sewer, drainage,
electric, telegraph, telephone, gas and steam purposes or for boulevard reserve purposes, in
the same manner as vacation proceedings are conducted for streets…”
According to Minnesota Statutes 412.851, “The council may by resolution vacate any street,
alley, public grounds, public way, or any part thereof, on its own motion or on petition of a
majority of the owners of land abutting on the street, alley, public grounds, public way, or
part thereof to be vacated. When there has been no petition, the resolution may be adopted
only by a vote of four-fifths of all members of the council. No vacation shall be made unless
it appears in the interest of the public to do so after a hearing preceded by two weeks'
published and posted notice.”
The proposed replacement easements would encompass the new utility locations and staff
believes would better serve the interests of the public. Portions of the existing easement do not
appear necessary now that there would be no utilities within them.
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item #7D
Baker Park Townhomes Page 2 of 2 June 21, 2022
Easement Vacation City Council Meeting
Staff believed it would be clearer and cleaner for title purposes to vacate all the drainage and
utility easement which was previously granted rather than describing just a portion of the
easement area.
Potential Action
Notice was published and mailed for a public hearing on the vacation at the June 21 Council
meeting. Staff received no contact from the notice.
Following the hearing, if the Council finds it in the public interest to vacate the easement
because the replacement easement is better located based on the new utility layout, the following
action could be taken:
Move to adopt the resolution vacating drainage and utility easement within 1432
County Road 29.
Attachments
1. Resolution vacating drainage and utility easement within 1432 Baker Park Road
2. Exhibit showing proposed replacement easement location
Resolution No. 2022-##
June 21, 2022
DOCSOPEN-ME230-752-804238.v1-6/15/22
Member ________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-##
RESOLUTION VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT AT
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Medina Townhome Development LLC (the “Owner”) owns property
located at 1432 County Road 29 (the “Property”), which is legally described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, a drainage and utility easement was granted upon the Property on November
9, 2021 and recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder on November 10, 2021 as document
number A11039280 (the “Easement”); and
WHEREAS, the Owner petitioned the City to vacate the Easement and proposes to
replace the Easement with easements in different locations based upon the Owner’s updated
utility layout on the Property; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 462.358 subd. 7 and Minn. Stat. § 412.851, the City
scheduled a public hearing to consider the proposed vacation; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was posted, published in the official newspaper
and mailed to the owners of affected properties, all in accordance with law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed vacation on June 21,
2022 at which hearing all interested parties were heard; and
WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the City Council determined that the
replacement easements would serve the needs of the public; and
WHEREAS, upon such finding, the City Council determined that the proposed vacation of
the Easement is in the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Medina,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The Easement, dated November 9, 2021 and recorded with the Office of the
Hennepin County Recorder on November 10, 2021 as Document No. A11039280, is
Resolution No. 2022-## 2
June 21, 2022
hereby vacated, subject to the Owner’s execution and delivery of a replacement
easement that meets all requirements of City staff.
2. The city administrator or his designee is authorized and directed to prepare and
present to the Hennepin County Auditor a notice that the City has completed these
vacation proceedings and record the vacation with Hennepin County in coordination
with recordation of said replacement easement as described herein.
Dated:
______________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Caitlyn Walker, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member ________
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2022-## 3
June 21, 2022
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of the Property
The Property is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota and legally described as follows:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 30, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of
the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the West line of
said Northwest Quarter, distant 813 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof; thence
South along said West line 231 feet; thence deflecting 90 degrees left 472 feet; thence
deflecting 90 degrees left 231 feet; thence West to the point of beginning.
Abstract Property
PROPOSED SUBSURFACE
FILTRATION SYSTEM
42" CMP
100-YEAR HWL = 996.24
BOTTOM ROCK = 991.75
BOTTOM SAND = 989.22
292 LF 6" DRAINTILE
PROPOSED TOWNHOME - SW
7,300 S.F.
FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME - NW
7,300 S.F.
FFE=1000.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME - SE
6,080 S.F.
FFE=999.0
PROPOSED TOWNHOME - NE
7,300 S.F.
FFE=999.0TOT
LOT
T
VA
N
PROPOSED FILTRATION BASIN
100-YEAR HWL = 992.26
BOTTOM POND = 989.00
BOTTOM SAND = 986.50
260 LF 6" DRAINTILE
5
24'18'
13
.
5
'
12
'
13
.
5
'
36'
20
'
20'
28
'
5'
5'
9.
0
7
'
16'36'
7'
4'
6'
6'
16'36'16'
18
'
24
'
18
'
18
'
24
'
18
'
7'
15
'
5.7'
10.51'
36'16'17.3'
B
B
B
E
E
E
E
E
E E
F
F
K
K
K
L
5'
36'
4'
J
9'
50'22.5'
32.9'
45
'
18
'
R8'
R
8
'
R15
'
R45'
R28
'
R8
'R8'R
8
'
AA
A
A A
A
A A
20
.
1
3
'
N
O
P
Q
R
29.5'
9.
5
7
'
14
.
5
2
'
R
8
'R8'
R
5
'R5'
12'
R
1
5
'
I
14
.
0
7
'
H
C
C
C
C
S
U
6.
5
'
U
6.83'
R10
'
FUTURE TRAIL
R13
'
15.22'
R3'
13
'
R
2
0
'
108'
33
'
PROPOSED EASEMENT
R1
-
1
R1
-
1
R3
-
8
10'42'
78
'
F
V
V
V
V
V
REMOVE AND REPLACE
BITUMINOUS IN KIND
INSTALL
BITUMINOUS
CURB IN
KIND
M
M
M
M
FUTURE SIDEWALK
6'
G
W
Jun 10, 2022 - 1:12pm - User:JPistorius L:\PROJECTS\22471\CAD\Civil\Sheets\22471-C3-SITE.dwg
C3.01
SITE PLAN
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo.By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved:Book / Page:
Phase:Initial Issued:
Client
MEDINA
TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
MEDINA
TOWNHOMES
MEDINA, MN
1432 COUNTY ROAD 29
JGP JGP
BWF
PRELIMINARY 6/30/2021
22471
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:52728
Brian W. Frank
6/30/2021 MLL GENERAL PLAN OF
DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL
7/27/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
9/22/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE/
PRICING SET
10/6/2021 MLL PERMIT SET
10/22/2021 MLL MCWD COMMENT RESPONSE
11/3/2021 MLL CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
11/8/2021 MLL CITY PLANNING COMMENT
RESPONSE
12/20/2021 MLL PROGRESS SET MCWD
05/03/2022 JGP CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
06/12/2022 JGP CITY COMMENT RESPONSE
NOT
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.
2.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT “GUTTER OUT” WHERE WATER
DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS “GUTTER IN” CURB.
COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.
4.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.
5.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
6.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE
LOCATIONS.
7.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS
8.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHT
POLE.
9.REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.
10.ALL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE
OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THE
MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE 2.08%
(1:48). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA
ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY
THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS
THE DESIGN GRADIENT AND COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.
11."NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.
12.STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY.
LEGEND
EASEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
SAWCUT LINE
NUMBER OF PARKING
STALLS PER ROW
SIGN
PIPE BOLLARD
ASPHALT PAVING
(SEE STR-06 ON
SHEET C9.01)
HEAVY DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
(SEE DETAIL 08 ON
SHEET C9.02)
CONCRETE PAVING
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
KEY NOTE
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
DEVELOPMENT NOTES KEY NOTES
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
XX
XX
THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED
ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING
SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING
UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THE
CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY
HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).
IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,
INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED
IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
AREA
GROSS SITE AREA
BUILDING SETBACKS
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
SIDE YARD
ZONING
EXISTING ZONING
PROPOSED ZONING
95,114 SF 2.18 AC
50 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
R-4
R-4
PAVEMENT BY OTHERS
(SEE ARCHITECTURAL
PLANS)
A.BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)
B.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (SEE DETAIL STR-01 ON SHEET C9.01)
C.B-618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
D.FLAT CURB SECTION
E.CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL 02 ON SHEET C9.02)
F.SEGMENTAL BLOCK RETAINING WALL (SEE NOTE 19 ON SHEET C4.01)
G.ACCESSIBLE STALL RAMP (SEE GRADING PLAN AND DETAIL 06 ON SHEET C9.02)
H.ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING (SEE DETAILS 08 ON SHEET C9.02)
I.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN (SEE DETAIL 11 ON SHEET C9.02)
J.TRANSFORMER
K.60" FENCE
L.CONCRETE STEPS AND HANDRAIL (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)
M.MEET AND MATCH BITUMINOUS CURB
N.4" CURB
O.BIKE RACK - MADRAX UX190
P.PERGOLA
Q.GRILL STATION
R.PICNIC TABLE
S.TYPE 3 BARRICADES
T.STOP SIGN (R1-1)
U.FENCE (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)
V.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP (SEE GRADING PLAN & MNDOT DETAILS C9.04)
W.CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER (SEE DETAIL 09 ON SHEET C9.02)
CR 29 PAVEMENT
REPLACEMENT IN KIND
SCALE IN FEET
0 4020
NORTH
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 1 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Debra Dion, Associate Planner; through Planning Director Finke
DATE: June 16, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022 City Council
SUBJ: Kyle Vitense (State Farm) – 340 Clydesdale Trail
PUD Concept Plan Review
Review Deadline
Complete Application Received: May 16, 2022
60-day Review Deadline: July 14, 2022
Summary of Request
Kyle Vitense has requested a PUD Concept Plan Review (PUD-CPR) for the construction of a
4,628-sf stand-alone building for a State Farm Agency at 340 Clydesdale Trail. The vacant lot is
just west of Wells Fargo and Target, and north of the Goddard School. The subject lot and all
surrounding properties are zoned PUD.
See aerial below outlining the subject lot in blue, which is Lot 4 in the Clydesdale Marketplace.
Agenda Item #7E
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 2 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
PUD History/Background
The original PUD was approved in 2005 and the development is named Clydesdale Marketplace.
The layout is shown below and is attached for reference. The subject site is highlighted with a
star below and outlined in red on the attached site plan. This site plan shows what was originally
approved, yet amendments have been approved/allowed throughout the years.
In 2015 the PUD was amended to allow for the Goddard School, which is directly south of the
subject lot which was a change in use from retail to early childhood education/daycare facility on
Lot 1, Block 2, Medina Clydesdale Marketplace. The PUD had contemplated a restaurant on
that lot. The use of exterior building materials was also modified to allow for noncombustible,
commercial construction fiber cement siding with a stucco texture.
On February 20, 2007, an Amendment to the PUD was granted for a drive-through for a coffee
shop/Caribou which is within a multi-use building. The original PUD approval specifically
stated only one drive-through, which was for the bank.
Over the years since 2005 the retailers have come and gone in the Clydesdale Marketplace in-
line buildings. Uses such as dental clinics and tax accountants have also occupied these spaces.
When the original PUD was approved, 3,200 square feet of retail space was identified for Lot 4.
Staff believes the footprint of the building and site layout for Lot 4 was likely originally based on
a drive-thru (fast-food or coffeeshop), but a drive-thru was not approved on this lot as part of the
original PUD. The lot has since remained vacant, and it has been 17 years.
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 3 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Development Guidelines
The original PUD established guidelines for applicants and staff to utilize during the
development phase of each lot. The guidelines encourage pedestrian-friendly design,
greenspace, architecture, building materials, trails, and signage. The guidelines also describe
water features and drainage systems. The Guidelines are attached for reference. It is important
to note that many of the guidelines have more to do with the overall development, but some are
more specific to sites.
Proposed Site Layout
The applicant is proposing a 4,628-sf building that is set back from Clydesdale Trail. It has
access off Clydesdale Trail and then an internal access via the Wells Fargo parking lot to the east
which funnels out onto Clydesdale Trail.
The application is only a concept plan review, so the submittal is minimal as far as what staff has
for review and what the applicant needs to submit. The applicant is aware that the original PUD
approval allowed square footage of 3,200 and that the use is to be retail. The applicant is asking
to amend these requirements.
The original building layout had been more centrally positioned on the lot, and parking was
adjacent and behind the structure. The proposed concept is pushed further to the north, creating
parking in front of the building, and establishing an open space between the parking lot and
Clydesdale Trail that is approximately 80’ x 100’ in area.
The original PUD did not quantify specific setback requirements for each lot but anticipated that
the use and building location and layout would generally be as shown in the PUD.
Greenspace/Plaza
The original PUD contemplated a retail building located closer to the trail to encourage more of a
pedestrian-friendly layout. Staff has suggested that, in connection with amending the PUD to
allow the site layout with the building at the back of the lot, the area at the front of the lot could
include plaza improvements adjacent to the trail. Staff has provided suggestions to the applicant
for use of their large open space, such as:
• Garden/landscape features rather than just mowed turf grass
• Sculpture/artwork similar to that at the Target area
• Bike rack / bike repair station
• Raingardens to capture parking lot run-off with artwork (If additional stormwater
treatment is necessary)
• Lower clock tower
All of the above would suggest that benches go along with them to provide for a welcoming
environment. The Design Guidelines emphasize bringing together the overall connectivity of the
trail, water, greenspace, and people. The improvements could be incorporated into the
maintenance of the overall commercial association.
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 4 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Parking
The parking lot has 23 parking spaces and starts approximately 80 feet from Clydesdale Trail
and is centrally located on the lot from east to west. All parking stalls and drive aisles meet
minimum requirements.
The original PUD showed 37 parking stalls for this lot. As noted above, staff believes this may
have been based on an earlier concept that a restaurant or coffee shop may be on this lot.
The City’s parking regulations require a minimum of one parking stall per 250 gross square feet
of retail or office. This would require a minimum of 19 stalls based on the use. Staff believes
the 23 parking spaces are sufficient for the proposed use. However, it should be noted that the
Medina Clydesdale Marketplace anticipated the ability to share parking between sites. This
suggests that if additional parking were shown on this lot during the original PUD, that it may
have been intended to support other lots. Staff believes the overall parking throughout the
project is more than sufficient. The change in building square footage has not increased the
number of parking spaces needed for the change in use.
Building Size
The applicant’s proposed building square footage of 4,628-sf meets the future needs of their
business currently and into the future so that they can move from Plymouth into Medina and stay
in Medina.
Landscaping
The site plan shows shrubs in front of the parking spaces facing south and five (5) other trees,
not yet identified plant/tree type. Knowing the plant/shrub/tree types and sizes would be a
condition of approval if this project moved forward through the PUD Amendment process.
Staff would recommend green space on the west side of the building where a sidewalk is being
shown. The sidewalk could shift further to the west to provide for greenspace and landscaping.
Shrubbery appears to be deficient on the overall site. It is recommended that the applicant add a
minimum of ten (10) feet of landscaping on the south and west sides of the building and provide
landscaping adjacent to the building.
The amount of proposed tree planting exceeds the amount shown in the original PUD, which
staff believes would go toward some of the goals of the PUD and make up for the fact the
building is less pedestrian oriented.
Lighting
The PUD does have restrictions on light pole height and type of decorative fixtures so that they
are consistent with the development. This would be a condition of approval if proceeding
forward with an Amendment.
Signage
The Clydesdale Marketplace has a Signage Master Plan for the development which staff uses
each time a business comes in for a sign permit. This is different from our sign code regulations
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 5 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
under Chapter 8, Section 815 of the City Zoning Code. Generally, wall signs may be 6% of the
area of the wall on which they are located. This lot would fall under the same Master
Plan.
Architecture
A condition of the PUD requires that the four stand-alone buildings shall consist of four-sided
architecture and shall be of similar architectural quality and materials as the Target buildings and
in-line retail space. This property/lot would
fall under this condition. The table to the
right describes the required building
materials within the design guidelines.
Manufactured stone is being proposed around the entrance area of the building with utility brick.
Nichiha fiber cement panels (Industrial Block 1818) accent the stone and brick, canvas canopies
are proposed over four of the windows except on the north building elevation. Integrated rock
face concrete block is proposed at the base of the building. Percentages of exterior building
materials were not provided and would be required to be provided to staff if they made
application for a PUD Amendment.
Fiber cement panels are not contemplated as a permitted exterior material within the design
guidelines. These panels have become more widely used since the guidelines were created in
2005. The panels were allowed on the Goddard School to the south. The proposed amendment
would provide the opportunity to allow for this material. The panels are proposed as an accent
material for this property and were a primary material on the Goddard site.
Staff would recommend building material samples be submitted for review and a colored
rendering if the applicant proceeded forward with the PUD Amendment process.
The applicant is proposing two additional exterior building materials to the front of the building
that are not being proposed to the other three elevations of the building. Staff suggests that
providing similar accents to the other elevations is consistent with the 4-sided architectural
requirements of the Design Guidelines. The Commission should discuss the proposed design.
Trash/Recycling
As a condition of the PUD, trash is required to be enclosed inside the building. The applicant is
proposing that trash and recycling be indoors.
Building Height
The PUD allows a maximum building height of 30 feet without a sprinkler system. The
applicant is proposing a building height of 16 feet. The front wall parapet adds four additional
feet.
Sewer/Water
Existing sewer and water stubs were provided at the time of site development. The applicant did
not provide a utility plan in connection with the Concept Plan.
Brick, stone, granite, glass, metal
panels, specialty concrete, stucco
30% min
Wood, metal 20% max
Decorative concrete, rock face CMU 70% max
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 6 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
Stormwater/Grading Review
The Concept Plan does not include full grading or stormwater plans. Any development proposal
would ultimately be subject to relevant stormwater standards. Stormwater improvements were
installed for the entire development in 2005. If proposed hardcover is the same or less than
contemplated in 2005, additional stormwater management would not be required by the City.
The applicant will need to confirm with Elm Creek Watershed that this would be the case for
their stormwater management regulations as well. If the proposed hardcover exceeds the amount
contemplated, additional improvements will be required.
Park Dedication
The original PUD placed a Park Dedication fee on this lot of $23,570.00.
Planning Commission Comments
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the concept plan at their June 14 meeting.
No one spoke at the hearing. An excerpt from the meeting minutes is attached for reference.
Commissioners generally emphasized the importance of the plaza improvements if the layout of
the site was going to be changed as proposed. One Commissioner stated that they thought the
site may have been better situated for a walk-up or even a drive-thru ice cream or food business
and that they wished the City would have considered amending the PUD sooner to allow for that
type of use. They stated that they did not oppose this proposal, but recommended that future
conversion of the property to different uses be considered when the final layout is established.
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, the
Comprehensive Plan, and other City policies. This is true while considering amendments to a
previously approved PUD, although staff believes it is reasonable to consider the extent of the
proposed amendment while considering how it may be consistent with the purposes and
objectives. It is reasonable to expect that a minor amendment may not meet a lot of the
objectives. On the other hand, if a proposed amendment is significantly inconsistent with the
purposes and objectives compared to what was previously approved, it would be reasonable to
not approve of an amendment. The Planning Commission and Council should provide
comments based upon this information.
In general, staff did not raise concern with the increase of square footage on the lot nor a
professional office as a use. Staff did question whether pushing the building to the rear of the lot
with parking between the building and Clydesdale Trail was consistent with the intent of the
PUD. Staff believes this potential inconsistency may be able to be addressed by providing
pedestrian friendly plaza or landscaping.
If the City Council is generally supportive of the concept and the applicant proceeds, staff has
provided comments throughout the report to be incorporated into any future formal application.
These comments are summarized below:
Kyle Vitense – State Farm Page 7 of 7 June 21, 2022
Concept Plan Review City Council Meeting
1. Future application shall be subject to the Clydesdale Marketplace Design Guidelines.
2. Future application shall be subject to the Clydesdale Marketplace Sign Criteria – Master
Plan.
3. The applicant shall design the 80’ x 100’ greenspace to incorporate plaza, gathering
space, or landscaping features.
4. Exterior building materials will need to be provided and quantified with percentages for
each elevation. Four-sided architecture shall be addressed, including providing additional
accent materials, especially to the west elevation.
5. Colored renderings of the building exterior showing materials should be submitted for
staff review.
6. Landscaping shall be provided adjacent to the building, especially to the south.
7. All necessary items needed for review for engineering, fire, and building will be required.
8. Light fixture details/cut-sheets will be required, along with a photometric plan.
9. Stormwater requirements will be required to be met.
10. A detailed landscape plan shall be required.
11. Impervious surface calculations will be required.
Attachments
1. Excerpt from draft 6/14/2022 Planning Commission meeting
2. Applicant Narrative
3. Medina Clydesdale Marketplace Design Guide
4. Site Plan & Building Elevations (2)
5. Original PUD Site Plan
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
1
Public Hearing – State Farm Concept Plan – Kyle Vitense – 340 Clydesdale Trail – PUD Concept
Plan to Amend Clydesdale Marketplace PUD for Construction of Professional Office Building
Finke stated that this would be for the western site of Clydesdale Marketplace, which has been vacant
since the site was developed in 2005. He displayed the originally approved PUD which identified
retail. He stated that a PUD amendment would be required to reduce the scale and change the
orientation of the building. He provided a brief history of the changes that have been approved
throughout the PUD. He reviewed the proposed site layout, noting that perhaps the area between the
parking lot and Clydesdale Trail could include pedestrian improvements. He reviewed the proposed
building material noting that was not included in the original PUD but was also used by the Goddard
School also located in the PUD. He stated that staff does support the amendment.
Popp asked if there is a vacant lot directly to the west.
Finke replied that is a pond and wetland space. He confirmed that this would be the last available pad
within the development.
Jacob asked if the feedback of staff is consistent with what has evolved.
Finke confirmed that noting that is why he included the history of changes that occurred since the
original PUD was approved.
Nielsen invited the applicant to speak and noted that no one else was present for the hearing. The
public hearing was opened and closed at 8:15.
Kyle Vitense, applicant, stated that he had be watching this site for a while and thought it would a
great opportunity to become a member of the Medina community. He noted that their desire to locate
the building back on the lot was create a single storefront entrance. With the original PUD, it was not
clear how to orient the internal working of the building. Parking was located along multiple sides of
the building and there was orientation towards the sidewalk. The long north-south layout also limited
how they could organize the interior spaces. He noted that their team acknowledged the interest in
creating more character and interest for both pedestrians and cars coming from the west.
Nielsen referenced the State Farm building near the Dairy Queen and asked if this would create
conflict.
Vitense stated that he knows that agent well. He stated that the majority of his business is referral
based and not based on the location of his office. He stated that he is currently located in Plymouth
and has not had any issues with the agenda in Medina.
Piper asked for details on the golf simulator.
Vitense commented that he has a lot of young professionals working for him and believed that would
assist in recruitment and retainment of employees and creating a welcoming workspace.
Jacob asked how the greenspace in front of the building would be maintained.
Vitense replied that he would hire professionals to maintain that area because it would be a reflection
of his business.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
2
Finke asked if there was discussion with the broader association and whether that greenspace would
be maintained with the other landscaping in the PUD.
Vitense replied that they had not had those discussions with the seller or members of the association.
He noted that it would be his preference if the area could be maintained as an amenity for the broader
area.
Rhem stated that the biggest thing for him is the wide-open space in the front and would like to see an
improved appeal, whether that is done to make it more inviting or to provide more pedestrian
connectivity.
Popp commented that when he drives through that site there is a lot of traffic. He asked the current
number of employees versus the fully staffed model.
Vitense replied that the building could accommodate approximately 17 employees. They currently
had approximately 8 workspaces, but were planning for long-term expansion.
Popp stated that he is not necessarily a concern but something he has noticed when visiting the
school. He stated that he does like the greenspace plaza concept. He stated that is one of the first
focal points when entering the development and therefore that should be kept in mind.
Jacob stated that he had similar comments with the optics of the building and landscaping.
Piper commented that this is well done and would be an improvement to the site. She also agreed
with the comments related to the western entrance.
Grajczyk stated that in looking at the site, his vision was for a Dairy Queen drive thru with walk up
windows. He thanked the applicant for taking interest in the location and had drive and vision as to
what could be located on the site. He stated that he is not fully against this proposal but asked that
things be constructed in a way that would make the lot more flexible should the success of the
business change in the future so that the space could be reused for shopping.
Nielsen stated that she likes the idea of having a plaza as you enter from the west. She commented
that it does seem odd to have so many State Farm offices so close together, but does not have broader
issues with the layout.
Nielsen commented that this would be a good addition to this site.
STATE fA
NSURANCE
Vitense Insurance and Financial Services, Inc.
10405 6' Ave N St. 120
Plymouth, MN 55441
Office: 763-231-3058
"',:l (,x,..)1, L,-h, 7,.,vXtJ"/'7, !Lrf-1:Lg-
7- '
; MAY 1 6 2022i
I
My State Farm Agency has been located in Plymoutli, MN since opening January l"', 2012. I have
always been intentional about our work within the community, and I was recently recognized by the
City of Plymouth with a Community Service Award in 2020. I previously served on the Board of the
TwinWest Chamber of Commerce as a voice for small business owners. The Vitense Agency has
been recognized as a Reader's Choice recipient by our loyal clients and Sun Sailor readers in the
surrounding area four consecutive years as Best Insurance and Financial Service Agency.
A lot of hard work by a tremendous team of licensed agents, and the opportunity to serve a vibrant
residential and small business community, has resulted in significant growtli the past ten years. An
increase in pliysical capacity is required to accommodate the needs of my growing business, and as I
envision the remaining 30+ years of my practice. I have observed the vacant North Outlot at
Clydesdale Marketplace for many years as an ideal permanent location. A majority of our existing
and new clients reside in zip codes 55446, 55311 and 55340. Clydesdale Marketplace would offer an
upgrade in location convenience. In addition, the lot would perfectly accommodate the size of
building needed as an owner occupant.
Our plans detail the construction of a building representative of the wonderful Medina, A/IN
community and Clydesdale Marketplace development. We took into consideration feedback and
suggestions by City of Medina staff to modi'fy plans and work within the planned space. It is my
understanding the lot has been vacant for over 17 years, I assume as a result of the lack of demand by
the market for a business in accordance with the original PUD. I have observed the wonderful
Goddard School addition to Clydesdale as an amendment to the original PUD. I believe a siinilar
amendment to accommodate a premier representative of the strongest brand in the Insurance and
Financial Services indushy would do well to complete the development. Our plans will eliminate the
need for a drive-thru as currently designed within Pun, and tlie congestion wliich may be detrimental
at the entrance of the development. As the development transitions from retail strip to Wells Fargo, I
believe a beautiful State Farm Agency would fit perfectly next door as an invitation to the space with
much more limited traffic.
I am excited about the opportunity to establish a permanent location on this site, and the tremendous
opportunity it will create. I look forward to the increased capacity and ability to create more jobs,
help more customers and expand our community involvement activities. I ask for your approval to
amend the development as originally designed and allow for our plans to move forward.
Sincerel ,
Kyle Vitense - Agency Owner
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Overview
As a gateway to the City of Medina this development
blends retail and hospitality uses. The project
maintains some features of the natural site and seeks
to create new, attractive design and landscape features
that will complement the City of Medina.
· Nature
o Color palette drawn from the Autumn season.
o Provide opportunities for walking paths.
throughout the site.
o Create places to relax and gather.
o Utilize wetlands and stormwater as an amenity
with ponds and water features.
· Preservation
o Maintain some of the significant trees and
wetland area.
· Community
o Provide a pedestrian scale development that
reinforces a downtown “commercial node”
experience.
o Create a hierarchy of spaces for commuters
and shoppers, and residents that slows the
pace of traffic and experience as you travel
through the site.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Introduction
This retail development in Medina, MN is proposed
by Ryan Companies US, Inc. This document is
created to help direct design solutions and define
character for this project. It is also intended to provide
concepts for future development.
Purpose
The primary purpose of Development Guidelines
is to set basic parameters, describe preferences and
illustrate design intent. These guidelines serve as
a framework within which creative design can and
should occur. There is no one prescribed solution, but
many options that can meet the basic requirements
and intent of this document.
Application
The format and content of these guidelines are
specifically tailored for use as a reference workbook
for both the retail center and outlot development. It
outlines issues and recommendations that apply to
the entire project area as well as highlights specific
guidelines that apply to each parcel.
Implied Responsibility
All participants in the development of this project
area must recognize the local and community impacts
of this project and the various systems that play an
important role. Each building must fit within the
context of the entire plan. Individual projects must
complement, not compete with, adjacent development
in terms of public space, walk and trail connections,
stormwater management solutions, street layout,
parking strategies, land use mix and building design.
Development Guidelines
Overall Guidelines
There are a number of guidelines that apply to
the entire project including recommendations for
stormwater management, streets, land use, parking,
and other development components. Many of these
overall project guidelines overlap, or are integrated
with one another. For ease of discussion they are
categorized according to a list of layers, similar to
those on a master plan map:
· Context – local, city, regional.
· Water Management – surface water features,
stormwater management.
· Green Structure – trails and open space.
· Land Use Mix – preferred uses, horizontal mixed
use.
· Streets and Blocks – access and circulation.
· Architecture – built form, character of
development.
· Parking Strategies – quantity, location, type.
· Transit – automobile, bus, other options.
The proposed and future design solutions for
development within the project area, must
demonstrate an understanding of the interplay
between these layers.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Context
Although unique to Medina, the project is not intended to be a stand
alone district within the City; instead, will be a part of, and connect with
a variety of local, city-wide and regional systems.
Guideline Recommendations
To ensure that the Project takes full advantage of local and regional
systems, development should:
· Provide safe, easily recognized connections to city, and county trail
corridors.
· Make provisions for city and regional transit service and amenities
and encourage their use.
· Integrate with and complement the existing (and future) street
framework.
· Become an integral part of the city and county drainage/ stormwater
management plan.
Examples
Open space will be easily
accessible to all residents and
people who work or visit the area.
· Bikeways and pedestrian
routes in the project must be
designed for safety and ease of
access.
· Overall project design (and
all future development within
the project area) should
accommodate stormwater
within each new project, and
highlight stormwater as an
amenity.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Water features and drainage
systems are essential components
of the project. The potential mix
of ponds, wetlands, fountains will
provide focal amenities within the
framework of an environmentally
responsible, visually pleasing
strategy to manage stormwater.
Water elements are not intended to
be separate stand alone features,
but instead should be integrated
with the variety of green spaces,
trails, public open space, and
gathering areas.
Guideline
Recommendations
Water Management guidelines
not only define the overall role
and character of public space, but
also encourage each development
parcel to address the following:
Water Management
· Create signature water features (ponds, fountains, wetlands, etc.) as
major visual amenities.
· Promote high quality, creative and appealing aesthetics for all
components of the water systems.
· Integrate stormwater management components (meeting both water
quality and quantity requirements).
Example
Integration of water and landscape, design creativity, use of quality
materials and safety concerns are the critical objectives to be met.
Water feature design should include both natural and informal forms
(such as ponds) and should explore creative ways to integrate wetland/
rain garden landscapes with active urban spaces.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
The overall design framework of the project creates a system of links
between open spaces and wetlands via pedestrian trails. Of equal
importance is the contribution from each use and each element of the
development to this network of connections and green space throughout
the project.
Guideline Recommendations
Green Structure guidelines encourage the following:
· Work with the City to create an integrated system that links with
existing city and county trails and open space networks.
· Encourage the development of inviting, innovative and usable green
space as integral parts of overall development.
· Integrate stormwater management components (meeting water
quality and quantity requirements) within the development.
Together, the system of public and semi-public green space will result in
a welcoming public realm throughout the new development.
Green Structure
Examples
Based on the Concept Plan for the
project, a variety of green spaces
is proposed including:
· Elements such as green areas,
plazas, and seating areas
characterize a pedestrian-
oriented environment.
· Green space should connect
with other open space
elements, providing a focal
point for activity and a sense
of place.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
The Concept Plan identifies the proposed mix and the
approximate location of the various land use types
for the project. Together with the Zoning Code, these
guidelines focus on the following overall objectives:
· Promote an interesting mix of building styles,
scales and massing over the different parts of the
project.
· Support creative, innovative, high-quality design
solutions as the benchmark for success.
· Integrate pedestrian connections through out the
project.
· Provide a variety of commercial types of
development.
Examples
· Buffer and transition different parcels by use of
landscape features.
· Create areas for large-scale, auto-related uses,
separate from smaller scale formats to provide
varied user experiences.
· Utilize the existing topography and landscape
features to the best extent possible.
· Uses shall promote pedestrian friendly streets, and
configurations to control vehicular traffic.
Land Use Mix
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Streetscape
Entrances to the project must balance a high level of
service for the automobile with attractive and inviting
amenities for the pedestrian including:
· Provide gracious sidewalk width to invite
pedestrian traffic.
· Install street trees within tree grates in sidewalks
and pedestrian plazas to frame and provide shade.
· Provide street lighting that meets all safety
standards and design criteria, while maintain the
unique character for the project.
· Provide bollards for pedestrian safety and building
security, where appropriate at street corners,
building entries, and other sensitive locations.
Lighting may be integrated in to the street corner
bollards to provide additional safety and as a night
time visual element.
Streets & Blocks
The Concept Plan defines a specific strategy for the
layout of the retail center and the outlets. The size,
type and configuration of this street hierarchy is based
on a combination of projected traffic volume, existing
and future road connections, level of service at
intersections, adjacent land use and desired aesthetic
character.
The project encourages a mix of large and small
floor plates, accommodating auto-oriented uses. This
suggests even greater attention be paid to public
realm and streetscape improvements that not only
accommodate vehicles, but also invite bicycle and
pedestrian traffic. Surface parking areas provided
through out the project with convenient access to
storefronts, but present an additional challenge to the
overall visual character and aesthetic appeal of this
area. While green space is identified in the project,
focus on gathering spaces and wide sidewalks are
necessary. A consistent and attractive streetscape
is also essential. Public realm and streetscape
guidelines include the following.
Public Realm
Public Spaces should:
· Focus on pedestrian connections and small
gathering areas.
· Encourage a balance of hardscape with landscape;
a mix of pavements with plantings.
· Provide small urban plaza integrated with building
entries or taking advantage of shared space
between buildings and outlots.
· Promote safety and security in all design
solutions, including landscape lighting, views into
the site and accessibility.
· Provide seasonal interest and color; promote
quality materials and finishes.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Buildings make a significant contribution to the first
impression of the project. Buildings form gateways at
the major entries into the site, architectural elements
and choice of materials convey a certain character and
the scale or massing of structures begins to define the
feel or experience of this place. The overall design
and specific details of the buildings should make the
project unique, inviting and memorable. Architecture
guidelines include the following:
Building Design, Character and
Expression
· Provide a variety of building types and styles
expressed both in large scale (overall building)
and small scale (design details).
· Promote interesting, animated architectural
features without being thematic or artificial – faux
decorative elements are discouraged.
· Promote 4-sided architecture at the outlot avoiding
large, unarticulated side and rear elevations.
· Emphasize important nodes by placing distinctive
architectural elements or interesting facades at
these prominent locations.
Scale, Proportion and Building Height
· Provide a variety of building heights, perhaps
related to changes in use or at demising walls –
retail buildings should express 12 to 14 foot floor
heights.
· Articulate front façades with projections and
recesses.
Street Presence
· Emphasize pedestrian experience with
architectural features at street level – canopies,
material details, decorative light fixtures.
· Encourage a variety of color, texture and materials
to complement other streetscape elements and
buildings within the project.
· Conceal service entries, loading facilities and
mechanical services from view.
Architecture
Windows and Doors
· Optimize glass openings for ground level front
facades in the village.
· Provided recessed entries.
· Use lightly tinted glass for all windows and doors
where reasonable – mirrored, reflective glass or
highly tinted glazing is not allowed.
Materials
· Provide a diverse mix of materials, applied in a
variety of proportions, exposures, and detailing
within a block or along a street.
· Encourage durable, high-quality materials – local
sources if available.
· Main building facade and the sides facing internal
streets shall use a minimum of 35% Class I
building materials.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Architecture
Guideline Recommendations
Of all the layers that combine to form the project
Concept Plan, architecture will typically be the most
prominent component. Both visually and physically,
architecture plays a major role in defining the overall
design character and mix of uses. It is crucial that
the design and location of buildings address these
architectural guidelines with specific emphasis on the
following:
· Promote a variety of building types, including
a range of height, scale and proportion,
that supports an integrated mix of shopping
destinations, food venues, service businesses, and
other proposed uses.
· Provisions for handicapped accessible facilities
shall be provided as required by Minnesota state
law.
· Exterior materials and finishes shall be durable,
non-combustible, and should convey a sense
of consistency between adjacent buildings. All
sides of buildings that face streets and driveways
should have the same level of architectural detail.
Material changes should not occur at interior or
reverse corners or external corners.
The exterior finish of buildings should be shall
have at least 30% of the following materials:
• brick
• natural stone
• granite
• glass
• metal panels
• specialty concrete
• opaque panels
• masonry stucco
• decorative concrete, precast concrete panels, and architectural rock face CMU may be used, provided the panels do not exceed 70% of exterior materials*
• up to 20% may be wood, anodized aluminum
or similar ornamental metals and my be used
as an accent material if appropriately integrated
into the overall building design
* Decorative concrete includes concrete that is: 1) burnished
to create a terrazzo appearance, 2) professionally colored
and patterned ti create a high quality earth tone brick
appearance, 30 professionally colored and patterned to
create a high quality white earth tone or stucco appearance
(not EFIS), 4) professionally colored and patterned to
create a high quality travertine appearance.
· Storefronts will be aluminum framing and glass as
required by code. Tenant’s frontage will include
storefront expanses in accordance with the City
approved PUD design guidelines. At least 60%
of the linear length of street-facing facades must
contain windows and doors.
· Minimize the impact of all mechanical equipment
as viewed from ground level. Mechanical
equipment located on the roof or around the
perimeter of a structure shall be screened by a
raised parapet, by comparable and compatible
exterior building materials, or painted to
complement the building materials in order to
diminish its impact.
· The site shall have asphalt paving at parking areas
and driveways. The periphery of parking and
driveways shall have poured in place concrete
curbing.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines 0
· Site lighting shall be dark skies compliant and
in accordance with current ordinances. The
rear facades of buildings shall have lighting at
entrances only to help minmize the impact to
neighbors. Light fixtures shall be downcast,
cut off type units, concealing the light source
from view and preventing glare. Uniformed
ornamental street lighting shall be used to
integrate the Clydesdale Marketplace with the
downtown Hamel lighting. Minimum light levels
shall be .9 foot candle at general parking and
pedestrian areas, as well as, 1.0 foot candle at
vehicular use areas.
· All exterior loading and service areas must be
completely screened from ground level view
from adjacent streets, except at driveway access
points. The trash area adjacent to the premises
shall consist of a concrete slab and screening that
is integral with the building.
· All areas of land other than occupied by building,
parking, or driveways shall be landscaped with
sod, mulch, and/or rock material in planting beds.
Provide understory trees, shrubs, flowers, and
ground covers deemed appropriate for a complete
quality landscape treatment of the site to comply
with City ordinances
· No sign, symbol, or advertisement shall be
placed or maintained on the exterior walls of, or
above, the premises except signs complying with
the City’s PUD sign ordinance. All signs shall
have individual back illuminated letters unless
otherwise approved. Color to be selected by the
tenant. Internally illuminated, individual channel
letters shall mounted directly to the facade or to a
raceway that matches the building sign band color.
Balancing the realities of car-related necessities
(streets, parking and so on) with potential for future
transit service, along with the desired character
of the project is a significant challenge. The goal
is to provide adequate parking; both quantity and
Architecture
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Parking
location, while promoting creative
strategies that support the overall
needs of the project and the
community.
Guideline
Recommendations
Parking guidelines encourage the
following:
· Utilize a combination of
landscaping and landform
to screen parking areas from
major streets and important
views (Highway 55)
· Create strategies for shared
parking between adjacent
uses, taking advantage of peak
and off-peak cycles, business
hours, night time activities,
special events and other needs
· Provide locations for bicycle
storage throughout the project
area at appropriate locations
· Explore various landscape
approaches to soften parking
area edges, provide shade,
integrate native plantings,
offset islands and other ideas
to reduce the visual impact of
parking areas
The project is designed to be
transit ready in a way that
provides a walkable public realm
and a connected street system.
The Concept Plan recognizes the
importance of providing transit
options other than the typical car.
Clydesdale Marketplace Development Guidelines
Transit
Guideline Recommendations
Transit is an important component to the overall plan,
with expectations for car trips to increase. It is a goal
of the developer to promote transit use, based on the
following guidelines:
· Understand and take advantage of opportunities to
use existing and proposed transit components.
· Provide facilities specifically linked to uses and
character including signage and lighting for way-
finding and bicycle amenities.
· Provide for future connections for bus and transit
links.
Overview
The Master Plan identifies four distinct, but connected
Blooming Meadows Page 1 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: June 16, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022 City Council
SUBJECT: Blooming Meadows – Pillar Home Partners, Inc.
E of Holy Name Dr., N. of CR 24 – Concept Plan Review
PIDs 2411823110004, 2411823120015, and 1311823440005
Review Deadline
Review Deadline: July 9, 2022
Summary of Request
Pillar Home Partners has requested review of a PUD Concept Plan for a 5-lot
rural subdivision located east of Holy Name Drive, northeast of Lakeview
Road.
The subject site is over 73 acres
in size, with approximately 22 acres
of wetlands. Almost all of the
remaining property has been
historically farmed. Surrounding
property within Medina is mainly
rural residential with the Lakeview
Road neighborhood and Holy Name
Lake to the southwest. The
Churchill Farms and Bridlewood
Farms neighborhoods in Plymouth
are located to the east. An aerial
of the subject site and surrounding
land can be found to the right.
The subject site is zoned and
guided Rural Residential (RR).
It appears that the property could
be divided into five lots which
meet the RR zoning district
standards, and the applicant has
submitted a “base density” plan
showing how five standard RR lots
could be arranged.
MEMORANDUM
• 5 lots
• 73 acres (gross)
• 51 buildable acres
• Rural Residential
Agenda Item #7F
Blooming Meadows Page 2 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
The applicant is proposing a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to result in the same number of
lots (five), but requests flexibility for lot size and arrangement to set aside a significant portion of
the site (approximately 7.5 acres) for creation of additional wetland areas. The applicant intends
to create a wetland bank with the additional wetland areas and sell credits from the bank.
Comprehensive Plan
The subject property is guided Rural Residential (RR) in the Comprehensive Plan. The
maximum density within the RR land use is generally 1 unit per 10 gross acres. The proposed 5-
lot subdivision would fall below this maximum density.
Staff has attached excerpts from Comprehensive Plan related to Vision and Community Goals,
the general land use principles and objectives of rural land use. The criteria for reviewing a PUD
include determining whether the PUD meets these objectives better than a development
following the general ordinance standards. The applicant describes how they believe their
proposal achieves these purposes and objectives in their narrative.
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.
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.
Blooming Meadows Page 3 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
The applicant proposes the PUD primarily to allow flexibility from minimum lot size
requirements to create additional wetland area. The applicant does not propose more lots than
could be achieved designing to the standard RR district standards.
The City has also established Conservation Design-PUD regulations. A CD-PUD would allow a
density bonus up to 20% above the base density (in this case, a sixth lot because the base density
is 5) in addition to other flexibility. The applicant has not requested additional density and has
not proposed a CD-PUD subdivision.
Proposed Concept
The following table summarizes the proposed lots compared to the general RR district
requirements. As noted above, a PUD allow the opportunity for flexibility from these standards
if the City determines that such flexibility meets the purposes of the PUD ordinance and other
City objectives. The areas of potential flexibility are highlighted in yellow.
RR
Requirement
Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5
Gross Acreage N/A 26.1 acre 19.5 acre 7.5 acre 8.5 acre 9.5 acre
Min. Lot Size 5 acre cont.
suitable soils
4.7 acre
4.17 acre
+ 2 acre
5.1 acre 5.2 acre 3.76 acre
Min. Lot Width 300 feet 708’ 1750’ 510’ 775’ 528’
Min. Lot Depth 200 feet 1272’ 580’ 965’ 1830’ 1120’
Front Setback 50 feet 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’
Side Setback 50 feet 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’
Rear Setback 50 feet 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’ 50’
The RR zoning district establishes a minimum lot size of 5-acres of contiguous suitable soils as
described in the subdivision ordinance. The applicant proposes that three of the lots contain less
then 5-acres of contiguous suitable soils. Generally, this results because areas of suitable soils
are proposed to be converted to wetland areas.
The applicant has not explicitly described flexibility from other lot standards. In preliminary
discussions with the applicants, staff had suggested potentially discussing reduced setbacks from
internal setbacks within the site, while maintaining at least the minimum setbacks to the exterior.
Wetlands and Floodplain
Seven wetlands have been delineated on the site. The largest
wetland occupies the northern quarter of the site. Wetlands 3
and 4 are the next largest and have usually not been farmed
in recent years. The remaining wetlands are smaller and
have often been farmed over time.
The City’s wetland protection ordinance requires buffers
based on the functional classification of the wetlands as
described to the right. If the applicant creates wetland areas
Wetland Classification Avg. Buffer
Width
1 Manage 2 25 feet
2 Manage 2 25 feet
3 Manage 2 25 feet
4 Manage 3 20 feet
5 Manage 3 20 feet
6 Manage 2 25 feet
7 Manage 2 25 feet
Blooming Meadows Page 4 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
as contemplated by the concept plan, it is likely that much larger buffers will also be proposed
adjacent to the new wetland. These buffers may also be sold as part of a wetland bank.
Wetlands 1, 3, and 4 are partially drained with a drain tile running through the field and to the
south. Creating the larger wetland area would likely include altering how this drain tile
functions. The drain tile serves as the primary outlet for Wetland 1, so it will be important that
this outlet function is maintained in a manner that Wetland 1 does not impact other adjacent
properties.
FEMA floodplain maps identify Zone A floodplains within and adjacent to Wetland 1. The
floodplains do not have a base flood elevation established, and it appears the mapped floodplain
extends further south than is accurate based on site conditions. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed
has provided a conservative estimate that the base flood elevation is likely below an elevation of
1002, but this will need to be modeled at the time of preliminary plat application. The applicant
does not propose any impacts even at the 1002 elevation, but the precise elevation will impact
allowed elevations for homes.
Access/Transportation
The applicants propose two shared driveways to provide access to Holy Name Drive, each
serving 2 or 3 lots. One driveway would be south of the created wetland, across from Lakeview
Road and the second driveway would be north of the created wetland, approximately 250 feet
north of Cheyenne Trail, approximately 40 feet north of the existing field access.
Tree Preservation
Most of the site is farmed or wetland. There are areas of trees along the western edge of the site
and a grove near the southern property line. It appears the applicant will propose some removal
for grading and installation of the two shared driveways. The applicant has indicated that their
intent is to save as much of the southern grove as possible by putting the driveway along the
southern property line. Information on tree removal will be required at the time of preliminary
plat review.
Stormwater/Grading Review
The applicant has not provided detail on proposed grading or stormwater management as part of
the concept plan. The subdivision appears to create hardcover in an amount which will trigger
the City’s stormwater management requirements. The enlarged buffers proposed by the
applicant as part of the wetland creation will serve much or all of the volume control
requirements of the site, and the applicant will need to show that runoff rate control is achieved.
Utilities/Easements
The lots will be served with individual wells and septic systems. The applicant has submitted
soil borings identifying a primary and secondary Type I septic location for each proposed lot as
required by state rules and the City’s individual sewage treatment system (ISTS) ordinance.
The Type I septic locations for Lots 1 and 2 are proposed across the large wetland to the north,
over 1200 feet from likely home sites. The building official has requested additional detail on
this septic design to ensure that the sites can be accessed, constructed and maintained
Blooming Meadows Page 5 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
successfully. There may be additional Type I locations within the southern portion of the
property, and the applicant may be able to shift lot lines or provide lot 1 or 2 the ability to install
septic systems in these locations through easements.
Any future plat should provide drainage and utility easements along the perimeter of lots, and
over wetlands and drainageways.
Park Commission Comments
The City’s subdivision ordinance requires the following to be dedicated for parks, trails and
public open space purposes, at the City’s option:
• Up to 10% of the buildable land (in this case = 5.1 acres)
• Cash-in-lieu of land – 8% of the pre-developed market value; minimum of
$3500/residential unit, maximum of $8000/residential unit (in this case the $16,000
maximum will be triggered for the additional lots)
• Combination of the above
The City’s park plan does not identify the need for park space or trail corridors in the area of the
property. Although the City’s trail plan does not identify trail connections, staff does believe it is
worth considering whether securing some opportunity for trail connectivity is advisable. Even if
construction of such a trail is not contemplated within the City’s 20-year trail plan, securing
easements for even the longer-term may be valuable.
The Park Commission reviewed the concept at their June 15 meeting. The Commission
expressed a strong interest in securing trail easements connecting both east-west and to the north,
even if no trails are anticipated to be constructed within the next few decades.
Planning Commission Comments
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Concept Plan at their June 14 meeting.
An excerpt from the draft meeting minutes is attached for reference. Six persons spoke at the
hearing and a written comment was also received. There was not significant opposition amongst
the speakers, and some expressed some level of support. Questions were raised about
stormwater management/drainage and the location of the shared driveways.
Comments from the Planning Commission were also generally supportive of the Concept Plan.
Some Commissioners specifically stated that the concept appeared to address a number of the
objectives that the City has identified for open space protection and wetland preservation.
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 page 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 RR requirements. The process provides flexibility which is ultimately at the
Blooming Meadows Page 6 of 6 June 21, 2022
PUD Concept Plan City Council Meeting
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.
It appears that the primary flexibility which the applicant is requesting is to reduce the amount of
suitable soil within the lots, but not to increase the number of lots above what may be possible
under standard RR zoning. Doing so provides flexibility on how the sites could be arranged.
If information can be provided showing adequate opportunity for septic locations for each of the
five lots, staff believes it is reasonable to conclude that the flexibility proposed within the PUD
serves various goals and objectives identified in the PUD purpose and the Comprehensive Plan.
Creating 4-5 lots and also creating the additional wetland areas would likely not be possible if
strictly adhering to the RR standards.
If the Planning Commission and Council are generally supportive of the concept and the
applicant proceeds, staff has provided comments throughout the report to be incorporated into
any future formal application. These comments are summarized below:
1) The PUD shall be contingent upon creation and restoration of wetlands as contemplated in
the concept plan.
2) The applicant shall provide information necessary to establish the base flood elevation.
3) The plat shall provide easements as recommended by the City Engineer, including along the
perimeter of lots and over all wetlands, drainageways, and stormwater improvements.
4) The applicant shall provide additional detail to show that all Type I septic locations are
accessible and practical for installation, use, and maintenance.
5) The plat shall provide sufficient right-of-way for potential road expansion for bicycle/non-
motorized transportation as recommended by the City Engineer.
6) Future application shall be subject to the City’s stormwater management requirements and
information on proposed management shall be provided at the time of preliminary plat.
7) Easement and maintenance agreements shall be recorded related to the shared driveways.
Driveway locations shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and Public
Works Director.
8) Future application shall be subject to the City’s tree preservation ordinance, and information
on tree removal shall be provided.
9) Except as explicitly noted within the Planned Unit Development, future applicants shall
abide by relevant City requirements.
Attachments
1. Comp Plan Info
2. Excerpt from draft 6/14/2022 Planning Commission minutes
3. Comment received
4. Applicant narrative
5. Concept Plan
6. Base Density Exhibit
EXCERPTS FROM COMP PLAN
Chapter 2: VISION & COMMUNITY GOALS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
The Vision and Community Goals chapter is the heart of the Comprehensive Plan and provides
the foundation from which City officials make consistent and supporting land use decisions. This
chapter includes a set of general community goals that guided the creation of this Plan.
The concepts in this chapter are some of the few static elements of the Comprehensive Plan. If land
uses change or other infrastructure varies from the Plan, decisions will be founded in the goals set
forth below. The Vision and Goals were created with the involvement of the Comprehensive Plan
Steering Committee (the “Steering Committee”), City officials, and residents of Medina and are
broadly supported.
Land use designations are subject to strong social and economic pressures to change. Accordingly,
it is appropriate that such systems be periodically evaluated in light of changing social and
economic conditions. As development evolves, the Vision and Goals will provide the guidance for
accomplishing the vision for the future of the community even when changes are necessary to the
land use plan.
Detailed objectives and recommendations are contained within each of the subject chapters of this
plan.
Creating the Vision and Goals
The residents, the Steering Committee, City officials and staff participated in the planning process
for the Plan. A series of public participation meetings were conducted to introduce and solicit
information from the residents of Medina. The Steering Committee held work sessions that
focused on integrating the concerns and desires of the community together with accommodating
growth and regional impacts. An online forum provided additional opportunity for residents to
impact the Vision and Community Goals as they were formulated.
In addition to land use and growth planning, the City implemented open space, natural resources,
and infrastructure planning. The goals which guided this process are integrated into this chapter.
Each element of this plan was developed with assistance from city officials and a diverse group of
community stakeholders producing a truly representative plan. The City made a conscious
decision to emphasize natural resources and open space conservation.
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 and protects natural resources.
Rural Designations
Objectives:
1. Allow low-density development in the Rural Residential Area including innovative
arrangements of homes that preserve open space and natural resources.
2. Encourage conservation of open space, farms and ecologically significant natural resources
in the rural areas.
3. Enforce stringent standards for the installation and maintenance of permanent, on-
site sewage disposal systems.
4. Allow public facilities and services, such as parks and trail systems, if compatible with
rural service area development.
5. Allow land uses, such as home-based businesses, hobby farms, horse stables, nurseries
and other smaller-scale rural activities, which will not conflict with adjoining residential
development.
6. Regulate noise, illumination, animals, and odors as needed to maintain public health and
safety.
7. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per forty acres for property in the Agricultural
land use.
8. Maintain a maximum density of one unit per ten acres for new development in the Rural
Residential and Future Development Area land use.
9. Consider exceptions to maximum density standards for open space developments that
protect natural features and put land into permanent conservation. Within the
Metropolitan Council’s long term sewer service area (reference Map 5-5), these
exceptions will be allowed to result in development with a density in excess of one unit
per ten gross acres if consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s Flexible Residential
Development Guidelines.
10. Urban services will not be provided to the Agricultural, Rural Residential, or Future
Development Area land uses during this planning cycle.
11. Require preservation of natural slopes, wetlands, woodlands and other significant
natural characteristics.
12. Require that lots contain adequate soil types and conditions as defined in the City's
on-site septic system requirements.
13. Protect property within the Future Development Area designation from subdivision and
development by requiring ghost plats for subdivisions so that future urban expansion is
not compromised.
14. Reduce impervious surfaces where possible by applying low impact design standards
and encourage innovative materials and plans that reduce runoff.
15. Encourage and incentivize landowners to participate in the protection and conservation of
significant natural resources.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
1
2. Public Hearing – Blooming Meadows – Pillar Homes Partners – East of Holy Name
Drive, North of Lakeview Road – PUD Concept Plan for Five Lot Rural Subdivision
Finke stated that the application proposes a PUD in order to receive flexibility on the five acres of
suitable soils requirement. He stated that the applicant is not proposing additional density within the
subdivision but to organize the lots differently. He stated that this proposal would allow restoration
and the creation of wetland in the center of the site. He stated that the City has not had a lot of
requests for rural PUDs, with the exception of the conservation design PUDs. He noted that a CD-
PUD does allow for an increase in density, but in this case no additional density is being requested
therefore a traditional PUD was proposed. He stated that the five lots would be proposed to lay
around the wetland bank which would be created in the center. He stated that the applicant proposes
two shared driveways to serve two to three lots each. He noted that each rural lot must have a
primary and secondary septic site identified and noted that the applicant has identified those for each
of the five lots proposed. He noted that the Building Official has requested that additional
information be shown to confirm that the secondary sites for lots one and two be confirmed as
feasible. He stated that there would be an option for the applicant to change the septic locations as
well. He stated that the applicant intends to create a wetland bank and those credits could be sold to
developers for impacts on other sites in Medina. He stated that staff would recommend that the PUD
be contingent upon the creation of those credits being created. He asked if the flexibility in the layout
of the lots better achieves the goals of the City.
Nielsen invited the applicant to address the Commission.
KC Chermak, Pillar Homes, stated that the owners of this land have decided they are interested in
developing the property and they used a collaborative approach to develop this concept. He stated
that they have been working with City staff and the watershed throughout this process and believe
that the PUD objectives have been met through this development in terms of open space and
restoration. He stated that they have embraced the concept of water management to create a premier
development while still coming in under the density that could be available. He commented that their
preference is to have the houses compliment the land.
Piper asked how the septic sites for lots one and two could be located so far to the northeast when the
sites for the homes are to the south of the wetland.
Chermak commented that they worked with a septic company to identify those secondary locations
which could be accommodated through directional boring. He stated that there would be an
opportunity that has been worked out that would allow a different type of septic system on the south
side of the wetland, closer to the homes. He stated that this site is basically raw dirt that they are
attempting to restore. He noted that they have legal and proper locations per lot to meet the rules, but
there are more sophisticated approaches that they will take and will be acceptable for lots one and
two.
Popp asked for more details on what a wetland bank is.
Chermak commented that typically in residential there is not difficulty in balancing out impacts to
wetlands on the site but explained that is often difficult in commercial and industrial developments.
He noted that in those cases a developer is permitted to purchase wetlands credits that are not located
on the development site. He stated that Hennepin County is currently in need of wetland credits. He
noted that this would be a creative development that would add wetlands and make additional wetland
credits available within the County.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
2
Nielsen opened the public hearing at 7:19.
Joel Feder, 2412 Holy Name Drive, referenced a clump of trees on the northeast corner and asked if
that would remain. He noted that it is a specialized tree clump where wildlife frequent.
Chermak confirmed that the trees would remain.
Feder asked if there would be any possibility of negotiation with the street being cut in 130 feet from
his driveway. He asked if that could cut in directly from Cheyenne Trail.
Chermak commented that they evaluated and discussed with Xcel Energy and have worked to keep
the homes away from the power lines. He stated that if they were to align with Cheyenne it would
align more with the power lines, and they would have to remove significantly more trees because of
the grading that would be needed. He stated that the proposed access would provide a softer
approach with less tree impact. He confirmed that there would be some soft landscaping to provide a
screening. He stated that this is an initial draft, and they could slightly adjust to the south, if desired.
Allison Cohn, 3435 Zircon Lane N, stated that she appreciates the thought that has gone into the
restoration of the wetlands noting that her family enjoys the wildlife in this area. She stated that she
also appreciates that they are only considering five homes. She stated that there are currently five
homes around the existing pond. She stated that the existing residents would love to see a berm and
larger mature trees to buffer the privacy of the pond area for the existing homes and new homeowner.
She stated that their HOA has rules requiring lighting to be turned off at a certain time of day and
asked if that could also be asked of these homeowners.
Chermak asked and received confirmation that the resident lives in Plymouth. He commented that
there is opportunity to do something along the lot line. He stated that although these lots may appear
similar to a Plymouth lot, these will be large lots and the new owners will also desire privacy. He
stated that this is currently farmland that will be restored to nature. He recognized the desire for
minimal lighting but noted that on large lots there may also be a desire for safety and therefore some
lighting in the evening is not a bad thing.
Hellen Miller, 2475 Holy Name Drive, commented that this is a beautiful area that she does not want
to see change much. She expressed concern with an offset for Lakeview Drive. She noted that there
will be development near the cemetery along with these proposed lots which will add traffic. She
expressed concern with additional traffic and access onto Holy Name Drive.
Chermak commented that safety is always important, noting improvements and reviews that have
been done of this road over the years. He stated that five homes will most likely not impact safety
and the road will be able to handle that traffic. He stated that they will work with staff and follow
recommendations. He noted that the homes were placed to take advantage of the environment and
compliment the access of the homes, noting that the five homes will share two accesses.
Miller commented that his reply was valid but did not know that addresses the issue of another access
onto Holy Name Drive. She stated that many people run the stop sign already.
Nielsen stated that Lakeview currently has a three way stop. She asked if there would be another stop
sign added.
Finke commented that it would be a shared driveway, not a road, so there would not be a stop sign
added for the driveway.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
3
Julie Rothstein, 3615 Alvarado Lane N in Plymouth, commented that the backyards in that area are
currently very wet and their sump pumps run a lot. She asked if there would be a potential that this
wetland creation could add wetness to the existing lots and homes, or whether this would assist in the
management of drainage.
Chermak commented that this piece of wetlands has been lost over time. He stated that because this
property was nature turned to farmland and they will be returning it to nature, this will better manage
the stormwater in this area. He commented that this will be an offset benefit to the entire
neighborhood.
Finke commented that the hydrology is interesting as most of the hardcover will drain to the newly
created wetland. He stated that as part of the wetland restoration, the modeling will be important and
that has been recognized by the City and watershed.
Barbara Nellermo, 2185 Holy Name Drive, asked for more information on the effect this will have on
water quality of Holy Name Lake.
Chermak commented that this will improve water quality. He stated that watershed district has been
engaged throughout this process. He acknowledged that there is most likely runoff from the farmland
that has impacted the lake. He stated that the water that leaves this site after the development will be
significantly cleaner than what it is today.
Nellermo asked if there is a timeline for this proposed development.
Chermak commented that they would hope to begin construction in the spring. He estimated that
construction could be completed in 18 to 24 months.
Nellermo commented that they have wondered what would happen to this property and this concept
sounds very positive and to be a real improvement for all the properties in the area. She thanked
everyone that has contributed to this process to provide this design.
Susie Sween, 2112 Holy Name Drive, stated that she has walked the property for about 40 years and
throughout the years the heavy equipment has crushed drain tiles which has created sink holes. She
asked how that would be addressed. She noted that on the property line between her property and the
subject property there is a large sink hole as well. She noted that some of the sink holes are deeper
than nine feet. She referenced the proposed driveways and asked what the required setback would be.
Chermak stated that he will work with the resident to resolve that situation. He commented that they
aware of the failed tile and sink holes. He explained how they will use grading to fix those issues.
He noted that there are some sink holes on the Sween property, and they can work together in attempt
to resolve that. He stated that the sink holes were created because the drain tile sped up the water,
whereas they will be slowing down the flow of water with this development.
Sween referenced the area to the north that gets very wet and asked how that will be draining.
Chermak commented that they will be working with the watershed in the modeling. He stated that
they will be improving the water management on the site through the restoration and would also want
to work with the Sweens with the issues on their property. He estimated a setback of 60 feet for the
driveway.
Medina Planning Commission Excerpt from Draft 6/14/2022 Minutes
4
Finke stated that the minimum setback for a driveway is 10 feet. He commented that they are
attempting to thread the needle with the modeling and staff recognizes that they do not want to dam
the water in the northern wetland while creating the southern wetland.
Nielsen closed the public hearing at 7:46.
Piper commented that she is pleased to see that this would fill the concept of ruralness that they love
in Medina. She thanked the property owner and developer for submitting a request for five homes
rather than 30 to 40.
Finke stated that one written comment was provided prior to the meeting that has been provided to the
Commission and will become a part of the record.
Popp stated that he appreciates that this follows the desire for rural development and preservation. He
stated that it is refreshing to see this much though and innovation in the design and approach. He
stated that he also appreciates the input and dialogue tonight, hearing input from residents. He
commented that he is supportive of this request.
Rhem echoed the comments about the collaboration with the community and dialogue tonight. He
stated that he would like to see the septic issue addressed to locate closer to the homes.
Jacob echoed the comments thus far in support of the project.
Grajczyk agreed and noted that this aligns with the visions and goals of Medina and this development
design would be similar to Northridge Farms. He agreed with traffic concerns and light pollution
concerns. He stated that he does feel that residents obey the speed limits in this area.
Piper asked if any of the people in attendance are part of the ownership and thanked them for bringing
this proposal forward.
Nielsen stated that she is a neighbor on Lakeview Road and disclosed that she does not have a
financial interest in this case. She stated that she is pleased to see this development proposal and
hoped that the developer would work to address concerns expressed by residents. She echoed the
concerns of traffic in the overall area with recent developments.
1
Dusty Finke
From:Lyra Totten-Naylor <lyratottennaylor@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, June 13, 2022 12:20 PM
To:Dusty Finke; Website Inquiries; Debra Dion; Brenda Ruth
Subject:Blooming Meadows Development
Solution Builders ‐ ThnAir
Warning: Sender lyratottennaylor@gmail.com is not yet trusted by your organization.
Please be careful before replying or clicking on the URLs.
Report Phishing Mark Safe
powered by Graphus®
Dear City of Medina Planning Commission,
Having had an all too brief chance to review the sent to me via mail regarding the upcoming development of Blooming
Meadows, I have several concerns and questions regarding this development.
1) How long will the construction last and disrupt the existing wetlands?
2) Why are the septic tanks for lots 1 and 2 located so far from the main residences? Being located on the
far side of wetlands, the homeowners will be less likely to notice any impending issues with the septic tanks.
The result is individuals in a different jurisdiction and HOA will be more likely to notice problems before the
homeowners. Also, what is the maintenance schedule for those septic tanks? Who will be responsible for
the maintenance, and how will the septic tank area be accessed both during installation and ongoing
maintenance? The other septic tanks are located near enough to the properties for the owners to gain
access and to provide adequate maintenance.
3) What are the plans to address run off and drainage during the construction project and beyond?
4) How much of the existing tree line will be disrupted?
These issues, particularly those involving water drainage and septic tank locations for Lots 1 and 2 are of particular
urgency for me. If there is an issue with a septic tank, my property is far more likely to suffer than the property owners
who will have the benefit of a wetlands buffer. My property is adjacent, but not directly on the lake behind Alvarado
Lane properties and the proposed development. I already receive considerable water run off and often have a soggy
backyard. Any potential run off from the project that damages the integrity of the pond and buffering wetlands as a
water retention device has the potential to make my backyard unusable during the construction and re‐establishment
phase.
If there is an issue with the septic or the drainage, I fear I will lack a clear path to solving the issue since I am a City of
Plymouth voter. It has been my past experience that governments respond to problems raised by those within the
2
jurisdiction rather than without. I would much appreciate receiving a written path of action for me to pursue – who to
contact, and who is responsible for what – before I can feel comfortable with this project.
I have no objections to the project as a whole and I appreciate the developers’ efforts to preserve and expand the
wetlands, but the location of the septic tanks on the far side of the wetlands on lots 1 and 2 have the potential to cause
significant disruption both during and after the construction phase.
Sincerely
Lyra Totten‐Naylor
3835 Alvarado Ln N
Plymouth MN 55446
763‐432‐5294
‐‐
Lyra Totten‐Naylor
www.lyratottennaylor.com
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 June 21, 2022
City Council Meeting
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director
DATE: June 16, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022 City Council
SUBJECT: Planning Department Updates
Land Use Application Review
A) Blooming Meadows Concept Plan – east of Holy Name Drive, north of Lakeview Drive – Pillar
Homes has requested review of a Concept Plan Review for a 5-lot rural subdivision. The
applicant proposes a PUD and requests flexibility from the Rural Residential zoning standards.
Standard RR zoning would permit 5 lots on the subject site, but the applicant proposes
alternative lot arrangement to allow for wetland restoration in a large portion of the site and
creation of a wetland bank. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 14 and
was generally supportive of the concept. Staff intends to present to Council on June 21.
B) State Farm-Clydesdale PUD Concept Plan – Kyle Vitense has requested review of a PUD
Concept Plan for construction of a professional office building at 340 Clydesdale Trail, to the
west of Wells Fargo. The proposed building differs from that anticipated in the Medina
Clydesdale Marketplace PUD, so would require an amendment to the PUD. The applicant seeks
feedback before proceeding to full design. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on
June 14 and was generally supportive of the concept. Staff intends to present to Council on June
21.
C) Cates Ranch/Willow Drive Warehouse Industrial – Comprehensive Plan Amendment– Jeff and
Chris Cates have submitted an amendment request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a
warehouse/industrial development east of Willow Drive, north of Chippewa Road. The
amendment proposes to change the future land use of approximately 30 acres from Future
Development Area to Business for an approximately 300,000 s.f. development. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the June 14 meeting and recommended approval of the
amendment. Staff intends to present to Council on July 5.
D) Life-Style Auto Condo – South of Hwy 55, west of Pioneer – SH Ventures has requested
review of a PUD Concept Plan for development of 9 buildings with approximately 218,740
square feet of space for privately owned garage condos. The Planning Commission and City
Council had previously reviewed a larger proposal of 12 buildings with approximately 258,000
square feet and generally did not express support for the proposed rezoning. A public hearing is
tentatively scheduled for the July 12 Planning Commission meeting.
E) Loram/Scannell Medina Industrial – Loram and Scannell have submitted materials for the City
to prepare an EAW for a warehouse/industrial development east of Arrowhead Drive, south of
Highway 55, to the south of Loram’s existing facility. The council approved the findings of fact
and made a negative declaration on the need for an EIS at the April 5 meeting. Staff will route
the record of decision as required. The applicant has now also applied for preliminary plat and
site plan review approval for construction of approximately 450,000 s.f. of office warehouse on
three lots. Staff is conducting preliminary review and will present when complete, potentially at
the August 17 Planning Commission Meeting.
F) Hamel Townhomes Pre Plat and Site Plan Review – Hamel Townhomes LLC has requested
preliminary plat and site plan review approval for a 30-unit townhome development at 342
MEMORANDUM
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 June 21, 2022
City Council Meeting
Hamel Road. The Council adopted resolutions of approval on June 7. Staff will await final plat
application.
G) Prairie Creek Final Plat – Stelter Enterprises has requested final plat approval for a 17-lot villa
subdivision at 500 Hamel Road. The applicant is re-evaluating their plans and staff will present
to Council when and if the applicant is prepared to move ahead.
H) Ditter Heating and Cooling Site Plan Review – 820 Tower Drive – Ditter Heating and Cooling
has requested a Site Plan Review for an approximately 5,000 square foot addition to its building.
The application is incomplete for review and will be scheduled for a hearing when complete.
I) BAPS Site Plan Review – 1400 Hamel Road – Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam
Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS), Minneapolis, has requested Site Plan Review for construction
of a place of assembly. The Planning Commission reviewed at the September 14 meeting and
recommended approval. The Council adopted a resolution for approval at the November 16
meeting. The applicant has indicated that they will likely not begin construction until spring.
J) Adam’s Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning – Pioneer Trail Preserve – These
projects have been preliminarily approved and the City is awaiting final plat application.
K) Baker Park Townhomes, Johnson ADU CUP, 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.
Other Projects
A) Uptown Hamel RFP – staff met with WSB for a kick-off meeting for work on the Uptown
Hamel Market/Feasibility study. The engagement strategy was discussed at length. A tour with
the consultant is scheduled for the afternoon of June 30.
B) Electric Vehicle Charging Regulations – staff updated the ordinance to remove incentives as
discussed by Council. The ordinance will be presented on June 21.
C) Highway 55 Transit study – staff attended a meeting with state and county elected officials and
staff from Met Council, MnDOT, County and cities related to the study of potential transit along
Highway 55. MnDOT and Met Council will be leading two related studies kicking off later in
the summer.
D) Vacation – I will be on vacation June 20-24 but will attend the June 21 meeting.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jason Nelson, Director of Public Safety
DATE: June 16, 2022
RE: Department Updates
As we are getting into the summer months, we are preparing for several different events that take
significant planning and coordination. In the past, we have utilized our Community Service Officers
to do the bulk of this along with our Reserve Coordinators but this year, due staffing issues, others in
the organization have stepped up and are currently working on the Hamel Rodeo Parade, Cops ‘n
Bobbers, Night to Unite, Loretto Fun Fest, and Medina Celebration Day. I am blessed with a great
staff that all works together to accomplish the goals of the organization. We look forward to a great
summer of community relations.
Staff is working hard at putting the final touches of the Cops ‘n Bobbers event. Officers McGill and
Vinck have done a fantastic job planning for this event. We still have a few openings if council knows
of anyone who would be interested in having a great day on the water with the police officers.
Officers have been working hard on patrolling all areas of the city. In the coming month, officers will
be focusing on seatbelt enforcement as part of a statewide “Click it or Ticket” campaign. We will be
doing multijurisdictional enforcement with seatbelts as the focus.
Patrol:
The following are updates of Patrol Officers between May 31, 2022 and June 14, 2022: Officers
issued 25 citations and 38 warnings for various traffic offenses, responded to 3 property damage
accidents, 1 personal injury accident, 10 medicals, 8 suspicious calls, 4 traffic complaints, 15 assists to
other agencies, and 10 business/residential alarms.
On 06/01/2022 at 0432 hours Officer checked on a suspicious vehicle in the lot of Adam’s Pest
Control. Officer made contact with a male who turned out to be an employee picking up supplies. No
issues.
On 06/01/2022 Officer responded to a found wallet in the 800 block of Meander Court. Two juveniles
found a wallet in the lot and wanted to turn it in to police. I was able to locate a phone number for the
owner of the wallet who was a FedEx driver who was unaware that he had dropped his wallet. He was
still in the area making deliveries and returned to pick up his wallet.
On 06/04/2022 Officer took a phone call regarding a theft report. Person from a business on Tower
Drive reported $90,000 in cash was stolen from a business safe. The caller was hesitant to provide full
details and it was requested that the business owner contact our department for follow up.
On 06/05/2022 at 0337 hours Officer located a person sleeping in a commercial vehicle in a business
parking lot after hours. The officer was able to wake the driver who stated he was exhausted from
working all day and fell asleep.
On 06/07/2022 Officer was dispatched to a reported stolen vehicle on Highway 55 heading eastbound.
Officers located and stopped the vehicle. The driver was found to be a girlfriend of the stepson of the
victim who reported the vehicle as stolen. Wright County reported it to be a civil matter and the
vehicle was not entered as stolen. The female driver was found to have a warrant for her arrest and
was placed under arrest and transported to jail. The vehicle was released back to the owner. During
an additional search at Hennepin County jail, suspected heroin was found on the female’s person.
Charges are pending.
On 06/09/2022 Officers responded to assist Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office on a person reported to
be slumped over in a vehicle in the Tractor Supply parking lot in Greenfield. Corcoran PD located the
vehicle on Highway 55 and ultimately arrested the driver for DWI.
On 06/09/2022 Officer was requested to check the area of Holy Name Lake for a person believed to
have made suicidal statements. The subject was found sleeping in the back seat of a vehicle at Holy
Name Park. Contact was made and the subject was ultimately placed on a transport hold and sent to
the hospital for evaluation.
On 06/09/2022 Officers were dispatched to what was reported as a person injured after a fall from a
bike, having a possible broken collar bone. When officers arrived, it was determined that it was a
motorcycle accident where a motorcycle had lost control and went into the ditch. The driver sustained
minor injuries and was looked at by North Ambulance Paramedics but refused transport. It was
determined that the motorcycle did not have any registration displayed and it was confirmed that it did
not have any vehicle insurance coverage. The driver was cited for the insurance violation and failing
to use due care. The motorcycle was impounded, and the driver was picked up by a friend from the
scene.
On 06/10/2022 Officers checked on a suspicious vehicle parked in a business lot adjacent to Holiday,
1300 Baker Park Road. Upon further investigation the driver was found to have a felony warrant and
was placed under arrest without incident.
On 06/11/2022 at 1502 hours officers were dispatched to a reported injury accident at the intersection
of Hunter Drive and Elm Creek Drive. Upon arrival it was determined that a vehicle turned in front of
a northbound vehicle causing the collision. Minor injuries were reported but the occupants refused
ambulance. One driver was cited for failing to yield.
On 06/12/2022 Officer was dispatched to a possible damaged fire hydrant in the 600 block of Medina
Street North in Loretto. It was reported a fire hydrant was possibly struck by a vehicle and was now
leaking water. Upon arriving and checking the area the officer found a neighboring business lawn
sprinklers had been active, and the water was flowing onto the sidewalk near the hydrant. No damage
was found to the hydrant.
On 06/12/2022 at 0143 hours Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department assisted with a traffic complaint
westbound on Highway 55 from Willow Drive. It was reported the vehicle was swerving and driving
at erratic speeds. A deputy located and attempted to stop the vehicle. The vehicle failed to stop, made
a U-turn, and sped off eastbound Highway 55. A pursuit was initiated, and Medina Officer assisted
until the State Patrol Helicopter got overhead and called the location of the vehicle. The suspect
eventually drove to Minneapolis where he eventually abandoned the vehicle and was apprehended a
short time later by officers.
Investigations:
Follow-up to the May 26th aggravated robbery at a local retail establishment. After concluding the
investigation, charges have been sent to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office for consideration of
2nd Degree Aggravated Robbery for both suspects. This investigation also led to charges in two other
jurisdictions as well.
On June 4th, our office received a report of a theft at a local business. The business owner advised that
a known suspect stole $90,000 from their safe. Investigation ongoing.
On June 7th, I received a theft report from a local business. The suspect was identified and charged in
two different theft instances in the month of May for nearly $350.
There are currently 7 cases assigned to investigations.
1
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: June 16, 2022
MEETING: June 21, 2022
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
STREETS
• Dust control has been applied to several gravel streets within the City to keep the
dust under control during dry conditions.
• The street closure for Arrowhead Drive is in place as the connection to Chippewa
Road is moving forward. There are several components to the shutdown
including: a trunk watermain extension to the west, a water and sewer connection
to Marsh Pointe, and street realignments to both Chippawa Road and Hackamore
Road to the north. The shutdown is expected to last up to six weeks, but we are
hoping for a shorter timeframe. There were several complaints from the
Bridgewater neighborhood about having to use the gravel road; but the calls
settled down within a few days of the posted detour.
• The Arrowhead Drive Intersection project is also well under way with utility work
being completed soon. Street milling will be done in the next week along with
preparation for the new roadway and connection to OSI.
WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER
• Now that we have received the official comments from the MDH pertaining to the
scoping meeting WSB will prepare a formal quote for Phase I of the Wellhead
Protection Plan (WHP). Phase I is the identification and threat to ground water or
wellheads and Phase II is implementation of the wellhead. The WHP is a ten-year
plan and will take a decent amount of time to complete.
• Irrigation water use is on the rise, we are hoping for more normal precipitation
this summer.
• Lisa completed the MS-4 Annual Report and formally submitted it to the MPCA.
• Culverts on Oakview Road have been replaced in preparation for the paving
project.
MEMORANDUM
2
PARKS/TRAILS
• Public Works is back to work on the renovations at Hunter Park. The poles for
the ballfield and the tennis/pickleball court have been installed and the infield has
been constructed and seeded. Next will be the concrete maintenance strip and the
asphalt.
• The closing date on the parkland purchase is planned for the end of the month.
• The Hamel Community Building, the parks, the ball teams, and park amenity
rentals are keeping us very busy in Public Works. Rental of the Hamel
Community Building is maxed out and park rental requests are at an all-time high.
With this comes numerous questions and calls for maintenance. The parks are a
very popular amenity for our residents to enjoy and take full advantage of
exploring.
• We have a vacant Youth Park Commissioner opening and have advertised to fill
the position.
• The Hamel Athletic Club (HAC) is hosting their annual Jamboree on Friday June
24 and Saturday June 25. In addition to a lot of baseball games, they will have
bounce houses, a dunk tank, face painting stand, visit from the fire department,
and a shaved ice truck. It is a great community event.
• FOX 9 will be broadcasting live from Hamel Legion Park on Wednesday, July 6th
beginning at 5 p.m. HAC and the Lions Club sought authorization from the Park
Commission to paint the dugouts blue for the event.
• The US Geological Survey will be visiting Medina Lake Preserve this summer as
part of a research project focusing on the rusty patched bumble bee. Their goal is
to estimate occupancy and detection of the endangered species.
ORDER CHECKS JUNE 7, 2022 – JUNE 21, 2022
053041 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC .................................................... $97.93
053042 ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS ....................................... $2,290.80
053043 ASPEN MILLS INC .................................................................... $164.56
053044 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE .................................................. $3,213.57
053045 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN ................................... $40,532.99
053046 BOEDDEKER, KAYLEN ............................................................ $117.76
053047 BORLAND, JAN ......................................................................... $250.00
053048 BOURLAND, CARRIE ................................................................ $250.00
053049 BRAUN, CHRISTOPHER/RAMONA .......................................... $100.00
053050 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. ............................................... $2,118.43
053051 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES ................................................... $3,029.41
053052 CORE & MAIN LP ................................................................... $1,684.83
053053 DORGLASS, INC ....................................................................... $835.00
053054 ECM PUBLISHERS INC ......................................................... $1,234.74
053055 FERGERSON WATERWORKS #2158 ...................................... $909.80
053056 FIRST STUDENT LOC 1399 ...................................................... $227.24
053057 G. L. CONTRACTING ................................................................ $106.88
053058 GO 2 HAMEL LLC .................................................................. $2,600.00
053059 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL .................................................... $367.20
053060 HAGESTUEN, MOE/ERIK ......................................................... $250.00
053061 HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES I ................................ $500.00
053062 HAMEL LUMBER INC ................................................................ $234.76
053063 HAWKINS INC. .......................................................................... $969.02
053064 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH .................................................. $2,347.02
053065 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC ............................................................ $780.00
053066 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC ........................................... $225.40
053067 JOSEPH M KITTOK ................................................................... $235.00
053068 LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES ..................................................... $77.22
053069 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS.TRUST ........................................ $815.00
053070 LORETTO VOL FIRE DEPT INC .......................................... $23,964.21
053071 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN ......................................................... $1,470.38
053072 MCCOLLINS, JANELLE ............................................................. $500.00
053073 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ................................................. $32,291.02
053074 MINNESOTA STREET WORKS INC ...................................... $1,140.00
053075 MOON, AMY .............................................................................. $250.00
053076 MOTLEY AUTO SERVICE LLC .............................................. $1,829.00
053077 MUKHERJEE, AMIT .................................................................. $100.00
053078 NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR ..................................... $225.00
053079 NEW LOOK CONTRACTING INC ......................................... $20,947.50
053080 NORTH MEMORIAL .................................................................... $40.00
053081 NORTHERN LINES CONTRACTING .................................... $10,500.00
053082 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTION LLC .............................................. $181.57
053083 OMANN BROTHERS PAVING INC ...................................... $26,459.42
053084 CITY OF ORONO ................................................................... $3,009.86
053085 REPUBLIC SERVICES ........................................................... $3,885.81
053086 RUSSELL SECURITY RESOURCE INC ...................................... $84.00
053087 SINGH, RAVINDER ................................................................... $950.00
053088 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC ...................................... $111.93
053089 SOLUTION BUILDERS INC .................................................... $9,551.17
053090 STILLMAN, NANCY ................................................................... $250.00
053091 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI .......................................................... $4,156.18
053092 VIJAY, RADHIKA ....................................................................... $250.00
053093 VIRIDIAN WEAPON TECHNOLOGIES ........................................ $48.00
053094 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE .................................................. $60.00
Total Checks $208,819.61
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS JUNE 7, 2022 – JUNE 21, 2022
006403E PR PERA .............................................................................. $19,116.77
006404E PR FED/FICA ....................................................................... $18,926.69
006405E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................... $2,284.00
006406E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA .................................................. $4,090.76
006407E CITY OF MEDINA ........................................................................ $26.00
006408E FURTHER .............................................................................. $1,929.37
006409E MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT .......................................... $1,195.20
006410E PR FED/FICA ............................................................................ $125.20
006411E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA ....................................................... $28.92
006412E CENTURYLINK.......................................................................... $252.01
006413E CULLIGAN-METRO ..................................................................... $36.50
006414E ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICE .................................................. $6,391.54
006415E FP MAILING SOL POSTAGE BY PHON ................................. $1,000.00
006416E FRONTIER .................................................................................. $57.11
006417E FURTHER .............................................................................. $2,954.76
006418E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC ........................................................... $931.79
006419E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC .................................... $1,188.28
006420E WRIGHT HENN COOP ELEC ASSN ...................................... $2,333.28
Total Electronic Checks $62,868.18
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT – JUNE 8, 2022
0511915 BILLMAN, JACKSON CARROLL ............................................... $664.76
0511916 COOK, JUSTIN W ..................................................................... $250.92
0511917 ALBERS, TODD M. .................................................................... $230.87
0511918 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L. ................................................... $1,137.75
0511919 BARNHART, ERIN A. ............................................................. $2,788.42
0511920 BAUMGARDNER, COLETTE J .................................................. $537.66
0511921 BOECKER, KEVIN D. ............................................................. $2,768.53
0511922 CAVANAUGH, JOSEPH ............................................................ $230.87
0511923 CONVERSE, KEITH A. ........................................................... $2,435.50
0511924 DEMARS, LISA ....................................................................... $1,558.36
0511925 DESLAURIES, DEAN ................................................................ $230.87
0511926 DION, DEBRA A. .................................................................... $2,091.51
0511927 ENDE, JOSEPH...................................................................... $2,463.02
0511928 FINKE, DUSTIN D. ................................................................. $2,869.01
0511929 GLEASON, JOHN M. .............................................................. $2,225.40
0511930 GREGORY, THOMAS ............................................................... $795.50
0511931 HALL, DAVID M. ..................................................................... $3,244.44
0511932 HANSON, JUSTIN .................................................................. $2,318.97
0511933 JACOBSON, NICOLE ................................................................ $909.85
0511934 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S. .......................................................... $2,441.82
0511935 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. ............................................................ $2,740.17
0511936 KLAERS, ANNE M. ................................................................. $1,616.28
0511937 LEUER, GREGORY J. ............................................................ $1,859.32
0511938 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M ............................................................ $327.07
0511939 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. .................................................. $2,007.72
0511940 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D .......................................................... $2,087.90
0511941 NELSON, JASON ................................................................... $2,795.91
0511942 RATKE, TREVOR J ................................................................ $1,734.86
0511943 REID, ROBIN ............................................................................. $230.87
0511944 REINKING, DEREK M ............................................................ $2,079.82
0511945 RUTH, BRENDA L. ................................................................. $1,612.91
0511946 SCHARF, ANDREW ............................................................... $1,607.80
0511947 SCHERER, STEVEN T. .......................................................... $2,527.20
0511948 VINCK, JOHN J ...................................................................... $1,842.71
0511949 VOGEL, NICHOLE .................................................................. $1,066.92
0511950 WALKER, CAITLYN M. ........................................................... $1,872.48
0511951 BURSCH, JEFFREY .................................................................. $368.40
Total Payroll Direct Deposit $60,572.37
PAYROLL MANUAL CHECK – JUNE 8, 2022
020452 COOK, JUSTIN W ..................................................................... $290.69
Total Payroll Manual Check $290.69