04-18-00 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow — to adopt Resolution No. 2000-011, as amended, A Resolution adding Section II A3 of the 1990 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. (Motion passed 4-1:Armstrong; the Planning Commission recommended 0.9 units and this is 1.4. This development is not appropriate for Lake Elmo and so far away from what we have done. Dunn was disappointed with herself in giving in for 109 units because she thought it would be less dense with the commercial development.) M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow — to adopt Resolution 2000-012, A Resolution Amending the 1990 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. (Motion passed 4-1:Armstrong: the development is too intense, too much traffic, not in keeping with the rural atmosphere of Lake Elmo.) M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow - to adopt Resolution No. 2000-013, A Resolution Approving a Planned Unit Development Concept Plan of Carriage Homes IX for Wilderness Run with the new density clause of 1.4 units per acre inserted in the 3rd Whereas. (Motion passed 3-2:Dunn:Her consideration for going up to 1.4 units was meant as a broad range, not used as a maximum. Disappointed this is how it always happens, felt she was snookered in, Armstrong: for same reasons stated, it's a common practice for developers to max out.) M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow - to adopt Resolution No. 2000-014 A Resolution Approving a Planned Unit Development Stage Plan and Preliminary Plat of Carriage Homes IX for Wilderness Run, as amended, (Motion passed 3-2:Armstrong:this development is too intense and not in keeping with the rural atmosphere of Lake Elmo, Dunn: PUD should allow flexibility but they do not. B. Open space zoning Ordinance Amendments Planner Dillerud provided a memorandum and draft Open Space ordinance amendments based on direction of the Council. Bob Engstrom, developer, made the following comments: asked why cut out the incentive to preserve historic features; with the 500' buffer what are you trying to buffer from; problems with definitions of townhomes and duplexes; why go to 40A rather than 20A, keep the viewshed along the roads, keep it rural no matter the acreage, l0A is a convoluted surveyors scheme. Tim Freeman made the following comments: He has no problem with minimum site size change from 20A to 40A. Three acres is difficult, but 10A would be impossible unless you change it to 80% in dealing with Land Trusts, The 500' setback does not work. Are you trying to buffer from an existing zoning, what if you have a first and 2"d addition. The densities you can get 7 units per 20 on a 2 '/z acre development. Discussion followed on the four items in the City Planners report: 1. M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn - to accept the Minimum site size for OP as a 40acre minimum is reasonable. (Motion passed 5-0) 2. Look at some kind of step formula, 60% of the unplatted OP must be designated to the City or a qualified Land Trust. Some method of determination that the city can apply. M/S/P DeLapp/Armstrong — 60% Preserved Open Space would be acceptable to a qualified non-profit organization such as a donation for development rights. (Motion passed 5-0.) 3. The 500' buffer is severe. Are we buffering existing land? Should identify why. Have to deal with this complex item at a workshop. The Planner is at a conference dealing with OP and we should wait and listen to what he has to say. 4. M/S/P DeLapp/Siedow — The Council is split at 6 to 8 units per 20 Acres as a base density depending on how other sections of the ordinance would go. (Motion passed 5-0), Did not close the door to some manner of bonuses, such as preserving a barn. Dunn-7 units, Hunt-8units. DeLapp and Siedow 10 units with a barn. M/S/P Dunn/DeLapp — to approve amending (page 4, No. 2 criteria) by adding "no leftover unspoken land". (Motion passed 5-0.) LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 18, 2000