04-04-00 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commission adopted a recommendation regarding the Old Village Planning District substantially differs than the Village Commission had recommended. That action concluded the Planning Commission recommendations regarding the Inventory, Policy and Land Use Elements of the Comp Plan Update. On March 22, the Village Commission discussed the action of the Planning Commission regarding Old Village Land Use and decided to ask the Planning Commission to defer sending its recommendation to the City Council. The Village Commission requested the Planning Commission to consider a workshop to discuss the differing views of the two commissions regarding Old Village land use. An additional topic of the workshop would be the topic of TDR/PDR and the County Green Corridor. Jane Harper, Washington County Planner, would attend the workshop to explain and answer questions on those topics. The Planning Commission concurred with the workshop request and requested participation in the workshop by the City Council. Based on staff availability, May 1'` would be the earliest date available. M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to establish May 1, 2000, 7 p.m., as the date for a Workshop on Old Village Land Use Planning and PDR/TDR/Green Corridor with the Village and Planning Commissions and City Council. (Motion passed 5-0.) B. Report on Open Space Zoning Ordinance Amendment City Planner Dillerud provided a memo outlining staffs understanding of the Council direction from November, 1999. The direction the Council had given in November represented a very significant departure from that recommended by the Planning Commission earlier in 1999 and refocusing on the concept of density bonuses in total. Council discussion was as follows: Council member Armstrong would be willing to make the open space smaller if the lots can be made larger. She thought 20 acres for OP was too small. The City does not have a hard rule as to pavement of trails. Council member DeLapp thought people like the trails and hated to loose them. The type of trail pavement would depend on how trails will be used. Mayor Hunt indicated the city does not want to cut down trees to put in trails because people like those amenities. Planner Dillerud responded if it's a part of the marketing strategy, the developer would do it on his or her own accord. Perhaps it should be mandatory. What is the relationship between increased density and trails? Should there be bonus points for anything, OR should some of the characteristics and amenities in the ordinance now like the village green, trails, setback of structures, be instead required, and then raise the base allowable to account for that. Council members Armstrong, DeLapp, and Dunn like that idea. Council members Siedow and DeLapp would use park dedication for trails and dispense with bonus points. Tim Freeman stated if you use wood chips for trails, which are not expensive, with the lack of maintenance, you don't have much of a nail. Bituminous nails are expensive and difficult to build. Dillerud stated that you could use park dedication credits for nails, and use a tighter grid for trails throughout the city. Council member Dunn had not been a real proponent of OP because developers seemed to cram as many lots as they can, and what is left over is in Open Space. Unusual shape parcels are hard to deal with. Some people in cluster developments think they live in the City. People who have acreage just love it. We tried our best, now what is the best way to retain our rural character. The Council was in agreement with the basic requirements for OP in Planner Dillerud's memo. As far as length to width ratio, Tim Freeman thought absolute ratio 2 '/2 to 1 more attractive ... 2 is too small. Mr. Freeman invited the Council to see how nice the Tana Ridge dev came out by listening to the land. As far as suggestion No. 2, raise OP to 10 acres and if you still require 50% open space, this will not work. Too many pieces that cannot be used will drive down the lot size. As for the 500', people will ignore the shape of the land. What are you trying to buffer from, OP from RR or RE. If you're going to use a nominal 40 acres, this should be spelled out exactly in the ordinance. Mayor Hunt thought the last four suggestions on bonus density would have to be reviewed for impact. Planner Dillerud responded that the intent of 500' was making the clustering invisible, internalizing it. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 2000 4