HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 14, 2009 workshop CITY OF
LAKE
AIA ELMO
City of Lake Elmo 651/777-5510
3800 Laverne Avenue North { Lake Elmo, MN 55042
City of Lake Elmo
City Council Workshop
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
July 14, 2009
6:30 p.m.
1. Agenda
2. Wireless Communications Tower Ordinance Discussion
3. Accessory Building Ordinance Amendments
4. Adj ourn
es
printed on recycled paper
City Council
Date: 7/14109
Staff Report—Workshop Discussion
Item:
ITEM: Wireless Communications Tower rdinance Discussion
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
I,
REVIEWED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
Craig Dawson, City Administrator.
Planning Commission
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is being asked to discuss the wireless communications ordinance update project as part
of its July workshop session. The primary purpose of the workshop is to provide the Council with an
opportunity to discuss the ordinance update project in advance of an initial draft ordinance being
completed. The Council's workshop will follow a similar discussion by the Planning Commission at its
meeting the preceding night. Any major discussion points from the Commission meeting will be shared
with the Council at the workshop.
A secondary objective of the workshop will be to introduce the project consultant Garrett Lysiak of Owl
Engineering and to provide the Council with an opportunity to ask questions of Mr. Lysiak before an
ordinance draft is completed.
Staff has attached the report submitted to the Planning Commission in advance of its meeting, which
outlines some of the major decision areas for the proposed code that will be reviewed by the
Commission,
As noted previously, the City Council has adopted a moratorium on the construction of any new
communications towers within the City, The purpose of the moratorium (which extends through the end
of 2009) is to provide the City with time to further study the issues associated with wireless
communications facilities and to draft revisions to the ordinance that will better represent the community's
expectations concerning he design and siting of new facilities in Lake Elmo. The moratorium was
adopted for a period of one year, and could be rescinded at an earlier date if the new code is ready for
adoption in accordance with the planned work schedule.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The next step in the ordinance update process will be to complete a draft ordinance for review at a future
Planning Commission meeting. It is anticipated that after the Commission has had a chance to review a
draft ordinance, there will be another open house scheduled to receive public feedback before a formal
public hearing is scheduled and recommendation is made to the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2, Current Ordinance (with highlighting to show sections targeted for revisions)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction....................................................Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator
- Report/Presentation .......................................................... Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
- Questions from the Council..................................................Mayor& Council Members
i
City of Lake Elmo Planning Department
Wireless Communications Ordinance Amendment
To: Planning Commission
From: Kyle K1att, Planning Director
Meeting Date: 7-13-09
Introductory Information
Objective: Early this year,the Lake Elmo City Council adopted a moratorium on the
construction of new telecommunications towers within the City, and has previously
directed the Planning Department to begin work on an update to the existing wireless
communication tower ordinance during the moratorium period. The moratorium was
established until the end of 2009; however, the work plan that was approved by the
Council for the update project anticipated that the new ordinance would be adopted
by July or August.
Based on the progress made to date, the City is about a month behind on the work
plan as originally approved by the City. The planning department has conducted an
open house to receive public feedback regarding wireless communications issues in
the City and is currently working with the project consultant to prepare an initial draft
of the revised ordinance. Prior to completing this draft, staff is seeking some
direction from the Planning Commission regarding the major decision areas that have
been identified as issues and that need to be addressed with the new code. These
decision areas are highlighted below.
With the feedback received from the Planning Commission, the project consultant
and staff will finish drafting the ordinance revisions with the intent of bringing these
back for review in August. The work plan calls for a second open house once a draft
has been prepared, which would likely occur sometime in the middle of August.
Open House An open house related to the wireless communications ordinance update project was
Summary: conducted on June 10, 2009 and was attended by six citizens and a representative
from the Minnesota Wireless Communications Association. The comments received
at this meeting can be summarized in general as follow:
• Residents spoke about the lack of coverage in certain portions of the City,
especially in the Tri-Lakes area.
Wireless Coalm unications C)pdhiance Anumd;nent
Planning(;omtnission Report; 711310.9
• There was support for providing expanded service in Lake Elmo, even if it
means the construction of new towers,
• The citizens present expressed a preference for towers that support co-location
to help expand the options for service in the City.
• There was no specific preference stated for where towers should be located,
whether on public or private property.
• The residents in attendance did not express concern over the appearance of
new towers, and did not see a significant benefit to using techniques to
camouflage new towers.
Garret Lysiak of Owl Engineer was present at the open house to answer questions
from the public and will also be available at the Planning Commission meeting to
further discuss the drafting of a revised ordinance.
StaffReview and Anal #s
Major The Planning Commission has previously been provided with information concerning
Decision the current ordinance and a summary of the issues that intend to be addressed with a
Areas: new ordinance. At this time,the Commission is being asked to review some of the
major decision areas to help provide direction for the drafting of a new ordinance.
Some of these decisions involve community preferences and the City will have a fair
amount of discretion at determining appropriate standards, Other amendments to the
code will likely be somewhat technical in nature and will be based to a much greater
extent on the expertise of the project consultant. Staff is planning to bring a draft
ordinance in front of the Planning Commission and to the public another open house
prior to setting a formal hearing date on the ordinance.
The attached existing wireless telecommunication tower permit ordinance has been
highlighted to depict which of the existing ordinance provisions will likely be updated
as part of the City's review, In addition, the following are the major decision areas
that will need to be address by a new ordinance:
• Location Preferences/Requirements. The City Council has previously
indicated that new towers should be located on public property, and only
constructed on private land when there is no reasonable pubic space available
to accommodate a new facility. Currently, the ordinance lists the allowable
locations, and was recently amendment to specify that the list of locations is
presented in preferential order, The ordinance could be revised to require
applicants to approach the City first before negotiating with a private property
owner.
• Submittal Documentation. The project consultant will be proposing language
in the ordinance that more clearly identifies the information to be submitted
in order for the City to verify the need for a new tower. Although this
language is more technical in nature, the Planning Commission should
Page 2
Wireless Cor midnications Ordinance Amendinew
Planning Commission Report; 7:I31(),)
confirm that a clear demonstration of need will help aid the City's decision
regarding new facilities.
• Proximity to Residential Areas. The current ordinance only allows towers in
residential zones on property that is greater than 14 acres in size. Although
this leaves a large percentage of the City available for towers, it does
eliminate some potential sites that could provide coverage within residential
neighborhoods.
• Proximity to Natural/Scenic Areas. During the course of the T-Mobile
application review, there was some concern expressed over the visibility of
the proposed tower from Sunfish Lake Park and Lake Jane. The Planning
Commission should indicate if there are specific natural or scenic areas that
should be protected from the visibility of new towers.
• Maximum Height. As part of a discussion concerning tower siting issues, the
Commission should consider whether smaller, less visible towers that may
not be suitable for co-location would be preferable to taller towers that could
allow for additional carriers and potentially reduce the overall number of
wireless communication sites needed on the in the community.
• Co-location Preferences. If co-location is determined to be a priority for the
City, the resulting tower design standards will need to allow for larger and
taller towers.
• Tower Design. The Commission has seen many examples of traditional.
stealth and camouflaged towers,and will need to determine if any particular
design is preferred in Lake Elmo. The type of tower that is used may have
impacts on whether or not co-location is viable for a particular site.
• Review Process. Staff is recommending that new towers be reviewed as a
Conditional Use Permit and that co-location facilities be allowed by
administrative permit. In order to make this change, the individual district
use charts would need to be amended to include wireless communication
facilities.
• Outside Review and Analysis. The Planning Commission should consider
including language in the revised code that clearly gives the City the
authority to request outside assistance with reviewing applications. Much of
the information that is submitted with a wireless communications facility
request is very technical in nature and should be reviewed by someone with
expertise in the area of RF Engineering.
• Search Radius. The ordinance has recently been amended to require a wider
search radius to determine whether or not there are suitable co-location
facilities for a new tower. Presently the search area is set at 2 miles from a
,Pogge 3
i
Wireless Communications Ordinance AMendrneni
Planning C omm scion Deport; 7/13/0.9
proposed site. Given the large open, natural, and park areas in Lake Elmo,
this distance may still be somewhat minimal.
• Alternative Sites. For applicants that choose to locate on a private site,there
is no language in the present code that requires any study of alternate sites as
a part of the City's review. This issue should be addressed as part of the
location preferences discussion as noted above.
Although a definitive response from the Planning Commission is not needed in order
to prepare an initial draft ordinance, it will be useful to incorporate the Planning
Commission's discussion into this first draft to facilitate later decisions on this item.
Conclusion and Next Steps:
The Planning Commission is not being asked to make a formal recommendation at
this time; however, any feedback received will be used to prepare a draft wireless
communications ordinance in advance of a public hearing on the revised ordinance.
The meeting will also provide the Commission with an opportunity to meet and ask
questions of the project consultant at an early juncture of the ordinance development.
The next major steps that are anticipated in the process of developing a revise
ordinance include the following:
1) Council workshop discussion on major decision areas with project consultant
(July 14, 2009).
2) Preparation of initial ordinance draft.
3) Review of draft ordinance by the Planning Commission (August 10, 2009)
4) Public open house concerning draft ordinance (week of August 17`' though
215).
5) Public hearing by Planning Commission on draft ordinance (September 14,
2009).
Page 4
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER PERMIT
§ 150.11.0 PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The wireless telecommunication tower permit regulations are intended to:
(A) Reasonably accommodate the provision of wireless telecommunication services
to the general public;
(B) Minimize adverse visual effects of wireless telecommunication towers, antennae,
or accessory equipment through careful design and siting standards;
(C) Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failures through
structural standards and setback requirements; and
(D) Maximize the use of existing and approved towers, structures, and/or buildings
for the location of new wireless telecommunication towers in order to reduce the number of the
structures needed to accommodate wireless telecommunication services.
(1997 Code, § 1390.01) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998)
1V.
5011 P�IiIT
No person shall install a wireless telecommunication facility or any portion thereof, at a
height at er than is allowed for structures in the underlying zoning district without first being
issued arrelessfel� ominu'zuahan towei�ern2t.
4.
(1997 Code, § 1390.03) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 1099
§ 1.50.11.2 PROHIBITED AREAS.
Wireless telecommunication towers shall not be allowed in the following areas:
(A) 4f esidenti�Ly zolzed ga qp s tMs thaft=ddf--��unless the wireless
- _
telecommunication tower and ground facilities accessory thereto are located within 100 feet of
the right-of-way of a public utility transmission line;
(B) Open space easements or conservation easements; and/or
American Legal Publishing Corp. 1
Summary of Comments on Printing - Lake Elmo, MN
Code of Ordinances
Page: 1
L'`�JNumber: 1 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:71911
2009 12:50:27 PM
LJ Number: 2 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9/2009 2:13:30 PM
Recommended to require a Conditional Use Pemit
1 Number: 3 Author:kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9/2009 2:15:48 PM
Lf Evaluate parcel and zoning requirements.
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
(C) Airport impact zones without consent of the F.A.A.
(1997 Code, § 1390.03) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§'-_ 0:1�� ��.��® SET►�'t��'4'JER� '�ES"
Applicants for a wireless telecommunication tower permit shall make a reasonable effort
to locate the towers and accessory ground facilities in the following areas:
(A) On an existing public utility power line support structure, within an existing
public utility power line right-of-way, or within 100 feet of the right-of-way;
B ubl�c oven ro MW
as approved b the CityCouncil; and/or
(C) On agriculturally or residentially zoned parcelsgreat than�L� acres
(1997 Code, § 1390.04) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
4& -
Applications for a wireless telecommunication tower permit shall be submitted on forms
provided by the City Planner, which shall include the following information:
(A) A sketch drawn to scale acceptable to the City Planner and City Engineer which
illustrates:
(1) The parcel on which the tower and accessory ground facilities;
(2) The buildings located and to be located on the tower parcel;
(3) The buildings located within 100 feet of the perimeter of the tower parcel;
and
(4) Access easements as necessary to the tower parcel.
(B) A sketch drawn to scale or a photo image acceptable to the City Planner and City
Engineer which illustrates the relative size of the proposed wireless telecommunication tower or
existing structure on which the antenna will be located compared to structures located within 100
feet of the perimeter of the parcel on which the tower is located and which illustrates the
visibility of the tower from adjoining parcels located within 100 feet of the perimeter of the
parcel on which the tower is located. The City Planner may also require a visual impact
demonstration including mock-ups and/or photo montages and plans for painting the tower;
American Legal Publishing Corp. 2
Page: 2
Number: 1 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9/2009 12:51;04 PM
Number:2 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9120D9 2:16:33 PM
Establish as a requirement to consider public lands before permitting on a private site.
Number:3 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:16:46 PM
Review area requirements,
:Number:4 Author: kyle.kiatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:60:52 PM
ME
Number: 5 Author: kyle,klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7l9/2009 2:17:21 PM
E!jMultiple changes to provide better information as part of the application process.
MINumber:6 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date;7/912009 12:51:51 PM
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
� ��e ort--frmn a ualrfa.ed and lr�ense�=p�o�esslonal eng_meer wl�x�h:'
(1) Describes the wireless telecommunication tower height and design
including a cross-section and elevation;
(2) Certifies the wireless telecommunication tower's compliance with
structural and electrical standards;
(3) Documents the height above grade for the mounting positions,which can
be used for co-location and the minimum separation distances between the co-location positions;
and
(4) Describes the wireless telecommunication tower's capacity to support
antennae,including an example of the number and type of antennas that can be accommodated
on the wireless telecommunication tower.
(D) A�t plan foa wiretelenicaze?nlitie to be located within the
.a
city shall be submitted by the applicant The city acknowledges that the plans are fluid and in all
likelihood will change depending upon market demands for the service. The city will maintain
an inventory of all existing and reasonably anticipated cell site installations. The applicant shall
provide the following written information in each.2-year plan and the plan must be updated with
each submittal for a new wireless telecommunication tower permit as necessary:
(1) A description of the radio frequencies to be used for each technology;
(2) A list of all existing sites to be upgraded or replaced, and proposed cell
sites within the city for these services by the applicant; and
(3) A presentation size map of the city,which shows the 2-year plan for cell
sites, or if individual properties are not known,the geographic service areas of the cell sites.
(E) The cost of mailing addresses for all property owners of record located within
1,000 feet of the subject property to be complied by the city;
(F) An application fee in an amount prescribed from time to time by City Council
resolution as necessary to reimburse the city for costs incurred to process the wireless
telecommunication tower permit application;
(G) Confirmation that the applicant is properly licensed by the F.C.C., or is the
authorized representative of a wireless telecommunication provider properly licensed by the
F.C.C.;
(H) Written authorization from the property owner describing the area which will be
subject to the tower lease and acknowledging that the property owner will be responsible for
removal of the wireless telecommunication tower, antennae, and tower accessory equipment
which is unused or abandoned for 12 consecutive months;
American Legal Publishing Corp. 3
Page: 3
=,;.Number: 1 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: W912009 2:18:14 PM
Provide information that can be used to clearly demonstrate the need for a new facility.
LNumber: 2 Author: kyle.kiatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:19:10 PM
11 Require carriers to provide information about surrounding sites. Need to establish coverage gaps and plan for addressing gaps.
i
i
i
I
i
Lake Elmo,MN Code of Ordinances
(I) Documentation of the steps to be taken by applicant to avoid causing destructive
interference to co-located previously established public safety communications facilities; and
(J) A detailed landscape plan,which indicates how tower accessory equipment will
be screened.
(1997 Code, § 1390.05) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998)
§ 150.115 PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW.
(A) Upon receipt of a completed application, the City Planner shall schedule a hearing
before the Planning Commission,which shall be preceded by 10-days mailed notice to the record
owners of property located with 1,000 feet of the parcel on which the tower will be located.
(B) The Planning Commission shall make recommendations to the City Council
regarding the issuance of the wireless telecommunication tower permit and, in particular, in
.regard to the following:
(1) Compliance of application with the city regulations and development
standards; and/or
(2) Proposed conditions, as necessary, to prevent the wireless
telecommunication tower, antennae, and tower accessory equipment from becoming a nuisance
to surrounding property owners.
(1997 Code, § 1390.06) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998)
§ 150.116 CITY COUNCIL.REVIEW.
(A) Upon receipt of Planning Commission recommendations, the City Council shall
review the application. The City Council may approve the application subject to conditions,
table its review until a date certain, or deny the application for a wireless telecommunication
tower permit. If the application is approved by the City Council, a wireless telecommunication
tower permit and a building permit shall be issued upon the execution of a wireless
telecommunication tower agreement.
(B) The agreement shall be signed by the applicant and property owner and the terms
of the agreement shall include the following:
(1) A list of the conditions of approval to the wireless telecommunication
tower permit;
(2) A statement indicating that failure to comply with the conditions of
American Legal Publishing Corp. 4
This page contains no comments
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
approval shall result in the removal of the wireless telecommunication tower, antennae, or tower
accessory equipment;
(3) A statement indicating that the expenses incurred by the city to enforce the
provisions of the wireless telecommunication tower agreement shall be reimbursed by the
applicant;
(4) A statement, which requires the applicant to utilize the,procedures
established by the F.C.C. to resolve any complaints received relating to interference allegedly
caused by the wireless telecommunication tower; and
(5) A statement indicating that a wireless telecommunication tower which has
not been used for 12 consecutive months shall be deemed abandoned and may be required to be
removed in the same manner and pursuant to the same procedures as for hazardous and
substandard buildings (M.S. §§ 463.15 through 463.261, as they may be amended from time to
time).
(1997 Code, § 1390.07) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998)
1507 S
CcTLIOi R �TIRME .
i
Except as hereinafter provided, antenna utilized to provide wireless telecommunication
services shall be located�n exsting i towers or structures which exceed 75 feet in height and
which are located with�rl-1/41r►i 'site being proposed by the applicant. In the
event that co-location is not possible,the applicant must demonstrate that a good faith effort to
co-locate on existing towers and structures was made but an agreement could not be reached.
(1997 Code, § 1390.08) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 150.11.8 EXCEPTIONS TO CO-LOCATION REQUIREMENTS.
The City Council shall waive any or all of the co-location requirements if it is determined
that:
(A) The antennae and/or tower accessory equipment would cause the structural
capacity of an existing or approved tower or building to be exceeded, as documented by a
qualified and licensed professional engineer, and the existing or approved tower or building
cannot be reinforced,modified, or replaced to accommodate the antennae or tower accessory
equipment at a reasonable cost;
(B) The antennae and/or tower accessory equipment would cause interference
materially impacting the usability of existing antennae or tower accessory equipment as
American Legal Publishing Corp. 5
Page: 5
Number: 1 Author:kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:719/2009 12:52:45 PM
i AFT]
Number:2 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:719/2009 2:19:51 PM
Adjusted to 2 miles, consider larger amount due to conditions in Lake Elmo.
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
documented by a qualified radio frequency engineer and the interference cannot be prevented at
a reasonable cost;
(C) Existing or approved towers and buildings within the applicant's search radius
cannot or will not accommodate the antennae and/or tower accessory equipment at a height
necessary to function reasonably as documented by a qualified radio frequency engineer; and/or
(D) Other unforeseen reasons make it infeasible to locate the antennae and/or tower
accessory equipment upon an existing or approved tower or building.
(1997 Code, § 1390.09) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998)
§ 150.119 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS.
All wireless telecommunication towers erected, constructed, or located within the city,
and all wiring therefore, shall comply with the requirements set forth in the Uniform Building
Code.
(1997 Code, § 1390.10) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998) Penalty,see§ 10.99
1�Qr1Q TlTA1S
(A) Wireless telecommunication towers shall comply with the following standards
unless the City Council grants a variance as necessary to reasonably accommodate the wireless
telecommunication tower. Variance procedures shall be processed according to the zoning code.
(B) (1) Design.
(a) To blend into the surrounding environment through the use of
color and architectural treatment;
�Po bofanonapole design un essheyty council cleterzn �'
that an.:altenlati .d.e ou�a�bett�r b ent into tl e surrou ng nva oazxnent,.
}63
Allproposed w9e7ess te�ecomnnuwcatan�tower shaI.be desnedzN+
structura)ly� electrically, arid�n alLrespects,to acco�rnmoae both thephcant's antennas an�c
comdaarable�nternlasoi a least addifional usersnf as-
the tovei is-0ve� 10(1 feet�aaeigit orQr a
T -
least 1 arlclsf��rna us et and 100 feet7ight,jan
(d) Where possible, all proposed wireless telecommunication towers
must be designed to allow for future rearrangement of antennas upon the tower and to accept
antennas mounted at various heights.
American Legal Publishing Corp. 6
Page: 6
j Number: Author: kyfe.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:20:17 PM
Community design preferences should be determined and included in this section.
Number: 2 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 719/2009 2:21:24 PM
Consideration for stealth and camouflage designs. Co-location limitations should also be considered.
�_z" Number: 3 Author: kyie.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:21:55 PM
Adjust in relation to general height requirements,
i
i
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
t'�): ��S`etbacics fi°rnn Zot lzxes;;
(a) In all residential zoning districts,wireless telecommunication
towers shall be set back 1 foot for each foot of tower height plus 20 feet.
(b) In all zoning districts, towers may encroach into the rear or side
yard setback areas, provided that the rear or side yard property line abuts a commercial or
business zoned property and the wireless telecommunication tower does not encroach upon any
easements.
(c) Wireless telecommunication towers shall not be located between a
principal structure and a public street.
(d) A required setback may be reduced or its location in relation to a
public street varied, at the sole discretion of the City Council, to allow for the integration of a
wireless telecommunication tower with an existing or proposed structure such as a church
steeple,power line support device, or light standard.
(e) A required setback may be reduced or its location in relation to a
public street varied upon providing the city with a licensed professional engineer's certification
that the wireless telecommunication tower is designed to collapse or fail within a distance or
zone shorter than the required setback distance.
�Llg�2
a) do a11'_3es�denfial zorm di�tncs,thenaxnnumhe�ght of any
�vireless�t��lecornmun�cat�onr�to�{eX incl�zdn�nll�ntennas and other-attachments_shall�t�t e�ceet)°:�
1�00#for-teach 1 foo��he�fov��r��isetbuck'rtn. a�es��entta��w�hng un�t�zpa�a�cmuinTo�
�95�eet�orpaice`l�s�f`�0 acre �q��tno3e-and<�25��eet f�i �a�ce7s�b�tween`l0 to��acre�nsize:=
- won residential 2on�n,Rg�zsh�t�,w�i�c��ess telecomYr�un,ica�o�x
over and anterinae shall r exceet� 5 feet in Rheig and fi fre�standin vu�i eless
ft
eleconxmulucation tower,And 195�eat neigh a�oV gi ameasuiedbyhe lowest gran .
ele atzo ad�ace t Eo a'bu lz�ing an vhic�i the tower7antenna is located,�ncluding a d10 enna;_and
- .
ot�.ier atta�hmert��v�rhe���t�lie�onrng=district xs a�jac�ntto a_�xesi�entz�zoning-district The
setback from=a coan�ol�ot lxieallbe,2 feet�al each��oQ��t�r�erhe �h-t.
(1997 Code, § 1390.11) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 150.121 LIGHTING.
At night, wireless telecommunication towers shall not be illuminated by artificial means.
(1997 Code, § 1390.12) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
American Legal Publishing Corp. 7
Page: 7
Number: 1 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9/2009 2:22:26 PM
Evaluate in relation to community preferences.
;INumber: 2 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date:7/9/2009 2:23:03 PM
UU Determine appropriate heights as part of tower location and proliferation discussions.
l-w Number: 3 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:53:57 PM
I
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
§ 150.122 SIGNS AND ADVERTISING.
The use of any portion of a wireless telecommunication tower for signs other than
warning or equipment information sign is prohibited.
(1997 Code, § 1390.13) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 1.50.123 INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATION.
No wireless telecommunication facility shall interfere with public safety
telecommunications. All wireless telecommunication towers/antennas shall comply with F.C.C.
regulations and licensing requirements.
(1997 Code, § 1390.14) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 150.124 PROHIBITED SUBDIVISIONS.
Where a wireless telecommunication facility has been located on a residentially or
agriculturally zoned parcel greater than 10 acres, except when the facility is located within a
power line easement, or within 100 feet of the easement, the parcels shall not be further
subdivided unless the resulting parcel on which the wireless telecommunication facility is
located continues to be more than 10 acres in size.
(1997 Code, § 1390.15) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 150.125 ACCESSORY UTILITY BUILDINGS.
All utility buildings and structures accessory to a tower shall be architecturally designed
to blend in with the surrounding environment.
(1997 Code, § 1390.16) (Ord. 97-24,passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
-0 M QLJND MOUNT D 4 1C7IP1VIE1r1T.
All ground mounted equipment accessory to a wireless telecommunication tower shall be
.American Legal Publishing Corp. 9
Page: 8
Number: 9 Author: kyle.klatt Subject: Highlight Date: 7/9/2009 2:24:10 PM
Evaluate impacts of generators and other potentially intrusive activities on the site.
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
enclosed in a building with brick walls and have a dark colored standing seam metal roof and be
further screened with sufficient trees, as determined by the City Planner, and shrubs to
substantially reduce the visual impact.
(1997 Code, § 1390.17) (Ord. 97-24, passed 1-21-1998) Penalty, see § 10.99
American Legal Publishing Corp. 9
This page contains no comments
City Council
Date: 7/14/09
Staff Report—Workshop Discussion
Item:
ITEM: Accessory Building Ordinance A endments
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director �.
REVIEWED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
Craig Dawson, City Administrator
Planning Commission
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is being asked to review proposed revisions to the City's accessory building regulations
found in the Zoning Ordinance. This agenda item was originally presented to the Council on November 5,
2008 but was tabled at this time so that it could be brought back at a workshop session in 2009. Given
the Council's relatively active slate of workshop agendas this year, the accessory building discussion has
been postponed until now due to more pressing matters,
In order to provide the Council with a sufficient amount of information for the workshop, the entire packet
item from November has been copied and is attached for consideration by the City Council. Staff will
present a summary of the major changes proposed at the workshop and will be available to answer any
question at this time.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Please refer to the executive summary prepared for the November 5, 2009 Council meeting for a detailed
summary of this discussion item.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Council Packet from 11/5/08, inducing:
o Executive Summary
o Ordinance No. 08-010 (to be renumbered)
o Resolution No. 08-049 (to be renumbered)
o Summary of Proposed Changes
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- introduction....................................................Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator
- Report/Presentation ........................... Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
- Questions from the Council..................................................Mayor &Council Members
City Council
Date: 11/5108
Regualar Agenda
MOTION
Item:
ITEM: Consider Amendments to the Accessory Buildings Section of the Zoning
Ordinance: Ordinance No. 08-010
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Susan Hoyt, City Administrator
Kelli Matzek, City Planner
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is being asked to consider amendments to the accessory building provisions of the
zoning ordinance. These changes represent minor modifications to specific sections of the ordinance and
have been proposed: 1) to improve the consistency between various sections of the current code and 2)
to clarify the intent and interpretation of various sections of the code dealing with accessory uses. The
proposed amendments do not propose a major departure from the current ordinance and are intended
primarily to clean up portions of the code that have been confusing or difficult to administer in the past.
The initial basis for the proposed amendments was the identification of discrepancies between a building
department setback handout and the zoning ordinance. As part of the regular review of building permits,
staff also found that the requirements for accessory buildings were either difficult to find or inconsistent
between various portion of the code. The proposed amendments should help clarify and simplify the
review of building permits, especially for accessory buildings. The proposed ordinance was reviewed
during the course of several Planning Commission meetings this past summer, and was recommended
for approval.
The regulations for accessory buildings may be found in two distinct sections of the Zoning Ordinance:
within the development standards for each zoning district and as part of'the design and performance
standards that apply to all districts. The sections that would be impacted by the proposed changes
include Sections 154.030 through 1.54.066 and Sections 154,092 and 154.093.
REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS:
The proposed changes can be summarized as follows:
• The RE District provisions (Section 154,058)will be amended to add accessory building setbacks to
the district table. This table will now include the front, side, street side, rear, and arterial street
setbacks for accessory building as well as principal buildings. Since these setbacks were not
previously identified elsewhere in the code, the Planning Commission recommended that they follow
the OP district requirements with the exception of the front yard setback (set at 100 feet to be
consistent with the front yard setback for principal structures).
• Language in all zoning districts will be amended to clearly state whether or not the dimensional
requirements apply to principal, accessory buildings, or both. Each zoning district table will include
separate headings labeled "Principal Building Setbacks" and "Accessory Building Setbacks". At
present, the code either uses these terms interchangeably or just uses "Building Setbacks".
1
• There are currently two definitions that describe how to measure the height of buildings: "Height of
Building"and "Building Height". The proposed ordinance eliminates one of these terms and adds a
diagram to provide additional clarity concerning the interpretation of this measurement.
• The reference to roof height in Section 154.092, Subd. (A,2)will be removed. With this change, all
accessory building heights will be calculated in the same manner as principal buildings. Specifically,
the definition noted above allows the averaging of the grade around the building and the averaging of
the height between the highest ridge and eave line to determine the two points used to calculate
height.
• The accessory building height in all districts (except for agricultural buildings)will be amended to 18
feet (from either 14 feet or 20 feet). This figure is recommended as a balance between the previous
roof height requirement of 20 feet and the averaging that is allowed for mansard, gable, hip, and
gambrel style roofs. The current requirement varies from,district to district and there is no apparent
reason for these discrepancies.
• The definition for a tool shed has been revised to delete a statement related to roof height. These
types of structures will still have a separate height requirement that is lower than other buildings, and
in this case, will be reduced from 12 feet to 10 feet (to account for the averaging as noted above).
• Accessory buildings in the Open Space Preservation District are currently allowed to be built to a
higher height than in other districts; this provision will be amended to reflect a common height across
all residential zoning districts. The current OP district height limit is 25 feet and would be changed to
18 feet under the proposed Ordinance. This change also reflects the definition change noted above.
• The requirements for maximum building height and door height will be included in the residential
district tables only. The requirements for accessory buildings in industrial and business districts will
therefore match the requirements for principal building in these districts. There are references to the
business and industrial district exemptions that can be eliminated from the current ordinance because
of these changes.
• Ail language pertaining to size limits for the parking of passenger automobiles (found in Section
154.092, Subd. D) will be deleted. Rather then specifying a specific size limit of 1,000 square feet,
the proposed amendments would limit the size of attached and detached garages to no more than the
footprint of the principal structure. This change will help end confusion regarding space marked on
building plans as storage, workshop, or miscellaneous useage.
• Clarification will be added to specify that building footprint will be used to calculate the size
requirements for an accessory building (not gross floor area). This revision also provides for a
blanket statement across all districts that an accessory building cannot exceed the size of a principal
structure. The current maximum size allowed for accessory buildings will not change, and previously
the size of the principal building was only relevant for parcels larger than 20,000 square feet.
• Section 154,092 Subd. F and G will be amended to clarify that accessory buildings cannot exceed the
height of the principal building in any zoning district with the exception of agricultural farm buildings
and the exceptions to height listed elsewhere in the City Code. This change does not alter the intent
of the current Ordinance.
• The table found in Section 154.093 has been updated to clarify the accessory building requirements
for the smallest lot sizes in RA RED, and OP districts and to remove existing language that states
the size of accessory buildings cannot exceed a principal structure. The revised statement in Section
154.092, Subd. D will now cover this requirement. The Planning Commission could find no reason for
a cut-off of 5,000 square feet for the smaller lots in this table, and with the proposed change, all lots
less than one acre in size would be grouped together.
• A provision will be added to Section 154.092 that reads as follows: "The footprint of an attached
garage shall not be larger than the footprint of the living area within the principal building. All garage
space located under a living area or other garage space will not count towards the total attached
garage area allowed". Although this language does not place set limit on the total area that could be
used for the parking of cars, the City's building code, setback requirements, impervious coverage
i
i
F
2
ordinance, driveway standards, and other similar provisions with the code provide additional
regulations that will limit the practicability of building an excessive-sized garage.
The amendments should help simplify the review process for new accessory buildings by standardizing
the organization of information and the consistency between each district.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Of the proposed amendments, the changes to regulations concerning the parking of passenger
automobiles represent the most significant modifications from the previous Ordinance. Under the current
code, space devoted to the parking of automobiles cannot exceed 1,000 square feet, and this limit applies
to both detached and attached garages. In practice, this limitation has been very difficult to administer
and enforce because the total size allowed for both accessory buildings in all districts exceeds this
amount. As part of its review, the Planning Commission determined that the use of space within an
accessory building was not as important as the total size and height allowed. The Planning
Commission's recommendation; therefore, is that the total size of all accessory buildings be regulated so
that they cannot exceed the size of the principal building on a lot(both for attached and detached
structures). tinder the proposed ordinance, the size of accessory buildings would still be regulated by
district and would never be allowed to exceed the size of a principal building.
All other changes are intended to provide consistency and clarity throughout the code, in some instances
incorporating revised standards, improved definitions, or updated tables to accomplish this objective.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments over the course of several
meetings earlier this summer, and conducted a public hearing on this matter on July 14, 2008, There
were no public comments received and the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the
Ordinance amendments as document in the attached Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approved the proposed amendments to the
accessory building provisions of the Zoning Ordinance,
SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION:
Motion:
Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 08-010 amending the accessory building regulations.
Motion to adopt Resolution No, 08-049 authorizing summary publication of Ordinance No. 08-010 in the
official City paper.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance No. 08-010
2. Resolution No. 08-049 (Summary Publication)
3. Summary of Proposed Changes (including summary table)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction....................................................................Susan Hoyt, City Administrator
Report................................................................................Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
3
f
Questions from the Council..................................................Mayor& Council Members
Questions/Comments from the public.................................................. Mayor facilitates
Call for a Motion
(required for further discussion; does not
imply approval of the motion ................................................................Mayor facilitates
Discussion ............................................................................................ Mayor facilitates
Actionon motion.................................................................................................Council
4
Accessory Building Ordinance Updates
Summary Table
Proposed Changes to Existing Zoning Ordinance
TABLE 1 —SETBACKS/B EIGHT
Accessory Bldg Setbacks AG AG RR RR RI R2 R3 R4 RE OP OP
CWMIJ Atba� T�
Front 200 30 30 100 30 30 50 507O : 30 30
Side 200 10 10 100 10 10 20 120 15* 15*
Side (Street) 200 25 25 100 25 25 50 150 #W 30 30
Rear 200 40 40 100 40 40 50 50 '1 '
Rear(Garages,Boats, Storage,Tool) 200 10 10 100 10 10 20 20 ! IS 15
Arterial Street 200 50 50 100 50 50 50 50 $x 0 0—
Heightresientialistrzct " AM 188
t14
Max Door Height�fosesientaidst 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14
Number 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
* Or 10%of lot width,whichever is greater
Notes:
• Building height will be calculated in accordance with the definition:in the City Code. References to maximum roof height
have been eliminated in the accessory building section.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-010
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ACCESSORY BUILDING REGULATIONS
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Section
11.01 (Definitions)is hereby amended to remove the following definition:
HEIGHT OF BUILDING. The vertical distance between the lowest grade level at the
building line and the uppermost point on the roof.
and to add the following diagram to the definition of BUILDING HEIGHT so that it
reads as follows:
BUILDING HEIGHT. The vertical distance from the average of the highest and lowest
point of grade for that portion of the lot covered by building to the highest point of the
roof for Flat roofs; to the roof deck line of mansard roofs; and to the mean height between
eaves and highest ridge for gable, hip, and gambrel roofs,
Highest Point
Of Roof
Building Height
(Flat or Shed Roof)
W
Ridge
�t Average Distance
Between Ridge and Eave
Eave Building Height
Gable, Hip or Gambrel Roof}
�Deelfline
Building Height
Mansard Roof)
i
Page I of 10
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that the
Minimum District Requirements tables found in Sections 154.036, Subd. (D); 154.041,
Subd, (C); 154.044, Subd. (C); 154.047, Subd.(C); 150.180, Subd. (B, 2,h) are
hereby amended in the following manner: .
Section 154.033
(D) Minimum district requirements.
Agricultural Zoning District Farm Dwellings and Related Structures and Non-Farm Dwellings
Activities and Non-Farm Dwellings if not and Activities if
Clustered Clustered
Lot Size Nominal 40 acres 1-1/2 acres(if
clustered)
A 40-acre parcel not reduced by more than 10%
due to road rights-of-way and survey variations
Lot Width 300 feet 125 feet
Primary Building setback from property lines:(Also see§ 154.082)
Front: 200 feet 30 feet
Side(Interior): 200 feet 10 feet
Rear: 200 feet 40 feet
Side Corner. 200 feet 25 feet
Arterial Street: 200 feet 50 feet
Primary Building Height(Also see§ 154.083) 35 feet 35 feet
Off-Street Parking(Also see§ 154.095) NIA 3 spaces per dwelling
unit
Accessory Building or Structure setback from property lines:(Also see§§154.092 and 164.093
Front: 200 feet 30 feet
Side(interior): 200 feet 10 feet
Rear: 200 feet 40 feet
Rear(detached residential garages and storage, boat,and 200 feet 10 feet
tool sheds)
Side Comer: 200 feet 25 feet
Arterial Street: 200 feet 50 feet .
Section 154.036
(D) Minimum district requirements.
Rural Residential Zoning District
Lot Size Nominal 10 acres 5 to 7 acres if
clustered
A 10-acre parcel not reduced by more than 10%and/or a 10-acre parcel
located on a comer or abutting a street on 2 sides not reduced by more
than 15%due to road right-of-way and survey variations
Page 2 of 10
i
Lot Width(See§153A4 300 feet 125 feet
Primary Buiiding or Structure Setbacks from property lines(Also see§ 154,082)
Front: 30 feet 30 feet
Side(interior): 10 feet 10 feet
Side(Corner): 25 feet 25 feet
Rear: 40 feet 40 feet
Arterial Street: 50 feet 50 feet
Primary Building Height(Also see 9 35 feet
154,083)
Off-Street Parking 3 spaces per unit same
(Also see§ 154, 95)
Accessory Building or Structure setbacks from property lines: (Also see 6&154.092 and 154.093)
Front: 30 feet 30 feet
Side(interior): 10 feet 10 feet
Side Comer: 25 feet 25 feet
Rear: 40 feet 40 feet
Rear(detached residential garages, 10 feet 10 feet
and storage boat and tool sheds)
Arterial Street: 50 feet 50 feet
Azseessery Buifdf�+g k#eigk�t(Alse see-§ 44 feet 444eet
454�33
Section 154.041
(C) Minimum district requirements.
R-4 Zoning District
Lot Size 1-112 acre per unit without sanitary sewer;
24,000 square feet per unit with sanitary sewer
Lot Width 125 Feet
Primary Building or Structure Setbacks from Property Lines(Also see§154,082)
Front: 30 Feet
Side(Interior): 10 Feet
Side(Corner): 25 Feet
Rear: 40 Feet
Arterial Street: 50 Feet
Primary Building Height(Also see§154.083) 35 Feet
Accessory Buildings or Strructure Setbacks from Property Linee J&Iso See§§154.092 and 154.093
I
Front: 30 feet
Side(Interior l: 10 feet
i
Page 3 of 10
i
j Side(Street): 25 feet
Rear: 10 feet
Arterial Street: 50 feet
AecesseFy Building k#ei5 20 feet
Section 154.044
(C) Minimum district requirements,
R-2 Zoning District
Lot Size ' One-Family: 1-1/2 acre per unit without sanitary sewer;
7,500 feet per unit with sanitary sewer
Two-Family: 1-1/2 acre per unit without sanitary sewer;6,000 square feet per
unit with sanitary sewer
Lot Width One-Family: 75 feet at front yard setback line with sanitary sewer;125 feet
without sanitary sewer
Two-Family: 100 feet at front yard setback line with sanitary sewer;200 feet
without sanitary sewer
Principal Building setbacks from property lines(Also see§154.082)
Front: 30 Feet
Side(Interior): 10 Feet
Side(Corner): 25 Feet
Rear: 40 Feet
Arterial Street: 50 Feet
Primary Building Height(Also see§154.083) 35 Feet
Accessory Buildings and Structures setbacks from J&Lso See§§154.092 and 154.093
property lines.
Front: 30 feet
Side: 10 feefi
Side(Street 25 feet
Rear: 10 feet
Arterial Street: 50_ feet
Aesesse"6mng and StruGtwos Hei9N(n�'^^^��ae§ 44 feet
a 54�j
Section 157.047
(C) Minimum district requirements.
R-4 Zoning District
Lot Size 3,500 Square Feet per Unit
Page 4 of 10
Lot Width 100 Feet at Front Yard Setback Line
Principal Building and Structure Setback2 from property lines{Also see§154.082)
Front: 50 Feet
Side(interior): 20 Feet
Side(Corner): 50 Feet
Rear: 50 Feet
Arterial Street: 50 Feet
Building height(Also see§ 154.063) 35 Feet
C Accessory Building'.and Structures Setbacks from property lines, Also See§§154.092 and 54.093
Front: 50 feet
Side: 20 feet
Side(Streetl: 50 feet
Rear: 20 feet
Arterial Street: 0 feet
Aesesser ildings a . 83) 44-feet
Section 150.048
(C) Minimum district requirements.
RE Zoning District
Lot Size 2-1/2 minimum(108,750 square feet)to 10 acres(435.600 square
feet)
Subdivision Density 3.33 acre average-No outiots to remain within subdivision
Lot Configuration Lots must be configured to contaln a circle with a diameter of 250
feet minimum;the ratio of lot length to width shall be a maximum of
3:1 —Flag lots are prohibited
Area of Building Site A minimum of 1,25 acres of land above the flood plain and free of
any drainage easements
Principal Building and Structure Setbacks from property lines: (Also see§154.082)
Front: 100 Feet Mnimurn
Side(Interior): 50 Feet Knimvm.
Side(Corner): 80 Feet iVlw mom
Rear: 100 Feet iWi m.
CollectortArterial Street: 150 Feet UMinmum
Frontage on Public Roadway 150 feet4�iinireum, except 70 feet at the end of cull-de-sac streets
Primary Building Height(Also see§ 154.083) 35 Feet
Accessory Buildings and Structures Setbacks (Also see 154.092
and 154.093?
F ro nt: 100 feet
Side: 15 feet
i
Page 5 of 10
Side(Street,): 30 feet
Rear: 15 feet
Arterial Street: 50 feet
Aesesser 13aildings-and Strast res Height-(Alsv"� ?44-.9133) 14Feet
Section 150.080
(h) Minimum district requirements,
Open Space Preservation District(OP)
Single-Family Townhouse
Maximum Building Height:
Primary Structure 2 and%stories or 35 feet 2 and Y2 stories or 35 feet
f Aeoesser-y%trusture 25 feet 4 story er�B feet-whichever-is less
Minimum Lot Width: NA NA
Y2 acre lot; 1 acre lot
Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage: No more than 15%for the primary
structure and driveway;but up to 17%
Gross Lot Area total when including all other impervious
surfaces NA
MI**r+urr+-Princlual Building and Structure Setbacks
Regairen:H n from property lines Also see l
154.082:
Front Yard 30 feet 20 feet
Side Yard 15 feet or 10%of lot width,whichever Is 15 feet or 10%of lot width,whichever is
greater greater
Corner Lot Front 30 feet 30 feet
Corner Lot Side Yard 30 feet 30 feet
Rear Yard: 40 feet 40 feet
Arterial Street: 50 feet 50 feet
Well From Septic Tank 50 feet 50 feet
f Accessory Buildings and Structures Setbacks(Also
see q. 154,092 and 154,093)
Front: 30 feet 30 feet
Side: 15 feet or 10%of lot width,whichever is 15 feet or 10%of lot width,whichever is
f rg eater areater
Side(Street): 30 feet 30 feet
Rear: 15 feet or 10%of lot width,whichever is 15 feet or 10%of lot width whichever is
rg eate greater
Arterial Street: 50 feet 50 feet
I
Page 6 of 10
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Section
154.092 is hereby amended to read as follows:
§ 154.092 ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES.
(A) Types of accessory buildings include storage or tool sheds; detached
residential garage; detached rural storage building; detached domesticated farm animal
buildings; agricultural farm buildings. The accessory buildings are defined as follows:
(1) STORAGE OR TOOL SHED, A 1-story accessory building of
less than 160 square feet gross area with a maximum few-height of 4-2-10 feet and
exterior colors or material matching the principal structure or utilizing earthen tones. No
door or other access opening in the storage or tool shed shall exceed 28 square feet in
area.
(2) DETACHED RESIDENTIAL GARAGE, A 1-story accessory
building used or intended for the storage of motor driven passenger vehicles regulated in
§ 154.093 wit m ^ef1..a'ght f 20 • No door or other access opening shall
exceed 14 feet in height. The exterior color, design, and materials shall be similar to the
principal structure.
(3) DETACHED RURAL STORAGE BUILDING. A 1-story
accessory building used or intended for the storage of hobby tools, garden equipment,
workshop equipment and the like. Exterior materials shall match the principal structure
in exterior color or be of an earthen tone.
(4) DETACHED DOMESTICATED FARM ANIMAL BUILDING.
A I-story accessory building used or intended for the shelter of domestic farm animals
and/or related feed or other farm animal supportive materials. The building shall require
a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency feedlot permit and site and building plan approval.
(Ain. Ord. 97-38,passed 11-17-1998).
(5) AGRICULTURAL FARM BUILDING. An accessory building
used or intended for use on an active commercial food-producing farm operation of more
than 20 acres, a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency permit may be required.
(B) A tool shed as defined in this section may be placed on any lot in addition
to the permitted number of accessory buildings.
(C) No accessory building shall be constructed nor accessory use located on a
lot until a building permit has been issued for the principal building to which it is
accessory.
(D) _o�+ f
No .J
r
other-epeeifig &ieeed the height of 10 0
Page 7 of 10
developmeRts. On pafee4s of
s
buildiftg ef garage shall exeeed the 95-,e of the pfincipal building in gross fleer me The
footprint of any detached accessory building shall not be larger than the footprint of the
principal building_
(E) The footprint of an attached garage shall not be larger than the footprint of
the living area within the principal building. All garage space located under a living area
or other garage space will not count towards the total attached garage area allowed
(F) An accessory building shall be considered as an integral part of the
principal building if it is located 6 feet or less from the principal building. The exterior
design and color shall be the same as that of the principal building or be of an earthen
tone;the height shall not exceed the height of the principal structure unless more
restrictive portions of this chapter prevail.
(G) Accessory Building Height.
(1) No accessory building shall
exceed the height of the principal building except for agricultural farm buildings and the
exceptions to buildinghei hg tlisted in Section 154.083.
(2)_ No detached building accessory to a residential structure or located
in a residential district shall exceed 18 feet in height,_ exrgpt as otherwise permitted as an
exemption from the district height requirements under Section 154.093.
fof the prineipal building.
(H) Accessory buildings in the commercial and industrial districts may be
located to the rear of the principal building, subject to the Building Code and fire zone
regulations.
(1) No detached garages or other accessory buildings in residential districts
shall be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on that lot, except in
AG, RR, and R-1 Districts where detached garages may be permitted nearer the front lot
line than the principal building by resolution of the City Council, except in planned unit
developments or duster developments.
(Ord. 97-107, passed 4-16-2002)
(7) Accessory structures located on lake or stream frontage lots may be
located between the public road and the principal structure,provided that the physical
conditions of the lot require such a location and a resolution is issued. In no event shall
the structure be located closer than 20 feet to the public right-of-way.
(K) All accessory buildings over 3 5 square feet in area shall have a
foundation, concrete slab or wind anchor. Buildings larger than 100 square feet shall
Page 8 of 10
require a building permit regardless of improvement value; Roof loads and wind loads
shall .conform to requirements as contained in the Building Code.
(L) The required rear yard setbacks for detached residential garages, and
storage,boat, and tool sheds shall be a distance equal to the required side yard setback for
each zoning district, except on through lots when the required rear yard setback in each
zoning district shall apply.
(M) Performance standards for detached agricultural buildings and
domesticated farm animal buildings on parcels of less than 20 acres shall include the
following:
(1) Setbacks. All animal buildings, feedlots, and manure storage sites
shall be set back in accordance with the underlying zoning district regulations.
(2) Slopes. The building, feedlot, or manure storage shall not be
placed on slopes which exceed 13%.
(3) Water level. Evidence of the seasonally high groundwater level or
mottled soil (as established by 8-1/2 foot borings) shall not be closer than 6-1/2 feet to the
natural surface ground grade in any area within 100 feet of the proposed building and/or
feedlot.
(4) Wetlands. No marsh or wetland (as established by the
predominant wetland vegetation and/or soils) shall be utilized for placement of the
proposed structure, feedlot, or grazing area.
Section 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Section
154.093 is hereby amended to read as follows:
§ 154.093 NUMBER/SIZE OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
The maximum number and size of accessory buildings permitted in each zoning
district shall be as follows. No accessory building shall be constructed unless there is
adequate room for the required secondary drainfield site.
Maximum Number and Size of Accessory Buildings
Residential -R-1, RED, and
OP
less A combined 1,200 square feet total for both attached
than 1 acre and detached accessory structures or residential garage;
the f the f tf + f t+h, � t., h ,r_ tf et ,ter,
��s�r.�:-mzrxc �r�crrrnziirorczi�� aczuc�rrcu�.-z-c�vcciie�iiu.
i
not eyeeed the size of the feetpr4nt of the pr-imaf
"�TC[4"1.Zcr�i
i
Page 9 of 10
i
I
i
From 1 acre to 2 acres One 1,200-square foot detached residential, garage or
building,in addition to an attached garage
Over 2 acres One 1,300-square foot detached residential garage or
building in addition to an attached garage
Section 5. Adoption Date
This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the
official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo,
This Ordinance No. 08-010 was adopted on this 5t' day of November 2008,by a vote of
Ayes and _ Nays.
Mayor Dean Johnston
ATTEST:
Susan Hoyt
City Administrator
This Ordinance No. 08-010 was published on the day of 52008.
Page 10 of 10
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-049
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 08-07 0 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS,the city council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-010,
an ordinance to amend certain provisions of the zoning ordinance concerning accessory
buildings; and
WHEREAS,the ordinance is lengthy; and
WHEREAS,Minnesota Statutes, section 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 Lake Elmo,
that the city administrator shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-010 to be
published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-010. The ordinance
incorporates the following changes:
• The RE — Residential Estate District provisions (Section 154.058) are amended to add
accessory building setbacks to the district table. This table now includes the front, side,
street side, rear, and arterial street setbacks for accessory buildings as well as principal
buildings, and follows the OP district requirements with the exception of the minimum front
yard setback. The front yard setback for accessory building in an RE zoning district is set at
100 feet to be consistent with the front yard setback for principal structures in this district.
• The tables describing the minimum requirements for certain districts are amended to clearly
state whether or not the dimensional requirements apply to principal structures, accessory
buildings, or both. Each zoning district table includes separate headings labeled "Principal
�I
Building Setbacks" and"Accessory Building Setbacks".
i
• One of two conflicting definitions for `Building Height" is eliminated and a table added to
clarify the interpretation of this measurement.
• The reference to roof height in Section 154.092, Subd. (A,2) is removed. With this change,
all accessory building heights will be calculated in the same manner as principal buildings.
Specifically, the definition noted above allows the averaging of the grade around the
building and the averaging of the height between the highest ridge and eave line to
determine the two points used to calculate height.
• The accessory building height in all districts, except for agricultural buildings, is amended to
18 feet(from either 14 feet or 20 feet). This figure serves as a balance between the previous
roof height requirement of 20 feet and the averaging that is allowed for mansard, gable,hip,
and gambrel style roofs.
• The definition for a tool shed is revised to delete a reference to roof height. These types of
structures will still have a separate height requirement that is lower than other buildings,and
in this case, will be reduced from 12 feet to 10 feet to comply with the revised definition for
building height.
• Accessory buildings in the Open Space Preservation District are currently allowed to be
built to a higher height than in other districts; this provision is amended to reflect a common
height across all residential zoning districts. The current OP district height limit is 25 feet
and is lowered to 18 feet. This change also reflects the revised definition for building
height.
• The requirements for maximum building height and door height are deleted from all
sections except the residential district tables. With this change, the requirements for
accessory buildings in industrial and business districts will therefore match the requirements
for principal building in these districts. There are references to the business and industrial
district exemptions that are eliminated from the current ordinance with these changes.
• The maximum size of the area devoted to the parking of passenger automobiles (found in
Section 154.092, Subd. D) is eliminated. Rather then specifying a specific size limit of
1,000 square feet, the ordinance will limit the size of attached and detached garages to no
more than the footprint of the principal structure.
• The ordinance clarifies that building footprint is used to calculate the size requirements for
an accessory building (not gross floor area). This revision also provides for a blanket
statement across all districts that an accessory building cannot exceed the size of a principal
structure. The current maximum size allowed for accessory buildings is not being amended.
• Section 154.092 Subd. F and G are amended to clarify that accessory buildings cannot
exceed the height of the principal building in any zoning district with the exception of
agricultural farm buildings and the exceptions to height Iisted elsewhere in the City Code.
• The table found in Section 154.093 is updated to simplify the accessory building
requirements for the smallest lot sizes in R-1, RED, and OP districts and to remove existing
language that states the size of accessory buildings cannot exceed a principal structure. The
revised statement in Section 154.092, Subd. D will now cover this requirement.
• A provision is added to Section 154.092 that reads as follows: "The footprint of an attached
garage shall not be larger than the footprint of the living area within the principal building.
All garage space located under a living area or other garage space will not count towards the
total attached garage area allowed". Although this language does not place set limit on the
total area that could be used for the parking of cars, the City's building code, setback
requirements, impervious coverage ordinance, driveway standards, and other similar
provisions with the code provide additional regulations that will limit the size of a garage.
The full text of Ordinance No. 08-010 is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during
regular business hours.
Mayor Dean Johnston
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Lake Elmo that the city
administrator 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.
Dated: —, 20,
Mayor Dean Johnston
ATTEST:
Susan Hoyt
City Administrator
(SEAL)
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.
I
and the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.