HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 11 Summary of Public Hearing Summary of Public Hearing Planning Commission Meeting: February 25, 2013
Public Hearing Item 4b: Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Village Land Use Plan
o Neil Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave. N., noted that he represents the 3rd generation of his family to live in Lake Elmo. He noted that he hopes to see the Village Center develop in a natural manner, not artificially. Second, Mr. Krueger noted that he would like his property removed from the urban portion of the Village in order to continue agricultural activities on his land. Third, Mr. Krueger noted that he adamantly supports the development of trails in the Village. Fourth, Mr. Krueger noted that he would like to see more small-scale single family uses continue in the Village.
o Deb Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave. N., noted that she is pleased that the current plan takes many of the principles of the previous planning efforts forward. She also noted that residents offered input at a meeting at Oakland Jr. High School several years ago. She asked if the City is considering the transfer of density rights. She also noted that the City should consider the extension of greenbelt corridors up Lake Elmo Ave. to the north. Third, Ms. Krueger noted that she is concerned about the City not carrying forward cluster developments. She stated that cluster developments should be done in a way so that residents can see the maximum amount of open space.
o Marjorie Williams, 3025 Lake Elmo Ave. N., noted that she previously served on the Planning Commission and Village study groups. She noted that she is concerned that historical preservation is not adequately addressed in the plan. In addition, the zoning code does not maintain the existing pattern of the built environment. It is important that the Village maintain the look and character as it stands today. Ms. Williams noted that she treasures the old homes in the Old Village.
o Larry Lanoux, from the City of Grant, noted that the City of Lake Elmo is looking at growth due to Met Council Mandates. He noted that the City of Grant is experiencing some similar pressure. He reported that the Planning Commission was disbanded in the City of Grant. He stated that the City of Grant will be one of the communities to review the draft of the Comprehensive Plan. He wanted to applaud the efforts of the Planning Commission. He reported that there is no planning Staff in the City of Grant to review the Comprehensive Plan.
o Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Ave. N., also served on the previous Village efforts. She noted that she appreciates the efforts of Staff, but urges the Planning Commission to vote against the proposed Comp Plan. She noted that there is too much passive language in the Comp Plan allowing for too much flexibility in the document. She also noted that the plan should only allow for 934 units, not up to 1100 units. She
2
also noted that there is another addition needed to the physical context of the Village, mentioning the storm water problems. Commercial should not be allowed in the Northeastern portion of the Village. She also noted that TIF financing should not be allowed. She submitted her comments in writing.
o Todd Bruchu, 3150 Klondike Ave. N., noted that he is a lifelong resident. He wanted to know where the Village parkway will be located. He also wanted to know why the recreation area is labeled as a regional park. Mr. Bruchu also inquired about the difference between the Village Boundary and the MUSA Boundary. Mr. Bruchu noted that he is concerned about the recreation area being divided by the railroad tracks. Finally, he reported that he supports the preservation of Lions and VFW parks, but he is concerned about the amount of parking available to these parks.
o Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd St. N., noted that she has reflected on what has made Lake Elmo special. She wanted to add the context of the Metropolitan Council mandates to the history of the planning process. She also added some key components of the physical context. She noted that the original Village Plan called for 600 residential units. She wanted the passive language to be removed from the document. She asked that the Art Center be added to the public spaces section. Ms. Dunn noted that she did not find any portion of the Comp Plan that discussed the protection of compliant and functioning septic systems. She also noted that the costs are not included in the document. She is glad that existing homes in the VMX area will not be considered non-conforming uses. She wanted to share her concerns pertaining to the ongoing problem to the lack of drinking water in the aquifers in the East Metro. She noted that she is glad that attention is paid to Hwy-5 safety. She wished to have images in the document. She is glad that the City is looking at design standards. The design standards should be considerate of building height, particularly near the existing Old Village. Finally, she thanked everyone who is working on these plans. However, she also emphasized that the financial issues related to sewer are very real for the residents.
o Chairman Williams spoke about three letters that were submitted to the Planning Commission. The City received letters from Michael Lynskey, James Mcleod and Steve DeLapp. Secretary Hall read the letters into the record.
o Steve DeLapp, Lake Jane Trail, had three key points: (1) the residents should always come first; (2) Sustainability is a key practice, particularly in Lake Elmo. This is very important for storm water management; and (3) the residents should not accept anything that does not meet a high standard. Mr. DeLapp also noted that residents of Lake Elmo have always had the ability to use their property for agricultural purposes. He also noted that the level of density in the downtown reflects the needed density to create the critical mass of people to have a thriving downtown. In addition, Mr. DeLapp noted that the issue of the Met Council mandates should be included in the plan. Chairman Williams read other key points from Mr. DeLapp’s letter.