HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Packet 12-02-14 pt 2PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 11/24/14
AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2014-48
ITEM: InWood PUD – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Stephen Mastey, Landscape Architecture, Inc. Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan
application from Hans Hagen Homes and InWood 10, LLC for a mixed use Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to be located on 157 acres of land at the southeast corner of Inwood Avenue and 10th Street in Lake Elmo. The application for a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan follows
the City’s approval of a general concept plan for the site, and the plans as submitted are consistent
with this earlier approval. While the overall plans include a mix of single-family residential, medium
to high density residential, and commercial development, the applicant has provided detailed preliminary plans for only the single-family portion of the site. The proposed plat includes 275 single family detached lots, while the remainder of the site will be platted as outlots for future open
space, commercial, and multi-family uses. Preliminary development plans will need to be submitted
in the future for these other planned uses. Staff is recommending approval of the request subject to compliance with 15 conditions as noted in the Staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Hans Hagen Homes (John Rask), 941 NE Hillwind Rd. Suite 300, Fridley, MN and Inwood 10, LLC (Tom Scheutte) 95 S Owasso Blvd. W., St. Paul, MN
Property Owners: Inwood 10, LLC (Tom Scheutte), 95 S Owasso Blvd. W., St. Paul, MN
Location: Part of Section 33 in Lake Elmo, immediately south of 10th Street (CSAH 10), immediately north of Eagle Point Business Park, immediately east of Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13) and immediately west of Stonegate residential subdivision.
PIDs: 33.029.21.12.0001, 33.029.21.12.0003, 33.029.21.11.0002 and
33.029.21.11.0001.
Request: Application for Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan approval of a mixed-use development to be named InWood. The
preliminary plat includes 275 single-family residential lots, while the remainder
of the site will be platted as outlots (subject to future review and approval by the
City of Lake Elmo).
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
2
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant land used for agricultural purposes. Current Zoning:
RT– Rural Transitional Zoning District; Proposed Zoning: LDR
– Low Density Residential, HDR – High Density Residential
and C – Commercial (all with PUD overlay)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Vacant agricultural land and two residential homes – RR and PF zoning; West: Oak Marsh Golf Course, urban single
family subdivision, commercial – City of Oakdale jurisdiction;
South: Offices in Eagle Point Business Park (including Bremer
Bank facility) – BP zoning; East: Stonegate residential estates subdivision – RE zoning.
Comprehensive Plan: Urban Low Density Residential (2.5 – 4 units per acre), Urban
High Density Residential/Mixed Use (7.5 – 15 units per acre)
and Commercial
History: The site has historically been used for agricultural purposes; there is no specific site
information on file with the City (the property was subject to development
speculation at various times in the past). The applicants have summited a mandatory
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the development and the comment period for the EAW ended on October 29, 2014. The City Council will consider adoption of a resolution declaring no need for an EIS (Environmental Impact
Statement) at its December 2, 2014 meeting. The City Council approved the general
concept plan for the development at its September 16, 2014 meeting.
Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 10/10/14 60 Day Deadline – 12/10/14
Extension Letter Mailed – No
120 Day Deadline – 2/10/15
Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 – Subdivision Regulations Article 10 – Urban Residential Districts (LDR and MDR)
Article 16 – Planned Unit Development Regulations
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment
Shoreland Management Overlay District
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Hans Hagen Homes and InWood 10, LLC for approval of a preliminary plat and preliminary development plans associated with the InWood
Planned Unit Development. The PUD will be located on 157 acres of land located southeast of the
intersection of Inwood Avenue and 10th Street in Lake Elmo, and is consistent with the development uses and areas as depicted in the general concept plan for the property. The submitted plans cover the entire site; however, the developer intends to proceed construction of only the single family areas
at this time, and will need to submit more detailed plans for the multi-family and commercial areas in
the future.
As noted during the concept plan review, the overall project can be divided up into three distinct areas on the plans, which includes a multi-family area south of 5th Street, a single-family “lifestyle housing” neighborhood north of 5th Street, and commercial areas with frontage along Inwood
Avenue. Within the residential areas, the developer plans a mix of different housing options,
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
3
including single-family detached housing, townhouses, and multi-family. The planned single-family
areas differ from typical residential neighborhoods in that the lots are smaller than otherwise allowed
in the LDR zoning district, with reduced setbacks from the LDR standards as well. The homes to be
built in these areas are intended to appeal to a different market then a typical neighborhood by incorporating common open areas, association-maintained lawns and driveways, and other services, and with amenities that are more typical in a townhouse type of development.
The concept plan was approved by the City Council with conditions that ultimately resulted in
reductions to the overall dwelling unit count for the project. These changes included the elimination
of any multi-family residential north of the proposed 5th Street alignment, and further reductions in the number of single-family lots to provide additional space for a larger park in the extreme
southeastern part of the site. The preliminary plans as submitted include 275 single-family
residential detached dwelling units (down from 281 on the original concept plan) all located in a
contiguous area on the site north of 5th Street and east of the planned commercial areas along Inwood Avenue.
For the purposes of this review, the proposed commercial and multi-family areas of the site will not
be discussed in terms of specific uses and building footprints or other site details since these details
will need to be provided as part of any future PUD and subdivision review and approvals. This is very similar to the approach used in the Eagle Point Business Park, with individual construction projects being reviewed by the City as buildings are proposed for undeveloped sites within the park.
The staff review therefore focuses on the single-family portions of the site in terms of the general
planning and zoning issues, and all of the single-family lots that are being platted as part of the
proposed preliminary plat. All other areas of the development are shown as outlots, and therefore will be subject to future subdivision approval. With the approval of the preliminary development
plans as submitted, the developer may proceed with final plat approval for the single-family portions
of the InWood development.
As part of the concept plan review, the City did approve the configuration of uses as shown on the preliminary development plan. This site layout includes the creation of a commercial area that extends approximately 400 feet east of Inwood Avenue and is located between 10th Street and 5th
Street. The preliminary plans also mirror the concept plan with the designation of a multi-family for
all portions of the site that are south of 5th Street. The other significant development area represents
the remainder of the site, which is planned for single-family development. In addition, the plans include a buffer along the eastern boundary of the site that maintains the 100-foot buffer specified for this area in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed land uses and configuration of these uses were
deemed to be in compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan by the City Council as part of the
findings of approval for the concept plan. The applicant has not deviated from the concept plan approval with the preliminary plat and PUD plan submissions.
While specific details concerning development within the commercial and multi-family outlots will
be provided with future plan submissions, the applicant has provided the required preliminary plans
for all site grading, erosion control, grading, storm water management, utilities, streets, sidewalks, landscaping, and other details for the entire development area. These plans will serve as the basis for all future reviews, whether these reviews are for a final plat related to the single family areas of the
site or more detailed preliminary development plans for the commercial and multi-family portion of
the InWood PUD.
The City’s overall PUD process has three phases: 1) General Concept Plan, 2) Preliminary Development Plan, and 3) Final Plan. It should be noted that the Planning Commission reviewed the InWood General Concept Plan at meetings conducted on August 25th and September 8 of this year,
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
4
with approval by the City Council at its September 16, 2014 meeting with the adoption of Resolution
No. 2014-72. Approval of the General Concept Plan allows the applicant to proceed with preparation
of preliminary plans, which the applicant has now submitted. Staff has reviewed the approved
General Concept Plan and all the conditions associated with the approval. The applicant has also provided a point-by-point response to the conditions of approval, which is included in the application packet provided to the Planning Commission.
The applicant has previously explained the rational for requesting a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) as part of the concept plan application, and Staff has agreed that using the PUD process for
the development of this site is reasonable and beneficial for the City in a number of ways, including:
• The PUD process allows the City to review the site as a whole instead of dealing with individual development projects that may or may not be connected to each other.
• This overall approach allows the City to work with the developer on a series of larger
planning and development issues on this site, including determining the appropriate road
configurations through this area, the best manner in which to serve not just the applicant’s
site, but adjacent areas with sewer and water services, and many other connected issues including park dedication, trails, County road improvements, landscaping and buffering and
other aspects to site development.
• The developer has requested certain exceptions from standard zoning requirements (as
allowed through the PUD process) in order to bring forward a unique development that
provides a housing option not presently found in Lake Elmo. The resulting project will function similar to a townhouse project, but with all of the homes on individual lots under
separate ownership.
• The integrated approach allows the developer to plan for common maintenance and upkeep
of the areas around individual homes, which further allows for some unique street
configurations that will bring open space into a median planting/storm water area within certain streets in the development.
• The development proposes a mix of uses and activities across the site that can be integrated
as one larger development instead of separate areas. For instance, the planned roads have
been designed to provide necessary access to residential and commercial areas while
providing for appropriate separation between these uses.
• The applicant has previously provided documentation that the development plans are consistent with the City’s requirements for consideration of a PUD.
In terms of new roads to serve the InWood development, the preliminary plans include the extension
of the City’s planned 5th Street minor collector road from the western-most extension of this road
through the Boulder Ponds development to the east all the way its eventually termination point at Inwood Avenue. The developer is proposing to build this road as part of the Phase 1 improvements, and it will serve as the main collector road for moving traffic through the middle portion of the
development while providing an important link to the east. The other major road feature, labeled as
Street B and Street B-2 on the plans, will provide a north and south connection through the entire site
and will eventually provide a link between 10th Street, 5th Street, and Eagle Point Boulevard and the extreme southern portion of the development. Other local streets will be constructed as the residential lots are platted or in conjunction with future plans for multi-family and commercial
development.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
5
The other major features of the InWood Preliminary PUD Plans include the creation of a new park
area immediately to the west of the existing Stonegate Park in the southeastern portion of the development; an extensive trail system providing access throughout the internal portions of the development, a site-wide storm water infiltration system that is intended to comply with South
Washington Watershed District requirements, and the use of center medians within individual
neighborhoods to provide common green space within the local street system. The applicant has also
submitted a concept plan for the use of Outlot P in the northwestern portion of the site in response to the Planning Commissions request for additional gathering space in this area.
The InWood planned development is located within Stage 1 of the I-94 Corridor Planning Area, and
pubic water and sewer services are presently available to the site via connections to the Eagle Point
Business Park. The City’s Comprehensive Plan calls for installation of a public water trunk line to bring water down to this area from the north that will also provide connections to City of Lake Elmo
water system for the other near-by developments to the east.
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
Because the Planning Commission has previously received a significant amount of information along
with the concept plan for the InWood PUD and spent several hours over the course of two meetings
reviewing this information, Staff will therefore focus on those aspects of the plans that have been changed or updated since the City’s concept plan approval, along with a general summary of the
PUD request as submitted by the applicant of the current report. Other general issues are noted as
well.
As required by the City’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, the applicant has provided a much greater amount of information as part of the current submission than is required for a Concept.
Because of this, Staff will not attempt to spell out every single change or update from the concept
plan, but instead will provide a summary of the most significant changes that have been made to address specific comments from the Commission as follows:
• All multi-family development is located south of 5th Street, and the area previously planned
for multi-family housing in the extreme northwest portion of the site has been changed to
commercial development. These units have been eliminated from the plans and resulted in a
fairly significant drop to the overall site density.
• The southeastern corner has been reconfigured to provide a larger park area adjacent to the Stonegate Park. The general park concept layout is consistent with a plan that was presented
by the applicant during the concept plan review.
• The portion of 5th Street extending to the east and south of the applicants’ site has been
reconfigured to avoid any additional right-of-way acquisition from Bremer Bank.
• Sidewalks have been added to both sides of “Street B” per the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
• Any lots that were encroaching into the required 100-foot buffer area between InWood and Stonegate have been moved to comply with this requirement.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
6
• In response to the Planning Commission request for additional small park in the northwest corner of the development the developer has submitted a concept for Outlot P (Street N) that
shows how this area could be used for public gathering space associated amenities. The
applicant has accurately pointed out that the City’s reviewing bodies did have differences of
opinions concerning the size and most appropriate improvement for this area.
• As a response to a specific condition of approval, the developer has proposed specific design considerations for the single family homes. These standards will be incorporated as part of
the City approval.
There are other aspects of the development plans that were discussed by the Planning Commission but that have not been changed based on the City Council’s direction to have the Commission reconsider these items as part of its preliminary development plan review. Please refer to the
attached minutes for the specific Council direction on these review items. These specific
development items include the following:
• The plans as submitted do not incorporate sidewalks on the interior loop roads throughout the subdivision. The developer has provided a response to this Condition in the application
packet (Page 6 of Exhibit A), and has explained how these particular streets have been
designed to accommodate pedestrians safely. In particular, the applicant stated that these
streets have been designed to slow traffic, provide space for guest parking in a location that reduces conflict points, promote clear sight lines along the road, reduce or eliminate cut-
through traffic, soften the landscape with plantings in the median, and minimize the distance
to sidewalk and trails that connect to the broader trail network within and outside the
development.
• The lots at the end of the Streets E, F, and H have been left in a configuration that follows the concept plan submission. The applicant again has provided a response to the concept plan
condition of approval as noted on Page 7 of Exhibit A in their PUD application materials.
The applicant has specifically stated in this response that making this change would require
pushing the lots back towards the boundary with Stonegate instead of maintaining a more substantial buffer than otherwise required to preserve the existing landscaping in this area. Staff would also like to point out that the resulting lots at the end of the curve are actually
very similar in size to the “designer” lots in the southern portion of the development. As
depicted on the InWood preliminary plat, the designer lots range in size from 8,346 to 11,931
square feet while the lots at the end of the loop roads in the eastern portion of the site range in size from 8,800 square feet to 10,754 square feet. Please note that all of the lots at the end of these cul-de-sacs meet the minimize lot size requirements of the City’s LDR Zoning Districts
For all practical purposes, there is not a lot of differentiation, if any, between these two types
of lots in terms of size, and the applicant has indicated that making these lots larger will have the unintended consequence of impacting the existing landscape buffer.
• The applicant has accurately noted that the County does not have plans for trails along either Inwood Avenue or 10th Street as part of its long-range plans, and has therefore not included
such trails as part of the preliminary development plans. After discussing this matter with the
County, Staff does not object to the applicant’s position concerning trails along and within
the County right-of-way, but would like to note that the City’s trail plan does include a connection from the intersection of 10th and Inwood through this development to the east.
Staff is recommending that as a condition of approval for the preliminary PUD plans, that the
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
7
preliminary development plans be updated to include a trail connection either along Inwood
Avenue from 10th Street to either 5th Street or to the planned trail segment along 9th Street
or a trail connection along 10th Street that connects Street B and the trail to the east to
Inwood Avenue.
The applicant has provided a detailed summary and response to all other conditions of approval that addresses the City’s previous review comments, along with a line-by-line response to the application
submission requirements for this type of request. Staff has reviewed this information and found that
it is an accurate response to the various development requirements and conditions of concept plan
approval.
The InWood development includes a request for a Planned Unit Development and some related
flexibility as permitted under this ordinance. In order to grant a PUD, an applicant is required to
demonstrate compliance with the City’s PUD applicant requirements and PUD Objectives. These requirements and objectives are spelled out in the attached PUD Narrative provided by the applicant,
along a response for each item. For the most part, the single family portion of the development is
consistent with the zoning requirements for the City’s LDR – Low Density Residential Zoning
District, with the exceptions that were discussed during the concept plan review and are summarized as follows:
Setback LDR Zoning District (Min.) Inwood PUD (Min.)
Front Yard 25 feet 20 feet
Interior Side Yard 10 Feet Principal Structure Side / 5 Feet Garage Side 4 Feet
Rear Yard 20 feet 20 feet
Lot Area 8,000 square feet 4,250 square feet
Lot Depth N/A 110 feet
Lot Width 60 feet 38 feet
All other requirements for the City’s LDR zoning district will apply, including the allowed uses and
other site and development standards.
Please note that the above table includes some minor modifications from the numbers proposed by the developer and are being recommended by Staff in order to ensure that there is sufficient flexibility to construct the subdivision as proposed. The purpose of this table is to document the
minimum expectation for lots and homes in the development, and is otherwise consistent with the
development plans. Staff is also recommended numbers that will allow for minor revisions to various site planning issues that have been identified by Staff, including wetland buffers, provision of adequate storm water infiltration areas, and road adjustments that are necessary for the development
to comply with all applicable City development and engineering standards. For instance, the City is
requesting that all wetland buffers be contained within an outlot and not spill over on to private properties. The developer should be able to address this review comment by making small adjustments to the property boundaries in these portions of the site to that the actual on site
conditions will not necessarily need to be changed.
The application packet provided by the applicant provides a fairly detailed response to the City’s PUD Ordinance requirements for a preliminary development plan, and Staff will not be providing
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
8
much more in terms of further analysis for this information, but would like to specifically comment
on the following aspects of the plan:
• The City’s PUD requirements require that 20% of the project area not within street rights-of-way must be preserved as open space (and the ordinance specifically allows infiltration areas to be counted towards this amount). The applicant has provided a specific plan as part of the
application materials that demonstrates that over 30% of the site, including roads, will be
open space.
• While the proposed lot dimensional standards listed above are lower than those required in
the LDR zoning district, the applicant has proposed a preliminary plan that includes a mixture of lot sizes and widths throughout the development, including “designer lots” in the southeast portion of the site that will predominately comply with the LDR district standards.
The overall breakdown of lot widths is listed in the development application as follows:
o 16% of lots are 38 feet in width
o 53% are 50 feet in width
o 16% are 58 feet in width
o 15% are 65 feet in width
With the provision of open space as note above and even with the smaller lot sizes that have
been proposed, this development falls within the lower end of the range allowed for low density residential development in the City Comprehensive Plan.
• The PUD applicant materials include a specific zoning and phasing plan for the project. As
noted in the previous Staff report concerning this matter, the base zoning will be established
at the time the final plat is recorded for the entire development (the specific land use areas
will not be established as separate outlots until this time). The Zoning for the property will be split between LDR, HDR – High Density Residential, and C – Commercial consistent with the corresponding land uses on the applicant’s plans. The Phasing Plan divides the single
family area into four distinct phases, starting with the neighborhoods immediately adjacent
and north of 5th Street. As noted earlier, the phase 1 area includes the construction of 5th
Street across the entire development site. There is no time frame established for the construction of any buildings or public improvements within the commercial or multi-family
portions of the site.
The overall site plan for the property follows the adopted concept plan very closely. Staff has conducted a review of the detailed plat and plans and specific comments from Staff concerning these plans are listed in the following section of this report.
The following is a general summary of the subdivision design elements that have proposed as part of the InWood preliminary plat and plans:
Zoning and Site Information:
• Existing Zoning: RT – Rural Development Transitional District
• Proposed Zoning: LDR, MDR and C
• Total Site Area: 157.2 acres
• Total Residential Units: 539 (275 single family, 264 multi-family per
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
9
development plans)
• Proposed Density (Net): Single Family – 3.0 units per acre
Multi-family – 9.1 units per acre
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards through Planned Unit Development Process:
• As listed above
Proposed Street Standards:
• ROW Width – Local 60 ft. (per Subdivision Ordinance)
• ROW Width – Minor Collector 100 ft. (Engineering Standard)
• ROW Width – Loop Roads 40 ft. (one way segment with median)
• Street Widths – Local: 28 ft. (per City standard)
• Street Widths – Loop Roads 24 ft. (one way)
The standards listed above are all either in compliance with the applicable requirements from the City’s zoning and subdivision regulations, or are consistent with requested modifications through the
proposed planned unit development (PUD). Based on Staff’s review of the Preliminary Plat and
Preliminary PUD Plan, the applicant has generally demonstrated compliance with the majority of the applicable codes, and the requested modifications or flexibilities as allowed under the City’s PUD Ordinance represent a reasonable request given the various design goals the applicant it trying to
achieve.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
City Staff has reviewed the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan. In general, the
proposed plat will meet all applicable City requirements for conditional approval, and any deficiencies or additional modifications that are needed are noted as part of the review record. In addition, the City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer, the Fire Chief and
the City’s Landscape Consultant, Stephen Mastey, all of which are attached for consideration by the
Commission.
In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report, Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the following review comments as well:
Critical Path Issues:
• Water Tower. The City’s water supply plan, last updated as part of the 2008 Comprehensive
Plan Update, indicates that a water tower is necessary to serve this area in order to provide
adequate water system operations to serve the additional units (both commercial and residential REC units) within the proposed development area. Although the Comprehensive
Plan does identify a water tower southwest of the 10th Street and Inwood Avenue intersection
of the applicant’s property, the land owner has been negotiating with the City to identify a
location for this water tower on land they presently own north of 10th Street. At this point, there is a general agreement in place for the City to acquire land roughly midway between 15th Street and 10th Street and adjacent to Inwood Avenue, which would allow the City to
construct the tower with the other planned water improvements in the area. As noted during
the concept plan review, the location of the tower will need to be finalized prior to the
platting of any property within the PUD project area.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
10
• 5th Street. The applicant has submitted plans for 5th Street that comply with the location for this road as depicted in the City’s transportation plan. As the Planning Commission has seen
with other projects in the area, transition from InWood to Boulder Ponds by the Bremer Bank
facility and Stonegate Park has previously been identified as a pinch point and an extremely
difficult transition area for this segment of the road. In balancing the needs and expectations of all impacted parties, while also adhering to the road alignment as previously approved by
the City, the developer has submitted plans that avoid any further impacts to Bremer’s
property while keeping the curve somewhat tighter to minimize impacts to Stonegate Park
and the new park area adjacent to Stonegate. The curve as proposed would reduce the intended design speed for 5th Street through this area; however, both the applicant and Bremer Bank have stated that they would prefer this solution to a higher deign speed. Should
the proposed design be found to be problematic as planning for 5th Street continues into the
final plat submission, the City will still be able to continuing working with the applicant and
neighboring property owners on an acceptable solution. As noted below, the applicant has also agreed to modify the preliminary plan to eliminate two of the existing access points on to
5th Street, which will also help ensure that that the proposed design will serve the intended
function of the road. Staff is recommending that the plans as submitted be approved for
InWood, with the understanding that additional conversations with the affected property owners and the results of any further analysis will be taken into consideration as the developer’s plans are finalized for their entire segment.
Other Issues:
• City Engineer Comments. The City Engineer has submitted a detailed list of comments that
will need be addressed prior to the City’s approval of final development plans for this property. None of the comments represent a critical concern (other than the ones noted above) that will not be able to be addressed by the applicant as they finalize the development
plans for the site, and most of the comments are requesting technical revisions to ensure
compliance with the City’s engineering and development standards. Of particular note, the
City Engineer has requested a realignment of Street N around Outlot P to meet the City’s required geometrics and is asking that all wetland buffers and the high water level of storm
water infiltration ponds be located on publicly owned outlots.
• Sewer and Water. The City will be extending water down Inwood Avenue to serve the urban
service areas along the I-94 Corridor as identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Prior to
the completion of this water project, the InWood development will be served under the City’s current agreement with the City of Oakdale. The water main project is expected to be completed in 2015. The developer will also be required to install sewer service throughout
the project area, and the City Engineer has asked that the preliminary plans be updated to
accommodate the oversizing necessary to provide adequate service levels within and adjacent to this development. The developer has provided a general response to the City Engineer’s comments, and will continue working with the City Engineer to ensure that the final design
accommodates the City’s service needs for the entire area.
• Environmental Review. The public comment period for the InWood EAW was completed
on October 29, 2014. The City received six letters from commenting agencies, and based on
the comments received, Staff agrees with the developer that none of the comments provided represent a significant environmental issue that could not otherwise be addressed through the
City’s review and approval process. The City Council will be considering the EAW
comments at its December 2, 2014 meeting, and will be asked to consider a resolution
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
11
finding no need to perform an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) at this time. The
developer is also working on a response to the comments that will be included with the
Council resolution.
• Design Standards. The Planning Commission requested the inclusion of residential design standards as part of the PUD approval. The developer has proposed specific design standards for the residential homes as listed in the PUD Narrative and response to conditions of
approval.
• Trails. In order to help better illustrate the location of all trails and sidewalks planned within
the development the developer has submitted a specific color plan illustrating the location of
these improvements throughout the project area. Staff would like to noted that although the developer is not planned to install any trails beyond those shown along Inwood Avenue and 10th Street, the City’s Trail Plan does depict a City trail extending from this intersection to the
City’s wide trail network to the south and east of this area. Based on this plan, Staff is
recommending that the preliminary development plans be updated to include a trail
connection either along Inwood Avenue from 10th Street to either 5th Street or to the planned trail segment along 9th Street or a trail connection along 10th Street that connects Street B and
the trail to the east to Inwood Avenue.
o Trail Adjacent to Wetland. In response to comments from the City Engineer, the
applicant will need to either move the planned north/south tail through Park 1 further to the west around an existing wetland area or will need to work with the South
Washington Watershed District to design a multi-purpose trail through the buffer area
that complies with the watershed district’s requirements.
• Sidewalks. The developer has provided a sidewalk along both sides of Street B in response
to the concept plan review comments from the City. The developer’s response to other sidewalk issues are noted elsewhere in this report.
• Washington County Review. The City has received an updated set of comments from the
County that mirror its review of the concept plan. The developer will need to prepare plans
for the intersection of Inwood Avenue and 5th Street and Street B and 10th Street that comply
with the County’s requirements for intersection improvements at these intersections. Staff is recommending that a condition of approval note that the City and developer will need to determine the appropriate cost sharing for these required improvements as part of a
development agreement for the Phase 1 and Phase 3 development areas. The County is also
asking for additional right-of-way to be platted along 10th Street; the final plat will need to
incorporate the County’s requirements for right-of-way in this portion of the plat.
• 5th Street Access. Staff is recommending that access to 5th Street from Streets D2 and the southeast park be eliminated from the development plans in order to bring the proposed
spacing into conformance with the City’s access spacing guidelines. Staff is requesting that
the developer continue working with the City to determine the most appropriate access into
and out of the southeast park area. Staff is encouraging the inclusion of a connecting road between the park area and Outlot C in the approximately location of Lot 4, Block 7 on the preliminary plat.
• Zoning. Staff will bring forward the appropriate zoning map amendments for consideration
once the applicant has submitted a final plat for the first phase of the development.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
12
• Wetlands. The wetlands identified on the site are being protected from development. The City Engineer has requested that the applicant keep all buffer areas around these wetlands on
publicly owned property.
• Landscape Plan Review/Tree Preservation. The City’s Landscape Architect has completed
an initial review of the proposed landscape plan and tree preservation plan, and his review comments are attached. The developer has been asked to provide additional documentation to verify that the eastern evergreen trees would be exempt from the City’s replacement
requirements.
• Park Dedication. The applicant has indicated that 12.2% of the overall land area planned for
single family development will be dedicated as public parkland, which exceeds the City’s
requirement for land dedication for this type of use. The City will need to work with the developer to account for the multi-family and commercial park land calculations as part of
any future development agreements for the project.
• Phasing. The developer will be constructing all of 5th Street and roughly one-third of the
single-family lots as part of Phase 1. The applicant will need to enter into a development
contract with the City related to the improvements necessary to service this development.
• Fire Chief Comments. Comments from the Fire Chief are attached for consideration by the Planning Commission. These comments will be taken into account as the final construction
plans are being reviewed by the City.
Other Comments:
• Subdivision Requirements. The City’s Subdivision Ordinance includes a fairly lengthy list
of standards that must be met by all new subdivisions, and include requirements for blocks, lots, easements, erosion and sediment control, drainage systems, monuments, sanitary sewer and water facilities, streets, and other aspects of the plans. Many of these requirements have
been addressed as part of the City Engineer’s review memo (which is summarized below).
After reviewing the proposed plat and PUD plan, Staff has not found any aspect of the plat
that conflict with these requirements.
• Comprehensive Plan. With the elimination of the multi-family area in the northwest portion of the site, the overall densities proposed within both the single-family area and multi-family
area are very much in line with the City’s future land use plan. In this case, the Low Density
Residential land use allows for residential densities at 2.5 to 3.99 units per acre and the
applicant has proposed a net density of 3.0 units per acre. For the multi-family area, the developer is indicating that these densities will fall in the range of 8.4 to 9.1 units per acre,
which is well within the Comprehensive Plan guidance of 7.5 to 15 units per acre.
• Buffer Area. The preliminary development plans indicate that no residential parcels will
encroach into the required 100-foot buffer area between Stonegate and the InWood PUD.
There are several locations in which the developer is providing a larger buffer area than required, with some areas as wide as 230 feet.
• Street Names. The final plat will need to incorporate street names per the direction of the
Planning Department.
• Shoreland Ordinance. The preliminary development plans have been designed to comply
with the City’s Shoreland Management Overlay District. The specific development plans
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
13
that are subject to Shoreland regulations will need to be reviewed with any future
development proposals for these site.
• Watershed District Review. Staff has not received any comments from the South
Washington Watershed District concerning the InWood PUD. The development will need to
comply with watershed district regulations and permitting requirements as the project moves forward for construction.
• Theming. Staff has distributed the Branding and Theming Study completed by Damon
Farber and Associates to the applicants previously. In finalizing a landscape plan for the site,
staff would recommend that the applicants consider the inclusion of various theming
elements and amenities identified in the plan for various locations within the development. For example, the 5th Street and Inwood Avenue Intersection presents a gateway opportunity for the City. Utilizing some of the elements described in the theming study would help the
development and City achieve unique design that is consistent with the theme that the City is
attempting to augment and achieve as private development moves forward.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan with 15 conditions intended to address the outstanding issues noted above
and to further clarify the City’s expectations in order for the developer to move forward with a final
plat and final PUD plan. The recommended conditions are divided into two categories to better
communicate the purpose and intent of the conditions. The recommended conditions are as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
Pending Review and Approvals
1) The applicant shall work with Community Development Director to name all streets in the
subdivision in a manner acceptable to the City prior to the submission of final plat.
2) The City and the applicant shall reach an agreement concerning the location and dedication of land associated with the proposed water necessary to provide adequate water service to the
InWood project area prior to the acceptance of a final plat for any portion of the PUD area.
3) The preliminary landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the
City’s landscape architecture consultant as noted in a review letter dated November 18, 2014.
4) Prior to the submission of a final plat for any portion of the InWood PUD, the developer shall
work with the City to determine the appropriate park dedication calculations for the entire
development area.
5) As part of any development agreement that includes improvements to one of the adjacent County State Aid Highways (CSAH 13 and 10th Street), the City and the developer shall determine the appropriate responsibility for the cost of these improvements.
6) The applicant must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City prior to the
commencement of any grading activity in advance of final plat and plan approval. The City
Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat, and said plan shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site.
7) The applicant shall continue to work with the City on the final design of 5th Street, and in
particular, the transition from the InWood PUD to properties located further to the east
(including the Boulder Ponds development and land owned by Bremer Financial Services).
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
14
8) The utility construction plans shall be updated to incorporate the recommendations of the
City Engineer concerning the appropriate location and size of sewer services through the
PUD planning area, including any requested oversizing of these facilities to service adjacent
properties.
Modifications to the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plans
9) The proposed public street access to 5th Street from Streets D2 and the southeast park area
(Park 1) shall be eliminated from the preliminary development plans in order to bring the
proposed spacing into conformance with the City’s access spacing guidelines. Staff is
requesting that the developer continue working with the City to determine the most appropriate access into and out of the southeast park area.
10) All center median planting areas as depicted on the preliminary plat and plans shall be owned
by the City of Lake Elmo and maintained by the Home Owners Association. The applicant
shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park,
trails, or open space on the final plat.
11) The applicant must either move the planned north/south tail through Park 1 further to the
west around an existing wetland area located approximately 400 feet south of 10th Street or
will need to work with the South Washington Watershed District to design a multi-purpose trail through the buffer area that complies with all applicable watershed district’s
requirements.
12) The Final Plat and Plans must address the requested modifications outlined in the City
Engineer’s review memorandum dated November 16, 2014.
13) The applicant shall be responsible for updating the final construction plans to include the
construction of all improvements within County rights-of-way as required by Washington
County and further described in the review letter received from the County dated November
17, 2014.
Plat Restrictions
14) Prior to recording the Final Plat for any portion of the area shown in the Preliminary Plat, the
Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney that
delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public
improvements.
15) The developer must follow all the rules and regulations of the Wetland Conservation Act, and adhere to the conditions of approval for the South Washington Watershed District Permit.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan:
• That the InWood PUD General Concept Plan was approved by the City on September 16, 2014, and the submitted Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan is consistent with the approved General Concept Plan.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
15
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan are consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan generally complies with the
City’s LDR - Urban Low Density Residential and MDR – Urban Medium Density
Residential zoning districts.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan comply with the City’s subdivision ordinance.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan comply with the City’s Planned Unit Development Regulations.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan comply with City’s Engineering
Standards, except where noted in the review memorandum from the City Engineer dated
11/16/14.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan comply with other City zoning ordinances, such as landscaping, tree preservation, and erosion and sediment control.
• That the InWood preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plan achieve multiple identified objectives for planned developments within Lake Elmo.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the InWood Preliminary
Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan with the 15 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion:
“Move to recommend approval of the InWood Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan with
the 15 conditions of approval as drafted by Staff based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. InWood PUD Application Booklet
a. PUD Plans
b. Application Forms
c. PUD Narrative
d. Open Space Plan
e. Plat Narrative
f. Preliminary Plat
g. Grading Plan
h. Utility Plan
i. Landscape Plan
j. HOA Documents
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM
16
2. Park “N” Concept
3. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 11/16/14
4. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 11/17/14
5. Landscape Consultant Review Memorandum, dated 11/18/14
6. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 11/17/14
7. City Council Meeting Minutes – Excerpt from 9/16/14 Meeting
8. Not Included in Packet – Available Upon Request:
a. Storm Water Management Plan
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM