HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7 - AttachmentsPUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 4B
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 5/27/15
AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2015-16
ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment – Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue
Ordinance
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
Adam Bell, City Clerk
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to conduct a public hearing on a request submitted by
Danielle Hecker to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues
through in interim use permit within the City’s RR – Rural Residential zoning districts. The City
Code presently restricts such uses to the A – Agriculture and RT – Rural Transitional Districts. The applicant is also asking to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event from 150 to
200. Should the applicant’s request for a zoning text amendment be approved by the City, she
intends to submit a subsequent application for the required interim use permit to conduct a
Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue at 11658 50th Street North.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Danielle Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Property Owner: Daniel J. and Danielle N. Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN
Location: The zoning text amendment as proposed would apply to all properties that are
zoned RR – Rural Residential within the City. Should the requested zoning
amendment be approved, the applicant intents to apply for an interim use permit to conduct a Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue at the above address. The site information listed below is specific to the applicant’s property.
Request: To amend the Lake Elmo Zoning Code to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony
Venues as an interim use permit within the City’s RR – Rural Residential Zoning Districts and to increase the maximum number of guests for each event from 150 to 200.
Existing Land Use: Rural Residential – Large Lot. Former farmstead that was part of a
larger agricultural operation.
Existing Zoning: RR – Rural Residential
Surrounding Land Use: Large lot (10+ acre parcels) residential. Within a short distance to four
open space developments: Tana Ridge, Sanctuary, Tamarack Farms, and
Fields of St. Croix.
2
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 4A
Surrounding Zoning: RR – Rural Residential and OP – Open Space Preservation
Comprehensive Plan: RAD – Rural Agricultural Density
Proposed Zoning: RR – Rural Residential (with amendments to allow Commercial
Wedding Venues as an interim use in this district).
History: The applicant’s 10-acre property was split off from the larger agricultural acreage in 2010. This subdivision facilitated the sale of the historic farmstead as a separate 10-
acre parcel. The applicant has since made substantial renovations to the single-family
residence on the property, in addition to removing several outbuildings and former
agricultural structures.
The City adopted the Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue Ordinance in May of
2010. This ordinance was superseded by a similar ordinance that was adopted, but
repealed, nearly 10 years ago. There are no current sites that are permitted under the
ordinance.
Applicable Regulations: §154.400 RR – Rural Zoning Districts §154.310 Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue Ordinance
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a petition from Danielle Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, to
amend the City’s Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City’s RR – Rural Residential zoning districts. The City Code presently
restricts such uses to the A – Agriculture and RT – Rural Transitional Districts. The applicant is also
asking to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event from 150 to 200. The
Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing on the request, as all changes to the City’s Zoning Code require a public hearing. The applicant currently resides at the above address, and should the zoning amendment be approved by the City, intends to submit an applicant for an
interim use permit in accordance with the Commercial Wedding Ceremony Ordinance to operate
such a use from this property.
BACKGROUND
The City of Lake Elmo has at two times in the fairly recent past adopted an ordinance to allow for “special events” or “wedding ceremonies” to occur on rural properties. The first such ordinance concerning “Outdoor Social Events” was adopted in 2006, but was repealed approximately one year
later before any events allowed under the ordinance were approved. In early 2014, at the request of a
resident that expressed an interest in conducting wedding ceremonies on her agricultural property, the Planning Commission drafted an ordinance amendment that allows wedding ceremonies (with no receptions) on A – Agriculture and RT – Rural Transitional properties. The ordinance that was
ultimately adopted by the City was modeled after a similar ordinance approved by the City of Afton.
The approved ordinance is attached for review by the Commission (Ordinance No. 08-107).
The City’s Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue Ordinance allows a use called “commercial wedding ceremony venue” as an accessory use within the City’s use classification system. These
types of activities are allowed an as interim use in A and RT zoning districts. The ordinance includes
a series of requirements for these types of uses, and covers a wide range of issues, including food
3
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 4A
handling, hours of operation, off-street parking requirements, setbacks, landscaping, screening,
application requirements, lighting requirements, and other relevant information.
The intent of the ordinance is to allow for the continued use of private agricultural property in a
manner that allows for a reasonable economic return for property owners that otherwise would be limited the use of their property. Commercial wedding venues are accessory to permitted agricultural uses (which include single family residential uses), and are only allowed upon an application for an
Interim Use Permit. The use restrictions specified in the ordinance are intended to minimize any
impacts to adjacent properties, taking into account the intensive agricultural activities that are
otherwise permitted on these sites.
During the course of three separate meetings in the spring of 2014 the Planning Commission
reviewed the ordinance and made modifications to the document in order to address questions and
concerns from the Commission and members of the public. The final draft as recommended by the
Planning Commission was adopted by the City Council in May of 2014 after further revisions as recommended by the Council were incorporated into the document.
The City was approached by the applicant earlier this year with a request to conduct wedding
ceremonies from the historic barn structure that is located at 11658 5th Street North. After reviewing
the present ordinance concerning Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues with the Planning Department, the applicant decided to file a formal petition with the City to amend the code and in order to allow such activities on her parcel. Because the proposed change affects a large number of
parcels in the community, and given the relatively recent adoption of the ordinance, Staff has
recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council deal with the zoning text amendment
first, and if approved, the applicant would be able to continue with an interim use permit request.
The applicant has provided a brief project narrative concerning her proposal for a Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venue at 11658 50th Street North, which includes an overall plan and vision for
the property. These materials include a site photograph with notations for the use of the property,
including the proposed parking locations.
Please note that a zoning text amendment, such as the applicant’s request, requires a public hearing but does not require individual mailed notice to property owners. In this case, Staff has provided
mailed notice for the zoning amendment (consistent with the City’s general notification
requirements) from the applicant’s property because she intends to move forward with an interim use
permit should the amendment be approved.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS:
The ordinance amendment as requested is very straight-forward because it requires minor revisions to the text as previously approved by the City. The applicant has provided a marked-up version of
the adopted Ordinance No. 08-107 with the changes that are being requested, which includes:
• Adding Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue as an interim use permit in RR – Rural
Residential Zoning Districts (Table 9-1).
• Revising Section 154.310 (D) to add RR – Rural Residential to the list of allowed sites for Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues.
• Amending Section 154.310 (D,2) to change the maximum number of guests from 150 to 200.
The applicant has not requested any other changes to the ordinance that was reviewed and adopted by
the City in 2014.
4
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 4A
The Planning Commission spent a large amount of time reviewing the Commercial Wedding
Ceremony Venue ordinance prior to recommending approval of the document, and tried to address
the various concerns that were raised about the ordinance by including specific restrictions and
requirements on these uses (as listed in the standards section). At the time of this review, the Commission was considering the potential impacts on a site located in close proximity to the Carriage Station neighborhood. The primary restrictions intended to minimize neighborhood impacts
include the following:
• Capping the number of guests that could attend such ceremonies.
• Allowing the serving of food and beverages only in conjunction with the ceremony itself; no
receptions are permitted.
• Restricting the hours of operation to 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.
• Requiring larger setbacks from adjacent properties.
• Requiring the submission of a traffic management plan for the operation.
• Requiring compliance with the City’s nuisance provisions concerning noise, sound amplification, waste removal, and other such issues.
One of the objectives of the current ordinance was to provide a reasonable option to help allow for
the continued use of private agricultural property in a manner that allows for a reasonable economic
return for property owners that otherwise would be limited in the use of their property. Commercial wedding venues are considered accessory to permitted agricultural activities and any single family
uses on such properties. The use restrictions drafted as part of the ordinance were intended to
minimize any impacts to adjacent properties, taking into account the intensive agricultural activities
that are otherwise permitted on these sites.
Based on the substantial review and analysis done prior to adoption of the existing ordinance, the same reasoning could be applied to properties that are zoned RR – Rural Residential. In this case,
the applicant would like to find a suitable (and economically viable) use for the historic barn
structure, and is proposing a major renovation and restoration of this building in order to bring the building up to current codes for public gatherings. Although the applicant’s property is located close to single-family residential neighborhoods, there are many parcels zoned A or RT that are situated
just as close or closer to existing residential developments.
Because such a large portion of the City is zoned RR – Rural Residential, Staff does recommend that
if the ordinance amendment as proposed were to move forward, it should include restrictions that limit the number of sites that could be used for Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues. Staff is
recommending that the ordinance amendment as proposed include restrictions that Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues only be allowed as an interim use permit on Rural Residential properties
that:
• Have historically been used as a farmstead for the surrounding agricultural land, and
• That would use a barn or other historic agricultural building (a structure that is older than 75 years) for the wedding ceremonies.
Consistent with the City’s review of the 2014 ordinance amendment, Staff has found that the
proposed ordinance amendment is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, and
specifically, the numerous statements in the Plan that support the preservation of the City’s rural character. In this case, Staff has found that the benefits of finding a suitable and economically viable use for historic agricultural buildings and surrounding property outweighs any potential impacts from
the conduct of limited commercial activity on the premises. In this case, such activity for wedding
venues is viable specifically because of the rural character and scenic qualities of the site. The
5
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 4A
ordinance as approved places numerous restrictions on the use that are also intended to ensure that
any such operations manage and minimize any negative impacts to adjacent properties. In addition,
the permitted of wedding ceremonies as an interim use gives the City added security that these types
of activities must be renewed a specific time intervals, and that failure to comply with any of the requirements can result in the termination of the permit.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the requested zoning
text amendment to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues
as in interim use permit within the City’s RR – Rural Residential zoning districts and to increase the
maximum number of guests allowed at each event from 150 to 200 with the additional restrictions as noted in the above Staff report.
The recommended motion to take action on this request is as follows:
“Move to recommend approval of the request amend the the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City’s RR – Rural Residential zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event from 150 to 200 with the additional restrictions recommended by Staff.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Form 2. Application Narrative
3. Proposed Ordinance Amendment
4. Location Map (Applicant’s Property in Red)
5. Aerial Photograph with Setbacks 6. Proposed Site Layout and Parking 7. Ordinance No. 08-107 (Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue)
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....................................................... Community Development Director
- Report by Staff ..................................................................................... City Planner
- 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
1
Kyle Klatt
From:Rebecca Tenpas <bigbangcreations@q.com>
Sent:Wednesday, May 27, 2015 11:58 AM
To:Kyle Klatt
Cc:wendy.griffin@mnwcd.org
Subject:planning meeting for 5/27/15
To Kyle and those concerned regarding the planning committee meeting on 5/27/15, I am writing in regards to the zoning text amendment for commercial weddings on a property on 50th St. N.,
Lake Elmo. I am a resident of 50th St. N. and cannot attend the meeting tonight. I am strongly against this
amendment for several reasons. The first is the increased traffic through our neighborhood associated with this
type of venue. There will also need to be parking for a large amount of vehicles. This kind of change will set a precedence for non-residential use of property in rural residential areas.
We have gone through a lot changes in this area over the last several years and the voices of the few people who
have lived and moved here for the rural environment are slowly becoming unheard. This and other developing
proposals would never be considered or proposed in a development neighborhood, but because we are not formally considered a "neighborhood", it seems to is an open target.
Please voice my opinions at the meeting tonight in my absence.
Sincerely, Rebecca Tenpas
1
Kyle Klatt
From:jenniferpelletier@comcast.net
Sent:Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:19 PM
To:Kyle Klatt
Cc:Dean Zuleger
Subject:Re: Tonight's agenda item / wedding facility in RR
Adding an "edit" below in bold type
From: jenniferpelletier@comcast.net
To: "Kyle Klatt" <kyle.klatt@lakeelmo.org>
Cc: "Dean Zuleger" <DZuleger@lakeelmo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:13:33 PM
Subject: Fwd: Tonight's agenda item / wedding facility in RR
Dear Planner Klatt and members of the Planning Commission,
I'm writing to you regarding tonight's agenda item: the proposed code change in the RR zoning district
to add wedding ceremonies. Initially, I had no questions or concerns. However, after thinking
through this request (and realizing that we're dealing with a city wide code change), I do wish to
express some thoughts for consideration. I am a previous planning commissioner myself, and live across the street.
Comment/Concern:
1) The ingress and egress ~ 50th street. This road has no shoulder for pedestrian and/or bike
traffic (it DOES have a trail along half of the road, but not the entire stretch). There are many children in the area that use the road, and it has become not only busier due to through traffic
heading to Hwy. 5 or CSAH 17, those who use the road frequently drive well over the 40MPR limit. In
fact, there is a speed indicator sign out on the road as we speak. QUESTION for the commission:
what would adding multiple wedding ceremonies add to this growing problem? Again, there is no
shoulder on this road.
2) Regarding the overall change in the zoning code: I'm not opposed to this type of business. In
fact, I think it's a wonderful use of space. However, my concern is that a wedding facility in one area
of the zoning district RR could look very different in another area. I'm hoping that the Planning
Commission does its due diligence and not only addresses all areas affected, but considers adjacent parcels that may be affected as well.
3) New development: the land immediately next to this parcel is slated for a new
development. Where will this traffic flow? Consider this in addition to a wedding facility, on a road
with no shoulder. This is another important question that I'd like the PZ to address.
4) Possible solutions:
a) limited the maximum # of visitors (issue: how would the city monitor this?)
b) discuss/limit the number of ceremonies allowed per day
2
c) discuss a time of day with which all visitors need to off the premises (i.e.: nothing past 6pm, etc)
To be clear, it is not my intent to come across as though I am against the project. However, as a
previous planning commissioner, these are important questions/concerns that I think deserve to be
addressed. This could have a significant impact on current adjacent parcels, and the future
development that will be coming in right next door.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Pelletier
4884 Lily Ave. North
1
Kyle Klatt
Subject:FW: Planning Commission Meeting - Wedding Facility in Barn - Feedback
From: Ann.Heimerman@thomsonreuters.com <Ann.Heimerman@thomsonreuters.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:18 PM
To: Julie Fliflet; JFliflet@freshwater.org
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting ‐ Wedding Facility in Barn ‐ Feedback
Hi Julie:
I am unable to attend the meeting this evening, but I was unsure as to where I could send our concerns. You came to
mind, so I apologize if I am sending this to the wrong person. Feel free to forward this to the appropriate individuals.
I think that the idea of turning a barn into a wedding site is not only a nice one, but a very popular one these days. I
would love to support my neighbors with this idea, I just feel as if this opens up a huge can of worms in our
neighborhood setting. We would love nothing more than to see this barn maintained, restored or even placed on a
historic site list, if that is an option. However, to allow it to essentially become a business site, is troublesome to us.
Are concerns are as follows:
1. Traffic: We are concerned about additional traffic on 50th Street and the increased visibility of the street as
some sort of “through street.” The “Parkway” addition at the Fields’ entrance is nice, but unfortunately many
days it seems more like a motor speedway, than a residential parkway. We hear all of it, as the backside of our
house faces 50th street.
2. New Development Adding Cars to our Area as Well: We are also aware of the proposed new development
around the barn site in the acres behind our home. This new development would likely add significant numbers
of cars and noise on 50th Street as well. Adding a wedding venue that could accommodate up to 200 people will
only add to this volume.
3. Two Hundred Potential Visitors, Really? : If the venue can hold up to 200 visitors where would these cars
park? This added parking issue plus the car and people noise from up to 200 cars is a huge concern ‐‐‐‐ let alone
the noise from the weddings themselves. With open windows in the summer months, noise really travels. It will
travel right to our backyard and back windows.
4. Where Two or More Join Together: Weddings without receptions? Why would people drive to this location
and not stay for a beverage or two or more? I just don’t think the “we are not hosting receptions” idea will
stick. What about the consumption of alcohol at some future point?
5. What about those runners?: There is a paved path for walkers, runners and bikes that runs in front of the
proposed area. Does this pose any issues for those using the paths? What about during dark nights plus no
streetlights?
6. Cows Moo, but Wedding Guests Rejoice: We joke about this, but it really is true ‐ ‐ we used to actually hear
cows mooing in the pasture from inside our home when that property was a dairy farm. Now all we hear is car
noise on the now paved 50th street (it used to be a dirt road when we built our house) and the added noise from
wedding goers would likely cause a great deal more noise than the cows. We will hear it – there is no doubt in
my mind.
These are just some of our concerns as the planning commission considers these measures.
Thank you for helping send this wherever it is needed. If you would like me to send this to anyone else, please let me
know.
2
Thank you for your help.
Ann
......................................................................
Ann C. Heimerman, J.D. Innovation Catalyst Manager
Product Development & Editorial
Thomson Reuters Phone: 651-848-4550
ann.heimerman@thomsonreuters.com