Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInwood 4th Minutes LAKE ELMO - City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2016 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fields, Dodson, Williams, Dunn, Kreimer, and Lundquist COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard, Larson & Griffin STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Lundquist/Dodson, move to approve the Agenda as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried Unanimously. Approve Minutes: September 26, 2016 M/S/P: Dodson/Fields, move to approve the September 26, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried Unanimously. Public Hearing—Inwood 4t'Addition Final Plat Wenman started his presentation for Inwood 4t"Addition Final Plat which includes 38 single family homes. Wensman went through some background regarding the development. There is parkland that is adjacent to this phase. This phase is 10.91 acres for 38 single family lots. The lot sizes vary from 8171 sq ft to 13,650 sq ft. and lot widths are 64.3 to 105 feet. The landscape plans are consistent with approved plans, the city still needs some information for the irrigation system. There are 3 conditions from the Preliminary Plat that are not met. Condition #1) the street naming policy changes, and staff is recommending that the new road be named to Ivywood Circle N condition # 10) there is no maintenance agreement for phase 4 which will be required before the release of building permits #18) the developer shall install a multi-purpose trail along 10th Street. This condition will be met in a future phase. There are 7 findings of fact for approval. Staff is recommending 7 conditions of approval which include complying with the engineers memo, landscape licensing agreement, a CIC Homeowners agreement, etc. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-16 2 Kreimer asked if there would be water service in the park. The public works department and Engineering has been in communication with the developer to find the best location for the stub. John Rask, MI Homes, they are phasing south to north based on where the water and utilities are coming from. This phase will have full basements and larger lots, but will be part of the overall HOA. Kreimer asked if the same style homes will be built. Rask stated that some will be walk- outs, there will be 2 additional style homes, but many will be similar. Public Hearing opened at 7:21 pm Alan Stocker, 8680 Upper 7t" Place, he is wondering about the completion of Island Trail through to 10th Street. All of the construction traffic comes right through their neighborhood. They were led to believe that Island Trail would go through to 10th Street. Wensman stated that this phase was not platted to include that road. The road is intended to be platted in the next phase. Rask explained how the sewer and storm water works for this development and that to make the connection, the other loop needs to be made. It is more of a sequencing thing. Utilities and infrastruction are dictating the phasing. The road connection is anticipated to be opened up in the Spring. They have started to work with Washington County to work out the details. Lisa McGinn, 8756 Upper 7t" Place N, they were all told that once the construction went through the first 4 cul-de-sacs, the construction traffic would come from the north for the next phase. There are children, buses, disabled, etc and there have been some circumstances where there have been some near misses. She is wondering why they can't use the construction road coming off of Inwood where it would not affect any of their homes, or not to start construction until they can put that road through to give this neighborhood relief. Williams is wondering about where the construction access is located. Lisa McGinn stated that she believes it is 9t" Street and there are currently construction trailers there. Mike McGinn, 8756 Upper 7t" Place N, he understands that it may be inconvenient and expensive, but he feels construction access is separate from sewer access and is typical for large construction sites. They could fence off the area so that you would not have residential traffic or speculative traffic. He feels that it would be a reasonable accommodation for the residents living there. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-16 3 There were no other written or electronic comments received Public hearing closed at 7:38 pm Williams is not sure how they can legally tie another construction access to this plat. Wensman stated that he would defer to the developer. He does not feel that they can tie it to this plat. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the Inwood 41" Addition Final Plat and PUD with the findings and 7 conditions of approval drafted by staff and listed in the Staff Report, Vote:6-0, motion carried. Fields would like to hear from the developer to see if they are willing to do anything to accommodate the traffic issues. Rask stated that they are not starting this addition this year. This addition will probably coincide with the Island Trail road access. They are working with the County to work through some issues regarding this. The construction access previously talked about is a restricted access that they were granted early on and was intended to be that in between access point before roads were built. Public Hearing—Wildflower 2nd Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Plan Wensman started his presentation for the Wildflower 2nd addition final plat and final PUD plans. Wensman gave the background regarding the development. The lot area is 4.4 acres for 20 residential lots (10 villa and 10 regular). Average garden villa lot is .16 acres and average single family lot is .29 acres. The landscape plans are not approved yet, but will be required before building permits are issued. Wensman brought up an issue that was discovered with the development. The PUD agreement was written that the sideyard setback is from a public street vs. from a property line. For this phase, he clarified the language to "from the property line", but shrunk the setback to 10 feet, specifically for Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 4, Block 3. Parking has been an issue for this development during construction, so the engineer is asking for designated allowed construction parking for this development. There is an unmet condition that there be a recorded landscape license agreement to include the public art. Wensman went through the findings for approval. There are 9 conditions of approval which include the CIC agreement, landscape/public art agreement, street B be to be named, 15' setback, etc. Lundquist brought up the water problem at 43rd Street and Lake Elmo Ave. She feels that it is because the landscaping for first addition was not done correctly. There is a berm that isn't built high enough so that what used to be a marsh is now a lake and is Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-16