HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 1-13-20
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of January 13, 2020
Commissioner Weeks called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission
at 7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Holtz, Steil, and Weeks
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Cadenhead and Risner
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Roberts, City Planner Prchal
There was some uncertainty if the number of members present met the quorum
requirements for the Commission, so the Commission opted to vote as if quorum was
not met by voting in consensus versus a motion and a second. It was later determined
by the City Attorney that a quorum was present given that three of the five seated
positions were present.
Approve Agenda:
M/S/P: Holtz/Weeks move to approve the agenda with the amendment to move the
election of officers to the next meeting, Vote: 3-0, motion carried unanimously.
Approve Minutes:
Vote of consensus to approve the minutes as presented.
Public Hearings
Variances
Prchal presented that the property owner Dan Grunder, is requesting a variance from
the City Code requirement which does not allow an accessory building closer to the
front lot line than the principle building for the property located at 10092 Stillwater
Lane. The Applicant has modified the plan and will not need a variance for the size of
the building.
For the City to approve a variance, an applicant must demonstrate a need for the
exception based on the variance criteria set forth in Lake Elmo City Code Section
154.017.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
A variance to the provision of this chapter may be granted where the strict enforcement
of this chapter would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the
individual property and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter.
With respect to the proposed variance for the location of structure, strict enforcement
of the City’s zoning regulations will cause practical difficulties and the applicant is
proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. The request can be considered
reasonable when all factors are considered as a whole. The eastern access will have
difficulty contending with overhead utility lines, western access would require filling and
grading to create a slope that is reasonable for access, and placement of a shed in the
rear yard that becomes excessively saturated and would put it at risk of flooding.
The proposed variance for the location of the structure is unique and has not been
caused by the applicant. Considering that more grading, tree removal, and water all
pose an issue in the rear yard, placement slightly closer to the front lot line appears to
be reasonable. With the applicant being unable to have reasonable control of where
flooding may or may not occur on the property the situation does appear to be unique.
The proposed variance for the location of the structure will not alter the essential
character of the locality. It is expected to be incredibly difficult to reasonably notice the
building in the proposed location.
The proposed variance for the location of the structure will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially
increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
The proposed variance for the location of the structure will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to the adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion
of the public streets or substantially diminish property values. The location of the
structure would not shade the neighboring properties or structures, nor would it impair
air flow.
Weeks opened the Public Hearing. She read the emails sent in favor of the variance, none
in opposition.
Dave Depner – 10032 Stillwater Lane, is the closest property to the structure, he has gone
over the plan with the applicant and with the wooded hill, there is little chance to see the
structure and supports the variance.
Weeks closed the Public Hearing.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
Discussion about the variance request being reasonable by meeting hardship
requirements and that the Commission appreciates the reduced size since it would have
been difficult to support that request.
Vote of consensus to approve the variance request for the location of an accessory
building and recommend denial for the size of the proposed accessory building for the
property at 10092 Stillwater Lane.
Rezoning and Variances
Prchal presented that the City has received a variance requests from applicant Patrick
Kinney, for the property located at 8340 Stillwater Boulevard. The applicant is
requesting a variance from the City Code requirements for maximum allowed
impervious surface, minimum lot size, and minimum septic size requirement. This
request is unique because there are two lots included in the request which are also
zoned differently. The applicant did apply for these same requests in 2002 and was
denied at that time. One zoned as Rural Single Family (RS) and the other as Residential
Estate (RE). Staff is recommending rezoning the parcel to RS. During this review the
City will also be considering a zoning map amendment for the neighboring properties,
which have the same circumstances.
An applicant must demonstrate compliance with the variance criteria set forth in Lake
Elmo City Code Section 154.017 before an exception to city code requirements can be
granted.
Strict enforcement of the City’s zoning regulations for the size of the lot will cause
practical difficulties. The applicant is requesting to build a new home and use the
property in a reasonable manner it is within an existing neighborhood. There is not a
request to further reduce the size of the lot, instead the lot would become further
conforming due to the required tax identification consolation.
Strict enforcement of the City’s zoning regulations for the septic area, will cause
practical difficulties and the applicant is proposing to use the property in a reasonable
manner. It has been proven, by the construction of homes on other lots in the
development that septic systems are capable of functioning on a lot of this size so the
request becomes reasonable.
The applicant did not develop the property or establish the lot, strict enforcement of the
City’s zoning regulations for the size of the lot for the RS zoning district makes the
property unbuildable, the existing owner and future owners would be required to
obtain a variance to build.
Strict enforcement of the City’s zoning regulations for the 20,000 sq. ft. of septic area,
has not been caused by the applicant, it would take up 65.7% of the property area. If
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
the property is capable of achieving a septic permit from Washington County, this would
be unneeded.
The request to build on the lot will not alter the essential character of the locality it will
be a single-family home in a single-family neighborhood. The lot size will be no smaller
or larger than they were in 1961 and 1994. The applicant also is not seeking a variance
relating to setbacks or impervious surface. With Staff being unable to deny a permit
strictly based on design the home would not conflict with this criteria.
The proposed septic area variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
There is no way to visually assess the property and that the septic area requirement has
or has not been satisfied.
The proposed variances for the size of the lot and for the septic area will not impair an
adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property or substantially increase the
congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish property values.
The applicant spoke about his approval of staff findings, his research into septic systems
with Washington County, and his desire to build on the vacant lot.
Weeks opened the Public Hearing.
Andrew Wolfram of 8308 Stillwater Blvd is the owner of the property to the west of the
subject property. His greatest concern was the drainage toward his property,
specifically his tuck under garage and basement. He explained that currently he builds a
dirt wall before the spring melt to prevent flooding of his lot and home. He also
explained that his understanding of the creation of the lots was to provide a flood area
around the creek and not have to have flood insurance on the entire property. This
would have a financial impact on his and surrounding properties. He also mentioned
the neighbor to the east of the subject property that sent the letter in opposition was
unhappy and that he was not able to attend.
Robert Dew 3036 Inwood Ave. He said that he does not think the overall rezoning and
combining of properties was noticed properly and would need to be done prior to
action on those items. He suggested that there should be a requirement in place for the
proposed new structure to meet a similar setback and style to the existing homes, to
create a neighborhood feel.
The applicant mentioned that the house would have a similar setback to the lots on
either side of it and that the swale the City Engineer is requesting should address the
drainage concerns of the property owner to the west.
Weeks closed the Public Hearing.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
Weeks and Holtz agreed that the property meets the standards of the variance request
and that combining the parcels and making the property less non-conforming is helpful.
Weeks suggested all of the setback requirements of the district would need to be met.
Holtz and Steil expressed his concerns about the drainage issues and follow the
Engineers requirements strictly.
Vote of consensus to approve the variances to reduce the minimum lot size and
minimum septic area required for the Rural Single Family Zoning District and for the
rezoning of the outlot to the Rural Single Family Zoning District for the property at 8340
Stillwater Boulevard.
Rezoning of surrounding properties will be tabled until properly noticed.
Applewood Pointe Senior Housing
Roberts reported that United Properties is requesting a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment from BP (business park) to MU-BP (mixed use – business park), a Zoning
Map Amendment (rezoning) from BP (business park) to MU-BP (mixed use – business
park), a PUD Amendment for the Eagle Pointe Park PUD to allow a residential use on the
proposed development site, and a Preliminary Plat and the Preliminary Planned Unit
Development (PUD) Plans for a proposed 105 unit multi-family residential development
to be called Applewood Pointe of Lake Elmo. The applicant is proposing this project for
a vacant 11.7-acre parcel on the southeast corner of Hudson Boulevard and Eagle Point
Boulevard in the Eagle Pointe Business Park. The City Council reviewed and approved
the concept plans for this PUD on October 1, 2019. This approval was documented in
Resolution 2019-073 and was subject to 13 conditions of approval.
Alex Hall United Properties 651 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis explained that there is a
significant market demand for this type of product. He also explained the work that is
planned to help address the neighboring office condo flooding issues.
Holtz asked about the sidewalk that does not connect. The applicant explained that
they would be inclined not to construct a sidewalk that connects to nothing. He
explained they will be doing improvements along Hudson Blvd. adjacent to their site.
Weeks opened the Public Hearing. No one from the public spoke. Weeks closed the
Public Hearing.
Holtz explained that he supports the proposal since there is a demand and getting the
increase in the taxes from land to a $40 million residential development is good for the
City. He supports the change to Mixed Use zoning not High Density Residential in order
to maintain consistency with the other zoning in the area.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
Vote of consensus to approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the site of the
Applewood Pointe of Lake Elmo on the corner of Hudson Boulevard and Eagle Pointe
Boulevard from BP (business park) to MU-BP (mixed use business park).
Vote of consensus to approve the rezoning of site of the Applewood Pointe of Lake Elmo
on the corner of Hudson Boulevard and Eagle Pointe Boulevard from BP (business park)
to MU-BP (mixed use business park).
Vote of consensus to approve the preliminary PUD Plan and preliminary plat as
requested by Jennifer Mason (of United Properties) for PID# 33.029.21.44.0009 for the
project to be known as Applewood Pointe Senior Living located on the southeast corner
of Eagle Point Boulevard and Hudson Boulevard.
Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Roberts presented the City Council recently approved a public improvement project to
extend sanitary sewer to the existing Heritage Farms subdivision. This development is
th
located west of Manning Avenue and south of 30 Street and has 44 single-family
homes that are now served by on-site sanitary sewer (septic) systems. The proposed
public improvement project will extend sanitary sewer throughout the subdivision
(along with other improvements) and will allow the property owners to connect to the
City sanitary sewer system. The City is planning this improvement project for the 2020
construction season.
This sewer change, however, requires City Council and Met Council approval of several
changes to the recently adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The changes are required
because the Heritage Farms subdivision is not now included in the MUSA (Metropolitan
Urban Service Area) nor had the City included these 44 properties in the Wastewater
calculations in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed comprehensive plan
amendments require a 4/5th affirmative vote by the City Council and approval by the
Metropolitan Council.
Weeks opened the Public Hearing.
Dan Pierpont 2958 Lisbon Ave, asked questions about the lot criteria required for
changes, he asked if this would allow these properties into the MUSA, he did express
concerns that he had to fix his septic system when he moved in and now will have to
pay to connect to sewer.
Roberts explained the lots in Heritage Farms would be larger than typically found in this
zoning district, that the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council and if they approve then it goes to the Metropolitan Council.
Weeks closed the Public Hearing.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20
Holtz expressed understanding for Pierpont’s position. Weeks explained that extending
sewer to many of the existing properties has been a financial burden and a slow and
difficult process in some cases.
Vote of consensus to approve all necessary amendments to the 2040 Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan (including those to the Land Use Plan and to Wastewater Services
Plan) to add the existing 44 single-family properties in the Heritage Farms subdivision to
the City’s sanitary sewer area.
Vote of consensus to approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment re-guiding on the
City’s Land Use Plan the existing single-family homes in the Heritage Farms subdivision
from RAD (Rural Area Development) to V- LDR (Village Low-Density Residential).
New Business
Weeks asked if we can review the 20,000 sq. ft. requirement for septic, Holtz agreed
that if it does not align with the county requirements, it should probably be removed.
Discussion about the railroad crossing and the airport modifications.
Vote of consensus to bring the 2020 Planning Commission Work Plan back to a future
meeting.
Staff and Commission Updates
The Lake Elmo Senior Living was approved at the January 7, 2020 City Council meeting.
The amendment to the CUP for the bus terminal was tabled at the December 17 and at
the January 7 City Council meetings. The developer would construct the first part of the
utilities and the developer is working with the City to establish a 429 Public
Improvement project to complete the second half of the project. In that scenario, the
City would do the work and bill or assess the developer for the work since he will benefit
from the new sewer and water lines.
Holtz explained some of the site review meetings for the Stillwater Area School District.
Meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Tanya Nuss
Permit Technician
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-20