HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Packet; 5-11-09 i
cm LAKE City of Lake Elmo
JL EL ��I0 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042
(651) 777-5510 Fax: (651)777-9615
Www.LakeElmo.Ora
i
NOTICE OF MEETING
The City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on
Monday, May 11, 2009, at 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Pledge of Allegiance
i
2. Approve Agenda
3
3: Approve Minutes
a. March 23, 2009
b. ApriI 13, 2009
4. Public Hearings
a. None
5. Business Items
a. Future Land Use Discussion at 400 Keats Avenue
6. Informational Items -verbal
a. Staff update on National Conference attendance
b. Update on Wireless Telecommunication Tower
71 City Council Updates `
a. May 5, 2009
i. Sign Ordinance-tabled
ii. Economic Development Recommendations I
iii. Final Adoption of AUAR—approved
iv. 2030 Comprehensive Plan updates —approved all but Transportation
Plan which was tabled
v. Metro Cities Policy Committee
8: Adjourn
i
i
i
I
I
DRAFT
i
1
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of March 23, 2009
i
Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission
at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Anderson, Bidon, Hall, McGinnis,
Pearson,Van Zandt, and Ziertman. Absent: Britz, Fliflet, Ptacek, and Van Erem.
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt, Senior Planner Gozola and Planner Matzek.
Agenda
Chairman Van Zandt added the item "New Commissioner Training Report."
j.
New Commissioner Training Report
Commissioner Bidon said he thought the Government Training Services workshop was
worthwhile and provided understanding for the ordinances and the job of the city staff:.
1
Minutes--February 9, 2009
M/S/P, McGinnis/Ziertman. Vote: 6:0. Abstensions: Hall
Public Hearing
None:
,
Business Items -Sign Ordinance }
Senior Planner Gozola reviewed the changes to the draft sign ordinance that were
suggested by the commission at the March 9`�meeting.
i
Commissioner Hall said the banner definition identifies that it shall not be a permanent
i
sign.
Senior Planner Gozola said he would remove that part of the definition.
Commissioner Ziertman identified that for item two under the building identification
portion,the building address is required on each principle building,but some homes are
so far back from the roadway or are hidden by trees that it would not be practical.
i
Senior Planner Gozola suggested the text"in a visible location from the right-of-way."
i
Commissioner Hall recommended requiring it both on the house and at a location on the
roadway.
i
Senior Planner Gozola stated that there are examples where multiple properties access a
roadway on one driveway.
i
PIanning Director Klatt said it would be difficult to go back to existing homes and
enforce. This ordinance would be with new building permit applications.
i
i
Lake Elmo Planning Commmission Minutes; 3-23-09
I
i
DRAFT
i
Commissioner Hall moved to recommend revising the proposed ordinance to say that
building addresses for all buildings should have an identifying number between three and
twelve inches in height that is viewable from the road. Seconded by Commissioner
Ziertman.
Senior Planner Gozola said that the language as it stands currently is only for residential
and not businesses,but the proposed language would include businesses. fie would ask
that it be separated if that is the direction the commission would like to go in.
Chairman Van Zandt said the emergency services crews need to quickly find addresses €
and it should be clearly marked.
Planning Director Klatt identified language from the State Fire Code which requires new
and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers,building numbers, or
approved building identification placed at a position that is plainly visible from the street 3
or road fronting the property. Buildings with multiple tenants shall place approved
addresses at front or rear doors to identify each address.
M/S/P, Ziertman/Hall to get rid of the language in sub. 2 in the proposed ordinance as it
is already covered by the State Building Code. Vote: 7:0.
E
Senior Planner Gozola reiterated that the only remaining language would be what was
proposed in Sub 1. He is looking for formal action on ordinance.
M/S/P, McGinnis/Hall, move to recommend the sign ordinance as amended. Vote 7:0.
Wireless Telecommunication
Planning Director Klatt provided an update to the wireless telecommunication ordinance
process. He identified the process: review of the current ordinance, alternatives
discussion, questions for the planning commission, next steps and then asked for
feedback.
Commissioner Hall asked if the railroad right-of-way is an option for locating towers.
i
Planning Director Klatt said it would probably not be available as an easement would
identify it is for transportation and not utilities. He said it may be helpful to do an
inventory of existing structures of a certain height for co-location options to help
facilitate the process.
i
Chairman Van Zandt suggested commissioners begin to formulate their input and talk to
their neighbors.
i
Commissioner Bidon suggested the city should build a tower and collect the rent.
Planning Director Klatt said the city is moving forward in soliciting Request For
Qualifications from consultants to rewrite the ordinance.
I
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 3-23-09
i
i
DRAFT {
t
t
General Updates
Planning Commission 2009 Work Plan
Planning Director Klatt said the City Council made a few changes to the work plan,
attached is the final version.
Commissioner Hall asked how the Village Area Planning will be done. j
Planning Director Klatt said staff will be bringing forward next steps for the village area.
Comprehensive Plan Update
Planning Director Klatt said he is working with the city engineer to bring forward the
Surface Water Plan, Water Plan, and Transportation Plan chapters for a formal public
hearing.
MnDOT Highway 5 Project
Planning Director Klatt said MnDOT conducted an open house on reconstruction plans
for Highway 5. The plan is to add a lane from Manning Ave to 55`h Street, Washington
County is still waiting to hear if the State would get the funding through the stimulus
package for the project. If Lake Elmo is interested in a trail along the road, it would be
beyond the proposed project.
i
Urban Land Institute; Community Research Project
Planner Matzek said the city has agreed to participate in a project with ULI and Citizens t
League focusing on public participation processes. Lake Elmo is one of three
communities in this larger study.
City Council Updates
Planning Director Klatt said the City Council did decide to move forward with Final
AUAR. A ten day comment period will begin shortly and assuming no objections are
received from a State Agency, the city will be able to then adopt the Final AUAR I
document.
Adjourned at 8:54 p.m.
i
Respectfully submitted,
Kelli Matzek
Planner
E
i..
i
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 3-23-09
i
i
ji
I
DRAFT
7
i
City of Lake Elmo i
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of April 13, 2009
Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission
at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Anderson, Bidon, Britz, Fliflet, Hall,
Pearson, Van Erem, Van Zandt, and Zierhmn. Absent: McGinnis and Ptacek. STAFF
PRESENT: Planning Director Klatt, Planner Matzek, Assistant Engineer Stempski, and
TKDA Consultant Bryant Fusek.
Agenda
M/S/P, Hail/Fliflet, to approve the agenda as presented. Vote: 9:0.
i
Minutes -March 9, 2009
Commissioner Fliflet stated that the minutes do not identify who seconded the motion on
the last page of the minutes.
Planner Matzek said that she did not have that information as the tape of the meeting was
i
cut off.
i
M/S/P, Anderson/Pearson,;Hove to approve as presented. Vote: 9:0.
Public Hearing—Comprehensive Plan Update, Transportation Chapter
Klatt.gave a brief overview of where the city.is at in the Comprehensive Plan update i
process and what the city is required to do. z
Assistant Engineer Stempski said the draft Transportation Plan chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan is now complete and ready for the commission's review.
Bryant Fusek, TKDA Transportation Engineer j
Mr. Fusek said the proposed draft plan was built off the previous Lake Elmo
transportation plan. He spoke of the goals and objectives, roadway system, transit
facilities, trail system,rail, aviation,and plan implementation. He showed maps to
illustrate a base scenario and an improved scenario for State Highway 36. Two proposed
changes to the plan are to downgrade Lake Elmo Avenue from an arterial to a major
collector and to eliminate one of the policy statements from the previous transportation
plan..
Commissioner Fliflet asked for clarification on what is meant by maintaining East and
West access to Highway 36 from County Road 17.
Mr. Fusek said traffic should be able to turn left or right onto Highway 36 at the
intersection.
Chairman Van Zandt asked how far a frontage road on the north side of Highway 36
would run. j
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-13-09
i
i
DRAFT
Mr. Fusek said it would run the full length of the road on the north side of the highway.
E
Commissioner Ziertman identified a chart on page twenty-one that models travel demand
based on land use. She disagrees with the numbers as various businesses along Highway
36, such as Rock Point Church, are not taken into consideration.
Planning Director Klatt said that although staff did notice that distinction as well, those
employment areas were not calculated in the county's model, so we did not include them
in the city's model. s
Mr. Fusek said that although the city does not want to dismiss that information, the
impact on traffic volumes would likely not make any changes to the recommendations in {
the plan. He also said that one of the proposals the model does not take into
consideration is a roundabout on Highway 5 as it can also reduce the volume.
Commissioner Fliflet said that trail use as a means to a destination should be further
emphasized in the transportation plan.
Commissioner Van Erem asked if there was a timeline for implementing the
recommendations of turning the road back to city and the quiet zones for the railroad.
Mr. Fusek said it could be implemented at any time, but it could be costly.
Commissioner Fliflet said that safety and parking at the elementary school should be j
further emphasized as they are problems.
i
Mr. Fusek said the plan does identify that intersection as a problem because of the crash
rates.
i
Commissioner Fliflet suggested adding apedestrian/child/safety zone/school area section
to the plan as it would heighten its importance.
Planning Director Klatt said the plan should reference the Safe Routes to School study
with proposed improvements.
THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:26 P.M.
No one spoke.
THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:27 P.M.
i
M/S/P, Fliflet/Hall, move to recommend approval of a revised transportation plan with a
few additions: heighten awareness of school zones and the importance of those
intersections; emphasis on trails system with regards to destinations; and with the
implementation section that was handed out. Vote: 9:0.
1
I
r
Lake Elmo.Planning Commission.Minutes; 4-13-09
i
DRAFT
i
E
Business Item--Comprehensive Plan Update: Park Plan; Review of Metropolitan
Council's response
Planner Matzek identified that the Park Plan is further along than the other three
components being updated this year. After years of work and public input, the plan was
sent in for an informal review by the Metropolitan Council. They provided four I
comments: to include eight"in-holding"parcels for future acquisition for the Lake Elmo
Regional Park Reserve, to move the Special Use Park Search Area so it did not overlap
with the Park Reserve,to add text for the Washington County Greenway Regional Trail
which was already shown on a map, and to submit the trail plan for their formal review.
None:of the requests have any impact on the intent or function of the plan.
M/S/P,Van Zandt/Ziertman, move to recommend approval of the changes. Vote: 8:0:1.
Pearson abstained as he was uncomfortable with the possible future lake access on Lake
Elmo,
Informational Item: Village Area AUAR Update
Planning Director Klatt stated that the City Council authorized the distribution of the
Final AUAR for a 10 day comment period with April 13`h as the deadline. He then
outlined what the city has done so far including the basic background engineering work.
One of the next steps will be to estimate the costs associated with the project.
I
City Council Update
Planner Matzek said that the council reviewed and discussed the Hugec variance at 2931
Jonquil Trail North, but tabled the application to a future date.
Adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
i
Respectfully submitted,
Kelli;Matzek
Planner
t
I
i
i
i
i
i
I
1
S
j
i
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes;4-13-09
i
I
s
I
i
1
Planning Commission
Date: 5/11/09
Concept Plan Review
Item: 5a
I
I
ITEM: Future Land Use Discussion —400 eats Avenue i
I
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Director of Plannin
REVIEWED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner
i
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
I
The Planning Commission is being asked to review a concept plan for the redevelopment of a
former golf practice facility at 400 Keats Avenue. The project proposer is seeking feedback from
the Commission regarding the proposed re-use of the site for an outdoor amphitheater and
performing arts center. The attached staff report provides a general overview of the request and
a summary of the relevant land use and zoning issues.
I
i
The Planning Commission is not being asked to take any formal action with regards to the
concept plan. Any feedback provided will be used by the applicant to help determine whether or
not the plan is feasible to pursue. I
i
RECOMMENDATION:
j
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed concept plan and
provide informal comments to the applicant. r
I
i
ORDER OF BUSINESS: r
- Introduction ....................................................................Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
- Report by staff............ ........... ............... ............Kyle Klatt, Director of Planning
- Presentation by Project Proposers...............................Brian McGoldhch/Greg Schlink
- QuestionslComments from the Planning Commission................Planning Commission
f
ATTACHMENTS:
• Staff Report
i
• Concept Plan 1
• Aerial Images of Site (facing north and south)
• AG—Agriculture Zoning District Regulations i
I
I
I
i
4
t
I
1
1
5
i
1
City of Lake Elmo Planning Department
Concept ]Plan Review and Discussion
t
i
To. Planning Commission
i
From: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
Meeting Date: 5/11/09
Applicant: Brian McGoldrich/Greg Schlink j
Owner., Gary T. Mulcahey, Sr. --MM One Golf, LLC
1
Location: 400 Keats Avenue
Zoning: A - Agriculture
E
i
1
Introductory Information
Requested Brian McGoldrick, as a representative of Gary Mulcahey, has been investigating
Action: proposed uses for the now abandoned Mulligan Masters Golf Facility at 400 Keats
Avenue. He has requested an opportunity to discuss proposed uses with the Planning l
Commission, focusing on the potential re-use of the site .for an outdoor amphitheater.
Another potential partner, Greg Schlink, has also been coordinating with Mr.
McGoldrich on a more ambitious project that would include an indoor concert
z
hall/performing arts center on this same site.
i
The information that is being presented to the Planning Commission at this time is
conceptual, and does not represent a formal application that requires action by the City
Council. The Planning Commission is being asked to provide feedback regarding the
proposed development plans. The Staff report below summarizes the relevant
Planning and Zoning issues that pertain to the site and the process that might be
necessary to move forward with the development plans.
This proposal was introduced at a public forum to the City Council in October of
2008;the City Council directed the applicant to discuss the proposal with the Planning
Commission before proceeding any further with a formal request.
}
Property The property under consideration is approximately 40 acres in size(including road E
Information: right-of way) and located along Keats Avenue roughly midway between the 1-94
Corridor and South 10`" Street. In early 2003 the City approved a series of requests to
accommodate a golf practice facility on the site, including a Comprehensive Plan
amendment, rezoning, and conditional use permit. After a minor modification of the i
planned office area in 2004 the site became functional and was known as Mulligan
Masters. The golf facility has since ceased operations, and because the site has not
been occupied for over one year,the conditional use permit(CUP) has expired. Any
future use of the site will either need to secure a new conditional use permit to operate
a golf practice facility or will need to observe the list of permitted and conditional
i
C'111P Requesi; FL,F Propertlev and Behl'e mie�Spa
l)1012rAi3 ,C.Omntnis.sion Report; Q 43-08
I
E
activities in the A—Agriculture zoning district.
Brian McGoldrich has been working with the property owner to identify a new use for
Proposed the property at 400 Keats Avenue, and is seeking suggestions for re-use of the golf
Concept practice facility. One concept that Mr. McGoldrich has pursued is converting the site
Plan: into an amphitheater and concert venue in accordance with the attached concept plan.
This plan depicts an outdoor amphitheater with seating for 6,000 people in addition to
an adjacent concert hall that would seat approximately 1,500 people. At this point in
time, the plan is very preliminary in nature and only depicts a general layout that could 3
work on the property. E
Beyond the construction of the actual concert hall and amphitheater, the most
significant component of the plan is the provision of over 1,650 parking stalls,which
would be located in a circular arch around the main structures. This circular
configuration is somewhat similar to the existing layout of the golf course practice
holes. The site plan for Mulligan Masters included an extensive amount of grading
and landscaping work, all of which would be significantly impacted be the
construction of a new building and parking areas on the site.
Applicable Section 154.018 Administration. fi
Codes: Subd 4. Conditional Use Permits. Outlines the general requirements for all
conditionally permitted uses in bake Elmo.
(A) Granting/denial. Conditional use permits may be granted or denied in any
5
district by action of the governing body according to the standards for that district
in granting a conditional use permit, the governing body shall consider the advice
and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed r
use upon the health, safety, morals, convenience,and general welfare of occupants 4
of surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions including parking
facilities on adjacent streets and land, the effect on utility and school capacities,
the effect on property values of property in the surrounding area,and the effect of
the prWosed use on the Comprehensive Plan. if it determines that the proposed
use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, convenience, morals,or general
welfare of the community nor will cause serious traffic congestion, nor hazards, 1
nor will. seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and that the use is in
harmony with the general vurnose and intent o this chapter and the
Comprehensive Plan,the Council may grant the permits(emphasis added by staff). I
Section 154.033 AG or A—Agricultural
Zoning district provisions attached—please note list of permitted and conditional
:z
uses.
Section 1.5=4.019 Interim Use Permits
Contains the City's requirements for granting an interim use permit.
S;il.n.r2rl li;se`:i'c;StF3If> #,p/)tit.'Cil}()r?S`y�fO liG'ia7.S. 6e:ldP38:SfY?f..>t112YCIIti':;.fp?9phhlhei=ier C"or o.-.-'J1?'r`Repor•r 5-1 f-09.doe
CUP iP Request,, FLF Properties and Belle:(,men:S17a f
P.L'1r2P'3dr- C.'t)r?2f7Pivii1rB Report: 9.8-08
i
Section 150.230 Interstate Corridor Overlay District
Special requirement for uses located within the interstate highway corridor.
3
Findings & General Site Overview
Site Data: Current Zoning: AG—Agricultural
i
Holding Zoning: HD-A-SRD t
Comp Plan Future Land Use: SRD—Sewered Residential Development(3.5 units per z
acre)
Development Staging: 2020-2030 sewer service area r
3
Water Service: Future service area
Adjacent Uses (Current): Aggregate Mining—North
z
Agriculture— West and East
Vacant—South
Future Adjacent Uses: SRD—3.5 DU/Acre i
z
Concept Review: '
Land Use Since the Planning Commission is being asked to conduct only a conceptual review of j
Discussion: the proposed site development plan, the most basic questions that should be addressed
concern the appropriate approval necessary to move forward with a request on this
site. Based on the information provided to date, please note the following:
• The amphitheater appears to be allowed as"Commercial Recreation of a Rural
Nature" on the A—Agriculture District use chart. The performing arts center
does not show up in any of the use classifications within the A—Agriculture or j
any other zoning district in the City.
• Neither use would be consistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for this
site, which is guided for sewered residential development at a density of 3.5
units per acre. All of the land surrounding the proposed site is guided in a
i
similar manner.
If the Planning Commission were to decide that an amphitheater is not consistent or
compatible with the proposed future uses in this area, it could use this finding as a
basis for denial of a conditional use permit. Concentrating on just the amphitheater,
this particular use could work well as an interim use provided minimal improvements
are necessary to the site and if the property owner was willing to commit to a specific
end date for the activity. The City cannot impose an expiration date on a conditional
use but can do so as part of an interim use request. At present,the A—Agriculture ,
zoning district does not permit amphitheaters (or outdoor recreation) as in interim use,
5';':l.elltr.l%.;,ci;C'Ussiia r1. rl;c'cttlr,>ru`Jfj(1 h�:ar,y,}vt'tttttt rs`tr7�iii2c:ttter,,.�?ryt6lii trr..ztr°r(.`i r1CLp1('l le' t�r3r .)-I
F�1
C..&P h'equca°t; 1~LF 'roDerth;,s and&?Ye,t rrrie,`,pa
Planning Commission Report; 9_8-08 I
and adding this use to the list of permitted activities would require a zoning text
amendment.
The other portion of the concept plan,the performing arts center, is much more
problematic based on the current and future land uses planned for the area. Although
the City could consider amending the zoning ordinance to allow a performing arts
center as an interim use, the investment and proposed activity as depicted on the
submitted concept plan does not appear temporary in nature. A permanent building
would require a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning to a district that would
allow a permanent facility. A performance arts center is most similar to the list of uses
allowed in the PF—Public Facilities zoning district.
Outside of the broader planning and zoning issues related to the proposed uses, other
relevant issues should be considered by the Planning Commission, including:
Parking. The concept plan indicates that the proposed facilities would need
1,654 parking spaces,which is a substantial increase over the parking provided.
for the golf facility. The applicant has suggested that a pervious system could
be used for some of the proposed parking to help mitigate storm water runoff
and to keep the site looking natural. Based on the total site occupancy (number
of seats) the number of suggested stalls is close to the City's parking standards
for public assembly uses.
• Traffic. A traffic analysis would be needed with the proposal to determine
potential impacts on Keats Avenue(CSAH 19). There is currently one
entrance into the facility, and a new access is shown on the concept plan.
Given the potential for large amounts of traffic entering and exiting the site at
peak tunes, understanding the potential impacts of this traffic will be a critical j
piece of any land use analysis for this site.
• Grading/Erosion Control. The golf facility site plans included an extensive
grading and erosion control plan. The proposed site plan would impact the
approved grading aa2d storm water management system, and the additional
buildings, parking areas, and other impervious surfaces would require further
analysis. The concept plan does not leave a lot of room for additional storm
water mitigation on the site.
• Landscaping/Buffering. Because the proposed uses are located in an area that
is planned for residential development, appropriate buffers should be
developed, if the plan moves forward, to make sure that the activities on the
site do not negatively impact adjacent residential uses. Preserving existing
trees and other natural vegetation would help buffer potential future uses on
this site.
• Future Land Uses. Although the surrounding land is predominately comprised
of agricultural and mining activity, or otherwise vacant, all of the land
surrounding the site is planned for sewered residential development. Any re-
use of the golf facility should be evaluated for compatibility with the future
surrounding uses. This is especially true if a permanent use is allowed that will j
.$'.Veand Use Possible.ti:t;,Iir..ulirlrti'::lEl;'.tt ctts;ave nai:.� tj.>iliaF<s:ltr:.tnrtahiih uicrC.'cirrt:Ept 1'�Rr.-j-wri !-:.!%.cziic:
Poop 4
i
I
CUP Rr gvesl: F%F f'rtspc rties and Behle Amie Spa i
Plcsrrriing t:.'ewnirrivsi«rr Report 9-5-08
t
not cease when sewer is extended to the area.
• REC Unit-Counts. Lake Elmo's Comprehensive Plan specifies that a certain
number of residential units and Residential Equivalency Units pertaining to
sewer service must hook into the regional sewer system by 2030. A low REC
unit count on the applicant's site would eliminate a fairly large area planned
for approximately 120 units of the City's total number required.
The applicant has indicated that he is willing to consider alternative uses of the site
and would welcome any feedback from the Planning Commission on this matter.
If the Commission were reviewing the concept plan as a conditional use permit,the
following impacts would need to be considered as part of its review:
1. Effects on the health, safety, morals, convenience, or general welfare of
surrounding lands.
2. Traffic &Parking conditions.
3. Effects on utility and school capacities.
4. Effect on property values of surrounding lands.
5. Effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
I
i
Alternatives: There are several different ways that the proposed concept plan could move forward
on the applicant's site. These options include the following:
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning to a district that would allow
an outdoor amphitheater and performing arts center. A zoning change would
also need to include a text amendment to add a performing arts center or
concert hall to the district use chart. A change may not be necessary if the
outdoor amphitheater is the only land use option pursued. In all cases,
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan would be an issue.
2. Planned Unit DevelopmentfMater Planned Community. A Planned
Development could be approved to allow a staged development or overall site
redevelopment project. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan would still
be an issue that needs to be addressed. If housing were added to the overall
plain for the site, it would help reduce concerns about the lack of REC units and
provide additional buffering from other residential uses.
I
3. Interim Use Permit. An Interim Use could be established in the A—
Agriculture zoning district to allow for an outdoor amphitheatre. The zoning
ordinance would need to be amended to establish a specific interim use in the
AG-district. This option would be the most consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan since the City could establish a termination date based on the provision of
sewer service to the site or the development of adjacent parcels.
4. Alternate Sites. The performing arts center could be established in another
location, and may be a use that is more compatible in a Public Facilities zoning j
1
S.V,ancl U,ve lPossir.'.Tle;tppliecuions.400 lte W�Ave+u e: rrt,.�i(/tetaler:�r,/7`ritiaeu;cr(.7onc:epi PJ'Yeoort.5-11-09.61,.-r,..
Pa—a--.
I
Ct/1'Request; FLI"Proper•1ies awd Belle Atnie;4j)a
1''la,nning(70Mmi.tsion Repor(. 1-8-08
district,business zoning district, or as part of the Village planning area. At E
present, a performing arts center would not be permitted in any of the City's
zoning districts and could only be considered with a text amendment to the
Ordinance.
5. if the concept plan is not deemed acceptable the property could be used in
accordance with the uses allowed under the A--Agriculture zoning district.
The improvements that have been previously made to the site make this
property difficult to convert back to an agricultural use.
i
i
i
Conclusion:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review the submitted concept plan and '.
provide any feedback to the project proposers. This review is not a formal request and
the Planning Commission does not need to take any formal action. Regardless of any
comments received, an application could be submitted to develop the site in
accordance with the options noted above. The Commission's feedback will help the
property owner decide whether or not to purse a land use or zoning change on the site
or to further develop plans in accordance with the concept plan.
i
I
i
7
cc: Brian McGoldrich, Greg Schlink
i
I
i
I
i
?
i
1
i
i
I
t
1
f
i
i
7
l
3
i
S:'.j.nui 1.�s-e i.P0,SIl7le f' llicofions',`00 Keats.•�'{%t"121i4:'�I7'd77.I+'i£'.C:dr.77'�:i? j71 fj7t't'1!S!"(..of'ce)i 1 e� }-j 7_ 9
IBC a ! f� j !!.Ac jk7/'r li�.d<x:
Pa--e 6
�s
i
d 4
011
w�
S ` •.x■.s r 1 rre
a
a*ysxsr Sri a�
r
IMP
x
,a
1
It•. - a -r. '� '"�■ 2
x
:, �M�- J.. '_, � `,T �r's 1R'N■�J)t 71!■7 s■■i;3fr L`-
V
xz
� # x
3 ](
1
x-x'' fir• 3 *� * �. R
��`.' It .f ► - .yq� �' -
��
r £� e
SK.
-.y +e \ ✓r fl .4 �' _tee T "
Y
'•YJ Lis=xs■■■ •■■r■�xsx■s;*s■■*Jl WJC 3rN JY'J �,
It
u
iR-
max
... ... .. ..... ..
Hub
Properties, . March 31, 2009 III
3050 Echo Lake Avenue
Mahtomedi,MinnesotaElmo, Minnesota ConceptPlan •
i
s
� Z
N"
a �l
WIN
own
-------------------
-U&SA few
Fz; 410
♦u
spy .�dd✓
m
Aq
Low
� I
k S KNOW i
�`*`�`.�", �.�. '�! x�{ _ ��Jyy !s �3.tr'c .Y,x✓y ..3k Y- I
�r
Mk
:f
7
I
I
E--\��,
t �
r 1
k � i
k
I
i.t.
s
I
,
x
s:
- rl
G
p ;r
i
3'
x�
� µ
F
1
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
i
§ 154.033 AG OR A— AGRICULTURAL.
i
(A) Permitted uses and structures.
(1) Commercial agriculture and horticulture;
(2) Poultry facilities meeting state and federal regulations;
(3) Farm buildings;
(4) Farm drainage and irrigation systems;
(5) Forestry meeting state and federal regulations;
(6) One farm dwelling per fan-n(also see §§ 154,091 and 154.105);
(7) One non-farm dwelling per each 40 acres, or part of a dwelling on a '
prorated basis,not already containing a farm or non-farm dwelling,provided:
(a) The dwelling unit is located on a separate parcel of record in the
office of the County Recorder and/or County Auditor,which shall be at least 1-1/2 acres in size;
(b) The parcel on which the dwelling unit is located must have at least
125 feet of frontage along a public street, be rectangular in shape and no dimension to be greater
than 3 times the other; and
i
(c) The dwelling is separated by at least 300 feet from the nearest farm 1
building.
i
(8) Seasonal open sales lots for agricultural and horticultural products
produced on the premises;
(9) Pick-your-own or cut-your-own type sales operations for products grown
on the premises; and
3
(10) Joint ownership of property or ownership by association or rental for the
purpose of providing private gardens or forest plots to its members or lessees.
(B) Uses permitted by conditional use permit.
i
(1) Greenhouses;
(2) Kennels;
(3) Stables;
I
American Legal Publishing Corp. 1
I
s
i
t
1
I
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
(4) Commercial recreation of a rural nature, including outdoor target ranges;
(5) Agricultural service establishments primarily engaged in performing
agricultural animal husbandry or horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including
sorting, grading, and packing fruits and vegetables for the owner, lessee, or sublessee;
agricultural produce milling and processing for the owner, lessee, or sublessee; horticultural
services; fruit picking; grain cleaning; veterinary services; boarding and training of horses;
i
(6) Open space development projects, as regulated by §§ 150.175 et seq.;
i
t
(Ord. 97-40, passed 12-1-1998; Am. Ord. 97-182, passed 10-3-2006)
,
(7) Non-agricultural low impact uses pursuant to the standards described in
division(F)of this section; and
(Am. Ord. 97-57, passed 7-18-2000; Am. Ord. 97-191, passed 4-3-2007)
,
(C) Accessory uses and structures(see §§ 154.092 and 154.093).
(1) Uses and structures which are customarily accessory and clearly incidental
and subordinate to permitted uses and structures as defined in § 11.01; _.
(2) Private garages, carports, screen houses, conservatories,playhouses,
swimming pools and storage buildings, as defined in § 11.01, for use by occupants of the
principal structures; and
(Am. Ord. 97-3 8,passed 11-17-1998)
I
(3) Home occupations.
I
(D) Minimum district requirements.
Agricultural Zoning District Farm Dwellings and Related Non-Farm
Structures and Activities and Dwellings and
Non-Farm Dwellings if not Activities f i
Clustered Clustered
Lot Sizc Nominal 40 acres 1-1/2 acres(if
clustered)
I
A 40-acre parcel not reduced by
more than 10% due to road
rights-of-way and survey
variations {
I
I.,ot Width 300 feet 125 feet
American Legal Publishing Corp. 2
E
i
i
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
Primary Building setback from property lines: (Also see § 154.082)
i
Front: 200 feet 30 feet
i
Side(Interior): 200 feet 10 feet
E
Rear: 200 feet 40 feet
t
Side Corner: 200 feet 25 feet
Arterial Street: 200 feet 50 feet
Primary Building Height(Also see § 35 feet 35 feet
154,093) E
Off-Street Parking (Also see § 154.095) N/A 3 spaces per 3
dwelling unit
Accessory Building or Structure setback from property lines: (Also see §§ 154.092 and 154.093)
Front: 200 feet 30 feet
Side (Interior): 200 feet 10 feet
Rear: 200 feet 40 feet
t
Agricultural Zoning District Farm Dwellings and Related Non-Farm
Structures and Activities and Dwellings and
Non-Farm Dwellings if not Activities if
Clustered Clustered
I
i
Side Corner: 200 feet 25 feet
i
Arterial Street: 200 feet 50 feet
Setback for all animal buildings, feedlots, N/A
and manure storage sites shall be as follows:
(Also see §§ 154.092 and 154.093)
Any property line 200 feet N/A
i
Any existing well, or residential 50 feet N/A
structure on the same parcel
American Legal Publishing Corp. 3
t
i
t
i
i
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
Any existing well,or residential 200 feet N/A
structure on an adjacent or nearby
parcel
i
Any body of seasonal or year-round 200 feet N/A
surface water
i
Agricultural Zoning District Minimum District Requirements
I
Septic Drainfield Regulations(Also All lots must have at least 1 acre of land suitable for
see 51.002 through 51.008) septic drainlields and area sufficient for 2 separate
i
and distinct drainfield sites.
i
Placement of the second required drainfield between
the trenches of the first drainfield is prohibited.
{
Minimum Width of Primary All dwelling units must be at least 20 feet wide f.
Dwelling or Structure through the main living area of the structure.
i
Footings All dwelling units must have frost footing.
Continuous frost footings are not required for
porches, decks, and other appendages as long as
proper post-type footings, per existing Building
Codes are constructed.
i
Minimum Lot Size for Clustering The entire tract of land for which a cluster
development as proposed shall not be less than 61
acres in size.
Agricultural Zoning District Minimum District Requirements
Cluster Density The maximum number of dwelling units proposed for
the entire tract, including any existing buildings, shall
not exceed 1 unit per 40 acres or major part of the
tract. For example, a tract of land consisting of 101
acres might qualify for 3 dwelling units on a prorated
basis.
Minimum and Maximum Road A parcel on which a dwelling unit is located shall
Frontage in Cluster Development have at least 125 feet of frontage along a public street
and a maximum of 500 feet.
Signage See §§ 151.115 through 151.124
American Legal.Publishing Corp. 4
i
i
1
i
I
i
Lake Elmo,MN Code of Ordinances '
Driveway Width See § 93.26
i
i
(Am. Ord. 97-57,passed 7-18-2000)
E
(E) Clustered development standards.
i
(1) The Council hereby finds that cluster development, as defined in this =.
chapter, provides a means to preserve good agricultural land, open green space, scenic views,and
other desirable features of the natural environment. It is,accordingly,the purpose of the cluster j
development standards to permit and encourage cluster development where appropriate.
t
(2) The owner of any tract of land in.an agricultural district may submit a plan
for the use and development of the tract of land as a cluster development and apply for a permit
authorizing completion of the project according to the plan. The plan for the proposed project
shall conform to all of the regulations applicable to agricultural districts,except as follows:
(a) A plat shall be approved that complies with the city's subdivision
ordinance; the entire parcel of land shall be included within the plat;
(b) All new lots created by the cluster development shall be
i
contiguous; i
(c) Each lot created shall be used for no more than 1 single-family
home which shall meet the following requirements: Each dwelling unit shall be located I
on a separate parcel of record in the office of the County Recorder and/or County Auditor; the
separate parcel shall be at least 1-1/2 and not more than 2 acres in size, except the remaining
large lot; and 3
1
(d) Any land which is to be set aside as an outlot shall be clearly
identified as such on the plat, and shall be dedicated as permanent open space in a manner j
approved by the City Attorney and City Council.
(F) Non-agricultural low impact use standards.
s
(1) (a) The city desires to maintain and preserve open space and 1
agricultural land within the city. The city recognizes the monetary regards that may be enjoyed
by a farmer or larger property owner who sells his or her land for development. The city further
recognizes that allowing non- agricultural low impact uses, strictly controlled and regulated by
conditional use permit, might allow a farmer or large property owner an economical use of his or
her property that is zoned for agriculture. The following standards shall apply to these types of
uses.
(b) It is also the intent of the city to preserve the appearance of rural
character within the community by establishing standards for the setback and screening from
American Legal Publishing Corp. 5
I
1
1
I
I
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
adjacent property and public roadways by natural features of any open storage as may be
associated with the non-agricultural use.
(Am. Ord. 97-76, passed 3-6-2001)
(2) (a) All of the property owner's real estate that is contiguous to the
non-agricultural low impact use must be zoned Agricultural and remain so zoned while the
conditional use permit is in effect.
z
i
(b) The area where the non-agricultural low impact use is located shall
be legally defined as approved by the city and is hereafter known as the "Non-Ag Area."The
Non-AgArea shall not exceed 4%of the property owner's contiguous agricultural zone gross lot
area. The building footprints and asphalt and concrete surfaces within the Nan-Ag Area shall not
exceed 1.5%of the property owner's contiguous agricultural zone gross lot area. Landscaping,
berms, ponds, gravel driveways, and other improvements that would otherwise be permitted in
the Agricultural zone may be located outside of the Non-Ag Area.
t
(c) Non-agricultural low impact uses shall only be allowed on a parcel
of a nominal 40 acres or larger.
i
(d) Non-agricultural low impact uses shall not generate more than 3 1
trips per day per acre of contiguous agriculturally zoned area,with the exception of land,with
sole access to Hudson Boulevard that shall not generate more than 6 trips per day per acre.
i
i
(Am. Ord. 97-112,passed 6-18-2002)
(e) Any uses under this section involving the outside storage of
vehicles, equipment,or goods shall be located a minimum of 200 feet from any public roadway
or adjacent landowner's boundary,except that the setback from the I-94 frontage road shall be
not less than 50 feet. In addition, any such outside storage shall be screened from view from
adjacent property and the public roadway by berms and landscaping. A plan for such screening
shall be submitted with the application for the conditional use permit which shall clearly
demonstrate by view cross-sections that said screening will be effective immediately, and in all
seasons. Degradation of such screening by loss of landscape materials, outdoor storage of items
that exceed the screened height or for any other reason shall be grounds for rescinding the
outdoor storage portion of the conditional use permit.
(Am. Ord. 97-71,passed 3-6-2001)
(f) Non-agricultural low impact uses may not generate more than 3.0
SAC units per 3.5 acres or 235 gallons per day per net acre of land based upon design capacity of
facilities, whichever is more restrictive.
i
(g) The property owner shall maintain the remaining land or farm {
outside of the CUP Area in accordance with the permitted uses of the Agricultural zoning district
American Legal Publishing Corp. 6
l
3
I
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
i
and the required practices of the Soil and Water Conservation District.
(h) All lighting shall comply with the city's regulations.
(i) All signs shall comply with the city's regulations.
(j) Rate and volume of runoff from the CUP shall not exceed the 1%
rule and shall be verified by the City Engineer.
(k) In the event that the property owner, or future property owner,
initiates a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning of any or all of the contiguous real
estate from Agriculture to a more intensive use, the conditional use permit shall terminate and all
non-conforming structures shall be removed from the site within 1 year from the date of the City
Council's adoption of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning, unless the city agrees
otherwise. This section shall not apply if the city initiates rezoning or if property owner is forced I
to transfer title to any part of the contiguous real estate due to eminent domain. f
(1) All conditional use permits granted to a non-agricultural low
impact use shall be reviewed on an annual basis, and may be rescinded, after a 2-week notice and
a public hearing, if the Council finds that the public health, safety, or welfare is jeopardized.
(m) The standards for buildings or structures,as listed in the minimum i
district requirements of the Agricultural Zone, shall not apply to structures built prior to the
effective date of this chapter.
;
(H) Commercial outdoor social events. Subject to the following required conditions:
t
(1) A site tax parcel area not less than 10 acres;
1
(2) No existing permanent or newly constructed structures may be used. Tents
are allowed;
(3) Events limited to twice weekly and only during the months of May
through October;
l
(4) Attendance at events shall be limited to 250 people;
I
(5) Compliance with city code ambient noise standards;
(6) All parking shall be off-street,and shall be set back and/or adequately
screened from adjoining properties;
(7) Limiting the hours for any event to 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., including
take down activity. All event-related people must be off the site by 10:00 p.m.;
(8) On-site portable sanitation adequately sized for the events;
i
(9) Prohibiting charging an admission fee for any commercial outdoor social i
American Legal Publishing Corp. 7
f
i
i
1
1
i
i
Lake Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances
event; and
(10) The lighting meets code and lights go off at 10:00 p.m. z
i
(1997 Code, § 300.07 Subd. 4.A) (Ord. 97-57, passed 7-1&-2000; Am. Ord. 97-167,passed
5-16-2006; Am. Ord. 97-192,passed 6-19-2007; Am. Ord. 97-205,passed 12-4-2007)
I
i
i
i
I.
i
t
i
i
i
i
1
's
i
i
i
I
1
i
1
I.
1
i
I
i
i
I
1..
4
i
s
5
I
I
3
i
t
f
American Legal Publishing Corp. 8 �