HomeMy WebLinkAbout#04 - Limerick Village 12.4.231
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 12/12/2023
WORKSHOP DISCUSSION
TO: City Council
FROM: Nathan Fuerst, AICP, Consulting Planner
AGENDA ITEM: Sketch Plan Review – Limerick Village
REVIEWED BY: Jenni Faulkner, Senior Consulting Planner
Sophia Jensen, City Planner
BACKGROUND:
The City is in receipt of a Sketch Plan application from Maplewood Development for the proposed
Limerick Village development. The development is proposed across two undeveloped parcels just
north and west of Hudson Boulevard North and Manning Avenue North. As proposed over the
nearly 80 acre site, this project would entail a total of 760 residential units which are broken down
into the following land uses:
• (Lot A) Rental Townhomes – 240 units
• (Lot B) Multifamily Apartments – 300 units
• Front Loaded Townhomes – 124 units
• 55’ Single Family Lots – 79 units
• 65’ Single Family Lots – 17 units
Given the land use guidance and proposed development density, the project would be connected to
city water and sewer services. The subject site is noncontiguous with existing development, so it
does not presently have ready access to the City’s available water and sewer connections. The
Applicant is proposing those connections at their expense. Reconstruction of a portion of Hudson
Boulevard will also be necessary to provide access to and through this site consistent with long
term guidance in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and prior approvals.
Per conversations with the Met Council’s area Sector Representative, a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to the City’s Future Land Use Map is an anticipated requirement. This is due to the
need to specifically align the future land uses shown on that map with the proposed lots and use
boundaries. Note the acreages for each designation are staying the same, with some land netted out
for purposes such as public right of way and parkland, it’s the boundaries that are changing.
The Applicant is required to go through the EAW process prior to compiling an application for
this development. Prior to proceeding with that step, the Applicant was instructed to request the
Sketch Plat Review for this property to understand whether the Council will support approval of
the necessary Comprehensive Plan Amendment and other entitlements.
This property is in the search area for a new public park. The concept plan has not yet been
reviewed by the City’s Parks Commission, but a review will be required, ideally prior to a
Preliminary Plat submittal.
2
A review of the concept plan and narrative supplied by the Applicant is provided in the planning
memo appended to this report. The details most important for this discussion are provided below.
ISSUE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL:
As proposed, this project will require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Planned Unit
Development. Since PUD’s recognize the uniqueness of a site and the proposed development, they
have different considerations and conditions. The City Council should provide feedback regarding
the comprehensive plan amendment and concept plan and advise Maplewood Development on
City preferences to move forward with the proposed development.
LAND USE GUIDANCE OVERVIEW:
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Guidance –Medium Density Residential (MDR) & High
Density Residential (HDR)
• Required Residential Density –
o MDR (~37 acres) 4.01 – 8.0 Units / Net Acre
o HDR (~42 acres) 8.01 – 15.0 Units / Net Acre
• MUSA Growth & Phasing Period – 2020 - 2030
Zoning District
• Existing – Rural Transition
• Requested – MDR & HDR (consistent w/Future Land Use Areas)
ENTITLEMENTS REQUIRED:
Staff have reviewed the concept level plan against the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the
City’s Zoning standards. The following approvals will be required for this project to be permitted:
1. Mandatory Environmental Review – The number of units in this residential development is
over the threshold triggering for a Mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW). This process must be completed prior to approval of the subdivision.
2. Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Amend the Future Land Use Map to ensure that the
future land use areas on the subject property line up with boundaries of the proposed uses
within the development.
3. Rezone – Amend the Zoning Map to revise the subject property’s zoning district from
Rural Transition (RT) to reflect the uses proposed by the development, Medium Density
Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR).
4. Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Provide flexibility to allow the developer to deviate
from the City Code requirements of the proposed base zoning districts, HDR & MDR.
5. Major Subdivision – Required for the purposes of necessary Right of Way and Easement
dedications.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to the City at this time. The Developer would be required to extend or
reconstruct public infrastructure serving the proposed development at their own expense.
ANALYSIS:
Relating to the Comprehensive Plan, there are two primary influences on the acceptability of the
land uses proposed by the Developer:
1. Density in MDR/HDR areas – the densities in the proposed areas must be consistent with
the range allowed in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is just meeting the
3
minimum density for the MDR acreage and is over fo the HDR acreage. (Explain where
they are at)
2. HDR density and Met Council Housing Policy – Any reduction in the net acreage of the
HDR future land use category in Lake Elmo may result in noncompliance with Met
Council regional housing policies. Currently, the City is meeting its goals relative to
housing, but it is close. A reduction of 3.6 acres would cause the City not to comply. Any
reduction will cause less flexibility in any future Comprehensive Plan Amendment relating
to the HDR, Village High Density Residential (V-HDR) or Mixed Use Commercial (MU-
C) categories.
The Developer has been instructed through the concept development process that a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required by the City to align the future land use categories
with the property boundaries proposed in the development. This is required to ensure that the
comprehensive plan’s map accurately reflects the property post development. As proposed, land
areas for both Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR) will
contain as close to the same net acreage as presently guided. Generally, the proposal meets the
intent of the Comprehensive plan to transition the density from higher on the east to lower on the
west.
Conformance with
Density requirements
Net Acres
Proposed
Units
Proposed
Density
Proposed
Min – Max Units
HDR (8.01 – 15 units/ac) 39.2* 612 15.61 314 – 588
MDR (4.01 – 8 units/ac) 36.51 148 4.05 146 – 292
Total 78.22 760 9.72 460– 880
*City Staff were advised by Met Council that the land to be dedicated as parkland to the City must be
netted out of the density figure. The 2.51 acres of parkland are removed in this table.
It is possible that the developer could seek a density bonus under Section 105.12.1160 to address
the issue with proposed net density of the HDR land. However, if the density of over 15 units per
acre is exceeded, the project wouldn’t comply with the comprehensive plan. Additionally, the
developer needs to keep the same net land areas for both MDR and HDR land so that the City can
continue to comply with Met Council housing policy as described above.
The current zoning district, Rural Transition (RT), is a transitional zoning district for large
undeveloped properties within the City’s MUSA boundary. A rezoning request would be required
for this project, consistent with other new developments. The requested zoning districts would be
consistent with the guidance in the Comprehensive Plan.
This will be part of a Major Subdivision. It is anticipated to be a phased development. A
preliminary plat would be required which shows the development plans in their entirety. A Final
Plat would be required for each individual phase of the project.
Each of the four residential land uses are reviewed against standards specific to the respective uses
in the appended Planning Memo. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) will be required to grant
flexibility to City standards, if desired. To receive a PUD, developments must meet certain
4
standards, such as minimum development area (5 acres), open space (20% of the development)
and street layout.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY:
A PUD is also anticipated with this project. The anticipated requests to deviate from City Code are
summarized below:
1. Entire Development - Open Space must constitute at least 20% of the area of PUDs, it is
unclear how that is being met with the proposal.
2. Lot B (4 story apartments):
a. Minimum Lot Size for the Multifamily Apartment Building (12.39 acres required,
4.96 acres proposed)
b. Parking is anticipated at 1.36 stalls per unit, this is unlikely to meet code but does
depend on the unit mix.
3. Lot A (20 Unit Townhomes) - Front Yard setback for storage structures on Lot B,
Multifamily Townhomes. Lot is considered a through lot, with 20’ setbacks on all sides
fronting a public street.
4. Front Loaded Townhomes –
a. Setbacks for Front, Side, and Rear yards due to the manner of the plat.
b. Parking proposed in front yard areas.
5. 55’ & 65’ Single Family Detached Lots – Standards are not proposed for these properties,
thus it is unclear whether deviations are required. It is possible that deviations to setbacks,
lot coverage, or driveway locations could be requested.
6. Additional Detail - Given the conceptual nature of the proposal, it is possible that
additional requirements for flexibility to City Code might be requested as the Applicant’s
team provides additional detail.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BENEFITS:
• A large central stormwater pond and adjacent park will provide over 11 acres of open
space in the center of the development with proximity to the uses with the greatest density.
• The development will provide a mix of different housing types, on a large scale, and serve
as a transition from mor intensive commercial uses south of the site.
• The proposed development will connect to, and extend, City utilities at the expense of the
Developer.
• Trails and pedestrian connectivity are proposed.
FEEDBACK DESIRED:
• Land Use Approvals
o Will the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (requiring a 4/5 vote) be supported?
▪ Do the revised boundaries for the future land uses meet the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan?
o Will the Preliminary Plat be supported?
▪ Water appropriations have been a topic recently discussed by the City
Council. Under what circumstances might the City make a determination
that the subdivision is premature?
o A Planned Unit Development is anticipated, will requests like those summarized
under Planned Unit Flexibility, above, be supported?
• Proposed Site Plan
o Is the proposed public park size and location acceptable?
o Will the City Council support the request to extend utilities to this property?
5
o Buffering will be required, what types of buffering might the Council find most
acceptable? Is a greater setback needed between the townhomes and business
park/commercial use?
o What conditions of approval might the applicant anticipate?
ATTACHMENTS:
• Proposed concept plans and narrative
• 12/4/2022 - Planning Comment Memo – Sketch Plan Review
• 11/25/2022 - City Engineering Comment Memo
• 11/22/2022 - Fire Chief Comments
• 8/8/2022 - Landscape Architect Comment Memo
Sketch Plan Submittal July 28, 2023
Limerick Village Page 1 of 3
LIMERICK VILLAGE
SKETCH PLAN NARRATIVE
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
July 31, 2023
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
Developer: Maplewood Development, Mario J. Cocchiarella
Civil Engineer: Alliant Engineering, Inc., Clark Wicklund
Surveyor: Alliant Engineering, Inc., Dan Ekrem
Landscape Architect: Alliant Engineering, Inc., Mark Kronbeck
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Parcel 1
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 29 North, Range
21 West,
Washington County, Minnesota which lies westerly of the westerly right of way line of Minnesota
Department of
Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 82-35 recorded as Document No. 424557 in the office of the
County Recorder,
Washington County, Minnesota and westerly of the westerly right of way line of Washington County
Highway Right of Way Plat No. 36 recorded as Document No. 449905 in said office of the County
Recorder.
Parcel 2
And also the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 29 North, Range 21
West, Washington County, Minnesota; EXCEPT the following described tract:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence
North along the West
line a distance of 152 feet to a point; thence Southeasterly in a straight line to a point on the South line
of said Northwest
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter to a point, said point being located 33 feet East of the Point of
beginning; thence West
33 feet to the point of beginning.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The property is currently owned by SPQR Lake Elmo, LLC, a subsidiary of Maplewood Development.
It is approximately 79.4 acres and bound by Manning Avenue to the east, agricultural land to the south,
agricultural land and a light industrial business to the west and agricultural land to the north.
Sketch Plan Submittal July 28, 2023
Limerick Village Page 2 of 3
The property is currently used for agriculture but for approximately 5 acres in the southeast used by
Sodbuster RC Flying Club. A farmstead with associated outbuildings exists at the northeast corner of
the property. Site access for the farmstead and flying club is from Manning Avenue.
Site topography varies gradually from an elevation of 918 in the northwest to an elevation of 893 in the
southeast. A low area near the southeast corner of the site provides approximately 28K cubic yards of
flood storage for the 100 year rainfall event and at an elevation of 895.1 per Valley Branch hydraulic
modeling. Surface runoff generally migrates from west to east and ultimately arrives at the St. Croix
River.
Site soils are generally free draining and anticipated to be suitable for infiltration.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The current sketch plan proposes for a mixed-use development consisting of single family homes,
town homes and apartments. Single family homes are to generally be located on the western half of
the site and consist of 65’ and 55’ wide lots. Front loaded town homes are to generally be located near
the center of the site and provided a transition to higher density product to the east on Manning
Avenue. The higher density product is to consist of 20 unit town homes and multi-story apartments
with underground and surface parking. A large stormwater feature of approximately 10 acres is to be
located near the center of the site and be an amenity to the single family and front loaded town homes.
A schedule of product types and quantities is as follows:
65’ single family homes 68
55’ single family homes 45
Front loaded town homes 72
20 unit town homes 240
Apartment units 300
The current sketch plan proposes for the extension of 5th Street North from the west to Manning
Avenue to the east. It is currently proposed that 5th Street North be located south and abutting the
north property boundary to avoid three large overhead transmissions towers to the north abutting the
property. The plan also proposes for the relocation of Hudson Boulevard (aka 2nd Street North) to the
south and which is to align with 2nd Street North on Manning Avenue to the east. The location and
alignment of Hudson Boulevard is as depicted in Four Corners 2nd Addition Plans prepared by Larson
Engineering and last dated July 10, 2019. Limerick Parkway is proposed to extend from 5th Street
North to relocated Hudson Boulevard and generally parallel Manning Avenue. It will provide internal
access at multiple locations to the single family homes, front loaded town homes, 20 unit town homes
and apartments.
Park areas are currently proposed in the northwest and southeast. The northwest park is approximately
1.1 acres and located in proximity to the single family homes. The southeast park is approximately 0.4
acres and located in proximity to the apartments. Both parks abut public right-of-way. It should be
noted that a private club house is currently proposed as part of the 20 unit town home development.
Sketch Plan Submittal July 28, 2023
Limerick Village Page 3 of 3
UTILITIES
The area is served with 12” watermain and a 24” sanitary sewer in Hudson Boulevard. Each stub is
located within right-of-way and located approximately a quarter mile south of the southwest corner of
the project site. It is the applicants understanding that each utility has capacity to serve the site and
subject to routing to the site.
It is the applicant’s intent to work with the abutting land owners to the south and west to determine an
extension of the two utilities to the site and as part of the preliminary plat submittal. It is understood
that the City of Lake Elmo is pursuing the construction of a water tower somewhere near the site to
serve properties in this area.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The property currently provides approximately 28,000 cubic feet of flood storage for the 100 year
rainfall event, which floods to an elevation of 895.1 per VBWD hydraulic modeling. An additional
95,000 cubic feet of flood storage is provided on the property to the south at that same elevation.
The sketch plan proposes to provide a local/regional stormwater management pond/infiltration basin of
approximately 10 acres near the center of the site. It is currently proposed that the basin be outlet to
the east under Manning Avenue to a ditch an approximate elevation of 890 which will provide for a
basin normal water level of approximately 892 and an infiltration bench of approximately 890.7, which
will provide approximately 40,400 cubic feet of flood storage or approximately 12,400 cubic feet of
excess flood storage.
PID: 3602921420001PID: 3602921410001DSDS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DSDS
DSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DSDOGPARKDOGPARKMDR/HDRLAND USE DIVIDE PERCITY COMPREHENSIVEPLAN Rental Townhomes: 240 UnitsTownhomes: 72 UnitsApartment: 300 UnitsTotal: 612 Units Hatch Area: 41.71 AcreDensity: 14.7 Units/AcrePID: 3602921420001MANNING AVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1315 16 22 23 24252627 2829 30 3132 3370 71 72 73 74756263 64 65 66 67 68 69 54 5556 57 58 5960PID: 3602921410001LOT B4.96 AC4 - STORY APARTMENTS WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING31,700 SF1131635633177 TOTAL PARKING EXTERIOR31322300 TOTAL UNITS±230 TOTAL PARKING INTERIORDSDS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DSDS
DSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DSDOGPARKDOGPARKLOT A12.72 AC65'65'4 - STORY APARTMENTS WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING20,300 SF4 - STORY APARTMENTS
WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING
26,500 SF 368'65'161'312'65'130'
11
7
'
196'65'191680'66'100'66'66'66'66'80'66'66'66'66'100'100'100'BUILDING 8 20 UNITSBUILDING 7 20 UNITSBUILDING 6 20 UNITSBUILDING 5 20 UNITSBUILD
ING
12
2
0
UN
ITSBUILDING 11 20 UNITSBUILDING 10
20 UNITS
BUILDING 9
20 UNITS
BUILDING 4
20 UNITS
BUILDING 3
20 UNITS
BUILDING 2
20 UNITS
BUILDING 1
20 UNITS CLUB HOUSE4TH ST N3RD ST N3RD ST CT N
5TH ST N4TH ST CT N2ND ST
N
5TH ST N
LILAC AVE
LIMERICK PKWYR=600.00'R=600.00'R
=
6
99
.5
2
'OUTLOT A(STORMWATER)8.65 AC 34 35 36 37 3839 4041 42 43 53 52 51 1719 14PARK A2.51 AC 44 45 46 47 48 49 5065'65'18 61130'2128 TOTAL PARK
I
N
G 207677787965' Lots: 79 Units55' Lots: 17 UnitsTownhomes: 52 UnitsTotal: 148 Units Hatch Area: 36.51 AcreDensity: 4.0 Units/AcreR
=
6
99
.5
2
'100'2ND ST
NMDRHDRLimerick VillageLake Elmo, MNDensity Exhibit
PID: 3602921420001||||||||MANNING AVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1315 16 22 23 24252627 2829 30 3132 3370 71 72 73 74756263 64 65 66 67 68 69 54 5556 57 58 5960PID: 3602921410001LOT B4.96 AC4 - STORY APARTMENTS WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING31,700 SF1131635633177 TOTAL PARKING EXTERIOR31322300 TOTAL UNITS±230 TOTAL PARKING INTERIORDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS DSDSDS DSDS
DS
DSDSDS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DSDSDS DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS
DS DSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS DSDSDS DS DS
DS
DSDSDS DSDSDOGPARKDOGPARKLOT A12.72 AC65'65'4 - STORY APARTMENTS WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING20,300 SF4 - STORY APARTMENTS
WITH UNDERGROUNG PARKING
26,500 SF 368'65'161'312'65'130'
11
7
'
196'65'191680'66'100'66'66'66'66'80'66'66'66'66'100'100'100'BUILDING 8 20 UNITSBUILDING 7 20 UNITSBUILDING 6 20 UNITSBUILDING 5 20 UNITSBUILD
ING
12
20 UN
ITSBUILDING 11 20 UNITSBUILDING 10
20 UNITS
BUILDING 9
20 UNITS
BUILDING 4
20 UNITS
BUILDING 3
20 UNITS
BUILDING 2
20 UNITS
BUILDING 1
20 UNITS CLUB HOUSE4TH ST N3RD ST N3RD ST CT N
5TH ST N4TH
ST
CT
N2ND ST
N
5T
H
S
T
N
2ND ST NLILAC AVE
LIMERICK PKWYR=600.00'R=6
0
0
.0
0'R=
6
9
9.52'OUTLOT A(STORMWATER)8.65 ACOVERHEAD POWER TRANSMISSION TOWER (TYP) 34 35 36 37 3839 4041 42 43 53 52 51 1719 14PARK A2.51 AC 44 45 46 47 48 49 5065'65'18 61896.5
896.5 900130'30'35'2128 TOTAL PA
R
K
I
N
G 20|||||||||||||CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWERAND WATERMAINSTREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS TOOCCUR AT TIME OF LIMERICK VILLAGE PROJECTCONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN ASPART OF LIMERICK VILLAGE PROJECTEXISTING ACCESSTO BE REMOVEDAT MANNING AVEHUDSON BOULEVARD REALIGNMENTAND TRUNK UTILITY EXTENSIONIMPROVEMENTS AS PER FOURCORNERS 2ND ADDITION PLANS76777879LIMERICK VILLAGE - INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN W/ AERIALLAKE ELMO, MINNESOTASHEET 1 OF 1
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 4, 2023
To: Maplewood Development
Cc: Nathan Fuerst, AICP, Consulting
Planner
RE: Limerick Village Sketch Plan Review
Description of Request
The City of Lake Elmo received a Residential Subdivision Sketch Plan from Maplewood
Development and Construction, Inc, for a project on two properties totaling approximately
79.4 acres. The subject property is located northwest of Manning and Hudson Boulevards
(PIDs 36.029.21.42.0001and 36.029.21.41.0001). The sketch plan depicts a major
subdivision which will result in a total of 760 residential units, broken down as follows:
• Lot A – Multfamily Residential Townhomes – 240 Units – 12 20-unit buildings on
one 12.72 acre lot
• Lot B – Multifamily Residential Apartments – 300 Units – 3 buildings on one 4.96
acre lot
• Front Loaded Townhomes – 124 Units – 12 6-unit attached townhomes on
individually platted lots.
• 55’ Single Family Homes – 17 Units on individually platted lots.
• 65’ Single Family Homes – 79 Units on individually platted lots.
A large central stormwater pond of approximately 8.7 acres is provided. Access to this
site is proposed from proposed extensions of 2nd and 5th Streets N. which will terminate
south and west of this site, respectively. An internal system of public and private roads will
provide access to individual lots. Utilities must be extended from the current terminus on
Hudson Boulevard to the south to the project site by the developer at their sole cost.
The proposal is characterized as a major subdivision. The applicant is requesting the
use of a Planned Unit Development Overlay (PUD) to allow for flexibility in meeting the
various standards required for the different residential uses comprising this project.
Premature Subdivisions – Lake Elmo Water Capacity Concerns
The City is working through issues relating to the amount of water which it can draw
under an existing Minnesota Department of Natural Resources permit. Resolution on this
issue is not expected until at earliest winter of 2024, and is made more complicated due
to the PFAS contaminant issue in the East Metro. Until the resolution of ongoing water
issues, Lake Elmo’s City Council may choose to reject new subdivisions as premature.
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
Development Summary:
Mandatory Environmental Review - Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
This project exceeds the statutory EAW review threshold for attached and unattached units and
therefore must receive a mandatory EAW under Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subp. 19. While the
project does not exceed the threshold for a mandatory EIS, we will not know the extent of
environmental review requirements until the EAW process is completed. An EAW may be prepared by
the Developer’s consultant and must be reviewed and accepted by the City of Lake Elmo, which will be
the RGU. Until the Environmental Review process concludes, a Preliminary Plat application will not be
accepted as complete.
Sketch Plan Review Narrative
While the narrative provides general information on the proposed development, it does not
provide much detail on the various elements of the project. The narrative should, at
minimum, contain the information required by Sec. 105.12.1210 (a) (2). Additional
information should be provided in a resubmittal as identified in the following review. (Must
be met in future submittals)
Comprehensive Plan Review
At 760 units on 79.3 gross acres, this concept meets the overall guided density of the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, which would require a range of units in each Future Land
Use Category as broken down below:
Net Acres
Proposed
Units
Proposed
Density
Proposed
Min – Max Units
HDR (8.01 – 15 units/ac) 39.2* 612 15.61 314 – 588
MDR (4.01 – 8 units/ac) 36.51 148 4.05 146 – 292
Total 78.22 760 9.72 460 – 880
*City Staff were advised by Met Council staff that the land to be dedicated as parkland to
the City must be netted out of the density figure. Therefore, additional adjustments to the
HDR/MDR boundaries and units are expected.
Site Size: 79.3 gross acres
Existing Zoning: Rural Transition (RT)
Proposed Zoning
District:
Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential
(HDR) with a Planned Unit Development Overlay (PUD)
Proposed Use(s): Multifamily and Single Family Residential
Use Classification: Multifamily is Permitted in HDR and Conditional in MDR, Single
Family is Permitted in both HDR and MDR.
Existing Land Use: Undeveloped Farmstead currently used as agricultural.
Adjacent Zoning
Designations:
North: Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Rural Transition (RT)
East: Rural Transition (RT)
South: Rural Transition (RT)
West: Rural Transition (RT)
Future Land Use: Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential
(HDR)
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
The proposed development will have to keep as close to the same amount of land guided
for each use as feasible. Specifically, the amount HDR land outside of the arterial ROW
along Manning cannot be reduced. This can be accomplished by a reduction of 2.51
acres from MDR and addition to the HDR. Units will need to be adjusted accordingly.
Land Uses
Rezoning will be required consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The concept plan
shows multiple land uses across the MDR and HDR zoning districts. Conformance can
be achieved through rezoning, a comprehensive plan amendment, and PUD. (Met)
Preliminary, and Final PUD
Any future submittal should address the requirements of the Planned Unit Development
Code Article XVIII.
PUD Minimum Requirements (Sec. 105.12.1150)
1. A PUD must include a minimum of five (5) acres (Met, total 79.3 acres)
2. For all PUDs, at least 20 percent of the project area not within street rights- of-way
shall be preserved as protected open space. (Not Met, total open space is
undefined, total open space can include the stormwater pond but it is not clear
how that and the parks will be a minimum 20% of the overall plat. If alternatives
to compliance are to be provided, this must be detailed in the narrative)
3. In newly developing areas, streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in
each cardinal direction, except where environmental or physical constraints make this
infeasible. All streets shall terminate at other streets, at public land, or at a park or
other community facility. (Met, See City Engineer’s comments on this issue)
PUD Identified Objectives (Sec. 105.12.1130)
When reviewing requests for approval of a planned unit development, the City shall
consider whether one or more of the objectives listed below will be served or achieved. It
is the responsibility of the applicant to provide a narrative of how the proposed planned
development meets one or more of the City's identified objectives 1 through 10. Planned
unit developments should not be allowed simply for the purpose of increasing overall
density or allowing development that otherwise could not be approved.
(It appears that multiple objectives are met, but the narrative should be revised to include this
assessment in future submittals)
1. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given
parcel than conventional approaches.
2. Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential,
commercial, and public facilities.
3. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses.
4. Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space,
recreational amenities, natural resource protection and other public facilities than
would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques.
5. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment
opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and emphasized to create additional
opportunities for lifecycle housing to all income and age groups.
6. Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through
careful and sensitive placement of buildings and facilities.
7. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility
within the development and surrounding land uses.
8. Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
on transportation, and/or the promotion of energy resource conservation.
9. Establishing measures to protect and preserve groundwater storage.
10. Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain
areas of the city and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be
achieved.
Urban Residential Zoning District Bulk Standards (Sec. 105.12.720)
Assumes HDR zoning for Lot A, Lot B, and Townhomes. MDR zoning assumed for Single
Family area to be consistent with comp plan.
Key: Met, Need Information, Not Met
Lot A - MFH Lot B – MFH Townhomes 55’ SFH Lots 65’ SFH Lots
Minimum Lot
Size
9.9 Acres 12.39 Acres 1800 Sq
Ft/Unit
7000 Sq Ft 7000 Sq Ft
Minimum Lot
Width
720’ 180’ 20’ 50’ 50’
Max Height 50’ 50’ 50’ 35’ 35’
Max Impervious 75% 75% 75% 50% 50%
FY – Setback 20’ 20’ 20’ 25’ 25’
SY - Setback 15’ 15’ 10’ 10’ 10’
RY - Setback * * 20’ 20’ 20’
* No rear yard areas on the triple fronted lots.
Development Standards for Multi-Family in HDR (Sec. 105.12.740)
1. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front facade and the
street. (Met on Lot B, not fully on Lot A)
2. Common open space for use by all residents or private open space adjacent to each
unit (as a courtyard or balcony) shall be provided. Such open space shall comprise a
minimum of 200 square feet per unit. (Need more information)
Structure Standards for Detached Accessory Structures in MDR & HDR (Sec.
105.12.760)
1. Detached accessory structures shall be located to the side or rear of the principal building, and
are not permitted within the required front yard or within a side yard abutting a street. (Need
more information)
2. Detached garages shall not exceed 1,000 square feet at ground floor level and shall not exceed
a height of 22 feet or the height of the principal structure, whichever is higher. The maximum
size and height may be increased upon approval of a conditional use permit, provided that lot
coverage requirements are satisfied. (Need more information)
3. Pole barns, as defined herein, exceeding 120 square feet shall be prohibited. (Met)
4. No more than 30 percent of the rear yard area may be covered by accessory structures. (Must
be met in future submittals)
5. shall not exceed 14 feet in height. (Must be met in future submittals)
Development Standards for Single-family attached (Townhomes) in MDR
(Sec.105.12.740)
1. A maximum of eight units shall be permitted within a single building. Buildings
with more than eight units may be allowed as conditional use. (Met, 6 unit
buildings)
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
a. Townhouses shall be located on lots in such a way that each individual
unit has a minimum of 15 feet of street frontage. No parking shall be
located in the front yard or between the front facade and the street. (Not
met, front loaded w/ driveways)
b. Townhouses that do not meet the minimum requirements for frontage
along a street or that have frontage along a private street may be allowed
as a conditional use. (Must be met in future submittals)
2. The primary entrance shall be located on the facade fronting a public street
unless the townhouses are approved as a conditional use under subsection
(g)(2)a of this section; an additional entrance may be provided on the rear or side
facade. (Met)
3. New housing types should be introduced in limited quantities to increase diversity
and housing choice, not to replace whole blocks of existing housing. Therefore,
no more than one-fourth of the lineal frontage of a developed block (measured
around the entire block perimeter) may be converted to townhouse units, and no
further townhouse, two-family or higher-density development is permitted once
this threshold is reached. (Met)
4. Townhouse units shall be designed to reflect the general scale and character of
existing buildings on surrounding blocks, including front yard depth, height and
roof pitch, primary materials, facade detailing and size and placement of window
and door openings. (Need more information in future submittals)
5. Common open space for use by all residents or private open space adjacent to each unit shall
be provided. Such open space shall comprise a minimum of 500 square feet per unit. (Need
more information in future submittals)
Development Standards for Single-family detached in MDR & HDR (Sec.105.12.740)
More information on the following will be required in future submittals:
1. Single-family detached dwellings, all urban residential districts. All single-family
dwellings shall be at least 24 feet in width, at least 960 square feet in area, and be
placed on a permanent foundation.
2. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front facade and the
street except on a permitted driveway.
3. The primary entrance shall be located on the facade fronting a public street.
Development Standards for Attached Garages in MDR & HDR (Sec.105.12.760)
More information on the following will be required in future submittals:
1. In all residential districts, the design and construction of any garage, carport, or storage building
shall be similar to or compatible with the design and construction of the main building. The
exterior building materials, roof style, and colors shall be similar to or compatible with the main
building or shall be commonly associated with residential construction.
2. The structure shall meet the required yard setbacks for a principal structure, as
established for the zoning district in which it is located;
3. The structure shall not exceed the height of the principal building to which it is attached;
4. Attached garages, urban residential districts.
a. Attached garages are encouraged to be side or rear loaded.
b. For single-family detached dwellings, the width of the visible garage door
area when closed shall not exceed 60 percent of the principal building
facade (including garage) fronting the primary street.
c. Attached garages shall not exceed 1,000 square feet in area at the ground
floor level except by conditional use permit.
d. Garage doors or openings shall not exceed 14 feet in height.
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
Mixed-use District Driveways (Section 9.16.090)
More information on the following will be required in future submittals:
1. Driveways must be consistent with all requirements of Section 9.16.090, a list of some relevant
standards follow:
a. Minimum width. All driveways shall have a minimum width of 12 feet.
b. Maximum width. All driveways shall have a maximum width of 26 feet within the public
right-of-way. In the absence of platted right-of-way, the setback at which point the
driveway width is measured shall be established by the prescriptive easement as
determined by the city engineer. Increased driveway width in the public right-of-way up to
commercial standard (34 feet) will be considered for active farms or agricultural
properties.
c. Curb cut. A curb cut must not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property
line by more than ten feet.
d. The minimum distance between curbs of driveways at the right-of-way line shall be ten
feet in any residential district. Lots that have been developed with zero lot line setbacks
may be exempt from this provision. In all other districts, the minimum distance shall be
20 feet.
e. No driveway or curb cut shall be less than 50 feet from any right-of-way line of any street
intersection,
f. All driveways shall connect to the public street at 90-degree angles, or must be approved
by the city engineer. Exceptions must demonstrate an inability to meet the 90-degree
angle due to extenuating circumstances.
g. A driveway must be at least five feet from any side lot line.
Off-Street Parking
Need more information, including proposed unit mix for all multi-family and townhome buildings, and
tabulation of interior and exterior parking counts for all multifamily and townhome buildings:
1. All off-street parking shall be in compliance with LEC 105.12.410 Off-Street Parking.
a. Multifamily/townhome parking requirements are 1 space per 1-bedroom unit
two spaces per 2-bedroom or larger unit. Single-family attached dwellings
shall provide an additional ten percent of parking spaces for visitor parking.
Multifamily dwellings shall also provide one visitor space per four units.
(Code likely not met on Lot B. A parking ratio of 1.36 stalls per unit is
shown on plans)
b. Single family detached dwellings must provide 2 spaces per dwelling unit.
(Need more Information)
c. Parking facilities for visitors shall be considered by the Development
regardless of whether uses are meeting parking requirements. Visitor
parking areas could be shared by the various residential uses for a more
efficient site design. (Code likely not met on Lot B)
Signage
Section 105.12.430 regulates signage. It is recommended that future submittals include
signage types, sizes, and locations for review against City requirements. More
information will be required in future submittals to assess conformance.
Screening
Section 105.12.480 requires screening between land uses differing in intensity. It is
anticipated that screening and buffering will be required between the proposed Front
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
Loaded townhomes proposed along the southern lot line and the future Business Park
and Commercial uses to the south. Depending on how land uses are transitioned across
the site, screening may be required internally. More information will be required in future
submittals to assess conformance.
Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards
The Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards apply. See chapter 2 for standards for
High and Medium Density Residential Development. Sidewalks are required on both sides
of all streets. Building designs throughout the development should be consistent, however,
variation of individual unit styles is encouraged. More information will be required in future
submittals to assess conformance.
Park Land Dedication
1. 10% of the land area is required for park land dedication.
2. The City’s Comprehensive Plan prioritizes trail connectivity. A trail (meeting park
dedication requirements) should be included north of 5th Street, north of Hudson
Avenue, west of Manning Avenue, and along Limerick Parkway. The existing 5th St
Trail is along the North side and there is a sidewalk on the south. This needs to be
continued through this development. Trail credit cannot exceed 25% of overall park
dedication.
3. This property is in the middle of a park search area in the City’s Comprehensive
Plan and identified as needing a neighborhood park. The two noncontiguous parks
will not satisfy the need of the community for parkland. A contiguous parcel of 2-4
acres should be provided which will allow the city to program as needed in the
future. Ideally this will be located along the north side of the stormwater pond for
easy central access or around 3rd St Ct. to combine with future development of the
adjacent parcel.
4. The Dog Park and Club House are considered as community amenities for the
residents and not considered to qualify as park land dedication.
5. After land dedication and any trail credit, staff will recommend that any remaining
parkland dedication obligation should be paid as a cash in lieu fee (acreage
requirement x fair market value).
Preliminary and Final Plat
Any Future submittal should address the requirements of LEC 103.00.090 and LEC
103.00.100. and LEC 103.00.140. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application
Requirements are also in the application checklist available on the city’s website.
Engineering
The City Engineer has provided comments in the attached memo dated November 25,
2023. There are noted issues with the alignment of proposed roads, timing of access
construction, stormwater management, provision of utilities, and other technical
comments to be addressed with preliminary plat submittal. (Detailed plans will be
required in future submittals)
Fire Department
The Lake Elmo Fire Chief provided comments in the attached memo dated November 22,
2023. All comments must be addressed with any future submittal.
Landscaping
The Lake Elmo Landscape Architect provided comments in the attached memo dated
August 8, 2023. A landscape plan and complete tree preservation plan needs to be
City of Lake Elmo • 3800 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042 • 651-747-3911
provided with any future submittal. All comments must be addressed with any future
submittal. Landscape plans shall also comply with Article VIII Environmental Performance
Standards and Design Guidelines previously referenced.
Washington County
The Washington County comment letter dated November 30, 2023 shall be addressed in
future submittals. Comments relating to access, potential noise impacts, drainage, and
permitting need to be adequately addressed by the developer.
Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD)
No comments received to date. Should we receive comments, they must be addressed with
any future submittal.
Required Next Steps
1. Sketch Plan for Staff Review,
2. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW),
3. Preliminary Plat, PUD, Comp Plan Amendment, & Rezoning applications,
4. Final Plat and PUD applications
Feel free to contact me with any questions about the City review of this concept or to discuss
any other matters regarding property improvements.
Nathan Fuerst
Consulting Planner
(612) 210-8150
Nathan.fuerst@bolton-menk.com
PAGE 1 of 4
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 13, 2023
To: Sophia Jensen, City Planner Re: Limerick Village Concept Plan
Cc: Jenni Faulkner, Planning Consultant PID 3602921420001 / 3602921410001
Dutin Kalis, Fire Chief
Chad Isakson, PE, Assistant City Engineer
From: Jack Griffin, PE, City Engineer
Engineering has reviewed the Limerick Village Concept Plan submitted by Maplewood Development. The review
consisted of the following documentation received on July 31, 2023:
Sketch Plan Narrative dated July 31, 2023.
Limerick Village Site Sketch Plan, Sheets 1‐6, dated July 28, 2023.
ALTA Survey dated June 21, 2021.
NON‐CONTIGUOUS DEVELOPMENT / PHASING PLANS
1. The development is being proposed as a noncontiguous development. As such the developer will be
responsible for the design and construction of all supporting public infrastructure both extending to the
site and within the proposed subdivision. A detailed public infrastructure plan should be prepared by the
applicant and reviewed and approved by the City prior to accepting a preliminary plat application.
2. Sanitary sewer must be extended and connect to the existing 24‐inch sanitary sewer located along
Hudson Boulevard on the east side of the Stillwater Bus facility. The extension must be completed as part
of the proposed subdivision improvements in accordance with the previously approved design for Four
Corners 2nd Addition. Sanitary sewer will need to be extended throughout the property in a manner that
will facilitate the future connection to sanitary sewer to Cimarron and the Oak‐Land Middle School.
3. Watermain must be extended to the site as part of the subdivision improvements with connections in two
locations such that the water system network is looped as part of the early phases of development. This
may require the developer to obtain easements from adjacent property owners to facilitate the project in
advance of contiguous development (see attached Watermain map).
4. Access to the Site is proposed from Manning Avenue in two locations. Secondary access will be required
once the development exceeds 30 units. Both the 5th Street access to Manning Avenue and the Hudson
Boulevard realignment with Manning Avenue will need to be constructed as part of the initial phases of
the development.
5. The alignment of Hudson Boulevard with 2nd Street will require the elimination of the existing Hudson
Boulevard intersection with Manning Avenue. These two intersections cannot coexist as active
intersections.
6. The installation of traffic signal(s) will be required as part of the Hudson Boulevard realignment with
Manning Avenue at 2nd Street and at the new intersection of Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) and 5th Street
North. Coordination will be required with Washington County for the construction and implementation of
the new traffic signal(s). A cost contribution should be required from the developer for traffic signal
improvements.
7. The proposed Limerick Parkway connection between 5th Street and the realigned Hudson Boulevard will
be required to be connected prior to the development exceeding 30 units to ensure primary and
secondary access to all developed parcels.
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4285
PAGE 2 of 4
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVMENTS, ACCESS AND COLLECTOR STREETS
1. Manning Avenue Right‐of‐way Dedication. Prior to the submittal of a preliminary plat application, the
existing right‐of‐way along Manning Avenue (CSAH15) must be fully detailed and any additional right‐of‐
way dedication, if any, must be shown in accordance with the right‐of‐way preservation requirements
from the Washington County Comprehensive Plan.
2. County Trail. The design and construction of a bituminous trail must be incorporated into the
development plans, extending along the full length of Manning Avenue (CSAH15) frontage.
3. Hudson Boulevard Realignment. As part of the development, Hudson Boulevard must be realigned to
move the existing Hudson Boulevard/Manning Avenue intersection north approximately 470 feet to align
with the existing Holiday Station driveway (2nd Street North). The concept plan shows the new
intersection at Manning Avenue but is silent in regards to the proposed phasing of this new intersection.
The full extent of the proposed project must be submitted for City review and will be considered part of
the subdivision improvements.
4. The project narrative indicates that the relocation of Hudson Boulevard at Manning Avenue (CSAH15) is
consistent with the Four Corners 2nd Addition Plans prepared by Larson Engineering. Based on the plans
submitted it is difficult to verify that no changes have been incorporated. Any plan submittal going
forward must include the Hudson Boulevard realignment plans as approved by the City will no deviations,
including lane configurations, clear zones, pedestrian facilities, turn lanes, and typical sections.
5. 5th Street North. Primary or secondary access for the development is shown with the construction of 5th
Street North. The 5th Street North collector roadway alignment is shown to be generally consistent with
the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Alignment details will need to be further evaluated and approved by the
City (and Washington County) prior to the submittal of a preliminary plat application. Additional plan
detail is required to review the proposed alignment at the north property line to verify that there are no
conflicts, including but not limited to conflicts with the existing overhead utilities. The alignment and
termination point at the westerly plat limits for the future extension of 5th Street North will need to be
coordinated with the adjacent property owner. Additional plan detail will also be required to show the
proposed 5th Street North typical sections, including turn lanes at each new intersection internal to the
subdivision. The 5th Street North typical sections will be required to be revised to be consistent with the
approved 5th Street North Engineering Design Standards.
6. Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) Traffic Signal/Turn Lane Improvements at 5th Street North and at Hudson
Boulevard. A traffic signal will be required at the new intersections with Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) and
turn lanes will be required along Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) at each new intersection. Coordination with
Washington County in regards to the timing and implementation of the new traffic signals will be
required. All future plan submittals will need to show the full extent of the County roadway
improvements.
7. Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) and 5th Street North Intersection. Washington County review of the proposed
intersection location will be required prior to submitting for preliminary plat, including turn lane
configuration requirements along both Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) and 5th Street North.
8. Pedestrian Improvements. The sketch plan must be revised to include the required trail and sidewalk
improvements along Hudson Boulevard, 5th Street North and Limerick Parkway. Sidewalks must also be
shown on both sides of residential roadways in median and high‐density residential areas.
RESIDENTIAL STREETS
1. All streets along single‐family units must be public streets and must meet the City’s Engineering Design
Standards including right‐of‐way width (66‐feet) and pavement width (32‐feet). Additional right‐of‐way
may be needed at intersections with Hudson Boulevard and 5th Street North to accommodate turn lanes.
2. All street intersections must be at 90 degrees and maintain 50‐ft of tangent with maximum longitudinal
slopes of 2.5%. Adequate tangents do not appear to be provided throughout the subdivision.
3. Surmountable concrete curb and gutter shall be installed in single family residential areas with future
driveways and B618 curb installed along entrance roadways and roadway stretches with no lots.
PAGE 3 of 4
4. Limerick Parkway. The design of Limerick Parkway should be constructed to a width of 32 ft. (FOC‐FOC)
with an 8‐ft. trail along one side and a 6‐ft. sidewalk on the other (similar to Village Parkway in the Easton
Village and Northport subdivisions).
5. All public streets must be reconfigured to maintain the physical street centerline at the centerline of the
right‐of‐way.
6. A 10‐foot utility corridor easement must be provided for small utilities along both sides of all public right‐
of‐way. The 10‐ft D+U corridors must be reserved for the installation of small/dry utilities and must
remain free from all encroachments, including retaining walls, trees, fences, signs/monuments, and must
maintain standard 4% boulevard grading.
7. It appears that the Apartment Units and 20‐unit Townhomes are proposed to be fronted by private
streets. Prior to receipt of a preliminary plat application, the private street design details should be
presented and accepted by City staff, including off‐street parking requirements, minimum allowable
street widths, hydrant locations, and snow storage locations.
8. The private street design details must also show the proposed layout for sanitary sewer, public
watermain, and small/dry utilities. Watermain easement locations must be shown at 30‐ft. wide centered
over the pipe and dedicated corridors for small/dry utilities must be shown with no encroachments to the
easements with the exception of 90‐degree crossings.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
1. The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, Valley Branch Watershed
District (VBWD) and City rules. Storm water facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and
VBWD permitting requirements must be constructed in accordance to City Engineering Design Standards.
2. The sketch plan proposes to provide a local/regional stormwater management pond/infiltration basin of
approximately 10 acres near the center of the site. The application narrative also makes reference to the
use of an infiltration bench. As the site design evolves it will be important to create a design with
separate “wet pond(s)” and “infiltration basin(s)” as the City no longer allows infiltration benches as an
approved BMP design.
3. Soil borings must be obtained for all proposed infiltration basins in the number and depth as outlined in
the City Engineering Design Standards and submitted as part of any preliminary plat application for the
application to be deemed complete. Design infiltration rates must be based on the recommendations
informed from only the borings taken within the basin footprint.
4. Rate and volume control requirements must be met for all points of discharge from the site.
5. All storm water BMPs must be placed in Outlots. The stormwater facility Outlots must fully incorporate
the 100‐year HWL, 10‐foot maintenance benches and all BMP maintenance access roads. Maintenance
access roads meeting City standards must be provided for all storm water facilities.
6. Overland emergency overflow elevations and pathways are required and must be utilized for all
stormwater ponding while maintaining 1‐foot minimum separation between structure low opening
elevation and the overland EOF.
7. The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3.0 feet.
Drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at all localized low points in the street.
Drain tile considerations may impact the storm sewer design and depth requirements at low points.
8. Per City requirements all storm sewer pipe easements must be a minimum 30‐feet in width. No structure
or patio encroachments are allowed within the storm sewer easements.
9. Storm water ponding adjacent to roadway corridors may not encroach the right‐of‐way or small utility
easement corridors along either side of all right‐of‐way.
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
1. Municipal water supply is not readily available to the site. Watermain must be extended to the site as part
of the subdivision improvements with connections in two locations such that the water system network is
looped as part of the early phases of development. This may require the developer to obtain easements
from adjacent property owners to facilitate the project in advance of contiguous development (see
attached Watermain map).
PAGE 4 of 4
2. Watermain distribution lines and connections will be required wherever reasonably possible to create a
looped network throughout the proposed subdivision and as the project is phased.
3. A watermain stub will be required to extend to the western plat boundary for future (or initial subdivision
improvements) extension along 5th Street North. Watermain will also need to be stubbed to the northern
plat boundaries at Limerick Parkway and potentially 3rd Street Ct N.
4. The developer will be responsible to place hydrants and water system valves internal to the site as
determined by the Lake Elmo Public Works Director and Fire Department.
5. Minimum 30‐foot easements centered over the pipe/hydrant will be required when not located within
the public right‐of‐way. Easements must be free from all encroachments, including retaining walls, trees,
fences, small/dry utilities, or storm water management BMPs. Easements must be dedicated to the city as
part of the plat. Dedicated watermain easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility, and
landscape plans when submitting a Preliminary and Final Plat application.
MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER
1. Municipal sanitary sewer is not readily available to serve this site. Sanitary sewer must be extended to the
site from the existing 24‐inch sanitary sewer located along Hudson Boulevard on the east side of the
Stillwater Bus facility. The extension must be completed as part of the proposed subdivision
improvements in accordance with the previously approved design for Four Corners 2nd Addition.
2. The developer will be responsible to extend sanitary sewer service to the site and throughout the
development at the developer’s sole cost to service each platted lot/parcel. A sanitary sewer main must
also be stubbed to the plat limits for future extension by each adjacent parcel, including Cimarron and the
Oak‐Land Middle School.
3. All public sanitary sewer mains placed within the development will require minimum 30‐foot easements
centered over the pipe/structure and be dedicated to the city as part of the final plat, if not located within
a public right‐of‐way. Dedicated utility easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility, and
landscape plans, and remain free from encroachments, including retaining walls, trees, fences, small/dry
utilities, or storm water management BMPs.
PUBLIC WORKS
Wayne Sandberg, P.E., Director, County Engineer
Frank D. Ticknor, P.E., Deputy Director
November 30, 2023
Sophia Jensen
City Planner
City of Lake Elmo
3880 Laverne Avenue
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Comments on Revised Limerick Village Sketch Plan
Dear Sophia,
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the sketch plan for the Limerick Village located
along CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue). We are grateful for the City of Lake Elmo’s partnership in ensuring the
safety and mobility of our County transportation system. Our development review team has reviewed
the resubmitted sketch plan proposal dated 11-17-2023 and offers the following comments.
CSAH 15 at this location is currently classified as an “A-Minor Expander” roadway. The Washington
County 2040 Comprehensive Plan contains access criteria for county roads related to spacing, sight lines,
and availability of local road connections. CSAH 15 requires preserving 180 feet of right-of-way for this
portion of CSAH 15. The site plan will need to show the right-of-way measurements in more detail to
ensure that it meets the needs identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
The development proposes accessing CSAH 15 at 5th Street N and 2nd Street N. These locations are in
conformance with the county’s access location guidelines. Access permits will be needed for the
construction of new street connections within the county right-of-way. Both access points are potential
candidates for traffic signals or roundabouts, either in the future or potentially upon opening.
Construction of such intersection improvements would be subject to “Washington County Cost
Participation Policy #8001 for Cooperative Highway Improvement Projects”, which can be found here:
https://www.co.washington.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/54003/Cost-Policy, including city cost for any
necessary changes to city-owned approach roadways. We would recommend a brief meeting with city
staff to discuss various lane configuration scenarios and traffic signal cost-share agreements to ensure
that the City’s and County’s interests are reflected in the development street plan.
Washington County access spacing guidelines for minor arterial roads is ¼ of a mile. The proposed
development access and the existing access to Oak-Land Middle School are approximately ¼ of a mile
apart. The City should work with the developer and the property owner to the north to plan for future
access into the northern parcel from the proposed 5th Street, as no additional access points to Manning
Avenue north of 5th Street would be allowed by the County.
The plans should identify trail connections within the site and along CSAH 15. Trails should connect to
future subdivisions to the north, Hudson Road, and Oak-Land Middle School, with a trail connection
through Cimarron to the northwest or directly west to connect to CSAH 17.
Washington County's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use
and highways. Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic
noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S.
Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for
taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area
Classification (NAC), where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established
noise standards. Minnesota Statute 116.07, Subpart 2a exempts County Roads and County State Aid
Highways from noise thresholds. County policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways
prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The developer should assess
the noise situation and take any action outside of County right of way deemed necessary to minimize the
impact of any highway noise.
A right-of-way permit will be required for any work within the County highway right of way as it relates
to the development. As the development progresses, a plan set will be required with the application and
include any grading, culvert installation, water and sewer services, parallel trail development, signage,
and any landscaping and other improvements within the County right of way. A temporary access permit
will be needed for access to Manning for site grading purposes, even if an existing access point is being
repurposed for such use.
Additionally, the developer or the City will need to submit a drainage report and calculations for review
of any downstream impacts to the county drainage system. Along with the drainage calculations, we will
request written conclusions that the volume and rate of stormwater run-off into the county right of way
will stay the same as part of the project. Confirmation that the developments stormwater plan meets all
watershed requirements will be required prior to any permit approvals.
All utility connections to County highway right of way for the development require Washington County
Right of Way permits. Typically, these utility connection permits are the responsibility of the utility
companies.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments on the revised sketch plan for Limerick Village.
We look forward to continuing to work with the City of Lake Elmo to ensure that development in this
area is successful and well-served by the transportation network.
A great place to live, work and play…today and tomorrow
Government Center | 14949 62nd Street North | P. O. Box 6 | Stillwater, MN 55082-0006
P: 651-430-6001 | F: 651-430-6017 | TTY: 651-430-6246
www.co.washington.mn.us
Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer
If you have any questions, please get in touch with me at 651-430-4307 or
daniel.elder@co.washington.mn.us
Sincerely,
Daniel Elder
Planner II
Cc (email only):
Wayne Sandberg, Public Works Director/County Engineer
Frank Ticknor, Deputy Director Public Works
Lyssa Leitner, Public Works Planning Director
Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer
Kevin Peterson, Design Engineer
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education
1
August 9, 2023
Sophia Jensen, City Planner
City of Lake Elmo, MN
Re: Sketch Plan Review of PID: 3602921410001 and 3602921420001 aka “Limerick Village” a 725 residential
unit development.
Prepared by: Anthony Svoboda, Fire Marshal
Approved by: Dustin Kalis, Fire Chief
Applicable Codes:
2020 Minnesota State Fire Code
Lake Elmo Fire Department Fire Code Policies
NFPA 13D, 2016 edition
Fire Department Comments:
1) All roads and drive lanes shall meet the Lake Elmo Fire Department requirements for widths and
turning radiuses.
2) Approved fire apparatus roads shall be provided and maintained throughout all development phases in
coordination with engineering, public works, planning, and fire departments.
3) Project construction phasing shall accommodate emergency access to the entire construction zone at
all times, generally meaning two separate means of entrance/exit as defined in the code. Phasing plan
to be approved by the fire department prior to construction.
4) An approved signage and marking plan shall be determined for all No Parking and Fire Lane access
roads. On- street parking shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and
Public Works. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of private drive lanes.
5) Street names and addressing shall be consistent with the Washington County Uniform Street Naming
and Property Numbering System. Street names proposed on document “Site Sketch – 2023-0728”
appear consistent with the county naming convention and are acceptable to the Fire Department.
6) Fire hydrants shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and Public
Works.
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education
2
7) Building address numbers shall be plainly visible from the street fronting the property and shall
contrasting color from the background. Size and placement of address numbers shall be approved by
the fire and planning departments.
8) Fire sprinkler systems shall be installed in the townhome buildings compliant with provisions of 2016
NFPA Standard 13D, Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two-Family Dwellings or IRC P2904.
City permit required prior to initiation of work.
The fire department recommends the installation of fire sprinkler systems within the twin homes in
order to achieve the same level of life safety protection within the development.
Questions, clarifications, or the request to provide code documents can be made using the contact
information listed below.
Respectfully,
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
800 Washington Ave. N., Suite 103
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 www.hkgi.com
Creating Places that Enrich People’s Lives
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sophia Jensen
FROM: Jody Rader, PLA
DATE: 8/8/2023
RE: City of Lake Elmo Sketch Plan Review | Limerick Village
Limerick Village
Submittals
1. Limerick Village Sketch Plan, dated 7/28/23, received 8/2/23
Review History
Initial sketch plan review on August 8, 2023
Location: 79.4 acres west of Manning Avenue N, south of 10th St. N, north of I-94,
east of Lake Elmo Avenue N (former site of Lake Elmo Sod Farm)
Current Land Use Category: Rural Transitional (RT)
Adjacent and Surrounding Land Use: Rural Transitional (RT) to the northeast, Medium Density
Residential (MDR) to the northwest, Rural Transitional (RT) to the west and south. Future Land Use is
guided for Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential
Special Landscape Provisions in addition to the zoning code: None
Tree Preservation: 105. 12. 470
• A tree preservation plan will need to be submitted that meets code, including, but not limited to:
o A tree inventory showing the quantity, size, species, health, and location of all significant
trees in graphic and tabular form.
o Listing of healthy significant trees to remain and to be removed
o Delineation of all areas to be graded and limits of land disturbance along with proposed
structures and impervious surfaces
o Tree protection measures
o Size, species, number and location of replacement trees
Landscape Requirements: 105. 12. 480
• A landscape plan will need to be submitted that meets code, including, but not limited to:
o The location, size, quantity, and species of all existing and proposed plant materials
City of Lake Elmo Sketch Plan Review – Limerick Village – August 8, 2023
2
o Structural and ground cover materials
o Provisions for irrigation
o Details and cross sections of all required screening
o The required number of trees
o The minimum tree composition requirements
o Screening requirements
o All landscape materials shall be guaranteed for two years
General Notes
• The existing site has very few trees today. The sketch plan appears to show opportunity to
preserve a few remaining trees in the northeast area of the site. Preservation of as many healthy
and significant trees as possible is encouraged.
o Note the allowable tree removal (105.12.470 (c) (5) states that up to 30% of the diameter
inches of significant trees on any parcel of land being developed, redeveloped, graded or
proposed for construction activity may be removed without having to adhere to the tree
replacement requirements.
o Healthy and/or significant mature trees could potentially be transplanted as part of the
Tree Preservation and Landscape Plans.
• Note the interior and perimeter parking lot landscape requirements as listed in 105.12.480 (d) and
(e).
o As shown in the sketch plan, there are smaller lots proposed surrounding the multi-family
areas, as well as a larger parking area to complete the parking matrix. Trees should be
planted per Table 6-2.
o Note that parking areas must be screened from public streets, sidewalks, and adjacent
residential properties via a landscaped frontage strip that includes a 3.5'-4’ tall screen and
trees at least every 50 linear feet.
• Note the screening requirements as listed in 105.12.480 (f) for adjacencies to less intensive uses.
The parcel to the west is guided for Residential Single Family (RSF), which is lower intensity than
the proposed development.
Recommendation:
• Prepare and submit tree preservation and landscape plans that meet code requirements.
Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc.
Jody Rader, PLA (MN)
City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect
P: (612) 220-8990
E: jody@hkgi.com