HomeMy WebLinkAbout#21 - Kramer Lake Overlook1
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 5/7/2024
Item#:
Motion
TO: City Council
FROM: Nathan Fuerst, AICP, Consulting Planner
AGENDA ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Amendment – Kramer Lake Overlook
REVIEWED BY: Sophia Jensen, City Planner
Jason Stopa, Community Development Director
Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
BACKGROUND:
The City is in receipt of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment application from Tamarack Land
Development for the proposed development on parcels north and west of Hudson Boulevard North
and Lake Elmo Avenue North. The proposed development is currently in concept form. It would
consist of 92 twin home units, 307 multiple family units across 2 buildings, and 60,000 square feet
of commercial space. The development is proposed to be connected to city water and sewer and
surrounds the property at 10746 3rd Street Place occupied by Pet Images Resort. No
improvements to the Pet Images site are proposed as a part of this project. The Applicant aims to
receive entitlements and begin work in 2025.
The Applicant requested a sketch plan review in 2022 and provided a modified plan again in 2023
for concept plan review. The Lake Elmo City Council most recently reviewed this item at its
December 12, 2023 workshop. Feedback was provided to the Applicant relating to the flexibility
that would be required through an eventual shoreland variances and a Planned Unit Development.
concern was noted for flexibilities to the Shoreland Density. The Applicant has not addressed
these concerns.
The development property is already located within the City’s Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA), however, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Map 3-7 is required for this area to be
developed within the decade between 2020 and 2030. The property is currently in the 2030-2040
development period on Map 3-7, the City’s MUSA Growth & Phasing Plan. Hence a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required.
ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION:
The City Council should make a determination on the Applicant’s request for a Comprehensive
Plan amendment.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Tamarack Land Development,
Property Owner: Gene & Ann Peltier
Location: Parcel Northwest of intersection of Hudson Avenue N. and Lake Elmo Avenue N.
2
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
PID#s: 3502921430001 & 3502921440012
Deadline: Application Completed – 11/3/2023
60 Day Deadline – 01/02/24
Extension Letter – 11/13/2023
120 Day Deadline – 03/02/2024
Developer 90-day extension request – 01/11/2024
Review Deadline – 05/31/2024
ANALYSIS:
Land Use Guidance Overview
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Guidance – Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C)
• Required Residential Density 10 – 15 Units / Net Acre
• Existing MUSA Growth & Phasing Period – 2030-2040
Zoning District
• Existing – Rural Transition
• Requested – Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C)
• Located in Shoreland Overlay
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan MUSA Map 3-7, MUSA Phasing & Growth Plan does not show
this area of the City developing until the time period between 2030-2040. The reason for the
planned phasing of the area bound by Keats, 10th St. N, and Lake Elmo Avenue is generally
because the area will be difficult to serve with public utilities. Required utility connections and
alignments create a need for broad coordination amongst current and future property owners in
this area.
The Comprehensive Plan states the following regarding Map 3-7:
Map 3-7 identifies four staging areas consistent with existing and planned water,
wastewater and transportation infrastructure. The City acknowledges that market
conditions, as well as other external impacts may influence exactly where and when
development occurs, and this map is intended to signal to the City that it must evaluate its
infrastructure with respect to timing and development approvals. This is particularly
important in the last phase denoted as post-2035. Property within this staging area should
be monitored for capacity and potential improvements based on actual development in
earlier phasing periods.
The City has sewer capacity to serve areas within the MUSA and plans to serve the property and
the surrounding parcels within the time horizon of the 2040 plan. Importantly, this site
development should not create a condition where the site is served by City utilities but the
property that it surrounds (Pet Images Resort) is not. The Applicant has not indicated how the
utility extension and required Hudson Boulevard improvements will be addressed.
However, the decision to change or amend the Comprehensive Plan is a policy matter for the City.
Any change to the Comprehensive Plan should be based on findings that show the change would
be consistent with the goals and policies of the City.
3
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
Development Timeline:
The following timeline has been estimated and submitted by the Applicant.
Date Activity
April 22, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting for Comp Plan Amendment
May 7, 2024 City Council Meeting for Comp Plan Amendment
May 10, 2024 Start update on EAW
June 2024 Submit EAW to City for review.
July 2024 Submit EAW for publication.
November 2024 EAW Approval
December 2024 Preliminary plat submittal
March/April 2025 Preliminary Plat Approvals
May 2025 Final Plat Approvals
June 2025 Site Construction
October 2025 Apartment Building Construction starts.
January 2026 1st Residential Single-Family lot sales
February 2026 1st Residential Single-Family homes start construction.
August 2026 1st Single-Family occupancy
Summer/Fall 2027 Apartment construction complete
Spring 2029 Final residential occupancy
Environmental Review Required
The number of attached units (399) in this residential development is over the threshold (375)
triggering for a Mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) established by
Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300. The City must determine that further review of the project
through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary. This must occur prior to
approval of the subdivision. It is not typical to accept a subdivision application as complete until
after the environmental review process has concluded.
Entitlements Required:
Staff have reviewed the concept level plan against the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the
City’s Zoning and Subdivision standards. The density of the property appears to meet the
requirements of the Comprehensive Plan but not the City’s Shoreland Overlay District, which will
necessitate shoreland variances.
The following approvals will be required for this project to be permitted:
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment – An amendment to the development period for the
subject parcels on Map 3-7 in the City’s Comprehensive Plan is required.
2. Mandatory Environmental Review – The number of attached units (399) in this residential
development is over the threshold (375) triggering for a Mandatory Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) established by Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300.
3. Rezone – From Rural Transition (RT) to Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C).
4. Major Subdivision – Required by the City’s ordinance to subdivide the property and allow
for dedication of easements and Rights of Way.
5. Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Provide flexibility to allow the developer to deviate
from the City Code requirements of the base zoning district, Mixed Use Commercial.
6. Variance(s) to Shoreland Overlay – Flexibility to requirements of the City’s Shoreland
Overlay Ordinance cannot be granted through a PUD. It is possible that flexibility to
4
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
requirements such as density, building height, or impervious surface could be requested. If
needed, flexibility must be granted through the variance process.
Planned Unit Development Flexibility Requests
It is likely that the Applicant will require flexibility to City standards, the flexibilities that will
ultimately be requested are not known at this time. It appears that the multifamily building parcels
will be smaller than required by City Code.
Shoreland Variances
Flexibility to the City’s Shoreland Overlay requirements may only be granted through a variance
review. The following variances to the City’s ordinance are anticipated with the concept layout
currently on file:
• Maximum Tiered Density – There are too many twinhome units within each of the three
tiers. With a maximum density bonus of 20 percent applied to each tier, the proposed units
exceed the maximum permitted by the Shoreland PUD ordinance.
• Minimum Setback for Twin Home – Proposed twinhomes do not meet the minimum
setback which is increased from 200 to 250 feet for PUDs with shoreland preservation.
• Impervious Surface – Each platted lot within the shoreland district must be under 30
percent impervious. A majority of the twinhome lots do not appear to comply with this
requirement.
Next Steps if Approved:
If approved, the Applicant will seek to initiate the EAW process with the project as currently
shown in the proposed concept. If the environmental review is completed, and the project changes,
the environmental review process may need to be repeated.
Next Steps if Denied:
The 2050 Comprehensive Plan will be due to the Metropolitan Council in December of 2028. The
City will likely be evaluating development and development potential city wide as part of that
update. It is possible the Comprehensive Plan land use or MUSA timeframe may be updated by
the City by then. If no changes are made in 2028, the Applicant could come forward on January 1,
2030 to request the development to occur on the site. At which time, the City will make a
determination if the site is ready to be developed and proper infrastructure readily available. If the
City determines the project may be more desirable if modified, the Applicant could seek to change
the project plans and reapply.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the Applicant’s requests has no fiscal impact to the City at this time. Subdivision
entitlement review will be required along with a Development Agreement which will detail public
improvements and address fiscal impacts. When developed, the property will have urban services
and will require associated development fees.
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS:
The decision to change or amend the Comprehensive Plan is a policy matter for the City.
However, at this time, staff is recommending that the City deny this proposed Comprehensive
Plan Amendment. The City Council has recently approved only two modifications to Map 3-7.
One time for the North Star development, which had already received final plat approval. The
other time that approval was granted was in order to allow the proposed Lake Elmo Elementary to
move forward. In that case, the parcel the school was to be located was not in the MUSA, and the
change brought it into the MUSA. Staff therefore propose the following findings:
5
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Findings.
1. That the Applicant has submitted a request to the City to amend the Comprehensive Plan in
accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and the
Lake Elmo Planning Commission and Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355; and
2. That the Request is to amend the MUSA Phasing and Growth Plan, Map 3-7 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan in order to allow development of the Property prior to the year 2030 (within
the decade between 2020 and 2030); and
3. The Property is within the City’s MUSA boundary and currently guided by the City’s adopted
2040 Comprehensive Plan to develop after the year 2030. This is because the area bound by
Keats, 10th Street N. and Lake Elmo Avenue (which includes the Property) will be difficult to
serve with public utilities. Required utility connections and alignments create a need for broad
coordination amongst current and future property owners in the area; and
4. Feedback was provided by the City to the Applicant relating to the flexibility that would be
required to be sought through eventual variances. For example, the proposed number of twin
home units will exceed the maximum permitted by the City’s shoreland planned unit
development ordinance, even when the density bonuses are applied. The proposed twin homes
also do not meet minimum setbacks required by the City’s shoreland planned unit development
ordinance, which provides for flexibility. In addition, a majority of the twin home lots do not
comply with the 30 percent impervious surface requirement in the City’s Shoreland District.
5. That the Request is to allow a development in 2020-2030 which is 10 years prior to the year
2030, which is when the Comprehensive Plan allows for the Property to be developed.
6. The reason for the Property not being able to be developed until at least 2030 is because the
Applicant will need to ask for flexibility with respect to the City’s shoreland overlay ordinance
through variances. Even though the City has provided the Applicant with these concerns, the
Applicant has not provided information as to how these concerns will be addressed.
7. The Property is difficult to serve with public utilities and will require broad coordination
amongst current and future property owners in the area, most of which are not prepared to
develop at this time. Furthermore, the City does not wish to create a situation where the Property
is served by City utilities but the property that it surrounds is not. The Applicant also has not
indicated how the utility extension and required Hudson Boulevard improvements will be
addressed.
8. It is not in the best interest of the City to amend its Comprehensive Plan that would allow for a
development that will not be able to meet the requirements of the City’s Shoreland Overlay
ordinance and variances or a planned unit development will not be able to provide the necessary
flexibilities.
6
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
WATER APPROPRIATIONS:
Staff acknowledge concerns regarding water appropriations. The City does have the ability to
approve or deny requests for comprehensive plan amendments but must make findings which
consider the goals and vision of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
The impacts of the proposed development on this site are not specifically known at this time.
Those impacts could be reviewed with greater detail at the time of an EAW.
The City’s “premature subdivision” ordinance is found in LEC 103.00.025, however, since the
Applicant is not proposing a subdivision, that section does not provide guidance on the findings
relevant to a denial of a comprehensive plan amendment. The City Attorney has advised that the
City treat developments consistently concerning the water issue.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Affected Jurisdictions:
As required with Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the City provided adjacent and affected
jurisdictions with an opportunity, beginning on November 8, 2023 to provide a comment on the
request. The following adjacent and affected jurisdictions were identified, with comments
summarized:
• Woodbury – Noted No Comments
• Mn DOT – Noted No Comments
• Mn DNR – No Comments Received
• West Lakeland Township – No Comments Received
• Valley Branch Watershed District – Recommendation not to approve Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, and to consider more vertical development to meet the required density
range. This is due to anticipated adverse impacts of impervious surfaces on ground and
surface water resources.
Public Hearing:
A public hearing notice has been mailed to surrounding properties and posted in the City’s
newspaper of record. One written comment was received at the time of writing and is appended to
the report. The Planning Commission held the public hearing at its regular meeting on April 22,
2024. Two residents spoke in favor of denial during the hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
Comprehensive Plan Amendments require a two-thirds vote of the City Council to be approved.
Two-thirds of a five member City Council is four members voting in favor of the amendment.
However, pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 462.355, amendments that would permit affordable
housing only require a simple majority, or 3/5 vote.
The City Council should discuss the request and make a decision supported by findings of fact.
Approval or denial must be provided by May 31, 2024.
Planning Commission Discussion
At its regular meeting on April 22, 2024, The City’s Planning Commission reviewed the item,
held the public hearing, and discussed the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
Planning Commission also received a presentation from the Applicant. The Planning Commission
discussed challenges relating to development within the shoreland overlay. Ultimately, the
7
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949622.v2-4/26/24
Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by
the Applicant.
Staff is suggesting a recommendation to deny based on the findings listed above which were
discussed and recommended by the Planning Commission. One finding, number seven, has been
amended to remove the reference to City utilities. Staff have further clarified that roadway
infrastructure is the primary concern with respect to public infrastructure, and that it has not been
clear that the improvements required to Hudson Boulevard North would be done by this project.
Example Motion Recommending Denial:
“Motion to adopt Resolution 2024-XXX 060 denying the request of Tamarack Land Development
for a Comprehensive Plan amendment with the findings therein.”
ATTACHMENTS:
• Application Materials – Narrative and Concept
• Resolution 2024-XXX 060 Denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request
• Valley Branch Watershed District Comments
• Written Public Comment
• December 12, 2023 Sketch Plan Review Staff Report – Link Only
• Lake Elmo 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Link Only
1
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949553.v2-4/26/24
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-060
RESOLUTION DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR
KRAMER LAKE OVERLOOK
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo (the “City”) is a municipal corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City has established a Comprehensive Plan that includes background
data, policy statements, standards, and maps that help to guide the future physical, social, and
economic development of the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 11, 2023, Tamarack Land Development (the “Applicant”)
submitted a complete application for an amendment to Map 3-7 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan
(the “Request”) for the Kramer Lake Overlook development on the property legally described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, a public hearing notice was published, mailed, and posted pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Sections 462.355; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 22,
2024, to review and consider the Request; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and
recommendations with respect to the Request to the City Council as part of the City Staff
Memorandum dated May 7, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Preliminary Plat at its May 7, 2024, meeting
and makes the following findings of fact:
1. That the Applicant has submitted a request to the City to amend the Comprehensive Plan in
accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and the
Lake Elmo Planning Commission and Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355; and
2. That the Request is to amend the MUSA Phasing and Growth Plan, Map 3-7 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan in order to allow development of the Property prior to the year 2030
(within the decade between 2020 and 2030); and
3. The Property is within the City’s MUSA boundary and currently guided by the City’s adopted
2040 Comprehensive Plan to develop after the year 2030. This is because the area bound by
Keats, 10th Street N. and Lake Elmo Avenue (which includes the Property) will be difficult to
2
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949553.v2-4/26/24
serve with public utilities. Required utility connections and alignments create a need for broad
coordination amongst current and future property owners in the area; and
4. Feedback was provided by the City to the Applicant relating to the flexibility that would be
required to be sought through eventual variances. For example, the proposed number of twin
home units will exceed the maximum permitted by the City’s shoreland planned unit
development ordinance, even when the density bonuses are applied. The proposed twin homes
also do not meet minimum setbacks required by the City’s shoreland planned unit development
ordinance, which provides for flexibility. In addition, a majority of the twin home lots do not
comply with the 30 percent impervious surface requirement in the City’s Shoreland District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT based on the above findings of fact, the
City Council does hereby deny the Applicant’s Request for an amendment to the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. The City Council’s denial of the Request is for the following reasons:
1. That the Request is to allow a development in 2020-2030 which is 10 years prior to the
year 2030, which is when the Comprehensive Plan allows for the Property to be developed.
2. The reason for the Property not being able to be developed until at least 2030 is because
the Applicant will need to ask for flexibility with respect to the City’s shoreland overlay ordinance
either through variances. Even though the City has provided the Applicant with these concerns,
the Applicant has not provided information as to how these concerns will be addressed.
3. The Property is difficult to serve with public utilities and will require broad coordination
amongst current and future property owners in the area, most of which are not prepared to develop
at this time. Furthermore, the City does not wish to create a situation where the Property is served
by City utilities but the property that it surrounds is not. The Applicant also has not indicated how
the utility extension and required Hudson Boulevard improvements will be addressed.
4. It is not in the best interest of the City to amend its Comprehensive Plan that would allow
for a development that will not be able to meet the requirements of the City’s Shoreland Overlay
ordinance and variances or a planned unit development will not be able to provide the necessary
flexibilities.
3
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949553.v2-4/26/24
Passed and duly adopted this 7th day of May, 2024, by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
___________________________________
Mayor Charles Cadenhead
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
4
DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949553.v2-4/26/24
Resolution 2024-____
Exhibit A
Legal Description of the Property
KRAMER LAKE OVERLOOK
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
LAKE ELMO, MN
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
UPDATED APRIL 8, 2024
The Gene and Anne Peltier Trust as property owners and Tamarack Land Development as Developer request
an amendment to Lake Elmo’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Our request is to move the MUSA Development
Growth time frame for these parcels located in the NW Quadrant of Lake Elmo Blvd and Hudson Road up to
2024 from 2030.
The Kramer Lake Overlook Mixed-Use Development project is proposed on approximately 57 acres of land on
the south-central border of the City of Lake Elmo in Washington County. The project will include 92 single -
family twin homes, one 121-unit multi-family apartment building and one 186 multi-family apartment
building, and 60,000 square feet of commercial space. Development of the project area will include
installation of public and private infrastructure including streets, municipal water and sanitary sewer,
stormwater systems, electrical, gas, and telephone lines, as well as mass grading, stormwater management
practices, and new home construction. Hudson Road will also be upgraded to current design standards and
will include a multi-use path along the project frontage.
The proposed development will also require a change in zoning from Rural Transitional to Mixed Use
Commercial. This zoning change is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan zoning guidelines.
This development supports the goals of the comprehensive plan that relates to land development. We are:
• Developing an area for new businesses
• Installing municipal infrastructure at this site allowing future extensions to the west
o Land owner sold to the city, at a reduced price, land to construct the new water tower
which is now fully constructed.
• Providing trails and improving Hudson Road
• Preserving view sheds and maintaining open spaces
• Adapting the site plan to meet the changing guidance of staff and zoning regulations
• Providing mixed housing stock
• Providing affordable housing, a significant increase over what currently exists
The 57-acre site is situated within the Kramer Lake Shoreland Overlay zone. Thirty-one acres falls within this
zone. The residential portion of this project has a density requirement of 10 units per acre. This requires
approximately 385 residential units. The proposed site plan meets this density requirement and complies with
several of the restrictive codes such as reduced unit densities per Shoreland Tiers, Increased buffer zones,
lower limits of impervious surface and lower building heights. To fully comply with the density requirements
of this zoning district, a PUD may be the best solution.
Granting this amendment request will help the City of Lake Elmo get closer to its goals of housing diversity and
affordability much sooner. As it stands today,” young people starting out their careers are distinctly missing
from the community because there are few, if any, options for them to live affordably in the community”
(Comp Plan page 4-17). Approval will also allow this development to move forward through the city’s
approval process. It is the goal of the property owners to sell the property once the developer obtains city
and other jurisdictional approvals. It is the developer’s goal to start construction in 202 5.
We hope the Planning Commission and City Council take into consideration the timing of this development.
Below is a schedule. If everything falls into place, full occupancy at this development w ill not happen until the
Spring of 2029 at the earliest.
Schedule
Date Activity
April 22, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting for Comp Plan Amendment
May 7, 2024 City Council Meeting for Comp Plan Amendment
May 10, 2024 Start update on EAW
June 2024 Submit EAW to City for review.
July 2024 Submit EAW for publication.
November 2024 EAW Approval
December 2024 Preliminary plat submittal
March/April 2025 Preliminary Plat Approvals
May 2025 Final Plat Approvals
June 2025 Site Construction
October 2025 Apartment Building Construction starts.
January 2026 1st Residential Single-Family lot sales
February 2026 1st Residential Single-Family homes start construction.
August 2026 1st Single-Family occupancy
Summer/Fall 2027 Apartment construction complete
Spring 2029 Final residential occupancy
The actual growth acceleration is between 1 and 3 years. Tamarack requests approval of the comp plan
amendment such that we can continue to complete the predevelopment work and submit for the preliminary
plat process at the end of this year. The above schedule does not include the retail/commercial component of
this development. Depending upon the market conditions, the ultimate buildout of this portion of the project
could go beyond 2030.
From:
To:Julie Johnson; Sophia Jensen
Subject:Public Comment for comp plan amendment, Kramer Lake, April 22, 2024
Date:Monday, April 22, 2024 1:23:44 PM
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important
Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution.
Planning Commision members,
I urge the Planning Commission to follow the recommendation of the city staff and
move to recommend the City Council deny the request of Tamarack Land
Development for a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
This decision is based on the fact that the proposed project does not take into
account providing utilities to adjacent properties in a cohesive and planned manner.
This development would necessitate a Shore land Variance. It appears that the
multifamily building parcels will be smaller than required by City Code and we have
seen the negative impact of this. There are too many twin home units within each of
the three tiers. With a maximum density bonus of 20% applied to each tier, the
proposed units exceed the maximum permitted by the Shore land PUD ordinance.
John Hanson, District Engineer for the Valley Branch Watershed District, suggests
the city not approve the amendment as there needs to be work to learn if this
development density can be done without adversely impacting ground and surface
water resources in the area.
There is an overwhelming number of facts that suggest an amendment is not
appropriate at this time and I urge you to follow the facts. Please vote to deny this
motion.
Ann Bucheck
2301 Legion Avenue N.
Lake Elmo MN 55042