Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes; 05-10-10APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 1 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 10, 2010 Chairman Van Zandt called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bidon, Britz, Fliflet, Hall, Pelletier, McGinnis, Pearson, Van Erem, Van Zandt, Williams, and Ziertman. STAFF PRESENT: City Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Klatt, Planner Matzek. Agenda Chairman Van Zandt suggested that item 5a regarding the zoning text amendment be discussed before item 4b as it is pertinent information in moving forward. M/S/P, Williams/McGinnis, move to approve as amended. Vote: 9:0. Minutes – April 12, 2010 Commissioner Pearson said he wasn’t at the meeting. M/S/P, Hall/Fliflet, move to approve as amended. Vote: 7:0. Abstained: Pearson, Pelletier, Van Erem and Ziertman. Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit Amendment; Lake Elmo Elementary School Planner Matzek introduced the item and explained that the school is looking to relocate the parent drop off location to the rear (North) side of the school. The amendment is to add two portable classrooms, add a parking lot, relocate a parking lot, and widen the existing entrance off of Laverne Avenue North. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:34 P.M. No one spoke. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:34 P.M. M/S/P, Williams/McGinnis, move to approve CUP Amendment with conditions in the staff report and including a condition requiring the school district to write a letter jointly with the city requesting no parking signs from Washington County along County Road 17. Vote 9:0. Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment – OP2 Overlay District Planning Director Klatt reviewed a proposal to create a new OP-2 Overlay Zoning District and noted that it was part of an application to allow a farm school and senior housing project at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The commission tabled this discussion at the last meeting and gave staff direction to proceed with forming an overlay district instead of amending the existing language for an OP development. Planning Director Klatt summarized the proposed overlay district with suggested revisions to the language provided by the applicant. Staff is recommending approval of the ordinance with three suggestion changes: adding townhouses to list of permitted uses, adding an APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 2 exception for accessory building height for agricultural buildings, and setting the maximum impervious surface coverage to twenty-five percent. Commissioner Fliflet asked why only the senior housing building is addressed in the table and not any other types of structures. Planning Director Klatt said that townhome regulations are addressed in the original ordinance, which the proposed overlay district references. Commissioner Fliflet asked if the definition of preschool or farm school should include a reference to licensing requirements. Planning Director Klatt said that the licensing requirements are outside the city’s jurisdiction, but it does tie back to that requirement. He asked the commission if an age restriction should be identified for the senior housing. He also said that the application is not specific to a farm preschool and believes the applicants would like to keep the option open to conduct activities on the site involving older children outside of regular school hours. Commissioner Williams asked why a preschool is defined as a facility whereas a farm school is listed as a program. Attorney Snyder said he was unsure why the distinction was made, but that wording could be changed. Commissioner Hall asked if the type and number of animals need to be discussed. Planning Director Klatt said the applicant would be subject to the underlying zoning district and the State has some regulations as well. Commissioner Ziertman said she understood that a property needs to be zoned Agricultural to have the exemption for accessory buildings and asked how this property could receive this exemption. Attorney Snyder said the property needed to be zoned and taxed as agriculture for that exemption. Planning Director Klatt said that this issue could be addressed as part of the proposed district standards, and that the agricultural building exception is a good general policy question for the City of Lake Elmo to consider. Commissioner Fliflet said the proposed overlay district states a requirement for open space, but it is confusing as other RAD2 areas will not necessarily have open space. Planning Director Klatt said that the applicants are showing one way in which this could be achieved, but that other RAD2 areas could possible be served by sewer as they are APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 3 adjacent to other cities. He stated that we are responding to an application while trying to structure the language to be somewhat consistent with other OP developments. Commissioner Pelletier asked about a smaller structure or less height for the proposed three story senior housing building. Planning Director Klatt said now is the time to discuss the limits and establish thresholds. Commissioner Fliflet asked how a PUD functions in relation to the ordinance. Planning Director Klatt said a PUD is another overlay on top of the zoning district which allows both a mix of uses and exemptions to the requirements. The waiving of some requirements is in exchange for a better project. He said that if the code set a maximum of two stories, a three story building could be allowed, but that if the city thinks a three story building is accetpable, then it should just be outright allowed. Attorney Snyder said that a PUD provides flexibility in exchange for concessions by a developer. Williams suggested requiring a PUD in the RAD2 areas to ensure a unique development. Tammy Malmquist, applicant Ms. Malmquist said she knows the city is trying to keep a small town feel which is why she is putting money into the two entrance homes. She said the school is going to look like a true one room school house and the senior housing building will have wrap around porches which is why the building is curved. Tim Freeman, FFE – applicant’s engineer Mr. Freeman said that one question that has come up was calculating density. He said he has calculated it the way past councils always have - on gross area, including the property in the road right-of-way. He said the precedent is set that way. Mr. Freeman said a 200 foot buffer setback would make the project unable to move forward. He said it is important to listen to the land and that setbacks take away creativity. He said that RAD2 developments will never have open space, but this project is trying to mimic the OP developments as closely as possible. He said the only thing they are asking for through the PUD is a mixed use, not a reduced setback. Commissioner Pearson said he is concerned with the proposed height as the cell tower discussion last year had many people concerned. Mr. Freeman said that the knoll will disguise the three story building and that it will not be visible from the highway because of existing homes and vegetation. He said they can not keep the units affordable without having more than two stories with an underground parking structure. Commissioner Williams asked what he meant by affordable. APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 4 Mr. Freeman said it would be cost prohibitive, meaning the applicant would have to charge more per unit which would drive them out of the range of what they believe they could get for each unit. He did not mean that it would meet the Metropolitan Council’s definition of affordable. Chairman Van Zandt identified that the Fire Department has spoken about how their equipment are not able to reach the existing large single family buildings in the City and questioend how this large building be served with fire protection. Mr. Freeman said they would like to see the buffer zone at 50 feet and that the driving surfaces could be within the 50 feet. He said it is important to talk about the barn and accessory structures on the site. He said the setbacks need to be scaled down to 5 feet instead of 15 feet. Commissioner Williams said this site may have a knoll to accommodate the height, but other RAD2 areas can use this ordinance as well. Commission Fliflet said the definitions should be revisited to incorporate licensing requirements and agreed with Mr. Freeman that a precedent has been set and gross area should be used in calculating density; believed a column should be added in the chart for the school building; said impervious surface should be calculated on the entire development and not on a specific site; and agreed with the reduced side yard setbacks. Commissioner Williams said that buildings should not be located within dedicated open space areas. Mr. Freeman said the school is not part of the open space, but that farm related buildings are an allowed use in the open space area. He said the animals will not include cows or horses, but instead chickens, goats, sheep, llama, or other small animals so a feedlot is not a valid concern. Roger Linell, 9204 Stillwater Blvd Mr. Linell said the project borders his property on three sides and he is in favor of the project. He and his neighbors have signed a statement opposed to having an entrance off of Jamaca Court. Attorney Snyder said public opinion is helpful and should be taken, but a decision can not be based on the opinions provided. He said it is the job of the commission to figure out how the project works for Lake Elmo. Kim Lipman, 8249 Deer Pond Court N Ms. Lipman said she has lived in Lake Elmo for 15 years and is not opposed to the project. She said that less than 20 homes were built last year and that the applicant’s proposal is the only one on the horizon. She said the seniors can not wait until the sewer line comes up to the Village Area and a development to be approved and built. She said APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 5 the site would only have a community septic system until it could be hooked up to city sewer. Attorney Snyder said that precedent is not set if a good record is set of why this property and not others can have this type of development. M/S/P, Fliflet/Ziertman, move to recommend approval of the ordinance as presented with expanded definitions to incorporate the licensing definitions and any appropriate wording and the applicant must follow all regulations for animals. Vote: 9:0. M/S/P, Fliflet/Pearson, move to recommend side yard setback be reduced from 15 feet to 10 feet and eliminate “10% or whichever is greater.” Vote: 9:0. M/S/P, Fliflet/Pearson, move to recommend calculating impervious surface on the entire site as opposed to individual lots by removing “gross lot area” and add “development wide basis” to the code. Vote: 8:1 (Hall against). Straw vote in favor of a 30 foot front setback for a farm school. Vote: 8:1 (Britz against). Move to add another line for the agricultural buildings in the setback chart with a 30 foot front setback for a farm school. Vote: 8:1 (Britz against). M/S/P, Williams/Pearson, move to recommend a 100 foot setback of any abutting parcel with a structure or 50 feet from a driving surface. Vote: 8:1 (Bidon against). M/S/P, Williams/Hall, move to recommend a maximum of fifty percent of a development can be built for townhouses. Vote: 8:1 (Fliflet against). M/S/P, Williams/Fliflet, move to recommend the ordinance require all development within the OP2 overlay district to be allowed by PUD development only. Vote: 9:0. M/S/P, Van Zandt/Fliflet, move to recommend approval of the amended ordinance. Vote: 9:0 Public Hearing – Open Space Preservation Development Concept Plan/PUD at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:35 P.M. (Concept Plan) No one spoke. M/S/P, Williams/McGinnis, move to continue the public hearing to the next meeting. Vote: 9:0. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 10:37 P.M. (PUD) No one spoke. APPROVED AS AMENDED; 6-28-10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 5-10-10 6 M/S/P, Williams/McGinnis, move to continue public hearing to the next meeting. Vote: 9:0. The meeting was adjourned 10:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kelli Matzek Planner